You did not act afraid or seem sad after the harassment.

First, just because you cannot see an injury does not mean it is not there. Post-traumatic stress disorder is a real neurological injury many sexual harassment survivors experience. The survivor is afraid they will lose their job and reputation. They cannot sleep or concentrate as they wonder what people are saying about them, whether they are safe from retaliation, and how to make it all end so they can keep themselves safe.  They may become hypervigilant, looking constantly for information about who knows about their experience, what "facts" they have been told, and whether the person remains a safe work contact. They may distrust others, uncertain if they are an ally or a potential bully. They may be mad their harasser discriminated against them or angry that their company mishandled the situation. They may be psychologically triggered every time they see the employees who harassed and retaliated against them. Simply because you do not see this trauma does not mean it is not there. 

This revictimization statement also misunderstands how people respond to trauma. Indeed, some people fight for their rights when they face conflict and perceive a threat to their safety.  Other survivors who encounter sexual harassment, however, can have a fawn, freeze, or flight response, all of which lack strong evidence that the survivor has been traumatized by sex discrimination. 

In the fawn response, the survivor cooperates with their administrator(s) and harasser(s), hoping  the harassment and retaliation will end. They avoid the conflict and never address their right to be respected and safe in the workplace, thereby letting people take advantage of them. I had this response in 2011 when the sexual harassment happened, telling my principal that “I just wanted it all to go away” but then adding that I wanted to go off record. I knew I needed the sexual harassment to stop but feared reporting the behavior would only create more conflict. I thought if I filed an informal complaint, my perpetrator and the district would return “the favor” and not retaliate against me. 

My fawn response continued when a teacher victim blamed me immediately after talking with my principal. Days after our conversation, the teacher shamed me for reporting the harassment to my principal, telling me I deserved it as I had laughed at his sexual jokes. This same teacher had, close to four months prior, told me I was self-centered and not a team player. Hoping to avoid more retaliation from my colleagues and feeling like I had to prove I was selfless, I cooperated with my perpetrator and those who supported him. Over the next two years, I wrote multiple grants that required I work with my perpetrator and retaliator. By making them look good professionally, I reasoned they would no longer throw mean accusations at me. I sincerely wanted to restore the friendship with my retaliator too. I knew I was hurting yet fawned as a method to control the pain. On the outside, it seemed like I was perfectly content with my work relationships. I was not though.  

Other people freeze during conflict, meaning they shut down psychologically. They are still physically present but are mentally and emotionally disengaged during the harassment and retaliation. They may stare in the distance like they are daydreaming or stay silent with a blank face that lacks emotion. These stoic responses do not mean they are unaffected emotionally. In fact, the opposite is true. They feel unsafe and consequently attempt to avoid the pain and discomfort by checking out. 

I had this “freeze” response when I heard staff discuss students in team meetings who experienced bullying or sexual harassment. I worried people’s opinions of student survivors was the same opinion they had about my story. When they said a survivor brought on their situation by acting oddly, I internalized their victim blaming statement thinking I could have avoided my discrimination if I had stronger social skills. When they said a target needed to stop holding a grudge and move on in the friendship, I felt colleagues were saying that about my circumstance as well. (it did not help that one teacher actually told me this directly when I shared the conflict I had with my retaliator. Rather than state he was a toxic colleague who required boundaries, my trusted mobster at that point instead suggested I let go and ignore what happened.) I knew gossip was going around about me as someone I did not talk to about my informal report sought me out after school to reprimand me for filing a complaint. At that point I panicked, wondering who in my building knew about the harassment and what they thought about it. Both my principal and my colleague did not support me. Did others feel the same way? It sure sounded like they blamed me. I concluded the shame and disbelief I received was merited. This pain, along with the belief there was no end in sight to it, overwhelmed me. I froze in silence. I did not advocate for the student survivors as the pain I was trying to manage consumed me. 

