Thread by @akuareindorf

1/ There are 3 kinds of relevant harassment

For all 3, A engages in unwanted conduct which violates B’s dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for B (if not deliberate, it must be reasonable for B to experience it that way)..

2/ The first kind of harassment is where the conduct is "related to" sex. This is broad. Eg:

- telling sexist jokes

- putting sexually explicit posters up

- saying “hiya, big tits” to a woman

- calling a man “a bald c*nt*” (even though some women are also bald)...

3/ The second kind of harassment is where the conduct is “of a sexual nature”. Eg:

- sexual touching

- physical “horseplay”

- sexual comments directed at B

In addition to being liable for this kind of harassment, employers have a duty to prevent it…

4/ The third potentially relevant kind of harassment is where B is treated less favourably:

- because she rejected or submitted to the conduct, and

- the conduct was either of a sexual nature or was related to gender reassignment or sex

NB “related to” is broad: see 2 above.

5/ In my view, it's strongly arguable that wearing giant prosthetic breasts at work is conduct related to sex. Then the question is whether it's either deliberately violating women's dignity etc or it's reasonable for women to feel that way...

6/ If wearing the giant prosthetic breasts at work is connected to the man identifying as trans, it's arguable that it's conduct related to gender reassignment. If so, a woman employee must not be treated less favourably for objecting to it.

7/ Wearing giant prosthetic breasts at work is less likely to be conduct of a sexual nature, but depending on the circumstances it might be. In which case, the employer has a duty to prevent it.