權力結構是性騷擾行爲的必要不充分條件嗎？

Is the Power Structure a Certainly Need Insufficiency Condition for Sexual Harassment？

相較於美國將性騷擾建立在性別歧視基礎上而言，我國的性騷擾立法更傾向於歐洲將性騷擾規制歸結於人格尊嚴保障的模式，但這並不意味著我國的性騷擾立法沒有關注到特定權力結構之於性騷擾認定的重要性。也正因爲如此，我國反性騷擾立法擺脫了作爲必要條件的權力結構或者說性別歧視問題，從而具有更强的針對性和可適應性。但其代價是縮小了性騷擾規範的適用範圍，比如美國法律語境中的敵意環境性騷擾就難以被有效規制。簡而言之，在我國的性騷擾立法當中，權力結構並沒有改變性騷擾的本質，其只是會對性騷擾的司法認定標準以及法律責任承擔産生具體的影響，如《民法典》中增設的單位責任便是對性騷擾背後權力結構問題的正面回應。

Compared with the United States, which bases sexual harassment on gender discrimination, China’s sexual harassment legislation is more inclined to attribute the regulation of sexual harassment to the protection of human dignity in Europe, but this does not mean that China’s sexual harassment legislation does not pay attention to the importance of specific power structure in the identification of sexual harassment. For this reason, China’s sexual harassment legislation gets rid of the power structure or gender discrimination as a necessary condition, so it has stronger pertinence and adaptability. However, the cost is to narrow the scope of application of sexual harassment norms. For example, in the context of American law, sexual harassment in the hostile environment is difficult to be effectively regulated. In short, the power structure does not change the essence of sexual harassment, but will have a specific impact on the judicial recognition standard and legal responsibility of sexual harassment，the unit responsibility added in the civil code is a positive response to the power structure behind sexual harassment.