The security community in general and privacy activists in particular have resisted giving up the party atmosphere of hacking-as-counterculture the way many tech communities have, and haven't had to because they're not, in general, at the mercy of investors and advertisers. That can cause unfortunate power dynamics in general, and makes sexual politics particularly perilous. That's not really unique to tech; there are a kerfuffle about the American Philosophical Association's smoker a few years back, because new PhDs are there to get jobs and to the people they need to get those jobs from it's a social event. I dread the death of fun gatherings of hackers, because having a community in many ways opposed to its employers is wonderful thing and could be easily lost by having to keep our gatherings professional, but it seems inevitable.
I think you raise an interesting point, specifically in that line between professional and not. But I'm not sure there couldn't be some improvement if there are indeed some problematic power dynamics without automatically losing the counterculture feel.
I don't think the answer to problem like this is necessarily more professionalism, but actually more egalitarianism. Appelbaum had the ability to repeatedly perpetrate these alleged crimes exactly because he had a certain level of power in the community. If the community was more equal, and had fewer untouchable 'stars' then these victims would have been more able to air these concerns.