Sexual Harassment: Edmund Wall And Vaughana Macy

855 Words2 Pages

Sexual harassment is a very serious problem in our world. There are many philosophical definitions of Sexual harassment in philosophy world. Edmund Wall and Vaughana Macy are both famous philosophers having different theories of sexual harassment. According to Wall and Feary, a case of Susan Wu in the articles Women in Tech Speak Frankly on Culture of Harassment, constitutes sexual harassment because the case meets wall’s four conditions of sexual harassment and Feary’s five criteria. The idea of Wall argues sexual harassment is essentially the concept of wrong communications that violates the victims’ privacy rights. In his words, “What is inherently repulsive about sexual harassment is not the possible vulgarity of X’s sexual comment or proposal, …show more content…

For Wall, Wu’s case talks about a female entrepreneur who faces a sexual harassment because her investors violate privacy rights by miscommunication. Mr. Sacca gets no consent from Wu to tough her face, the motive of Mr. Caldbeck is sexual, and Wu rejects their actions and feels distressed on their behavior. Another idea raised by philosopher, Vaughana Macy Feary, argues that “sexual harassment in the workplace is morally wrong” based on its five criteria, “physically and psychologically harms victims”, “violates privacy rights”, “discrimination”, “violates liberty rights and violates rights to fair equality of opportunities” of recipients. (Feary, p191) For Feary, the case of Susan Wu also violates privacy rights. In addition, the investors, Mr. Sacca touches the face of Wu has psychological and psychological harm to Wu. Mr. Caldbeck sends proposition …show more content…

The Reason why Feary thinks the actions are sexual harassment because the actions of supervisors are immoral. They pull female employees bra strap and lifts their shirt and run his tongue across her stomach, and the behavior is physically and psychologically harms women. The reason why women need to do this thing are they want to get money and a permeant job offer. If they don’t do this thing, they will lose their job. Some low-income single mothers want to get more money and this is the way they can earn more money. Supervisor’s behavior is gender discrimination to the female employees, it violating women liberty rights and their fair equality of opportunity. While in Wall’s theory, he thinks sexual harassment is morally good and desirable conduct if the actions are welcomed by the recipients. In this case, Wall will not agree with supervisors’ behavior is sexual harassment because the actions of supervisors are not rejected by female employees. Women voluntarily join the party in order to get money and get permanent job offer even though they know the supervisors have sexual interest on them. If the women’s reaction is welcoming and accepting the behaviors, it means they don’t have the mental state of distressed from their

Open Document