College of Arts and Sciences Sssscsciencestechnological University Rizal Technological University

RIZAL TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

sSSSCSCIENCESTECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING
Introduction
Despite the fact that serious consequences stems out from sexual
harassment whether it involves men or women, sexual harassment towards men is not
taken seriously. There has been an extensive research and studies looking at how sexual
harassment affect woman, but few were conducted about men where the male is
traditionally seen as the stronger sex, and thus, the oppressor. There is still an
undeniable need for a comprehensive conversation with regard to the issue of sexual
harassment against men.
A common thread seems to be the lack of empathy- or even sympathy
because for some reason the idea of sexual harassment towards men is incongruous.
Few men file reports about being harassed, they may fear being embarrassed in the
details of the harassment being looked, particularly, if they believe that they should be
able to handle the issue themselves. Other reasons may be because they are afraid of
being mocked, if people believe that men are not capable of being harassed by woman
or that being harassed by a man implicates their own sexuality
It is in the collective psyche that only men abuse. Their collective denial
says that women are not violent or when they are violent, there is an excuse but when
men are violent, there is no excuse. Regardless of the sex there should no excuse. As
long as men stay in the closet about being molested or physically or psychologically
1
abuse as a child, being battered in a relationship, or being sexually harassed on the job,
it is going to continue to be seen as - only men abuse and only women can get help.
Men are having a hard time deciding if it’s okay to admit to being a victim
and weighing in the events that suggest to sexual harassment. The perpetrators can
come from the opposite gender or women who are capable of harassing men sexually.
Is it really possible for the male species appear to be so defenseless? Men can be
possibly harassed because of it because of their body structure, clothing preference or
body language that is misunderstood. These ideas don’t have an obvious answer for
cases about male sexual harassment aren’t widely discussed. The people are not aware
that even men are being violated sexually- be it verbally or physically.
Conceptual Framework
Sexual harassment against male is almost nonexistent. However, it is not only
the women who get sexually harassed. Believe it or not, males are victims of this
heinous crime, too. Sexual harassment laws barely recognize male victims. There
aren’t any male victims as much as women whose cases are reported. What exactly is
sexual harassment? It refers to any unwelcome sexual advances towards someone else.
Coercing someone to engage in a sexual relationship, and catcalling are only some of
the types of sexual harassment. Although most of the victims are women, men are
being victimized while keeping their mouth shut.
Only few men confessed to being a victim of the sexual offense. Is this because
men are supposed to be 'manly' enough not to be bothered by inappropriate advances on
2
their modesty? Since men have high regards for their masculinity, they come out tough
most of the times. They don’t whine about their issues, let alone announce that they are
harassed sexually. They think that coming out as a victim of sexual harassment will
make people think less of them. Is masculinity concerned with having high level of
sexual tolerance? There are some chances that one cannot distinguish if they are already
a prey for they have high sexual tolerance and they think it is still normal although they
find the situation uncomfortable, they will just shrug it off and play it cool. It is very
unfortunate that this kind of issue is not taken seriously. This is a matter that should be
talked about and not something to make fun of. Men are suffering the consequences
that they should not even carry. They remain silent thinking it is for the best. Imagine
the trauma and the great anxiety it is causing them.
Statement of the Problem
1. What is the demographic profile of the selected respondents in terms of the following:
1.1. age;
1.2. year level; and
1.3. course?
2. How frequent do the respondents experience sexual harassment in terms of:
2.1. verbal;
2.2. physical; and
2.3. visual
3. How frequent do the respondents experience sexual harassment in terms of:

3.1. Gender harassment
3.2. Unwanted sexual attention
3.3. Sexual Coercion
4. What are the common barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the
harassment?
3
5. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents prevalence of sexual
harassment and the barriers on reporting it?
Hypothesis of the Study
There is no significant relationship between the prevalence of sexual harassment
and the barriers on reporting it.
Research Paradigm
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
 Profile of  Conducting a survey

