Women Working in Male Prisom 307and by phone at home. The overtly sexist language and conduct was openly toler-
ated (Owen, as cited in S. E. Martin & Jurik, 1996). This sexual harassment makes
relationships with male COs "difficult in that a balance always has to be struck
between being friendly and being thought of as sexually available-—-being 'one of
the boys' or designated as the fraternity whore" (Pollock-Byrne, 1990, p. 138).
S. E. Martin and Jurik (1996) state that further problems arise when female COs
refuse their counterparts' protection and sexual advances and attempt to show their
competence. The male COs label them as "too mannish, 'man-haters', bitches, or
lesbians" (S. E. Martin & Jurik, 1996, p. 174).
Women have had some success in trying to stop sexual harassment. For example,
in Bitndy v. Jackson (1981), a woman prison counselor was being harassed by her male
supervisors. When she rejected their advances, they prevented her from advancing
in her job. When she charged them with sexual harassment, the court ruled in
her favor, saying that her employer had allowed a hostile and discriminating work
environment that violated Title VII (S. E. Martin & Jurik, 1996). Despite cases like
this, S. E. Martin and Jurik (1996) say that sexual harassment in all-male prisons has
not decreased. The correctional field has been slow to prevent this type of behavior.
Women tear that if they complain it may cause a negative evaluation of their job
performance or even job loss.
Another aspect of opposition that female COs must face is that male COs evaluate
women's job performances more negatively than they do their own (S. E. Martin &
Jurik, 1996). A study by Fry and Glaser (1987), which gave questionnaires to staff,
reported that the men found women COs less capable than themselves in duties
that related to security and safety. Szockyj (1989) stated a similar finding in that
male COs viewed themselves as more effective in handling situations that involved
physical strength and preferred male back-up over female back-up. Male COs view
women as too physically and emotionally weak to work in all-male prisons, and,
therefore, they cannot do their jobs adequately in violent situations and will be
injured (S. E. Martin & Jurik, 1996). There is also a fear that women will get
too friendly with the inmates, so female officers' intentions with the prisoners are
scrutinized, although male officers' intentions are rarely monitored (S. E. Martin &
Jurik, 1996). Crouch (1985) found that the problem was not an inability by female
COs to handle the job demands, but rather one of male guards' perceived standards
of appropriate behavior for both genders. Therefore, it is often necessary for female
COs to prove that they can perform their job well before being accepted, whereas
this is not necessary for male COs. This negative view of women and their ability to
do their job creates a disadvantage for promotions because they are often evaluated
by male supervisors (Crouch, 1985). Thus, it is more difficult for women to get into
positions of power where they could attempt to change the atmosphere of hostility
female COs endure.
Because most of the resistance faced by female COs comes from male coworkers,
some ideas have been offered that explain this occurrence. First, female COs are
viewed as intruders in an all-male world (Home, 1985). Female officers threaten