Indeed. And he was given the chance to put his side of the story on June 10th. Unfortunately for him, he made a non-apology apology, saying:
"I did mean the part about having trouble with girls. It is true that people - I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it's very disruptive to the science because it's terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field. I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult."
and
"It's terribly important that you can criticise people's ideas without criticising them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth. Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science."
As for the idea that he was taken out of context, the linked article which is supposed to support that idea quotes him as saying:
"Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab: you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them they cry. Perhaps we should make separate labs for boys and girls?”
So yeah. He was sexist in context, he was given the chance to put his side of the story, he doubled down and said he stood by his comments and made more sexist remarks, and only then did he lose his job on June 11th.
Submitter should probably spend less time reading Brietbart.