You're absolutely right that I'm talking about the law, and that I'm not talking about if the joke is sexist or not. That's what this discussion should be about, shouldn't it?

The law defines what discrimination means, with many cases brought to the courts to flesh out the details, including a Supreme Court case that establishes that sexual harassment is part of Title VII restrictions on sexual discrimination in the workforce. It's much easier to reference these laws and these legal cases, with reasoned judgments which are directly relevant to the topic, then to suppose that my personal beliefs are the way of the world.

As such, my comments are not about the topic of whether the joke was sexist. My comments are about the topic of if jokes like these contribute to a hostile workplace. The Supreme Court in Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc says

> This is not, and by its nature cannot be, a mathematically precise test. We need not answer today all the potential questions it raises, nor specifically address the EEOC's new regulations on this subject, see 58 Fed. Reg. 51266 (1993) (proposed 29 CFR §§ 1609.1 1609.2); see also 29 CFR § 1604.11 (1993). But we can say that whether an environment is "hostile" or "abusive" can be determined only by looking at all the circumstances. These may include the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance. The effect on the employee's psychological well being is, of course, relevant to determining whether the plaintiff actually found the environment abusive. But while psychological harm, like any other relevant factor, may be taken into account, no single factor is required.

Notice how there's nothing in there about being sexist? It's all about discriminatory conduct.

So even if every reasonable person agrees that there is no sexism in the joke, it could still be part of a hostile workplace. That's why I'm focused only on the latter.

Now, as Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Serv., Inc. points out, Title VII is not a civility code:

> Title VII does not prohibit all verbal or physical harassment in the workplace; it is directed only at " discriminat[ion] . . . because of . . . sex." We have never held that workplace harassment, even harassment between men and women, is automatically discrimination because of sex merely because the words used have sexual content or connotations.

> We have emphasized, moreover, that the objective severity of harassment should be judged from the perspective of a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position, considering "all the circumstances." ... The real social impact of workplace behavior often depends on a constellation of surrounding circumstances, expectations, and relation ships which are not fully captured by a simple recitation of the words used or the physical acts performed. Common sense, and an appropriate sensitivity to social context, will enable courts and juries to distinguish between simple teasing or roughhousing among members of the same sex, and conduct which a reasonable person in the plaintiff's position would find severely hostile or abusive.

Part of the "constellation" might include the severity or pervasiveness of the offensive acts acts. Part of it might include if there was an attempt to effect change. Part of it might be the reaction of people when there is an attempt to change things.

But none of it says that we can only look to see if a joke is sexist in order to help identify if it might be part of a hostile workplace.

So I don't care what people are talking about, if they are only concerned about if the joke is sexist or not. I care about if this was contributory towards a hostile workplace environment, and I care about what mechanisms we as the tech industry (and since I am a PSF member, what we as PyCon organizers) should have in place in order to reduce hostility in the workplace -- and yes, a conference is part of many people's workplace.

If your only interest is in if the joke is sexist, then you're spending all your focus on the easy issue, and ignoring the more important and thornier issues.