1. The text suggests that much of the controversy over sexual harassment arises because of confusion about what it is.  Explain why there is such confusion.  Do you think that sexual harassment can be defined in a way which removes that confusion? If so, how?

2.It is commonly assumed that sexual harassment is sex discrimination, hence that it’s prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (including Title IX in the 1972 amendment).  Reasons are given in the text (Section 5.4) for questioning that assumption. What do you think? If you think sexual harassment is sex discrimination, why?  If you think it is not, why not?  Even if sexual harassment is legally wrong, does that suffice to show why it is morally wrong? 

3. Consider the following passage:

“Many of today’s feminists, in their focus on sexual harassment…are creating their own utopian visions of human sexuality….The difficulty with these rules [governing sexual harassment] is that, although it may infringe on the right to comfort, unwanted sexual attention is part of nature. To find wanted sexual attention, you have to give and receive a certain amount of unwanted sexual attention. Clearly, the truth is that if no one was ever allowed to risk offering unsolicited sexual attention, we would all be solitary creatures.” (Katie Roiphe, “Reckless Eyeballing: Sexual Harassment on Campus,” from The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism)

How might feminists (and others) who favor zero-tolerance sexual harassment policies for colleges and universities respond to the above? Where do you stand on the issue?  How, in light of the discussion in the text, would you defend your position?