Does he, though? That's a stretch. If someone believes that 20% of the elite computer scientists will be women, why does it follow that he would not have confid

Does he, though? That's a stretch. If someone believes that 20% of the elite computer scientists will be women, why does it follow that he would not have confidence in the women who take his class? For instance, suppose about 20% of his class is women. He's not saying that this 20% of his class shouldn't be there, or won't rise to the top. He is saying that it may not be productive to even out this ratio. Plenty to disagree with and object to in that thesis. But that is very different from not believing in the women who take his class, and it is utterly different from sabotaging the women in his class (making sure they don't rise to the top). I want to be very clear in this comment and elsewhere that I believe that there is plenty to object to in the claim that 20% represents some kind of natural plateau. My position is that we need to accurately represent the point of view that we are debating.