Thesis Normalisation of Street Harassment Thesis PDF

Onlinedatei vom 09.04.
2019 05:01
MSc Public Policy 2017-2018
The Normalisation of Street Harassment in the

Dominican Republic: A Gendered Perspective
A dissertation submitted to the School for Policy Studies at the University of

Bristol, in part fulfilment of the award of MSc in Public Policy.
Candidate Number: 45532
Student: Arlette Danielle Román Almánzar
Supervisor: Dr. Junko Yamashita
Unit Code: SPMOL1010_2017
Word Count: 13,864
October 2018
1
Onlinedatei vom 09.04.2019 05:01
Abstract
This thesis initiates the discussion of street harassment in the Dominican Republic, contributing
new quantitative research for the first time on the gendered perception towards unsolicited
compliments from strangers. The aim is to challenge the dominant discourse that normalises
unwanted sexual attention at the cost of being in public. The discourse suppresses women’s
perception to favour gender stereotypes and men’s perspective, assuming evaluative comments
of women’s bodies are complimentary, disregarding the potential of pain or pleasure towards
the victim and forcing a non-consensual interaction that disproportionately targets women.
Thus, I used a feminist standpoint theory to provide a safe space to expose women’s perception
by integrating qualitative experiences in a quantitative method through a survey. I collected
1,824 responses composed of 1,341 (73%) women and 483 (26%) men to confirm the same
objective event men find pleasurable, women might find harmful. The study assessed
respondents’ awareness of their own victimisation status, their understanding of the term
‘sexual harassment’, acts normalised by society, and compared the pervasiveness against police
reports along with barriers to reporting. Findings show women received street harassment
almost every day associating it with negative feelings, while men only few times a year and
felt flattered or indifferent.
2
Contents
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
2. Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 8
2.1 Naming the Gender-Specific Harm of Street Harassment ............................................... 8
2.2 Conceptualising Street Harassment ................................................................................ 10
2.3 Policy response around the world .................................................................................. 11
2.4 National Legal Framework............................................................................................. 12
2.5 Social Context of Street Harassment .............................................................................. 14
3. Methodology .................................................................................................................... 19
4. Results and Discussion ................................................................................................... 25
4.1 Respondents’ gender ...................................................................................................... 26
4.2 Respondents’ behaviour in public spaces by gender ...................................................... 26
4.2.1 Respondents who received and complimented strangers in public spaces .............. 26
4.3 Gender that regularly compliments ................................................................................ 29
4.4 Reaction of victim and perpetrator ................................................................................. 30
4.5 Frequency of receiving compliments in public spaces by gender .................................. 32
4.5.1 Frequency by age and gender .................................................................................. 34
4.6 Difference in perspective on receiving compliments by gender .................................... 38
4.7 Perception of compliments received from strangers by age .......................................... 41
4.8 Awareness on pervasiveness of sexual harassment by gender ....................................... 43
4.8.1 Women’s awareness ................................................................................................ 43
4.8.2 Men’s awareness...................................................................................................... 43
4.9 Respondents experiences by gender ............................................................................... 46
4.9.1 Technical Harassment experienced by gender ........................................................ 46
4.9.2 Normalised acts by gender ...................................................................................... 46
4.10 Reportage of sexual harassment to an authority by gender .......................................... 50
4.11 Reasons for not reporting by gender ............................................................................ 52
5. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 54
6. Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 57
3
1. Introduction
This research attempts to contrast the gendered experiences towards street harassment,
providing a safe space where women’s standpoint exposes the overlooked perception of
females through an online survey available to both men and women. Frequency and its effect
on perception will be evaluated, as other studies (Kearl, 2010) have suggested an impact
according to gender. Due to the underrepresentation of women's perception in the dominant
discourse, this paper will often discriminate positively this group's sensitivity towards street
harassment in an attempt to research areas of social life previously treated as non-existent or at
the very least, unimportant to social research (Gray et al., 2007).
Street harassment is trivialised in Latin American culture and the Dominican Republic,
which explains the scarce data on the issue, lack of popularity of the concept and the cultural
norms promoting victim blaming as a disincentive for victims to speak out (Pantaleón, 2003).
It is estimated that over 80% of women around the world have been or will be targets of street
harassment in their lifetime (Oxygen/Markle Pulse Survey, 2000), but normalisation exists to
the extent people cannot recognize certain acts fall under sexual or street harassment until many
years later (Lauren, 2016). Thus, the invisible nature of the unnamed harm represents an
obstacle to develop policy responses and legal tools for victims.
In the absence of local academic research on street harassment, I will investigate society’s
acceptable behaviours and understanding of the broader term, sexual harassment, through the
first large quantitative survey on the social perception of harassment in the Dominican
Republic, focused on Distrito Nacional and Santo Domingo with the main research question:
1. Do men and women perceive compliments from strangers in public spaces differently?
If so, does frequency influence?
The hypothesis of this study claims the existence of gender differences in evaluating
potentially harassing conducts, since women have been found more likely than men to asses
such situations as offensive and as a threat in virtually every study ever conducted (Fitzgerald,
Swan and Fischer, 1995). I argue that frequency plays a key role on the perception of the issue
by gender, given that women are far more expose to intrusions in public spaces than men ,
eventually forfeiting their right to privacy (Kissling and Kramarae, 1991) and freedom of
movement throughout a process in time rather than a one-time event. Moreover, consequences
are generally worse psychologically for women as compared to men by reducing feelings of
safety in public spaces (Barling et al., 1996).
4
The under-researched characteristic of this phenomenon requires drawing similarities

and theories parting from street harassment's broader concept, sexual harassment, while
simultaneously constructing space to recognise the former term from a gender perspective. The
less ‘serious’ forms of harassment have the potentiality of severe impacts on the victims, but
because of trivialisation most research on sexual harassment in the Dominican Republic focus
in the workplace, ignoring the rest of the places where it is habitual such as public places and
schools -where it is reinforced the most (Kavanaugh, 2013). Nevertheless, there are similarities
between sexual harassment at work and street harassment, which have been linked to anger,
depression, and low self-confidence among the victims (Willness, Steel, & Lee, 2007)
Law constructs a very limited definition of sexual violence, reflecting only the male
perspective and subsequently causing the denial of women's experience towards sexual
violence caused by males. Since men write the law due to the low occupation of women in
decision and law-making positions, Radford (2015) argues street harassment becomes a
challenge to what men define as abusing, since it demonstrates the historical exclusion of what
women perceive as abusive. This further creates a gap between women's reality and men's
behaviour which has been normalised and is the process this thesis tries to portray. (Fineman
and Thomadsen, 2013).
The normalisation erected by a male dominated culture (Tuerkheimer, 1997), causes

self-reporting to be tricky as some victims have internalised trivialisation convincing
themselves that ´nothing happened´ because their perception is unlikely to be validated by
society. However, incidents demonstrate even those events considered less severe cause
anxiety and fear. In an attempt to internalise and adapt to the discourse available, which is the
male stream ideology, trivialisation becomes a coping strategy for the victim to justify and
minimise the episode (Radford, 2015).This explains the low numbers The Office of the
Attorney General reports, since only 44,088 cases have been reported under sexual crimes in
the lapse of 6 years (2011-2017) and only 5,605 were filed under sexual harassment. The year
with most reporting was 2004 with 8,463, while only 1,692 cases were filed under sexual
harassment reported in 2013, which is highly unlikely in a country of 10,917,042 citizens
(Worldometers, 2018). In the province of Santo Domingo and Distrito Nacional alone in 2017
only a total of 117 sexual crimes and only 5 cases of sexual harassment were reported. Research
(Gutek, 1985) establishes that victims avoid reporting because they believe it is useless or
dangerous to do so.
5
As analytical framework, I am writing this paper through the lens of feminist post-
structural lens, analysing how knowledge, gender and language intersect to construct power
relations and create meaning within discourse (Barrett, 2005). This will contribute to make
sense of how society, especially women, have internalised discourses available to them and
examining how their experience with technical acts of harassment overlaps to the socially
constructed definition and acceptance of sexual harassment.
Additionally, feminist therapy theory states that the personal is political, meaning that
women´s personal problems around the world are influenced by the socio-cultural and political
conditions in which they live, therefore it is conceptualised as reactions to oppression (Brown,
1994). Women are subject to sexism from religious institutions, media, political and legal
systems, work, and interpersonal relationships (Association, 2017). However, patriarchy is a
system on which both men and women participate to perpetuate the power imbalance between
the genders and its success is due to sustaining internalised sexist ideologies limiting women
(Brown, 1994).
There is consensual agreement that this phenomenon is not experienced by women or

men in the same way (Vera-Gray, 2016), moreover, the intersection of multiple oppression
such as race, class, sexual preference, disability and other factors situate women in a hierarchal
relation to each other and to men as well. The difference is that in women these factors also
intersect with gender inequality, making them more vulnerable than men. Intersectionality
forces women to have diverse experience of street harassment in one or multiple way (Chubin,
2014).
Intersectionality of race, sexual preference, nor class income will be addressed in the
findings due to the novelty of the subject and the condensed space available to explain the
factors that have led to its normalisation and trivialisation. Therefore, this research will focus
on the gendered perspective and prevalence of street harassment, but strongly encourages
further investigation should include intersectionality of sexual orientation, class, race,
disability, and other factors that overlap in the system of oppression. Furthermore, recognises
the need of additional research of sexual harassment in schools where normalisation is
reinforced (Tolman, 2006); identify the myths that exonerate the perpetrator through victim
blaming and rape culture that lead to acceptance of harassment and subsequently rape myths;
and identify ambivalent sexism and the coping strategies used by women to confront
harassment.
6
To comply with the objective of the research, this paper has been structured into
chapters, as follows. The second chapter is a literature review outlining the existing research
on the field. It is divided into subsections, which will define and conceptualise street
harassment, evaluate the pre-existing context and oppression that enables street harassment in
patriarchal cultures. Additionally, will identify studies and policy responses from around the
world describing the pervasiveness of the issue and the national legal framework available.
The third chapter corresponds to the methodology, which includes an explanation and
structure of the questions used in the survey. This chapter also discusses why quantitative
method was used over qualitative, ethical considerations, and addresses validity, reliability and
generalisability of the research. Limitations and recommendations for further research in the
field are portrayed in this chapter as well.
The fourth chapter analyses the relevant survey results and discusses its relation to the
theories exposed in the literary review. Thus, it discusses the gender of participants,
pervasiveness of receiving and giving compliments in public spaces by gender, the stranger’s
most common gender, frequency and perception by gender and age to understand generational
variance, and reaction from both sides. Likewise, covers respondents’ experiences on technical
harassment, identifies the acts society has normalised by what they have excluded from their
definition of sexual harassment, and validates low reporting of respondents comparing it with
annual police reports from 2011-2017 of sexual crimes in the Dominican Republic. The reasons
for not reporting are also disclosed.
The final chapter is the conclusion, which provides a summary of the key findings of the
research. As well as critical reflections and recommendations on how to make this issue
relevant.
7
2. Literature Review
This chapter highlights the existing research about street and sexual harassment and the
global pervasiveness of the issue. The first section explains the importance of naming the harm
suffered by minorities in order to provide effective policies to eradicate it. The second section
conceptualises street harassment as the first step towards escalating sexual violence and linking
it with rape on a single continuum of male sexual aggression against women. The third section
and fourth section describe the current policy response around the world and the legal
framework in the Dominican Republic. The last section explains the social factors in society
that endorse the pervasiveness of street harassment.
2.1 Naming the Gender-Specific Harm of Street Harassment
This section will explain the importance of recognising and defining harms. It is
feminists’ researchers’ task to define harms in ways that are true to gender-specific pain and
understandable to male culture. Women and men experience pain and pleasure differently. The
same objective event can be pleasurable to men and disturbing to women– even in pornography
women’s humiliation is eroticised (West, 1987). Bowman (1993) confirms that because men
do not suffer street harassment to the extent women do, society will not recognise it as harmful.
Thus, women are blamed for exaggerating for attaching negative meanings, while men view it
as trivial or ‘boys will be boys’ behaviour (Kissling, 1991).
Grievance experienced by disempowered or minority groups will lack a name, a history,

and in general a linguistic reality, which explains women’s reality in public spaces (Fineman
and Thomadsen, 2013). Normalisation contributes to history of silencing the issue and the lack
of visibility of street harassment, since problems without names tend to be ignored in policy
design (Kearl, 2010). Society normalises when it excludes or deems acceptable technical
harassment acts instead of recognising the harm, hence definition differs between individuals
due to cultural and social norms (Zimbroff, 2007).
Sexual harassment is a sex-based behaviour that is unwelcome by its recipient and has
two forms. First is quid pro quo (Ministry of Women, 2010), which refers to a job benefit,
made conditional on the victim agreeing to engage in some form of sexual behaviour. The
second definition applies when a hostile environment is created through conditions that are
intimidating or humiliating for the victim. Street harassment falls under the latter. However,
even the most basic definition of what entails sexual harassment is contested, building greater
8
difficulty to deliver comparable results across studies (Fitzgerald, 1988) for of the lack of
consensus between researchers.
Holly Kearl (2010) found over 400 women defined sexual harassment saying it is any
sexualised or aggressive activity meant to make someone feel unsafe being in public, or to
point out the person's sexualised or second-class status. Some women stated ‘For me, it's a
strange man treating me differently than he would if I were accompanied by a man/older
person. Someone he would respect and not view in a sexual way.’
Furthermore, Bowman (1993) states the main characteristics of street harassment

entails the following: (1) the targets of street harassment are female; (2) the harassers are male;
(3) the harassers are unacquainted with their targets; (4) the encounter is face to face; (5) the
forum is a public one (6) the content of the speech, if any, is not intended as public discourse.
“On the other hand, Tuerkheimer (1997) also considered the target being just women ‘Street
harassment occurs when a woman in a public place is intruded on by a man’s words, noises, or
gestures. In so doing, he asserts his right to comment on her body or other feature of her person,
defining her as an object and himself as a subject with power over her’. However, this paper
argues that the definition can apply to both women and men, but the difference relies on
hierarchal power, the frequency by which men and women endure this and the perspective on
feelings of insecurity that causes according to gender (Kearl,2010).
‘We are harassed because we are sexually subordinated. Power is central to any
explanation of street harassment, as is sexuality. Where gender is relevant, power and sexuality
are inexorably linked’ (Tuerkheimer, 1997).
The specification of women as the victim highlights the importance of the imbalance
between the perpetrator’s position of power and the victim. However, this term is already
contested based on the grounds that ‘‘harassment’’ predefines the experience and doesn’t take
into account how the recipient feels about the event or context, narrowing down the range of
possible responses (Brewer, 1982).
In the midst of the normalisation, researchers found it sustained women’s

