Whatever insulting things are said about hair loss from men to other men are meant to diminish the person who receives them, judges ruled They are considered equivalent to comments about a woman's breast size
Comments about a man's baldness in the workplace will now be considered equivalent to comments about a woman's breast size, a court in Britain has ruled, in a decision that elevates the comment to a sexist one.
The court was brought by Tony Finn, an employee against the construction company where he had worked for 24 years. He was fired last May, but went to court citing a series of company behaviors, including sexual harassment.
Finn's supervisor, the former employee alleged, had called him a "bald cunt" in July 2019. Was this offensive or actual harassment, the court was asked.
The judges (all three were men) said that "we have no doubt that referring to him in this derogatory way was unwelcome behaviour as far as Finn was concerned". Although such boyish language was common in the work environment, "in our judgment" the supervisor "crossed the line by making personal remarks to the plaintiff about his appearance."
By what the supervisor said, he "intended to insult Finn's dignity and create an intimidating, hostile, humiliating or offensive environment for him," the ruling said."
And they added: "In our judgment, there is a connection between the word 'bald' on the one hand and the protected gender characteristic. The company's lawyer correctly stated that women as well as men lose hair. However, for the three members of this court, it is clear that loss is much more common in men than in women. And we find that it is directly related to gender."
The court incorporated into the decision an earlier court decision where a man was convicted of sexual harassment for commenting on the size of a co-worker's breasts. The supervisor "made the specific comment in order to hurt the victim by talking about her appearance, which often occurs among men."
"The court therefore finds that referring to the victim as a bald m.... was inappropriate conduct, a violation of the plaintiff's dignity, created a threatening environment for the plaintiff, was done with intent, and was tied to the plaintiff's gender," the ruling concludes.
Source: protothema.gr
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source