Well, up until the 'he leaned in and kissed me, I told him not interested' part, I don't think it's terribly controversial to suggest no crime had happened. Had it just ended with that, no big deal. It's just the "jamming his hand into my underwear" part that seems to approach/cross the line. A plausible interpretation of that is "touched my butt", which while unlikely to win the girl over, I don't see as something deserving of being "locked up", or, perhaps worse, having his career ruined as it surely now has.
I should add, in all honesty, I don't completely believe the girl's account of this. There's 6 or 7 things in there which just don't make a whole lot of sense to me (the "logistics" of the whole thing, to borrow someone else's word). You add in her reaction, writing a blog post detailing it, naming names, etc., the very next day it, just seems suspect (not to mention her claims this has happened before - she must be very unlucky!) . I could be completely wrong here, and defending a bad guy. But that's not a big deal, as we can see there's no shortage of white knights rushing to the poor girl's defense.
Is there any context/interpretation/way of which some dude jamming his hand into your underwear and fumbling after being told you weren't interested in such a thing wouldn't be considered highly invasive?
Using the words "jamming" and "fumbling" are interpretations. See the examples I gave above for, IMO, more benign actions which could be interpreted that way.
Jesus H. Christ, only in the geek community can people be outraged at backscatter machines and TSA patdowns, and then try in rationalize sticking your hand down a woman's pants despite her protests.
Disgusting. Go ahead, down mod me.
Huh? I'm the only possible candidate for "rationalizing sticking your hand down a women's pants despite her protests", and several people have disagreed with me. So no need to act like a martyr. :)
I don't know what "jamming his hand into my underwear and fumbling" even means - did he penetrate her with three fingers right through her underwear (was she not wearing pants/skirt?), or was he playing with an exposed thong T-bar, or something else?
By something "similar" I mean I've been "rejected" by girls before, and not immediately raised my hands in submission and backed off. E.g., talking to a girl, tried to make out with her, and she said no, depending on what I thought, I might, say, keep a hand on her thigh, or playing with her pantie line. Not a perfect match, but I could definitely see someone wanting to make a big deal twisting that into something along the lines described here.
I could be wrong, and this guy could have committed the very worst interpretation of what the author described. But I doubt it, because the article seems like it's written for maximum effect.
Anywhere young people, booze, and partying mix, this sort of thing happens, so I don't see why the author sees it as a sign the OSS community, in particular, is "the epitome of a hostile misogynistic work environment".
Further, to publicly name the guy over this seems harsh. I don't really see what he did as a big deal. I've probably done similar things many times, as well as having similar done to me. If you're drinking with members of the opposite sex, have some rapport, kidding around, etc., then slapping a butt, putting a hand on a thigh, etc., is usually cool. Why the need to tell the entire world, probably ruining the dude's career?
I should add, in all honesty, I don't completely believe the girl's account of this. There's 6 or 7 things in there which just don't make a whole lot of sense to me (the "logistics" of the whole thing, to borrow someone else's word). You add in her reaction, writing a blog post detailing it, naming names, etc., the very next day it, just seems suspect (not to mention her claims this has happened before - she must be very unlucky!) . I could be completely wrong here, and defending a bad guy. But that's not a big deal, as we can see there's no shortage of white knights rushing to the poor girl's defense.