objectification (Bowman, 1993), restricted movement through public space and limitation of
mobility (Laniya, 2005),caused fear and reduced sense of security, and psychological harm
(Lenton et al 1999). Despite the measures women take, we fear any form of pervasive violence
against women and we fear violence by men we know and those who we do not know
(Tuerkheimer, 1997).
9
For the purpose of this research, street harassment is will be defined as a form of gender
based-violence consisting on intrusions by male strangers in public spaces, who project power
dynamics between genders reminding subordinated groups – specifically women and LGTBQ-
their historically vulnerability to be assaulted in public spaces. Moreover, promoting the sexual
objectification of these groups in everyday life (Hollaback!, 2013). Logan (2015) includes
actions such as catcalling, whistling, prolonged staring or ogling, groping, following, and
intrusive verbal comments. Sociologists add (Gardner, 1980) it is a continuum of possible
events beginning with customary civility and ending with the transition to violent crime such
as assault, rape or murder. Some even include actions that would fall under legal definitions of
rape and sexual assault (Gardner, 1995). This will be the definition used in this paper, generally
excluding bars and clubs since a different dynamic occurs in these places and require further
study (Kearl, 2010).
2.2 Conceptualising Street Harassment
Mackinnon (1979) affirmed that economic power is to sexual harassment as physical

force is to rape, supporting the argument that some authors sustain (Koss et al, 1994) when
linking rape and sexual harassment on a single continuum of male sexual aggression against
women. In this context from a feminist theoretical concept, rape culture and patriarchy
encourages sexually aggressive behaviour including harassment by normalising the ideas of
gender inequality, rape myths and victim blaming (Biglarbegi, 2017)
Kissling (1987) also asserts that rape and other sexual acts can begin with an act of
street harassment, since potential rapists assess accessibility of a victim through offensive
sexual comments to identify if she can be frightened (Bowman,1993). Regardless of the real
possibility of rape, harassment plays a role in the objective condition of women fearing bodily
harm daily, triggering sexual assault survivors (Ramakrishnan, 2011)and is a constant warning
of the real threat of sexual violation (Laniya, 2005).
On a particular level, there is a continuous risk on rape due to the high figures of gender-
based violence against women (Hooks, 1984). Hence, this fear of rape is not unrealistic since
at least one in three women have been victims of rape or attempted rape at some point in their
life (Bowman, 1993). This reminds women of their vulnerability to sexual violence since
harassment in public spaces force women in a sexual atmosphere without their approval
(Bowman,1993). It is essentially a tool used by men to subordinate women, policing gender
norms to prevent women straying from the approved feminine role (Franke, 1997). Based on
10
the latter, gender stereotypes and roles in society will be studied to understand how this engages
in street harassment as a social problem. Additionally, factors as sexism, male privilege, rape
culture, victim blaming, and patriarchy play a role as well (Alter, 2014). Social institutions and
structures must be assessed to understand how the patriarchal gender order is perpetuated.
(Lennox, Rebecca, 2017)
Vera-Grey (2017) argues that the harm in street harassment is not only in a particular
incident, but rather ‘the overall impact of dozens of car horns and crude comments that are
dehumanising’, making it cumulative and unable to be attributed solely to the actions of any
one individual -this theory suggests that frequency affects perception. Furthermore, the
framework does not consider certain types of harassing situations are intrinsically more
traumatic or severe than others, rather distinguishes the role of perception of the individual to
determine the experience.
This differs to other researchers (Till, 1980) who divide harassment in five levels or the
merit system that split between less severe and more severe situations. Nevertheless, even
though this paper recognises there are acts strikingly more offensive than others, the severity
of the situation will not be evaluated in the event by itself (Vera-Grey, 2017). Rather finds
more worthy evaluating frequency, duration, perceived offensiveness, previous victimisation,
economic vulnerability and other individual factors used to establish the psychological severity
of a harassing incident.
In contrast to this theory, other authors (Arvey and Cavanaugh, 1995) differ in regard
to severity, considering it necessary to evaluate the harshness of the offence and arguing that
estimates are inflated by trivial and rare experiences (Vaux, 1993). Yet, must be noted these
authors are researching about sexual harassment, not street harassment, thus they may trivialise
less severe acts since then street harassment was still understudied and remains so now.
2.3 Policy response around the world

This section will explain the different policy responses around the world targeting
street harassment.
France recently approved a law against street harassment, implementing on-the-spot

fines up to 750 euros, with the possibility to be fined more in case of recidivism or when
escalating to physical violence (Vagianos, 2018). The law forbids insulting, intimidating,
threatening and following women in public spaces, as well as extended deadlines for filing rape
complaints. Survey results on the backing of the law via www.viehealthy.com showed 90%
11
support for punishing harassment on the streets. This is a large number and surprising in
contrast to other places where street harassment is still considered benign. However, criticism
said this law would kill the culture of the ‘French lover’ to which the Gender Equality Minister
replied that ‘it will bring back chivalry… and between consenting adults everything is allowed
– except when someone says no, it is a final no.’ (Williams, 2018).
Since 2013, Brussels imposed 69 fines for sexual remarks towards women and same
sex relationship abuse. Meanwhile, Canada does not evaluate the unwelcomeness of the
victim, rather focuses on the motives of the perpetrator which shifts the focus from the victim
to the aggressor avoiding victim-blaming. This has led to prosecutions in 2009 where an
offender jumped out from behind bushes to block a stranger at night, chased her to a house and
stared at her while she waited for someone to open the door (Ackermann et al., 2014).
Many countries use civil or administrative laws are to punish street harassment. In
Poland, if the moral rights of the victim were violated, the perpetrator can be requested to
publish a public apology in a newspaper for the actions. However, as a first step, policy
responses have focused on making transport system safe. More than 15 countries countering
high rates of male harassment, implemented women-only bus services and cabs including
Mexico, France, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, India, United Arab Emirates, Thailand,
Japan, Egypt, Iran, South Korea, Brazil, England and Russia (Valenti, 2007). However,
segregation is just a temporary remedy and does not address the original cause nor holds the
perpetrators responsible for the crimes. Critics also argue this promotes the paternalistic
stereotype that women have to be protected. Instead, policy designs should focus on teaching
and preventing men from harassing women. (Kearl 2010).
2.4 National Legal Framework

Despite the pervasiveness of street harassment, there is no legislation or policy targeted
to end it in the Dominican Republic. This gap in legislation reinforces normalisation and the
belief that is innocent or complimentary behaviour (The Advocates for Human Rights, 2013).
The approach to fight harassment has focused on cultural transformation instead of enforcing
legislation that condemns the issue, due to the difficulty of proving it amongst other obstacles.
Legal and social change should go hand in hand since the law responds to the society; however,
critics against the legislation argue free speech concerns and trouble with accountability. The
Law 24-97 of January 1997 on Family Violence proposes prison sentences up to a year and
fines from U.S.$200 to U.S.$400 for those guilty of sexual harassment in its article 333-2 which
establishes ‘Every thread, force or offering destined to obtaining favours of any sexual nature,
12
made by a person that abuses authority from its position’. The Labour Code, article 96, states
that sexual harassment in the workplace is a cause for dismissal for the women worker
(Ministry of Women, 2010). (Ministry of Women, 2010). However, street harassment is not
recognised in the law nor constitutes a relevant topic in the Dominican Republic.
2.4.1 Studies on Street Harassment in the Dominican Republic
In the Dominican Republic, there are no records of previous studies specifically

referring to street harassment or significant data to make visible the trivialised issue of street
harassment. However, an OXFAM (2018) investigation in 12 countries of Latin America about
gender-based violence included one question on street harassment. Their findings revealed that
84% of young people between 15-25 years old thought that complimenting women in the street
was normal. With one man from a focal group even stating: ‘A compliment is like a poem, that
a woman is grateful for. You tell her so that she feels attracted to you. If you say something
vulgar, then is not a compliment’. This demonstrates how society has adopted men’s discourse
that the act is benign and complimentary in nature. Also, you can discern a sense of entitlement
and need to tell the woman she is desired.
The topic of street harassment has been invisible and ignored by most academics. Thus,
I will refer to the few ones that have investigated sexual harassment in the work place, which
is the area that has been most studied of the field in the country. Even so, there are very few
studies on sexual harassment at work as well. Two of the most recent was ‘Sexual Harassment
in the Export Processing Zones of the Dominican Republic’(Pantaleón, 2003), which revealed
that 40% of the women interviewed have been harassed at work. In 2007, the Centre for
Investigation for Feminine Action (CIPAF) investigated 'Roles in tension: Mothers and
workers in Export Processing Zones in Dominican Republic' which surveyed 300 workers in
San Pedro de Macorís. Contrary to the previous study, findings revealed that only 2.7% of the
interviewed women have been victim of sexual harassment and only 3% said to know similar
cases.
A more recent investigation on sexual harassment at work by the Ministry of Women
in the Dominican Republic in 2010, challenges these findings recognising the possibility of
misinformation regarding the understanding of sexual harassment and the blurred lines between
provocative attitudes, since it is so normalised in the culture that cannot be recognised.
Moreover, there is the possibility of these women being afraid to come forward.
13
In 2013, the International Organisation of Labour did a qualitative research on sexual

harassment in the work place and masculinity in Central America and the Dominican Republic,
which studies how men perceive the harassment that women suffer at work. Furthermore,
highlights ideologies and beliefs that construct the reality of men from the general population
about sexual harassment in the work place. They explored 90 diverse sample of men between
the ages of 19-65 years old from the Dominican Republic. Their findings discovered that men
use compliments or ‘piropo’ fuelled with sexual intentions to test the waters and evaluate
sexual access. They also felt the need to express ‘If you like a woman, necessarily you need to
compliment her’ (International Labour Organization, 2013), disregarding the potential for
discomfort or pleasure, or whether the victim likes them back or not.
2.5 Social Context of Street Harassment

This section will discuss from a general point of view the different social institutions
that influence in normalising street harassment as complimentary and the social process of
suppressing women’s perspective.
2.5.1 Genderisation of the Streets
Street harassment represents men’s entitlement to invade a women’s space and thus
entitles men to own public spaces through the unsolicited intrusions of women (Laniya, 2005).
Genderisation refers to the projection of power imbalance between genders in the streets – as
another forum that supports gender hierarchy and domination (Mackinnon, 1987)). This will
be explored by looking at the four social effects of street harassment, which are exclusion,
domination, invasion and oppression (Davis, 1994). The paper will further analyse the pre-
existing context that sustain the system through gender stereotypes, culture domination and
sexual objectification.
The hostile environment created through harassment demarcates the street as a male
space. This implies ‘either women are acting out of role simply by their presence in public’
(with justifications on how women shouldn’t be out late or by themselves in their street to
prevent sexual violence) or with commands such as ‘smile’ implying that part of their role is
‘to be open to the public’(Gardner, 1980). Supporting the latter, domination is also an effect to
these one-way interactions that implies if women are going to participate in the public sphere
in a way that pleasures men ‘You need to learn how to take compliments; why don’t you
smile?’. (Rushin, 1983).
14
The allegation on invasion claims that street harassment forfeits women’s right to
privacy (Kissling and Kramarae, 1991), suggesting women have to pay the price of being open
persons to be present in public spaces. Moreover, Hooks (1984) argues oppression is a social
factor which means the absence of choices, referring to the restriction of women’s mobility or
lack of option to decide whether she consents to interacts or no (Bowman,1993).
2.5.2 Gender Stereotypes
Heteronormative discourses are key for normalising street harassment, identifying

female sexuality with submissiveness, passivity, while male sexuality is identified by
dominance, aggression, and desire (Butler, 1999). Additionally, assuming traditional sexual
orientation. Stereotypes harm both men and women, since they constitute a prison that orders
men to think every woman wants to be validated for her attractiveness and that complimenting
her is a must (Kissling and Kramarae, 1991). This might be true in regard to stereotype roles,
however, most women rather be complimented by someone they know instead of a stranger.
This roles prevent men to understand street harassment as harmful or unwanted (Bartky, 1979).
Arguments stating ‘a woman is modern if she whistles at a man and if a man whistles
at a woman is a rapist’ contribute to normalisation of women’s silent suffering towards street
harassment. Furthermore, ignores power positions since most studies proved the different
perceptions towards street harassment by gender. My findings suggest that if men were
subjected to the same behaviour as women they would not consider it harmful.
Patriarchal narratives state women’s worth is linked to their sexuality and appearances,
commending that the ideal woman must cover herself and avoid stimulating men’s gaze
(Mohammadinia, 1992). Furthermore, in the study (International Organisation of Labour,
2013) men discussed how sexual need was an instinctual part of their nature, exempting their
responsibility from controlling their sexual urges. This shows how science has served to justify
patriarchal narratives throughout history. However, covering does not liberate women from
harassers. This illusion is a tool for social control, paving the way for victim blaming by shifting
the responsibility from the perpetrator to the victim (Chubin, 2014). If women disobey, they
pay the price by being harassed in public places (Lahsaeizadeh and Yousefinejad, 2012).
Additionally, slut-shaming discourses legitimise harassment of women who disobey gender
norms (Mahdavi, 2009).
15
In order for street harassment to be trivialised, a cooperative system is required where

men are excused by ‘boys will be boys’ and that women enjoy being chased ‘When women say
‘No’ means ‘Yes’ and ‘when women play hard to get they just want us to keep insisting’.
Research by Plan International on the construction of masculinity found that men

associate masculinity with aggressiveness and strength, having more than 5 women while
married, and going after teenagers because are easier to control (Plan International, 2017).
Which is not very different from the Iranian patriarchal discourse, where masculinity is defined
by protecting and controlling women’s sexuality (Ghandehari, 2006)
2.5.3 Sexual Objectification
Sexual objectification theory exposes psychological effects for women who live in a
culture that hypersexualises them and regards them as things rather than persons in media and
interpersonal relationships (Fredrickson and Roberts, 1997). For this, Argentina criminalised
referring to women as objects as an act of violence (Ackermann et al., 2014)
When a women’s body is singled out from her whole person and treated as if it only
exist for society’s pleasure to be groped and targeted for sexual advancement, a process of self-
objectification and internalisation of the observer’s perception occurs (Bartky, 1990).
Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) defined it as ‘habitual monitoring of the body’s outward
appearance’ causing short and long term mental health effects (Calogero, 2011). Studies
(Fuller-Tyszkiewicz et al 2012)) show objectification by strangers produces further negative
consequences than friends. Street harassment from strangers also creates a particularly
uncontrollable sexual objectification, since eliminating it would require women to retire from
all public spaces (Berger, 1972), internalising the male gaze to help determine how others will
treat them.
Sexual gaze has defined women’s life experiences with their appearance, attractiveness
and body functions as currency for women’s social and economic success. However, this is
only true when the appearance is attractive to the dominant while male culture (Fredrickson
and Roberts, 1997). If it is the contrary, insults or offensive comments are most probable to
happen. Research overwhelmingly demonstrates that men often objectify women, attending
more to their bodies than their intellect or personality for sexual purposes (Fredrickson and
Roberts, 1997). This dehumanisation consists of using women for their own purposes, without
self-determination, no show of concern for her feelings or experiences and assuming they are
replaceable. While it affects women primarily, it also constructs men’s perception of women
16
detaching her from the rest of her personality (Bartky, 1979). In a qualitative study done in the
Dominican Republic on sexual harassment, a man stated ‘The only important thing about
women is their pussy’ (International Labour Organization, 2013).
Furthermore, consequences of objectification forces women to identify themselves with

their sexual parts or creating self-consciousness in young girls aware of their body parts and
the male gaze (Davis, 1994). The awareness is such that one expressed it as:
‘My body is no longer mine. On the street, my body is theirs. I can define myself all I
want, but in their eyes, I am a body on the street, two tits and no head and a big ass. My
body becomes a cunt, and although I'm not physically raped, psychically I am, and I
ache from it’ (Dimen, 1986).
To confront this problem, society sells that women must give up sexuality to forbid
strangers from taking it, as Mackinnon (1987) expressed ‘only by living as less gendered can
a woman hope to be anything but sexually vulnerable and oppressed’. Instead of teaching men to
respect women regardless of the clothe they are wearing.
For all these reasons, street harassment reflects the execution of objectification theory
framing women’s everyday life for male pleasure, with the purpose to compliment her body as
a giver of pleasure to the male subject (Tuerkheimer, 1997). Bartky (1990) states ‘I must be
made to know that I am a ‘nice piece of ass’; I must be made to see myself as they see me’,
forcing awareness of our body or our own flesh. Tuerkheimer highlights the passivity of women
in street harassment, since the potential for disgust or pleasure is ignored. The assumption that
the perpetrator can judge women’s bodies and by this – their worth as human beings – is
underlined even if the comment is considered positive or negative.
2.5.4 Cultural Domination and Masculinity
Bartky(1979) argues that cultural refers to ‘all the items in the general life of a society’;
stating that even if women and men live in the same culture, women’s subordination and
androcentrism defines their understanding of being. This means that ‘language, institutions,
art, literature, popular culture suppress women’s perspective manifesting ‘male supremacy in
different levels a culture constructed by men’ (Davis, 1994).
Susan Fisher Sterling, director of Washington’s National Museum of Women in the

