One of the reasons you wouldn't post a link to "The history of sex toys and what they tell us about ancient women" on the engineering Slack at work, is the same reason you wouldn't want to upvote it on the front page of HN.

Imagine an engineering team including a female engineer, and that gets posted to the Slack. Probably she was aware of industry's sexism problems, but maybe she felt accepted as a peer professional by her teammates, until she saw her teammates engaging with that post, rather than indicating that was inappropriate. I can only guess that she might feel disappointed and alienated by her teammates, among other thoughts.

But some might object, oh, but this is for the curious hacker spirit in all of us. OK, 19 hours in, let's look at the top-voted comment. Nope, it's quoting something from the article about superstitious insertion of fish into a woman's anatomy, before serving it to the man, and making a dismissive joke comment about preferring microplastics in modern fish.

"What's the matter, Sally Engineer, can't you see this is a valuable hacker curiosity discussion, and you shouldn't be uncomfortable that your teammates think it's appropriate in this context?"

Accidentally doing something, but then deciding it's improper, and correcting it, is one thing. That can even be a net positive, if people learn from it. But being told someone else thinks it's improper, and going into obstinate, combative mode, is a different thing.