Silicon Valley's Secretive, Orgiastic Side

Recalls True Detective Season 2 when they infiltrate a similarly described (but likely dramatized version) party with Politicians instead of Tech players:

[Midseason spoiler warning]

"Bezzerides goes undercover, posing as Athena to infiltrate one of the secret elite parties in Monterey. With no phone, transmitter or weapon, she is forced to rely on Woodrugh and Velcoro for support. At the party, she is drugged and taken to the guests with a busload of other girls. Her attempts to search the party are hampered by the male guests (Geldof, Holloway and Tony Chessani among them) and hallucinations of a strange man from her childhood, implying that she was sexually abused"...etc

I suppose that it's a fair criticism.

I imagine that if, even if they took the drugs voluntarily and with full knowledge it could be a problem.

As the men also took the drug, we could make a powerful case that they are not consenting neither.

I understand. However, a lot of the time article titles are brief and/or misleading and/or click bait, but the article itself is insightful. I don't want to make the call for editorializing a title myself since I'm not a journalist, and I don't want project any bias I may or may not have. Frankly, I only do this because the Techmeme summary is anecdotally superior to the original article's title, but HN's character limit for the title is too short.

Since you have asked me to stop, I will do so, but do please keep in mind that I only did so because:

1) the limitations on the character count are on the HN side 2) I wanted work around that character count to give insightful, intellectually-stimulating, yet poorly-titled articles their chance to shine.

Thank you for taking the time to read my reply,

Preface: I spend a lot of this response talking about a hypothetical high-status man and a low-status woman. This isn't to be sexist or perpetuate stereotypes; it's just to use a common example that we've all probably seen and witnessed.

Preface 2: this response was to someone else in this thread but it got pulled out to the top level for some reason.

The intention of the article was, probably, just to shed light on the fact that this sort of stuff happens. It might not even be accurate. But, for the sake of argument, let's assume that it is. The author wasn't suggesting solutions. Why is it interesting to Vanity Fair readers?

- It's about the glamorous lives of the 0.1%.

- It's about sex.

- It's about drugs.

- A lot of these men are socially oblivious, so it provides material to laugh at otherwise powerful people. Who, in their right minds, sees a co-worker at a bondage-event and tells others at their workplace? And who, in their right minds, brings it up with said co-worker?

- If what the article reports is true, the behaviour of some of the male participants could reasonably be interpreted as sexually predatory.

It's the last point that's a bit troublesome. I think a lot of the men involved don't realize their behaviour is shitty. They flash wealth and reputation and make drunken suggestions like, which I've personally witnessed, "Oh, you're interested in starting a company... I could totally put you in touch with my friend who runs a VC firm. He's always looking for new investments. Hey, let's get another drink. You're super interesting. Oh, it's closing time. Wanna head back to my place, it's only a couple blocks away, and we could continue this conversation?"

It's even worse if the dude talking has some sort of professional connection with the woman (e.g. introduction through co-worker or investor). It's not illegal but it's lousy. It's also reasonable for her to think that their might be some form of punishment for saying, 'no'. I think the lesson those sorts of guys could learn is that they're, at best, being manipulative and assholes. And the lesson targeted women can learn is that these guys probably aren't telling the truth and they should stick to mostly professional channels to get ahead (if that's their reason for engaging sexually with these men).

Guys, if sex is your goal, I suggest the old-fashioned method. This isn't targeted at you, OP, but just a rhetorical bit aimed at the hypothetical male described in the article:

- Work your way into a good job.

- Be polite.

- Be funny.

- Work out.

- Dress well.

- Be financially responsible.

- Have a drink or two, if that's your thing.

- Don't be too flashy and avoid mentions of wealth or powerful connections.

- Show genuine interest in the other party and her friends and family.

- Be forward but not obnoxious about your intentions before sex (e.g. looking for sex, looking for a relationship, etc...).

- Never lie.

- Never EVER make promises or suggestions that you can help her career until you're well into a relationship.

- If you genuinely believe in her and want to help her career, do so, but save any romantic or sexual advances until after you've helped and you can't renege what you've done. Be absolutely clear that she doesn't owe you anything.

EDIT:

- And never kiss and tell. It might win you a few bar-room points but it's frankly trashy and teenager-like behaviour. Romantic and sexual relationships involve two parties and are inherently intimate and you might be violating your partner's trust and reputation by divulging you've had sex or what the sex was like and so on. Even if your partner is okay with it, a lot of people don't find talking about your sexual conquests entertaining.

On what basis do you ignore the events that, as reported in the article, were not as consensual as you suggest here?