Introduction

The unnamed should not be taken for the non-existent Siege (1991)

A wolf whistle. A leer . A disconcerting nearness. A seemingly innocent touch on the breast. An invitation for a date from a professor whose subject the coed is in danger of flunking ,worse, an out right proposition for sex from said mentor and the implicit option: Kautro or kuarto?

The term ‘sexual harassment’ has recently emerged to describe a range of unpleasant experience long persisting but without  a name. Women have been molded in a culture of silence where open discussions of sexual harassment is deemed embarrassing and could even raise speculation on one’s integrity and womanhood. Sexual harassment is tied up with lack of awareness of their right and on womens innate nature as “secret sufferers”, “muzzled moaners”, often afraid to speak out (Luciano, 1994).

But the issue cannot be hushed for so long . The women’s movement has urged that this seemingly personal experience of almost every woman needs to be made public so that the politics context and implications can be better understood and more effectively confronted. Discussions on the issue in the mass media revealed how real and pervasive the problem is. First, in the Anita Hill case in the United State and in the local scene, the controversial “kissing Lolo” case at the Commission on Election and, in the academe, the much-talked about cases of Professors Salvador Carlos and Juan Tapales at the state university, U.P. in Diliman.

The Women Studies Association of the Philippines, an association with membership of over 100 schools all over the country, has embarked on a  project entitled “Participatory Research on Sexual Harassment and School-based Feminist Counseling in Selected Schools in Visayas and Mindanao: as part of its efforts towards a gender-fair education in general. Specifically this study which is a major components of the project aims to conduct a systematic investigation on women’s perceptions and experience towards clarifying WSAP’s specific recommendation on the issue.

This is a one-year collaborative project of selected schools affiliated with WSAP Visayas and Mindanao. Overall, the project aims to mobilize the capability of women’s studies programs in their respective member schools.

Essentially, this project involves three major components:

a) WSAP network assemblies and fora to clarify the project at the start and to share findings and recommendations at the end of the project.

b) Participatory action research for a deeper understanding of sexual harassment and other emerging gender issues in the campuses; and

c) Feminist counseling training and services to woman students, faculty and personnel  as an initial support service.

Background of the study

Women’s Studies in the Philippines has grown from a core of nine schools in Metro Manila in 1987 to more than 100 schools all over the country in 1995. Gender sensitivity training (GST), teachers training on integrating gender perspective in curriculum, and module development of materials for teaching gender in eight disciplinal areas of the curriculum have been most helpful project undertaken with DIWATA’s support.

Despite these efforts, most women’s studies advocates and practitioners are a minority, and sometimes a marginalized sector in their respective schools with little or no institutional support. Majority need strengthening and support in terms of being further equipped with feminist perspectives, skills and support services to respond to the gender needs and issues unfolding before them.

In the region, the effort at gender sensitization among the teachers and students uncover deeper gender problems and issue affecting teaching and learning. These include issues of sexual  harassment , teen-age pregnancy among students and other various aspects of gender and sexuality issues especially among female students, faculty and staff in their personal and family relationship, as well as in their work relationship with each other. These issues need urgent response and support from the womens studies programs of these schools.

Sexual harassment is a vaguely defined and understood gender issue, more so as a form of violence against women. Its non-recognition as a violation of women’s rights can be attributed to the lack of gender awareness and sensitivity among most Filipino women, even among the schooled Patriarchal Filipino culture blurs women’s perception of the practices of sexual harassment.

The lack of clear definition and public policies on sexual harassment is indicative of the grave lack of understanding and action on this issue. There is therefore a need for a systematic investigation on women’s perceptions and experiences on sexual harassment towards clarifying WSAP’s specific recommendations on the issue. Initial research efforts have been undertaken by the University of the Philippines in Quezon City. A regional view is important in having a more representative picture of the problem.

While this research was being undertaken, support services had to be simultaneously organized. There have been reported school-based cases of sexual harassment and gender-based issues among students and faculty requiring feminist counseling intervention and related services. Such support services are important components of a gender-responsive women’s studies programs.

Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to probe deeper into the issue of sexual harassment in the campus both as a concept and a reality and recommend ways of addressing the issue. Thus, in general, it investigated the perceptions and experiences of sexual harassment and other gender issues affecting students in selected Visayas and Mindanao schools for a more representative view of the issue and to evolve a more comprehensive response to it. Specifically, it sought to attain the following objectives:

1. To surface the incidence and forms of sexual harassment experienced by students in selected Visayas and Mindanao schools.
2. To elicit suggestions to guide formulations of policy recommendations and corrective mechanisms to address the problem of sexual harassment in the academe.

Scope and Limitations

Five schools in the tertiary levels in Visayas and Mindanao participated in the study. These WSAP member-schools are UP-Visayas in Iloilo, West Visayas State University (WVSU) and Siliman University, Dumaguete City in the Visayas and Ateneo de Davao and Western Mindanao State University (WMSU) in Zamboanga City for Mindanao. UP Visayas, WVSU and WMSU are state run educational institutions while Siliman University and Ateneo de Davao are private secular schools.

The study was conducted from August 1994 to July 1995.

Research Methodology

This research consciously employed feminist participatory research method. The nature of the problem lent itself more appropriately to qualitative method which requires probing discussions of experiences, of feelings and thoughts. Sexual harassment is an issue not openly discussed in public. Most often, victims are reluctant to reveal their ordeal, nor name their harassers so a study on this subject matter need to be preceded by preparatory activities. More than just a study to gather empirical data on the issue of sexual harassment in the campus, this research sought to foster awareness and raise consciousness of the members of the academic community regarding this problem. Thus,several parallel activities were undertaken prior and after actual data gathering by survey.

