This info makes the last item of the article even more bizarre. I'm starting to think this was reported inaccurately by TC. Maybe she was really referring to a separate incident that happened at the hula dancing event, an incident we don't have any information about. Otherwise, this makes no sense.

He probably just asked what the straw was that broke the camel's back.

They tend not to be all that huge, being straws and all.

It makes all the sense when you consider the possibility that she might be a person that specifically collects even the smallest pieces of evidence to support her theories of sexism and bigotry in the workplace.

Or that the TechCrunch reporter is writing the story at a certain angle, and asked for anything that could fit into that narrative. I think that, in the context of a certain sort of modern journalism, a version of Hanlon's razor is called for: "Never attribute to ideological slant that which is adequately explained as linkbait and sensationalism."

Sexism in tech companies is a fact whether this "smallest piece of evidence" supports it or not.

Of course. It is also a fact in every single community of a certain size because there's always a number of that have sexist behavior.