Dating in the work place is not sexual harassment, how can you come to such a conclusion? Look around in your life, don't you know of couples who met at their jobs or who worked at the same job? For each couple that stuck together there are many more who dated or just had flings.

The profits for the 85 year old stock owners have everything to do with it, since it is the company leadership who issues these insane policies of trying to forbid their workers from dating. It is one more way that they seek to dehumanize their employees. That anybody actually listens to them is bewildering to me. I haven't met anybody yet who has such low self respect that they would accept an employer doing that to them.

You talked about getting in trouble, but let's step back and we see that who can actually get into legal trouble if they discipline or discriminate against employees on grounds of their private affairs, or try to interfere in the privacy of their employees.

The crime of sexual harassment has nothing to do with this, the subject is dating in the workplace.

You're still in your groove. Absolutely nobody said that 'dating in the workplace is sexual harassment' that's your strawman and I really wonder how you can be so confused that you believe that that is my conclusion, it really isn't.

So I'll ignore the rest of all that follows from that ridiculous conclusion because it isn't based in fact, nor is it attributed correctly (it's yours, not mine).

These 'insane policies' are issued by just about every workplace anywhere on the globe with more than a handful of employees because those policies seem to work reasonably well in practice whilst accommodating the reality that people will date other people in the workplace.

As for sexual harassment: that happens and more often than not it is exactly in the situation where superiors push subordinates to do more than their job description strictly requires. Likewise for co-workers if superiors don't run a tight ship.

That none of this happens where you happen to work doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And no, the subject is not 'dating in the workplace', the subject is Amazon that is selling a bay area office complex, but if you want to be specific I did mention the word 'superior' in my comment and you seem to have completely ignored it.

You are bringing up sexual harassment again and again when the top comment you replied to was talking about dating. Accusing me of weird opinions:

"pretending that only the US has a workforce sexual harassment problem"

I haven't touched on sexual harassment. I'm talking about dating and romance in the workplace, and I can assure you that few workplaces globally have any policies against this, including large and very large companies. Principally the largest workplaces of all: the public sector.

American corporate (and American inspired) anti-dating policies are creepy. Not even the Soviets infringed on their workers like that.

If somebody reads our little flame war here, I'd like to tell them: Your boss or company trying to control who you date is as weird as they trying to control what you eat.

But I do honestly think we have different perspective on the roles of bosses and workers in the workplace. For me, it is alien to refer to any boss as a "superior". They lead the daily work, and that's as far as their authority stretches. Referring to them as "superior" would be fit in a military setting, but nowhere else. Is the worker "inferior" then? Calling them "subordinate" is also very alien to me. Where does that kind of language regarding fellow workmates come from?

I've had bosses and I've been a boss. I'd expect my employees to laugh in my face if I tried to tell them what to do outside of job tasks, just as I would laugh in the face of any boss doing the same to me.

Ok, goodbye now.