[ffef]

As a male in my early twenties, working as a developer I've come to realize that it's just better to not even try to engage in small talk and/or non-work related conversations with female co-workers. I keep it dry and basic. Just last week I had a buddy who was on the phone with his brother and blurted "Bro, she was amazing, then I left her house haha" he was fired the next day because a co-worker overheard his conversation and felt uncomfortable.

[aerovistae]

I don't even know what to say to this. If your interactions with females are so problematic that you're now afraid to talk to them for fear of repercussions, I seriously doubt "women" are the problem here, which is what you seem to be implying.

[unethical_ban]

It's off topic. It is also concerning that (without more detail) a singular remark about a social event off-hours would get someone fired.

[danpalmer]

I suspect that, for someone who uses that sort of language to talk about women even in private, it likely wasn't a first or only offence.

[unethical_ban]

Using 'bro' non ironically might be more of a key off than describing an experience with a woman as 'amazing'.

[danpalmer]

As a male in my early twenties, working as a developer, I've come to realise that one of the best ways I can combat sexism in our industry is to treat women normally, and not make special exceptions while working with them.

I wouldn't talk to my male friends, colleagues or brother in the way you've said your colleague did, I think it's demeaning and unpleasant, and I don't think calls of a very personal nature are appropriate to take around work colleagues anyway.

[Arizhel]

If you're so unprofessional that you can't prevent yourself from having lurid conversations about sex in a workplace with women in earshot around you, then maybe you should be working someplace else, such as a dirty warehouse.

[plink]

Thank God women don't work in dirty warehouses, historic bastions of misogyny. /s (had to edit and add the slash-"es" for the daft)

[fullshark]

How is this relevant? Are you implying that the original blogpost indicated an overreaction on Susan Fowler's part?