As folks have said below, it’s refreshing to hear a voice raised for discussion, with some counter points and arguments rather than outrage and hyperbole and wilful misinterpretation.
I think maybe you disagree less than you think. He didn’t say, as far as I can tell, that ‘average differences’ meant that women couldn’t do engineering (that appears to come from those who would rather misinterpret), but that ‘average differences’ meant that the proportions of women and men would be different in a workplace, and so a ‘Diversity’ programme that tries to force equivalence was inappropriate. He also suggested some alternatives — pairs programming for example — that would cater to some possibly dodgy perceptions of how women would prefer to work that would still contribute to the company. Should this alienate 32%?
