A subtext that you may have missed is that it's very awkward and uncomfortable to have only one party to a conversation think that the conversation is sexually charged, and the possibility of that happening is a disincentive to circulating and socializing.
I thought it was a pretty straightforward observation, but hopefully my summary helps you. Translating basic human experience to nerd-ese --- all part of the service we provide!
However, my argument was that if the situations were reversed, the outcome would be exactly the same. Go to a place where there are predominantly women (any dance class or even a Yoga class, feminist conference), and if you and I would try to "talk to them like we talk to men", many of them would assume that we're flirting with them. Or do my observations not concur with yours?
Second, I think your response deliberately discards context. If socializing at "dance class" made women think I was flirting with them, and I was thus disincentivized from going to dance class, I'd... what, be a poorer dancer? Britta's story is about a career problem, not a "not fitting into dance class" problem.
Finally, I think your response totally misses the point. You do not win any kind of rhetorical award for coming up with some kind of table-turning scenario about "feminist conferences", because those scenarios don't have anything whatsoever to do with Britta's experience. She wasn't trying to score points. She was explaining why a piece of standard advice given to people about making connections in their profession is difficult for women.