1. This review essay considers recent theories of the wrong of sexual harassment, taking as its central reference pointDirections in Sexual Harassment Law, ed. Catharine MacKinnon and Reva Siegel (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), henceforth,DSHL, while also considering several important articles on the subject. I thank Tyler Burge, Ann Garry, Barbara Herman, Alison Jaggar, Helen Longino, Seana Shiffrin, participants in the philosophy colloquia at the University of Colorado, Boulder and UCLA, and the Editors ofPhilosophy & Public Affairsfor helpful advice.
2. 1.Sexual Harassment of Working Women(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979), henceforth,SHWW.
3. 2. It also considers the historical context of practices of sexual harassment, alternative remedies to sexual harassment, and controversies over the ways sexual harassment laws regulate speech.
4. 3. 477 U.S. 57 (1986). See also Alexander v. Yale University, 459 F. Supp. 1 (D. Conn., 1977) (finding sexual harassment of students in federally funded schools illegal under Title IX). This review, following the bulk of the literature, focuses on sexual harassment in the workplace.
5. 4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 29 C.F.R. s 1604.11 (a) (1998).