Sexual Harassment or just Harassment?
What if I just said “Hi. Will you come back to my place and have sex with me?”
Is that sexual harassment?
One thing I find notable about Friends is the pervasive anti-intellectualism in it, with everyone (except Ross) constantly mocking anything that had to do with anyone having any interest in having a higher education. Also interesting is one instance where it was assumed that references to The Lord of the Rings would be obscure, which is a bit less relevant today.
To the extent that Leonard was definitely under pressure (not least from Sheldon) to provide the quo for the hoped-for quid, it was definitely sexual harassment. It doesn’t matter that in the end he did it for the sex itself and not for the money. There was originally pressure from both the University and the client (the woman) even though she said later that she regretted it.
It is also the case that, regardless of what Mrs. Latham said to Leonard in her limo, pretty much everyone else at the University, up to and including the University President, assumed that he had sex with her in exchange for the donation. In fact, President Siebert even had a line which implied that he had done the same thing (traded sex for a donation) earlier in his own career. All played for laughs.
At a Dunkin Donuts, to an employee? Sexual harassment.
In a bar? Gross, but probably only sexual harassment if you continue the behavior after being rebuffed.
(I’m not really concerned with legal definitions, only the ethical implications, so YMMV.)
To someone working in a fast food place? Yeah, I’d say so.
ETA - obviously, ***sexual ***harassment, as the context was a reply to the binary question you asked. :rolleyes:
It’s not MY employee. I’m a customer.
But, in any event, just so I’m clear, you consider asking a woman one time if she will have sex with you “sexual harassment”?
To a woman who is working? Yes, that is highly inappropriate.
Sorry, but the question is not “Is it inappropriate” The question is “Do you consider that sexual harassment?”
If you’re a customer and she’s an employee, yes. She’s in the delicate position of not pissing you, and thus her boss, off.
If you’re both employees, yes. It’s not appropriate for the workplace.
If you’re both customers, eww, but probably not. It would only be harassment if the behavior continued unwanted.
Sexual harassment is generally defined as inappropriate or unwanted sexual advances or obscene language, but I’d go a bit broader in some social contexts in terms of what’s acceptable, because hey, you never know. But I would put the odds of the average women in Dunkin Donuts desiring someone to come up and ask her to fuck him somewhere in the 0% range.
Since this will inevitably devolve into ''what if…?" pedantic challenges, I’ll come right out and say that there are probably exceptions. If a customer at Dunkin Donuts is rubbing her crotch while looking at you suggestively, go for it.
Sexual harassment is generally defined as inappropriate or unwanted sexual attention so Grr! is pretty much answering your question. For it not to qualify, you’d have to be reasonably certain that the employee in question wants you to ask her to fuck you.
Yes, I realize this is a subjective evaluation. Common sense applies.
Based on the training I just had to take, in manson1972’s example, legally speaking no one has committed a crime or tort, but the store’s management could face liability if the employee feels harassed or threatened by a customer and management does not take action, or if management forces the employee to continue interaction with the customer (or worse, implies or insists that the employee acquiesce to secure a sale).
Thanks for the answer. But according to my Sexual Harassment training that I have to take annually and the EEOC, you are leaving off some key points in the definition of “Sexual harassment”, namely:
[ul]
[li]submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment,[/li]
[li]submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individuals, [/li]
[li]or such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.[/li][/ul]
I’m curious which one of those covers a customer asking an employee of a business one time “Hey, will you have sex with me”?
I’m not talking about the workplace definition of sexual harassment, though. I’m talking about things that people do to other people that are shitty. One of those things is being sexually aggressive with them to the point that they feel uncomfortable or threatened. I would call catcalling women on the street sexual harassment also, but it has nothing to do with the workplace.
aktep points out the ways in which this situation could be uniquely shitty for an employee dealing with the advances of a customer.
“Uniquely shitty” is a far different standard than “Sexual Harassment” Is there a link to the legal definition of “Sexual Harassment” that you can point too that describes what actions outside of the workplace would be “Sexual Harassment” I mean, saying someone is committing sexual harassment is a pretty big deal, and I would think you would have some sort of legal definition you could show instead of just “He mentioned sex, and it’s a shitty, inappropriate thing to do. Therefore, he sexually harassed her!”
Do you honestly think that asking an employee, point blank, out of nowhere: “Wanna have sex?” isn’t creating a hostile work environment?
Think about it: She doesn’t have the authority to ask this individual to leave. Her only options are to smile and just deal with it.
Or…
Take the issue to her boss. A situation in which, she has no idea how her boss is going to respond. Making the whole thing even more unpleasant, embarrassing, and anxiety inducing.
It’s sexual harassment. Arguing over the legal definitions seems pointless to me as most sexual harassment cases are tried in a civil court rather than a criminal one.
I don’t really know the legal standard, I just know what it’s like to be sexually harassed. People routinely justify all types of bad behavior on the basis that it’s legal… I don’t even think ‘‘sexual harassment’’ is a crime outside the workplace.
Looking at this obviously biased website and the laws in the state of Michigan, it doesn’t look like there is anything specifically on the books for sexual harassment. The two closest would be the sexist-as-shit “Improper Language in the Presence of Women and Children” and ‘‘Undesired and Unwelcome Accosting’’ which seems to have no sexual connotation whatsoever.
Sometimes shitty behavior is just shitty behavior. If you’re being sexually aggressive toward someone to the point that they are uncomfortable or threatened, I personally think that *is *a big deal and I don’t want to live in a society that tolerates it on the grounds that ‘‘well, it’s not illegal.’’ Especially because that kind of behavior, when unchecked, escalates to sexual assault all-too-frequently.
you answered your own question. I realize you don’t listen to anyone else, but maybe you should at least listen to yourself!
…this is a cafe society thread about an episode of Friends and Big Bang Theory: not a great debate over the legal definition of “sexual harassment.” That you would think that if you went to a “Dunkin Donuts today” and told the cashier “If you have sex with me, I’ll buy every donut in the place” might not be a “pretty big deal” shows you have a blindspot over what is and isn’t normal in society. People don’t do that shit. They don’t do that shit because it freaks the fuck out of the cashier, puts them in a terrible, untenable position, and makes everybody feel just a little bit less safe. It may or may not fit the definition of “sexual harassment” in every jurisdiction all over the world: but it most certainly fits the literal definition of the words: and in a thread in cafe society I think that’s all that matters.
So just for future reference: don’t go to your local Dunkin Donuts and tell the cashier that you will buy every donut in the place if they will have sex with you. Because it will get you labeled a creep and get you trespassed and banned from every Dunkin Donuts on the planet. It might not be a “pretty big deal” to you. But it is a “pretty big deal” to the poor cashier you just sexually harassed.
True, but the episodes were being discussed because they may or may not have actions in them that were sexual harassment. Seems appropriate to find out what people mean by “sexual harassment” in order to have a proper discussion on whether or not the scenes in question were, in fact, sexual harassment.
I’m pretty sure I don’t have a blind spot over what is and isn’t normal in society. I think you all have a blind spot over what is and isn’t “sexual harassment” I never said it was a good idea, or not a big deal, or not completely fucking stupid. I simply maintain that it is not “sexual harassment”
Also a bad idea with buying Girl Scout cookies.