What the author is suggesting is that romance is inappropriate between potential investors and founders, regardless of how objective their roles and interactions are outside the sphere of Romance. I disagree with this zero-sum approach. While it's essential to maintain objectivity, if it takes away the humanity, what exactly is the point of this, or anything
This is in no way saying you have to give up your humanity. Not hitting on people you shouldn't be hitting on is not like some kind of vow of celibacy. There is a time and place for trying to pursue romance. On the job with another professional whom you have power over is not it.
For hundreds (thousands?) of years, the separation between the sexes and the expectations placed on their roles were intensely ingrained in human cultures across the globe. In less than 100 years we have upended thousands of years of cultural norms. That's no small thing.
One of the implications of this is that we are encountering situations for which we have absolutely no rule book. We just don't know how to respond to them. At all. We are stumbling around in the dark, blindly trying to figure it out, all the while trying to create a future any of us actually want to live in.
I know I wouldn't want to live in a world where my female colleagues were continually plagued by the question of their advancement relying on the fallout of a single attempt at a romantic encounter. That is not the future I want to build.
We set these boundaries - like the writer of this article - because the long term effect is that we build a world where men and women can work side by side without destroying their relationships. If more men did as he did, we would not be experiencing the hyper-sensitive environment we are seeing now. The long term effect of this behavior matters far more than the short term desire to hook up.
As in all things, there is a time and a place. The moment when a woman is attempting to get her business off the ground, and you can help her sink or swim, is not the time or place to be expressing your interest in her. She's got enough to be worrying about without that. Maybe there will be (or won't be) a later, where that moment IS appropriate. That is what happened in this case. It won't always.
He included her point of view and her needs and wants in his decision making. That is what he did. That is an incredible sign of respect. That is the future I want. There is no loss of humanity here - in fact exactly the opposite. Our humanity is also seen in the hard choices we make.
That's the humanity I want to be part of.
Lets take a more common and less obvious situation; dating coworkers: If things don't work out, often one of the pair will need to leave their job - probably her.
A considerate person would realize that "Would you like to get drinks tonight?" really means "Hey, lets see if we have some chemistry and if it doesn't work out, I'm OK with you losing your job."
Work isn't the same as school.
I think males tend to be oblivious to the downsides of asking a scrum-mate out on a date. After all, it's not awkward for them. I mean, who wouldn't be flattered to be asked out by me right! Even if she didn't accept this time, she's really going to enjoy pair programming with me in the future.
This is where the concept of consideration comes into play - a considerate person thinks about how their actions will will affect others, in this case the coworker you ask out or the rest of the team.