Views of Katie Sullivan on the Issue of Sexuality in Workplaces - Coursework Example

A CRITICAL DISCUSSION OF THE VIEWS OF KATIE SULLIVAN ON THE ISSUE OF SEXUALITY IN WORK PLACES Name Institution Date Sexuality in Work Places Introduction The issue of sexuality in a workplace has been affecting both men and women for a significantly long time. Although workplace sexual issues are very insidious, they still remain as one of the hardest things to deal with. This may be because of the stereotypes that are shared by many people about sexuality. Nonetheless, these issues still have a great impact on the lives of the victims hence they need to be understood and dealt with. Katie Sullivan, 2014 in her article ‘with (out) pleasure: Desexualization, Gender and Sexuality at Work’ tackles the issue of desexualization in organizations and particularly in massage therapy. Sullivan maintains that the understandings of sexuality in workplaces, for instance, whether it is coercive, pleasurable or strategic; depend on the nature of the work being performed. Sullivan chooses to tackle the issue of desexualization specifically in massage therapy because, unlike numerous other professions, this work is operated under vast beliefs that it is sexual in nature. The practices that take place in a massage therapy session can easily ignite sexual confusion among many people because of the kind of environment it is conducted (Sullivan 2014, 347). Some of the key words in this paper will be desexualization, re-eroticization, ethnography, gender, and professionalization. Desexualization can be defined as the deprivation of the sexual character or distinctive sexual qualities. On the other hand, ethnography is the systematic study and recording of people’s culture. To re-eroticize refers to presenting something in a sexual manner. Gender is a word used to describe the range of characteristics that define masculinity and feminism. Lastly, professionalization is the social process by which a particular occupation transforms itself into an occupation with high competence and integrity. Studying desexualization in work places is very important because there has been an increase in the number of cases of sexually related violations in many organizations. In most of these cases, the men continue to be depicted as the offenders and the women as the victims. The truth is the issue of sexual harassment is affecting both the women and the men, hence it is important to study desexualization to understand some of the reasons why people see the men as more of offenders than the women (Sullivan, 2014. 350). This essay is a presentation of some of the views of Katie Sullivan from her paper ‘with (out) pleasure: Desexualization, Gender and Sexuality at Work’. This paper will critically discuss her views while providing some additional evidence to verify whether her views are logical or not. In this essay, there will also be a personal view on the arguments of Katie Sullivan and also on the issue of sexuality in a workplace (Sullivan, 2014, 347). Heteronormativity in Business Organizations Heteronormativity in different organizations refers to the belief that different people fall into different distinct gendered groups with their natural roles. According to Sullivan, there are various scholars who recognize the presence of desexualization in organizations, but the wider view is held by professional, bureaucratic and feminist discourses that highly support its eradication (Sullivan, 2014, 352). All these people have been able to put forth a common call for desexualization in organizations although all of them have different reasons. There are various bureaucratic organizations that have managed to make use of sexuality for their own benefits because of the society’s heteronormative nature. According to Sullivan, many organizations have been making use of sexuality to achieve some purposes. Some of them make sexuality part of the job literally by hiring people for their sexuality or their sex appeal. In spite of the pubic efforts to desexualize, there are still some organizations that attempt to benefit from sexuality (Sullivan 2014, 360). According to Sullivan, organizational studies have proven that many organizations are gendered in different ways that favor the men or masculinity while the other gender is considered semi-professional or even unprofessional. Sullivan claims that the masculine gender has structural and numerical benefits in organizations as compared to the feminine people. She maintains that professional identity is not freely available for all workers. When the female people enter a profession, they generally have to put more effort to achieve the professional identity they want (Sullivan 2014, 359). Because of heteronormativity, the men who do not have the conventional masculine professions are viewed with suspicion and discriminated in the society since men are viewed as natural workers. These people are therefore referred to as predators or homosexuals by the public. Despite the fact that the male gender offers people more opportunities in the professional areas, the men who participate in the feminized professions still struggle to be viewed as professionals. Sullivan also tackles the issue of heteronormativity in massage therapy as she looks at the different stereotypes that people maintain about the masculine and feminine clients and massage therapists. Sullivan argues that the strategies of both the male and the female therapists to marginalize their professional identity often depicts sexuality as something that the female people are obliged to control while their male counterparts are less impacted by stigmatization. Sullivan uses the stories of different massage therapists to gather some evidence to support her claims that there are indeed some heteronormative tendencies in the business of massage therapy that develop certain