I don't think what this guy did was even slightly morally wrong, but I would say it sounds unprofessional trying to milk your social status and social capital for physical affection.
But then again, so is hopping to the press because you found 1 sleazy man out there and trying to milk the cultural moment for a few views. (not that one cancels the other)
I don't consider it a problem– she very quickly discovered this guy had zero interest in helping her without using her. So she blocked him, which was the obvious next step.
Posting the conversation publicly? Her prerogative.
Like he said: he didn't break any laws and he doesn't think communicating with people this way and having that become public will cause damage to him.
Does that mean there's an institutional bias against girls becoming entrepreneurs? Or lesbians becoming entrepreneurs? Or 18-year-olds becoming entrepreneurs?
If there is, this situation isn't an example of it. It's just an example of a guy who took a message from a young nobody on the off chance he could score.
I think you have to be very very careful when you start labelling things as moral or otherwise.
Not to nearly the same extent, no. If someone has power over you and you refuse them sex, they could potentially do you all kinds of harm. If someone is very sexually attractive but has no power over you, then the worst that they can do is leave you a bit sexually frustrated.
In other words, being offered sex with strings by an attractive person is hardly as bad as being threatened by a powerful person.
>I think you have to be very very careful when you start labelling things as moral or otherwise.
Behavior that is clearly wrong is clearly wrong. The danger lies in not calling it out and allowing it to become normalized.
I only mean to say that typically people meet potential mates/partners in school and at work. Now, taking a text based conversation to that level is definitely wrong. But I would propose that actually testing for interest in the workplace isn't inherently wrong, only in so much that it's a matter of intent, extent and explicitness that isn't always easy to judge.
Personally, I'm of the mind that a soft ask about dinner/drinks/coffee sometime, and if a decline, then one more ask a few weeks later is probably okay, as long as it ends on a second ask. The reason I say this is only because sometimes a person doesn't feel comfortable if they don't know the person well enough yet, so best not to close the door right away.
On the flip side, this was very explicit without any of the contextual cues you get in person, especially with a soft rejection, is definitely over the top. Never be overtly sexual or dominating over someone in the workplace.
Well she blocked him before it got further.
I think men will always have to fight the urge to not "go for it" with women they find attractive. In a way, we're kinda hard-wired to do that. That doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't fight the urge and be decent to women - especially now that women everywhere are speaking up and letting us know how this kind of behavior makes them feel.
Addendum:
The first reactions to my post are pretty negative. I can see why (over-generalization) but on-balance I don't feel like my post is negative. The core message is - be decent. If the volume of women's complaints are a measure, I'd venture to say there are a lot of men out there that struggle to do so. If you're not one of those guys- awesome . But a lot of dudes are and the first step to getting them to treat women well is to vocalize the expectation that they do so and maybe while we're at it, not trying to shame them into decency by pointing out how awesome you are and, by contrast, what horrible human beings they are for having unacceptable feelings.
As a man, I am offended by this stereotype.
It takes no more effort to not make sexual advances in an inappropriate context (even when there is an attractive woman around) than it does to not assault and rob vulnerable passers-by on the street.
Which, I suppose I now must add for clarity, also does not take any effort worthy of the name.
Thus because we are conditioned to sometimes be indecent, it does in some circumstances require effort to override it.
There's a time and place for everything. "going for it" every time you meet a woman is just immature and needs to be corrected.
> I think men will always have to fight the urge to not "go for it" with women they find attractive.
For you, maybe. Not for me, and not for a lot of men. Please don't typical-mind-fallacy the rest of us who don't need to expend effort to not be a douchebag.
Some people--a lot of people--just don't have those thoughts. That doesn't make them better or worse than people who do; both can do good, or harmful things. I think the point of GP's comment was that there are many of people out there who simply don't feel that way.
There are a lot of ways that might play out: they might not be attracted to others until someone is attracted to them; they might be attracted, but have no automatic desire to turn that into action/hitting on people; they might not be attracted to others period, et cetera.
> The urge to hit on a woman you find attractive ... makes [you] a straight/bi male
You're still assuming the two go hand in hand. Your impressions might be confirmation/selection bias: people who don't have the urge to hit on people they find attractive are going to be less obvious to you (insofar as they are competition for people you find attractive), and are also likely less inclined to jump into public discussions on the subject, given that a lack of sexual aggression is, in many demographics/situations, a basis for shaming.
Edit: punctuation.
I have lots of lurid thoughts. I also have enough respect and self control to not blurt them out. I've managed to interact with many women without overtly showing that I find them sexually appealing. Remarkable in this age of entitlement, isn't it?
If you want to indulge in more, that's sad, but don't project that desire onto anyone else.
Here's the thing: this is called projection. You're speaking for yourself, not men in general.
Wow. That's blatant sexist bigotry.
Can you imagine if someone said the same thing about women and what the reaction on HN would be?
She messaged him on Facebook, that's not a professional environment, it's social. He took it as such, his messages weren't inappropriate. Labelling it as 'sexism' is a little much, it's normal human interaction.
