Quite shrill. It hurt my ears. Calm down, buddy.

Yes, well articulated. Don’t see anyone actually discussing facts. It’s easier to mischaracterize his arguments and then can dismiss him as “anti-diversity” and avoid any honest intellectual discussions. And that’s quite dishonest

Those *are* his points. But, where does he say that “[women are] not suited for better pay because [they’re] too emotional and not smart”?

A. If attempts to prevent discrimination, are actually forms of discrimination then that’s not really helping the problem. And as the author puts it fairly well it can exacerbate the problems. Meritocracy is after all the ideal, if there are cultural biases in play you address those, but you shouldn’t do it by making…

Everything has to be black or white. And since white is the sign of all evil and injustice in the world, not even the slightest of grey areas can be viewed as possible.

It’s actually ironic that many people have denounced this bit of writing because of the incorrect or contentious elements/facts, while blindly ignoring there is a strong and valid core and that very denunciation is actually evidence of much of the core underlying point of the latter half of the document, which is…

Sadly, if women, after all these years of affirmative action and “you-go-girl-ism”, cannot muster the courage to ask for a raise or enroll in STEM, maybe the problem lies with them in some capacity.

Don’t bother. Almost everyone is here just trying to run in with their pitchforks. They are not interested in polite discourse.

Just keep shouting him down. That’ll teach him.

You are 100% mischaracterizing his position. That’s 100% unethical. You know that he is not saying that. But stupid people will read your post and become emotional and react to it. Where was the comment that women are not smart? Where did he say that? Where did he say that “you’re not suited for better pay because…

The idea that women are bad at negotiation is cited repeatedly by equal pay advocates. For example:  http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/negotiating-challenges-for-women-leaders

Looks like someone did not get their point across.

There are very few “flaws in logic” pointed out and far more “OMG so sexist tech bro” etc.

Got to love how nearly every comment here affirms what the memo author said would happen. Moral reactions are emotional reactions and are not based on actual facts. The guy is trying to have a rational conversation. Disagreement is expect and is no doubt the desired outcome. Declaring him a racist and/or sexist ends…

There has never been a study, in the history of mankind, that demonstrated IQ is solely related to “flexing your brain.” That’s an asinine stance not rooted in any science.

We looked up 7,243 professors and found 3,623 to be registered Democratic and 314 Republican, for an overall D:R ratio of 11.5:1.

A cheap ad hominem that doesn’t address any of the issues. In short, a dodge. His article is clearly not trying to be offensive, nor is he denigrating other groups. You might disagree with some claims, but he clearly acknowledges that he has his own biases.

The fact that many here disagree with that utterly logical and soundly reasoned essay makes me realize that we have probably lost a generation to terminal politically correct groupthink .

Get to the back of the mob you garbage person!!

Ironically that was one of the points the email author is making.