Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
I Had Sex with an Investor and I Am Sorry (medium.com)
13 points by zonotope 136 days ago | hide | past | web | 6 comments | favorite



I knew being hot got me in the door and after that I had to make that work for me.

The timing of this is incredible. I am being trashed elsewhere for commenting on implied sex and being called a misogynist, etc. and here is this woman admitting that implied sex is exactly how she opened doors.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14715003


[flagged]


You're being trashed because you wrote an article implying that a woman forfeits her right to her body and physical safety when she accepts favors from men in the business world.

No, that isn't what I wrote about at all.


[flagged]


These are things that you bring up. You are basically reading into things based on the fact that your particular opinion was not repeated.

Why not post your own opinion in a blog online, thereby exposing yourself to anyone that disagrees with you?


I'm not reading into it, I'm addressing explicit statements. That's why I quoted from the article and directly refuted the quoted text.

I haven't written a "no means no" article because a million others exist, and I don't see any reason ask for dissent on that opinion.

My comments certainly are available for discussion, anyway. They're on a discussion board here, which you've used to argue that my format is wrong without actually addressing the content of my argument.


Mz never questioned that no means no, only that events before Cheryl finally said "no" could have played out differently if she were faster to react to his pretty obvious sexual moves. And that it is unclear why he believed that she would want to sleep with him in the first place and was surprised when she refused and felt offended.

Feel free to defend Cheryl by saying that she was worried he would refuse to finance her if she kicked him out, even though in fact she ultimately did kick him out and he still signed the deal regardless. Even though tolerating sexual advances in expectation of financial gain could be seen as borderline prostitution by some - maybe she really didn't want it to be that way, we get it.

But don't pretend that she wouldn't have been much safer if she were more assertive from the beginning.


No, you quoted statements, but addressed your own interpretation of them. That is not "explicit". The format, as you put it, concerns the content, so implying that I'm tone policing is a cop out too.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: