She and complains one during an out-of-city review, Waggoner shared with her to get a journey back again to their own lodge away from a bank staff since the he would feel aside inspecting assets

Penry in addition to cites research indicating you to definitely Waggoner played pranks on her. You to definitely prank the guy played half dozen so you’re able to ten times, mostly when you are she is actually pregnant. Predicated on Penry, Waggoner carry out sneak up about her, set his practical their own arms and you can loudly state their own label to frighten their unique. Additional a couple pranks was indeed one-time incidents. One in Summer 1990 in which Waggoner knocked on her behalf lodge door and hid, together with most other in which the guy got rid of their hand regarding steering controls when you’re driving a motor vehicle in which Penry because the a traveler. Within her effect, Penry states one to she will not define this type of acts as «sexual serves by itself,» however, argues it still create sexual harassment given that «they illustrate Waggoner’s men popularity over women teams into the attentive factors.» The newest court disagrees. Penry merchandise zero facts, except that conjecture, these particular situations had been motivated from the sexual animus otherwise gender prejudice. In her own deposition, Penry states she did not know what inspired such as for example perform because of the Waggoner. Penry plus does not provide judge service for her «male popularity» idea, together with court is not persuaded in order to construe just what seems to end up being gender-natural buffoonery since the a demonstration away from «men dominance» over «captive» women personnel. The reality that Penry might have been «separated and you will by yourself» within her works cubicle otherwise «captive» inside the Waggoner’s car cannot transfer gender-basic pranks to the carry out motivated because of the sexual animus otherwise gender bias.

Penry along with opposes defendants’ realization wisdom activity that have proof Waggoner’s carry out during the aside-of-town performs assignments. Penry now offers no facts these particular symptoms resulted away from gender prejudice or animus. Quite the opposite, they look getting gender simple, while the perform Waggoner’s comments, throughout the a corporate trip, regarding the their marital difficulties. » New legal discovers no quality to that particular disagreement. As well, Penry’s declare that the latest project to visit having Waggoner comprises sexual harassment is even unavailing. Without facts on the contrary, management choices, regardless if injudicious, is almost certainly not classified due to the fact because of gender. Pick Ballou v. *839 School regarding Kansas Scientific Ctr., 871 F. Supp. 1384, 1390 (D.Kan.1994).

Penry complains you to definitely in February 1990, Waggoner failed to let their lift heavy boxes throughout an on-web site evaluation out-of a bank hence she needed to consume dining that have Waggoner while in the out-of-city monitors

Penry next opposes defendants’ conclusion view activity by providing proof Waggoner’s unpleasant statements and you may outbursts. Penry complains you to Waggoner tend to yelled at the Betsworth getting their particular errors, which he demeaned Betsworth trailing their own straight back, and you may said that every woman throughout the safekeeping department have been «dumb» hence his wife are «unaware.» Penry together with complains about Waggoner’s use of the label «gals» to mention on feamales in his institution. Betsworth affirmed you to definitely Waggoner yelled in the her and you may she yelled within your, but she never believed he was abusive so you’re able to their. When you are particularly antics get contribute to an offensive if you don’t «hostile» ecosystem, there’s no facts that the hostility derived from specific gender-founded animosity otherwise prejudice. The latest 10th Circuit provides held you to definitely problem out-of a keen employee’s works, without some type of gender-certain resource, isnt gender-depending run. Terrible, 53 F.three-dimensional on 1545-46. At exactly the same time, «dumb» are good gender simple name because it can apply similarly so you’re able to one another sexes. Id. at the 1543; Young v. Finish line, Inc the knockout site., 1995 WL 472783 at * 5 (D.Kan.). So it need also relates to Waggoner’s use of the identity «ignorant.» Significantly, Penry stated in their deposition that Waggoner’s utilization of the label «dumb» to mention to your feamales in the latest safekeeping company wasn’t because of sexual animus, however, was a good example of his general tendency from excusing their individual mistakes by the progressing blame with other events. In the long run, Penry gift ideas zero research you to Waggoner’s utilization of the name «gals» stemmed out of sexual animus. Considering Waggoner, the guy made use of the identity off behavior, not-out out of sexual animus. More over, it seems that it was not the term itself that upset Penry, but it was utilized by Waggoner. Penry reported that she was not offended whenever her prior female management described Penry or any other guarantee company team just like the «their particular girls.»