stereotypes used to describe the sexualities of men and women. Through the different stories as stated by the female therapists, most of the female clients are not comfortable being massaged by the male therapists because of the heteronormative view associated with them. According to them, the female clients are afraid of the male masseuse because they are associated with sexual harassment (Sullivan 2014, 361). According to the views of the massage therapists, when the women try to make sexual advances during a massage session, they are viewed as previous victims of harassment while the men are viewed as offenders if they do exactly the same thing. Heteronormativity may not be necessarily true because there are many people who are homosexuals and thus might be able to arouse sexual feelings, even when being massaged by people of the same sex. In her discussion of the issue of heteronormativity in massage therapy, Sullivan fails to use any empirical evidence to support her claims. She bases all her views on the personal facts that have only worked in the massage therapy business but do not have the proper skills to critically analyze the effects of sexuality to the behaviors of different people. Sullivan provides no scholarly evidence that has been verified by professionals to verify the fact that heteronormativity exists in the massage therapy business. The issue of sexuality in business organizations is under-researched and thus evidence on the issue of heteronormativity in business organizations are rather limited (Reingarde 2010, n.p). The general issue of the experiences of homosexuals at work has become relatively invisible to many people (Reingarde 2010, n.p). Due to the inadequate research on this topic, it may not be wise to consider the views of Sullivan as logical because of the unreliable evidence. According to Reingarde 2010, the heterosexuals seem to be seen as living in a world that is dominated by sex while the homosexuals live in a sexually neutral world. Because of this people underestimate the issue of sexuality in massage therapy and different other work organizations. In my own view, the issue of heteronormativity is real and it is not only affecting the massage therapy clients and therapists but also all people in work organizations. Due to the stereotyped views on the responsibilities of the men and the women, people seem to underestimate the chance they really have at being sexually harassed at a massage parlor or any other place of work (Burrell 1894, 99). For example, since women believe that their fellow women are less of sexual aggressors, they easily feel comfortable being massaged by them. However, it is possible that the therapist is not really a heterosexual as they had earlier assumed and hence they have an equal risk of being harassed as if they had been massaged by a male therapist (Burrell 1894, 106). It is hence important for the public to understand that there exist people of different sexual orientations in the world instead of just assuming that all people hold on to their distinct gender roles. Heteronormativity not only affects the homosexuals, but also the heterosexuals because it controls the way they must act in the eyes of the society. This mentality also affects people in their relationships because they are expected to act in certain ways according to their sexes. The Issue of Sexual Harassment in Organizations Sexual harassment is another example of the predominant views about sexuality in business organizations that has been taken very keenly by many feminist scholars (Burrell 1894, 107). A large percentage of all the literary works that have been done on sexuality at work tackle the issue of sexual harassment (Sullivan 2014, 362). The views on sexual harassment as a product of sexuality at work reify it as a potentially dangerous or dangerous act. Sexual harassment offers people only one way in which they can create a view on sexuality in work places. Because of sexual harassment, sexuality is viewed as coercive and unsolicited in different work organizations (Sullivan 2014, 362). However, Sullivan maintains that many studies on sexual harassment tend to ignore the fact that there are various other things that can cause coercive sexuality in organizations. Because of the heteronormative sexual understandings and the descriptions of sexual harassment coercive sexuality is highlighted as the main product of sexuality at work. The women are mainly depicted as the vulnerable victims of sexuality while the men are depicted as the people who are possibly always ready to dominate. Right from the historical era, the women are painted as subjugated and weak (Sullivan 2014, 357). The women’s sexuality tends to be viewed as sites for sexual harassment while the male sexualities continue to be ignored. For this reason, people continue to believe that the responsibility to desexualize in organizations lies in the women. As women are burdened with the responsibility to desexualize, it appears that they are materially bound to fail as it is not possible to literally strip off sexuality from a person. The desexualization functions that are meant to control sexuality continue to be viewed as important but the approach that can be used to achieve this continues to be a mystery (Sullivan 2014, 360). In massage therapy in particular, the female clients are not viewed as sexual beings. In fact, they are said to fear being touched by the male massage therapists. According to Sullivan, the female clients have fears of being sexually abused when they are massaged by the male therapists. This could be because of the fact that the male people are viewed as the assaulters while the females are viewed as the victims of the assaults (Sullivan 2014, 364). To support her claims, Katie Sullivan gathers some evidence from the statements that have been offered by different massage therapists