respondents to determine the  Relationship
barriers of male between barriers
 Age students towards and prevalence of
sexual harassment sexual harassment
 Year and course
 Applying different among male college
standardized tests to students.
establish relationship
between barriers and
prevalence of sexual
harassment among
male college students.
Scope and Delimitation
This study focuses on the relationship between prevalence of sexual
harassment and barriers on reporting of sexual harassment among male college
students.
4
This is limited to selected 360 undergraduate students of Rizal
Technological University, from College of Engineering and Information Technology
(CEIT) ranging from 1st year - 5th year.
Significance of the Study
Men. Men may have an awareness regarding with the different forms of
sexual harassments they may be experiencing. This will help them to voice out and
avoid tolerating those experiences.
Women. Will have a knowledge that they are not the only ones
experiencing sexual harassment. They will know from here that men are also prone to
harassment and this will help them to be more sensitive to men’s feelings.
Government. This research will give insight to the government with the
prevalence and level of sexual tolerance of men who have experienced being sexually
harassed. The government should provide laws and actions regarding the issue.
Future researches. Who wish to study the same topic, may use as a
reference and information provider that will be vital to their research.
School. This research paper will help the school to teach the students
about the cause and effect of sexual harassment and guide them to where to seek help
preferably to those students who has been sexually harassed and been tolerating their
experience.
5
Definition of Terms
Barriers refers to circumstances that keep the victim from filing a report for being
sexually harassed.
Catcall a form of sexual harassment that attributes to whistling or making sexist
statements.
Gender harassment is harassment in which the victim’s gender is being derogated.
Harassment is defined as the act of abusing, insulting or harming another individual.
In the closet is a term used to describe a homosexual person who has not told anyone of
his/her sexual orientation.
Oppressor refers to someone who carried out the malicious act that is sexual
harassment- which is the focus of our study. The oppressor may also be referred to as the
perpetrator.
Physical harassment is when a victim is touched in an inappropriate way.
Prevalence refers to the frequency of sexual harassment.
Sexual harassment refers about unsolicited sexual advances towards someone. These
sexual advances may be in the form of physical or verbal.
Sexual attention is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing
such interest.
6
Sexual coercion is an act in which a person sexually touches another person without
that person's consent, or coerces or physically forces a person to engage in a sexual act
against their will.
Sexual misconduct is any misconduct of a sexual nature that is usually perpetrated
against an individual without his or her consent.
Tolerance indicates the ability of men to tolerate or endure sexual acts.
Verbal harassment is the state of criticizing someone sexually. (e.g., catcalling,
whistling)
Visual harassment being made to look at sexually explicit images or being shown
obscene sexual gestures may constitute sexual harassment. Being exposed to people’s
private parts or repeatedly stared at in a way that is offensive or uncomfortable.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Sexual Harassment on Men
According to Studzinśka, (2016) the tale of Joseph of Egypt is most likely
the principal composed record of sexual harassment in history, in which, the casualty is
a man, and the culprit is a lady. In this short Biblical story, Joseph turns into a casualty
7
of two sorts of inappropriate behavior: undesirable sexual consideration, when
Potiphar's better half circles the house attempting to get him and sexually manhandle
him, and further on we discover that there may have been a component of sexual
intimidation, as Potiphar's significant other penalized Joseph for not submitting to her
will. In any case, possibly Potiphar's better half revealed to Joseph that he should lie
with her since he seems as though he needs it. Perhaps she made a joke that he's not by
any stretch of the imagination a man on the off chance that he wouldn't like to lie with
her, or possibly she said that both Joseph and Potiphar are the same, and like all men,
are useful in vain (Studzinśka, 2016).
It is currently perceived that guys, both as kids and as grown-ups, can be
casualties and survivors of sexual manhandle and rape. The dominant part of casualties
of rape are female and there is a huge assemblage of research from many controls
analyzing the criminal and common equity framework reactions, impacts, treatment,
and so on. The group of research on male casualties is a great deal more restricted
likely because of the little numbers and difficulties enlisting delegate tests (McDonald
& Tijerino, 2013). As indicated by U.S. Division of Justice measurements from 1997,
an expected 9 % of assault survivors are male. Their assailants are quite often different
guys. At times the man who assaults another man is hetero and homophobic, and the
assault is an expression of the disdain he feels for the other individual, whom he sees as
not being sufficiently manly in appearance and conduct. In different cases, the
aggressor is indiscriminate in his decision of a male or female casualty. In all cases
considered by Nicholas Groth and Ann Burgess, the rape was a demonstration of
8
striking back, a statement of energy, and an affirmation of their quality and manhood.
The survivor in such rapes is most certainly not essentially, nor generally, gay
(Greensite, 1999).
Despite the fact that the greater part of grown-up sexual wrongdoings are
conferred by men against ladies, sexual harassment can be executed by or against
members of both genders. While men are more liable to be the aggressors and ladies the
victims, analysts are not catching the full range of sexual viciousness by survey men as
it were culprits and ladies as just casualties. Indeed, around 3 to 8% of American and
British men report having encountered an adulthood occurrence of rape in their lifetime
and between 5 to 10% of assault casualties are male. These rates likely belittle the size
of the issue of male assault given that men are frequently unwilling to report sexual
encounters. Notwithstanding recording the pervasiveness of male assault, look into
proposes that the dominant part of rough rapes against men are conferred by men, with
investigations of casualties who looked for related treatment announcing that between 6
to 15% of strikes included a female culprit. Assault is additionally not only a hetero
issue with 13.2% of promiscuous men and 11.6% of gay men revealing a history of
assault in adulthood in one examination. Despite the fact that concentrate male rape is
an essential issue, it has generally been "disregarded, rejected, or taken for granted"
(Turchik & Edwards, 2011).
Schrobsdorff (2017) recently an Instamotor online survey which found that 2
out of 3 men don’t think repeated unwanted invitations to drinks, dinner or dates is
sexual harassment. One man commented on the survey saying if people think that
9
asking a colleague out for dinner is harassment, “No wonder everyone is so lonely and
frustrated.” A woman jumped into the comments and pointed out that he’d skimmed
right over the words repeated and unwanted. When a comment or offer is turned down,
then it is found to be uncomfortable and therefore should be stopped. If it happens
again and again no matter how many times the rejection happens, especially if it’s lewd
then it is considered to be sexually intimidating.
Myths About Male Sexual Harassments
Those intangibility and minimization of male sexual assault is generally
due to the perpetuation for assault myths which has been ordinarily characterized
concerning illustration that prejudicial, stereotyped or false convictions over rape,
assault victims, and rapists (Turchik & Edwards, 2012). Less is thought about assault
myths concerning male casualties, yet past inquire about has recognized the
accompanying convictions: (a) Being assaulted by a male aggressor is synonymous
with the loss of manliness; (b) men who are sexually harassed by men must be gay; (c)
men are unequipped for working sexually unless they are sexually stimulated; (d) men
can't be compelled to have intercourse without wanting to; (e) men are less influenced
by rape than ladies; (f) men are in a consistent condition of availability to acknowledge
any sexual open door; and (g) a man is required to have the capacity to guard himself
against rape (Chapleau et al, 2008).
Stories and reports of male assault go back a few centuries, showing up in
Roman old stories, old Greek myths and Biblical records. In more present day times,
the media, particularly TV, has likely been an essential supporter of individuals'
10
learning of male assault as the media is thought to be the best wellspring of wrongdoing
information in spite of male assault being portrayed just sometimes in predominant
press. In examples when male assault is accounted for or delineated by the media, it is
frequently done as such in a way that advances stereotyped perspectives of male assault
with assault happening just in specific settings (Turchik & Edwards, 2012). In spite of
the fact that examination and various case examples have exhibited that male assault
does happen, the law does not generally recognize these encounters and propagates
myths, for example, men can't be assaulted, male casualties are most certainly not
influenced by assault, and male assault is not important.
Lately, there has been a developing collection of writing committed to
male assault myths. A few examinations have discovered a huge predominance of male
assault myths acknowledgment among the all-inclusive community. This examination
likewise found that male assault myths acknowledgment was decidedly corresponded
with homophobia and certain conventional manly esteems, i.e., achievement, power,
rivalry, and adversely associated with instruction level. Furthermore, look into has
uncovered that men will probably acknowledge male assault myths than ladies. As
indicated by this examination, advising understudies were destined to concur with
casualty accusing explanations, and a noteworthy bit of the specimen upheld the
conviction that male casualties "ought to have demonstrated more resistance" to their
aggressors. This article likewise announced that more youthful students will probably
bolster assault myths, and in addition students who had insignificant clinical
involvement with casualties of rape (Bateman & Wathen, 2015).
11
Definition of Sexual Harassment
According to Hejase (2015), sexual harassment is characterized as "unwelcome
lewd gestures, demands for sexual favors, other verbal or physical direct of a sexual
sort" that meddles with one's business or work execution or makes a "threatening or
hostile workplace". Another definition for sexual harassment is "the place any type of
undesirable verbal, non-verbal or physical lead of a sexual sort happens, with the reason
on the other hand impact of damaging the poise of a man, specifically while making a
threatening, debasing, embarrassing or hostile condition. Lewd behavior is an
unwelcome consideration of a sexual sort that makes a man feel awkward. It
incorporates a scope of practices from mellow transgressions what's more,
inconveniences to genuine misuse, which can include constrained sexual movement.
Sexual provocation is considered as a type of unlawful segregation and also a sort of
mental and sexual mishandle. Sexual harassment is defined as incorporating anybody
or a greater amount of the accompanying unwelcome acts or conduct regardless of
whether specifically or by suggestion, to be specific: physical contact or advances; a
request or demand for sexual favors; making sexually hued comments; demonstrating
obscenity; whatever other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal lead of a sexual
sort. Regularly circumstances that begin off honestly wind up in unseemly and
amateurish practices. Remember that working environment lewd behavior is sexual,
unwelcome also, the experience is subjective. It is the effect and not the plan that
matters and it quite often happens in a framework of force. It is conceivable that a lady
may encounter a solitary occasion of sexual badgering or a progression of episodes over
12
a time frame. It is essential likewise to recall that each case is one of a kind and ought
to be analyzed in its own specific circumstance and as per the encompassing conditions
in general (Handbook on Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace, 2015).
According to Alberta Human Rights Act (2012) sexual harassment is defined as
any sexual acts that is unwelcome and has unfavorable effect on human’s job, work
conditions, having promotions, accommodations and serving the public. Sexual
harassment is someone’s attempt to make a force on another person. It is undesirable,
coercive and cause emotional abuse that brings to a nonproductive environment. Sexual
harassment is a source of danger in the work area across the globe that decreases the
quality of work and human being, weakens gender equality and create costs on different
firms and organizations (McCann, 2005).
According to Wordlbank (2013), sexual harassment includes a wide range of
behaviors, from glances and rude jokes, to demeaning comments based on gender
stereotypes, to sexual assault and other acts of physical violence. Although the legal
definition varies by country, it is understood to refer to unwelcome and unreasonable
sex-related conduct. A fairly comprehensive definition considers sexual harassment as
“any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favor, verbal or physical conduct or
gesture of a sexual nature, or any other behavior of a sexual nature that might reasonably
be expected or be perceived to cause offense or humiliation to another. Such harassment
may be, but is not necessarily, of a form that interferes with work, is made a condition of
employment, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.
13
According to Rivera (2017), individual can be harassed because she is a woman
or because he or she transgresses gender roles, and so forth. Gender harassment, or
gender-based harassment, occurs when a person harasses another based on their gender
or gender identity. The harassment does not need to be based on anything of a sexual
nature. Instead, gender harassment usually involves stereotypes based on the roles and
functions associated with a particular gender.
According to AWARE (2008), the term 'sexual harassment’ as a descriptor for
this direct was just instituted in the 1970s. From that point forward the issue has turned
into a perceived wonder all through the world in all social and word related settings. As
indicated by the International Labor Association (ILO), lewd behavior is a reasonable
type of sex separation in view of sex, a sign of unequal power relations amongst men
and ladies. The issue relates less to the real natural contrasts amongst men and ladies. Or
maybe, it identifies with the sexual orientation or social parts ascribed to men and ladies
in social and monetary life, and observations about male and female sexuality in the
public eye that can lead to unequal male-female power connections (AWARE, 2008).
Sexual harassment is a reasonable type of sexual orientation separation in view of sex,
despite the fact that this relates less to the genuine natural contrasts amongst men and
ladies, however to social parts ascribed to men and ladies, and discernments about male
and female sexuality in the public eye. Lewd behavior is an unmistakable sign of
unequal power relations – it is not about inferring sexual delight out of the
demonstration, however about stating power. Today, the issue of lewd behavior in work
environments is recognized as a genuine issue – as a word related peril and an
14
infringement of human rights. The ILO has called it an infringement of the principal
privileges of specialists, a well-being and well-being peril, an issue of segregation, an
unsatisfactory working condition, and a type of savagery, for the most part against ladies
specialists. Albeit both men and ladies can be subjected to sexual provocation,
quantitative and subjective research demonstrates that ladies are a great deal more liable
to be casualties and men culprits in social orders internationally.
Sexual harassment is a demonstration or a progression of acts including any
unwelcome lewd gesture, demand or interest for a sexual support, or other verbal or
physical conduct of a sexual sort, conferred by an administration representative or
authority in a business related, preparing or instruction related condition. Sexual
Harassment, which has been pronounced unlawful in the work environment, preparing
and training conditions, won't go on without serious consequences as it abuses the
nobility and human privileges of a man (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2008).
Different Forms of Sexual Harassment
Occurrences have been depicted now and again in the press, regularly on the
'more extreme' sorts of inappropriate behavior like assault, attack and strike that are
considered criminal acts. Less is found out about the 'less serious' types of badgering
which are most certainly not considered criminal, for example, verbal mishandle,
physical touching, rehashed lecherous messages or unwelcome remarks on conduct or
dress (AWARE, 2008). A few types of lewd behavior, for example, rape, are intrinsically
hostile and terrible, and require happen just once to be viewed as an unmistakable type
of badgering. Different structures may not be so effortlessly recognized from safe
15
conduct as talked about above. Sexist comments or non-verbal sexual motions for
instance, regularly introduce themselves as clearer expectations to annoy, when they are
done more than once, and all the more particularly, when they happen in spite of the
beneficiary demonstrating that such conduct is undesirable, unwelcome and hostile.
Sexual harassments are those generally ordinarily alluded to as getting vocation dangers,
for example, signs that you will be let go or withheld advancement in the event that you
didn't acquiesce to demands for a date, or sexual favors. Verbal lewd behavior such as
being tended to by unwelcome and hostile terms for example, 'bitch', 'dick', 'sweetheart',
and so forth; getting unwelcome remarks or being inquired nosy inquiries concerning
appearance, body parts, sexual coexistence, feminine cycle and so forth; being made to
over and again and purposefully tune in to messy jokes, unrefined stories that are
unwelcome and discomforting, being irritated for dates or accepting unwelcome sexual
proposals or solicitations, being over and again subjected to sexually suggestive, vulgar
or offending sounds. Visual lewd behavior – more than once accepting messages, texts,
which contain unwelcome dialect of a sexually-express nature, having somebody
uncover their reproductive organs to you, or over and again gaze at your body parts in a
way that is unwelcome and discomforting, being made to more than once take a gander
at sexually express pictures, or being demonstrated vulgar sexual motions. Physical lewd
behavior – being brushed against or touched in any capacity, being stood near or
cornered, being persuasively kissed or embraced, or being coercively made to touch
somebody (AWARE, 2008).
16
Jokes are a piece of any workplace and are frequently used to lighten the
atmosphere. However, jokes that are always coordinated at one individual or can be
classed as hostile can be seen as work environment provocation. Jokes that are
coordinated against one individual can be classed as badgering. In the event that the joke
scares, causes trouble or mortifies a worker in any capacity this can be a type of work
environment provocation. Jokes that are hostile in nature ought not go on without
serious consequences, regardless of whether the culprit of these jokes does not
understand they are being hostile. This sort of nonstop badgering can cause extreme
trouble for the 'casualty' of these work environment jokes. This can be seen similarly as
play area harassing and has no place in the cutting edge working condition (Crystal,
2012).
Sexual Harassment in the Philippine Context
Sexual harassment happens regularly, all over the place, to everybody. It is
miserable to surmise that it might be as regular as the cold. The infection of this
wrongdoing comes in many structures; sexism, control relations, mental components,
moral and social esteems and relies upon every circumstance. Each case is all things
considered an infringement of human rights. Philippine law fleshes out the definition,
parameters, and punishments for assault, as The Anti-Rape Law, however is yet to give
a greater cover to the more undetectable issue of sexual harassment. We have the Anti-
Sexual Harassment Act, which punishes against lewd behavior in schools and work
environments, yet our arrangements presently can't seem to get up to speed to a sort of
issue that infringes each edge of the nation, and even, the world (Cabral, 2017).
17
The Philippines likewise has an Anti-Sexual Harassment Act, presented in 1995,
to disallow inappropriate behavior by anybody having expert, impact, or good authority
over another. An overview directed in the Philippines revealed that 17 percent of 43
unionized and 291 non-unionized foundations had records of cases relating to
inappropriate behavior. (Kenny, PhD., 2011) Republic Act No. 7877 is a milestone
unique enactment that, without precedent for Philippine lawful history, names,
characterizes and punishes the wrongdoing of lewd behavior in work environments and
instructive or preparing establishments in general society and private areas (Ursua,
2001).
The principal study on inappropriate behavior and brutality against ladies in the
Philippines uncovered the disturbing number of ladies who have encountered lewd
behavior of any sort in the nation—and the similarly disturbing reaction to casualties of
provocation and mishandle. Sexual harassment, characterized as undesirable
considerations constrained on casualties due to their real or saw sex, show in various
ways. Three of every 5 ladies have encountered sexual harassment at any rate once in
their lifetime, the examination uncovered. More than 34% of them were casualties of
glimmering, open masturbation, and grabbing. The most noteworthy occurrences in all
age ranges are instances of wolf shrieking, vulgar dialect, and exhibitionism and open
masturbation. Different structures incorporate stalking, voyeurism, grabbing, rubbing,
touching, cat-calling, disgusting motions, cyber violence, and sending of explicit
pictures and recordings (Bartolome, 2016).
Men as Perpetrators and Victims of Sexual Harassment
18
It is dependably imperative to recall that, what may not be hostile to one
individual may truly insult another, especially one of an alternate age, from an alternate
culture or in a more powerless position in the work environment. It is additionally
imperative to note that sexual harassment might be executed by a man of a lady, by a
lady of a man, by people of a similar sex, by a chief of a subordinate, by a subordinate
of a chief or by associate partners. It might likewise be executed upon focus
representatives by a meeting expert or an associate (Joshi & Nachison, 1996). It is
essential to note that, while cases most regularly included a lady bothered by a male
companion or chief, provocation by a lady of a man, by a subordinate of a manager or
by individual of a similar sex are situations that happen and should be seen as similarly
genuine.
In the all-inclusive community, sexual culprits have been recognized as having
more elevated amounts of threatening vibe towards ladies; bring down levels of
sympathy; and will probably hold customary sexual orientation part generalizations,
underwrite proclamations used to legitimize assault, and hold ill-disposed convictions
about relationship amongst men and ladies. Moreover, they will probably have
encountered manhandle and brutality as a tyke, have occupied with youthful
misconduct, have peers who see constrained sex as adequate, and have had early and
visit dating and sexual encounters (Krebs, Ph. D et al, 2007). Ponders have found that
men who execute rape will probably support assault myths, have peers that are tolerating
of viciousness against ladies, drink all the more much of the time, and have been
casualties of youth sexual manhandle. While these reviews have distinguished what's
19
more, approved the previously mentioned hazard considers as indicators of rape
execution, none of these variables fundamentally recognize somebody as a culprit, and
they tend to work in mix, so that men who have a large number of these attributes will
probably confer rape than are men who have only a couple (Martin, 2010). Adolescence
sexual manhandle has been connected to execution of rape further down the road
declare, seeing or encountering misuse as a kid make a social condition which instructs
men to regard ladies as items instead of equivalents. The impact of youth sexual
manhandle is frequently inspected under the cycle of mishandle hypothesis - the idea
that casualties of youth manhandle might be more probable than non-casualties to
execute different types of mishandle as grown-ups. Think about on nonphysical sexual
compulsion discovered fractional support for youth manhandle as an indicator of sexual
intimidation.
According to U.S Department of Education (2008) sexual harassment can take
distinctive structures relying upon the harasser and the way of the provocation. The
direct can be done by school representatives, different understudies, and non-worker
outsiders. Both male and female understudies can be casualties of lewd behavior.
Furthermore, the harasser and the casualty can be of a similar sex. Men, women and
transgender people can all experience inappropriate behavior. Sexual harassment can
happen between people of various sexual orientations (Alberta Human Rights
Commission, 2012).
Hejase (2015) the sexually bothered can be anybody, male or female, regardless
of whether an administrator, a customer, a collaborator, educator or teacher, an
20
understudy, a companion and even an outsider. With respect to the harasser, he/she
doesn't need to be of the inverse sex; he/she might be totally unconscious that his/her
conduct is hostile or constitutes inappropriate behavior, or is maybe totally unconscious
that his/her activities could be unlawful. The sexual harassers pick their casualties in
view of attributes, for example, age, saw inactivity, absence of self-assurance, poor
training, low self-regard and different regions of defenselessness.
For men who experience of being a casualty of harassment clashes with
predominant ideas of manliness. Men are associated to be solid, sexually forceful and
dependably in control. Females are doled out the part of sexual guardians and it is
viewed as more satisfactory for a woman to deny sexual access to a man, than a man to
deny sexual access to woman (Pitfield, 2013). Men are not commonly seen as casualties
of harassment and in that capacity most writing has concentrated on discovering
commonness rates and profiling the "reasonable" casualty to construct authenticity for
male assault as a social issue. Inquire about recommends that the male casualty is
probably going to be in their 20s to mid-30s to be attacked by more than one attacker,
distinguish as gay or promiscuous include liquor inebriation and in the lion's share of
strikes the culprit is probably going to be somebody they have 'recently met'. It is
recognized that male and female casualties tended to have comparative qualities. In any
case, men will probably be attacked by more than one individual and were less inclined
to have been physically hurt. Similarly as with female casualties of harassment, men are
not arbitrarily chose from society but rather are regularly helpless individuals being
preyed upon. Male casualties will probably be without work or from socially distraught
21
foundations and have a background marked by adolescence sexual mishandle and give
physical or subjective handicaps.
Barriers on Reporting of Sexual Harassment
A prevalent and problematic belief linked to typical conceptions of
manhood is the belief that men cannot be abused physically, sexually or otherwise. This
is linked to the idea that men must not express vulnerability or emotion, men are strong
and they can fight, if they experience pain they must not show of talk about it
Barriers on reporting of sexual cases may be because of shame, guilt,
embarrassment and fear of being not believe. In the case of men, they might fail to
report it or file a case because it may be perceived to jeopardize their masculinity.
Another factor would be the reason of not wanting their family to know about the
sexual harassment has a greater significance to men rather than of female victims
(Sable et al, 2006). The high score of being judge as gay may acknowledge society’s
consideration that male rape occurs only with gays, not the general community. Some
male victims may remain silent rather than being labeled as a closet-homosexual or
being ridiculed as somebody who is inadequate or weak (Anderson, 2004).
Many also fear their disclosure will not result in helpful outcomes.
Acquaintances, friends, co-workers, or colleagues are more likely to use tricks, verbal
pressure, threats, negative consequences or victim-blaming. This impacts a victim’s
ability to resist or report what happened. He or she may blame him/herself, or feel
responsible for the harassment. Other victims do not disclose what happened because
22
they are embarrassed, or do not want anyone to know. Worrying that if they tell their
story, everyone in the community, school, or community will know. Especially those
who experienced sexual harassment in work or school settings, fear retaliation or
reprisal from the harasser, colleagues or their employer (Pietsch, 2015).
Another common reason of males not reporting the assault includes the lack of
faith in the criminal justice system and the perception that there was a lack of evidence.
While most women can cry for help and can easily find services there are a few rape
crisis centers there are only a few who assess services and there is none specifically
designated for men (Mcdonalds & Tijerino, 2013).
Benatar (2012) also stated that men can also become victims of domestic violence
and sexual assault but these are not taken seriously since there is a strong prevailing
attitude to men that they are fearless and, sustain grater pain, and are capable of self-
defense. He also quotes some studies that females are treated more leniently that males
when being sentenced by the court system, and when the victim is female, the offender
is more likely to be arrested. Sexual harassment us underreported in both sexes but the
rating rate is even lower for males.
The abuse of males is still underrepresented in our literature, statistics and
programs pertinent to sexual abuse. Men’s experiences can differ from women’s. Like
all forms of sexual assault, under-reporting of male sexual assault gives a considerable
challenge for the development of meaningful and reliable methods of data collection.
Furthermore, there is limited consensus on how male sexual assault is actually defined
23
in a legal and clinical sense. Historically, male sexual assault has been regarded as a
subset of homosexual behavior (Foster, 2005), an association still common in the
literature. A problem with many theories describing violent crime is that they fail to
address males as victims, and the consequences of stereotypes of masculinity. In a
popular stereotype of masculinity, men are stereotyped as being only active rather than
passive participants in sexual activity. Such a stereotype assumes men are able to
protect themselves.
According to Reuters (2017) some people claim to be "huggers" or "touchy-
feely," but no one has a right to hug or touch you if it makes you uncomfortable.
Unwelcome touching of a sexual nature is often disguised as friendly or paternal
behavior. Under the law, it may be considered sexual harassment. Sexual harassers get a
sense of power or thrills from this kind of touching, and they are skilled at passing it off
as innocent behavior.
About 87 % of men attacked are not reporting it and “these are real men in real
pain” according to Hopper. Being sexually assaulted brings additional feelings of
shame to a man because it works against the ideal of what it means to be a man and it
brings fear. There is a fear of those memories, there is a fear of being violated, there is
fear that someone might know what happened to them. Men who have been sexually
assaulted believe they are not worthy of respect, Strand said. Many males won’t get
help, because they feel they won’t be believed, understood or supported. Part of that is
they know most people don’t expect men to be assaulted, that this can’t really happen to
‘a real man”. They are also afraid of their friends or teammates finding out what
24
happened to them, he said. They believe they will be looked at as less than a man, that
they will be ostracized and shunned. And, many victims see the assault as the death-
knell to their careers (Garamone, 2015).
Indeed, at least one in six men have been sexually abused, according to, a
nonprofit organization that helps men who've had unwanted or abusive sexual
experiences. Along with common myths and misperceptions about sexual violence,
make it difficult for men to report harassment and assault. Boys learn early on that men
must be strong, not vulnerable, and that sexual abuse means they've been made helpless
in some way. How men resolve that inner conflict can shape the course of how they
cope with what happened. The majority of men who've been abused struggle for a long
time. They might experience overwhelming self-doubt and feel they don't "measure up"
to society's idea of what it means to be a "real man." And some men find the conflict
between victimization and stereotypical masculinity "absolutely intolerable," so they
pretend the abuse never happened. Beyond the social pressure to appear conventionally
masculine, men are also silenced by myths about sexual violence. They may worry that
people will conflate abuse and assault perpetrated by another man with their sexual
orientation. The cultural stereotypes around gender, including portrayals of men as
versions of a physically dominant and invincible Jason Bourne, make it difficult for
people to understand that men can also be rendered vulnerable by intoxication,
intimidation, and threats. (Ruiz, 2017).
According to Engel (2017) shame is at the core of the intense emotional
wounding women and men experience when they are sexually violated. An expert on
25
shame Gershen Kaufman aptly stated in his book Shame: The Power of Caring, “Shame
is a natural reaction to being violated or abused. In fact, abuse, by its very nature, is
humiliating and dehumanizing.” This is especially true with sexual violations. The
victim feels invaded and defiled, while simultaneously experiencing the indignity of
being helpless and at the mercy of another person. According to (Engel, 2017) a
survivor’s feelings of guilt and self-blame will have an effect on their decision to reach
out for help. Many people have internalized the idea that the victims are to blame for
sexual assault. They may feel they provoked the attack through appearance or behavior.
When victims report sexual assault, the sad truth is that they aren't always
believed. Drunk victims were interrogated about why they took drinks from their
perpetrator or why they got wasted at all. Sometimes the clothes is being blamed. An
important note: People of all genders can and doget assaulted, and there are unique
challenges that men and genderqueer people face when reporting their experiences.
People who doubt the accusers will commonly ask things like, did they have ever go to
the police about this and why did it take you so long to speak up. Just because a victim
didn't report an assault doesn't mean an assault never happened. As it stands, there are
myriad reasons why a survivor might not want to disclose what happened to them. A
survivor may be worried that they can't "prove" anything happened to them, if there is
no physical evidence available. They may worry about appearing "too calm" or "too
hysterical" to be taken seriously. If they choose to have a rape kit performed, that
experience can be traumatizing, too (Bahadur, 2016).
Length of Reporting Sexual Harassment

