I personally dislike them for two reasons. The first is that they are inherently subjective; it assigns a motive to another person's actions, which the author

I personally dislike them for two reasons. The first is that they are inherently subjective; it assigns a motive to another person's actions, which the author almost certainly doesn't know. Maybe the motivations were sexist, maybe not. The second is that those terms are untouchable in a sense. I skimmed it a bit and couldn't find anything more specific than using those terms. Unfortunately, that's generally acceptable today because questioning whether those terms actually apply gets an immediate response claiming that you are victim blaming. It cheapens the discourse to me, because the central premise of the article is held as unquestionable. Then again, perhaps this category of writing just isn't for me. I don't disagree that her feelings are salient to her experience; but my interest isn't really in her experiences, it's in the knowledge that we can derive from her experiences. I.e. can her experiences reveal some insight into sexism amongst tech companies, or how victims are treated? However without a basis in objective facts, I fear there's not much knowledge to derive beyond her experiences in and of themselves.