Page 221 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

RAGINS AND WIETHOFF
190
the scenario where she makes no attempt to hide her sexual orientation,
but coworkers are simply oblivious to her gay identity. These scenarios
illustrate both that self-reports of disclosure may not reflect the actual de­
gree of disclosure and that coworker's reports of sexual orientation are
fallible.
There are a number of potential outcomes associated with these scenar­
ios. One is that gay and lesbian employees may experience discrimination
based on their sexual orientation, but may not perceive or report it because
they believe that no one knows they are gay. Another outcome is that
gay and lesbian employees mistakenly believe that their sexual identity is
known to all and therefore misattribute negative work outcomes to hetero­
sexism. Reports and attributions of heterosexism may become even more
complex for gay and lesbian people of color, who may question whether a
negative work outcome was due to their sexual orientation, gender, race,
or just their work performance. Finally, heterosexual employees who are
assumed to be gay may encounter sexual orientation discrimination, but
may not perceive or report it because they are unaware of these percep­
tions. These outcomes also point to a much broader issue: the distinction
between reported and actual discrimination. Self-reports of discrimination
reflect perceptions that may over- or under-estimate actual discrimination.
Although this is an issue in the study of workplace discrimination for
all groups (cf. Ruggiero & Taylor, 1995), the variability in the visibility of
sexual orientation, and the uncertainty as to "who knows and who does
not," makes this a critical issue in the study of gay men and lesbians in
the workplace. However, even though self-reports may or may not reflect
actual discrimination, perceived discrimination is the employee's reality
and most certainly affects his or her work attitudes, behavior, and psycho­
logical stress.
To more accurately assess heterosexism in the workplace, it is useful to
examine both heterosexual and gay employees' perceptions. A good ex­
ample of this was a study of 71,570 service members on 38 military bases
and 11 navel vessels (Myers, 2000). Recognizing that the military's "don't
ask, don't tell" policy would bias reports of heterosexism, the researchers
did not ask respondents to reveal their sexual orientation and instead sim­
ply asked about the work climate for gay military personnel. They found
that, in the past year, 80% of the respondents had heard offensive speech,
derogatory names, jokes, or remarks about gays, and 37% had witnessed
or experienced an incident of harassment based on perceived homosexu­
ality. More than half of these incidents involved threats, unfair discipline,
or discrimination in training or career opportunities. This study provides
a good example of an alternative method of assessing heterosexism in the
workplace.