Does she really need to explain the obvious? Are you malisciously avoiding to mention the obvious thing here? This person, the sexual harasser, is an accomplished astrophysicist. He doesn't magically forget everything he knee about physics the moment he became a harasser.

I'm a woman. An awful lot of people who have expressed interest in "my work"/"working with me" were men looking for an excuse to chat me up.

There have been damn few people genuinely interested in my actual work, which is part of why I remain independent and poor.

My firsthand experiences of how hard it is to genuinely open doors career-wise is part of what informs my view here. I am well aware I am not supposed to say something like this. I mostly bit my tongue about Elizabeth Holmes because I am quite aware this is not socially acceptable to say.

I spent years and years wanting a better explanation for what went wrong with Theranos and why and it's mostly Verboten still to talk about that, even though the company went bankrupt and she is now serving time (or supposed to be -- maybe she continues to put that off, I haven't looked recently at an update).

My interest in such topics is because I want an actual career and I continue to fail to have one. And this remains true in part because we can't talk about the social dynamics of trying to work with members of the opposite sex unless someone has already been convicted of a crime and then we pretend it's some kind of statistical anomaly, some bizarre outlier, and not something that's potentially tough to navigate every single day if you are a woman wanting to be taken seriously for your work and not sleep your way into power...until that backfires like it ultimately did for Holmes.