In this article, Professor Franke asks and answers a seemingly simple
question: why is sexual harassment a form of sex discrimination under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? She argues that the link be
tween sexual harassment and sex discrimination has been undertheorized
by the Supreme Court. In the absence of a principled theory of the wr
ong of sexual harassment, Professor Franke argues that lower courts ha
ve developed a body of sexual harassment law that trivializes the lega
l norm against sex discrimination. After illustrating how the Supreme
Court has not provided an adequate theory of sexual harassment as sex
discrimination, she traces the theoretical arguments advanced by femin
ist scholars on behalf of a cause of action for sexual harassment unde
r Title VII: 1) it violates formal equality principles; 2) its sexism
lies in the fact that the conduct is sexual; and 3) sexual harassment
is an example of the subordination of women by men. Professor Franke p
rovides a critique of each of these accounts of sexual harassment, in
part, by showing how each is unable to provide an account of whether s
ame-sex sexual harassment should be actionable under Title VII. She ar
gues that flaws in both the theory and the doctrine are amplified in t
he marginal cases of same-sex harassment. Professor Franke then argues
that the discriminatory wrong of sexual harassment, between parties o
f different or same sexes, should be understood as a technology of sex
ism. That is, the sexism in sexual harassment lies in its power as a r
egulatory practice that feminizes women and masculinizes men, renders
women sexual objects and men sexual subjects.