So it's true that everyone who disagrees with you is sexist? I dont think you mean that. Do you mean sexism should be addressed? There I agree, but that doesn't mean that every other point of view is sexist. And thats exactly on of the problems these kinds of discussion face. Every opposing argument is dismissed as "sexist" and not even taken slightly in account. And thats why some feminists are seen as fanatic- they refuse to take other points of view seriously, on the ground that it is sexist anyway. I think discussions don't work when you are aren't ready to accept other points of view, or at least take them serious.
Calling someone "mysoginistic" when he calmly and reasonably rational commented on a gender related issue, even if you dont agree, is not in bad taste. It's taking a dump on every feminist who worked on enabling women to be able to discuss these issues and be taken serious with that.
What ideas do you think are being suppressed here? The idea that this isn't a problem? The idea that we shouldn't do anything about it, because idiots will be idiots or jerks will be jerks?
The fact is that accusing the whistleblower of being impolite is just another barrier thrown up by thin-skinned people who cannot admit they've been wrong. The objective of calling it "bad style" or a "label used to suppress ideas" is itself to suppress the idea that something wrong has happened and must be addressed.
Nobody is suppressing ideas in this scenario. You are free to be a sexist jerk if you want to. However, people absolutely have the right to call you out on that behavior and statements made to that effect. If you are implying that calling out shitty behavior is itself a shitty behavior, then you might want to reexamine why you are supporting the behavior of sexists and chauvinists.
Nobody is? Huh? GP implies pretty heavily that anyone who disagrees with the article is sexist. That is suppressing opposing ideas by using unfounded accusations like sexism.
Calling out shitty behaviour is OK, and should be done, so hopefully people will change their behaviour or other come to realise such behaviour is not acceptable. However, taking the stance that everyone, who disagrees even on exactly how or why the behaviour is unacceptable, is sexist, is shitty behaviour in itself.
We're not supporting the behaviour in the article (at least, I hope so). What is happening here is that people disagree with the article exactly why it's not OK. And that this behaviour is not a symptom of endemic sexism in software. So in se, I don't even think the article (and GP) are completely wrong, only that I disagree that this is sexist.
Your style of reasoning and arguing is very familiar to me, and it's not unique to feminists. If you're unable to make compromises, or look at an issue from another point of view, you will stand alone soon enough. Nobody is asking you to give up your ideals, only that you do not call people, who in essence agree with you but maybe for the wrong reasons, sexists and chauvinists.