3 ms·
But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment. Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is c
by naikrovek 9y ago
But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment.
Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...
- rectang 9y agoHarassment does not require "multiple". That's just wrong.
- naikrovek 9y agoThe dictionary of definition DEFINITELY does. (Caps for emphasis, not yelling.)
- rectang 9y agoIt is not a requirement. Consider the Oxford English definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment > Aggressive pressure or intimidation. ‘they face daily harassment and assault on the streets’ English doesn't have a definitive dictionary, anyway -- usage determines meaning. It has been the case for decades that a single quid pro quo proposal could be ruled as "harassment" in court. (As it should be!) Is it any wonder that colloquial understanding would reflect legal reality?