26
Attempting to defame and discredit the abused is a tried and true method of
silencing them. The reason/s why victims chose to come forward after a long period of
silence is good to point out. They might establish geographical distance from their
perpetrator and feel safer facing it. Another reason is they come to find out the
perpetrator has had other victims and are no longer as worried about being believed.
Many of the victims remain silent about them experiencing sexual harassment (Bostick,
2017).
According to Hu (2017) People for so long have been dismissed as emotional
and irrational and flighty and all of this. In these instances, to stay silent and to not
speak has been the most rational decision they could make in the moment. Just the
economics of it are so brute and punishing, you know? Just as a matter of pure sort of
cost-benefit analysis, it often just does not make sense for them to come forward
because they will be often punished. They will be shamed. They will be told, "You
know, maybe — you know, maybe you misunderstood the situation," or "Maybe you
shouldn't have worn that outfit." Or you know, "They are just like that, you know?
Don't make a big deal about it." Then there's also the fact that the people who
experienced this harassment have come forward often and they don't see any results.
From research and through experiences that sexual assault and rape are the most
underreported crimes. And part of the reason they’re underreported is that victims are
concerned about whether they’re going to be believed or not. That prevents a lot of
folks from coming forward, as well as the trauma of the experience. So we see this
27
delayed reporting in many instances, because victims are so traumatized. For one, it’s
hard for them to believe that this happened to them. Two, they don’t want to
acknowledge that they’ve in fact been a victim. It’s often someone the victim knows
and trusts. The most common thing you hear, and the most common thing you see in
the research, is that victims don’t think they’re going to be believed or supported
(Tremblay, 2016).
If it was any other crime, we would not blame the victim. Yet, when it comes to
rape, victims face many barriers. It takes an incredible amount of courage for a victim to
come forward. High profile cases make it even harder, because a victim may worry
about how the media scrutiny will impact their lives/families, or some fear that they will
not be believed. Others may face retaliation or fear for their safety. We need to support
survivors everywhere. This case could impact whether other victims will come forward
in future cases. Each survivor reacts to sexual violence in her/ his own unique way.
Trauma impacts the way memory is stored and how victims recall events. Alcohol and
other drugs also impact memory. Some victims may tell others what happened right
away, while others will remain silent. Many will wait weeks, months or even years
before discussing the assault. (Williams, 2015).
Sexual Harassment at School
According to Catherine Hill, Ph.D., and Holly Kearl, M.A. (2013), the term
sexual harassment also refers to unwanted sexual conduct at school. In the school
setting, sexual harassment involves unwanted sexual behavior that impedes a student’s
28
educational opportunities. Sexual harassment at school can include making verbal or
written comments, gestures, showing pictures, physical coercion, or any combination of
these actions. It can take place either in the flesh or through electronic means such as
text messages and of course, social media. Perpetrators can be a school staff, but
student peer-to-peer sexual harassment is the most common sexual harassment at
middle and high schools (Eckes, 2006). Students who sexually harass other students are
likely to have been victimized themselves (Fineran & Bolen, 2006).
Harassment based on a victim’s failure to conform to gender norms is recognized
as sexual harassment. Antigay and -lesbian slurs are frequently used in gender
harassment, but any student who is perceived as failing to conform to social gender
norms can be the target. The courts have recognized gender harassment as a part of
sexual harassment, and thus it is subject to Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972, a law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex at all schools that receive
federal funding (Graves, 2011).
There are two types of sexual harassment that may take place in school. These are
the “quid pro quo” and hostile environment. When someone with power, usually a
teacher or administrator, abuses her or his power to coerce a student into sexual activity
in exchange for a good grade, it is said to be quid pro quo harassment. The vast
majority of sexual harassment at school falls into the category of hostile-environment
harassment, which includes unwanted sexual conduct that is pestering enough to limit a
student’s participation in an educational program or activity.
29
Sexual harassment in school is sometimes considered a form of bullying
(Ashbaugh & Cornell, 2008; Brown et al., 2007). Indeed, both terms refer to harming a
peer or subordinate at school or work. Both bullying and sexual harassment can have
negative psychological effects that interfere with education or work, and a few
behaviors, such as calling someone gay or lesbian in a negative way, are sometimes
considered bullying or sexual harassment or both. Too often, the more comfortable term
bullying is used to describe sexual harassment, obscuring the role of gender and sex in
these incidents (Stein & Mennemeier, 2011). However, it is very important to
distinguish between the terms for they both have different definitions and regulated by
different laws. Schools are likely to promote bullying prevention while ignoring or
downplaying sexual harassment (Gruber & Fineran, 2007).
Young and colleagues (2008) said that boys are more likely than girls to say that
sexual harassment incidents do not bother them. It maybe because of boys and girls
experience different types of sexual harassment. Individuals have different emotional
responses to sexual harassment, due to differences in the kind of sexual harassment they
encountered. Boys are most likely to cite being called gay in a negative way in person
as their most negative experience of sexual harassment and they appear to be less
affected than girls by sexual harassment. Meanwhile, sexual harassment reminds girls
of the gender-power imbalance that exists in most societies (Ormerod et al., 2008;
Gadin & Hammarstrom, 2005; Lichty & Campbell, 2011). Girls are more likely than
boys to say that they have been negatively affected by sexual harassment (AAUW,
30
1993, 2001; Fineran & Bolen, 2006), although the 2009 National School Climate
Survey, by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (Kosciw et al., 2010),
found that the emotional toll can be high for boys who are not straight. The gender of
the harasser also affects outcomes. Felix and McMahon (2006) found that being
sexually harassed by a boy was more strongly related to behavior problems for both
male and female victims than was being sexually harassed by a girl.
Harassment based on a victim’s failure to conform to gender norms is recognized
as sexual harassment. Antigay and -lesbian slurs are frequently used in gender
harassment, but any student who is perceived as failing to conform to social gender
norms can be the target. The courts have recognized gender harassment as a part of
sexual harassment, and thus it is subject to Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972, a law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex at all schools that receive
federal funding (Graves, 2011).
Synthesis
Sexual harassment is the term by default has always been associated with
women, and men also who undergo similar ordeals remain invisible. Men feel hesitant
to come forward to talk about it, fearing the stigma associated with masculine
vulnerability or "weakness". Yet, the problem exists. Our male-dominated society
refuses to acknowledge the sexual harassment of men, and this ignorance - born of
gender bias - perpetuates the secrecy and the problem. The issue is neglected to such an
31
extent that even the legal system does not recognize men as possible victims of sexual
harassment. The fact is men too can fall victim to sexual crimes.
This has always prompted many to wonder if male sexual harassment is really a
thing. There have been cases of men being victims to sexual harassment in the reel and
real-life places in the past. But the reason why this topic was still not taken seriously is
that probably because though many agree that subjecting men to involuntary groping
and touching is certainly not a laughable matter many are still used to seeing men as the
harassers rather than the harassed. However, not only is male sexual harassment 'a
thing' - it has been legally addressed in countries across the world, and has precedents
in several places.
While the vast majority of sexual harassment cases filed are filed by women, an
increasing number of men are filing their own claims. There are no exact statistics on
how many men are sexually harassed at school, and how many of these men actually
file claims for sexual harassment. However, it is likely that the cases filed represent just
a portion of the total number of men who are sexually harassed at school.
Some men may not report their harassment or file a claim because they are
afraid of being mocked by co-schoolmates. They may believe that men can't truly be
sexually harassed by a woman, or that being harassed by another man implicates their
own sexuality. They may fear being embarrassed if details of the harassment were
leaked, particularly if they believe that they should be able to handle the issue
themselves. Whatever the reason, it is evident that many men are simply not filing
claims of sexual harassment.
32
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the methodology of research study, supervision of interviewers
and data analysis techniques including collection of data, sampling frame, procedure of
respondents’ selection and study design was described. This study used methodologies
to diagnose and examine the correlation between prevalence and barriers of reporting of
cases of sexual harassment among male college students under the CEIT department of
Rizal Technological University.

33
Research Method Used
To gather the necessary information for this study, the descriptive research
method was used. This method enabled the researchers to interpret the theoretical
meaning of the findings and hypothesis development for further studies. Specifically,
the researchers utilized a questionnaire type of descriptive research method which
enables the researchers to gather information from the respondents without the
respondents having any difficulties in answering the questions required for researchers
to have information regarding the correlation between prevalence and barriers of
reporting cases of sexual harassment.
Population and Sample Scheme
The population of the study is composed of undergraduate students of Rizal
Technological University during the semester of S.Y. 2017-2018. Male students from
the College of Engineering and Industrial Technology (CEIT) who experienced sexual
harassment were selected.
The researcher made used of purposive sampling in the selection of the
respondents. A purposive sample is a non-probability sample that is selected based on
characteristics of a population and the objective of the study. Purposive sampling was
also known as judgmental, selective, or subjective sampling.
To come up with a representative sample of the total population, 5% margin of
error from a total population of 3,635 selected undergraduate students of Rizal
Technological University.
34
The College of Engineering and Industrial Technology has five year levels. The
first year consisting of ninety-five male students with the percentage of 2.61, the second
year level consisting of 559 male students with the percentage of 15.38, the third year
level consisting of 1679 male students with the percentage of 46.19, the fourth year
level consisting of 752 male students with a percentage of 20.69 students, and the fifth
year level consisting of 550 male students with a percentage of 15.13
Description of the Respondents
The respondents were chosen from the department of CEIT (College of
Engineering and Industrial Technology), as having the most dominant number of male
students at the Rizal Technological University with a total population of three thousand
six hundred thirty five (3,635) during the second semester of school year 2017-2018.
Out of the total population, 360 participants were chosen to take the test. Only 130
students were said to be harassed.
Data Gathering Procedure
To attain the relevant and necessary information, the researchers begin the data
gathering procedure by seeking the help of Rizal Technological University's College of
Arts and Sciences Reading Center (CAS-RC) to allow them to visit other university
libraries. For the number of respondents needed, the researchers wrote a letter of
request to the Management Information Center (MIC) office. Morever, a letter of
request was addressed to the Dean of College of Engineering and Information
Technology (CEIT) prior to the testing and gathering of data.
35
Instrument Used
The Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) is a behavioral-based measure of
sexual harassment whose purpose is to identify the frequency of sexual harassment. The
SEQ indicates whether a person has experienced offensive behavior which may be
deemed sexual harassment by these definitions, meeting the empirical definition of
sexual harassment set out by Till (1980), widely accepted for research purposes.
All items ask the participants to respond whether or not a behavior occurred,
thus avoiding the misinterpretation of the ambiguous term “sexual harassment” is not
included in the survey until the last item, which asks “Have you ever been sexually
harassed” Likert responses, ranging from 0-4, include 1) never, 2) once and 3)
sometimes, 4) often, and 5) very often.
The SEQ, has three major subscales: gender harassment, unwanted sexual
attention, and sexual coercion. Gender harassment (items 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9) described as
verbal and non-verbal behaviors which display degrading, hostile, or insulting attitudes
but whose purpose is not to invoke sexual activity. Unwanted sexual attention (items 5,
8, 10, 13, 14) is comprised of verbal and non-verbal behaviors which were originally of
the three categories of seductive behavior and sexual imposition. Thus behaviors such
as the repeated requests for dates, sexual touching or grabbing, or assault are placed in
this category. Lastly, sexual coercion (items 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19) includes items
which either explicit or implied bribes o threats for sexual activity. All three subscales
are dependent variables in the study.
36
The Importance of Barriers to Reporting Rape and Sexual Assault Questionnaire
(Sable et al., 2006) or The Rape and Sexual Assault Awareness Campus Survey asked
participants to rate the importance of specific barriers to reporting cases of rape and
sexual assault. Male respondents rated the level of perceived importance of 14 barriers
using a 5-point Likert-type scale, where 1 indicates “Not Very Important” and 5
indicates “Very Important”. The specific prompt given to respondents on this measure
is as follows: “Please rate each factor on scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being not very important
and 5 being very important as a factor in men not getting the help they need. The
ratings for each barriers were scored individually, with higher scores for a given item
indicating greater salience or importance of that particular barrier to reporting sexual
assault.
Statistical Treatment of Data
1. Percentage frequency and percentage was used to describe the profile of the
respondents.
Formula:
P= __f__ X 100
N
Where
P = Percentage
f = Number of students per profile
N = Total number of students
37
2. Weighted Mean was used to determine the sexual harassment experience by the
respondents and the barriers in reporting
Formula:
x = ∑fx
n
3. Pearson’s correlation coefficient- was used to determine the relationship between
prevalence of sexual experiences and barriers in reporting
Formula:
r= N∑xy- (∑x) (∑y)
[N∑x2 – (∑x)2][N∑y2- (∑y)2]
Where:
N = number of pairs of scores
∑xy = sum of the products of paired scores
∑x = sum of the x scores
∑y = sum of the y scores
∑x2 = sum of the squared x scores
∑y2 = sum of the squared y scores
38
CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter presents the analysis and the interpretation of data gathered from the
respondents.
Table 1
Profile of the Respondents in terms of Age
Age Frequency %
18-22 113 86.9
23-27 16 12.3
28-32 1 .8
Total 130 100.0
Table 1 shows that one hundred thirteen (113) or 86.9% of the respondents
are between 18 to 22 years old, sixteen (16) or 12.30% of the respondents are between
23 to 27 years old, and only one (1) or 8% of the respondents are between 28 to 32
years old. Engineering course is 5 years so it is expected that students will be
graduating by 21 years old. Nevertheless, there are respondents who are 22 years old
and above because of their irregularity in academics. Some of them were late returnees
and other unlikeable circumstances.
39
Table 2
Profile of the Respondents inTerms of Year Level
Year level Frequency %
Second 8 6.2
Third 76 58.5
Fourth 34 26.2
Fifth 12 9.2
Total 130 100.0
Table 2 shows that seventy six (76) or 58.50% of the respondents are third year
students, thirty four (34) or 26.2% are fourth year students, twelve (12) or 9.2% are
fifth year students and eight (8) or 6.2% of the respondents are second year students.
Table 3
Profile of the Respondents in Terms of Course
Course Frequency %
ARCHI 20 15.4
ECET 1 .8
40
CE 34 26.2
CET 5 3.8
CPE 13 10.0.
CPET 2 1.5
ECE 19 14.6
EE 27 20.8
ICT 4 3.1
IT 1 .8
ME 4 3.1
Total 130 100.0
Table 3 shows that among the 130 respondents, thirty four (34) or 26.2% of the
respondents are taking up Civil Engineering while twenty seven (27) or 20.8%
respondents are Electrical Engineering majors. Architecture students comprise 15.4%
of the respondents which is equivalent to twenty (20) in numeric, nineteen (19)
respondents are from Electronics Communication Engineering with a percentage of
14.6% while Computer Engineering students are thirteen (13) and cover the 10% of
the respondents. Respondents taking up Information Communication Technology and
Mechanical Engineering are tied with 3.1% or four (4) students from the two Courses.
1.5% or two (2) respondents are taking up Computer Engineering Technology. IT and
Electronics Communication Engineering Technology tied at the lowest, having the
least respondents in Engineering Department with only .8% or only one (1)
respondent.
41
Table 4
Forms of Sexual Harassment Experienced by the Respondents
Forms of harassment Frequency %
Verbal 88 67.7
Physical 55 42.3
Visual 26 20.0
Table 4 reveals that eighty eight (88) or 67.7% of the respondents experience
verbal harassment, fifty five (55) or 42.3% of the respondents experience physical
harassment and twenty six (26) or 20.0% of the respondents experience visual
harassment.
42
According to studies, verbal mishandle, rehashed lecherous messages or
unwelcome remarks are “less serious” type of harassment which are most certainly not
considered criminal.
Table 5
Frequency of the Respondents Experiencing Sexual Harassment in Terms of
Gender Harassment
Items Weighte Interpretatio

