; and (ii) conduct based on multiple protected characteristics (such as sex and race) viewed in totality, rather than in isolation. (C) The factors specified in this subparagraph are among the factors to be considered in determining whether conduct constitutes workplace harassment and are not meant to be exhaustive. No one of those factors shall be considered to be determinative in establishing whether conduct constitutes workplace harassment. Such factors are each of the following: (i) The frequency of the conduct. (ii) The duration of the conduct. (iii) The location where the conduct occurred. (iv) The number of individuals engaged in the conduct. (v) The nature of the conduct, which may include physical, verbal, pictorial, or visual conduct, and conduct that occurs in person or is transmitted, such as electronically. (vi) Whether the conduct is threatening. (vii) Any power differential between the alleged harasser and the person allegedly harassed. (viii) Any use of epithets, slurs, or other conduct that is humiliating or degrading. (ix) Whether the conduct reflects stereotypes about individuals in the protected class involved. (4) In determining, for purposes of this subsection, whether conduct constitutes workplace harassment, conduct may be workplace harassment regardless of whether, for example— (A) the complaining party is not the individual being harassed; (B) the complaining party acquiesced or otherwise submitted to, or participated in, the conduct; (C) the conduct is also experienced by others outside the protected class involved; (D) the complaining party was able to continue carrying out duties and responsibilities of the party's job despite the conduct; (E) the conduct did not cause a tangible injury or psychological injury; or (F) the conduct occurred outside of the workplace. . (2) Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Section 102(b) of the Americans with Disabilities Act ( 42 U.S.C. 12112(b) ) is amended— (A) in paragraph (6), by striking and at the end