At the UP-Visayas, two fora were held, one in UP-Miag-ao and another in UP-Iloilo Campus in November 29, 1994. These were co-sponsored by the UPV Women’s Desk and the Scintilla Juris Fraternity, a student organization. Classroom orientations on the subject were conducted at the Siliman University. Twenty classes were covered.

At the WVSU, a forum was held on the subject supplemented by discussion groups and classroom discussions.

A forum entitled “Speak Out, Speak Up” was sponsored by the Communication Arts students of Ateneo de Davao. Likewise, a symposium on Sexual Harassment was sponsored by the sociology class. In both fora, students from other colleges/department attended.

At the WMSU meanwhile, four fora were held in February, 1995. With the joint sponsorship of WSAP Mindanao and the Office of Student Affairs, the fora drew in a total of 445 participants from six colleges of WMSU.

Posters on sexual harassment were posted all over the campus of said schools during the period of study to help raise awareness of the issue and to elicit interest on the public fora being held.

More in-depth discussions and exchange of ideas were made possible with the conduct of focused group discussion (FGDs) in all the aforementioned pilot schools.

Several students who experienced sexual harassment narrated their ordeal and sought counseling. Some of these critical incidents are appended in the study as illustrative examples although for reasons of ethics and confidentiality, their names and those of harassers have been disguised.

Researchers made use of a survey questionnaire patterned after the Diliman Study on Sexual Harassment, 1994 and used with the permission from Prof. Rosalinda Pineda Ofreneo to solicit the information required for the study. Minor changes have been made by the researchers to suit the particular needs/circumstances of their respective schools.

Purposive sampling was used in all researches conducted in participating schools. The usual procedure followed was after the forum, students were invited to participate in the survey and only those who volunteered to answer were included. Participants to the FGD were taken from those who responded positively to the question as their willingness to join such discussion.

While only students were taken as respondents in the survey, the FGDs conducted drew more representative samples from the academic community and were composed of students, faculty members (both males and females) and administrators.

Research Findings

Ginhimuslan!

Natsansingan!

By whatever term it is called, sexual harassment is very much evident or a reality in many women’s lives. A number of women have complained of disconcerting experiences which affront their dignity as a person. Until recently. such experiences are not discussed at all or if ever, only talked about in hushed whispers. Victims dare not speak about it in bewilderment, much less complain or name their attackers.

As defined, “unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature constitute harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment or academic advancement; (2) submission or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for employment or academic decisions; (3) conduct interferes with individual work or academic performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment. (U.P. Diliman Questionnaire on Sexual Harassment, 1994).

Any sexual behavior or act that is unwanted or uncalled for, short of grave physical assault such as rape is sexual harassment. It makes the victim feel “uncomfortable, embarrassed, compromised or ill at ease.” Most of the time, the harasser is a male or a group of males, or in the workplace, somebody in a position of authority, or in the school campus, usually a professor or a fellow student. (UCWS Primer on Sexual Harassment, 1994).

As classified, there are two broad types and forms of sexual harassment. These are:

a. Sexual coercion – an act which has direct consequence to the workers’ employment status, of gain or loss of job benefits, as when a supervisor using his power  over matters such as salary promotion, training and promotion itself attempts to cause a subordinate to grant sexual favors.

b. Sexual annoyance – an act which has no direct relation to job benefits or harm but creates a hostile, intimidating and bothersome work environment.

(Bureau of Women and Young Workers Flyer, 1992)

In the academe, sexual, coercion is directly related to granting or withholding of academic action (e.g. passing grades, scholarship) in exchange for sexual favors, usually by a professor or teacher to a student.

Sexual annoyance meanwhile does not involve such a quid pro quo situation but nevertheless makes the academe an unhealthy climate for educational pursuit. Vexations made by students against fellow students is an example of sexual annoyance.

This issue of sexual harassment is basically about power relations and not about sex. It is, in a strict sense, a form of misuse of power or authority over another, using sexuality as a means to achieve it.

Sexual harassment is the abuse of the social and economic power that hold over women. “When men use their power to treat women sexually in a non-sexual context, they interfere with women’s right to work, to learn, to walk on the street without fear and to be treated as equal and respected participants in public life. Like other kinds of women abuse, sexual harassment both reflects and reinforce women’s unequal position in our society. (University of Toronto, 1993).

Analyses of incidents of sexual harassment indicate that it is one way by which the harasser shows his power or dominance over the harassed person. Because of the manner by which society defines the role of the women and men, the majority of the victims are women while the majority of the harassers are men. Boys are trained to be strong, to initiate action, to be aggressive, dominating and controlling relationships. On the other hand, girls are taught to be obedient, docile and attentive to the needs of men. Society expects them to continue this passive attitude and dependent stance up to adulthood.

A teacher-student relationship has essentially all the trappings of power or authority relations. Thus, female students fall prey to the sexual harassment committed by the male professors who use their position of authority to force students to submit to these advances and to stay quiet for fear of repercussions in their academic standing. This abuse of power structure can range from seemingly innocent brushing of bodies, to sexually suggestive remarks, to blatant negotiations for sexual favors in exchange for grades or promotion.

Victims of sexual harassment, who are mostly women, are most often hesitant to pursue any action against the harasser. Shame, guilt or fear of losing job, or not getting a promotion or in the case of students, failing a course, are basically clear indications of power play or imbalance in the power structure.

