Final answer:
Activities or actions undertaken for a proper military or governmental purpose, such as combat survival training, are not considered harassment as long as they align with national security and defense and do not target protected characteristics. It is crucial to differentiate between necessary training for service and inappropriate conduct that could be deemed harassment. Legal and international standards, such as the Geneva Conventions, must be upheld in all contexts, including the military.
Step-by-step explanation:
Activities or actions undertaken for a proper military or governmental purpose, such as combat survival training, are not generally considered harassment. Harassment is defined as unwanted conduct related to protected classes such as race, national origin, religion, or age, which creates a hostile or offensive work environment or leads to adverse employment outcomes. Military training programs are designed to prepare individuals for service and are pursuant to national security and defense rather than personal attributes. However, if the training includes behavior that could fall under these definitions without clear, justifiable military or governmental purpose, it could be considered harassment. For instance, unwelcome sexual advances or offensive remarks about a person's religious beliefs in non-essential scenarios can constitute harassment.
Specific examples, such as the interrogation techniques used on detainees at Guantanamo Bay or the use of "unlawful combatant" designations, may be contested from a human rights perspective. Still, these are distinct from harassment in the civilian workplace context. The military and governmental activities must always uphold the law and international treaties, like the Geneva Conventions.
Harassment in the Context of Military Training-
A clear line exists between necessary and lawful military training activities and inappropriate conduct. For example, offensive behavior based on protected characteristics that goes beyond the scope of military necessities could be deemed harassment. However, rigorous and demanding physical or psychological aspects of military training crucial for combat survival would not automatically meet the standard for harassment if they serve a legitimate governmental purpose.