Yes, I agree. Perhaps if they weren’t out late at night having drinks, the gentleman in question wouldn’t have been put into a position of allowing himself to be lead on.
Oh wait. You thought that they were doing serious business, over drinks, late at night. Presumably at a restaurant or nightclub. No one could possibly think that such a scenario was social. Oh heavens no, it couldn’t be that! It was all business, nothing but the business, all the time. And oh boy was he ever given the business.
Hopefully you can see how he might have misread the signals; thinking that they were both having a good time, maybe a few laughs, a pleasant smile and some quick witted banter. If she thought that this was pure business, then how could he have been so wrong as to send an email stating: I don’t know whether to hire you or hit on you.
Do you really presume that he’s that obtuse, given his clearly knowledgeable business savvy, as to send such an email unless he thought there was some “chemistry”. That it is an either/or dichotomy.
That if he hires her, then pursuing a relationship with her is out of the question, but if he pursues her then he can’t give her a job, what with twisted feminism and sexual harassment law preventing both from occurring simultaneously.
The poor guy misread whether this (remember that they were having drinks) was social or professional, or even a little of both. Now his mea culpa is met with women that want to see his career flushed or today’s version of his head on a platter. The guy made a mistake, owned up to it and is still being vilified.
Meanwhile no one is asking, what is/was her role in this. I’m not blaming the victim here, because, as I see it, he could be the victim. After all she was having drinks late at night with him. Voluntarily of her own volition. Did he invite her or did she invite him or perhaps herself. We don’t know. Nor do we know the nature of their conversation, or her role throughout, because no one asked her this simple question; what was your part?
so that no woman must fear that she need sleep with or otherwise sexually indulge him or any other man to advance in her career.
Plenty of woman have done just that. Slept their way up. Often sleeping with their married bosses, with complete disregard for the wives or for that matter other women coworkers who were more deserving yet were denied advancement, due to their actions. Yet no feminists have heaped scorn upon them for the affrontary.
In such an instance the man is certainly wrong on all accounts, particularly if he’s married for the infidelity, but also for sleeping with subordinates. One cannot however ignore the responsibility of the other player or the role they played. Particularly in wreaking a marriage.
So before you condemn him, ask what her role is. Why was she meeting with him late at night? Why were drinks involved? Would she really meet with her lawyer or banker and sign legal documents over drinks?
I think they were both wrong, and neither should be vilified, for the mistake of confusing business in a social setting.