This reluctance or refusal to confront the sexual harassment incident has grave psychological and socio-economic costs. Victims are often swamped with feelings of shame, anger and humiliation. Many feel afraid, helpless and alone, even guilty as they struggle to be from the unpleasant experience. Among students there could be a loss of self-confidence. Their intellectual development can be badly affected as they suffer from confusion, doubts and distrust in the teacher concerned. (UCWS Primer)

Since most schools do not have clear policies on sexual harassment, many victims are in the dark on how best to bring up the issue. Some manage to move to another institution while others keep quiet. This does not at all solve the problem and even encourages the perpetrators to continue their behavior.

Incidence of Harassment

Knowing the nature of phenomenon, it is difficult to ascertain the extent and degree of sexual harassment incidents even in the campuses under study.

However, figures cited are indicative of the gravity of the problem. Of the 574 students in the five schools who responded to the survey, 317 or 55.23% professed to have experienced sexual harassment on campus. As explained in the methodology, the study utilized purposive sampling. Only students who participated in the fora held and who were willing to respond to the questionnaire were sampled. Understandably, most of the respondents have “a story to tell.” However, this does not alter the fact established that the danger of sexual harassment lurks in school campuses and that this has been experienced by many students in varying forms and guises as will be discussed in the following pages.

Range of Experiences

The most common forms of sexual harassment experienced by the students in the order reported are:

1. Leering, peeping, whistling, following or making sexually suggestive gestures
2. Unwanted physical contact (e.g. unnecessary touching, patting, pinching, squeezing, grabbing, placing hand or arm over one’s shoulder, brushing against one’s body)
3. Suggestive remarks, innuendos or lewd comments and jokes, graphic commentaries on one’s body
4. Offensive flirtations
5. Display of pornographic pictures

Not as prevalent but cited just the same are the following forms of harassment list in descending order of incidence reported.
1. Unwelcome sexual advances (kissing, embracing, touching private parts, invading one’s “space” by leering over or cornering …)
2. Propositions or pressures for sexual activity, usually accompanied by a promise or threat
3. Continued suggestions for social activity outside the school after it has been made clear such suggestions are unwelcome
4. Display of private parts (exhibitionism)
5. Outright sexual assault, molestation, rape

These situations not only happen between men as harassers and women, mostly, but also men as victims, whether between peer groups or between persons of authority and persons, especially women, in lower position of authority.

Unlike an ordinary stare, there are malicious stare (panulok nga may malisya) which makes the object of staring feel uncomfortable or uneasy (panulok nga nagalapos o ,inaubahan ang babaye), or which threatens to strike a person down like a snake (daw matukob nga panulok). Some male students however in one FGD complained, “ta mira lang gane“, perplexed that just a look could cause discomfiture. In graphic Chavacano, a female respondent complained of boys who stare hard at her, ” daw pwede ya makaprinyada“, (as if enough to make one pregnant).

Verbal remarks with sexual innuendos: Students report these situations to happen even inside the classrooms, between students and teachers, in informal bantering as well as academic discussions. The sexual innuendo is described as ‘palabtik nga may malisya‘ or ‘hutik nga may malisya‘ or simply kabastusan. Vulgar tirades are usually directed at the students. Reported were such verbal repartees as:

A point blank question of “Are you still a virgin?” asked by a male teacher to a coed.

Non-sensical questions asked by a male teacher in his social science class, “Is there politics in the vagina?”; “What is the relation of penis to power?”

Items in a history exam: “Did Spanish colonization permit masturbation and communal bathing practices?”

Remarks after hearing an unsatisfactory recitation of a male student; “If you are not good inside, you must be good outside in other things” (sexual connotation).

“How long do you come up?” Asked the male teacher to a male freshman. The student replied ” Twenty minutes from the dorm to the CAS building”. Teacher’s retort, “Gago! How long do you ejaculate?”

Male teacher to coed: “Kanami magdala sang bayo; kanami sang buli“. (You carry your dress well; you have nice buttocks).

A male teacher assigned his male students to individually report to class the measurement of their penis.

Some faculty members force their students to utter words on sex even if they are not comfortable saying them. Some teachers discuss sex even if it is not within the context of subject matter.

In humanities classes, art works displaying female nudes are exhibited and discussed. Male classmates give unpleasant remarks on female anatomy and jeer at their female classmates during these sessions.

In a swimming class, a male P.E. teacher embarrasses a flat-chested female student in bathing suit with a remark: “How come your front looks like an ironing board?”

On the first meeting of a class, a male professor was introducing his subject, presenting expectations and class requirement. To illustrate a point, he asked a student, “Do you know what masturbation is? Can you show it to the class?”

The word ,coined from “chance” describes a range of behavior more vexing than “making a pass”. It includes apparently innocent brushes or touch through the objects of such action could feel an unmistakable sexual overtone.

Examples are:

In a P.E. swimming class, the male instructor touches students in unlikely parts such as the buttocks.

A male teacher in a computer class forcibly kissed female students and touched their private parts while ‘looking over’ their computer work.

Freshmen students are made to line up in the nude during their physical examination.

A male faculty member “read” a female student’s palm and coaxed her, “Say I love you kon kabalo ka man mag love sang pareho mo.; Hambala bi…” (Say I love you if you really know how to love others. Try saying it). When the student obeyed saying, “Sir, I love you”, he tried to kiss her.

A female security guard posted at the university entrance gate touches female students’ private parts in the guise of frisking. She does this selectively to pretty students.

Profile of Harassers

Based on the survey, majority of harassers are related to the victims either as classmates, schoolmates, friends boyfriends, board mates or suitors/date. A significant number of reported cases fall in the category of sexual annoyance such as:

A group of male students make catcalls or wolf whistles and publicly rate each passing coed with such remarks as: “Wow legs! Pare, boobs! Ay pangit!”

Intentional pushing/shoving to touch breast, legs or buttocks of female classmates.

Passing around nude pictures as in ‘Playboy’ magazine.

