UK High Court Rules Calling a Man ‘Bald’ Can Be Sexual Harassment

A UK High Court has ruled that calling a man “bald” can constitute sexual harassment, setting a precedent that links the term to gender discrimination under equality law.

The case began in 2019, when electrician Tony Finn accused his boss at the British Bung Company of harassment after allegedly being called a “stupid bald c***.” While the language itself was offensive, the panel of judges zeroed in on the word “bald” as the discriminatory element.

Why Baldness Was Seen as Gender-Related

The ruling, led by Judge Jonathan Brain, argued that the term “bald” is “inherently related to gender,” given that baldness is significantly more common in men than women. Therefore, using it as an insult toward a man could breach UK equality laws.

The panel of three judges—reportedly all bald themselves—stated there is a “connection between the word ‘bald’ and the protected characteristic of sex.” In their view, making derogatory comments about baldness in the workplace is akin to mocking someone over gender-specific traits.

Four Years to Reach Judgment

The Employment Appeals Tribunal’s full judgment was only published this year, four years after Finn’s initial complaint. Finn is now expected to receive compensation for the alleged harassment.

Public Reaction: Shock, Humor, and Debate

The decision has quickly gone viral on social media, sparking both laughter and serious discussion.

Some users dismissed it as absurd: “This is silly. We should all be supportive of those dealing with appearance changes, but it seems silly to waste court time on this.”

Others saw the logic: “If people cannot joke about something a woman cannot control, then why should they be able to joke about something a man cannot control?”

The case has raised broader questions about where to draw the line between workplace banter and unlawful harassment. While many agree that targeting someone’s physical appearance is unprofessional, not everyone believes the “bald” insult rises to the level of a legal violation.

Implications for Workplace Conduct

While this ruling applies specifically to UK employment law, it serves as a reminder for global employers: comments that may seem like lighthearted teasing can carry legal risks if they relate to protected characteristics.

In practice, this could encourage companies to expand anti-harassment training to cover appearance-based comments—especially those tied to gender, age, or health.