Arts (NMWA), stated ‘Museums, in general, mirror the power structures in our society,
17
structures that in the arts, privilege the history of white men’s accomplishments.’ Shockingly,
only 3-5% of major permanent collections in the US and Europe are from women artists (Le
Brun, 2015).
Furthermore, authors argue that street harassment is another item defined by men and
adapted as a natural cultural experience, even though some question the harm in street
harassment, both women and men have experienced it. Even though definitions vary, ‘there is
a general agreement as to what street remarks look and sound like’ (Kissling and Kramarae,
1991). Women’s inability to define culture results in a strip of ‘cultural autonomy’. Therefore,
since most men view street harassment as acceptable and natural part of a women’s everyday
life, some women internalised this dominant discourse and assimilated street remarks as
complimentary(Bartky, 1979).
Kramarae (1992) argues that women are socially conditioned to perceive this behaviour
as inoffensive. However, gender stereotypes have also made women request affirmation of
their attractiveness; the difference is it would be from someone they know, who does not have
the potential to harm them. Hence, the argument that women’s acceptance of street harassment
as non-offensive reflects a lack of cultural autonomy.
The author does make the difference of a man walking down the street and telling a
woman she had a pretty smile which is clearly an expression of admiration, alternative to the
order of ‘smile’ which is considered as an attempt to control and dominate women (Bartky,
1979). It is interesting to note how street harassment produces an erotization of power (Batres,
1999), since most of the time what causes pleasure is not the approach but the certainty that
they are exerting dominance and control over someone else (West, 1987).
Overall, the literary review exposes the different definitions and conceptualisation for street
harassment linking it with rape on a violence continuum. Additionally, disclosed studies
arguing women were often the victim and men the perpetrator, which had an influence on
frequency and perception, being a tool for men to demonstrate power. Also, analysed the
predisposition of society to normalise street harassment through social norms and values with
the support from gender stereotypes, sexual objectification, and women’s lack of cultural
autonomy through male domination.
18
3. Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this research is to expose the difference in gender perception towards street
harassment and how frequency influences perspective. To comply with this, the research
considered factors as age, level of education, technical harassment experiences, self-reporting
of victimhood, gender, amongst other factors that will help understand further this
phenomenon.
This chapter will expose the logic and strategy of the online questionnaire structured to
grasp a glance of the social perception of sexual harassment in the Dominican Republic. Thus,
I will justify the methods, ethical consideration, and how I will analyse the data along with the
recognition of limitations and recommendation for further research. Finally, validity, reliability
and generalisability of the findings will be evaluated.
3.2 Research objectives and research questions
The main objective of this study is to highlight the different perceptions of women and
men towards compliments by strangers in the streets and frequency as an influencing factor.
Since the dominant discourse on this topic is constructed by male’s point of view, which
permeates culture through gender stereotypes that assume women enjoy having their bodies
evaluated by strangers in public spaces. This research created a space for women to speak their
mind and expose their perspective.
3.3 Data Sources
Harding (1991) argues that scientific narratives are told from the perspective of the
‘winners’ of the ‘battle of the sexes’, consequently it is important to consider how my gender
plays in the role of researcher in the study. Since most feminist researchers claim that there is
an empathetic understanding due to similar position of power in society which determines if a
researcher is appropriate for any study (Gray et al., 2007), contributing to a more representation
of their lived experiences. Moreover, Harding (1991) recognises that certain bias can be
socially degenerating, but that on the contrary, feminist bias can be progressive due to the rare
exposure of women’s standpoint as a source of knowledge.
Women are strangers to research and historically have been marginalised intellectuals
that could enrich sociological discourse dominated by men. Thus, women can see patterns of
19
belief and behaviour that those immerse cannot due to normalisation (Collins, 1990). The
combination of closeness and remoteness that a women researcher possess to the topic is central
to maximising objectivity, since women are thought as outsiders to the dominant institutions
in society in contrast to men whose way of thinking fit the dominant culture and conceptual
schemes (Gray et al., 2007).
Therefore, the lens of post-structuralism used in this research plans to deconstruct

reality and argue for the existence of a socially constructed reality, raising awareness of the
way women’s experiences have been ignored and highlighting the unique perspectives on
social reality by members of oppressed groups (Gray et al., 2007). Standpoint theory draws on
postmodernism by challenging dominant and normalised discourse in society criticising
existing knowledge and the hierarchical power they defend. Furthermore, Harding (1991) states
that women as source of knowledge can check against the validity of information claims since
Smith (1987) argues that women’s everyday realities and experiences do not match
conventional male-biased theoretical constructs.
I used a quantitative method since it is thought to be more concerned with the deductive
testing of hypothesis and theories. This type of research is characterised by its objectiveness
(Bryman, 2008) and focus on measurement, quantification and collection of numerical data to
explain a particular phenomenon allowing little room for bias from the researcher (Muijs,
2011). Also, society tends to disqualify qualitative studies arguing it represents a very small
population and that it ignores the possibility of diverse opinions; thus, this research wanted to
capture the greatest number of answers possible and integrate standpoint theory into
quantitative methods – specially from women whose perspective is undermined and who are
currently oversampled in this study.
An online survey is a fast and organised way to gather data (Best and Krueger, 2004)
offering an anonymous way to pose delicate questions which increases the level of reporting
sensitive information and accuracy (Kreuter et al, 2008). Therefore, I conducted an online
survey to gather more about women’s and men’s experiences and to provide the respondent
with anonymity and privacy that would otherwise not be available in interviews in person.
The online survey was created using www.surveymonkey.co.uk to a close-end

questionnaire since respondents are less likely to answer open-ended questions (Rossi, Wright
20
and Anderson, 1983). The survey was called ‘social perception of sexual harassment in
Dominican Republic’ – although the focus was on the province of Distrito Nacional and Santo
Domingo. The online survey was run with ethical approval given by the University of Bristol
Ethics Committee. Question topics covered demographics, respondent’s understanding of
sexual harassment, personal experiences on sexual and street harassment, impacts, disclosure
on reporting practices and measuring several harassment myths.
3.4 Participants
A self-selecting convenience sample of 1,826 respondents in total, with an estimated

completion rate of 85% in an estimated time of 4 minutes open for two weeks from August 5th,
2018. The survey was sent to more than 20,000 people via the digital newspaper database ‘El
Brifin’. In addition, the survey was distributed through social media networks, particularly
Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp groups and through the social platforms of the Vice-
presidency of the Dominican Republic. The only requirement was being Dominican residents.
3.5 Measures
The questionnaire initiated explaining the purpose and aim of the study, the possibility
to get out at any moment if the respondent felt uncomfortable and that the answers would be
anonymous and confidential. The structure was carefully planned and revised by the Board.
The thought that survey questions should avoid the term sexually harassed and use unwanted
behaviour instead (Fitzgerald & Shullman, 1993) was considered. However, I decided to use
‘sexual harassment’ to measure respondents’ understanding of the term and what technical acts
they normalised and exclude from the definition. Thus, no information was provided to
participants regarding the technical definition of sexual harassment, since one of the questions
asked if the participant believed they have been a victim and another question they were
instructed to draw on from their experience selecting one or multiple acts that constitute’
technical sexual harassment. Furthermore, they answered questions on how they felt about
catcalling in the streets, which gender it was generally from and were provided with two
examples regarding sexual consent and alcohol to test sexist and victim blaming ideologies.
The first three questions were answered by the totality of respondents. The survey
initiated selecting gender male, female, or other; the second and third question asked if the
person has ever given a compliment to a stranger in a public space, and the third enquired if
the person ever received a compliment from a stranger in a public space. These will inform
21
which gender commits and receives the most intrusions in public spaces. The latter also
happened to be a filter question, if the person selected the answer no in the third question, they
skipped questions four until eight evaluating the impact.
Question four asked to select the gender that generally compliments them between male
and female validating previous questions on which gender intrudes more; the fifth question
asks what the perpetrator does if the victim reacts. This question will expose how the victim
copes with what just happened and will be linked with how they perceive the event. The sixth
question explores the frequency that the person receives compliments in public spaces.
Frequency will also define the different cumulative experience between the genders and how
often they are exposed to this, which can affect how they feel or perceive it. Question seven
asks to select between one or several feelings caused by compliments from strangers in public
spaces. This is key to answer the research question since it will demonstrate if there’s any
difference in perception by gender.
Question eight until tenth are yes or no questions to explore acceptance of rape and
sexual harassment myths, eight asks if the person thinks women should wear less provocative
clothes to prevent sexual harassment, ninth is about consent. The latter asks ‘if a person accepts
to have sexual relations, but during the act expresses they do not want to continue but the
partner does not stop- do you think the first person has part of the guilt?’; tenth question asks
‘if the victim of a harassment case got voluntarily drunk and lost control, the victim has part of
the guilt for what happened?’ In the same line of thought regarding myths, question fourteenth
also measures beliefs asking if the respondent considers that a man who is sexually aroused
cannot contain himself.
The eleventh question asks if they know a victim of sexual harassment, which helps
measuring the awareness on the pervasiveness of the subject; the twelfth question evaluates the
respondent’s understanding of the technical definition of sexual harassment, since the answer
will be compared with the next question that asks the respondent if they consider themselves a
victim of sexual harassment. to select one or multiple scenarios which happen to be included
in the technical definition. The thirteenth question will inform about the technical harassment
respondents’ have experienced, this way the findings will show a scope of the respondent’s
definition of sexual harassment and what they consider acceptable or normal.
Question fifteenth and sixteenth want to validate the secondary data obtained from the
General Attorney General and theories that argue sexual harassment is underreported, asking
22
if the respondent has ever reported harassment to an authority. Question sixteenth tested the
reasons why the respondent might not have reported the episode.
Question seventeenth until twenty are demographics placed in the end to avoid people
losing interest with these questions. Seventeenth explores the main way of transport of the
respondent since this affects the frequency and exposure to harassment in public spaces. The
next asks for age selecting 17 or less, then 18-24, 25-34, 35-44 and over 45. Question nineteenth
asks the higher level of education. Last question enquires the place of residence presenting the
32 provinces of the country, since it was an online survey, I did not want to exclude other
people who could have received the link. However, the diffusion focused on provinces Santo
Domingo and Distrito Nacional.
3.6 Analytical Strategy
We begin with a descriptive analysis that describes the prevalence of victimization in

the whole sample and then analyse differences in frequency of victimization. Next, the answers
to the open-ended questions are analysed thematically and patterns are identified.
3.7 Limitations and Implications for future research
My findings are not statistically significant or representative of the whole population

and can only suggest the pervasiveness of the problem (Kearl, 2010) and a gendered difference.
Nevertheless, it offers a snapshot of the universality of the problem that is inherently difficult
to quantify and replicated methods of international studies on the subject (Stringer, 2007).
Participation was open to all genders, but only two persons identified as other in the gender
question. Since Dominican culture is highly conservative and LGTBQI subjects are
stigmatised, I chose to avoid collecting information on sexual orientation due to the possibility
of lack of disclosure. Demographic data was not collected on race/ethnicity since it is a blurred
concept in the Dominican Republic and the answers might not be totally accurate. Income and
disability were also purposely excluded. Since it was the first-time creating data on this specific
subject, I decided to focus on the pervasiveness in general to develop intersectional analysis in
further research.
It must also be noted, that since I used a digital tool the research excluded potential
participants who don’t have access to internet and was not able to reach people from a diverse
socio-economic background since internet users are presumably higher up in the hierarchy and
more educated. However, I replicate the assumption that if sexual harassment was reported
23
among this group, it should be more common among women in lower-paid jobs (Ramanathan
et al., 2005). Most of the participants have their own vehicle, which reduces significantly the
frequency of sexual harassment, even though the perception of the frequency was still high.
For further research, would have been better to address people who use more public
transportation and who mainly walk. The limitation that most respondents have attained a basic
and high level of education, excludes less privileged people where prostitution is common, and
women are taught to sell their bodies in exchange of goods or services.
3.8 Validity, Reliability and Generalisation
One of the most relevant matters to any findings is the question of reliability, validity,
and generalisability. Morse (1999) states that reliability and validity are central to all findings
and verification strategies such as creating a relationship with theoretical approach, theory
development, sampling and data analysis ensure validity and reliability. Strauss (2006) defines
reliability as an estimate of consistency across time from one measurement to the next, while
validity refers to the accurate measure of the concept.
Validity requires that the concept is accurately measure which in this case would be if
men and women have different perspective on compliments by strangers in the streets, which
the survey measures by replicating other survey questions on the same subject (Kearl, 2010,
You Gov, 2014) bringing certain reliability to the results found since it confirms the findings.
Reliability consists on making sure the measure is consistent and that if used repeatedly the
same findings will be met (Bryman,2008). It guarantees that a quality of measurement method
will produce the same data after repeated observations of the same phenomenon. Thus,
quantitative research, in this case a survey, makes it more likely for studies to be replicated and
for the findings to be reliable (Gray et al., 2007) since the data collection procedures are easier
to reproduce than imitating the same conversations or observations that are essential to
qualitative research.
Generalisability consists of seeking to establish causal relationships that maximise internal

and external validity or that can be generalised to a broad population (Jerit, Barabas and
Clifford, 2013). Convenience samples such as online surveys are a great tool for testing
grounds for experimental social science and unexplored subjects (Mullinix et al., 2015) such
as sexual harassment in the Dominican culture. Even though non-probability samples will not
replace population-based samples which tend to be representative and heterogeneous,
24
according to Campbell (1969) it is the best place to begin testing hypothesis and explore
whether they are falsified. Mullinix (2015) argues that they can lead to ‘substantial progress in
the social sciences, most acutely when researchers understand the conditions under which those
samples are more or less likely to provide generalizable population inferences’. Hence, since
target was internet users who are known to be from a higher socio-economic status and the
sample was composed of highly educated people, it can be suggested that these class of people
share characteristics of the findings. Additionally, they highlight that scientific knowledge
grows through repetition rather than judging on sample heuristics. This can be achieved
through comparisons across samples and linking theories.
4. Results and Discussion
In this chapter, the most relevant answers from the survey results will be exposed and
analysed. Fist, the composition of respondents by gender, respondent’s behaviour in public
spaces by identifying frequency of receiving compliments and their tendency to do it
themselves. Linking gender and frequency as a factor that influences perspective towards
compliments from strangers in the street. Also, exposing respondent’s awareness on the
pervasiveness of sexual harassment and their experiences to understand which acts they have
excluded from the definition of sexual harassment. Finally, understanding main reasons for not
reporting harassment to an authority. The survey results are in appendix II.
25
4.1 Respondents’ gender