Gays are often subject of ridiculing remarks and obscene jeers.

Female students changing to P.E. uniform are the subject of “pamboboso” or peeping.

Interestingly, male students profess uncertainty and confusion on the issue of sexual harassment. Among questions/remarks expressed during the forum and FGDs were:

We live in a democratic country. Whistling is just a way of expressing our admiration for girls. Don’t they like to be appreciated?

Sometimes, girls just pretend that they do not like to be looked at, or touched, or kissed. Actually, they like it, “hele-hele bago quirre!”

The definition of sexual harassment is not clear. How do we validate a girl’s allegation that she has been harassed? She may complain of sexual harassment when actually, she was just tapped on the shoulder and she did not like it. She may think it is malicious but the doer of the act has no such intention . So, this is my question :” How can a boy know that he has committed sexual harassment ?”

The above comments and questions express the male students apparent bewilderment on the issue of sexual harassment. Assuming their genuine befuddlement, there is a clear need to focus on gender relations among classmates/schoolmates. Male students disclaim that they do not have the intention to harass their schoolmates in doing such acts as whistling or telling green jokes but were quite so used to doing it not thinking of consequent hurt or vexations on the part of the victims . Cases which involve both students, persons of seemingly similar status illustrate how gender  itself plays a power element in peer relationship. Male teachers oppress their female colleagues on the basis of the latter’s looks and on the account of their being female.

The study also unearthed a number of cases wherein the identified harassers are the boyfriend/dates of the victims, like facing forcing their girlfriends/dates to yield  to kisses, embraces, or submit to such acts as necking, petting and even intercourse.

Of course, there were reported cases of sexual harassment – both sexual coercion and annoyance -perpetuated mostly by male faculty with such acts ranging from relatively mild sexist jokes in the classroom to outright sexual proposition or assault.

Shielded by their anonymity in answering the questionnaire, a number of students reported of cases of sexual harassment by teachers. But generally , students are hesitant in sharing their experience and in naming their harassers. During the fora, they are keen to inquire on the “guarantees” they will get against retaliatory action by their harassers should they decide to come out and file a complaint after the forum, a few dared to identify their harassers confidentially with the schools guidance counsellor.

The study conducted in five pilot schools indicated the identified male faculty harassers seems to be just a handful but their behavior affects a significant number of students Their presence disturb the learning environment in the campus and cause untold difficulties for many people. Some drop out or change classes after experiencing  harassment but generally, students suffer in silence or just avoid the teachers presence or circumstances where they would be alone with said teachers.

The Victims

The victims of harassment are mostly female students though there are reported cases of young male undergraduate students victimized by gay teachers. Several female faculty members likewise experienced harassment from their male colleagues.

One incident with a female university faculty as harasser was mentioned. This was the case of a single, middle-aged female teachers who was reported to harass a male college freshman with effeminate ways, perhaps a case of homophobia expressed through hostile behavior towards a gay student.

The incident happened at a forum where the professor served as one of the resource persons. She delved into homosexuality which was completely out of topic in the discussion. She approached a male student sitting infront and asked him to say something on the microphone. But the boy just bowed his head and kept quiet. To the persistent coaxing of the teacher, the boy asked, “Ma’am, what will I say?” She laughed and sashaying in front of the audience remarked, “See, that’s how these homosexuals are!”

Among colleagues of similar status, acts of harassment often take the disguise of jokes or “witty” remarks. Others complained of patronizing or condescending comments. Some illustrative examples are :

Over lunch, a male faculty member commented to a female colleague who was recently appointed to a high position: “Perhaps, you were chosen because you have nice legs!”

A recently widowed female faculty member came up to the faculty room nicely dressed, coiffed and made-up. A male colleague cattily remarked, “Uy, nagpapaganda ang biyuda. Available na uli!”

Often, objects of such insensitive remarks and merciless remarks and teasing are unmarried female faculty members or graduate students labelled sexistly as “spinsters”, or even nuns or lay persons with religious vows. One reported repartee went this way:

In a graduate class the male faculty member was discussing the term “atrophy”. After defining the term, he illustrated that parts of the body may atrophy after a long period of disuse. Then, turning’ to a nun, he asked, “What part of your body has atrophied?”

Circumstances: Places and Witnesses

Consistent with the most frequent types of sexual harassment experienced {i.e (1) leering, peeping, whistling… (2) unwanted physical contacts (3) suggestive remarks (4) offensive flirtations and (5) display of pornographic pictures}, most reported incidents occurred in the presence of schoolmates or friends. The more vicious forms of vexations understandably occur when no other person was present, except the victim and the harasser.

Indicative of the total lack of understanding and appreciation of the gravity of the offense is the fact that such incidences happen everywhere in campus in full view of other people, specially in public places as enclosed courts, classrooms, social halls, in corridors or covered walks, in the schools’ parking lots and in other places where outside school activities are held. These places have been identified in the five schools surveyed to be places where various forms of sexual harassment occur.

The covered court for instance, where school activities are usually held provide venue and opportunity for “chancing” or apparently unintentional body contacts. The crowd and the dim lights during such activities provide anonymity and convenience for harassers.

Among reported cases of sexual harassment perpetrated by male faculty members, the more serious offenses of unwelcome sexual advances , offensive flirtations and propositions or pressure for sexual activity occur in the faculty lounge, consultation rooms and other relatively isolated or private rooms.

In one FGD held, it was revealed that sexual harassment can and do occur in the consultation room which is a big area with half-length cubicles where only heads and feet of persons inside may be seen. In faculty rooms, meanwhile, normally off-limits to students, coeds who are allowed inside may be subjected to sexual harassment in the form of sexual innuendos or outright propositions when they inquire about their grades or report for an assignment.

