I’m beginning to think “sexual harassment” should be confined to
1) proof of actual extortion of a female employee - “unless you do it, you’re gone” or
2) proof of truly unsolicited actual or attempted physical sexual touching
The “unsolicited” is a pretty big deal. I think women know what they’re up to and I think they usually can avoid a compromising situation if they want to. I think often they allow themselves to get into a potentially compromising situation and then later cry “Wolf” if it suits them.
And I think since women generally know when they choose to enter a potentially compromising situation, they can be prepared to prove legitimate “harassment” although they could also use the same device to entrap the guy (including subtle “soliciting”).
IMO, there’s a lot of b/s surrounding the sexual “harassment” thing. So many women have decided to climb into the ring with the guys to compete with them in the workplace. That in itself is potentially volatile. IMO, generally women don’t belong in the workplace competing with men, but if they do, then they should take the consequences.
The Murdoch boys decided they wanted BOR gone. Fortunately for them he appears to be a serial sexual asshat and they used it to get rid of him. They are not getting rid of O’Reilly because of the sexual harrassment suits or it would have happened several years ago.