Dude, what the fuck? Her having picture of herself showing cleavage is totally irrelevant. Dressing attractively does not make it ok to be harassed.

Secondly, saying "don't hit on women who come asking for funding or professional consolutation" in no way means "you can't date or hit on professional women".... you just can't do it TO THE WOMEN WHO ARE ASKING YOU FOR PROFESSIONAL HELP. You can flirt and do your thing if you meet a professional woman in a social situation, just not when you are interacting with them in a business context.

You can even date co-workers (I am married to a woman I met at work), but 1) you can't be in a position of power over them and 2) You have to be EXTREMELY careful in how you approach them. You do NOT start off with texts about sex or sexual things. You don't send anything sexual until you are way into your relationship. You would start with something like 'hey, would you like to grab a drink after work', and then if they say no, you stop IMMEDIATELY AND NEVER ASK AGAIN.

>Just kind of musing on a concern I've heard from a lot of people in and mostly outside that field just talking about rules where men can never hit on or anything close women who are professionals.

Then why do couples often say they met at work?

If you're an investor, meeting someone for the first or second time, and someone asks you for money, and you hit on them, you're an utter asshole and moron. Yes, even if someone was dressed in a way that exposed cleavage.

It's not remotely appropriate, professional, or even decent to hit on someone at the place and time that Cantor did.

If you already have a steady, mutual friendship (or other positive relationship) with someone you work with, or are in a casual setting that people go to with the intent of hitting on people or being hit on, then, sure, things can work differently. But that's extremely distant from what occurred here. Someone asking something from you in a professional capacity does not ever want "wanna fuck?" as the answer.

There is a legal, and ethical difference between meeting and dating a co-worker, and hitting on someone who you have power over.

The former is, assuming everyone is OK with it, fine. The latter is illegal as hell, and even if everyone is OK with it at the time, will expose you to litigation. Don't do it.

This is sexual harassment training 101.

Wow. Is this satirical? This is disgusting - you are part and parcel of the rampant sexism the women in the article are speaking out against.

> That she might use sex appeal to her advantage is believable since many hard-working artists do. Just use every natural or acquired gift you have.

You're evaluating whether or not you think somebody's claim of harassment is true based on whether or not you think they are attractive. Does that mean that you would disregard allegations by somebody you found homely? We should assess claims of harassment based on the testimony provided not your personal assessment of somebody's attractiveness.

> That said, I'd probably not do it as a venture capitalist helping her get funding just because of the liability. I might end up in a news article or something.

The reason to avoid making women seeking funding feel uncomfortable is to avoid making women seeking funding feel uncomfortable. It's not so that you avoid bad PR.

> If I did it, there'd be a brick wall between the two with me testing her interest up front. She can tell me what she's comfortable with taking me up on personal/professional interests anywhere from zero (dont work with me) to both.

There should be zero personal or romantic engagement by the part of a VC with an entrepreneur where the first interaction is skewed by the power dynamic. A consensual and equal relationship is impossible when one party controls the financial and social prospects of the other.

> Then, there seems to be an expectation that successful or professional men never show interest in any women who are skilled professionals or founders in favor of... lesser women in clubs, churches, or something?

It's possible for men to interact with women in social contexts, not just in professional ones.

> Telling me I must sacrifice all potential for a date or resulting relationship with such incredible women just because they're founders or something with nothing in return... while they can mostly do whatever they want... seems a bit arbitrary, unfair and lots of missed potential.

Women do not exist in the world solely for you to date. Again, if there exists an asymmetrical power dynamic there is no possibility of a consensual equal relationship. If somebody asked you out while holding a gun to your head would you feel comfortable turning them down? You might protest at the metaphor, but being able to deny somebody resources they desperately need can be just as threatening.

> Also, every one I've heard from reported witnessing a varying chunk of those women would hit on or flit with men they liked who were professionals doing their job. They said that was OK since they initiated.

Are you sure that in every instance the women are expressing romantic interest? Or are they merely being friendly, and being misinterpreted. That is a trope that comes up often - men think they are being hit on but nothing of the sort is happening.

"Does that mean that you would disregard allegations by somebody you found homely?"

That's exactly what Trump asked all the voters in America to do, and many did.

Donald Trump Says Accusers Are Too Ugly For Him To Have Groped: “Believe me, she would not be my first choice,” he said of one woman.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/10/donald-trump-insults-...

Sounds like a serial sexual assaulter justifying his own behavior.