As an example of what (I think) he was trying to get at, let's say a man gets into an elevator after a woman. He makes small talk on the way up and she feels uncomfortable being in an elevator alone with him and perceives the small talk as flirting. It's fair to say she is uncomfortable and the fact that he didn't intend to make her uncomfortable is irrelevant. But is that enough to call it harassment? If she felt harassed was he by extension harassing her?
Yes, it is enough to call it harassment.
Harassment only requires that a person feel harassed.
Whether or not that feeling was intentional is a whole other topic, which could arguably leave us thinking the harassment is of a higher or lower level - but in either scenario it is still harassment.
Fae's example is absolutely perfect. The man probably didn't intent to be sexist, but that makes his statements no less sexist. The man in the hypothetical elevator didn't mean to harass anyone, but that doesn't make his actions any less harassing.
Legally, harassment is apparently "
generally defined as a course of conduct which annoys, threatens, intimidates, alarms, or puts a person in fear of their safety." It says nothing about it being a course of conduct
that intends to annoy, threaten, etc. Harassment is defined by the person receiving the attention, not the intentions of anyone giving attention.
EDITED TO ADD:
I think another thing worth throwing out here is that 'harassment' can obviously have various levels of severity. Small talk in an elevator is not on the same level as sexually explicit comments to a stranger on a street, but that doesn't mean they can't both still be considered harassment (they are simply at different levels). I think people who mean no harm are uncomfortable and offended by the idea that they might be under the same umbrella as overt offenders... but it's not up to them, it's up to how they leave people feeling with their actions, regardless of intent.
I suppose as a society we need to reframe the question and stop asking "
Was this action harassment?" and instead ask "
Was this person left feeling harassed by this action?"
EDITED AGAIN TO ADD:
As an analogy - harassment is like homocide.
We have manslaughter and murder, which take into account intent - but they are both considered 'homocide', and in either case the subject winds up dead.
Unfortunately the language surrounded harassment is not as well defined, and we don't have clear terms to parse out intention. So the only way we can talk it about is in terms of the subject's reaction. But I would say that much like murder vs manslaughter, the intention doesn't matter a whole lot to the victim.\\
EDITED FOR THE LAST TIME TO ADD:
And now I feel like I am mansplaining harassment to a thread filled with women... and if that is how this came across I am sincerely sorry. It is not my intention, and please know that I only speak out like this because I feel too many men are quiet and feel it makes them look weak to speak up about these things. Apologies if this is not my place.