> When investigated, it seems to always boil down to one of two things Investigated by whom? Yourself? What criteria are you using, or are you just using your

> When investigated, it seems to always boil down to one of two things Investigated by whom? Yourself? What criteria are you using, or are you just using your "general aura?" > The feelings of being offended aren't real So they are liars? > Guy points out that lots of scientists think men and women have different interests for genetic reasons Guy implies that leading to them being less fit for programming without evidence and segues into promoting an alt-right agenda. > Nobody is ever actually offended by science People do get offended by poor science used to prop up a political agenda (Global warming, anyone?). > The offence is manufactured to meet an end goal: the punishment of those who do not bow to the power of the ideology. So your logical conclusion boils down to a conspiracy theory with the opposing power being a group of lying women on a power-trip. Now why wouldn't people want to enter into a constructive dialogue about gender differences and their effect on the workplace with you to try and improve things?