Even though Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 contains no specific provisions stating sexual harassment is a discriminatory act, the Supreme Court ruled 10 years ago that unwelcome sexual conduct or remarks that foster a hostile work environment violate federal anti-discrimination laws. This case provided those subjected to unwanted sexual advances in the workplace with the first opportunity to obtain legal recompense. But it was originally construed to apply only to harassment done by members of the opposite sex.
The Supreme Court must take a firm stance against all forms of sexual harassment. Even though a ruling is expected sometime in July, Supreme Court justices are currently debating issues like how to prove same-sex harassment, the difference between male horseplay and harassment, and whether there could even be gender discrimination in a single-sex workplace. All indications point to a ruling that will render same-sex harassment illegal only in certain, narrowly defined situations. Such a ruling would not go far enough - the court needs to realize same sex harassment is as harmful as opposite-sex harassment.
In addition, the ruling could be a potential turning point in the gay community's uphill battle to win federal recognition and equal rights. With the Supreme Court's refusal to hear any cases concerning gay marriage or the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy, the justices are indirectly denying equal opportunity to America's gay community. Further, this treatment implies that the court believes gays and lesbians lead a lifestyle that does not deserve the same protection as America's heterosexual majority. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the most powerful anti-discrimination law on the books and it says a lot about the nation's values - it is time for the gay community to be included and receive the recognition and necessary protection it needs from all forms of hatred.
The court should treat same-sex harassment the same as it would such conduct between members of the opposite sex. There is no justified rationale for an ambiguous ruling. Sexual harassment is an unwelcome sexual act that violates a person's right to a hospitable workplace, and it should not matter whether it involves members of the same or opposite sex. The Supreme Court has an opportunity to help deter sexual harassment in the workplace - while the situation may be better than in years past, sexual discrimination on the job still persists. The Court must recognize that same-sex harassment does occur, and deserves equal protection under the law.