This is the second article, the first was by the Economist, arguing - coherently - that firing Damore was not the right thing to do. The problem of course is th

This is the second article, the first was by the Economist, arguing - coherently - that firing Damore was not the right thing to do. The problem of course is that what Damore wrote - assuming its actually scientifically accurate - is very easy to mischaracterise.