who have managed to handle both the male and the female clients. From the different stories given by the massage therapists, Sullivan was able to gather some evidence on how the therapists view the issue of sexuality in massage therapy. In most of the stories told by the female therapists, they did not talk much about the female clients, but they pointed out that they were afraid of being massaged by the male therapists (Sullivan 2014, 365). The male therapists on the other hand had a lot of stories to tell about their female clients and their stories pointed out that the female clients had sexual displays that were clear indications and symptoms of sexual abuse. Sullivan uses an example of a story told by one of the male therapists about a female client who kept on exposing herself by pulling the sheet down in order to arouse some sexual feelings. According to this particular therapist, this could be a sign that this therapist has been sexually abused in the past. This therapist noted that different types of sexual abuse start with simple touches that are similar to those of the massage rooms and the clients who are not able to separate the two will try to arouse sexual tension. Sullivan states that people with poor boundaries may have gotten to this point because they have a history of sexual abuse. Very many therapists shared the view that the female clients were either victims or potential victims of sexual abuse. However, there are some that believed that the female clients are more of vixens who seduce the male therapists to get some evidence to destroy them by lawsuits (Sullivan 2014, 361). One male therapist even states that he was almost quitting his job because of the fear that he might one day be seduced and later sued by one of his female clients. Because of the nature of the society, the male clients are viewed quite differently whenever they express any kind of sexual arousal during the massage session. The female therapists seemed to believe that the male clients in massage therapy who had any kind of sexual arousal during the massage were suffering from the craving for non-sexual touch. One of the female therapists states that the body of non-touched man will react to any kind of touch because they become vulnerable. These views are thus different from the society’s heteronormative views of the masculine gender as sexually aggressive. The views of Katie Sullivan on massage therapy seem logical because they are based on evidence provided by people who have had one-on-one experiences with the massage clients of both genders. However, the views of these people are too generalized. The therapists use their observations on a few clients to generalize their perceptions on the sexual behaviors that are depicted by the different clients they encounter. For instance, the view that a female client who tries to arouse sexual feelings is a victim of sexual abuse may not be entirely true since different people have different characters. Kensbook et al. (2015) in their research paper on sexual harassment on women working in the five-star hotels, state that sexual harassment is any kind of unwanted imposition of sexual requirements between people with unequal power. Sexual harassment can be taken as a continuum of different acts including verbal comments, sexual gestures or even coercive attempts to make sexual interaction between two people in different ranks (Kensbook et al. 2015). According to this definition, the women who try to arouse sexual feelings on their male therapists should be categorized as more of sexual harassers as opposed to the victims of harassment as Sullivan depicts in her paper. The fact that the male victims are depicted as the offenders while the women are seen as victims is based on the fact that there are more cases of female harassment that have been provided compared to the male cases. This may be because most of the cases of work sexual harassment that have been reported are related to female people being harassed by their male bosses. However, there have also been a significant number of harassment cases reported by men on sexual harassment by their bosses (The HR Specialist 2015, n.p). The above evidence shows that female people also have the capability to sexually harass their male counterparts as opposed to the view currently held by the public. I personally believe that sexual harassment is real in all business organizations for both the male and the female workers. In massage therapy, both the male and the female therapists have an equal chance of harassing their clients or being harassed by their clients. It is wrong to classify the masculine gender as the sexual harassers and the females as the victims as there have been both kinds of cases reported in the past (The HR Specialist 2015, n.p). According to a certain workplace sexual harassment statistic conducted by the Association for Women and Action for Research (AWARE) both men and women have the probability of being assaulted sexually at work by people they consider their bosses. This survey was also able to show that sexual harassment can take place across the board from the executive levels to the administrative staffs (AWARE 2015, n.p). Different people have also been able to share their stories through the AWARE website about their experiences as victims of sexual harassment. Here we are able to see that there are both male and female cases of sexual harassment; therefore, it is very wrong to generalize the male individuals are the offenders because they are not any less of victims as the female people. Sexual harassment must be taken very seriously by the relevant authorities in the business organizations, regardless of whether it is a report by a male or a female victim. The authorities must try to avoid the generalizations that have been made by the society about the different genders and fairly look at all