A discussion of the current state of sexual harassment attitudes in the US. (employee, credit)

[danielpalos]

I am hoping for a frank discussion of the current state of sexual harassment attitudes in the US.

From one perspective, I think sexual harassment laws can be an infringement on individual liberties (via the 9A).

From another perspective, I don't think someone should be required to have sex in order to obtain or keep a job if it is not stated in the company morals handbook.

When will a balance of power between the sexes enable truer forms of individual liberty, without resorting to forms of blacklisting for not having sex to get or keep a job if it is not part of the "corporate" culture?

I think many companies would be better off, if the simply stated what will not constitute sexual harassment, instead of what may constitute sexual harassment. From a 9A perspective, I think companies should be able to state their views on "corporate" morality, without public sector interference.

[Magnolia Bloom]

Well, there is that little issue of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

I've never worked for a company that had a morals handbook.

[danielpalos]

I think "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964" exceeds the scope of the powers granted in the constitution, and is not in full compliance with Article 4, Section 2 of the constitution.

Article 4.

Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records,
and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general
Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be
proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section 2
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities
of Citizens in the several States.

Let's assume that A4S2 is the only source of federal oversight authority.

How much would it matter to an individual if there is a published employee handbook, stating what is normal and proper for that organization (and a 9A power and right to self-determination of that legal fiction of an individual when in the form of a corporation)?

I think many companies would be better off, if they simply stated what will not constitute sexual harassment, instead of what may constitute sexual harassment. From a 9A perspective, I think companies should be able to state their views on "corporate" morality, without public sector interference.