Court OK's "Equal Opportunity" Sexual Harassment

Further, when the justices made motivation a deciding factor in determining sexual harassment, they completely missed the point. Interest in “courtship” or even sex is not the motivating factor behind sexual harassment. Very few men yelling, “Hey faggot, suck this!” actually have an interest in a sexual relationship with the person that they are yelling at, though they might rape him if given the chance. Instead, the point of sexual harassment is to intimidate, humiliate, or exclude members of particular groups. It is at this point that sexual harassment and discrimination converge.

You might be asking, “How do anti-glbt comments relate to sexual harassment?” The answer is two-fold. First, such comments bring unwanted sexual attention and serve to denigrate, humiliate, and/or intimidate the recipient. Secondly, anti-glbt or homophobic attitudes and sexism are inextricably intertwined. Simply put, gay men are hated because they are perceived to be “like women” and lesbians are hated because they are “the wrong kind of women” (meaning that they are not subservient to men). Bisexuals and transgendered people are assumed to be gay or lesbian and are hated for the same reasons that their gay and lesbian counterparts are hated. When the kids at school call a boy who isn’t “up to par” a “sissy” and when a coach refers to his or her male players as “girls,” the message is clear: the intended victim is acting like a girl, and if he doesn’t shape up and act like a “real man,” he may be subjected to the same kind of denigration and violence that women are subjected to.

Because homophobia is so closely connected to sexism, it is possible to discriminate against women by sexually harassing a man for “being like a woman.” Further, such comments and behaviors work to increase discrimination against women in society at a more general level by implying that women are less than men and deserve to be treated accordingly.

By creating a legal loophole for “equal opportunity” harassers, the Justices of the Supreme Court have shown that they do not acknowledge the connection between anti-glbt sexual harassment and gender discrimination. On the bright side, in both the Oncale decision and in its refusal to hear the Holmans’ appeal, the Court reinforced its stance that discrimination based on gender is unacceptable. This position is especially notable in the wake of the national dismantling of affirmative action policies. The Court has also expanded the interpretation

Go To Page: 1 2 3