cases that are presented to them. All the victims of sexual harassment have equal rights to report any person who tries to harass them sexually regardless of their gender. In my view, people need to be more open minded about the issue of sexuality at work places and recognize that people are no longer bound by the constraints of gender roles when performing their duties to the society. Conclusion Sexuality truly exists in different professional organizations. While some organizations work very hard to desexualize, others have fully embraced this factor and they take advantage of it to sell more of their products. For example, in flight attendants are hired for their sexual appeal or better yet their sexuality. Generally, workplace sexuality is an important issue that needs to be dealt with as fast as it is possible. The sexual differences between people in a particular organization affect the operations greatly and hence there is a need to desexualize. It is because of sexuality that there are cases of sexual harassment, assaults, and sexual discrimination among people, especially those working in the body related professions. Katie Sullivan, 2014 maintains that sexuality has led to discrimination, heteronormative beliefs and also harassments in business organizations. Sullivan views the impulse to desexualize in different organizations as pervasive but she believes that it is an ideal that can be fully realized if people put in some more effort (Sullivan 2014, 366). However, according to (Burrell 1984, 110) any attempts that people make towards desexualization only arouse more problems instead of reducing the already existing problems in the work organizations. He believes that it is important that people only examine the outcome of sexuality at work and try to deal with them instead of trying to desexualize in organizations. Some of these outcomes include sexual harassment, discrimination and also heteronormativity. Different employers may consider using the currently existing methods to reduce these effects in their organizations. For instance, they may consider training all their employees on matters concerning different sexual orientations so that they can work together in a professional manner without being affected by the societal views of sexuality. She expresses her views on the issue of sexuality in business organizations and especially in massage therapy. According to the arguments of Sullivan, the women are viewed as either victim or potential victims of sexual harassment in the massage therapy business while the men are viewed as the oppressors. Sullivan also states that some male therapists continue to be afraid of the female therapists because of the fact that they can be vixens in the sense that they arouse the men and later sue them for sexual harassment. On the other hand, the male people are viewed as harassers and the male clients who try to arouse any sexual relations are depicted as people craving sexual attention (Sullivan 2014, 366). The willingness of the public to accept that sexuality is something that is hard to control is what will determine the way forward. What the public should do is to accept the liberatory sexuality that does not teach the women to be sexually accessible to men. This kind of thinking is better that the view of sexuality that is currently being held by different people that sexuality is based on the interactions between different people (Beach 2014, n.p). References List ACAS. 2010. Sexual Orientation and the Work Place. A Guide for Employers and Employees AWARE, 2015. Workplace Sexual Harassment Statistics. Beach, Z. 2014. Letting go of Heteronormative Ideas and Improving your Relationships and Sex Life Brewis J., Melissa T., and Albert M., 2014. Sexuality and organizational analysis—30 years on: Editorial introduction, Organization, Vol. 21(3): 305-311 Burrell G., 1984. Sex and Organizational Analysis, Organization Studies, Vol. 5(2): 97-118 Colgan F. and Tessa W., 2011. Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Equality in a Modernizing Public Sector 1997–2010: Opportunities and Threats, Gender, Work & Organization, Vol. 18( 5): 548–570 Collins, E. G., & Blodgett, T. B. 1980. Sexual harassment... some see it... some won't. Harvard business review, 59(2), 76-95. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., & Magley, V. J. 1997. Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: a test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 578. Jackson, S. 2006. Gender, sexuality and heterosexuality: The complexity (and limits) of heteronormativity. Feminist theory, 7(1), 105-121. Jolanta Reingarde, 2010. Heteronormativity and Silenced Sexualities at Work MacKinnon, C. A. (1979). Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination (No. 19). Yale University Press. Nick R. and John B., 2014. Gay men in the performing arts: Performing sexualities within ‘gay-friendly’ work contexts, Organization, Vol. 21(3): 365-382 Nielsen, J. M., Walden, G., & Kunkel, C. A. 2000. Gendered heteronormativity: Emprical illustrations in everyday life. The Sociological Quarterly, 41(2), 283-296. Peter Fleming, 2007. Sexuality, Power and Resistance in the Workplace, Organization Studies, Vol. 28(2): 239-256 Russell, D. E. (1984). Sexual exploitation: Rape, child sexual abuse, and workplace harassment. Sandra Kensbock, Janis Bailey, Gayle Jennings and Anoop Patiar (2015) Sexual Harassment of Women Working as Room Attendants within 5-Star Hotels. Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 22(1): 36-50 Sullivan K. R., 2014. With(out) pleasure: Desexualization, gender and sexuality at work, Organization, Vol. 21(3): 346-364 The HR Specialist, 2015. What managers need to know about sexual harassment Retrieved from: http://www.thehrspecialist.com/2321/What_managers_need_to_know_about_sexual_harassment.hr?cat=tools&sub_cat=memos_to_managers Read More