Sexual harassment is but a form of sex (gender) discrimination. The conduct need not be sexual in nature, but must disadvantage one sex more than the other.

Therefore, a bullying manager whose conduct can be characterized as “harassment” is not committing unlawful discrimination as long as he or she practices “equal opportunity” in selection of targets.

On the other hand, harassing conduct that is not sexual in nature (i.e., no sexual advances, rude discussions of sexual activity, etc.) may still be unlawful sex discrimination if targeted at one gender and sufficiently severe and pervasive.

What is somewhat novel in this case is:

“The court noted that it was not necessary for the women to prove that their boss intended to discriminate against them or to target them based on gender. ‘Title VII is aimed at the consequences or effects of an employment practice and not at the…motivation of co-workers or employers.’”

The effects were quite different based on gender: “female employees cried, became panicked, felt physically threatened, avoided contact with the boss, called the police, and even resigned. . . . No evidence suggested that any male employee had anywhere near the same severity of reactions to the boss’s conduct; in fact, it wasn’t uncommon for them to hang out with the boss in his office, talking and laughing.”