Q. 1: Gender
1,341 (73%) Women, 483 (26%) men and 2 respondents identified as other. All
answered the first three questions of the survey regarding compliments in public spaces. Only
two persons identified as others probably because of the conservative society that frowns upon
identifying outside of the traditional genders (Rodriguez, 2017).
Figure 1: Respondents’ gender
Figure 1 shows women are oversampled in this study as in other online surveys (Kearl,
2010), suggesting that women were more engaged politically or practically in the issue and
want their perspective to be heard. Due to trivialisation of street harassment by the male
dominant discourse, most men might have not seen the relevance in the topic whilst many
females recognised it as more important (Vera Gray, 2017). It is significant that greater
women’s perception was captured, since it is a way to better challenge the present discourse.
4.2 Respondents’ behaviour in public spaces by gender

4.2.1 Respondents who received and complimented strangers in public spaces
Only 111 (8%) women respondents have complimented strangers in a public space in
contrast to 1230 (92%) who have not. Meanwhile, all 1325 (99%) women have received them
(Figure 4.2.1) corroborating similar trends from 23 different countries on five continents
(Kearl, 2010), similar to a 2015 research in France whose findings showed that 600 (100%)
women across the country had faced harassment on the transit system (Elzas, 2015). The
overwhelming majority of women’s respondents who have received it in contrast to 314 (65%)
men (Figure 4.2.2), contributes to the theory of the ghettoization of women in the streets
26
(Bowman, 1993), which theorises it as a dynamic reflecting the gender power imbalance and
the price women have to pay to be out in public.
It is not surprising that the number of men respondents who have received compliments
in the street is high, since it has been normalised in the culture. However, there is a discrepancy
between the pervasiveness of men receiving compliments and that only 111 (8%) women
respondents declared to have done it. It is also surprising that only 190 (39%) men have
complimented strangers in public, while a large number has not – 293 (61%). This could be
attributed to the high education level of respondents (See appendix II), confirming other studies
that have found education positively related to sexual harassment. Well educated women could
identify more behaviours as such, hence they would refrain from doing it (Tang et al, 1995).
Meanwhile 16 (1%) women and 169 (35%) men did not received compliments in public spaces,
hence skipped questions four to eight on the survey.
Table 4.2.1
Women Yes No Total

Complimented
strangers in 8% 111 92% 1230 74% 1341
public
Received
compliments
99% 1325 1% 16 74% 1341
from strangers
in public
Table 4.2.2
Men Yes No Total

Complimented
strangers in 39% 190 61% 293 26% 483
public
Received
compliments
65% 314 35% 169 26% 483
from strangers
in public
27
28
4.3 Gender that regularly compliments
The majority of perpetrators are men and the victims are women, which is why it should
be considered a gender-based issue. All women respondents 1,213 (100%) and 35 (14%) men
alleged the perpetrators were men and only 6 (0%) were female. Findings show that when men
receive it, most probable comes from a woman with 220 (86%) stating this, however it further
proves the theory that men are the majority of perpetrators since a very insignificant number
of women declared other women have done it to them, while 35 (14%) men identified their
perpetrator as men. Rarely a woman was the perpetrator for the respondent, but men also were
perpetrators to other men. There is a difference in context when the interaction is from one
vulnerable group towards a powerful one (women complimenting men) and when it happens
between two persons in the same position of power (women to women or men to men). This
difference is confirmed in Figure 4.6.1 illustrating perspectives by gender.
Figure 4.3: Gender of the stranger who compliments regularly
Male perpetrator Female perpetrator Total

Q1:
Female 100% 1213 0% 6 83% 1219
Q1: Male 14% 35 86% 220 18% 255
Total 85% 1248 15% 226 100.00% 1474
29
4.4 Reaction of victim and perpetrator
The most popular choice is to not react and ignore it with 813 (67%) women and 162
(64%) men selecting this. There is no way to predict how a person will react or perceive it, but
generally courts and the dominant discourse constructs women’s silence to mean the
compliment is welcome or ‘could not have been that bad’ (Estrich, 2015). Studies show
victim’s actions and reactions define the crime more than those of the perpetrator, focusing on
the reaction, lack of it and defining whether the victim asked for it (women’s case with
provocative clothes).
Men in a focus group have said ‘When a decent female receives a compliment in public
and she does not welcome it she needs to call him out and ask for respect, because if she stays
silent, she likes it’. Another one said, ‘the problem is not the man who harasses, it is up to the
victim to accept it or not.’(International Labour Organization, 2013). On the other hand, experts
(Ghandehari, 2006) see it as a coping mechanism with different meanings according to gender.
Therefore, one might not react because of a feeling of indifference or because they have
associated it with a negative feeling and chose not to engage with the perpetrator.
Findings show that women are more likely to be insulted when reacting since 199 (16%)
women and only 8 (3%) men expressed this, while 144 (12%) women and 21 (8%) men said
the perpetrator insists. It appears that men were more prone to be respected since only 57 (5%)
women in contrast to 51 (20%) men said the perpetrator stayed in silence and left. Only 5
(0.41%) women and 10 (4%) men said the perpetrator apologised after they reacted.
30
Figure 4.4 Reaction of perpetrator to a response by gender
31
4.5 Frequency of receiving compliments in public spaces by gender

Figure 4.5 shows women are more exposed to street harassment than men are, the
popular response for 565 (46%) women being almost every day in contrast to 6 (2%) men who
selected this, while the most popular response for 115 (45%) men was few times a year in
contrast to 52 (4%) women who selected this. The findings corroborate with other results such
as the Egyptian Centre for Women’s Right survey of 2,000 men and women, finding that 83%
of women reported street harassment and half experienced it daily (Kearl, 2010) – which also
proved that wearing a veil or covering up stops the probability of harassment. Also confirmed
by a 2014 survey of 629 youth in Serbia, where 64% women and 14% men said they experience
harassment on a daily basis (Equity Youth Association, 2014).
The average frequency for women is once a week (m=2.18) and for male at least once
in two months (m=4.88). This contributes to Vera-Grey’s argument (2017) referenced in the
literary review, stating street harassment is a cumulative process instead of a particular incident,
which eventually forfeits women’s right to privacy and freedom on the streets due to the
frequency of the act - no matter how positive or negative it is. Also, shows how it is a tool used
by men to demonstrate their power over women. In total, 565 (46%) women experience it
almost every day while 115 (45%) men experience it few times a year.
Figure and table 4.5 Frequency by gender
32
Frequency by gender in percentages

46% 45%
24% 24%
16%
11% 10%
4% 6% 4% 4%
2% 4%
0% 0%
ALMOST ONCE A SEVERAL ONCE A AT LEAST FEW ONCE A NEVER
EVERY DAY WEEK TIMES A MONTH ONCE IN TIMES A YEAR
MONTH TWO YAR
MONTHS
Woman Men
Figure 4.5.1 Frequency percentage by gender
Frequency by gender
565
295
190
70 115
29 60 45
26 52
6 10 0 9
2
ALMOST ONCE A SEVERAL ONCE A AT LEAST FEW ONCE A NEVER
EVERY WEEK TIMES A MONTH ONCE IN TIMES A YEAR
DAY MONTH TWO YAR
MONTHS
Woman Men
Figure 4.5.1.1 Frequency by gender in numbers
33
4.5.1 Frequency by age and gender

Figure 4.5.1 and Figure 4.5.2 break down the frequency of receiving compliments in
public spaces by age.
Figure 4.5.1 shows the majority of women respondents of all age groups experience
compliments from strangers almost every day except from 33 (35%) women between 35-44
years old and 24 (34%) women over 45 years old, whose most popular answer was several
times a month. The percentage of women who experience it almost every day appears to reduce
when age increases.
On the contrary, Figure 4.5.2 shows the majority of men respondents of all age groups
experience compliments from strangers few times a year. Except for 4(67%) boys under 17
years old, whose most popular response was several times a month, which could have been
caused by the small sample of boys who took the survey 6 (9%) from respondents under 17
years old.
Table 4.5.1 highlights most women's answers are concentrated in ‘almost every day’,
‘once a week’ and ‘several times a month’ with 1048 (86%) of women in total representing
these frequencies. In contrast, table 4.5.2 highlights male respondents' answers concentrated
between once a month, once in two months and few times a year with 201 (79%) men
representing these frequencies.
Table 4.5.1 highlights the women's group with the highest percentage was 35 (56%)
young girls under 17 years old who experience compliments almost every day, next to 316
(55%) women from 18-24 years old and 179 (42%) women from 25-44 years old who
experience the same frequency. This supports that society sexualises women from a young age
and are seen as more sexually available than older women, which explains the
overrepresentation of young victims and the frequency and anger towards it from this range of
age. In contrast, table 4.5.2 shows men's age group with the highest percentage was 13 (68%)
respondents between 35-44, who experienced compliments few times a year, next to 9 (53%)
men over 45 years old and 53 (51%) men between 25 – 34 years old who experience the same
frequency.
We can see a significant difference between women respondents from 18 to 24 years -

316 (55%) - selecting ‘almost every day’ in contrast to 3(3%) men who selected such. This
discrepancy is replicated throughout the different age ranges between men and women.
Additionally, corroborates younger women, college students particularly, have been identified
34
as a high-risk subsample of the population with widespread victimization (Fisher, B.S., Cullen,
F.T., & Turner, 2000). My findings show that the younger the women, the higher the frequency
of street harassment.
Findings corroborate the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention report stating
women ages 16–24 are more victimised than older women and that sexual harassment is a
common experience among women under 16 (Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention,
2016). Around 71% of women start suffering street harassment between ages of 11 and
17(Feminism: Women’s uphill struggle against street harassment in Spain | In English | EL
PAÍS, 2018). In Serbia, 58% said they experienced their first harassment at age 13-17 years
(Kearl, 2010). The frequency experienced by women respondents over 45 years old reduces
significantly, because they might be considered less sexualised by society.
35
FE MAL E FRE Q UE NCY B Y AGE

> 17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45
56%
55%
42%
35%
34%
30%
29%
21%
20%
19%
18%
18%
16%
15%
10%
10%
10%
10%
7%
6%
6%
6%
5%
5%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
ALMOST ONCE A SEVERAL ONCE A AT LEAST FEW TIMES ONCE A NEVER
EVERY DAY WEEK TIMES A MONTH ONCE IN A YEAR YEAR
MONTH TWO
MONTHS
Figure 4.5.1
MAL E FRE Q UE NCY B Y AGE

> 17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45
68%
67%
53%
51%
36%
27%
24%
21%
17%
17%
16%
13%
12%
11%
11%
9%
9%
6%
6%
6%
5%
4%
4%
3%
3%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
ALMOST ONCE A SEVERAL ONCE A AT LEAST FEW TIMES ONCE A NEVER

EVERY DAY WEEK TIMES A MONTH ONCE IN A YEAR YEAR
MONTH TWO
MONTHS
Figure 4.5.2
36
Table 4.5.1 Female frequency by age
Table 4.5.2 Male frequency by age
37
4.6 Difference in perspective on receiving compliments by gender

Figure 4.6.1 illustrates respondents’ opposite feelings towards compliments from
strangers in public by gender. Findings corroborates other studies mentioned in the literary
review that found women are more likely than men to associate such situations with negative
feelings in virtually every research ever conducted (Frazier, P., Valtinson, G., & Candell,
1994). My findings demonstrate that men tend to associate it with positive feelings, which is
the current dominant discourse and resonates with studies around the world (Kearl, 2010). This
thesis sustains a difference in gendered perception on street harassment. Additionally, argues
that effects are generally worse psychologically for women as compared to men by reducing
feelings of safety in public spaces (Barling et al., 1996). Gallup data from surveys in 143
countries including Italy, France, Australia, and the U.S. in 2011 show men are more likely to
feel safe walking at night in their neighbourhood than women (Women Feel Less Safe Than
Men in Many Developed Countries, 2012)
Difference in perspectiveby
gender in %
60%
49%
44%
38%
32%
20% 21%
8% 7% 5%
DESIRED INDIFFERENT INSECURE DISGUSTED ASHAMED
Women Men
Figure 4.6.1 Difference in perspective by gender in %
Figure 4.6.1 shows 735 (60%) women felt disgusted or angered in contrast to 14 (5%)
men who selected this, while the popular response for 126 (56%) men was feeling desired in
contrast to 96 (8%) women feeling such. This corroborates that the same objective event men
find pleasurable, women can find harmful (West, 1987) since both experience pain and pleasure
differently. Connecting with literary review where the masculine cultural domination is
explained, which causes women’s perspective to be undervalued and substituted by men’s
perspective. In consequence, trivialising date rape, street and sexual harassment, amongst other
acts female find disturbing.
38
Studies (Mellgren et al., 2017) show street harassment caused anger specifically toward
men in general, turning into a general fear and anger toward a patriarchal society.
‘I guess I was annoyed and felt like my personal boundaries were crossed. It also annoys
me that I kind of find it normal and that the general perception from their side is that it is a
compliment/not something they take serious.’ (Mellgren et al., 2017)
Second popular feeling amongst women -465 (38%) - was insecurity in contrast to
111(44%) who felt indifferent second to desired. Women’s higher general fear compared to
only 17 (7%) men who felt insecure, supports (Ferraro, 1996) theory that attribute women’s
fear to being exposed to sexual offenses and other crimes as burglary, robbery, and assault
(Hilinski, 2009). This means that frequency of sex crimes has the potential to influence more
than the direct victim, spreading a threat of victimisation to the women collective, affecting
everyday life regardless of individual experiences.
Langelan (1993) suggests there’s an underlying tension in women wondering how far
the harasser will go and if it will become violent, citing mostly their fear of rape. About a third
of women from a crime survey in Sweden reported they do not feel safe outdoors alone late at
night in their own neighbourhood, or they do not go out of fear of victimisation (Swedish
National Council for Crime Prevention, 2017).
Findings back up Nepal’s report in 2013 saying that one in three women in contrast to
one in six men feel unsafe on public transport(World Bank, 2013) and a national sample of
12,300 Canadians which reported street harassment caused 80% women to lower their
perceived safety in public (Kearl, 2010).
Research on women in public spaces link street harassment to consequences as fear

