The Sexual Harassment Jackpot : Ridiculous legal awards and bad laws won’t fill in for societal restraints. Women should speak up for themselves.

Of all the legal jargon we’ve recently created in an attempt to compensate for the moral principles jettisoned over the last 30 years, no term is more absurd than sexual harassment. People, just like other members of the animal kingdom, are attracted to one another to ensure perpetuation of the species. Since sexual attraction is such a powerful drive, civilizations have evolved cultural norms to modulate it, and these norms are flouted only at great risk. To put it another way, sex is fun, but it can have some unanticipated results, and societies must come up with taboos to minimize their occurrence. In days of yore, a guy had to be ready to put unanticipated results through college or at least to teach them the family business before he indulged. Girls didn’t get off easily either. They were instructed to wear appropriate clothing to avoid “leading a guy on” and to eschew excessive indulgence in certain beverages lest their innate modesty be washed away. Most people played by the rules.

Then came the sexual revolution. Equality demanded that women be free to have sex whenever and with whomever they wished. Men no longer felt responsibility because women had all the tools to prevent any unintended results of the sex act. All of this new freedom was heady except for one thing: Women were perceived as having surrendered their moral right to societal protection. Overstepping the boundaries was no longer possible; there were no boundaries. So women sought protection from unwanted sexual intrusions through the courts. And thus was born the term sexual harassment.

Now, I don’t believe anyone, male or female, should have to tolerate behavior that makes them uncomfortable. Good manners demand that all of us try to respect one another’s feelings. But we do seem to be overdoing it a little when it comes to taking offense from certain words, gestures and touches. (Rape is a crime of a totally different dimension and is certainly not to be considered in the same arena as sexual harassment.) Take the case of the 40-year-old San Francisco secretary who just hit the jackpot in her suit against a lawyer alleged to have inappropriately touched her and to have made lewd comments. This lady was able to extract from her touchy boss and all 1,700 of his legal associates $7.1 million in punitive damages. I suspect that most of those associates had no desire to similarly grope her and were guilty of only the remotest of associations with the defendant. Yet all were punished. This case, if upheld, could establish a legal precedent with the force of law.

And speaking of laws, one sits on the desk of Gov. Pete Wilson at this very moment. Apparently groups like the National Organization for Women, California Women Lawyers and others feel that there is little recourse when people other than one’s employer grope or make lewd comments. Infliction of emotional distress being a hard thing to prove, they’ve opted to push for a law making actionable unwelcome sexual comments uttered in the course of a professional relationship such as dentist-patient or collection service-debtor, if the plaintiff has requested that these comments cease. Note that no groping need take place. The clear implication in this law is a sexist one, namely that males are the professionals and females the clients. In point of fact, most women doctors in a recent study reported instances of “sexual harassment” by one or more of their patients. According to this law, these physicians could sue their patients for three times the financial loss they incur through this harassment. But who would be sued? The patient’s managed-care plan? Blue Cross/Blue Shield? Medicare? Badly written laws that attempt to make up for the shortcomings of a society that has thrown away its natural decorum concerning sexual matters can only do more harm than good. They make people vulnerable to false accusations, present the risk that misinterpretation of a casual comment may result in litigation and promote the Victorian image of women as frail and fragile flowers who swoon when four-letter words are in the air.

Let’s fight the battle that needs to be fought, for equality of opportunity. But let’s not get sidetracked in the process. If you’re lucky enough to elicit admiration from the opposite sex but find this admiration unwelcome, well, you’ve got a tongue! If things get physical, there already are laws to protect you. And lest I be justly accused of chauvinism, let me add that you buff guys who silently suffer the unladylike stares and comments of female escrow loan officers and financial planners have recourse even if Sen. Tom Hayden’s bill escapes Wilson’s pen, as do those undergoing same-sex “harassment.” Lets all treat each other with respect and common sense and cease this legal demonization of those whose chromosomes may be a little different from our own.