In one school, a female student who requested for a make-up exam as she failed to get the mid-term was told to get such exam at 5:00 in the morning in the faculty room. Though perplexed by this schedule, she nevertheless complied. While taking the test, she felt the hands of her teacher holding her hand, ostensibly guiding her in writing the answer. Then, he started embracing her. The girl shouted for help. Luckily, a security guard was nearby.

The Victims’ Feelings and Reactions

Queried about how they felt at the same time of harassment, most reported mixed feelings of frustration, anger, fear and shame dominated by a sense of helplessness. Other reported feelings are coldness and rigidity, “dirtied/ violated”, and “slightly uncomfortable”. Not a few however remarked that they did not feel anything or “thought it was normal”. In a few cases, several respondents (3 females and 12 males) said they actually enjoyed the experience. On the extreme, some expressed revenge in mind.

Most common reaction to harassment at the time of occurrence is “doing nothing” or “walking away”. There were isolated incidents of several victims resisting “with physical force” as in WMSU where one wrote the response “I punched him in the eye”. Other reported reactions are “looking with tiger eyes” and “laughed along with them.”

Still, majority of the victims did not have the courage to tell the harasser to stop, much more retaliate with physical force implying  that there is a need for students to be more aware of their rights and assert that such rights be respected.

Effects on Victims

It is apparent that the immediate psycho-social costs are the humiliation, the loss of self-esteem and confusion on the part of the victims. The academic performance of those who experienced harassment specially from their teachers is most often, adversely affected.

In Siliman University, to illustrate, the following effects on victims are reported: psychological impact like stress, frustration, strong feeling for revenge, physical ailments such as stomach aches, headaches, nausea, involuntary muscular spasm, insomnia and hypertension and psychological depression as despair. Clearly, the tolls of harassment are not only psychological but physical, economic too, as some students drop out the course/s or quit studying altogether or
transfer to other schools to avoid harassment.

Most respondents who have suffered from various forms of sexual harassment believe that the lack of information/ knowledge/ consciousness of sexual harassment on campus and the lack of clear policies/rules/ procedures on the matter, the influence of alcohol and drugs and unequal gender relation in that order are the factors largely relevant to being sexually harassed.

Other reasons cited in descending order are: the harasser’s position in power and authority over the victim, opportunities provided by time, place and isolation and “uncontrolled urges”. Likewise cited are societal values, prevailing attitude of males towards female and “our (females). acceptance that such acts are just natural/ normal, palibhasa lalaki.”

Power relations as a factor in sexual harassment is clearer to the victims than to the harasser. Female students are aware that it is their position of weakness, their inability to fight back or simple refusal to take retaliatory action due to shame or guilt, that encourage the harasser to persist in his behavior. In one FGD, the girls said that it is “makaulaw” (shameful) to complain and thus, call attention to the incidence.

In the FGDs conducted, other factors cited related to being, sexually harassed are “physical appearance/ wearing of sexy or provocative clothes” and “coming home late at night”. Male FGD participants rationalized that wearing sexy clothes and coming home late at night are “come hither” actions.

Societal values, were likewise cited as contributory to sexual harassment incidences. As explained in one FGD, the prevailing culture of machismo and the differing socialization process for boys and girls shape the roles assigned to them. The cultivation of a macho image- a dominant, aggressive and powerful behavior for the males and the “feminine ideal” of being beautiful, submissive, pliant and weak- the “brave knight out to save a damsel in distress”- is continuously being fostered by the media.

Victims of harassment either keep quiet about the incidence or confide mostly to a friend. Very rarely do they report to their teacher, the administrators, or even their parents. In Siliman, only 3.3% of the cases were reported to authorities while at the WMSU, it was noted that none of the respondents who experienced harassment reported to the school counsellor or the Office of the Dean of Student Affairs which has jurisdiction over problems on student discipline.

In the critical incident report cited in this study (The case of Susan), it was the father of the victim who reported the incident to the DSA. In two cases, complaint was made directly to the police.

The victims who confided to a friend/friends said they did so to help others become aware of this problem, warn them to be more cautious and likewise, to “ease the shame and pain”. They find it more comfortable to share with peers, rather than with their parents. More often, such sharings of confidences yield commonality of experience. At times, the identified harasser is likewise the same person who menaced the friend to whom the victim is confiding!

Teachers are not considered worthy confidants in sexual harassment cases. In a cited case, one who reported an incidence to the teacher was just advised to avoid the classmate pestering her.

Aside from confiding to peers, majority choose not to complain, lest of all, officially to school authorities. The victims did not report for the following reasons: avoidance of scandal, too much hassle, lack of set of procedures for handling such cases, shame/embarrassment, fear of reprisal/ not being believed and even pity/concern for the harasser whose career may be ruined. A few remarked “its not serious enough”. One said, “I did not know I was already being harassed”.

In general, the respondents who experienced harassment are still able to contain their feelings about their experiences and accept them as part of life. Some do not even see themselves as victims. Still some realize belatedly that indeed, they have been unduly taken advantage of.

Knowledge of other Victims of Sexual Harassment

In the Siliman study, 50.8% of the respondents averred that they know of schoolmates who have been victims of sexual harassment in campus. At the WMSU, 23.5% of the respondents claimed that they know of others who have been harassed in campus. Compared to forms of harassment personally experienced by the respondents, the reported cases heard or they personally know about are more serious -physical, rather than verbal or visual, unwanted physical contacts, unwelcome sexual advances, proposition or pressures for sexual activity, display of private part (exhibitionism), even outright sexual assaults, molestations and rape. Such allegations must be probed deeper as the study may not have sufficiently uncovered the seriousness of the situation. In this regard however, researchers express this reservation: The traditional scholar may insist on empirical proofs, on figures and statistics, even statistical tests to substantiate assertions made in this research. However, how can the intensity of a phenomenon like sexual harassment in campus, long ignored and swept in the rugs though acknowledged to exist, be described or measured? One or one hundred is immaterial. One student harassed is one too many.

