It’s the low bar set by feminists for what constitutes “abuse”.

See the history of “the reasonable woman standard”.

If we were to flip the tables… I can show you what that would look like.

How about laws that bar women from wearing revealing or otherwise sexually stimulating dress as creating a hostile work environment for men.

This is what a “low bar” looks like from the other side.

One complaint from a man about your clothes… and HR is on your ass.

See how that works?

Then I would be here asking you: Why do some women need a “decency pledge”… etc. etc.

Your position is, essentially, circular.

“Let’s create a legal framework to force men to comply with OUR sensibilities…” and then turning around and asking “Why do some men need this?”

I’m told that Camile Paglia, noted feminist, has said that any feminist that can’t handle the sexual interest of a man is neither a feminist, or an adult woman.

Coddling of women in the workplace is a clear display of inequality and weakness… “We can do it!” turned into “we can’t do it… we need special protection.”

Color me not impressed.

REAL sexual harassment… like extorting sex in order to keep one’s job, is certainly a problem, but not because it violates a woman’s sensibilities, but rater because of extortion. I don’t care if it was “give me $100” or “give me a bj”, it’s the same issue…

Asking why I need to be forced to bend to your sensibilities is an intellectually bankrupt notion.

You would need to be forced to bend to mine as well.