[shadesandcolour]

Stating that the same thing happens to males isn't actually justification for taking an issue with what she is saying. It shouldn't be about gender at all.

However, I agree with you in thinking that the attempts to tie this to gender issues are way off base. When I first read the reports on the issues (which are not the whole truth, I understand), none of them read like gender issues. They read like issues between employees male or female, that didn't work well together. Would we have had the same reaction if Tom's wife had interfered in a male employees relationship? We should. Would we have had the same reaction if a female employee was reverting changes from a male? We should.

From what I've seen, it looks like this became a gender issue because JAH is a female, not because there were specific gender harassment issues.

[integraton]

It's about gender because she is directly claiming it's about gender and has done so from the beginning. As valleywag quoted her saying today:

"Would this happen to a man in the same situation? No."

She is wrong, wrong, wrong. Things happen all the time to men in the tech industry that are worse than what she claims happened to her. Even famously so:

http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-color-employee-files-lawsu...