As in those cases directly experienced, cases which respondents only heard or have personal knowledge of having female students as victims and are largely unreported to authorities.

Whether sexual harassment is considered a problem in their school

To this question, Siliman respondents were unanimous (100%) in the affirmative answer. At WMSU, plurality (40.5%) considered it so while 32.7% said no or “not yet”; 25.5% are undecided. While no such direct question was asked of respondents in other schools under the study, it can be gleaned from the discussion that sexual harassment in campus needs to be addressed with more concrete actions and definitive policies.

Most answer given to this question in the questionnaire as well as in FGDs were the actions recommended by the panelist or resource persons in the fora held: “tell harasser directly that you do not like what he/she is doing; seek advice, counselling and support and report the incident and file a complaint with proper authorities.”

Sexual Harassment Experienced Outside the Campus

While the research focused on sexual harassment on campus, efforts were likewise made to gather data on such vexations outside the school. Violence is endemic in the life of the woman. Woman’s life is always accompanied by some forms of violence, physical, sexual, or mental and verbal abuse, sexual harassment, wife battering and rape (Luciano, 1994). This observation is validated in the data gathered in the five schools under study.

To the question, of “have you been sexually harassed outside the school?”, 30.7% of 140 respondents in WMSU answered affirmatively; majority in WVSU and 46.4% at the Ateneo de Davao likewise responded “yes” to the question. While no figures are cited at the Ateneo de Davao and UP-V studies, it can be gleaned from discussions that sexual harassment outside the school are very evident.

The streets, jeepneys, movie houses, boarding houses, discos,beach resorts and other public places are not safe for women where they are subjected to such indignities as leering, wolf whistling, being touched at breast, legs and buttocks and become objects of voyeurs and exhibitionists.

What is disturbing are some reports of serious cases of molestations such as “being molested by stepfather”, “boyfriend persisted in petting despite my objections”, “co-boarder propositioned for sex” and “doctor conducted internal genital examination without gloves”.

These incidents mirror the gender imbalance and persecution suffered by women in larger society. The school should address these issues not only those cases happening in school. Victims of sexual harassment inside or outside the campus must be helped.

In all the pilot schools studied, researchers claimed that existing administrative mechanisms or bodies, policies, rules and regulations do not adequately address the problem of sexual harassment. This is apparent from the response given that the leading factor perceived to be related to the incidents is lack of clear policies, rules or procedures on the matter.

Illustrative of the schools’ response to sexual harassment cases are the following critical incident reports:

The Case of Susan

(Account of this incidence is based on the interview with the father of Susan who is a faculty member of school X. To protect the identity of some persons, assumed names. have been used in the narration.)

Susan, a student of the College of Education usually takes her lunch with her father in the latter’s room. On that particular day in October 1994 at about 12:00 noon, she was walking with a friend to join her father for lunch when she passed by a group of male students. One of these students called out to her “Hoy, pangit! Pangit!” while the others laughed. Susan confronted the group and said, “Why, did I ever say that I’m pretty?” But as she turned to walk away, the same student again shouted at her “Pangit!” Angered,

Susan again confronted the group focusing on the boy who persisted in taunting her. But as she was protesting his catcalls, he slapped her hard on the face. This was in full view of many students.

Crying, Susan ran to her father’s room and reported what happened. Her father Prof. Veracruz, wasted no time. He hurriedly went to the Security Unit and asked the security guards to accost the student who slapped her daughter.

Two security guards accompanied him. On their way, they were met by the same male student who appeared unrepentant, even arrogant. To Prof. Veracruz’ surprise, the two security guards did not make any attempt to get the boy but just talked with him. After a brief exchange of words, the boy walked away but even left some threatening words.

Prof. Veracruz then brought Susan to the University’s Medical Officer. By this time, her cheeks had swollen and turned reddish. After explaining what happened, Prof. Veracruz requested Dr. Pablo to issue a medical certificate. However, the Doctor refused saying the girl should be brought to the medico-legal officer. No amount of explanation from Prof. Veracruz could make Dr. Pablo change his mind.

After taking their delayed lunch, Prof. Veracruz brought Susan to another doctor. But at 3:00 PM, the swelling in her cheeks has subsided and except for a slight reddening, no trace of injury was noted in her medical certificate. Prof. Veracruz then filed a complaint to the Police Station. Upon inquiry, it was found out that the harasser was a student from Jolo, who was a returning student after having stopped for two years from the College of Nursing.

In the school, the case of Susan was brought before the Dean of Student Affairs.The Dean, Mr. Rivera called on the students involved in the case and their parents, the Deans of the College of Education and Nursing and the witnesses.

The harasser was accompanied by his aunt. Prof. Veracruz noted how the OIC of the College of Nursing tried to shift the blame on his daughter. “Kasi siguro mataray ka, e napahiya si X“.

After several hearings, the boy was meted one week suspension. Prof. Veracruz protested this citing that in the University Student Handbook, among the offenses punishable by one-year suspension is “4. Lifting a hand on a fellow student or hitting him with anything that hurts.” He filed a request to the University President to reconsider the decision. In the meantime, the criminal case of slander by deed was filed by a Fiscal.

As the accused refused to answer the summons nor appear at the preliminary hearings, a warrant of arrest was issued to him.

