Do you think this is sexual misconduct?

Well you can already tell that by the way society as a whole see's the situation that if the male exposes himself to the female it's going to be much more frowned upon than the same situation in reverse (i.e. female exposing herself to the male), even though technically it's the same.

but at the same time I can see why society frowns more upon the male exposing to a female than the reserve because of guys being physically stronger etc. so when it happens to the female it seems like it's much worse than if the reverse happens and being people just kind of assume guys will just about always like it if it happened to them kind of mentality, it tends to be far less serious. so it's sorta like things can get in hot water quickly with the male (male exposing himself to a female) where as the female (female exposing herself to a male) no one really seems to care all that much because you don't really think of females raping males but since the reserve tends to happen people are quick to flip out etc. I am sure you get the gist of it.

but to get back to the OP's described scenario's... given the way many in society think, it seems they just sort of assume if you go back to their house that 'sex' is likely going to happen, or a decent chance of it, which may not always be the case. so putting aside any power over the other person like the OP described and just two average people in those situations I can see how someone could consider it out of line but at the same time the one exposing themselves don't mind taking a risk on the chance they could have sex and I figure it's not the end of the world as long as it goes not get physical which by the OP's definition it does not get physical. so since it never reaches a physical point the one who see's the other person exposing themselves could basically just decline etc.

but come to think of that general situation with barely knowing the other person and then immediately goes back to their place for sex not long after meeting might be a bit of a red flag that unless both people don't care about a relationship and are in it for sex chances are they can't be trusted if they are that quick to jump into sex with whoever they meet.

so I guess the exposing thing is kinda of risky but at the same time it's not totally the end of the world either because if the one who exposes themselves keeps on pressuring one who clearly says they don't like it etc then I could easily see how your definitely starting to cross the line at that point and could get even worse depending on how things go. then you got those in a position of power which makes it look even worse like the case with Harvey Weinstein where he just goes on pressuring them again and again after they basically rejected him but where probably semi-afraid to firmly say no and and if he did not stop, they could leave etc, because potential damage to their career etc. so I could easily see how one would say he was leveraging his power over them for his own sexual satisfaction.

but ever since the Harvey Weinstein thing came out in the open you are seeing a lot of claims. but personally... while I assume some are legitimate, there has to be some that are mostly a non-issue and those sexual harassment claims will do more harm to the accused than the accuser experienced (especially those situations where it might have happened a couple of times or so with language and then gets burned for it. because if that still goes on and on and was told to stop and still continues I can see you got to draw the line at some point and make a claim). because it does not take much for someone to claim 'sexual harassment' and having that label put on you seems to be quite damaging even if it's a mild/petty thing. that's why I don't think people should be claiming this unless it's something clearly out of line or they have been warned multiple times to stop say someone was talking dirty to someone and they did not like it and were asked multiple times and still continue to do it. basically I am just saying that before filing a claim of sexual harassment I would give the person a reasonable chance to stop first before pressing things. but obviously if things start getting physical that can be potentially serious the first time depending on what happens etc.

also, looking up 'sexual misconduct' seems like a good term in reference to Harvey Weinstein as it says... "Sexual misconduct is misconduct of a sexual nature. The term may be used to condemn an act, but in some jurisdictions it has also a legal meaning. In legal sense, for a person in a position of authority it includes in particular any sexual activity between him or her and one of his or her subordinates."

so after reading that, without checking, I imagine there is different definitions for 'Sexual Harassment' and 'Sexual Misconduct' etc. my guess is the 'Harassment' is more language and 'Misconduct' might be when people expose themselves etc but is not rape level either.

with all of that said... I guess where one draws the line could vary a bit from person to person but just for me personally when it comes to language I would not be too concerned over this even though one can only go so far here before it needs to stop otherwise the one using the language has it coming. but I can see how some shady people out there will claim sexual harassment and the like over next to nothing just to screw with someone or try to extract some $$$ from people etc.

just some random thoughts.

p.s. for the record... people should not be having sex until they are legitimately married because it's a serious sin to do so according to the moral guide of the world (i.e. the Catholic church). but it seems most people don't adhere to these standards anymore (which are set in place by God basically). once someone goes out of this standard it's not surprising things tend to go bad for people.

Wrong in all cases the OP described. The reason it is wrong in all the cases they hardly new each other.

That being said if a women invited me to her house and came out with a opened robe it would not disturb me one bit.

I feel sorry for Baby Boomers because they grew up in a time when it was more permissible to be sexually upfront. Anyone who's ever gone to a public gym has seen that one person walking around naked with no sense of modesty. Bet you money that 9/10 of those people were born prior to 1965. Boomers just have a different sense of sexual boundaries, and now their careers are being ruined because of a swift change in social perception.

Also, the first wave of feminism involved women taking control of their own sexuality. Women were finally able to publicly want sex, to enjoy sex. Women were shedding the "good girl" image and were exploring their sexual feelings. The '60s, after all, was an era known for "free love." I'm sure men got used to being able to be upfront about the idea of a sexual hook up, and now that behavior isn't acceptable.

I don't condone repeated unwanted advances, and I don't condone inappropriate touching in the workplace (inappropriate primarily being the grabbing of genitals), but on the other hand, you don't know if an advance is unwanted until you advance.

As for appearing naked in front of others, it all depends on context for me. What era? What led to it? What were the motivations? Was there a sense of invitation, even if implicit? In some cases, I can see it as inappropriate, and in others I can see it as rather innocent.

In some sense, I don't get what the issue is. It's just a naked body. If you don't want to see it, let them know it. If you aren't willing to do that, then keep it to yourself. Louis CK clearly has a problem. He's said so himself. I wish we were more concerned as a society in helping him than destroying his career.

I know it's a complex subject, but overall, I'd like to see more willingness to take context into account.

Of course it is.