harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment and the harassment was directed at him because of his sex. Not all sexual harassment that is directed at an individual because of his or her sex is actionable. Title VII does not attempt “to purge the workplace of vulgarity.” Baskerville v. Culligan Int’l Co., 50 F.3d 428, 430 (7th Cir.1995). As the Supreme Court recognized in Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., - U.S.-,-, 114 S.Ct. 367, 370, 126 L.Ed.2d 295 (1993), “Conduct that is not severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment — an environment that a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive — is beyond Title VII’s purview.” See also Meritor, 477 U.S. at 67, 106 S.Ct. at 2405 (<HOLDING>). In deciding whether the harassment to which
recognizing that conduct amounts to actionable sexual harassment only when it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victims employment and create an abusive working environment  alteration in original citation omitted holding single incident of sexual harassment was neither sufficiently pervasive nor severe to constitute a hostile work environment holding that severe and pervasive conduct is so permeated with discriminatory intimidation ridicule and insult that it alters the conditions of the victims employment and creates an abusive working environment holding that harassing conduct not sufficiently severe and pervasive where conduct would not have affected the work environment of a reasonable person holding that a single incident in which a coworker squeezed an employees buttocks was not sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the conditions of the victims employment and create an abusive working environment