Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!rex!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!kadie From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Anonymous postings Message-ID: <1991Jan13.215158.12795@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> Date: 13 Jan 91 21:51:58 GMT References: <1991Jan7.190403.9267@alphalpha.com> <1991Jan09.175609.6303@looking.on.ca> <40305@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <10129@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <11705@goofy.Apple.COM> Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News) Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Lines: 58 In bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes: >Obviously anyone can sue anytime, let's get that out of the way... >But I'm curious about the (legal) wisdom of companies like DEC and >Apple removing certain hierarchies such as alt.sex. [...] Here is what the ACLU's "Rights of Women" handbook says: [aside: the book was published in 1983 and so may be out-of-date] 'Several federal courts have ruled that [...] different treatment based on sex is a form of employment discrimination forbidden by Title VII. "Sexy" pictures and lewd comments also may amount to sex discrimination on the job if they create a work environment which is hostile and offensive to the woman worker. [...] One of the best definitions of sexual harassment is one proposed by the National Orgainzation for Women and the Working Women United Institute: Sexual harassment is any repeated or unwanted verbal or physical sexual advances, sexually explicit derogatory statements, or sexually discriminatory remarks made my someone in the workplace which is offensive or objectionable to the recipient or which causes the recipient discomfort or humiliation or which interfers with the recipient's job performance. [...] Unwanted touching, sexual comments and innuendo, and offensive displays of "sexy" pictures or cartoons may also be sexual harassment. In 1980 the EEOC passed guidelines[41] which defined sexual harassment by focusing more specifically on the required impact on a worker's job. Under the guidelines, in order to establish a violation of Title Vii, you mush show one of three things: [...] (3) that the harasssment itself is intended to or does interfere with your work or creates "an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment," whether or not there is any other unfavorable job action. ----- Note: The ACLU handbook is by Susan Deller Ross and Ann Barcher. ============================== IMHO, merely subscribing and reading the alt.* newsgroups is not sexual harassment. However, displaying "sexy" notes that a coworker finds offensive is harassment (and quite rude). For example, taking a note that someone finds offensive and making it the message of the day, or posting it to the local general newsgroup, or e-mailing it to the offendable person, or reading it loudly, or printing it out and pinning it up, etc. are examples of harassment. Note that such actions are harassment regardless of were the material comes from. -- Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign