Sable, yes I think your workshop leaders were over-zealous. Federal guidelines are quite explicit in defining sexual harrassment as UNWELCOME sexual behavior on the part of one party towards another. I have linked the guidelines below. Here are the relevant definitions: Title VII does not proscribe all conduct of a sexual nature in the workplace. Thus it is crucial to clearly define sexual harassment: only unwelcome sexual conduct that is a term or condition of employment constitutes a violation. 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a). The EEOC's Guidelines define two types of sexual harassment: "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment." The Guidelines provide that "unwelcome" sexual conduct constitutes sexual harassment when "submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment," 29 C.F.R � 1604.11 (a) (1). "Quid pro quo harassment" occurs when "submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual," 29 C.F.R � 1604.11(a)(2).1 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a)(3).2 The Supreme Court's decision in Vinson established that both types of sexual harassment are actionable under section 703 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e-2(a), as forms of sex discrimination. A. Determining Whether Sexual Conduct Is Unwelcome Sexual harassment is "unwelcome . . . verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature . . . ." 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a). Because sexual attraction may often play a role in the day-to-day social exchange between employees, "the distinction between invited, uninvited-but-welcome, offensive- but-tolerated, and flatly rejected" sexual advances may well be difficult to discern. Barnes v. Costle, 561 F.2d 983, 999, 14 EPD � 7755 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (MacKinnon J., concurring). But this distinction is essential because sexual conduct becomes unlawful only when it is unwelcome. 2) Isolated Instances of Harassment - Unless the conduct is quite severe, a single incident or isolated incidents of offensive sexual conduct or remarks generally do not create an abusive environment. So, saying "You look nice today" does NOT constitute sexual harrassment. And because there is NO evidence that Monica felt that her relationship with Clinton was unwelcome or a condition of future employment in her job, it did NOT meet any criteria of sexual harrassment. I am not defending Clinton's behavior. But there was NO basis for impeachment. It was a very expensive partisan witch hunt, lead by the oh so holy Henry Hyde riding in to save the country. So indignent was he when his own behavior hit the news. What a bad bad joke. To set up a system that you have described where any sexual behavior in the workplace is prohibited and can reported on by fellow coworkers who then sit in judgement as to whether the relationship meets their criteria of a "genuine love affair" is frightening. It is also open to tons of potential of abuse of the kind of "hey, I want your job so I'll accuse you of having a relationship, even if both parties feel it is consensual." Oh wait, that is actually what happened to Clinton. The Republicans wanted his job, lol. Here is a link that might be useful: Federal guidelines for sexual harrassment

I am not a big Oprah fan either and I do agree it's annoying that she is on the cover of her magazine EVERY single month...BUT...Nobody's perfect. Every single human has good and bad qualities. Same goes with Oprah, although I would say her good qualities probably far outweigh her bad qualities. I think she genuinely cares about making the world a better place and has done ALOT of good with her time and money, probably more than most people, so I admire her for that. I think she tries to inspire others to give back and that is main reason she talks about how she gives, she has certainly received enough kudos to last a lifetime. Even though we all know you should give just for the sake of giving, everyone likes a pat on the back and a "job well done" sometimes, even Oprah. Yes, she can be full of herself, but it would probably be a little hard not to be a little full of yourself with her life. All in all, I truly believe Oprah is a good person who tries her best to better the world the best way she knows how and I respect anyone who does that. I also think it is wonderful that people try to improve their lives or themselves in any way that works for them, including this class. I say whatever works for you...go for it!

Included in my World Deluxe membership at Amazon.com is something called Long Lost People. If you e-mail me through my page here at the KT, I'll do a search and e-mail the results to you. Please provide the full name, approximate age, and what state you think the person may be in.

"I really hate how the government creates such havoc in people's lives!" Just thank your lucky stars there is even such an agency as Social Security to provide those who really need it with some sort of meager retirement income. I doubt it will be around long enough for our children and grandchildren to benefit from this program. Yes, it's bureaucratic and complicated to deal with but it sure as heck beats the alternative......which is nothing!!