Outrageous Sexual Harassment Claim

[panther10758]

My girls (13 and 11) do not own such VS merhchandise nor would I allow it. If I saw such picture son their myspace I would delete their accounts! However it is still a serious issue yes the VS catalog is far from Playboy but some could still consider it offensive. Even mor eof a concern might not be the images but the situation that was created when OP handed said catalog to a co worker unrequested. Now where the images "might" not meet (still debating) criteria for sexual harassment the act of giving such a catalog of intimate attire to a co worker of oppsite sex might suggest other motives that the co worker could find offensive

[AmieRenee1980]

Wouldn't the same situation arise then if he had offered this woman say a womans clothing catalog that happened to contain a few pages of underwear ads showing women wearing them? Or even a newspaper, which sometimes contain advertisements showing women in bras? I definitely don't think he should have done this in the workplace, but I also don't think this should be looked at as sexual harrasment unless there is more to the story then we've been told. Yes the employer has the obligation to investigate this woman's claim, but this just doesn't seem to rise to the standard of sexual harassment in my mind so long as this guy was innocently trying to pass along an unwanted item that other co-workers had taken from him in the past without any complaint.

[panther10758]

I think your splitting hairs at this point. Its not up to us and our preception of issue that matters its the employer. I have to think that a co worker would be very uncomfortable with being handed a VS catalog vs. Popular mechanics

[cbg]

And NONE of the above changes the fact that it was LEGAL to fire the employee for this, whether it technically reaches the level of sexual harassment or not.

It showed outrageously poor judgement to hand out an underwear catalogue at work, no matter what. That in and of itself is a perfectly good, and perfectly legal reason for termination.

[cyjeff]

And NONE of the above changes the fact that it was LEGAL to fire the employee for this, whether it technically reaches the level of sexual harassment or not.

It showed outrageously poor judgement to hand out an underwear catalogue at work, no matter what. That in and of itself is a perfectly good, and perfectly legal reason for termination.

Employers will fire someone over such a bonehead play for the simple reason that the lack of judgement over something relatively minor could translate into something for which the employer could be, ultimately, liable.

At that next incident, the VS catalog would be brought up and the employer would be cast in a terrible light for not "nipping it in the bud".

Therefore, most employers will stop such things at the first whiff of impropriety... and that usually means a stupid but well meaning head may roll.

And I agree with that judgement. It is not hard to imagine that the VS catalog leads to the SI Swimsuit issue which leads to that really funny (but a bit dirty) thing you saw on youtube to that... etc, etc, etc.

Then, you have to fire a department to get back to the light.

Nope... not worth it. One person is an excellent object lesson.

[cyjeff]

Wouldn't the same situation arise then if he had offered this woman say a womans clothing catalog that happened to contain a few pages of underwear ads showing women wearing them? Or even a newspaper, which sometimes contain advertisements showing women in bras? I definitely don't think he should have done this in the workplace, but I also don't think this should be looked at as sexual harrasment unless there is more to the story then we've been told. Yes the employer has the obligation to investigate this woman's claim, but this just doesn't seem to rise to the standard of sexual harassment in my mind so long as this guy was innocently trying to pass along an unwanted item that other co-workers had taken from him in the past without any complaint.

We don't know, by the way, what the tone of voice was when it was handed over, either.

"Do you want to see if there is anything you might like in here?" can be innocent or creepy.

Tone is everything. Worse, it is all in the ear of the beholder.

[mitousmom]

While some men & women might be offended by a Victoria's Secret catalog, I still don't think it meets the reasonable standard required under Title VII. The pictures in the catalog aren't any different than what you see walking past the window displays in their stores.

I thought myspace.com users had to be at least 16.

[cyjeff]

You are probably right.

However, most employers will simply not take the chance that this is the only time the employee will decide that something inappropriate is his right.

Especially when he call the "victim" a lesbian-feminist.

Yeah, that's adult.

[mooreted2000]

Perhaps there is more to the story. I have never heard the guy make a sexual or racist slur in my presence. He is usually a really nice guy. As to the 'cuteness' of the women involved; this points to the myth that men always approach women for sex and women are helpless to defend themselves against it. It is comments like this that are demeaning to men and women alike.

The thing I'm angry about is the hostile environment men now have to work in and that translates to less equity for women. Now even women are afraid to hire women because the company could be held liable if a woman complains.

The law presumes guilt. Draconian sexual harassment policies trivialize real victims and make women look hysterical and pathetic. It puts feminism back 30 years. It's dangerous for men and women.

The whole politically correct agenda polarized everyone and creates hostility.

If a man was really harassing a woman I would be the first to put his head on the block, but we need some sanity here. We can't joke, we can't flirt, we can't be friends with women at work. There is always the chance that the slightest, most innocent comment will get you fired.

This is all coming from the same feminists who think all sexual activity with a man is rape. Fortunately there are good men and good women who are seeing the enormity of the problem and beginning to do something about it.

Like I said: I can't do anything about employment policy from within my work environment, but I can sure as hell make my voice heard.

Thank you very much.

[las365]

The thing I'm angry about is the hostile environment men now have to work in and that translates to less equity for women. Now even women are afraid to hire women because the company could be held liable if a woman complains.

The law presumes guilt. Draconian sexual harassment policies trivialize real victims and make women look hysterical and pathetic. It puts feminism back 30 years. It's dangerous for men and women.

The whole politically correct agenda polarized everyone and creates hostility.

If a man was really harassing a woman I would be the first to put his head on the block, but we need some sanity here. We can't joke, we can't flirt, we can't be friends with women at work. There is always the chance that the slightest, most innocent comment will get you fired.

This is all coming from the same feminists who think all sexual activity with a man is rape. Fortunately there are good men and good women who are seeing the enormity of the problem and beginning to do something about it.

This sort of overwrought, fallacious rhetoric is the male equivalent of the mythical "lesbian-feminist" stance that you claim to abhor.

You, sir, are full of it.