there are two issues: one cofounder was being "man-handled" by an investor, and their product received little support, allegedly because the author and cofounde

there are two issues: one cofounder was being "man-handled" by an investor, and their product received little support, allegedly because the author and cofounder was not attractive, white, male, etc. i think everyone here agrees being "handsy" with anyone in a professional setting is not the right thing to do. it's certainly not punishable by death, but it's socially uncouth. that being said, the author acknowledged that it's common for sales pitches to be misinterpreted as sexual interest, and seeing how women generally like aggressive men, it's not hard to see how an investor would interpret such a situation as a cue to get "handsy" with the cofounder. again, not excusable in a professional setting, but you can't lambaste a man for his own biology. which brings me to the second issue. if men are biologically predisposed to choose male leaders over female leaders and we want women to have an equal opportunity to be funded -- provided their product is actually as good as a man's -- then women will gain better traction by offering incentives for men to prefer the female leaders over the male leaders, rather than trying to change biology so men "work correctly".