d Mean
n
1. Habitually told suggestive stories or offensive 2.22 Sometimes
jokes?
2. Made unwanted attempts to draw you into 1.68 Sometimes

discussion of personal or sexual matters (e.g.,
attempted to discuss or comment on your sex life)?
3. Made crude and offensive sexual remarks, either 1.31 Sometimes

publicly (e.g., in the office), or to you privately?
4. Treated you “differently” because of your sex (e.g., 0.90 Once

mistreated, slighted, or ignored you)?
5. Displayed, used, or distributed sexist or suggestive 1.18 Once

materials (e.g., pictures, stories, or pornography)?
43
6. Frequently made sexist remarks (e.g., suggesting 1.02 Once
that women are too emotional to be scientists or that
men should not be the primary caretakers of children
because they are not nurturing?)
7. “Put you down” or was condescending to you 0.82 Once

because of your sex?
Over-all Mean 1.30 Once
0-0.49 = Never, 0.5- 1.49 = Once, 1.5 – 2.49 = Sometimes, 2.5- 3.49 = Often, 3.5 – 4.0 = Very Often
Table 5 shows the frequency of the respondents experiencing sexual harassment
in terms of gender harassment. The respondents sometimes are “habitually told
suggestive stories or offensive jokes” (mean = 2.22), and “made unwanted attempts to
draw into a discussion of personal or sexual matters (e.g., attempted to discuss or
comment on sex life)” (mean = 1.68).

The respondents once experience “made crude and offensive sexual remarks,
either publicly (e.g., in the office), or privately” (mean = 1.31), “displayed, used, or
distributed sexist or suggestive materials (e.g., pictures, stories, or pornography)”
(mean = 1.18), “frequently made sexist remarks (e.g., suggesting that men should not
be the primary caretakers of children because they are not nurturing” (mean = 1.02),
“treated ‘differently’ because of their sex (e.g., mistreated, slighted, or ignored)” (mean
= 0.90), and “put down” or was condescending because of their sex” (mean = 0.82).
An over-all Mean of 1.30 which means that the respondents once experience
gender harassment. The result of the study is as the same as with the findings of
Benatar (2012) which states men can also become victims of domestic violence and
sexual assault but these are not taken seriously since there is a strong prevailing attitude
to men that they are fearless and, sustain grater pain, and are capable of self-defense.
44
Table 6
Unwanted Sexual Attention
Items Weight Interpretation

ed
Mean
1. Gave you unwanted sexual attention? 1.22 Once
2. Attempted to establish a romantic relationship 1.12 Once

with you despite your efforts to discourage this
person?
3. Has continued to ask you for a date, drinks, 1.42 Once
dinner, etc., even though you have said “no”?
4. Touched you (e.g., laid a hand on your bare arm, 1.56 Sometimes
put an arm around your shoulders) in a way that
made you feel uncomfortable?
5. Made unwanted attempts to stroke or fondle you 1.05 Once

(e.g., stroking your leg or neck, etc.)?
Over-all Mean 1.28 Once

in terms of unwanted sexual harassment. The respondents sometimes “been touched
(for example laid a hand on their bare arm, put an arm around their shoulders) in a way
that made them feel uncomfortable” (mean = 1.56).

The respondents once "had continued to ask for a date, drinks, dinner, etc.,
even though they have said no” (mean= 1.42), “been given unwanted sexual attention”
45
(mean=1.22), "attempted to establish a romantic relationship despite of efforts to
discourage this person” (mean= 1.12), and "made unwanted attempts to stroke or
fondle them (e.g., stroking their leg or neck, etc.)” (mean = 1.05).
An over-all mean of 1.28 which means that the respondents once experienced
sexual harassment in terms of unwanted sexual attention. The data resulted to never
experience unwanted sexual attention. The result in the study is the same as with the
findings of Alberta Human Rights Commission (2012) which states that men, women
and transgender people can all experience inappropriate behavior and sexual
harassment can happen between people of various sexual orientations.
Table 7
Sexual Coercion
Items Weighted Interpretation

Mean
1. Made you feel like you were subtly bribed with .97 Once
some sort of reward or special treatment to engage
in a sexual behavior?
2. Made you feel subtly threatened with some sort of .72 Once
retaliation for not being sexually cooperative (e.g.,
the mention of an upcoming evaluation, review,
etc.)?
46
3. Made unwanted attempts to have sex with you .65 Once
that resulted in you pleading, crying, or physically
struggling?
4. Implied faster promotions or better treatment if .61 Once

you were sexually cooperative?
5. Made it necessary for you to respond positively to .76 Once

sexual or social invitations in order to be well-
treated on the job or at school?
6. Made you afraid you would be treated poorly if .68 Once

you didn’t cooperate sexually?
7. Treated you badly for refusing to have sex? .71 Once
Over-all Mean .71 Once

in terms of sexual coercion. The respondents once “made feel like was subtly bribed
with some sort of reward or special treatment to engage in a sexual behavior” (mean = .
97), “made it necessary to respond positively to sexual or social invitations in order to
be well-treated on the job or at school” (mean = .76), “made feel subtly threatened with
some sort of retaliation for not being sexually cooperative (e.g., the mention of an
upcoming evaluation, review, etc.)” (mean =.72), “made afraid would be treated poorly
if they did not cooperate sexually” (mean = .68), “made unwanted attempts to have sex
that resulted in their pleading, crying or physically struggling” (mean = .65), “implied
faster promotions or better treatment if they were sexually cooperative” (mean = .61),
and “treated badly for refusing to have sex” (mean = .61).
47
An Over-all mean of .71 which means that the respondents once experienced
sexual harassment in terms of sexual coercion. The result of the study is the same with
the findings of Ruiz (2017) that the cultural stereotypes around gender make it difficult
for people to understand that men can also be rendered vulnerable by intoxication,
intimidation, and threats.
Table 8
Common Barriers that Keep the Respondents from Reporting the
Harassment
Items Weighted Interpretation
Mean
11. Concerns about confidentiality. 4.00 Important
2. Fear of not being believed. 3.97 Important
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining 3.88 Important

treatment.
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. 3.86 Important
48
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and family 3.79 Important
to know about the rape or assault.
6. Does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted. 3.75 Important
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child 3.69 Important

care, money or insurance.
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who 3.68 Important

committed the sexual abuse or assault)
10. Lack of services available in the local area. 3.68 Important
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully 3.67 Important
prosecuted.
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice system. 3.66 Important
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator 3.64 Important

not allowing the man to obtain help.
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining help. 3.63 Important
14. Fear of being judged as gay. 3.44 Important
Over-all Mean 3.74 Important
0-1.49 = Not very Important, 1.5- 2.49 = Not Important, 2.5 – 3.49 = Somewhat Important, 3.5- 4.49 = Important
4.5 – 5.0 = Extremely Important
Table 8 shows the common barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the
assault. The respondents keep from reporting the assault because the following are
important to them, “concerns about confidentiality.” (mean = 4.0), “fear of not being
believed” (mean = 3.97), “lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining
treatment” (mean = 3.88), lack of knowledge about how to get help” (mean = 3.86),
“shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and family to know about the rape or
assault.” (mean = 3.79), “does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted”
(mean = 3.75), “lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care,
money or insurance” (mean = 3.69), “fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person
49
who committed the sexual abuse or assault)” and “lack of services available in the local
area” (both with mean = 3.68), “does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be
successfully prosecuted (mean = 3.67)”, “dislike or distrust of the police and justice
system” (mean = 3.66)”, “financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator
not allowing the man to obtain help.” (mean= 3.64), “cultural or language barriers to
obtaining help” (mean = 3.63), and lastly “fear of being judged as gay” (mean = 3.44).
An over-all mean of 3.74 which means that the common barriers in reporting the
sexual assault is important. According to studies, barriers on reporting of sexual cases
may be because of shame, guilt, embarrassment and fear of being not believe. In the
case of men, they might fail to report it or file a case because it may be perceived to
jeopardize their masculinity. Another factor would be the reason of not wanting their
family to know about the sexual harassment has a greater significance to men.
Table 9
Correlation Between Item Number 1 of the Sexual Experience Questionnaire and

the Barriers that Keep the Respondents from Reporting the Assault
Pearson p-
Barriers "r" Interpretation value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not Positive Very p>.05, accept
wanting friends and family to know about Weak Ho
the rape or assault. 0.107 Relationship 0.227 Not affected
2. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
0.108 Relationship 0.22 Not affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the Positive Very p>.05, accept
person who committed the sexual abuse or Weak Ho
assault) 0.042 Relationship 0.636 Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and 0.138 Positive Very 0.118 p>.05, accept
50
justice system.
sSSSCSCIENCESTECHNOLOGICAL
Weak
UNIVERSITY
Ho
Relationship Not affected
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist p>.05, accept
will be successfully prosecuted. Ho
0.003 No Relationship 0.972 Not affected
6. Does not want a friend or family member Positive Very p>.05, accept
to be prosecuted. Weak Ho
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get Positive Very p>.05, accept
help. Weak Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance Positive Very p>.05, accept
of obtaining treatment. Weak Ho
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as Positive Very p>.05, accept
transportation, child care, money or Weak Ho
insurance. 0.074 Relationship 0.405 Not affected
10. Lack of services available in the local Positive Very p>.05, accept
area. Weak Ho
11. Concerns about confidentiality. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, p>.05, accept
or the perpetrator not allowing the man to Ho
obtain help. 0.004 No Relationship 0.965 Not affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to Positive Very p>.05, accept
obtaining help. Weak Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
Table 9 depicts that there is a positive very weak relationship between the
barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual
harassment experienced by the respondents: Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not
wanting friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r = 0.107, p =0.227);
fear of not being believed ( r = .108, p =0.22); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the
person who committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r =0.042, p =0.636) dislike or
distrust of the police and justice system( r = 0.138, p = 0.118) ; does not want a friend
or family member to be prosecuted(r = .087, p 0.326); lack of knowledge about how to
get help(r = .083, p 0.35); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining
51
treatment(r = .076, p = 0.391); lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation,
child care, money or insurance(r = .074, p = .405); lack of services available in the
local area(r = .025, p= 0.774); concerns about confidentiality(r = 0.084, p 0.339);
Cultural or language barriers to obtaining help(r = 0.164), p = 0.062); and fear of
being judged as gay (r = 0.044, p 0.616).
However, there is no relationship between barriers that keep the respondents
from reporting the assault. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be
successfully prosecuted (r = .003, p 0.972) and financial dependence on the
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r = .004, p =
0.965). It means that when the respondents experienced having told suggestive stories
and offensive jokes, they will not report the case because according to studies, Many
has fear their disclosure will not result in helpful outcomes. Especially those who
experienced sexual harassment in work or school settings, fear retaliation or reprisal
from the harasser, colleagues or their employer (Pietsch, 2015). Also, when the victim
is female, the offender is more likely to be arrested. Sexual harassment is
underreported in both sexes but the rating rate is even lower for males.
Since all the p- values are higher than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is
accepted. This implies that the sexual harassments experienced by the respondents are
not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault. This
means that when the respondents experienced having told suggestive stories and
offensive jokes, there may be a tendency for them to report the assault. According to
Crystal (2012), jokes are a piece of any workplace and are frequently used to lighten
52
the atmosphere. However, jokes that are always coordinated at one individual or can be
classed as hostile can be seen as work environment provocation. Jokes are an awesome
method to soothe worry in the working environment however representatives do need
to recall that not every person has the same tolerance levels.
Table 10