(Macmillan, R., Nierobisz and Welsh, 2000)behavioural adjustments such as avoiding places
(Ferraro, 1996) and limiting movement, as well with anxiety, shame, guilt, trouble sleeping,
distrust, depression, stress, and lowered self-esteem (Lenton et al., 1999).
39
Figure 4.6.2 Perspectives by gender
40
4.7 Perception of compliments received from strangers by age

This section breaks down the gendered perspectives by age to identify trends in
different subgroups. Figure 4.7.1 shows the most popular answer for all women respondents
under 17 to 44 years old, was to feel disgusted or angered, except for 37 (53%) women over
45 years old who mostly felt indifferent. Most women's answers concentrated in feeling
angered or disgusted, insecure and ashamed.
Table 4.7.1 shows the age range with the most significant and largest percentage feeling
angered or disgusted which is women between 18-24 years represented in 376(66%)
respondents. Figure 4.7.2 illustrates the most popular answer in men from under 17 to over 45
years old was feeling desired and flattered, except for male respondents between 18-24 years
old who disrupted the tendency since a larger group – 50 (45%) within the range felt indifferent.
Most men’s answers concentrated in feeling flattered and indifferent.
Figure 4.7.1. Women’s perception by age
Figure 4.7.2 Men’s perception by age
41
Table 4.7.1. Female perception by age
Table 4.7.2 Male perception by age
42
4.8 Awareness on pervasiveness of sexual harassment by gender

This section provides a notion of society’s awareness of the pervasiveness of sexual
harassment.
4.8.1 Women’s awareness

The survey asked, ‘Do you think you know a victim of sexual harassment?’ and ‘Do
you think you have been a victim of sexual harassment?’ No definition for the term was given
on purpose to understand what the respondent excludes as sexual harassment. It is surprising
to see Figure 4.8.1 demonstrates how women who have been victims of sexual harassment are
more likely to identify that other friends might have also been victims. 810 (66%) women
thought they were victims of sexual harassment and 827 (67%) women recognised the
pervasiveness of it expressing they think they know a victim. 417 (34%) Women thought they
were not a victim, and 400 (33%) do not think their acquaintances could have been either, this
caused probably by their narrow definition of being a victim of sexual harassment and suggests
they have trivialised less severe acts.
4.8.2 Men’s awareness

In contrast to women, Figure 4.8.2 illustrates only 80 (20%) men thought they have
been a victim of sexual harassment and 206 (50%) men thought they knew a sexual harassment
victim. However, male respondents appear to be less aware than women on the pervasiveness
of sexual harassment since 201 (49%) men thought they do not know a sexual harassment
victim and 327 (80%) men thought they have never been a victim.
Most women considered themselves victims while most men thought they were not.
43
WOMEN'S AWARENESS OF SEXUAL

HARASSMENT
Do you think you know a victim of sexual harassment?
67% Do you think you were a victim of sexual harassment?
66%
34%
33%
YES NO
Figure 4.8.1 Women’s awareness of sexual harassment
MEN'S AWARENESS OF SEXUAL

HARASSMENT
Do you think know a victim of sexual harassment?
Do you think you were a victim of sexual harassment?
80%
50%
49%
20%
YES NO
Figure 4.8.2 Men’s awareness of sexual harassment
44
Table 4.8.1 Women’s awareness of sexual harassment
Table 4.8.2 Men’s awareness of sexual harassment
45
4.9 Respondents experiences by gender

Figure 4.9.1 exposes all respondents’ experiences by gender while Figure 4.9.2 informs
what is mostly excluded from the definition of sexual harassment according to gender by
filtering respondents who selected they were not victim of sexual harassment but still selected
one or more of the technical experiences of harassment.
4.9.1 Technical Harassment experienced by gender
Figure 4.9.1 illustrates the most popular answer for women respondents regarding acts
they experienced was 1083 (88%) compliments in the streets and 1079 (88%) whistles and
other noises. Next to these 896 (73%) experienced sexual or sexist comments and 947 (77%)
dirty looks. The most popular answer for men respondents regarding the acts that they have
experienced was compliments in the streets 226 (56%), next to 161 (40%) the command to
smile and 114 (28%) dirty looks.
More women than men have experienced whistles in contrast to 103 (25%) men.
Women respondents are more exposed than men to receiving dirty looks. Women were more
prone than men to receive sexually explicit or sexist comments since 100 (25%) men
experienced this. Women were more probable to be followed – 438 (36%) – in contrast to 16
(4%) men. Women were more exposed to witness masturbation or exhibitionism 315 (26%) in
contrast to 26 (6%) men. Only 13 (1%) women respondents and 83 (20%) men selected none.
4.9.2 Normalised acts by gender
This section filters respondents who self-declared never being victim of sexual
harassment but selected one or more acts that technically constitute harassment from question
13, thus normalised the following acts excluding them from their definition of sexual
harassment.
In figure 4.9.2 it appears that 365 (88%) women have internalised the male gaze through
compliments and dirty looks 262 (63%). 345 (83%) Women have normalised whistles and
other noises, the command ‘smile’ with 247 (59%) and some 237 (57%) even excluded sexual
or sexist comments from their definition of harassment. Figure 4.9.2 shows the acts most men
respondents normalised were compliments in the streets 177 (54%), followed by the command
smile 126 (39%) and whistles and dirty looks with 74 (23%). In the United States, 72% of
participants from a YouGov poll thought that catcalls were compliments and men were more
likely than women to say it is sometimes appropriate(You Gov, 2014).
46
Overall, men and women respondents who self-declared not being a victim of sexual
harassment, 542 (73%) normalised compliments in the streets and 419 (56%) whistles and other
noises the most. In this finding a greater percentage of women normalised more acts than men.
Results corroborates with other studies such as 2014 report in Serbia where 629 youth
were surveyed, and the most common form of harassment was also evaluative physical
comments, was not recognised as harassment at all since only 19% of respondents agreed that
these unrequested comments on the body constitute harassment (Equity Youth Association,
2014).
47
Figure 4.9.1 Technical harassment

SEXUAL HARASSMENT EXPERIENCED BY GENDER
experienced by gender
Women Men
88%
88%
77%
73%
64%
56%
40%
36%
28%
26%
25%
25%
25%
24%
20%
18%
13%
9%
6%
6%
4%
4%
2%
1%
Table 4.9.1 Technical harassment

experienced by gender
Drugged
Sexual or Exhibitionism Pressed for
Compliments sexist or Grabbing with Forced to sexual Whistles or
Smile in the streets Followed comments masturbation of genitals genitals Dirty looks sexual act act noises Total
Women 64% 787 88% 1083 36% 438 73% 896 18% 226 26% 315 25% 301 77% 947 13% 154 6% 75 88% 1079 1214
Men 40% 161 56% 226 4% 16 25% 100 24% 96 6% 26 9% 38 28% 114 4% 16 2% 7 25% 103 324
Total 58% 948 80% 1309 28% 454 60% 996 20% 322 21% 341 20% 339 65% 1061 11% 170 5% 82 72% 1182 1538
48
Figure 4.9.2 Acts normalised by gender

Acts normalised by gender
100%
88%
90% 83%
80%
70% 63%
59% 57%
60% 54%
50%
39%
40%
30% 23% 23%
20%
20% 17% 17% 16%
8% 10%
10% 5% 6%
2% 3% 2% 2% 1%
0%
Women Men
Sexual or Pressed Forced to Drugged

Compliments in sexist Exhibitionism or Grabbing with sexual for sexual Whistles or
Smile the streets Followed comments masturbation of genitals genitals Dirty looks act act noises Total
Women 59% 247 88% 365 20% 83 57% 237 8% 32 16% 66 10% 42 63% 262 3% 12 2% 7 83% 345 56% 417
Men 39% 126 54% 177 2% 7 17% 56 17% 56 5% 16 6% 20 23% 74 2% 7 1% 2 23% 74 44% 327
Total 50% 373 73% 542 12% 90 40% 293 12% 88 11% 82 8% 62 45% 336 3% 19 1% 9 56% 419 311% 744
Table 4.9.2 Acts normalised by gender
49
4.10 Reportage of sexual harassment to an authority by gender

Figure 4.10.1 illustrates a low reportage of sexual harassment since 1,147 (93%) women
and 395 (97%) men said they have never reported it, while only 80 (7%) women and 12 (3%)
men said they have. Results are similar to other studies where 98.5% women had not reported
their experiences to the police, which was an expected finding based on police reports (Lenton
et al., 1999). The decision to report a crime is based on a cost-benefit analysis, where
commonly the benefit is to get justice from the perpetrator’s conviction or a financial
compensation. Occasionally, reporting causes more harm and produces a secondary
victimisation, loss of time and energy and replaying trauma without achieving conviction
(Mellgren, Andersson and Iver, 2017). This corroborates with Figure 4.10.2 that shows the
annual report for sexual crimes in the Dominican Republic, a country with 10,917,042 citizens,
and the total reports for 2011-2017 represent 0.4% of the population. Evidently, studies show
discrepancy in pervasiveness and reportage.
Men appear less prone to report than women, most probable because of trivialisation or shame
as shown in Figure 4.10.1 ; while majority of women’s reason was the lack of consequence.
Figure 4.10.1 Reportage of sexual harassment to an authority by gender
Yes No Total
Q1: Female 6.52% 80 93.48% 1147 75.09% 1227
Q1: Male 2.95% 12 97.05% 395 24.91% 407
Total 5.63% 92 94.37% 1542 100.00% 1634
Table 4.10.1 Reportage of sexual harassment to an authority by gender
50
Figure 4.10.2 Report of total sexual crimes for Dominican Republic 2011-2017
POLICE REPORTING OF SEXUAL

CRIMES FOR DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
2011-2017
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
-
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Data from Attorney General of the Dominican Republic. Graph by author
Table 4.10.3 Segregated sexual crimes in the Dominican Republic 2011-2017
51
4.11 Reasons for not reporting by gender

This section filters respondents who self-declared as victims of sexual harassment who
did not report it and expressed the reasons for not doing so.
Figure 4.11 shows 418 (56%) women said there would be no consequence, making it
the most popular answer, which corroborates with Gutek (1985), who reported that 60% of the
non-reporters in her sample believed complaints would be ineffective because nothing would
be done. Second was shame represented by 219 (30%) women. The most popular answer for
men was shame represented by 22 (30%) and indifference 20 (27%). Findings suggest that
more men than women were indifferent, validated with the fact that most women decided not
to report because of the lack of consequence.
52
Figure 4.11 Self-declared victims and reasons for not reporting by gender
Reasons for not reporting

60% 56%
50%
40%
30%30%
30% 27%
22% 23% 22%
19%
20% 17%
15% 14% 14%
12% 12%
10% 8% 10%
10% 7% 7% 7%
0%
Table 4.11 Self-declared
victims and reasons for Women Men
not reporting by gender

Not a Would be Did not want
victim of labelled I thought I Call me a It was Afraid of the There would be to hurt
Indifferent SH guilty was guilty liar nothing Shame aggressor no consequences aggressor Total
Women 15% 108 7% 49 14% 103 12% 87 22% 163 14% 107 30% 219 17% 123 56% 418 10% 72 91% 741
Men 27% 20 12% 9 7% 5 10% 7 19% 14 23% 17 30% 22 8% 6 22% 16 7% 5 9% 73
Total 16% 128 7% 58 13% 108 12% 94 22% 177 15% 124 30% 241 16% 129 53% 434 9% 77 100% 814
53
5. Conclusion
This chapter will provide a summary of the key findings of the online survey while
reflecting critically on the gendered perception towards street harassment and its normalisation
in the Dominican Republic. Furthermore, I will provide recommendations on how to tackle this
issue and propose future research to expand the academic literature in this field. An
understanding of the social context that sustains this phenomenon is key to develop social
policies to address this gender-based problem.
The findings proved that there is a difference in perception and frequency by gender
towards street harassment. While most men associate it with positive or neutral feelings as
flattering and indifferent; overwhelming majority of women have negative associations with
the most popular being angered or disgusted and insecure. This thesis sustained that frequency
influences this gendered perception. Supporting the previous statement, findings confirmed
that the group of women with most exposure to street harassment almost every day (18-24
years old) was also the group with largest percentage of anger and disgusts toward it (Table
4.7.1). In contrast to men who received compliments from strangers mostly few times a year
and mostly felt flattered or indifferent (Figure 4.7.2). Validating the theory that it is a process
of forfeiting women’s right to privacy instead of just a one-time event. Also, that male privilege
of experiencing a lower frequency does not allow men to understand women’s constant burden.
Eventually, men’s continuous intrusion of women’s space leads to a forfeiting of privacy

