A panel of British judges in Sheffield has ruled that calling a man “bald” counts as sexual harassment. Each of the three judges involved in the tribunal was all said to suffer from hair loss themselves and therefore concluded that using the word “bald” is a form of discrimination, The Telegraph reports.
- What makes it prejudice? According to one of the judges on the panel, baldness is more prevalent in men than women, therefore singling someone out for hair loss is a form of prejudice.
- The bald judges complained about their baldness throughout the hearing. On multiple occasions during the North Yorkshire tribunal, the male judges whined about their hair loss and suggested that commenting on a man’s baldness is basically the same as talking about the size of a woman’s breasts.
- The case came about thanks to an electrician named Tony Finn. He was fired from the British Bung Company in May 2021 after 24 years with the company. He claimed that in 2019, he was with factory supervisor Jamie King, who make comments about Finn’s appearance that “crossed the line.” According to Finn, he and King argued and nearly had a physical fight. At one point, he claimed that King, 30 years Finn’s junior, called him a “bald c**t.” He claimed he “feared for his personal safety” and didn’t appreciate being made fun of.
- Lead judge Jonathan Brain thinks Finn was definitely the victim of harassment. King didn’t just insult Finn, he harassed him, Brain said. “We have little doubt that being referred to in this pejorative manner was unwanted conduct as far as [Mr. Finn] was concerned,” the judgment read. “This is strong language. Mr. King crossed the line by making remarks personal to the claimant about his appearance. In our judgment, there is a connection between the word ‘bald’ on the one hand and the protected characteristic of sex on the other. We find it to be inherently related to sex.”
- Finn will now be entitled to compensation. The tribunal pointed out that “a person on the receiving end of a remark such as that made by Mr King would be male.” They concluded: “The tribunal therefore determines that by referring to the claimant as a ‘bald c**t,’ Mr King’s conduct was a violation of the claimant’s dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant’s sex.”
