indicate any other incidents which might be construed to be sexually harassing behavior. See Sexual HarassmentySex Discrimination/Hostile Work Environment and Retaliation Complaint Form & Questionnaire (Exh. 22 to Moore Aff.). In essence, then, Plaintiff Lamb complains of general flirtatious behavior and two specific comments over the course of two and a half years of her employment with the City. Such behavior does not rise to the level of actionable sexual harassment. As the Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit have reiterated, “simple teasing, offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to discriminatory changes in the ‘terms and conditions of employment.’ ” Shepherd, 168 F.3d at 874 (citing Faragher v. City of Boca Rat F.3d 803, 806 (5th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Viewed objectively, none of Peterson’s
holding that samesex sexual harassment claims are not actionable under title vii holding that sexual harassment need not take the form of sexual advances or other explicitly sexual conduct in order to be actionable under title vii holding that sexual harassment is a personal injury tort holding that samcscx sexual harassment claims are actionable under title vii holding that supervisors questions made two and three times a week about plaintiffs sexual activities constituted actionable sexual harassment