It's worth reconsidering your viewpoint when...

... you are in a privileged position in the science community, and refuse to take a woman seriously and instead completely belittle her experience with unwanted sexual attention (and her extremely rational response, I might add).

Needless to say I'm interested in the recent hubub in the "skeptic" (atheist) community, in which a female blogger received widespread criticism (including from Richard Dawkins) for calling attention to the sexual harassment she experienced at a recent conference. The skeptic community (which is overwhelmingly male, I believe) seems to be reeling with questions like "then when is it appropriate to hit on women?" Many of these questions and conflicts seem to apply to the academic community at large.

I was discussing this with a friend, and I sometimes feel that academia, among other things (conferences, the work structure in general) are institutions that were set up in the absence of women's participation in them. Thus sometimes it feels like a constant struggle to "break in" to these institutions and the "boys clubs" that often inhabit them. So don't make it more difficult for us. Use a little more thought before you act, and reconsider that your viewpoint is the only one that's important.

It's not fair to just ignore sexuality; it's a part of human nature that I believe if we address more openly and set new norms for male/female relationships in our post-public/private-sphere society, it will lead to empowerment of all genders.

The final thing worth reconsidering is what you might think of "sexual harassment" as: Just because something's not physical doesn't make it not painfully uncomfortable, intimidating, and contributes to the overall context of fear that women often live their everyday lives in.