Barriers Pearson"r Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, -.021 Negative Very .812 p>.05,
not wanting friends and family to Weak accept Ho
know about the rape or assault. Relationship Not affected
3. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
3. Fear of retaliation by the
perpetrator (the person who Negative Very p>.05,
committed the sexual abuse or Weak accept Ho
assault) -0.054 Relationship 0.539 Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police 0.013 Positive Very 0.882 p>.05,
and justice system. Weak accept Ho
53
Relationship
UNIVERSITY
Not affected
5. Does not believe the Positive Very p>.05,
perpetrator or rapist will be Weak accept Ho
successfully prosecuted. 0.029 Relationship 0.745 Not affected
6. Does not want a friend or Negative Very p>.05,
family member to be prosecuted. Weak accept Ho
-0.112 Relationship 0.204 Not affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how .090 Positive Very .306 p>.05,
to get help. Weak accept Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the .132 Positive Very .135 p>.05,
importance of obtaining Weak accept Ho
treatment. Relationship Not affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain .052 Positive Very .554 p>.05,
help, such as transportation, child Weak accept Ho
care, money or insurance. Relationship Not affected
10. Lack of services available in -.014 Negative Very .872 p>.05,
the local area. Weak accept Ho
11. Concerns about -.036 Negative Very .688 p>.05,
confidentiality. Weak accept Ho
12. Financial dependence on the -.189* Negative Very .032
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Weak p<.05, reject
allowing the man to obtain help. Relationship Ho Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers .039 Positive Very .659 p>.05,
to obtaining help. Weak accept Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .025 Positive Very .774 p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
Table 10 reveals that there is a positive very weak relationship between
the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault and the following
sexual harassment experienced by the respondents: fear of retaliation by the
perpetrator (the person who committed the sexual abuse or assault (r =0.09, p =0.307);
dislike or distrust of the police and justice system( r = 0.013, p = 0.882) ; lack of
knowledge about how to get help (r = .090, p 0.306); lack of knowledge about the
importance of obtaining treatment (r=.132, p=0.135); lack of resources to obtain help,
such as transportation, child care, money or insurance( r = .052, p = .554); cultural or
language barriers to obtaining help (r = 0.039), p = 0.659); and fear of being judged as
gay (r = 0.025, p 0.774).
54
Meanwhile, there is a negative very weak relationship between the
harassment experienced by the respondents: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r =- 0.21, p =0. 812); fear of
retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who committed the sexual abuse or assault (r =
-0.054, p 0.539) and does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r =-
0.112, p= 0.204); lack of services available in the local area (r = -.014, p= 0.872);
concerns about confidentiality (r = -.036, p 0.688); financial dependence on the
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r = -.189, p = 0.032).
Since most of all the p- values are higher than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is
not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault. This
means that when respondents experienced having made unwanted attempts to draw into
a discussion of personal or sexual matters (e.g., attempted to discuss or comment on
your sex life) there may be a tendency for them to report the assault because such cases
are forms of verbal harassment and are intolerable. According to the studies of
AWARE (2008), verbal lewd behavior are such as being tended to by unwelcome and
hostile terms for example, 'bitch', 'dick', 'sweetheart', and so forth; getting unwelcome
remarks or being inquired nosy inquiries concerning appearance, body parts, sexual
coexistence, feminine cycle and so forth; being made to over and again and
purposefully tune in to messy jokes, unrefined stories that are unwelcome and
55
discomforting, being irritated for dates or accepting unwelcome sexual proposals or
solicitations, being over and again subjected to sexually suggestive, vulgar or offending
sounds.
Except in item number 12, the hypothesis is lower than 0.05, therefore the
hypothesis is rejected which means that respondents experiencing sexual harassment is
affected by the financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing
the man to obtain help. This means that when the respondents experienced having
made unwanted attempts to draw into a discussion of personal or sexual matters (e.g.,
attempted to discuss or comment on your sex life), they may not report the case because
according to studies, many has fear their disclosure will not result in helpful outcomes.
Especially those who experienced sexual harassment in work or school settings, fear
retaliation or reprisal from the harasser, colleagues or their employer (Pietsch 2015).
Also, when the victim is female, the offender is more likely to be arrested. Sexual
harassment is underreported in both sexes but the rating rate is even lower for males.
Table 11
Correlation between Item Number 3 of the Sexual Experience Questionnaire and

Pearson
Barriers "r" Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting .101 .253 p>.05, accept
friends and family to know about the rape or positive Very weak Ho
assault. Relationship Not affecte2d
2. Fear of not being believed. 0.185 positive Very weak 0.035
Relationship
p<.05, Reject
Ho affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the 0.136 positive Very weak 0.124
person who committed the sexual abuse or Relationship p>.05, accept
assault) Ho
Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice 0.149 positive Very weak 0.092 p>.05, accept
system. Relationship Ho Not
56
affected
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist 0.166 positive Very Weak 0.659
will be successfully prosecuted. Relationship p>.05, accept
Ho Not
affected
6. Does not want a friend or family member 0.148 positive Very Weak 0.092
to be prosecuted. Relationship p>.05, accept
Ho Not
affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. .273 positive weak .002
Relationship p<.05, Reject
Ho affected
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance .225 positive weak .010
of obtaining treatment. Relationship p<.05, Reject
Ho affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as .220 positive weak .012
transportation, child care, money or Relationship p<.05, Reject
insurance. Ho affected
10. Lack of services available in the local .239 positive weak .006
area. Relationship p<.05, Reject
Ho affected
11. Concerns about confidentiality. 0.131 positive Very Weak 0.139
Relationship p>.05, accept
Ho Not
affected
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, 0.05 positive weak p<.05, Rejectt
or the perpetrator not allowing the man to Relationship 0.571 Ho Affected
obtain help.
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining 0.22 positive weak 0.012
help. Relationship p<.05, Reject
Ho affected
14. Fear of being judged as gay. positive Very Weak p>.05, accept
Relationship Ho Not
0.069 0.435 affected
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r = .101, p =.253) fear of not
being believed.( r = 0.185 p =0.035); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person
who committed the sexual abuse or assault)(r =0.136, p =0.124) dislike or distrust of
the police and justice system ( r = 0.149, p = 0.092) ; does not want a friend or family
member to be prosecuted (r = 0.148, p 0.092); concerns about confidentiality (r =
0.131, p= 0.139); and fear of being judged as gay (r = 0.069, p= 0.435 and a positive
weak relationship between lack of knowledge about how to get help (r = .273, p=
57
0.002); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment(r = .225, p =
0.10).
Since all the p- values are higher than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is accepted.
This implies that the sexual harassments experienced by the respondents are not
affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault. This means
that when the respondents experienced having made crude and offensive sexual
remarks, either publicly (e.g., in the office), or privately there may be a tendency for
them to report the case. According to the Philippine Statistics Authority (2008), sexual
harassment, which has been pronounced unlawful in the work environment, preparing
and training conditions, won't go on without serious consequences as it abuses the
nobility and human privileges of a man.
Table 12

Barriers Pearson "r" Interpretation p-value Decision
1.Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting
friends and family to know about the rape or p>.05, accept
assault. Negative Very Ho Not
-0.023 Weak Relationship 0.797 affected
2. Fear of not being believed.
Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
0.078 Relationship 0.05 affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person p>.05, accept
who committed the sexual abuse or assault) Ho Not
-0.007 No Relationship 0.937 affected
58
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice p>.05, accept
system. Negative Very Ho Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be p>.05, accept
successfully prosecuted. Negative Very Ho Not
6. Does not want a friend or family member to be Positive Very
prosecuted. Weak p<.05, Reject
0.206 Relationship 0.018 Ho affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. .124 Positive Very .160 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
Relationship affected
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of .108 Positive Very .221 p>.05, accept
obtaining treatment. Weak Ho Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as .005 .954 p>.05, accept
transportation, child care, money or insurance. Ho Not
No Relationship affected
10. Lack of services available in the local area. .128 .147 p>.05, accept
Positive low Ho Not
11. Concerns about confidentiality. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the Positive Very p<.05,
perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help. Weak Rejectt Ho
0.112 Relationship 0.206 Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining help. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
Weak Ho Not
harassment experienced by the respondents: fear of not being believed.( r = 0.078 p
=0.05); does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted(r = 0.206, p 0.018);
lack of knowledge about how to get help(r = .124, p= .160); lack of knowledge about
the importance of obtaining treatment(r = .108, p = 0.221); concerns about
confidentiality(r = 0.092, p= 0.297); financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the
perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help(r = 0.112, p = 0.206) cultural or
language barriers to obtaining help(r = 0.071, p = 0.42) and fear of being judged as
gay(r = 0.156, p= 0.076; and a positive low relationship between lack of services
available in the local area(r = .128, p= .147).
59
Meanwhile, there is a negative very weak relationship between the barriers that
keep the respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and
family to know about the rape or assault(r = -0.023, p =0.797) dislike or distrust of the
police and justice system( r = -0.059, p = 0.502) does not believe the perpetrator or
rapist will be successfully prosecuted.(r = -0.059, p 0.502). According to Sable et al
(2006) Barriers on reporting of sexual may be because of shame, guilt, embarrassment
and fear of being not believe. In the case of men, they might fail to report it or file a
case because it may be perceived to jeopardize their masculinity. Another factor would
be the reason of not wanting their family to know about the sexual harassment has a
greater significance to men rather than of female victims. Another common reason of
males not reporting the assault includes the lack of faith in the criminal justice system
and the perception that there was a lack of evidencece (Mcdo0nalds & Tijerino, 2013).
However, there is no relationship between barriers that keep the respondents
from reporting the assault. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who
committed the sexual abuse or assault)(r =-0.007, p =0.937) and Lack of resources to
obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or insurance(r = .005, p = .954)
This means that when the respondents experienced having treated differently because of
their sex (e.g., mistreated, slighted, or ignored you) they will not report the case
because of fear retaliation or reprisal from the harasser, colleagues or their employer
(Pietsch, 2015). According to Mcdonalds and Tijerino (2013), While most women can
60
cry for help and can easily find services there are a few rape crisis centers there are only
a few who assess services and there is none specifically designated for men .
This implies that the sexual harassments experienced by the respondents are not
affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault. This means
that when the respondents experienced having treated differently because of their sex
(e.g., mistreated, slighted, or ignored you) there may be a tendency that they will report
the case. According to Worldbank (2013) sexual harassment includes a wide range of
behaviors, from glances and rude jokes, to demeaning comments based on gender
stereotypes, to sexual assault and other acts of physical violence. Sexual harassment is a
source of danger in the work area across the globe that decreases the quality of work
and human being, weakens gender equality and create costs on different firms and
organizations (McCann, 2005).
Table 13

Barriers Pearson
"r" Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not Negative Vey
wanting friends and family to know Weak p>.05, accept Ho
about the rape or assault. -0.036 Relationship 0.681 Not affected
4. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very
Weak p>.05, accept Ho
61
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator Positive Very
UNIVERSITY
(the person who committed the sexual Weak p>.05, accept Ho
abuse or assault) 0.067 Relationship 0.451 Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and Positive Very
justice system. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or Negative Vey
rapist will be successfully prosecuted. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
6. Does not want a friend or family Positive Very
member to be prosecuted. Weak p<.05, Reject Ho
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get Positive Very
help. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the Positive Very
importance of obtaining treatment. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, Positive Very
such as transportation, child care, Weak p>.05, accept Ho
money or insurance. 0.119 Relationship 0.179 Not affected
10. Lack of services available in the Positive Very
local area. Weak p<.05, Reject Ho
11. Concerns about confidentiality. Positive Very
12. Financial dependence on the Positive Very
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Weak p>.05, accept Ho
allowing the man to obtain help. 0.068 Relationship 0.442 Not affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to Positive Very
obtaining help. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. Positive Very
Table 13 depicts that there is a negative very weak relationship between the
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r = -0.036 and p= 0.681); does
not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted (r=-0031 and p=
0.73).
The table depicts that there is a positive very weak relationship: fear of not
being believed (r=0.080 and p=0.368); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (p=0.067
62
and r=0.451); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system (r= 0.069 and
p=0.436); does not want a friend or a family member to be prosecuted (r=0.098 and
p=0.267); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r=0.094 and p=0.289); lack of
knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.094 and p=0.289); lack of
resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or insurance
(r=0.119 and p=0.179); lack of services available in the local area (r=0.198 and
p=0.024); concerns about confidentiality (r=0.044 and p=0.617); financial dependence
on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r=0.068 and
p=0.442); cultural or language barriers to obtaining help (p=0.068 and r=0.442) and
fear of being judged as gay (r= 0.095 and p=0.283).
This implies that the sexual harassment of unwanted sexual attention experienced by
the respondents are not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from
reporting the assault. According to the studies of Foster (2005) a popular stereotype of
masculinity, men are stereotyped as being only active rather than passive participants
in sexual activity. Such a stereotype assumes men are able to protect themselves.
Table 14

Pearson
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting Negative Very p>.05,
accept Ho
friends and family to know about the rape or Weak Not
assault. -0.02 Relationship 0.818 affected
5. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very
p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
63
3.
Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the Positive Very
UNIVERSITY
p>.05,
person who committed the sexual abuse or Weak accept Ho
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice Positive Very
p>.05,
system. Weak accept Ho
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist Positive Very
p>.05,
will be successfully prosecuted. Weak accept Ho
6. Does not want a friend or family member to Positive Very
p>.05,
be prosecuted. Weak accept Ho
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. Positive Very
p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of Positive Very
p>.05,
obtaining treatment. Weak accept Ho
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as Positive Very
p>.05,
transportation, child care, money or insurance. Weak accept Ho
10. Lack of services available in the local area. Positive Very
p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
11. Concerns about confidentiality. .040 Positive Very .650
p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, .084 Positive Very .342
p>.05,
or the perpetrator not allowing the man to Weak accept Ho
obtain help. Relationship Not affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining .116 Positive Very .190
p>.05,
help. Weak accept Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .037 Positive Very .678
p>.05,
Weak accept Ho
Table 14 shows positive very weak relationship with items: fear of not
being believed (r= 0.02, p= 0.824); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (r=0.02,
p=0824); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system (r=0.134, p=0.13); does not
believe the perpetrator or rapist wil be successfully prosecuted (r= 0.118, p=0.179);
does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=0.067, p=0.448), lack of
knowledge about how to get help (r=0.113, p=0.2); lack of knowledge about the
importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.131, p=0.138); lack of resources to obrain help
(r=0.127, p=0.151), lack of sercices available in the local area (r=0.0002, p=0.98);
64
concerns about confidentiality (r= .040, p= .650); financial dependence on the
perpetrator (r= 0.084, p= .342); cultural or language barriers to obtaining help (r= .116,
p= .190) and fear of being judged as gay (r= .037, p= .678). Meanwhile, negative very
weak relationship on items: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and
family to know about the rape or assault (r= -0.02, p=0.818).
Since all the p- values are higher than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is
accepted. This implies that the sexual harassment of unwanted displayed, used or
distributed sexist or suggestive materials experienced by the respondents are not
affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault, according
to AWARE (2008) the issue relates less to the real natural contrasts amongst men and
ladies. It identifies with the sexual orientation or social parts ascribed to men and
ladies in social and monetary life, and observations about male and female sexuality in
the public eye that can lead to unequal male-female power connections
Table 15

