Policies of inclusivity are currently governed by the perception of the mob. Trying to apply thoughtful thinking in this area publicly is dangerous (presuming t

Policies of inclusivity are currently governed by the perception of the mob. Trying to apply thoughtful thinking in this area publicly is dangerous (presuming that's what he did) because it's falsely evaluated as a dichotomy between either discriminating positively or discriminating negatively... conflating all other complex sources of minority proportions, not bothering to understand the source of these differences, and ignoring the potential negative consequences of positive discrimination to the very people they intend to help - the general reaction to this criticism in my experience is that these details are insignificant, whereas I suspect the true reason is that they are uncomfortable to explore. It's incredibly difficult to broach this subject with anyone publicly in a rational way, let alone widely because the mob has already made up it's mind that if you are not in camp A, then you are evil, since the only alternative in their eyes is camp B. If you can also see the potential harm it can cause, the best you can do is plant seeds with others, and focus on being unbiased yourself, if you want to go deeper then you could even try to explore the sources of the differences (privately) and then enact some informed change - but committing career suicide helps no one. [edit] This is probably the most public I've been with this subject and I already feel uncomfortable.