A hypothetical that might more accurately reflect the situation at conferences would be if the social events consisted of nothing but nature hikes.

I'm still not sure that's an ideal analogy, though, because it still misses an analogue to a key angle that the article brings up: nature hikes don't engender things like sexual harassment in quite the same way.

Context is key, if you work in a re-rehabilitation center, you are not going to organise a nature hike.

Alcohol should not be a key factor for people to network and have fun, especially in professional spaces.

> Alcohol should not be a key factor for people to network and have fun, especially in professional spaces.

It's not called "social lubricant" for nothing.

While we're far and away from the Madmen era all day drinkathons, it is certainly acceptable in professional spaces and capacities for a little alcohol to be shared.

It's certainly not required, but I wouldn't say it's unprofessional to have a couple drinks at a professional event offering them.

I go on nature hikes during work less often than I drink during work.

The only 'hike' I've ever seen in a professional office setting was when the department rented out a movie theater and my boss decided that we'd walk a mile together to get to the theater. Of course that was more of an urban stroll than a nature hike. Is watching Tron Legacy a legitimate part of a professional environment? It was that day.

Bars almost always have alternative options or food, unlike physical activities

That’s a very all or nothing scenario. No one is saying no alcohol and no one is saying no nature hikes. The big ask here seems to be that people be understanding that recovering alcoholics can’t always be in the room with alcohol, just like we’d be understanding that someone in a wheelchair couldn’t necessarily go hiking. Similarly, the article says that people would like sober events to be made available in addition to events with alcohol.

> "No one is saying no alcohol"

That's definitely not true. There are a lot of people who believe alcohol has absolutely no place in any professional setting.

How about "No one in the linked-to article is saying no alcohol."

Eg, quoting from the article: "These scholars don't want everyone to become teetotalers, or for conferences to ban alcohol altogether. They just want to be able to tackle the social labors of being an academic without the expectation to imbibe." and "Pearl isn't arguing that there shouldn't be any alcohol-related events, she said."

Also, "no one in the HN thread is saying no alcohol."

While your statement is true, I don't think it's useful to point to extreme viewpoints as a reply to a comment saying that we shouldn't use an "all or nothing scenario".

Any more than it would be useful to point out that that, in a piece arguing for vegetarian alternatives, that there some people who insist that no one ever eat meat. Sure, they exist, but it derails the topic.