There was quite a lot of what I would consider to be victim blaming in the previous thread where it was less clear what the allegations were. Or at least, my impression of the thread was that there were a very high proportion of commenters saying we should reserve judgement and at the same time hypothesizing about all the ways that the woman might be at fault.

While this is all true (on the information we had in that thread, it was possible that the woman was the one at fault, and it's good to reserve judgement until more information arrives), it was really weird how many people felt the need to point these things out.

I do agree that this thread seems more balanced, although even in this thread people are surprisingly quick to point out that these problems are not 'sexism' (despite the fact that the situations described would have been an order of magnitude less likely to arise if she were a man).

> (despite the fact that the situations described would have been an order of magnitude less likely to arise if she were a man).

How and why is this a fact? Could really none of this happen to a male employee?

Crazy boss? Check. Workplace relationship? Check. "Enemies" reverting your code? Check. Management non-reactive to complaints? Check. I think a lot of this goes on regularly on many companies, an concerns many employees. In particular, what seems sexist here is trying to make this a women's problem, not an employee's problem.