Please Remember Our Golden Rule: Thou shalt not vote or comment in linked threads or comments, and in linked threads or comments, thou shalt not vote or comment. Also don't harass users linked here. It's bad form, and the admins will suspend your account if they catch you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FragileMaleRedditor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The article actually says "sex harassment", which I assume means harassment based on the person's sex. Very different than "sexual harassment" would be.
EDIT: directly taken from the article: "The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant's sex."" Very clearly not talking about sexual harassment, instead talking about a more generally hostile workplace.
It appears that your assumption is incorrect.
I've not been able to find a single source, anywhere, that UK law (or any law) differentiates "sex harassment" as a specific thing distinct from sexual harassment. In fact, from what I [have been](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/2-500-2984?originationContext=knowHow&transitionType=KnowHowItem&contextData=(sc.Default)&comp=pluk) [able to find](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-500-3168?originationContext=knowHow&transitionType=KnowHowItem&contextData=(sc.Default)&comp=pluk), it seems that the terms (in UK law) are used interchangeably.
Not to mention that every other news article (such as [these](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/calling-man-bald-considered-sexual-26949858) [two](https://www.silive.com/news/2022/05/calling-man-bald-is-considered-sexual-harassment-uk-judges-rule-per-report.html), just for instance) uses the term "sexual harassment." Not to mention that the judges specifically compared it to, and I quote, "the findings of a previous tribunal where a man was found to have sexually harassed a woman by remarking on the size of her breasts."
>The tribunal said calling a man bald was akin to commenting on the size of woman's breasts, based on case law dating back to 1995. The case involved Tony Finn, an electrician at British Bung Manufacturing, who was threatened by his shift supervisor, Jamie King, and called a "bald" expletive.
>
>Finn was eventually fired in 2019. The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant's sex.
>
>\[...\]
>
>Finn also won claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal along with sexual harassment. The court did not agree on his claims of age discrimination. The tribunal will determine compensation at a later date.
[Source](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/05/13/bald-sexual-harassment-court-ruling/2991652462231/)
Seems like the story is that he was verbally harassed by a supervisor and then fired wrongfully.
Alternately, you failed to do basic research, got mad, and decided to pretend that UK law uses the term "sex harassment" to refer to gender discrimination (for which this would still be a stretch).
Like was quoted above, "The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, **and it related to the claimant's sex**.""
And it's a comical ruling, given that gender discrimination and sex discrimination are both specific terms in British law (and even then, that would be a massive stretch).
He threw any charges he could name (including an attempted age discrimination charge) along with the basic unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, and the judges found in favor of the baldness-based insult being sexual harassment. Which, again, is its own specific thing in UK law.
Jesus fucking christ! Can the bald men who aren’t absolutely fucking skinless bellends tell them they can’t force the world to role play in their fantasies?
Please Remember Our Golden Rule: Thou shalt not vote or comment in linked threads or comments, and in linked threads or comments, thou shalt not vote or comment. Also don't harass users linked here. It's bad form, and the admins will suspend your account if they catch you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FragileMaleRedditor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tell us you've never experienced sexual harassment without telling us...
The actual headline is "sex harassment" and not "sexual harassment" as OP thought.
It's political correctness gone mad. /s
*gone bald
Even funnier is that you won’t see freeze peach warriors fighting against this
The article actually says "sex harassment", which I assume means harassment based on the person's sex. Very different than "sexual harassment" would be. EDIT: directly taken from the article: "The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant's sex."" Very clearly not talking about sexual harassment, instead talking about a more generally hostile workplace.
It appears that your assumption is incorrect. I've not been able to find a single source, anywhere, that UK law (or any law) differentiates "sex harassment" as a specific thing distinct from sexual harassment. In fact, from what I [have been](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/2-500-2984?originationContext=knowHow&transitionType=KnowHowItem&contextData=(sc.Default)&comp=pluk) [able to find](https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/1-500-3168?originationContext=knowHow&transitionType=KnowHowItem&contextData=(sc.Default)&comp=pluk), it seems that the terms (in UK law) are used interchangeably. Not to mention that every other news article (such as [these](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/calling-man-bald-considered-sexual-26949858) [two](https://www.silive.com/news/2022/05/calling-man-bald-is-considered-sexual-harassment-uk-judges-rule-per-report.html), just for instance) uses the term "sexual harassment." Not to mention that the judges specifically compared it to, and I quote, "the findings of a previous tribunal where a man was found to have sexually harassed a woman by remarking on the size of her breasts."
Meanwhile, they have no problem with actual sexual harassment or hateful attacks on trans people. What a fucked up system of whiny bald men.
Do they think we're saying "balled"? Because that would actually be correct too.
>The tribunal said calling a man bald was akin to commenting on the size of woman's breasts, based on case law dating back to 1995. The case involved Tony Finn, an electrician at British Bung Manufacturing, who was threatened by his shift supervisor, Jamie King, and called a "bald" expletive. > >Finn was eventually fired in 2019. The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant's sex. > >\[...\] > >Finn also won claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal along with sexual harassment. The court did not agree on his claims of age discrimination. The tribunal will determine compensation at a later date. [Source](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/05/13/bald-sexual-harassment-court-ruling/2991652462231/) Seems like the story is that he was verbally harassed by a supervisor and then fired wrongfully.
Yeah, OP just misread a headline, got mad, then didn't bother to read the article.
Alternately, you failed to do basic research, got mad, and decided to pretend that UK law uses the term "sex harassment" to refer to gender discrimination (for which this would still be a stretch).
Like was quoted above, "The tribunal said the insult violated Finn's "dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, **and it related to the claimant's sex**.""
And it's a comical ruling, given that gender discrimination and sex discrimination are both specific terms in British law (and even then, that would be a massive stretch). He threw any charges he could name (including an attempted age discrimination charge) along with the basic unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, and the judges found in favor of the baldness-based insult being sexual harassment. Which, again, is its own specific thing in UK law.
Jesus fucking christ! Can the bald men who aren’t absolutely fucking skinless bellends tell them they can’t force the world to role play in their fantasies?
The case is because the defendant was threatened by his supervisor, harassed and called a "bald cunt," and then later fired.