“...that some large fraction of your colleagues are at root not good enough to do their jobs, and that they’re only being kept in their jobs because of some political ideas.”
But that is exactly not what he said though. He said some pretty stupid things, but he never said that. He stressed against the very notion. Argue against what he said — there’s *plenty* to argue — but don’t misrepresent it.
“…a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face”
I think this might only demonstrate his point.
He missed the mark on a lot, but the mischaracterization of what was actually said in the memo is frustrating and is, in many ways, emblematic of some of his actual-salient points (more about just engaging with the other side, less about gender).