If you're worried about mutual protection, it would seem that you don't trust the person.
You also seem to imply that harassment is more about having opportunities to harass, rather than a person wanting to commit harassment and waiting for the right opportunity. If someone wants to do something, I figure they could be very patient in waiting for their time.
Also, how would you know until everyone is already uncomfortable? The only way it sounds like to fix that is to trust no one, ever, and have everyone travel in groups of at least 3?
Your conclusion sounds completely absurd, but I agree with you. In fact, even walking around in groups of 3 is dangerous if you keep talking because what you said might be interpreted as offensive and all 3 people would hear it.
I guess I don't understand what you would propose as a solution...
Current situation is obviously not working.
Right now the following is happening:
1) Ladies get harassed by those with more power because it's a way to get dates. They could potentially lose their job/opportunity if they disagree to go on a date. This leads to 2.
2) Men get false accusations because women do not currently have to provide proof for low rank employee harassment cases.
3) Culture is changing in such a way that more and more things are considered offensive to say.
4) People are choosing to have fewer 1-on-1 (or at all) interactions with coworkers because of these issues. It's unfair to discriminate against just some coworkers because you might suspect they will be trouble. As a result, you might be forced to not have 1-on-1s. Might be forced to give up all non-strictly-work-related conversations with everyone at work.
At my current work, all of us are now walking as a group to lunch in silence. It is extremely awkward but it seems like this is the only possible outcome of such a system.
I guess my own current solution is to leave US/Bay Area for basically any other country. I rather not deal with these dangers since I want to have friends at work and any non-work related conversation might be considered offensive by someone in a group of 20 or so people.
Legitimately curious: if you walk to lunch in silence, why even go to lunch together? What would you talk about? Purely work? I'm sorry for you, that sounds like a really unfun workplace with bad culture if it's as bad as you say. Why stay there if it's that bad?
I think one aspect that makes it workable is that it's about the power imbalance, not simply being alone with someone. It's ok to date a coworker. It's not ok to express or receive interest in someone who works under you. So it's not that everyone needs to travel in groups of 3, but rather that the people who have power over you are held to a different standard.
You also seem to imply that harassment is more about having opportunities to harass, rather than a person wanting to commit harassment and waiting for the right opportunity. If someone wants to do something, I figure they could be very patient in waiting for their time.
Also, how would you know until everyone is already uncomfortable? The only way it sounds like to fix that is to trust no one, ever, and have everyone travel in groups of at least 3?