Dear Houellie,

You can discuss the "philosophical" aspects of
sexual harassment as much as you want, however,
it won't change the fact that sexual harassment
is illegal in Australia,
(under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984), and all
employers are obliged to provide a harassment-free
workplace where everyone is free to get on with
their job. If they don't they can be held
legally responsible for acts of sexual harassment
committed by their employees.

You said that you're not discussing the "clear-cut,"
areas that I keep mentioning. So, what exactly are you
discussing? Unwanted, uninvited, sexual attention at
work seems to me to be pretty straight forward, especially
if it persists and the person doing it has been asked
to stop. I'm not talking about flirtatious, mutually
consensual, reciprocative behaviour here. I'm talking
about sexual harassment - which is unwanted, uninvited
sexual behaviour - and most organisations do have
written policies and procedures on that topic. There are
also Human Resources Managers, Supervisors, Department
Heads, and other Senior Management who can help clarify
problems.

If you're concerned about what constitutes sexual harassment
in your workplace - and why - all you need do is ask
the appropriate people. Most of us however, know where
to draw the line, we have a conscience for a reason.

Anybody with even half a brain would know precisely what constitutes sexual harassment. A LOT of people believe they have the right to harass others sexually, and will come up with a million grey areas that offer them convenient excuses to repeatedly force their sexual behaviour on their targets. You know the type of harasser, "she asked for it" or "look at the way she's dressed" or "she didn't stand up to me stare me in the face and headbutt me, therefore she consented" or "everyone does it" or "I didn't do it, I'M the victim" or "she hates men". Yes, they have every excuse under the sun.

Transki

If defining sexual harassment is so easy, you have a crack. Foxy and Pelican failed, but you are obviously smarter then the rest of us. Your definition needs to specify behaviour that is never alright under any circumstances and not dependent on subjective judgements by the 'victim'.

Foxy

Plenty of blokes
have gotten in
trouble for
behaviour that
they reasonably
could have
hoped would have
been seen as
"flirtatious,
mutually
consensual,
reciprocative
behaviour
here."

I think some posters are totally missing the point here.
Let's look at the Australian Government's definition of sexual harassment, and the fact that this behaviour is UNLAWFUL.

"Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature which makes a person feel offended, humiliated and/or intimidated where that reaction is reasonable in the circumstances. Sexual harassment in employment is unlawful under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) (Sex Discrimination Act)."
http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sexualharassment/quickguide/index.html

So it doesn't really matter what people think should or shouldn't constitute sexual harassment in the workplace, the fact remains that if you make unwelcome advances, inappropriately touch or hug someone uninvited or make suggestive sexual comments or jokes, and many other behaviours suggested on the official website above, then you CAN be reported for sexual harassment.

The fact that one person may not have a problem with an unwelcome hug, while another may take great offence at this action, probably means that you should know for sure BEFORE you try this with anyone at work if you don't want to get into trouble!

Exactly!

Bingo!

Suzeonline nailed it 100%.

Sexual harassment is NOT "sexual behaviour". Sexual harassment is "unwanted and unwelcome" sexual behaviour, and while it can be a one off it is usually "repeated".

It is up to the person making the sexual advance to fully know BEFOREHAND whether or not sexual behaviour would be welcome by the other person in the workplace. If you don't know for sure, DON'T DO IT!

Not hard to understand! Unless one has an "agenda". Or unless one is terribly thick.

Suzeonline:""Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature which makes a person feel offended, humiliated and/or intimidated where that reaction is reasonable in the circumstances."

Thanks for that Suzie, we already know there's a law. Nice of you to drop in though.

What we're discussing is whether the law is adequate. Perhaps you could ask your hubby what he thinks.

Transki:"Sexual harassment is NOT "sexual behaviour". Sexual harassment is "unwanted and unwelcome" sexual behaviour, "

Thanks for stating the bleeding obvious. How do you define "unwanted and unwelcome" objectively? I may think you're a fat old cow not worth the trouble of chatting up, while the bloke at the next desk may have a "thing" for fat old cows and think your moustache is really hot stuff. It's all subjective.

By all means mandate "no touching" rules, or similar objective constraints, leave the subjective victimhood out of it, that's the point.