The one short-coming of the MeToo movement, as I see reflected here, is the huge spectrum from violating one’s personal space to violent rape. The law draws one line as to what is never acceptable. There is another legal line between what is acceptable between one in authority (teacher, police, etc.). There is usually a third line many of us live with as to what is acceptable in the workplace.
Much of this conversation has slipped back and for between different definitions, levels and understanding of unwanted sexual advances. I wonder how much disagreement would there actually be between two people if the terms never changed.
So, what is the actual criteria that we should morally use? I would suggest that the proper level of caution, the line which should no be crossed, is wherever the person who is being approached wants it. The one approaching her (or him) should err on the side of caution. The one approaching must be a little understanding of misunderstandings. And finally, if some woman does not like that men are having to become two cautious for their tastes, don’t blame the women who are simply afraid and uncomfortable. Take the initiative yourself, if you must. That’s my opinion, not that I will need this for me ever again.