It is important to note that survivors are also forced to remain silent by privacy clauses. For example, my teaching contract says I cannot release information about my district’s students, parents, or staff. It took me over five years before I disclosed my harassment to my parents and in-laws. I was afraid that if I told them, they could tell someone else, who in turn would tell someone else, until the story eventually found itself back to my company. To keep my job, I had to be stoic. I had to carry on like nothing happened despite the trauma I was enduring and trying to process.  There was no training course on “here is how much you can share before we can fire you or relocate you.” I was left guessing, and that was not a guessing game I wanted to get wrong.  

Finally, many sexual harassment survivors choose a flight response where they willingly flee from work obligations in order to cope with the pain. Survivors can leave their company, resign from committees, take a demotion, or avoid social gatherings with work colleagues. They may explain their behavior by offering the excuse that they are behind at work, looking for change, or too stressed in their current position.  I choose this response after I realized I was being mobbed by my district. To minimize any triggers, I withdrew from an advisory committee, anti-bullying committee, curriculum committee, and staff recognition committee. I stopped running a peer tutoring program and resigned from being team leader, a paid position that oversaw five other teachers.  To date, I have not rejoined any of these committees or sought out additional job responsibilities. In order to manage my anxiety, I have placed clear boundaries in place that limit the risk of being bullied and harassed. Shy of leaving my school district, I have committed myself to performing only the bare minimum.  Those around me, meanwhile, have been unaware what prompted this decline in motivation.

Businesses who wish to decimate sex discrimination must tackle the fear survivors feel when considering whether to fight their sexual harassment. Employees enter the workforce with their own worldviews, including formed ideas about whistle blowing, herd mentality, loyalty, and authority. Others have exposure to victim blaming statements connected with sexual abuse, assault, and harassment. As a child, for example, I heard statements on the news that Michael Jackson’s accusers and Kobe Bryant’s accuser were just after money. Employers need to discuss these issues with their employees to ensure their workplace has a common culture that recognizes those who are loyal to the company, at times, challenge the statue quo by speaking up about certain problems.  Employees also have their own personality type, meaning they have an inkling to favor either the fight, flight, freeze, or fawn response. Directly training employees on the negative and positive aspects of these responses, as well as the causes of sex discrimination and the damage of victim blaming statements, will establish a productive work environment that reports harassment.  

Administrators need to take reported concerns serious, which includes workplace mobbing. When a company fails to adequately address a survivor’s concerns, they ultimately realize they have to keep themselves safe. In other words, the likelihood of them trusting administration with future concerns goes down.  Underreported sex discrimination creates a toxic work environment, high employee turnover, and limited company growth. It is in the company's interests, then, to encourage sexual harassment reports. 

My narrative includes this counterproductive frame of mind. I reported a staff conflict to my principal before my 2011 informal sexual harassment report. Four months prior, a teacher I worked with told me I was selfish and not a team player. She was angry that I lied in order to acquire a teaching position that put me on a path to receive a special award. I reported this conflict to my principal, who did nothing about it (if he did, he did not tell me about it). His apathy taught me that it was my responsibility to keep myself safe. My principal’s victim blaming statement only heightened this perspective. He did not believe me and would only discredit and dismiss me.  As a result, I went off record with my sexual harassment report, hoping that if I “played nice” my district, perpetrator, and his allies would too. I certainly could not trust my principal to protect me. By going off record, I thought those who found out about my report would act more favorably towards me. It is for this reason that I adopted a fawning response to my sexual harassment. 

There are additional ways employers can ease sexual harassment survivors’ fears. Reports could be filed to a third party who keeps their identity anonymous; remaining incognito would ease survivors’ fear of retaliation, especially if they were accusing someone high up in the ranks of the company. Companies should also encourage bystanders who observe or hear about sexual harassment to report it. This includes administrators who hear about sexual harassment, see the survivor is too afraid to go on record, and then do nothing to support them. Like a mandatory reporter, the administrator will tend to the survivor's well being amid their traumatic frame of mind and report the harassment. In addition, companies could praise (either publicly or privately) those who came forward to identify cooperate weaknesses. Finally, each company should create an anti-discrimination committee whose purpose is to review regularly internal investigations and the company’s work culture. Administrators could then be held accountable if they fail to decimate the shame, blame, dismissal, and fear that holds many survivors back from reporting sexual harassment.