Perhaps it's not the impression you meant to give, but your comment seems to be suggesting the following:
1. That the blame for girlgeek abuse at conferences lies with the socially awkward.
2. That the socially awkward be shunned, if they don't shape up.
I am quite horrified by both of these possibilities.
Firstly where is the evidence for point 1? I am quite sure the socially-adept are more than capable of such abuse. Social adeptness is a prerequisite for popularity and hence a sense of power/entitlement that can be a factor in physical abuse. Even with a problem that socially-inept *are* prone to, the "unwitting stalker" problem where they fail to notice the other side wishes to detach from social interaction with them, I have seen just as many of the socially-adept male conference-goers being creepy in the level of attention they give to the opposite sex. So, if anything, my anecdotal experience suggests that the problem of inappropriate behaviour to women is quite orthogonal to social-adroitness.
So, again, where's your evidence for this extra-ordinary claim (at least, a claim that at least some readers of your comment will perceive it to make)?
The 2nd perceived suggestion should obviously be horrifying to one and all. Even if there were a kernel of truth to the first claim, it proposes a form of collective punishment through intolerance of a physiological characteristic and shunning those with it. That clearly beyond the pale.