Penry contends that bank’s take a trip and eating arrangements “offered a ready arena getting Waggoner’s sexual run

She as well as complains one to during an out-of-urban area inspection, Waggoner informed her to obtain an experience back to their particular resort from a lender staff member given that he’d become aside examining assets

Penry together with alludes to research demonstrating that Waggoner played pranks on her behalf. You to definitely prank he played half dozen so you’re able to ten times, mainly if you are she is expecting. Centered on Penry, Waggoner do sneak-up behind their unique, put his on the job her arms and you will loudly state their own title to frighten their own. Others several pranks was indeed one-time situations. One in June 1990 in which Waggoner kicked on her behalf lodge home immediately after which hid, therefore the other in which the guy removed their hand from the direction controls when you’re driving a car or truck in which Penry once the a passenger. Inside her reaction, Penry states one to she does not characterize these acts as “sexual acts per se,” but contends it nevertheless compensate sexual harassment as “it illustrate Waggoner’s men popularity more than women teams into the attentive items.” The newest courtroom disagrees. Penry gift ideas no research, apart from speculation, why these facts were passionate from the sexual animus otherwise gender prejudice. In her own deposition, Penry says she failed to know what driven like make of the Waggoner. Penry including does not give legal service to have their unique “men prominence” idea, together with legal isnt convinced in order to construe exactly what seems to become gender-basic buffoonery just like the a presentation off “men popularity” over “captive” feminine personnel. The fact that Penry may have been “remote and you can alone” in her own work cubicle otherwise “captive” when you look at the Waggoner’s auto does not move gender-neutral pranks toward make passionate of the sexual animus otherwise gender bias.

Penry in addition to opposes defendants’ summary view action having proof of Waggoner’s make during the out-of-city really works assignments. Penry now offers no facts these particular attacks lead regarding gender bias otherwise animus. To the contrary, they look are gender natural, because the would Waggoner’s statements, during the a corporate excursion, throughout the his relationship issues. ” The newest courtroom discovers zero quality to that dispute. Additionally, Penry’s point out that the brand new assignment to visit that have Waggoner comprises sexual harassment is additionally unavailing. As opposed to evidence on the contrary, government decisions, though injudicious, may possibly not be distinguisheded given that because of gender. Discover Ballou v. *839 School out of Ohio Scientific Ctr., 871 F. Supp. 1384, 1390 (D.Kan.1994).

Penry complains that when you look at the February 1990, Waggoner didn’t help their particular elevator heavier boxes throughout an on-webpages evaluation off a bank and therefore she must consume dining that have Waggoner while in the out-of-area inspections

Penry 2nd opposes defendants’ summary view action through providing proof Waggoner’s unpleasant statements and you may outbursts. Penry complains you to definitely Waggoner tend to yelled at the Betsworth for their errors, he demeaned Betsworth about their straight back, and you can mentioned that all women on the safekeeping company have been “dumb” and that his partner was “unaware.” Penry plus complains from the Waggoner’s use of the identity “gals” to mention towards the feamales in his agency. Betsworth testified you to Waggoner yelled in the their and you will she yelled during the him, however, she never ever believed he had been abusive to their own. While you are instance antics get join an offensive if not “hostile” environment, there’s absolutely no proof that this aggression produced by some gender-oriented animosity otherwise bias. The latest 10th Routine keeps kept you to definitely grievance of an employee’s functions, without some type of gender-particular source, is not gender-established run. Disgusting, 53 F.three dimensional at 1545-46. At the same time, “dumb” was good gender basic label as it can use equally so you can each other sexes. Id. at 1543; More youthful v. Finish line, Inc., 1995 WL 472783 within * 5 (D.Kan.). That it cause including pertains to Waggoner’s like this use of the name “unaware.” Somewhat, Penry made in her deposition one to Waggoner’s use of the term “dumb” to mention on the feamales in the new safekeeping institution was not on account of sexual animus, but are a typical example of his general inclination off excusing their own mistakes of the moving on fault some other functions. Eventually, Penry merchandise no research that Waggoner’s use of the title “gals” stemmed out-of sexual animus. Predicated on Waggoner, he used the title out-of practice, not out from sexual animus. More over, it appears that it wasn’t the word by itself one upset Penry, however, that it was utilized by Waggoner. Penry stated that she was not offended whenever their particular prior feminine management regarded Penry or other equity agencies professionals because the “her girls.”