Because of bad luck, I know way too much about employment law.  Ongoing harassment is required for the legal definition [1]. The company only has to demonstrate reasonable effort in addressing the problem to avoid a lawsuit. So termination after a MILF comment is overkill in the legal sense. The cases that make it to court are god awful. [2]<p>The variables are how badly does the employer want to avoid negative press and an EEOC investigation. On the other hand, lawyers wouldn&#x27;t take a case on contingency unless the litigant had a chance. In fact, it&#x27;s a litmus test. Don&#x27;t sue for discrimination if no lawyer will take the case on contingency. For example, Ellen Pao had to pay for her own lawyers. I chatted with my employment lawyer friends and they said her case was weak.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eeoc.gov&#x2F;laws&#x2F;types&#x2F;sexual_harassment.cfm" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eeoc.gov&#x2F;laws&#x2F;types&#x2F;sexual_harassment.cfm</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eeoc.gov&#x2F;search&#x2F;search?q=sexual&amp;btnG=Search&amp;entqr=0&amp;ud=1&amp;sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&amp;output=xml_no_dtd&amp;oe=UTF-8&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;client=press_frontend&amp;proxystylesheet=press_frontend&amp;site=PressReleases&amp;filter=0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.eeoc.gov&#x2F;search&#x2F;search?q=sexual&amp;btnG=Search&amp;entq...</a>