Why had she written that blog post banning sexual harassment?
“There are so many new investors coming into the Valley from New York and everywhere else, and we just wanted to lay that out there,” Livingston said. “The overt sexual harassment you read about — the men who say they don’t invest in women — I can’t force them to invest in women, but I can say you can’t sexually harass our founders. And so that’s what I did.”
I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this is "hitting on" her. Maybe he had those intentions, but this conversation doesn't prove it. The Match.com stuff is sketchy, but he didn't say anything rude or sexual. Maybe the tone was lost in translation to text?
Ok, say he was hitting on her. Is that wrong? Is that bad? Would it be different if the genders were reversed?