[repolfx]

People have expressed these arguments in:

- Conference talks

- Essays posted to libertarian blogs

- Private corporate memos written after feedback was explicitly requested

Probably others.

The same thing was said in every case: "it's not the right forum, it's insensitive and without empathy".

How incredibly surprising that there doesn't seem to be any right forum or right time for expressing opinions about anti-male bias. Somehow it's always offensive and it's always terrible that women were upset.

It looks almost as if some people want to shut that conversation down wherever it happens.

[posterboy]

It seems as if that conversation was part of the bias in the first place, so there's two sides of the same medal.

One right place would have been the room where the anti-male/pro-female responsibility was decided. Now that the decision is through, it's just bickering and not constructive to oppose it, ignoring it denigrating it in public as if that was outside the assumed responsibility for the forum (the institution).

[simonrobb]

I can't speak for the libertarians and how they respond. I think a libertarian blog is the perfect place for it, and I'd have happily engaged in a debate, just like I am here.

I was very outspoken in the wake of James Damore being fired from Google, because I think there was a reasonable narrative in there somewhere, even though some of the science was flawed. I still don't think firing the guy was the right response. To my mind his ideas were respectfully presented and weren't phrased in absolutes. There could have been a great conversation around gender in Google as a result.

But this is different to that. This is somebody writing off a large group's experience, supported by poor science, in an area he knows nothing about, at a conference for the express purpose of supporting women. I don't want to shut down conversation, but I sure want to condemn people who can't be respectful of others.