Pearson
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not p>.05, accept
wanting friends and family to know Negative Very Weak Ho Not
about the rape or assault. -0.34 Relationship 0.704 affected
6. Fear of not being believed. p>.05, accept
Negative Very Weak Ho Not
-0.057 Relationship 0.517 affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator 0.018 Positive Very Weak 0.84 p>.05, accept
(the person who committed the sexual Relationship Ho Not
65
abuse or assault)
affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and p>.05, accept
justice system. Positive Very Weak Ho Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or p>.05, accept
rapist will be successfully prosecuted. Negative Very Weak Ho Not
6. Does not want a friend or family p>.05, accept
member to be prosecuted. Positive Very Weak Ho Not
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get p>.05, accept
help. Negative Very Weak Ho Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the p>.05, accept
importance of obtaining treatment. Negative Very Weak Ho Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, p>.05, accept
such as transportation, child care, Positive Very Weak Ho Not
money or insurance. 0.044 Relationship 0.622 affected
10. Lack of services available in the p>.05, accept
local area. Ho Not
0 No Relationship 0.998 affected
11. Concerns about confidentiality. .025 .777 p>.05, accept
Positive Very Weak Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the .001 .995 p<.05,
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Rejectt Ho
allowing the man to obtain help. No Relationship Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to .095 .284 p>.05, accept
obtaining help. Positive Very Weak Ho Not
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .071 .424 p>.05, accept
Positive Very Weak Ho Not
Table 15 shows positive very weak relationship with items: fear of retaliation by
the perpetrator (r=0.018, p=084); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system
(r=0.038, p=0.666); does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=0.12,
p=0.174); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.131,
p=0.138); lack of resources to obtain help (r=0.044, p=0.622); concerns about
confidentiality (r= .025, p= .777); cultural or language barrier to obtaining help (r= .
095, p= .284) and fear of being judged as gay (r= .071, p= .424). Meanwhile, negative
very weak relationship on items: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and
family to know about the rape or assault (r= -0.34, p=0.704) ; fear of not being believed
(r= -0.057, p= 0.517); does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
66
prosecuted (r= -0.103, p=0.244) and lack of knowledge about how to get help (r= -0.01,
p=0.91). However there is no relationship for lack of services available in the local area
(r=0, p=0.998) and financial dependence on the perpetrator (r= .001, p= .995)
This implies that the sexual harassment of frequently made sexist remarks experienced
by the respondents are not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from
reporting the assault according to Crystal (2012), jokes that are hostile in nature ought
not go on without serious consequences, regardless of whether the culprit of these jokes
does not understand they are being hostile.
Table 16

Pearso
n
Barriers "r” Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, Negative Very p>.05, accept
not wanting friends and family to Weak Ho
know about the rape or assault. -0.143 Relationship 0.105 Not affected
2.Fear of not being believed. 0.063 Positive Very 0.473 p>.05, accept
67
Weak Ho Not
perpetrator (the person who Positive Very p>.05, accept
committed the sexual abuse or Weak Ho Not
assault) 0.024 Relationship 0.79 affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police Positive Very p>.05, accept
and justice system. Weak Ho Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator Negative Very p>.05, accept
or rapist will be successfully Weak Ho Not
prosecuted. -0.084 Relationship 0.342 affected
6. Does not want a friend or Positive Very p>.05, accept
family member to be prosecuted. .053 Weak Ho Not
Relationship 0.552 affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how -.023 Negative Very p>.05, accept
to get help. Weak Ho Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the Positive Very p>.05, accept
importance of obtaining treatment. .049 Weak Ho Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain Positive Very p>.05, accept
help, such as transportation, child 0.015 Weak 0.865 Ho Not
care, money or insurance. Relationship affected
10. Lack of services available in Negative Very p>.05, accept
the local area. -.107 Weak .227 Ho Not
11. Concerns about p>.05, accept
confidentiality. -.007 .941 Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the Negative Very
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not -.010 Weak .911 p<.05, Rejectt
allowing the man to obtain help. Relationship Ho Affected
obtaining help. .102 Weak .249 Ho Not
Weak Ho Not
Table 16 shows positive very weak relationship with items: fear of not being
believed (r= 0.63, p= 0.473); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (r=0.024, p=0.79);
dislike or distrust of the police and justice system (r=0.154, p=0.08); does not want a
friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=0.053, p=0.552), lack of knowledge about
the importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.049, p=0.581); lack of resources to obtain
68
help (r=0.015, p=0.865): cultural or barriers language to obtain help (r= .102, p=.249)
and fear of being judged as a gay (r=0.049, p=0.579).
Meanwhile, negative very weak relationship on items:, shame, guilt,
embarrassment not wanting friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r=
-0.143, p=0.105); does not believed the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
prosecuted (r= -0.084, p=.342); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r= -0.023,
p=0.796), lack of services available in the local area (r= -0.107, p= .227); concerns
about confidentiality (r= -0.007, p=0.941) and financial depence on the perpertrator (r=
-0.010, p= 0.911).
This implies that despite the efforts of turning down experienced by the respondents are
not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault despite
the fact that concentrate male rape is an essential issue, it has generally been
"disregarded, rejected, or taken for granted.
Table 17

Pearson p-
Barriers ”r" Interpretation value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, -0.104 Negative Very 0.24 p>.05, accept Ho
not wanting friends and family Weak Not affected
to know about the rape or Relationship
69
assault.
7. Fear of not being believed. Negative Very
perpetrator (the person who Negative Very
committed the sexual abuse or Weak p>.05, accept Ho
4. Dislike or distrust of the Positive Very
police and justice system. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
5. Does not believe the Negative Very
perpetrator or rapist will be Weak p>.05, accept Ho
successfully prosecuted. -0.056 Relationship 0.527 Not affected
6. Does not want a friend or Negative Very
family member to be Weak p>.05, accept Ho
prosecuted. -0.017 Relationship 0.851 Not affected
7. Lack of knowledge about Positive Very
how to get help. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the Negative Very
importance of obtaining Weak p>.05, accept Ho
treatment. -0.058 Relationship 0.512 Not affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain Negative Very
help, such as transportation, Weak p>.05, accept Ho
child care, money or insurance. -0.056 Relationship 0.524 Not affected
10. Lack of services available Negative low p>.05, accept Ho
in the local area. 0.018 Relationship 0.839 Not affected
11. Concerns about Negative low p>.05, accept Ho
confidentiality. -0.09 Relationship 0.263 Not affected
12. Financial dependence on
the perpetrator, or the Negative Very
perpetrator not allowing the Weak p<.05, Rejectt Ho
man to obtain help. -0.116 Relationship 0.189 Affected
13. Cultural or language Negative Very
barriers to obtaining help. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. Positive Very
Table 17 depicts that there is a negative very weak relationship between the barriers
that keep respondents from reporting assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and
family to know about the rape or assault (r=-0.104, p=0.24); fear of not being believed
70
(r=-0.067, p=0.449); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who committed
the sexual abuse or assault) (r=-0.087, p= 0.326); does not believe the perpetrator or
rapist will be successfully prosecute (r=-0.056, p=0.527); does not want a friend or
family member to be prosecuted (r=-0.017, p=0.851); lack of knowledge about the
importance of obtaining treatmentt (r=-0.058, p=0.512); lack of resources to obtain
help, such as transportation, child care, money or insurance (r=-0.056, p=0.524);
financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to
obtain help (r=-0.116, p=0.189) and cultural or language barriers to obtaining help (r=-
0.04, p=0.653).
Meanwhile, there is a positive very weak relationship between the barriers that
keep respondents from reporting assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: dislike or distrust of the police and justice system. (r=
0.026,p=0.768); lack of knowledge about how to get help.(r=0.037,p=0.679) and fear of
being judged as gay.(r=0.11,p=0.899)
There is a negative low relationship between the barriers that keep respondents
from reporting assault and the following sexual harassment experienced by the
respondents: lack of services available in the local area.(r=0.018,p=0.839) and concerns
about confidentiality (r=-0.09,p=0.263)
not affected by the barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the assault.
71
According to the studies of Rivera (2017), individual can be harassed because she is a
woman or because he or she transgresses gender roles, and so forth.
The harassment does not need to be based on anything of a sexual nature. Instead,
gender harassment usually involves stereotypes based on the roles and functions
associated with a particular gender.
the man to obtain help.
Table 18
Correlation Between Item Number 10 of the Sexual Experience Questionnaire

and the Barriers that Keep the Respondents from Reporting the Assault
Pearson p-
Barriers “r” Interpretation value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, p>.05, accept
not wanting friends and family to No Ho
know about the rape or assault. -0.007 Relationship 0.833 Not affected
72
8. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
perpetrator (the person who p>.05, accept
committed the sexual abuse or No Ho
4. Dislike or distrust of the police
and justice system. Positive Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator p>.05, accept
or rapist will be successfully No Ho Not
prosecuted. -0.002 Relationship 0.983 affected
6. Does not want a friend or family p>.05, accept
member to be prosecuted. No Ho Not
7. Lack of knowledge about how to Positive Very p>.05, accept
get help. Weak Ho Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the Positive Very p>.05, accept
importance of obtaining treatment. Weak Ho Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, Positive Very p>.05, accept
such as transportation, child care, Weak Ho Not
money or insurance. 0.077 Relationship 0.384 affected
10. Lack of services available in Positive Very p>.05, accept
the local area. Weak Ho Not
11. Concerns about confidentiality. Negative Very p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the Negative Very
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Weak p<.05, Rejectt
allowing the man to obtain help. -0.011 Relationship 0.899 Ho Affected
obtaining help. Weak Ho Not
14. Fear of being judged as gay. p>.05, accept
No Ho Not
0 Relationship 0.996 affected
Table 18 depicts that there is a positive very weak relationship between the barriers
that keep respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: fear of not being believed (r=0.096,p=0.275); dislike or
distrust of the police and justice system (r=0.056, p=0.529); lack of knowledge about
73
how to get help (r=0.127, p=0.151); lack of knowledge about the importance of
obtaining treatment. (r=0.132, p=0.134); lack of resources to obtain help, such as
transportation, child care, money or insurance.(r=0.077, p=0.384) lack of services
available in the local area (r=0.129, p=0.144) and cultural or language barriers to
obtaining help.(r=0.044, p=0.623)
Meanwhile there is a negative very weak relationship between the barriers that keep
respondents from reporting assault and the following sexual harassment experienced by
the respondents: concerns about confidentiality (r=-0.028, p=0.752) and financial
dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help.
(r=-0.011,p=0.899). However there is no relationship between the barriers that keep
respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment experienced
by the respondents: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and family to
know about the rape or assault (r=-0.007, p=0.833); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator
(the person who committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r=-0.002, p=0.983); does not
believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted (r=-0.002, p=983); does
not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=0.006, p=0.945) and fear of
being judged as gay (r=0, p=0.996).
According to the study of Schrobsdorff (2017) recently an Instamotor online survey
74
which found that 2 out of 3 men don’t think repeated unwanted invitations to drinks,
dinner or dates is sexual harassment.
Table 19

Pearson p-
1. Shame, guilt, -0.1 Negative Very 0.258 p>.05, accept Ho Not
embarrassment, not Weak Relationship affected
wanting friends and family
75
to know about the rape or
assault.
2.Fear of not being .611
believed. Negative Very p>.05, accept Ho Not
-0.045 Weak Relationship affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the .423
perpetrator (the person who
committed the sexual abuse Negative Very p>.05, accept Ho Not
or assault) -0.071 Weak Relationship affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the Positive Very weak .877 p>.05, accept Ho Not
police and justice system. 0.014 Relationship affected
5. Does not believe the .592
perpetrator or rapist will be Positive Very weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
successfully prosecuted. 0.047 Relationship affected
6. Does not want a friend or .347
family member to be Positive Very weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
prosecuted. 0.093 Relationship affected
7. Lack of knowledge about Positive Very weak .454 p>.05, accept Ho Not
how to get help. 0.066 Relationship affected
8. Lack of knowledge about .343
the importance of obtaining Positive Very weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
treatment. 0.084 Relationship affected
9. Lack of resources to .483
obtain help, such as
transportation, child care, Positive Very weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
money or insurance. 0.062 Relationship affected
10. Lack of services .918 p>.05, accept Ho Not
available in the local area. 0.009 No Relationship affected
11. Concerns about Negative Very -.072 p>.05, accept Ho Not
confidentiality. -0.072 Weak Relationship affected
12. Financial dependence .720
on the perpetrator, or the
perpetrator not allowing the Positive Very weak p<.05, Rejectt Ho
man to obtain help. 0.032 Relationship Affected
13. Cultural or language Positive Very weak .426 p>.05, accept Ho Not
barriers to obtaining help. 0.07 Relationship affected
14. Fear of being judged as Negative Very .761 p>.05, accept Ho Not
gay. -0.027 Weak Relationship affected
barriers that keep respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r=-0.1,p=0.258); fear of not
being believed (r=-0.045,p=.611); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who
76
committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r=-0.071,p=.423); concerns about
confidentiality (r=-0.072,p=-.072) and fear of being judged as gay (r=-0.027, p=.761)
Meanwhile, there is a positive very weak relationship between the barriers that
keep respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: dislike or distrust of the police and justice system
(r=0.014, p= .877); does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
prosecuted.(r=0.047, p=.592); does not want a friend or family member to be
prosecuted (r=0.093,p=.347); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r=0.066,
p=.454); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.084,
p=.343); lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or
insurance. (r=0.062, p=.483); financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the
perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r=0.032, p=.720) and cultural or
language barriers to obtaining help (r=0.07, p=.426)
However, there is no relationship between the barriers that keep respondents from
reporting the assault and lack of services available in the local area. (r=0.009, p=.918)
According to (Engel, 2017) a survivor’s feelings of guilt and self-blame will have an
effect on their decision to reach out for help. Many people have internalized the idea
77
that the victims are to blame for sexual assault. They may feel they provoked the
attack through appearance or behavior.
Table 20