Susan Veracruz’ case remains unresolved to date. The boy did not enroll in the second semester of 1994-95. But as gathered, even before the slapping incident, the boy’s performance in class had been very poor and his dropping out could not solely be attributed to the incident.

The Case of the “Chancing” Computer Teacher

This is a case of sexual harassment filed by a female undergraduate student (Student A) against a male teacher (Mr. X) in the College of Management.

A is a student who had to work on some course paper she needed to submit that day. Mr. X, a computer teacher, offered in a fatherly tone to assist her. When they were in a computer room, Mr. X locked the room, and opened the locker by the door to block people entering. The conversation ran this way.

Mr. X: “B…, kiss ko.” (I’ll get my kiss.)
Student A: “Indi ko, sir! Indi ko sir!” (No sir! No sir)
Mr. X: “Ngaa Indi ka haw? Baho ako haw sigarilyo?”
(Why don’t you like it? Do I smell of cigarette?)
He then kissed her on the mouth . . . Somebody knocked.
Mr. X: “Sige na lang, stay as sweet as you are to your boyfriend.”

Student A told her boyfriend, a co-student, who encouraged her to file a complaint with the school authorities. They eventually told classmates who gave them moral support. In response, the College Student Council pushed for the ouster of the harassing faculty from the school.

Some faculty members helped student A when she reported the incident. During the faculty deliberation, some faculty members were surprised at the complaint considering that the harasser, a male colleague, seems an unlikely harasser. He seems to be very pleasant and friendly person, solicitous to assist others and conscientious with his work. They expressed disbelief that this harassment act happened. It seemed unlikely because he seems happily married, has two teen-age daughters also enrolled in the university high school department, and is himself, a high school Parents-Teachers Association officer.

Further investigation was done on the erring faculty. Three more female students came forward with same complaint against Mr. X. He either made gestures of trying to kiss the students and touched their breasts from their back when they were working on the computer in his class. He also asked them to come to his house to check papers. It was further found out that he was dismissed from his former school of employment for similar offense. However, there was no formal complaint on his previous offenses hence these were not known to the university until this reported incident.

The case was hushed up although rumors circulated. The college faculty did not want a scandal in their college. They also considered the possible effects on the harasser’s daughters who are also high school students in the same campus. Instead of filing administrative charges, they simply reprimanded him and did not renew his employment contract.

Members of the university Women’s Desk reached out to the student and offered their support. The student informed the Women’s Desk members that her father wanted her to graduate first before they file charges against the suspect. Besides, the faculty member concerned had already been dismissed and they felt that the dismissal was enough sanction on the faculty member. The Women’s Desk did not act any further on the case except note it down for documentation purposes.

The Case of Professor Chick Boy

Cristina (not her real name) is a senior college student, about 5’2 in height, and approximately 102 lbs. in weight. Fair complexioned and with charming facial features, Cristina is a typical, soft spoken college student.

During the first semester of school year 1992-93, Cristina took a Philosophy course under Professor X. Although Cristina attended her class regularly, her performance was below average. Towards the end of the semester, Professor X, who is male and married, announced to the class about the possibility of increasing low marks by submitting extra requirements.

All the while, Cristina knew as well as her other classmates, about the characteristics of this professor, his antics and techniques, that earned him the title of “Chick Boy.

After a class meeting, Prof. X told Cristina to stay behind which she did. According to Cristina, she then started to be anxious, she anticipated something may happen to her.

The Professor informed her of her poor marks and encouraged her to improve her grade. She was instructed to go to his office after class hours to get the assignment, but was asked not to bring a companion. Knowing the “chick boy” background of the professor , Cristina brought her boyfriend to accompany her. However, the professor did not give the assignment but instead told her to come at another time. In the next class meeting, the professor confronted Cristina by saying, “Why did you bring somebody with you?” Cristina’s fear became more defined when he set another appointment with her. This time, the professor made it clear that she was not to bring a companion.

Cristina must be in dire need of that grade to risk herself. However, this time, she surreptitiously brought along a female friend. Cristina asked her friend to wait for her outside the professor’s office – some five to six meters away from the door.

The professor asked her to come in, ordered her to sit down and locked his office door. Professor X didn’t go back to his chair, (behind the desk) but instead sat infront her “Are you prepared to take the exams?” He extended his right hand towards the pocket of her shirt and said “What’s inside your pocket?” But his hand was directed towards her breasts. She then started to tremble. “Are you nervous?”, he continued to ask, but this time he gave her a “pinch in the cheek”. So Cristina gave an alibi, “Yes sir, I have a cold and I’m not yet ready.”

He must have noticed that Cristina was really scared. He asked her to come back for the exam after several days and led her towards the door. There, lie touched Cristina’s face and embraced her.

“I pushed him back,” Cristina said, “opened the door and left the room.” Hurriedly, she ran towards her companion and walked out of the building, crying. Her friend asked her some questions but she didn’t answer her immediately. She vowed never to go back to that office, resigned to receive whatever grade she may obtain from Professor X.

Cristina shared this incident with her other close friends. Like many other students, she didn’t report the incident to the University authorities. However, the Department Chair learned of it later and encouraged her to make a complaint with the College Dean against Prof. X’s abusive conduct, explaining that she should do it for the sake of other “would be victims.”

The Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences created a fact-finding committee. After a series of investigations, the Committee found that there was an abusive conduct on the part of the professor, that the incident really happened, and that the mere denial of the professor in the light of the student’s affidavit cannot be accepted. The Committee recommended that the professor resign as Department Head and be suspended for one year from the university . The University administration affirmed the Committee’s recommendations.

The next school year, Cristina is enjoying her internship program while professor X is “on leave.”

