I just think that things have reached a sad point in society if a man has to REALLY try to inhibit, in a friendly and subtle way, a woman from sexually-harassing(??) HIM if HE doesn't want to get sued down the road.
Here's the sad fact of what happens (or at least happened in a lot of cases in the 1990s, companies are starting to take a hard line today):
Cute young secretary in a big company gets fired, because she always puts too many "Qs" in Cincinnati (or whatever) and gets a heavy-duty attitude about doing anything at all. So standard procedure was to sue for sexual harassment, make up things if you have to, and then sit around a wait for your check for $5,000 or 10,000 when the company figures out that a lawyer would cost more, and the company doesn't need the negative PR. It's called a "nuisance suit".
But companies today, as far as I can get the drift, are taking a hard line and actually carrying the proceedings through. The new idea is that they will pay more for lawyers in the individual case, but it will discourage nuisance suits in the future, and plaintiff's lawyers (especially the variety that takes on cases without evident merit - and, uhh, yes, they exist LOL) eventually won't take these cases to a great degree if the contingency fee consistently turns out to be "0 dollars".