in public spaces. Moreover, projecting power imbalance between genders by reminding
subordinated groups their historical sexual objectification and vulnerability to be assaulted due
to the constant threat of gender-based violence. This is shown in Figure 4.7.1 where depicts the
second most popular answer amongst women towards street harassment was a feeling of
insecurity. The survey collected an overrepresentation of women with 1341 (73%), suggesting
this group was far more engaged politically in exposing their perspective on the issue. Majority
of participants had a high level of education, owned private vehicles, and lived in Distrito
Nacional and Santo Domingo, all factors that can affect exposure and perception towards street
harassment (See appendix II). Findings demonstrated street harassment is a pervasive issue in
the Dominican Republic, affecting both men and women but disproportionally targeting
women since 1325 (99%) women respondents expressed receiving compliment from strangers
in the streets in contrast to 314 (65%) men. However, only 111 (8%) women respondents have
complimented a stranger in public.
54
Most male respondents 293 (61%) have not complimented a stranger in public,
probably associated to the high level of education of respondents (Tang et al, 1995).
Furthermore, findings confirmed that the majority of perpetrators are men with 1248 (85%)
respondents selecting this while the rest were women perpetrators (Figure 4.3); and victims
were largely identified as women. Nevertheless, women intruding a male stranger cannot be
framed as equivalent to a male intruding a female stranger, since one is replacing a vulnerable
group for a group in power. Due to power positions in society, high rates of gender-based
violence and women’s historical vulnerability, along with the frequency of exposure, a
different context is constructed.
It is no surprise that men are also a target of street harassment, since society deemed
this behaviour as acceptable and consider it trivial or complimentary in nature (Gardner, 1980).
As Zimbroff (2007) stated, what constitutes sexual harassment may differ between individuals
based on social norms and citizens proceed to internalise it. Therefore, individuals will strongly
internalise their culture’s discourse. Findings prove this in Figure 4.9.2 where most women
internalised male gaze through compliments and dirty looks, whistles and other noises, the
command smile and even sexist comments. Even though the majority of women associate it
with negative feelings, they do not dare to identify it as sexual harassment creating a limbo or
cognitive dissonance since it makes them uncomfortable but cannot ascribe a name to it.
On the other hand, men normalised compliments in the streets and whistles and other
noises. Corroborating other studies (Equity Youth Association, 2014) that suggest the most
frequent acts of harassment are excluded from the definition and thus normalised, in this case
compliments from strangers were normalised by 542 (73%) respondents who self-reported as
not being a victim of sexual harassment. This shows most respondents failed to label their
experiences as sexual harassment, since only 46% respondents were aware of their victim status
(See appendix II), but almost all selected having experienced technical harassment acts shown
on Figure 4.9.1. Results concluded that even if the victim recognised an experience as sexual
harassment, most probably will not be reported. Figure 4.11 illustrates a filter of respondents
who self-declared as victims of sexual harassment, however, did not reported. Most men
decided to avoid reporting because of shame and indifference; while women thought there
would be no consequence (Gutek, 1985) and because of shame. This confirms the low
reporting of sexual crimes provided by the Attorney General, since the totality of reports from
2011-2017 only represent 0.4% of a population of 10,917,042 citizens (Worldometers,
2018)(Figure 4.10.2).
55
This portrays the Dominican Republic as a patriarchal and hierarchical society where
women are subordinated to men and thus the latter are entitled to make unconsented sexual
advances, causing women to perceive these acts as part of the culture and everyday life (Eros
and DeSouza et al, 2004). Thus, women are encouraged systematically to undermine their
negative feelings towards violence from men. Consequently, compliment from strangers are
mostly thought as benign when it lacks explicit vulgar and threatening words; however, it is
the violation of the civil rules of face-to-face interaction that pose a personal risk (Zimbroff,
2007) which prompts spreading awareness to not address strangers as if they were intimates or
are obliged to be open persons.
Further research must be made regarding how factors such as gender, race, disability,
income, education, and rural or urban area intersect to form multiple layers of oppression or
influence frequency and perception towards street harassment with a more diverse pool of
participants (Tolman, 2006).
Given the fact that the majority of perpetrators are men, measures to eradicate this issue
should focus on their behaviour. Starting with awareness campaign in schools, workplaces, and
especially public transport in order to instruct what sexual and street harassment entails. The
latter is important since findings showed respondents’ low awareness and narrow scope of what
constitutes sexual harassment. Therefore, a creation of public education campaign is imperative
where the existing reporting mechanisms are highlighted. Additionally, implementing an
anonymous reporting mechanism to illustrate the pervasiveness of street harassment, educate
bystanders and men allies on how to intervene, and creating an application/website mapping
harassment and interventions. For the latter, I initiated a website, so women and men can share
their sexual and street harassment stories in www.bit.ly/HerStoryDR.
Finally, analysing the way media portrays and depicts women to avoid further trivialisation
of sexual objectification and dehumanisation. Exposure on the difference of gendered
perspectives also indicates that law and policies, written by men, have ignored women’s
perception of male violence and further normalised street and sexual harassment. Policy
designing, and law makers should take into account women’s specific grievances and construct
a healthy masculinity to promote higher reporting overall. However, social transformation and
cultural barriers must be addressed and go hand in hand, so the law and policies do not turn
useless.
56
6. Bibliography
Ackermann, L. et al. (2014) Street Harassment: Know your rights. Available at:
www.dlapiper.com. (Accessed: 22 September 2018).
Alter, C. (2014) ‘New global study calls violence against women an “epidemic”.’, Time
Magazine. Available at: http://time.com/3598444/lancet- violence-against-women-global/.
Arvey, R. D. and Cavanaugh, M. a. (1995) ‘Using Surveys to Assess the Prevalence of Sexual
Harassment: Some Methodological Problems’, Journal of Social Issues, 51(1), pp. 39–52. doi:
10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01307.x.
Association, A. P. (2017) ‘APA Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Girls and Women’,
American Psychologist, (April), pp. 1–82.
Barling, J. et al. (1996) ‘Prediction and replication of the organizational and personal
consequences of workplace sexual harassment.’, Journal of Managerial Psychology.
Barrett, M. (2005) ‘Making sense of feminist post-structuralism in environmental education

research and practice.’, Canadian Journal of Environmental Education.
Bartky, S. (1979) ‘On Psychological Oppression’, Philosophy and Women.
Bartky, S. L. (1990) ‘Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of

oppression’, Routledge.
Batres, G. (1999) ‘The dark side of masculinity’.
Berger, J. (1972) ‘Ways of seeing.’, Penguin.
Best, S. J. and Krueger, B. . (2004) ‘Internet Data Collection’, Sage.
Biglarbegi, N. (2017) ‘An Invisible Gender-based Violence Exploring Iranian male university
students’ thoughts on street harassment A qualitative study in Tehran, Iran’. Available at:
http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1177958/FULLTEXT01.pdf (Accessed: 25 July
2018).
Bowman, C. G. (1993) ‘Street harassment and the informal ghettoization of women’, Harvard
Law Review.
57
Brewer, M. B. (1982) ‘Further beyond nine to five: An integration and future directions.’,
Journal of Social Issues.
Brown, L. S. (1994) ‘Subversive dialogues’.
Bryman, A. (2008) ‘Of methods and methodology’, Qualitative Research in Organizations and
Management: An International Journal.
Butler, J. (1999) ‘Gender trouble.’, Routledge.
Calogero, R. (2011) ‘Self- objectification in women: Causes, consequences, and

counteractions’.
Campbell, D. T. (1969) ‘Prospective: Artifact and Control’, Artifact in Behavioral Research,.
Chubin, F. (2014) ‘You may smother my voice, but you will hear my silence: An
autoethnography on street sexual harassment, the discourse of shame and women’s resistance
in Iran’, Sexualities. doi: 10.1177/1363460713511097.
Collins, P. (1990) ‘Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of
empowerment (perspectives on gender)’, Routledge.
Davis, D. (1994) The harm that has no name: Street Harassment, embodiment, and African
women.
Dimen, M. (1986) ‘Surviving sexual contradictions: A startling and different look at a day in
the life of a contemporary professional woman’.
Domingo, S. (2010) From anecdote to evidence: Investigaion on sexual harassment at work

Dominican Republic
Elzas, S. (2015) On French public transit, ‘100 per cent’ of women have been sexually
harassed - France - RFI. Available at: http://en.rfi.fr/france/20150416-french-public-transit-
100-cent-women-have-been-sexually-harassed (Accessed: 23 September 2018).
Equity Youth Association (2014) Serbia: Street Harassment Survey Has an Impact. Available
at: http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/2014/12/serbiaspsmfinalreport/ (Accessed: 23
September 2018).
Eros, R. and DeSouza et al (2004) ‘Female Nurses and Educators’ Reactions to Sexual
Harassment Charges: A Cross-Cultural Perspective’, Interamerican Journal of Psychology.
58
Estrich, S. (2015) ‘Sex at Work’, Stanford Law Review, 43(4), pp. 813–861.
Feminism: Women’s uphill struggle against street harassment in Spain | In English | EL PAÍS
(2018). Available at:
https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/04/11/inenglish/1523436006_224554.html (Accessed: 22
September 2018).
Ferraro, K. F. (1996) ‘“Women’s fear of victimization: Shadow of sexual assault?”’, Social

Forces.
Fineman, M. A. and Thomadsen, N. S. (2013) At the boundaries of law: Feminism and legal
theory, At The Boundaries of Law: Feminism and Legal Theory. doi: 10.4324/9780203094112.
Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T., & Turner, M. . (2000) ‘The Sexual Victimization of College
Women’, National Institute of Justice. Available at:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Shullman, S. L. (1993) ‘Sexual harassment: A research analysis and agenda
for the 1990’s’, Journal of Vocational Behavior.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S. and Fischer, K. (1995) ‘Why Didn’t She Just Report Him? The
Psychological and Legal Implications of Women’s Responses to Sexual Harassment.’, Journal
of Social Issues, 51(1), pp. 117–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01312.x.
Franke, K. M. S. L. R. (1997) ‘What’s wrong with sexual harassment?’, Stanford Law Review.
Frazier, P., Valtinson, G., & Candell, S. (1994) ‘Evaluation of a coeducational interactive rape
prevention program.’, Journal of Counseling and Development.
Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) ‘Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental
health risks’, Psychology of Women Quarterly.
Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M., Reynard, K., Skouteris, H., & McCabe, M. (2012) ‘An examination
of the contextual determinants of self- objectification.’, Psychology of Women Quarterly.
Gardner (1980) ‘Passing by: Street remarks, address rights, and the urban female’, Sociological
Inquiry, pp. 328–356.
Ghandehari, P. (2006) ‘Sexual harassment: Iran.’, ncyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures:
Family, Body, Sexuality and Health.
59
Gray, P. S. et al. (2007) The research Imagination: An Introdution to Qualitative and

Quantitative Methods, Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
Gutek, B. (1985) ‘Sex and the workplace. Impact of sexual behaviour and harassment on
women, men, and organisation’.
Harding, S. (1991) ‘After the Neutrality Ideal: Science, Politics and “Strong Objectivity.””’.
Hilinski, C. (2009) ‘“Fear of Crime Among College Students”’, American Journal of Criminal
Justice.
Hollaback! (2013) Hollaback! Nederland. Available at: https://nederland.ihollaback.org/faqs/

(Accessed: 22 September 2018).
Hooks, B. (1984) ‘Feminist theory: From margin to center’, South End Press, p. 57.
International Labour Organization (2013) Exploration with men in society oN sexual

harassment at work and masculinity in Central America and Dominican Republic. Available
at: www.ilo.org/sanjose (Accessed: 25 July 2018).
Jerit, J., Barabas, J. and Clifford, S. (2013) ‘Comparing Contemporaneous Laboratory and
Field Experiments on Media Effects’, Public Opinion Quarterly, pp. 256–82.
Kavanaugh, P. R. (2013) ‘The continuum of sexual violence: Women’s accounts of

victimization in urban nightlife.’, Feminist Criminology.
Kearl, H. (2010) Stop street harassment: making public places safe and welcoming for women.
Santa Barbara: Praeger.
Kissling, E. A. (1991) ‘Street harassment: The language of sexual terrorism’, Discourse and
Society.
Kissling, E. A. and Kramarae, C. (1991) ‘Stranger Compliments: The Interpretation of Street

Remarks’, Women’s Studies in Communication, pp. 77–95.
Koss, M. P., Goodman, L. A., Browne, A., Fitzgerald, L. F., Keita, G. P., & Russo, N. (1994)
‘No safe haven: Male violence against women at home, at work, and in the community.’
Kramarae, C. (1992) ‘Harassment and Everyday Life’, Women making meaning.
Kreuter, F., Presser, S. and Tourangeau, R. (2008) ‘Social Desirability Bias in CATI,IVR, and
Web Surveys: The Effects of Mode and Question Sensitivity.’, Public Opinion Quarterly.
60
Lahsaeizadeh, A. and Yousefinejad, E. (2012) ‘Social Aspects of Women’s Experiences of

Sexual Harassment in Public Places in Iran’, Sexuality and Culture.
Langelan, M. (1993) ‘BACK OFF! How to confront and stop sexual harassment and harassers.’
Laniya, O. O. (2005) ‘Street smut: Gender, media, and the legal power dynamics of street
harassment, or “‘hey sexy’” and other verbal ejaculations’, Columbia Journal of Gender &
Law.
Lauren, Q. (2016) ‘The Normalization of Sexual Harassment’.
Lennox, Rebecca, and R. J.-H. (2017) ‘Beyond the empirical and the discursive: The
methodological implications of critical realism for street harassment research.’, Women’s
Studies International Forum.
Lenton, R., Smith, M. D., Fox, J., & Morra, N. (1999) ‘Sexual Harassment in Public Places:
Experiences of Canadian Women’, Canadian Review of Sociology.
Logan, L. S. (2015) ‘Street harassment: Current and promising avenues for researchers and
activists.’, Sociology Compass.
Mackinnon, C. (1987) ‘Feminisn Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law’.
MacKinnon, C. (1979) ‘Sexual Harassment of Working Women, Yale University Press.’
Macmillan, R., Nierobisz, A. and Welsh, S. (2000) ‘Experiencing the streets: Harassment and
perceptions of safety among women.’, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency.
Mahdavi, P. (2009) ‘Who Will Catch Me If I Fall? Health and the Infrastructure of Risk for
Urban Young Iranians.’, Contemporary Iran: economy, Society, Politics.
Mellgren, C., Andersson, M. and Iver, A.-K. (2017) ‘“It Happens All the Time”: Women’s
Experiences and Normalization of Sexual Harassment in Public Space’. Available at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08974454.2017.1372328?needAccess=true
Mohammadinia, A. (1992) ‘What a woman must know’, Center for Islamic Propaganda
Publications.
Morse J. M. (1999) ‘Myth #93: Reliability and validity are not relevant to qualitative inquiry.’,
Qualitative Health Research.
61
Muijs, D. (2011) ‘Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS’.
Mullinix, K. J. et al. (2015) ‘The Generalizability of Survey Experiments’, Journal of

