> EEOC charge statistics say otherwise: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/charges.cfm

How do you figure? Less than 100,000 charges of harassment, in a world where someone is harassing you pretty much on a minute-by-minute basis. I'd say that thoroughly substantiates my claim that harassment is almost never illegal.

>> Honest complements, by definition, cannot create a hostile or offensive work environment

> They can if they're inappropriate and unwanted.

They can only if they're inappropriate and unwanted... and so frequent or severe enough. Which honest complements cannot be. A complement on someone's appearance is not sexual nor inappropriate. It may be unwanted, which goes back to my point about how well-meaning humans communicate through things like eye contact and facial expressions. I'd ask you to point out a single case of proven sexual harassment based on someone simply paying complements to a co-worker, but it's probably not worth your time.

If sexual comments are inappropriate, unwanted, and are so frequent or severe that they create a hostile work environment (did I get the quote right that time?!), then they rise to illegal sexual harassment. It seems simple enough to me. Clearly a complement fails the 'severe' test, fails the sexual test, and so I'm left to just guess where you're coming from -- perhaps you're imagining a coworker doggedly pursuing an uninterested colleague, which, again, would not be what I call a honest complement.

>> First, actually, yes you can separate out the two.

> You can, because you personally know your intent. But no one else can, and your intent is irrelevant. If your actions create a hostile work environment...

Certainly I agree the definition of a 'hostile work environment' does not hinge on the harasser admitting fault or intent. However, I also do not think a hostile work environment can be something that "just happens" without some actual physical manifestation of harassment. When we tell co-workers to speak up it's about identifying these moments when a line is crossed. Long before honest complements could somehow even remotely approach the point of creating a hostile work environment, I am quite comfortable the vast majority of people's ability to recognize that. And I am convinced that calling for a outright ban on complementing someone's appearance in the workplace is incredible overreach.

> You don't have a right to say whatever you want to someone.

Whatever you want? Surely not. But this is a logical fallacy I won't chase.

> Someone's attractiveness and physical appearance isn't relevant in the workplace, and it's inappropriate to bring it up.

You're overgeneralizing here. In most workplaces physical appearance is absolutely relevant to some degree.

But ignoring the obvious cases where physical appearance is relevant, I'm honestly not sure what you mean by 'relevant in the workplace'. My workplace is not an assembly line where I don't interact with humans; quite the contrary. Interaction with humans is a large part of most workplaces, and conversing with, building rapport, trust, shared understanding and common goals is a major component of most workplaces. Part of team building is also building relationships and friendships, and that will naturally include people talking about themselves and talking about each other. While we should all expect this is always done in a positive and inclusive manor, we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Comments about peoples apparel, or appearance are natural, unoffensive, and should not be banned in the work environment. The damage in sterilizing the workplace of this type of camaraderie far outweighs to potential for harm. My general thesis is, that this is an over-reaction to the base and vile things that sometimes, but rarely, do occur in the workplace.

>> E.g. If a colleague, male or female, comes in on Monday and their hair is a different color, I think not noticing it is more insulting by far.

> It's extremely entitled to think that someone, man or woman, changed their appearance to elicit a reaction from you.

Huh, what?! That's not what I said at all, please re-read it. I think something just shifted in your tone, and I'm sorry to see it go in that direction. Please try to remain charitable in light of the limited bandwidth of the communication medium. I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, probably because I was trying to be too cute while saying it.

The point I'm trying to make is, I don't think it's a reasonable trade-off, in fact I think it's massive overreach to strictly enforce a sterile workplace because someone might be offended by an honest complement. It's actually not about "me" it's just that pronouns get messy in comment threads. Please keep ad hominem out of it, because I'm actually trying to have a productive conversation here.

I'm not complaining about how onerous it would be for me to stop complementing someone. What I think we do need to protect is our ability to be human and humane to one another, to empathize with one another, and to have the option of connecting on a remotely personal level to people we spend the majority of our days with. I think this happens naturally and copacetically 99.99% of the time. I think your quoted Charge Statistics support my conclusion.