Implications of Study Findings

1. Sexual harassment is very much evident and a reality in the academe, affecting mostly female students though female faculty members and male students are not exempt.
2. A significant number of reported form of sexual harassment in campus fall in the category of sexual annoyance and are relatively “milder” like “leering, peeping, whistling”, “unwanted physical contact” and suggestive remarks, innuendos or lewd comments and jokes, graphic commentaries on one’s body.

This finding implies that power relationships do not strictly come into consideration in these cases, students being at par with other students. There is a need to focus on gender relations between the sexes. That several students reported that incidences like “whistling, leering, sexist jokes,” are “normal” and that they just felt slightly uncomfortable , even “laughed with them” or have accepted these as a way of life imply that they have not yet been sensitized to gender issues and in a way participated in their own victimization.

3. The more offensive and vicious forms of sexual harassment specially those falling under the category of sexual coercion are relatively less prevalent but are nevertheless reported to occur with some disturbing regularity. More cases under this type are reported as “heard” or not personally experienced by the respondents themselves.

4. Sexual harassment takes a great psycho-social toll on the victims; manifestations include psychological impact like stress, anxiety, fear, anger and depression and physical ailments such as stomach aches, headaches, nausea and spasm. This implies a need for proper management of victims. Counselling and other support system to victims of sexual harassment inside or outside the campus should be accessible.

5. It is very rare that students who experienced sexual harassment report the case or incidence to authorities like the classroom adviser or counsellor. Victims prefer to confide to their friends or peer groups. This implies that guidance counsellors should strengthen peer counselling program and provide peer counselling training to include skills in advising friends who are victims of sexual harassment.

6. The study established that existing policies, rules and regulations governing student discipline do not adequately address the problem of sexual harassment in campus and that there is inadequate/ineffective mechanisms to prevent said acts and penalize offenders. This situation is deemed a significant factor to continuing incidence of sexual harassment in campus.

7. Aside from lack of policies, structures and mechanisms in schools to address sexual harassment, other factors and circumstances related to the occurrence of sexual harassment are identified as gender relations, lack of information or knowledge on the matter, attitude of males towards females, the females’ passivity and tolerance of such acts and opportunities provided by time and place. Thus, while policies, structures and mechanisms are needed, it is more important that societal attitudes and perceptions regarding gender roles and relations be overhauled.

8. Consistent with the nature of the offense, less vicious SH cases especially those that fall under the case of sexual annoyance occur everywhere in campus: in the classrooms, in corridors, covered courts, parking lots or entrance gate in full view of other people.

Sexual coercion ranging from offensive flirtation to molestations happen in more private and secluded outright This implies the need for a study of physical rooms  arrangements and structures like faculty lounge or counselling rooms that may provide opportunity for attackers to harass their victims.

Recommendations
In the rank order of frequency of citation, respondents in the five schools under study recommended the following actions to address the problem of sexual harassment in campus:

1. Formulate university policies, guidelines, to penalize or punish the harasser
2. Formulation of code of ethics that will govern the behavior of faculty toward students and student toward each other
3. Conduct information dissemination activities, seminars, fora and discussion
4. Encourage victims to report such incidents
5. Include gender sensitivity education in curriculum
6. Provide counselling services to student victims (to include victims of SH outside campus)
7. Encourage students to train in self-defense
8. Setting up of a hot line or desk/center where victims can go or seek assistance without being identified

The FGD yielded wider and more imaginative courses of action against sexual harassment such as:

1. On the sectoral level, student government and other student organizations should spearhead a campaign against sexual harassment. Strong student vigilance must be encouraged.
2. On the institutional level, a body such as a committee or desk specifically to handle SH cases should be established. It should be clad with sufficient authority to hear and decide such cases.
3. On the national level, values must be strengthened through societal institutions like the school and media. DECS should institutionalize gender sensitivity trainings for faculty members and administrators. GST should also be offered to other government officials and employees.

Concluding Statements

Many events have occurred during the period that this research was being undertaken. Among the positive results of media publicity on the issue are Civil Service Commission memorandum Circular No. 19 s. of 1994 dated May 31, 1994 providing for a Policy on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, and Republic Act No. 7877 approved February 14, 1995 entitled An Act Declaring Sexual Harassment Unlawful in the Employment, Education or Training Environment, and for other Purposes. In the University of the Philippines, this led to the formulation of a policy and implementation guidelines on Sexual Harassment by the University Center for Women’s Studies and the eventual adoption of a Policy on Sexual Harassment. Formulation of such policy was attended by varied reactions and much debate reflective of the lack of common understanding on sexual harassment and the inadequate policy and support services in the University to address the problem.

Prior to this research, hard data is virtually non-existent to detail the extent and magnitude of the problem but society, specially the academe, cannot just be oblivious to the issue. Thus, the research has been most timely. The project was conceived before the issue of sexual harassment erupted and its implementation coincided with the peak media publicity of sexual harassment cases in various campuses in the Philippines, the most notorious cases of which are those of UP Diliman’s. Public awareness on the issue was heightened,. hence this facilitated eliciting the positive response from administrators of WSAP member-schools.

Making public the issue has catalyzed public awareness, and policy sensitivity to this problem. The legislations and administrative issuances on the matter have made the personal experience of countless women a political issue.

A lot more need to be done. Despite RA 7877 and the schools’ policy pronouncements, effective implementation cannot instantly come about without vigilance and organized action.

Gender sensitivity trainings with administrators, faculty and students should be promoted so that non-sexist and gender-fair learning and work environment is sustained. The issue of sexual harassment has to be fully understood, not just as isolated acts of ‘individuals but as something endemic in a patriarchal culture. Aside from efforts from the academe, the influence of the family, religion, mass media, business and other social institutions should also be targetted for advocacy and transformation.