Experimental Political Science. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-
cambridge-
core/content/view/72D4E3DB90569AD7F2D469E9DF3A94CB/S2052263015000196a.pdf/g
eneralizability_of_survey_experiments.pdf (Accessed: 24 September 2018).
OXFAM (2018) Breaking paradigms: transforming social norms to eliminate violence against
women. Available at:
https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/620524/rr-breaking-the-
mould-250718-summ-es.pdf (Accessed: 27 July 2018).
Oxygen/Markle Pulse Survey (2000) ‘Oxygen/Markle Pulse Poll Finds: Harassment of Women
on the Street Is Rampant’.
Pantaleón, L. (2003) Sexual Harassment in the Export Processing Zones of the Dominican
Republic International Labor Rights Fund Rights for Working Women Campaign. Available
at: http://old.laborrights.org/sites/default/files/publications-and-
resources/DominicanRepublic.pdf (Accessed: 22 September 2018).
Plan International (2017) ‘Niñas esposadas’.
Radford, J. (2015) ‘Invalidation of Women´s Experience’, 1(1), pp. 8–23. doi: 10.3868/s050-
004-015-0003-8.
Ramakrishnan, K. (2011) ‘Inconsistent legal treatment of unwanted sexual advances: A study

of the homosexual advance defense, street harassment, and sexual harassment in the
workplace.’, Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice.
Ramanathan, M. et al. (2005) ‘Sexual harassment in the work place: lessons from a web-based
survey’, Indian Journal of Medical Ethics.
Rodriguez, C. (2017) The Case for LGBT Rights in the Dominican Republic | La Galería
Magazine. Available at: http://www.lagaleriamag.com/the-case-for-lgbt-rights-in-the-
dominican-republic/ (Accessed: 25 September 2018).
Rossi, H. P., Wright, J. D. and Anderson, A. B. (1983) ‘Handbook of Survey Research’.
62
Rushin, D. (1983) ‘The Tired Poem: Last Letter for a Typically Unemployed Black
Professional Woman’, p. 255.
Smith, D. E. (1987) ‘The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology’, North-

eastern University Press.
Strauss, E. et al (2006) ‘A compendium of neuropsychological tests.’
Stringer, S. (2007) Hidden in Plain Sight: Sexual Harassment and Assault in the New York City
Subway System. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/city_room/20070726_hiddeninplainsight.pdf
Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (2016) ‘School survey on crime’.
Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (2017) ‘National crime survey 2017’,
Victimization, fear of crime and trust.
Tang, et al (1995) ‘How do Chinese college students define sexual harassment?’, Journal of
Interpersonal Violence.
The Advocates for Human Rights (2013) Law and Policy on Street Harassment. Available at:
http://www.stopvaw.org/law_policy_street_harassment (Accessed: 20 September 2018).
Till, F. (1980) ‘Sexual harassment: A report on the sexual harassment of students’, National
Advisory Council on Women’s Educational Programs.
Tolman, D. (2006) ‘In a different position: Conceptualizing female adolescent sexuality

development within compulsory heterosexuality.’, New Directions for Child and adolescent
Development.
Tuerkheimer, D. (1997) ‘Street Harassment as Sexual Subordination: The Phenomenology of

Gender-Specific Harm’, Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal.
Vagianos, A. (2018) France Just Made Street Harassment A Crime. Available at:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/france-street-harassment-
crime_us_5b634939e4b0b15abaa0f552?guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d
3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_cs=ghwADTHbj5hNbpcOX1O_ww (Accessed:
23 September 2018).
63
Valenti, J. (2007) ‘Is segregation the only answer to sexual harassment?’, The Guardian.
Vaux, A. (1993) ‘Paradigmatic assumptions in sexual harassment research: Being guided

without being misled.’, Journal of Vocational Behavior.
Vera-Gray, F. (2016) ‘Men’s stranger intrusions: Rethinking street harassment’, Women’s

Studies International Forum, 58, pp. 9–17. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2016.04.001.
West, R. (1987) ‘The difference in women’s hedonic lives: A phenomenological critique of

feminist legal theory’, Wisconsin Women’s Law Journal.
Williams, A. (2018) France Targets Sexual Harassment With On-The-Spot Fines | HuffPost.
Available at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/france-sexual-harassment-fines-
bill_us_5ab2870de4b0decad0462d2e?ncid=other_huffpostre_pqylmel2bk8&utm_campaign=
related_articles (Accessed: 23 September 2018).
Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Lee, K. (2007) ‘A meta-analysis of the antecedents and
consequences of workplace sexual harassment.’, Personnel Psychology.
Women Feel Less Safe Than Men in Many Developed Countries (2012). Available at:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/155402/women-feel-less-safe-men-developed-countries.aspx
(Accessed: 16 October 2018).
World Bank (2013) Riding a Bus in Kathmandu: Gender and Transport in Nepal. Available
at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2014/03/17/riding-a-bus-in-kathmandu-
gender-and-transport-in-nepal (Accessed: 23 September 2018).
Worldometers (2018) Dominican Republic Population (2018) - Worldometers. Available at:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/dominican-republic-population/ (Accessed:
18 October 2018).
You Gov (2014) YouGov Sexual Harassment Survey Findings. Available at:
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/67vqlfmv5l/tabs_OPI_catcalls_20140815
.pdf (Accessed: 23 September 2018).
Zimbroff, J. (2007) Cultural differences in perceptions of and responses to sexual harassment.

Available at:
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1140&context=djglp (Accessed:
18 October 2018).
64
APPENDIX I
SPS STUDENT ETHICS FORM
This form must be completed for each piece of research carried out by all undergraduate and taught
postgraduate students in the School for Policy Studies.
Doctoral (PhD/DSocSci/DedPsy) students should complete the staff and doctoral students form which
is submitted to the School Research Ethics Committee.
Students should discuss their proposed research with their supervisors who will then approve and sign
this form before forwarding to the relevant dissertation convenor, unit convenor or programme director.
Failure to get approval prior to conducting any fieldwork may result in the University taking action for
research misconduct – the outcome of such action may be that your degree is not awarded and/or that
you are unable to submit your fieldwork findings for assessment.
Depending on the nature of the research you wish to conduct, it may be necessary for you to get
additional approvals and checks. This may involve submitting a full application to an NHS Research
Ethics Committee (NRES) or submitting your SPS application for review by the SPS Research Ethics
Committee. You should discuss this with your supervisor. It is your responsibility to ensure that you
have enough time to obtain these approvals prior to conducting any fieldwork.
This signed form or a copy must be submitted as an appendix to your dissertation. If appropriate, a
copy of approval from the SPS REC or other REC committee should also be in the appendix to your
dissertation.
65
SECTION ONE: GOVERNANCE
1. NHS Research Ethics approval
Who needs to provide Ethics approval for your project?
The School will only consider those projects which do not require ethical approval from
elsewhere. As such, you should make sure that your proposed research does not fall within the
jurisdiction of the NRES system:
http://www.nres.nhs.uk/applications/approval-requirements/ethical-review-requirements/
If you are not sure where you should apply please discuss it with your supervisor.
Currently NRES are not expected to consider applications in respect of activities that are not
research: i.e. clinical audit, service evaluation and public health surveillance. In addition
REC review is not normally required for research involving NHS or social care staff recruited
as research participants by virtue of their professional role. Social care research projects
which are funded by the Department of Health, must always be reviewed by a REC within the
Research Ethics Service for England. Similarly research which accesses un-anonymised
patient records must be reviewed by a REC and NIGB.
2. Local Governance
If your project involves access to patients, clients, staff or carers of an NHS Trust or Social
Care Organisation, it falls within the scope of the Research Governance Framework for
Health and Social. You will also need to get written approval from the Research
Management Office or equivalent of each NHS Trust or Social Care Organisation
3. Disclosure and Barring Service check
Do you need a Disclosure and Barring Service check?
The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) replaces the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) and
Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA). Critieria for deciding whether you require a DBS
check are available from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/disclosure-and-barring-service/about
You should specifically look at the frequency, nature, and duration of your contact with
potentially vulnerable adults and or children. If your contact is a one-off research interaction,
or infrequent contact (e.g.: 3 contacts over a period of time) you are unlikely to require a
check.
If you think you need a DBS check then you should consult the University of Bristol web-
page.
http://www.bris.ac.uk/secretary/legal/disclosure/crbhome
If ‘yes’ then please discuss with your supervisor and check the university guidance to
determine whether you will need to apply for DBS clearance PRIOR to conducting your
research
Do you require such clearance? Yes No X
Have you received clearance? Yes No X
66
SECTION 2: STUDENT, ADVISOR/SUPERVISOR AND PROJECT DETAILS
4. Student’s name:
Arlette Danielle Román Almánzar
5. Programme:
MSc Public Policy
6. Year of Study:
2017-2018
7. Project advisor/supervisor:
Junko Yamashita
8. Date dissertation is to be submitted:
October 19th 2018
9. Project title:
The Normalisation of Street Harassment in the Dominican Republic: A Gender Perspective
If your research involves secondary analysis of data, please go to question 11.
67
SECTION THREE: THE RESEARCH
10. For those intending to carry out primary research:
Who are your participants and how are you contacting them?
a) Describe your research participants. What populations form the basis of your sample? (e.g.
general population, lone parents, mature students etc). Identify if your participants come from a
vulnerable group (e.g. homeless, victims of crime etc). How many people do you expect to
recruit?
Design a survey to create quantitative data for the first time on the social perception of street
harassment from a sample of the general population– since it is an invisible topic, this
data is non-existent in the Dominican Republic. This would help to understand the
different experiences according to gender, education, transportation use, their
reaction to it and how do men and women perceive it. Also, since street harassment is
a new term, we will be referring to its broader issue as well - sexual harassment –
which is penalised in the criminal code and is underreported. The survey also asks if
they have ever reported sexual harassment and what they understand by it. I expect to
recruit over 400 people through a self-selecting online survey promoted through social
media, local newspapers and influencers.
b) Describe the source(s) of your participants and the selection criteria. Specifically, how will you
find potential participants, and how will you contact them? Bear in mind that in most cases it is
not appropriate for researchers to contact individual potential participants directly (e.g. service
users should be informed of any research by the service and not by the researcher).
I will send the online survey through different databases of newspapers, social media, and
government institutions that will share it. Thus, a limitation would be the exclusion of
people who don’t have access to internet but will give Dominicans online the
opportunity to speak what they think on this topic.
c) Are you advertising for participants or posting a notice for volunteers? If yes, attach a copy of
the advertisement, notice, email or web post. Yes.
Yes. Email sample attached.
d) Are you using a questionnaire, interview, focus group as part of your procedure? If yes, attach a
copy of the questionnaire(s), topic guide and/or interview questions.
Yes, a questionnaire.
e) Will you be asking questions that might disturb your participants emotionally or produce stress
and anxiety? If Yes, what plans do you have to deal with this? For example, what support can
be provided to them? If you intend to give participants a list of support services, please provide
a copy with your application.
Yes. I will refer them to contact the Prosecutor General providing the address and number to
make a claim on sexual harassment. 809-221-6400 ext. 434 Ave. Jiménez Moya esq.
68
Juan Ventura Simó, Centro de los Héroes, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana or to
get attention in the NGO PACAM Centre to Help Battered Women Santo Domingo calling
1 809-533-1813 or visiting Av. John F. Kennedy 16.
f) Do you consider any of your participants to be especially vulnerable and/or especially at risk of
harm? If yes, what risks do you anticipate and how are you planning to deal with them? For
example, a survivor of abuse may be at further risk from the perpetrator if they take an
information sheet away with them. Please note that in most circumstances, professionals who
are being asked about their professional role and being offered anonymity would not be
considered at risk of harm.
Yes, I will refer them to contact the Prosecutor General providing the address and number to
make a claim on sexual harassment. 809-221-6400 ext. 434 Ave. Jiménez Moya esq.
Juan Ventura Simó, Centro de los Héroes, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana or get
attention in the NGO PACAM Centre to Help Battered Women Santo Domingo calling 1
809-533-1813 or visiting Av. John F. Kennedy 16.
Informed consent and researcher safety:
g) Information for participants: what information will you be giving to participants? (E.g. letter of
introduction, outline of project’s aims, participant information sheet etc). Please attach copies of
any such information to this form.
Brief letter of introduction.
h) Informed consent: what procedures will you follow to ensure all of your participants give
informed consent (i.e. that participants know exactly what they are agreeing to and what you will
do with the information they provide)? You should consider whether participants have the
capacity to give informed consent, provide enough information so that consent is informed, and
provide copies of any consent forms with your application. Participants should be asked to put
their initials to show they give consent for the specific points on the form. Where written consent
is not possible, you should explain your consent process in detail (i.e., will consent be audio
recorded?):
In the survey it will be explained as a checkbox prior to the questions, consent will be given
by clicking accept in the online survey after reading the brief introduction on the aims
of the survey and they will be able to abandon the questionnaire any time they want to.
i) Confidentiality and anonymity: how are you going to anonymise the data you collect? How
will you keep it confidential?
The online survey will not record any names or distinct characteristics that could narrow
them down, only demographics and standardised questions based no experience
and perception.
69
j) Researcher safety: are there any potential risks to you in undertaking this research and how
will you deal with them? Where will the fieldwork take place? Who will you notify with details of
where and when you are doing the fieldwork? Will you take your mobile phone with you? Please
explain your plan for ensuring your safety and explain who will be notified about where you will
be and when you are due to return. Note that you should not conduct research in someone’s
home if you do not know them and are alone. You may need to have a research safety protocol
which should be discussed with your supervisor.
No, since it is desk work.
11. For those intending to carry out secondary analysis of data:
What data will you use?: give a brief description of the data. Please also explain:
(1) Where did you get these data from (e.g. ESRC Data Archive)?
(2) How did you obtain permission to use these data? (e.g. by signing an end user licence)
(3) Where will you store the secondary datasets?
1. From the Office of the General Attorney, in their official website they have provided
their database on sexual crimes and harassment reports. Also, another
qualitative research done by OXFAM where they analyse sexual harassment at
work but also other important qualitative information from men´s perception
towards sexual harassment at work in Dominican Republic that could compliment
my quantitative results.
2. It is open to the public and it in the website of the General Attorney. The OXFAM
report is published on their website.
3. My computer with a protected password
70
SECTION FOUR – DATA MANAGEMENT

12. Where is your survey data stored?
If you intend to use an on-line survey (for example Survey Monkey) you need to ensure that the
computers they use are based in an EU country (or Iceland & Norway) and not in the USA. Please
confirm that no data will be sent outside of Europe.
My survey data will be stored in Survey Monkey UK servers and straight to my password
protected computer. No data will be sent outside of Europe as it will remain in the UK servers.
13. How will you manage your data?
How will the data you collect be stored? All identifiable electronic data should be stored on the
university password protected server. If this is not possible you should ensure that your home
computer or laptop is password controlled and secure. Data should be anonymised as soon as
possible and identifying files kept securely away from anonymised data. Unanonymised data should
never be stored on a memory stick or digital recorder (obviously it may be necessary on your return
journey from an interview). Any physical data such as cassette tape, minidisc, or paper files should be
locked away in a secure draw or cabinet. Please tell us where this physical data will be stored and
whether you have any concerns about security at this location.
It will be stored solely in my computer from www.surveymonkey.co.uk and deleted after

download, saved under a strong password in my laptop. Data is anonymised and confidential, it
will not be stored in any physical data. All data is anonymous and confidential so there is no risk
of disclosing identities.
14. Will your data be available to others?
What are your plans for the long-term preservation of the data? Will the data storage be stored in a
way that will enabled it to be accessed by other researchers? Will the data be destroyed/deleted at
any point? If so, how and when will this be done? For example, reformatting tapes or discs,
confidential shredding of paper waste etc).
The School may require you to produce your data. If there is no long term data sharing plan,
please confirm that you will not destroy your data until after your degree has been awarded.
I will make it accessible to other researches publishing it in different databases and newspapers
or websites, and it will not be destroyed in the long term since the data is anonymous and
unidentifiable.
71
SECTION FIVE – OTHER DOCUMENTS
15. What documents are you submitting with this form?
Additional Material - please identify which of the following additional materials you have attached to
this application and attach in the order listed? (helpful for reviewing lots at same time!) Please collate
the form and attachments into one document before submitting to your supervisor/ unit convener
Additional Material Number of Documents

Participants information sheet (s) 1
Consent form (s) 1
Confidentiality protocol
Researcher safety protocol
Recruitment letters/posters/leaflets 1
Photo method information sheet
Photo method consent form
Risk assessment form
Support information for participant 1
3rd party confidentiality agreement
Other information
72
SECTION SIX: CONFIRMATIONS AND SIGNATURES

A: Student:
I certify that the statements made in this request are accurate and complete, and if I X
receive approval for this project from my supervisor/unit convener I will conduct my
research as stated.
I agree to inform my advisor/supervisor/unit convener in writing of any emergent X

problems or proposed procedural changes and that I will not proceed with the
research until any proposed changes have been reviewed and approved.
I have attached all of the relevant documentation necessary to carry out this research. X
I am aware that this form and, if necessary, REC approval from the SPS REC or NHS X
must be included in an appendix in my dissertation.
B: Student advisor/supervisor: Please tick the first box and one of the subsequent boxes:
I have reviewed this form.

