You are writing a lot of comments with apparently little relation to the case at hand but that hint that you are basically trying to blame the victim in the general case and then accusing everyone of misrepresenting you when they try to make sense of the mess you got yourself into. It's at best a dysfunctional conversation. I think all the comments and downvotes are sending you a clear message.

I apparently am missing your point entirely as most of your comments seem directly contradictory to the idea that harassment can be objectively observed.

What do you mean by "objectively observed"? Obviously im not asking in general, but in this case.

Sexual harassment is defined in the legal code, for the US at least. There's a pretty healthy history of cases to clarify the details.

If you're curious about it, your HR department probably has some training materials.

>If you're curious about it, your HR department probably has some training materials.

There you go again, with the pointless grandstanding.

It seems like you never had any intention of having a genuine discussion, since I can't find a single one of your comments that doesn't read as venomous and disingenuous. You're exactly the type of person that needs HR, and I mean that in a bad way really.

Not sure what you mean by grandstanding. You asked how harassment can be objectively observed. I explained that it's defined in the law. Did I misunderstand what you meant?

BTW, I try to be polite, but ain't so easy when you're accusing and insulting me.

How many replies does the HN forum allow? Can you give me another?

Edit: Sorry, that was rude. But I couldn't resist.