A UK court has ruled that calling a man “bald” can be considered sexual harassment. The ruling stems from a case involving Tony Finn, a former employee of the British Bung Company, who sued the West Yorkshire-based firm for sexual harassment after an offensive remark was made by a supervisor.

Tony Finn, an electrician, had worked at the British Bung Company for nearly 24 years before being dismissed in May 2021. Following his dismissal, Finn took legal action against the company, alleging unfair dismissal and sexual harassment, with one of his key complaints being the derogatory comments made about his baldness.

The harassment incident occurred during a heated argument on the shop floor, where Jamie King, a factory supervisor, called Mr. Finn a “bald cunt”. Offended by the personal nature of the remark, Mr. Finn pursued legal action, claiming the comment was not just an insult, but sexual harassment.

In February 2022, an Employment Tribunal ruled in favor of Mr. Finn, agreeing that the baldness-related comment constituted sexual harassment. Mr. Finn also won claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful termination.

In November 2023, the Employment Appeals Tribunal, overseen by Mrs. Justice Naomi Ellenbogen DBE, dismissed the company’s appeal. Justice Ellenbogen concluded that the comment was “inherently related to sex” and that baldness, particularly in men, is often used as a point of ridicule linked to masculinity.

“The remarks about Mr. Finn’s baldness were directed specifically at his appearance and masculinity, making the comment inherently related to his sex,” said Justice Ellenbogen in the court’s ruling.

  • Bob@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    It wasn’t sexual harassment but “sex-related harassment” or something like that.

  • 1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    I realize cunt has a different level of salaciousness in UK than US but it is a little ironic that an insult referencing female genitalia (and in my opinion is inherently based in misogyny) has been used to show sexual harassment against a man because it was prepended with a traditionally masculine trait.

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I wouldn’t have said this before I read about that ruling…but, now, all I see are 9 himbos indecently exposing their naked cue balls to anyone who walks by, including children.

      Won’t somebody please think of the children?

      I’m thinking mandatory hats, and for men who repeatedly expose their shinny ass heads in public, they choose jail, or get hair plug surgery.

      Either way they’ll have to be on the sex offender registry, obviously.

  • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Shouldn’t there at least have been a summary ruling on whether or not the plaintiff was in fact, a cunt?

    Because honestly, I imagine there’s a lot of cunts all over that factory floor. Maybe he was the only bald one. It’s a pretty important descriptor and you wouldn’t want to confuse workers on the shop floor.

    What if you left out “bald” and then dangerously distracted the nearby curly haired cunt, or ginger cunt?

  • kitnaht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Makes sense. Logically it’s a trait that’s most common in men. I see no problems here.