X
I approve the information in this form and do not think higher level approval is X
necessary.
I have sought advice from the SPS REC, this advice has been headed and approval X
has been given.
This form should be examined by the SPS REC. X
This project has been submitted for ethical approval from an NHS REC.
C: The dissertation convenor, unit convener or programme director, on behalf of SPS REC:
Please tick the appropriate box:
Approval is granted to this project
This form is being referred to the appropriate SPS/NHS REC.
Signature Arlette Danielle Román Date: 09-08-2018
I. Participants information sheet
73
-This survey is intended to contribute and create data, that is currently inexistent about sexual
harassment experiences from men and women in Santo Domingo.
II. Separate consent form
I ___________________ , owner of the social security number ________________ consent on

sharing my opinion and experiences on sexual harassment to be published anonymously for the
purpose of a research or thesis starting from the date __________________.
III. Support information for participant
If you feel in distress or need to report a crime, you can report a case in the Office of Sexual Violence
Victims Department of the Office of the General Attorney calling ____________.
IV. Survey
1. Select your gender: Feminine, Masculine, Don´t identify with any

2. Have you complimented a stranger in a public space? Y/N
3. Have you received compliments from a stranger in a public space? Y/N
4. Select the gender that regularly compliments you. Masculine, Feminine
5. What does the person do if you react? I do not react, I ignore it; stays in silence or leaves;
insists; insults or mocks me; apologises.
6. How often does this happen? Almost every day, once a week, several times a month, once a
month, at least once in two months, few times a year, once a year, never.
7. Select the ones that apply, one or multiple. How does it make you feel? Attractive/happy;
Indifferent; Insecure; Disgusted or Angered; Ashamed.
8. Do you think women have to dress less provocative clothes to prevent sexual harassment?
Y/N
9. A person agrees to have sexual relations, but during the act expresses, they no longer want
to continue, do you think they have part of the guilt if their partner does not stop? Y/N
10. In a sexual harassment case, if the victim was drunk, do you think they have part of the
guilt for having lost control? Y/N
11. Do you think you know a victim of sexual harassment? Y/N
12. Do you think you have been a victim of sexual harassment? Y/N
13. Select the ones that apply, one or multiple. Have you experienced any of these? None;
‘Smile’; compliments in the streets; you have been followed by foot or any type of transport; sexually
explicit or sexist comments; exhibitionism or masturbation; grabbing of private parts; pressed with
genitals on your body with intentions; dirty looks or staring; you have been forced to a sexual act; you
have been drugged or drunk in order to get a sexual act; whistles and other noises (kisses, honking).
14. Do you think once a man is sexually aroused he can control himself? Yes, he can; No, he
cannot; Sometimes.
15. Have you ever reported sexual harassment to an authority? Y/N
16. Select the ones that apply, one or multiple. Have you avoided reporting for one of these
reasons? I am indifferent; I have not received sexual harassment; I would be labeled guilty as well; I
thought I was guilty as well; They would not believe me or call me a liar; it was nothing; Shame; Afraid
of the aggressor; There would not be consequences; I didn’t want to hurt the person.
17. What is your main way of transport? Public transport (bus, shared vehicle, metro); private
vehicle; motorcycle; walking.
18. Select your age.
19. Select your highest level of education. Bachelor or less; University; Masters or Doctorate; PhD;
Others (specify).
20. In what province do you live? Select from the 32 provinces.
74
1. Recruitment Post sent by email by newspaper
Translation:
Let’s learn about our culture
Because the #Metoo movement is not only outside of

the country…
Let’s contribute to create data for the first time about the
normalisation of sexual harassment in Dominican
culture. The information is anonymous, and when the
investigation is ready you will know the results.
You can stop the survey if you feel uncomfortable.

The survey takes 4 minutes.
2. Translation of Participants information sheet:
This survey contains sensible matters on sexual violence.

All the answers are anonymous and confidential with the aim to create quantitative data and to be
used for academic research.
There are no wrong or right answers.
You can stop the survey if you feel uncomfortable.
You can Approximate time will be of 4 minutes or less.
Accept.
3. Support information
If after filling this survey, you want to reach for support on topics about sexual violence, please don’t
hesitate to contact the Office of the Prosecutor General in the phone number 809-221-6400 extension
434, or make a physical report in the address Ave. Jiménez Moya esq. Juan Ventura Simó, Centro de
los Héroes, Santo Domingo, República Dominicana or to get attention in the NGO PACAM Centre to
Help Battered Women Santo Domingo calling 1 809-533-1813 or visiting Av. John F. Kennedy
75
APPENDIX II
Results
Social perception of sexual harassment Survey
Q1 Select your gender

Answered: 1,824 Skipped: 0
100%
100.00% 100.00%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Female (1) Male (2) Other (specify) (3)
FEMALE (1) MALE (2) OTHER (SPECIFY) (3) TOTAL

Q1: Female 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 73.52%
1,341 0 0 1,341
Q1: Male 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 26.48%
0 483 0 483
Total Respondents 1,341 483 0 1,824
BASIC STATISTICS
MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN MEAN STANDARD DEVIATION
Q1: Female
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Q1: Male
Social perception of sexual harassment 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Survey
0.00
Q2 Have you complimented a stranger in a public space?

100%
91.72%
80%
60.66%
60%
39.34%
40%
20% 8.28%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Yes (1) No
YES (1) NO (2) TOTAL

Q1: Female 8.28% 91.72% 73.52%
111 1,230 1,341
Q1: Male 39.34% 60.66% 26.48%
190 293 483
Total Respondents 301 1,523 1,824
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.92 0.28
Q1: Male
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.61 0.49
76
Q3 Have you received compliments from a stranger in a public space?

100%
98.81%
80% 65.01%
60%
34.99%
40%
20%
1.19%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Yes No
YES NO (2) TOTAL

Q1: Female 98.81% 1.19% 73.52%
1,325 16 1,341
Q1: Male 65.01% 34.99% 26.48%
314 169 483
Total Respondents 1,639 185 1,824
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 2.00 1.00 1.01 0.11
Q1: Male
1.00 2.00 1.00 1.35 0.48
Q4 Select the gender that regularly compliments you

100%
99.51%
80% 86.27%
60%
40%
13.73%
20%
0.49%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Male Female
MALE FEMALE TOTAL

Q1: Female 99.51% 0.49% 82.70%
1,213 6 1,219
Q1: Male 13.73% 86.27% 17.30%
35 220 255
Total Respondents 1,248 226 1,474
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.07
Q1: Male
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.86 0.34
77
Q5 What does the person do if you react?

100%
80% 66.75% 64.29%
60%
40%
20.24%
11.82%16.34%
8.33% 3 17% 3.97%
20% 4.68% 0.41%
.
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
I do not react, I ignore it (1) Stays in silence or leaves (2) Insists (3)
Insults me or mocks me (4) Apologises (5)
I DO NOT REACT, I IGNORE IT STAYS IN SILENCE OR LEAVES INSISTS INSULTS ME OR MOCKS ME APOLOGISES TOTAL
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Q1: Female 66.75% 4.68% 11.82% 16.34% 0.41% 82.86%
813 57 144 199 5 1,218
Q1: Male 64.29% 20.24% 8.33% 3.17% 3.97% 17.14%
162 51 21 8 10 252
Total 975 108 165 207 15 1,470
Respondents
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 5.00 1.00 1.79 1.20
Q1: Male
Social perception of sexual harassment 1.00 5.00 1.00 1.62 Survey
1.03
Q6 How often does this happen?

100%
80%
60% 46.35% 45.10%
40%
24.20% 23.53%
15.59% 11.37% 10.20%
20% 5.74% 4.27% 3.69% 2.35%
3.92% 3.53%
0.16%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Almost every day Once a week Several times a month

Once a month At least once in two months Few times a year
Once a year Never
ALMOST ONCE A SEVERAL TIMES A ONCE A AT LEAST ONCE IN FEW TIMES A ONCE A NEVER TOTAL
EVERY DAY WEEK MONTH MONTH TWO MONTHS YEAR YEAR
Q1: Female 46.35% 15.59% 24.20% 5.74% 3.69% 4.27% 0.00% 0.16% 82.70%
565 190 295 70 45 52 0 2 1,219
Q1: Male 2.35% 3.92% 11.37% 23.53% 10.20% 45.10% 0.00% 3.53% 17.30%
6 10 29 60 26 115 0 9 255
Total 571 200 324 130 71 167 0 11 1,474
Respondents
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 8.00 2.00 2.18 1.41
Q1: Male
1.00 8.00 5.00 4.88 1.47
78
Q7 Select the ones that apply, one or multiple. How does it make you feel?
100%
80%
60.30%
60% 49.41%
43.53%
38.15%
31.75%
40%
20.18% 21.18%
20% 7.88% 6.67% 5.49%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Desired/Flattered Indifferent Insecure Disgusted or Angered
Ashamed
DESIRED/FLATTERED INDIFFERENT INSECURE DISGUSTED OR ANGERED ASHAMED TOTAL

Q1: Female 7.88% 20.18% 38.15% 60.30% 31.75% 130.87%
96 246 465 735 387 1,929
Q1: Male 49.41% 43.53% 6.67% 5.49% 21.18% 21.85%
126 111 17 14 54 322
Total Respondents 222 357 482 749 441 1,474
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 5.00 4.00 3.56 1.10
Q1: Male
1.00 5.00 2.00 2.25 1.44
Q8 Do you think women have to wear less provocative clothes to prevent sexual
harassment?
100%
80.52%
80%
56.51%
60%
43.49%
40%
19.48%
20%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Yes No
YES NO (2) TOTAL

Q1: Female 19.48% 80.52% 75.09%
239 988 1,227
Q1: Male 43.49% 56.51% 24.91%
177 230 407
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.81 0.40
Q1: Male
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.57 0.50
79
Q9 A person agrees to have sexual relations, but during the act expresses they no longer
want to continue, do you think they have part of the guilt if their partner does not stop?
100%
73.22%
80% 87.69%
60%
40% 26.78%
12.31%
20%
0%
Q1: Female Q1: Male
Yes No
YES NO (2) TOTAL

Q1: Female 12.31% 87.69% 75.09%
151 1,076 1,227
Q1: Male 26.78% 73.22% 24.91%
109 298 407
BASIC STATISTICS
Q1: Female
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.88 0.33
Q1: Male
1.00 2.00 2.00 1.73 0.44
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87

Thesis Normalisation of Street Harassment Thesis PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Thesis Normalisation of Street Harassment Thesis PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Onlinedatei vom 09.04.

MSc Public Policy 2017-2018

The Normalisation of Street Harassment in the

A dissertation submitted to the School for Policy Studies at the University of

Candidate Number: 45532

Student: Arlette Danielle Román Almánzar

Supervisor: Dr. Junko Yamashita

Unit Code: SPMOL1010_2017

Word Count: 13,864

The under-researched characteristic of this phenomenon requires drawing similarities

The normalisation erected by a male dominated culture (Tuerkheimer, 1997), causes

There is consensual agreement that this phenomenon is not experienced by women or

2.1 Naming the Gender-Specific Harm of Street Harassment

Grievance experienced by disempowered or minority groups will lack a name, a history,

Furthermore, Bowman (1993) states the main characteristics of street harassment

In the midst of the normalisation, researchers found it sustained women’s

2.2 Conceptualising Street Harassment

Mackinnon (1979) affirmed that economic power is to sexual harassment as physical

2.3 Policy response around the world

France recently approved a law against street harassment, implementing on-the-spot

2.4 National Legal Framework

2.4.1 Studies on Street Harassment in the Dominican Republic

In the Dominican Republic, there are no records of previous studies specifically

In 2013, the International Organisation of Labour did a qualitative research on sexual

2.5 Social Context of Street Harassment

2.5.1 Genderisation of the Streets

2.5.2 Gender Stereotypes

Heteronormative discourses are key for normalising street harassment, identifying

In order for street harassment to be trivialised, a cooperative system is required where

Research by Plan International on the construction of masculinity found that men

2.5.3 Sexual Objectification

Furthermore, consequences of objectification forces women to identify themselves with

2.5.4 Cultural Domination and Masculinity

Susan Fisher Sterling, director of Washington’s National Museum of Women in the

3.2 Research objectives and research questions

3.3 Data Sources

Therefore, the lens of post-structuralism used in this research plans to deconstruct

The online survey was created using www.surveymonkey.co.uk to a close-end

A self-selecting convenience sample of 1,826 respondents in total, with an estimated

3.6 Analytical Strategy

We begin with a descriptive analysis that describes the prevalence of victimization in

3.7 Limitations and Implications for future research

My findings are not statistically significant or representative of the whole population

3.8 Validity, Reliability and Generalisation

Generalisability consists of seeking to establish causal relationships that maximise internal

4. Results and Discussion

4.1 Respondents’ gender

Figure 1: Respondents’ gender

4.2 Respondents’ behaviour in public spaces by gender

Women Yes No Total

Men Yes No Total

4.3 Gender that regularly compliments

Figure 4.3: Gender of the stranger who compliments regularly

Male perpetrator Female perpetrator Total

4.4 Reaction of victim and perpetrator

Figure 4.4 Reaction of perpetrator to a response by gender

4.5 Frequency of receiving compliments in public spaces by gender

Figure and table 4.5 Frequency by gender

Frequency by gender in percentages

Figure 4.5.1 Frequency percentage by gender

Figure 4.5.1.1 Frequency by gender in numbers

4.5.1 Frequency by age and gender

We can see a significant difference between women respondents from 18 to 24 years -