Pearson Interpretatio p-
Barriers "r" n value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends Negative p<.05,
and family to know about the rape or assault. weak Reject Ho
2. Fear of not being believed. 0.006 No 0.95 p>.05,
78
accept Ho
Not
relationship affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person p>.05,
who committed the sexual abuse or assault) accept Ho
Positive low Not
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice system. p>.05,
Positive Very accept Ho
Weak Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be p>.05,
successfully prosecuted. Positive Very accept Ho
Weak Not
6. Does not want a friend or family member to be p>.05,
prosecuted. Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. p>.05,
Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of p>.05,
obtaining treatment. Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as p>.05,
transportation, child care, money or insurance. Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
10. Lack of services available in the local area. p>.05,
Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
11. Concerns about confidentiality. p>.05,
Negative accept Ho
Very Weak Not
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the negative Very p<.05,
perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help. Weak Rejectt Ho
-0.147 Relationship 0.096 Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining help. p>.05,
accept Ho
No Not
0.004 relationship 0.96 affected
14. Fear of being judged as gay. p>.05,
Positive Very accept Ho
Weak Not
Table 20 depicts that there is a negative very weak relationship between the barriers
experienced by the respondents: does not want a friend or family member to be
prosecuted (r=-0.018, p=0.842); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r=-0.018,
79
p=0.841); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r= -0.017,
p= 0.186); lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or
insurance.(r=-0.036, p=0.687); lack of services available in the local area (r=-0.04,
p=0.654); concerns about confidentiality. (r=-0.012, p=0.173) and financial dependence
on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help. (r=-0.147,
p=0.096).
Meanwhile, there is a positive very weak relationship between the barriers
experienced by the respondents: dislike or distrust of the police and justice system
(r=0.082, p=0.352); does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
prosecuted (r=0.049, p= 0.577) and fear of being judged as gay (r=0.023, p=0.795).
There is a positive low relationship between the barriers that keep
respondents from reporting the assault and Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the
person who committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r=-0.073, p=0.408).
However there’s no relationship between the barriers that keep respondents
from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment experienced by the
respondents: fear of not being believed (r= 0.006, p=0.95) and cultural or language
barriers to obtaining help. (r=0.004, p=0.96)
80
Except in item number 12 and 1, the hypothesis is lower than 0.05, therefore
the hypothesis is rejected which means that respondents experiencing sexual
harassment is affected by the financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator
not allowing the man to obtain help and Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting
friends and family to know about the rape or assault. According to (Bahadur, 2016) A
survivor may be worried that they can't "prove" anything happened to them, if there is
no physical evidence available. They may worry about appearing "too calm" or "too
hysterical" to be taken seriously. If they choose to have a rape kit performed, that
experience can be traumatizing, too.
Table 21

Pearson
Barriers “r” Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment,
not wanting friends and family to Negative Very p<.05, Reject Ho
know about the rape or assault. -.088 Weak Relationship 0.321 affected
81
9. Fear of not being believed. Positive Very Weak
UNIVERSITY
p>.05, accept Ho
committed the sexual abuse or p>.05, accept Ho
assault) -0.006 No relationship 0.0944 Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
and justice system. 0.015 Relationship 0.861 Not affected
5. Does not believe the
perpetrator or rapist will be Negative Very p>.05, accept Ho
successfully prosecuted. -0.077 Weak Relationship 0.382 Not affected
6. Does not want a friend or Negative Very p>.05, accept Ho
family member to be prosecuted. -0.018 Weak Relationship 0.842 Not affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
to get help. 0.065 Relationship 0.462 Not affected
8. Lack of knowledge about the
importance of obtaining Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
treatment. 0.104 Relationship 0.239 Not affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain
help, such as transportation, child Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
care, money or insurance. 0.101 Relationship 0.252 Not affected
10. Lack of services available in Positive Very Weak p<.05, Reject Ho
the local area. 0.174 Relationship 0.047 affected
11. Concerns about Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
confidentiality. 0.33 Relationship 0.71 Not affected
12. Financial dependence on the
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Positive Very Weak p<.05, Rejectt Ho
allowing the man to obtain help. 0.135 Relationship 0.127 Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers Positive Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho
to obtaining help. 0.154 Relationship 0.8 Not affected
14. Fear of being judged as gay. Positive Very Weak p<.05, Reject Ho
Table 21 shows that there is a negative very weak relationship between the
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r=-.088, p=0.321); does not
believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted (r=-0.077,p=0.382)
and does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=.0.018, p=0.842).
There is a positive very weak relationship between the barriers that keep
respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment
82
experienced by the respondents: fear of not being believed (r=-0.75, p=0.399); dislike
or distrust of the police and justice system (r=0.015, p=0.861); lack of knowledge
about how to get help (r=0.065, p=0.462); lack of knowledge about the importance of
obtaining treatment (r=0.104, p=0.239); lack of resources to obtain help, such as
transportation, child care, money or insurance (r=0.101, p=0.252); lack of services
available in the local area (r=0.174, p=0.047); concerns about confidentiality (r=0.33,
p=0.71); financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the
man to obtain help (r=0.135, p=0.127); cultural or language barriers to obtaining help
(r=0.154, p=0.8) and fear of being judged as gay (r=0.185, p=0.035)
Meanwhile, there’s no relationship between the barriers that keep
respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment
experienced by the respondents: fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who
committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r=0.006, p=0.0944). This means that when
respondents experienced unwanted attempt to have sex with them, they will not report
the case because according to Reuters (2017), some people claim to be "huggers" or
"touchy-feely," but no one has a right to hug or touch you if it makes you
uncomfortable. Unwelcome touching of a sexual nature is often disguised as friendly
or paternal behavior.
Table 22

Pearson p-
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting 0.007 No 0.935 p<.05, Reject
83
friends and family to know about the rape or Relationship
UNIVERSITY
Ho affected
assault.
2.Fear of not being believed. p>.05, accept
Positive low Ho Not
0.093 relationship 0.29 affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the Positive low p>.05, accept
person who committed the sexual abuse or .069 relationship .434 Ho Not
assault) affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice .073 p>.05, accept

Positive low Ho Not
system. .407
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will p>.05, accept

No Ho Not
be successfully prosecuted. 0 1
6. Does not want a friend or family member to p>.05, accept

be prosecuted. Positive low Ho Not
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. p>.05, accept

.026 Positive low .770 Ho Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of No p>.05, accept

obtaining treatment. .005 relationship .959 Ho Not
affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as .515 p>.05, accept

Positive low Ho Not
transportation, child care, money or insurance. .058
10. Lack of services available in the local area. Positive low

Relationship p<.05, Reject
0.117 0.185 Ho affected
11. Concerns about confidentiality. .138 p>.05, accept
.135 Positive low Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, or .125 .119
the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain Positive low p<.05, Rejectt
help. Relationship Ho Affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining .053 .551 p>.05, accept
help. Positive low Ho Not
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .164 Positive low p<.05, Reject
Relationship 0.062 Ho affected
Table 22 reveals that there is a positive low relationship between the barriers
experienced by the respondents: fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who
committed the sexual abuse or assault) (r=.069, p=.434); dislike or distrust of the
84
police and justice system (r=.073, p=.407); does not want a friend or family member to
be prosecuted (r=0.134, p=0.128); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r=.026,
p=.770); lack of resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or
insurance (r=.058, p=.515); lack of services available in the local area (r=0.117,
p=0.185); concerns about confidentiality (r=.135, p=.138); financial dependence on
the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r=.125,
.p=.119); cultural or language barriers to obtaining help (r=.053, p=.551) and fear of
being judged as gay (r=.164, p=0.0652). However, fear of not being believed has
positive very weak low relationship (r=0.093, p=0.29)
There is no relationship between the barriers that keep respondents from
reporting the assault and the following sexual harassment experienced by the
respondents: shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends and family to know
about the rape or assault (r=0.007, p= 0.935); does not believe the perpetrator or rapist
will be successfully prosecuted (r=0, p=1) and lack of knowledge about the importance
of obtaining treatment (r=.005, p=.959).
Table 23

Pearson
Barriers “r” Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not -0.219 Negative Weak 0.012 p<.05, Reject Ho
wanting friends and family to know Relationship affected
85
about the rape or assault.
2. Fear of not being believed. Negative Very
3. Fear of retaliation by the -.121 .171
perpetrator (the person who Negative Very
committed the sexual abuse or Weak p>.05, accept Ho
assault) Relationship Not affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and -.115 Negative Very .194
justice system. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or -0.066 Negative Very 0.458
rapist will be successfully prosecuted. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
6. Does not want a friend or family p>.05, accept Ho
member to be prosecuted. -0.002 No relationship 0.983 Not affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how to .009 No .916 p>.05, accept Ho
get help. Relationship Not affected
8. Lack of knowledge about the -.002 .983 p>.05, accept Ho
importance of obtaining treatment. No relationship Not affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, -.023 Negative Very .791
such as transportation, child care, Weak p>.05, accept Ho
money or insurance. Relationship Not affected
10. Lack of services available in the -.016 Negative Very
local area. Weak p>.05, accept Ho
Relationship 0.853 Not affected
11. Concerns about confidentiality. -.109 Negative Very .216
12. Financial dependence on the -.065 Negative Very .452
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Weak p>.05, accept Ho
allowing the man to obtain help. Relationship Not affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to -.006 .947 p>.05, accept Ho
obtaining help. No relationship Not affected
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .010 Positive Very
harassment experienced by the respondents: fear of not being believed (r=-0.014,
p=0.871); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who committed the sexual
abuse or assault) (r=-.121, p=.171); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system
(r=-.115, p=.194); does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
86
prosecuted (r=-0.066, p= 0.458); lack of resources to obtain help, such as
transportation, child care, money or insurance (r=-.023, p=.791); lack of services
available in the local area (r=-.016, p=0.853); concerns about confidentiality (r=-.109,
p=.216) and financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the
man to obtain help (r=-.065, p=.452).
There is no relationship between the barriers that keep respondents from
respondents: cultural or language barriers to obtaining help (r=-.006, p=.947); lack of
knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=-.002, p=.983); does not
want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=-0.002, p=0.983); lack of
knowledge about how to get help (r=.009, p=.916). This means that when respondents
experienced unwanted attempt to have sex with them, they will not report the case
because according to (Haas, 2016) experts are still having a hard time trying to find the
best definition because it includes so many behaviors and situations, and it
encompasses a perceived unwillingness to participate in the sexual acts by the victim.
Sexual coercion can be a part of a controlling and manipulative relationship, but it isn't
always treated as such. Sexual coercion itself is an act of dominance and power.
Table 24

Barriers Pearson"r" Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, -0.171 Negative Very Weak 0.051 p>.05, accept Ho Not
87
not wanting friends and family to
know about the rape or assault. Relationship affected
2.Fear of not being believed. -0.108 Negative Very Weak 0.221 p>.05, accept Ho Not
committed the sexual abuse or Negative Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
assault) -0.084 Relationship 0.341 affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police Negative Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
and justice system. -0.088 Relationship 0.318 affected
5. Does not believe the perpetrator -.054 .542
or rapist will be successfully Negative Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
prosecuted. Relationship affected
6. Does not want a friend or family .015 Positive low p>.05, accept Ho Not
member to be prosecuted. Relationship 0.865 affected
7. Lack of knowledge about how to -0.018 Negative Very Weak 0.838 p>.05, accept Ho Not
get help. Relationship affected
8. Lack of knowledge about the .039 Positive low .658 p>.05, accept Ho Not
importance of obtaining treatment. Relationship affected
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, -.068 .439
such as transportation, child care, Negative Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
money or insurance. Relationship affected
10. Lack of services available in -.015 Negative Very Weak .868 p>.05, accept Ho Not
the local area. Relationship affected
11. Concerns about confidentiality. .087 Positive low .327 p>.05, accept Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the -.085 .334
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Negative Very Weak p>.05, accept Ho Not
allowing the man to obtain help. Relationship affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to .032 Positive low .715 p>.05, accept Ho Not
obtaining help. Relationship affected
14. Fear of being judged as gay. -.041 Negative Very Weak .640 p>.05, accept Ho Not
Table 24 depicts that there is a negative very weak relationship between
the barriers that keep respondents from reporting the assault and the following sexual
friends and family to know about the rape or assault (r=-0.171, p=0.051); fear of not
being believed (r=-0.108, p=0.221); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person
who committed the sexual abuse or assault (r=-0.084, p=0.341); dislike or distrust of
the police and justice system (r=-0.088, p=0.318); does not believe the perpetrator or
rapist will be successfully prosecuted (r=-.054, p=.542); lack of knowledge about how
to get help (r=-0.018, p=0.838); lack of resources to obtain help, such as
transportation, child care, money or insurance (r=-.068, p=.439); lack of services
available in the local area (r=-.015, p=.868); financial dependence on the perpetrator,
88
or the perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help (r=-.085, p=.334) and Fear of
being judged as gay (r=-.041, p=.640) This means that when respondents experienced
implied fast promotions or better treatment if they were sexually cooperative, they will
not report the case because according to Udice (2016), people in power are able to
offer raises, benefits, special deals, recommendations, and certain shifts — so it can be
easier for them to get away with this behavior by offering these incentives. Quid pro
quo harassment entails a harasser that is a superior—whether it’s a supervisor,
manager, professor, or any other person of power—taking advantage of their power
over an individual and demanding sexual favors for job benefit. The literal translation
of quid pro quo is “something for something,” or “this for that.”
There is positive low relationship between the barriers that keep respondents from
respondents: does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=.015,
p=0.865); lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=.039,
p=.658); concerns about confidentiality (r=.087, p=.327); cultural or language barriers
to obtaining help (r=.032, p=.715)
Table 25

Barriers Pearson Interpretation p- Decision
89
“r” value
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not Negative Very p>.05, accept
wanting friends and family to know Weak Ho
about the rape or assault. -0.14 Relationship 0.112 Not affected
2. Fear of not being believed. 0.011 Positive Very 0.897 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
perpetrator (the person who Negative Very p>.05, accept
committed the sexual abuse or Weak Ho Not
assault) -0.04 Relationship 0.054 affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and Negative Very p>.05, accept
justice system. Weak Ho Not
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or -.151 Negative Very .087 p>.05, accept
rapist will be successfully prosecuted. Weak Ho Not
6. Does not want a friend or family .052 Positive Very .553 p>.05, accept
member to be prosecuted. Weak Ho Not
7. Lack of knowledge about how to -0.055 Negative Very 0.531 p>.05, accept
get help. Weak Ho Not
8. Lack of knowledge about the .096 .278 p>.05, accept
importance of obtaining treatment. Positive low Ho Not
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, .013 Positive Very .882 p>.05, accept
such as transportation, child care, Weak Ho Not
money or insurance. Relationship affected
10. Lack of services available in the -.054 Negative Very .539 p>.05, accept
local area. Weak Ho Not
11. Concerns about confidentiality. -.085 Negative Very .337 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
12. Financial dependence on the -.076 Negative Very .387 p>.05, accept
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not Weak Ho Not
allowing the man to obtain help. Relationship affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to .026 Positive Very .770 p>.05, accept
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .033 Positive Very .709 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
believed (r= 0.011, p= 0.897); does not want a friend or family member to be
90
prosecuted (r=0.052, p=0.553), lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining
treatment (r=0.096, p=0.278); lack of resources to obtain help (r=0.015, p=0.865):
cultural or barriers language to obtain help (r= .026, p=.779) and fear of being judged
as a gay (r=0.033, p=0.709).
Meanwhile, negative very weak relationship on items:, shame, guilt,
-0.143, p=0.105); fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (r=-0.04, p=0.54); dislike or
distrust of the police and justice system (r=0.092, p=0.297); does not believed the
perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted (r= -0.0151, p=.087); lack of
knowledge about how to get help (r= -0.055, p=0.531), lack of services available in the
local area (r= -0.54, p= .539); concerns about confidentiality (r= -0.085, p=0.337) and
financial defense on the perpetrator (r= -0.076, p= 0.911).
Since most of the p- value are lower than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is
accepted. Young and colleagues (2008) said that boys are more likely than girls to say
that sexual harassment incidents do not bother them. It maybe because of boys and girls
experience different types of sexual harassment. Individuals have different emotional
responses to sexual harassment, due to differences in the kind of sexual harassment they
encountered.
Table 26

