Okay, so his actual position is that it is not sexual misconduct and that those who believe it is are idiots/out-of-touch/snowflakes/whatever you think he meant by Third Reich Language Police.
But that's still wrong. Which is my point. It's incredibly wrong.
https://www.doi.gov/pmb/eeo/Sexual-Harassment
Quote:
Examples of Sexual Harassment
Any of these elements may constitute sexual harassment or discrimination. These examples are not meant to be all inclusive.
Physical contact
Squeezing a worker's shoulders or putting a hand around his or her waist
...
Terms of endearment, such as calling a co-worker “honey,” “dear,” “sweetheart,” or some similar expression. (The effect is the primary issue rather than intent. Even if the person “means nothing to you” or you have “used the term for years” you should be aware that such expressions are inappropriate.)
|
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/pdf/whatissh.pdf
Quote:
Sexual harassment includes many things...
· Actual or attempted rape or sexual assault.
· Unwanted pressure for sexual favors.
...
· Referring to an adult as a girl, hunk, doll, babe, or honey.
|
It's not the 1950's anymore guys, you can't get away calling coworkers (especially as someone in authority) pet names like that.