According the the EEOC sexual harrasment is defined as the following:
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.
Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances, including but not limited to the following:
The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex.
The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee.
The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to or discharge of the victim.
The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome.
Okay lets try and tackle these one by one.
1) Unwelcome sexual advances- Vague at best. If a one member asks another member out on a date; And refuses technically speaking that is grounds for sexual harassment. It was unwelcome and an advace. Maybe thats an extreme case and is not really harassment its just one time.
But say a person is persisitent and keeps asking John or Cindy would you like to go out with me Friday night is that sexual harassment? Assuming of course the person does this over an extended period of time. I would say,NO. There is nothing overtly sexual about it really. That person is just being annoying and obnoxious as hell but not harassment. You have any idea how many dates,marriages,happen because one person just kept asking over time?
2) Requests for sexual favors- Ok,no real arugment here. Except doesn't that violate the right to free speech for the individual? Nothing wrong with being blunt is there? Should not be.I can see it being wrong to force a person to perform a sexual favor. But to ask and he/she says no,its not the end of the world is it? Course,not. Move on to Lois,or Steve from accouting.
3)Verbal/Physical conduct that of a sexual nature that affects a person's employment- Ok, another obvious one. Probably the most logical of them all. The rest are completly subjective. If you touch another person's rear end, to me that is assualt plain and simple. No questions asked really, of course it has to be unwarranted touching. So when NBA player's or NFL slap each other on the buttox and say one did not like it,I wonder if he would sue his teammate...You should not be fired because you will not let someone grope you.
Verbal on the other hand is a different story entirely. I worry about where does the risk run between being PC and having free speech. Free speech is not absolute we know that. Cannot yell fire in a movie theater because you will cause panic and maybe mass death,I buy that.
But because you are commenting on a guys' horizontal anatomy or a womans' vertical,where is the harm? If anything more people talk about sex,race,politics,and religion in the office than anything else. It is called "juicy office gossip". Goes on in every office in America everyday. Can we all just be grown-ups about this issue. For once can stop trying to sterilize speech so much to the point we have to talk in constant code like we are windtalkers? Everyone knows what you really mean anyway. This to me sounds like a case of popular speech versus unpopular speech. And people fail to realize you cannot protect popular speech while getting rid of unpopular speech, instead you will destroy free speech altogether.
4)Anyone that is affected by the offensive conduct- I am sorry to say folks. The language in the law is more beautiful than the actuality of human nature. We all are going to get offended by what someone says or does not say. Or what they imply. If that is the case everyone can say at some point they were a victim of sexual harassment.
Id rather have people be straight up and honest. All this poltically correct non-sense drives me nuts. There is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. Then youll get what about when it is racial? Im going to say it like this...If you have the balls to call me the N word,then do so if you think you have a pair. Because if that is the only word you can call me you should watch more spelling bee's,because my vocabulary arsenal is a surplus.
Now im not saying men should be allowed to oogle women all day long in the office,that is for construction workers. Or women talking about "the size" or anyother of the parts of a man. The women on "The View" do that just fine. But we have to realize we are all adults here. If we keep sanitizing everything,this society will not be clean it will be blank.