91
p-
Barriers Pearson"r" Interpretation value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not Negative Very p>.05, accept
wanting friends and family to know about Weak Ho
the rape or assault. -0.151 Relationship 0.086 Not affected
2. Fear of not being believed. -0.002 0.659 p>.05, accept
Ho
No Relationship Not affected
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the Positive Very p>.05, accept
person who committed the sexual abuse or Weak Ho
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and Negative Very p>.05, accept
justice system. Weak Ho
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist -.130 .142 p>.05, accept
will be successfully prosecuted. Negative Ho
low Relationship Not affected
6. Does not want a friend or family member .052 Positive Very .553 p>.05, accept
to be prosecuted. Weak Ho
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get 0.096 Positive Very 0.278 p>.05, accept
help. Weak Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance .096 Positive Very p>.05, accept
of obtaining treatment. Weak Ho
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as .023 Positive Very p>.05, accept
transportation, child care, money or Weak Ho
insurance. Relationship .793 Not affected
10. Lack of services available in the local -.054 Negative Very .539 p>.05, accept
area. Weak Ho
11. Concerns about confidentiality. -.085 Negative Very .337 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho
12. Financial dependence on the -.076 Negative Very .387 p>.05, accept
perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing Weak Ho
the man to obtain help. Relationship Not affected
13. Cultural or language barriers to .026 Positive Very .770 p>.05, accept
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .033 Positive Very .709 p>.05, accept
Weak Ho Not
Table 26 shows positive very weak relationship with items: fear of retaliation
by the perpetrator (r=0.039, p=0.659); does not want a friend or family member to
be prosecuted (r=0.052, p=0.553), lack of knowledge about the importance of
obtaining treatment (r=0.096, p=0.278); lack of resources to obtain help (r=0.023,
92
p=0.793): cultural or barriers language to obtain help (r= .026, p=.779) and fear of
being judged as a gay (r=0.033, p=0.709).
Meanwhile, depicts negative very weak relationship on items:, shame, guilt,
-0.151, p=0.086); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system (r=-0.142,
p=0.107); does not believed the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted
(r= -0.130, p=.142); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r= -0.055, p=0.531),
lack of services available in the local area (r= -0.54, p= .539); concerns about
confidentiality (r= -0.085, p=0.337) and financial dependence on the perpetrator (r=
-0.076, p= 0.911).There is no relationship between: fear of not being believed (r=
0.002, p= 0.659).
Since most of the p- values are lower than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is
accepted. According to Graves (2011) when someone with power, usually a teacher
or administrator, abuses her or his power to coerce a student into sexual activity in
exchange for a good grade, it is said to be quid pro quo harassment.
Table 27
93
Barriers Pearson “r” Interpretation p-value Decision
1. Shame, guilt, embarrassment, not wanting friends p>.05,
and family to know about the rape or assault. accept Ho
Negative Very Weak Not
2. Fear of not being believed. 0.092 0.296 p>.05,
accept Ho
Positive Very Weak Not
3. Fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person p>.05,
who committed the sexual abuse or assault) accept Ho
Not
-0.001 No Relationship 0.995 affected
4. Dislike or distrust of the police and justice system. p>.05,
accept Ho
5. Does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be -.011 .901 p>.05,
successfully prosecuted. accept Ho
Negative Very Weak Not
6. Does not want a friend or family member to be .074 .400 p>.05,
prosecuted. accept Ho
7. Lack of knowledge about how to get help. 0.051 0.561 p>.05,
accept Ho
8. Lack of knowledge about the importance of .125 .155 p>.05,
obtaining treatment. accept Ho
9. Lack of resources to obtain help, such as .087 .324 p>.05,
transportation, child care, money or insurance. accept Ho
10. Lack of services available in the local area. -.009 .923 p>.05,
accept Ho
Not
11. Concerns about confidentiality. .065 .464 p>.05,
accept Ho
12. Financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the .059 .504 p>.05,
perpetrator not allowing the man to obtain help. accept Ho
13. Cultural or language barriers to obtaining help. .062 .485 p>.05,
accept Ho
14. Fear of being judged as gay. .482 p>.05,
.062 accept Ho
94
believed (r= 0.092, p= 0.296); dislike or distrust of the police and justice system
(r=0.044, p=0.623); does not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted (r=0.074,
p=0.400), lack of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment (r=0.125,
p=0.155); lack of resources to obtain help (r=0.087, p=0.324): cultural or barriers
language to obtain help (r= .026, p=.779); concerns about confidentiality (r= 0.065,
p=0.464) ; financial dependence on the perpetrator (r= -0.059, p= 0.504) and fear of being
judged as a gay (r=0.033, p=0.709).
Meanwhile, there is negative very weak relationship on items:, shame, guilt,
-0.09, p=0.307); does not believed the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully
prosecuted (r= -0.11, p=.901); lack of knowledge about how to get help (r= -0.055,
p=0.531) and there is no relationship fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (r=0.001,
p=0.995) and lack of services available in the local area (r= -0.009, p= .923)
Since most of the p- values are lower than 0.05, thus the null hypothesis is not
accepted. According to Young and colleagues (2008) the vast majority of sexual
harassment at school falls into the category of hostile-environment harassment, which
includes unwanted sexual conduct that is pestering enough to limit a student’s
participation in an educational program or activity.
95
Table 28
Pearson “r Between Frequency of Experiencing Sexual Harassment and the
Common Barriers that Keep the Respondents from Reporting the Assault
Sexual Experiences Pearson “r” Interpretation p-value Decision

Gender Harassment .118 Positive low .180 p>.05,
Relationship accept Ho
Not affected
Unwanted Sexual .117 Positive low .186 p>.05,
Attention Relationship accept Ho
Not affected
Sexual Coercion -.048 Negative low .585 p>.05,
Relationship accept Ho
Not affected
Table 11 shows that, there is a positive low relationship between gender
harassment and common barrier of the respondents reporting the assault (r= 0.118) and
relationship between unwanted sexual attention and common barrier of the respondents
reporting the assault(r= 0.117). This means that when respondents experience gender
harassment and unwanted sexual attention, there may be a tendency to report the assault.
But on the other hand there is a negative relationship between sexual coercion and
common barrier of the respondents reporting the assault (r= -0.48).This means that if the
respondents experience sexual coercion, they may not report the assault because their
life will be in danger.

The computed p-value between gender harassment and common barrier of the
respondents reporting the assault (p=0.180) and relationship, between unwanted sexual
attention and common barrier of the respondents reporting the assault (p= 0.186) and
between sexual coercion and common barrier of the respondents reporting the assault
(p=0.585) are all higher than .05, thus the null hypothesis is accepted. This means that
96
respondents’ sexual experiences do not affect the barriers on reporting the assault.
According to the Related Review of Literature, the majority of men who've been abused
struggle for a long time. They might experience overwhelming self-doubt and feel they
don't "measure up" to society's idea of what it means to be a "real man." And some men
find the conflict between victimization and stereotypical masculinity "absolutely
intolerable," so they pretend the abuse never happened.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
This chapter discusses the summary of findings based from the statement of the
problem, conclusions and recommendations from the collected data.
Summary of Findings
The statement of the problem includes the respondent’s demographic
profile which include their age, course, and year level. The frequency of their
experience in terms of verbal, physical and visual harassment, the frequency of their
experience in terms of gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention and sexual

97
coercion, the common barriers that keep the respondents from reporting the
harassment and the relationship between the prevalence of sexual harassment and the
barriers on reporting it.
Survey method of descriptive research design was used in this study.
With the help of survey questionnaires, the following data were collected from the
selected respondents. Based on the data collected, the findings were presented as
follows:
1. The Demographic Profiles of the Selected Respondents

1.1 Age
It shows most of the respondents were from the age group of 18-22 years old.
1.2 Year level
It shows most of the respondents were from the 3rd year level with a percentage
of 58.5%
1.3 Course
In terms of course, it shows that most of the respondents were from BS Civil
Engineering (BSCE) with a percentage of 26.2%
2. Frequency of the different forms of sexual harassment experienced by the
respondents
Eighty-eight (88) or 67.7% of the respondents have experienced verbal
harassment, fifty- five (55) or 42.3% of the respondents have experienced physical
harassment, and twenty- six (26) or 20% visual harassment.
3. Frequency of the respondents’ sexual harassment experiences in terms of the
three subscales
98
In terms of Gender Harassment, it has resulted with an over-all mean of
1.30 and interpreted as Never. An over-all mean of 1.28 interpreted as Never in terms
of Unwanted Sexual Attention and an over-all mean of .71 interpreted as Never in
terms of Sexual Coercion. This shows that most of the respondents never experience
sexual harassment in terms of the three sub scales.
4. Common barriers that keep the respondents from reporting sexual harassment
The data shows the common barriers that keep the respondents from
reporting the assault and shows that the following are important to them, “concerns
about confidentiality.” (mean = 4.0), “fear of not being believed” (mean = 3.97), “lack
of knowledge about the importance of obtaining treatment” (mean = 3.88), lack of
knowledge about how to get help” (mean = 3.86), “shame, guilt, embarrassment, not
wanting friends and family to know about the rape or assault.” (mean = 3.79), “does
not want a friend or family member to be prosecuted” (mean = 3.75), “lack of
resources to obtain help, such as transportation, child care, money or insurance” (mean
= 3.69), “fear of retaliation by the perpetrator (the person who committed the sexual
abuse or assault)” and “lack of services available in the local area” (both with mean =
3.68), “does not believe the perpetrator or rapist will be successfully prosecuted (mean
= 3.67)”, “dislike or distrust of the police and justice system” (mean = 3.66)”,
“financial dependence on the perpetrator, or the perpetrator not allowing the man to
obtain help.” (mean= 3.64), “cultural or language barriers to obtaining help” (mean =
3.63), and lastly “fear of being judged as gay” (mean = 3.44).
99
5. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ prevalence of sexual
harassment and the barriers on reporting it.
The data shows that the computed p- value between gender harassment
and common barrier of the respondents reporting the assault (p=0.180) and
relationship, between unwanted sexual attention and common barrier of the
respondents reporting the assault (p= 0.186) and between sexual coercion and common
barrier of the respondents reporting the assault (p=0.585) are all higher than .05, thus
the null hypothesis is accepted. This means that respondents’ sexual experiences has
no relationship with the barriers on reporting the assault.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of the study the following conclusions were stated:
1. The respondents were composed mostly of 18-22 years old, third year level and
BSCE course.
2. The respondents mostly experience verbal harassment, they mostly experience
harassment at school and most of them has experience harassment 2-4 years ago.
3. Most of the respondents once experience Gender harassment, unwanted sexual
attention and Sexual Coercion.

4. The common barriers on reporting cases of sexual harassment are important for the
respondents.
5. The null hypothesis was accepted because the prevalence of sexual harassment do
not affect the barriers on reporting cases of sexual harassment among male college
students.
Recommendations
100
Based on the significant findings and conclusions drawn from the study,
the following recommendations are hereby forwarded:
1. A seminar about sexual harassment awareness that would be participated by male
college students to teach and to mind every actions they take and to report any
suspicious motives toward them.
2. An organization should be formed to protect males from all kinds of harassment.
This also will encourage those who were harassed to confess knowing they aren’t the
only ones experiencing sexual harassment.
101
102

College of Arts and Sciences Sssscsciencestechnological University Rizal Technological University

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

College of Arts and Sciences Sssscsciencestechnological University Rizal Technological University

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

College of Arts and Sciences Sssscsciencestechnological University Rizal Technological University

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RIZAL TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

harassment against men.

A common thread seems to be the lack of empathy- or even sympathy

or that being harassed by a man implicates their own sexuality

possibly harassed because of it because of their body structure, clothing preference or

that even men are being violated sexually- be it verbally or physically.

Sexual harassment against male is almost nonexistent. However, it is not only

being victimized while keeping their mouth shut.

men are supposed to be 'manly' enough not to be bothered by inappropriate advances on

the trauma and the great anxiety it is causing them.

Statement of the Problem

3. How frequent do the respondents experience sexual harassment in terms of:

harassment and the barriers on reporting it?

Hypothesis of the Study

There is no significant relationship between the prevalence of sexual harassment

and the barriers on reporting it.

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

 Profile of  Conducting a survey

Scope and Delimitation

This study focuses on the relationship between prevalence of sexual

harassment and barriers on reporting of sexual harassment among male college

Technological University, from College of Engineering and Information Technology

(CEIT) ranging from 1st year - 5th year.

Significance of the Study

avoid tolerating those experiences.

reference and information provider that will be vital to their research.

Catcall a form of sexual harassment that attributes to whistling or making sexist

Gender harassment is harassment in which the victim’s gender is being derogated.

Harassment is defined as the act of abusing, insulting or harming another individual.

his/her sexual orientation.

Physical harassment is when a victim is touched in an inappropriate way.

Prevalence refers to the frequency of sexual harassment.

sexual advances may be in the form of physical or verbal.

against their will.

Sexual misconduct is any misconduct of a sexual nature that is usually perpetrated

against an individual without his or her consent.

Tolerance indicates the ability of men to tolerate or endure sexual acts.

Verbal harassment is the state of criticizing someone sexually. (e.g., catcalling,

private parts or repeatedly stared at in a way that is offensive or uncomfortable.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Sexual Harassment on Men

According to Studzinśka, (2016) the tale of Joseph of Egypt is most likely

are useful in vain (Studzinśka, 2016).

It is currently perceived that guys, both as kids and as grown-ups, can be

aggressor is indiscriminate in his decision of a male or female casualty. In all cases

conferred by men against ladies, sexual harassment can be executed by or against

encounters. Notwithstanding recording the pervasiveness of male assault, look into

(Turchik & Edwards, 2011).

Schrobsdorff (2017) recently an Instamotor online survey which found that 2

then it is found to be uncomfortable and therefore should be stopped. If it happens

then it is considered to be sexually intimidating.

Myths About Male Sexual Harassments

Those intangibility and minimization of male sexual assault is generally

concerning illustration that prejudicial, stereotyped or false convictions over rape,

accompanying convictions: (a) Being assaulted by a male aggressor is synonymous

against rape (Chapleau et al, 2008).

Stories and reports of male assault go back a few centuries, showing up in