The basic idea that threatened masculinity increases the likelihood of sex discrimination — and especially its most common form, sexual harassment — isn’t new, and past studies in the lab have seemed to support the idea. But does this play out in the real world? If men are engaging in sexual harassment in response to a threat to their gender dominance, sex discrimination complaints should increase when men lose their jobs, but women don’t. Based on EEOC data on sex discrimination claims in each state and the District of Columbia between 2009 and 2016, as well as official government unemployment rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the same, my analysis shows that increases in men’s unemployment — but not women’s — leads to more sex discrimination claims in that state. These findings help show that sex discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace is a way to assert power and control. Traditionally, being the breadwinner is an important part of men’s — especially married men’s — gender identity, and when that role comes under threat, men assert their masculinity in other ways. Money is power, and when men are denied power in one area, they’ll try to claim it in another.

Despite all the mandatory trainings on sexual harassment that have taken place in American workplaces over the last two decades, the problem seems to be getting worse. Sex discrimination claims made to the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are up about 10% in the last 20 years. Some of that is surely due to increased reporting, but some is also the result of changing gender dynamics in society. Women’s progress towards economic parity may present a threat to the way that men understand their own roles in their workplaces and in society in general, and sex discrimination is one way for them to assert their dominance. To test this theory, I analyzed EEOC and Bureau of Labor Statistics data and found that sex discrimination spikes when men fall behind women in the workforce.

The basic idea that threatened masculinity increases the likelihood of sex discrimination — and especially its most common form, sexual harassment — isn’t new, and past studies in the lab have seemed to support the idea. Most notably, a 2003 study from researchers at the University of Padova threatened some men’s gender roles, and then gave them the opportunity to engage in sexual harassment. The men were told that they were part of a study on visual memory with two others, a man and a woman (neither of whom actually existed), who they would only meet in person at the end of the study. The task was to exchange images via a computer program; participants were told that they would later be asked to recognize which images had been sent. Half of the participants were told that this sort of task was especially difficult for men, and that women generally did a better job of it. After each participant — both real and fake – provided a short description of themselves, the task started, with the participants picking one out of 110 images to send to the others. Men who had been told that women were better at this task – threatening their gender role — were more likely to send pornographic images, despite the objections of the fake woman upon receiving them. When the woman had previously identified herself as a feminist, both groups of men were more likely to send the pornographic images.

So long as these studies stay in the lab, it’s easy to dismiss them: the key question is whether such findings hold up in the real world, with professionals, who are supposed to know better. While this is made difficult by the fact that many allegations of sexual harassment are never reported (70% in a 2013 YouGov poll of Americans), we can look at patterns in the roughly 29,000 allegations that are reported to the EEOC each year.

If men are engaging in sexual harassment in response to a threat to their gender dominance, sex discrimination complaints should increase when men — especially married men, who have been shown to be especially sensitive to economic threat — lose their jobs, but women don’t. Based on EEOC data on sex discrimination claims in each state and the District of Columbia between 2009 and 2016, as well as official government unemployment rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the same, my analysis shows that increases in men’s unemployment — but not women’s — leads to more sex discrimination claims in that state.

Controlling for the change in the number of other types of discrimination complaints made to the EEOC (race discrimination complaints are the most common type), a higher level of unemployment among married men leads to more sex discrimination complaints — but only when their unemployment is equal to or higher than that of women. For instance, if women have an unemployment rate of 6% (right around the mean for the time period covered), there are fewer sex discrimination complaints in the state than in the previous year if men have an unemployment rate of 2% or 4% — but there’s more reported sex discrimination than in the previous year if men have an unemployment rate of 6% or 8%.

Of course, there are some objections that could be raised. Maybe there’s more sex discrimination because there are relatively more women in the workplace, for example. But that wouldn’t explain why the effect is contingent on the relative levels of men and women’s unemployment. Some of the sex discrimination complaints are made by men — about 1 in 6 — but that proportion has been stable over time, and doesn’t do much to explain changes in the number of complaints. Another potential objection is that the overall size of the effect seems relatively small; anywhere between 20 and 100 extra (or fewer) sex discrimination complaints in a state in a given year. That may not seem like a lot, but remember that states only average about 350 sex discrimination complaints to the EEOC per year, and that most sex discrimination never results in a claim at all, so the actual amount of additional discrimination is likely much, much higher. Also, since the scale is based on the number of complaints sent by each state, an increase of 40 complaints, for instance, is actually 2040 complaints nationwide, or about a 7.6% increase in complaints overall.

These findings help show that sex discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace is a way to assert power and control. Traditionally, being the breadwinner is an important part of men’s — especially married men’s — gender identity, and when that role comes under threat, men assert their masculinity in other ways. (There’s reams of evidence to show this.) Money is power, and when men are denied power in one area, they’ll try to claim it in another.

All of the seminars in the world aren’t going to stop sexual harassment if it’s driven by a desire to assert dominance over women. Sex discrimination in the workplace isn’t about just one bad actor, or a problematic relationship: it’s a reflection of the larger environment. The good news is that there are constructive ways for men to assert their gender identity, and a workplace that gives men those sorts of outlets may be better positioned to prevent sex discrimination.