For example, the inclusion of Elizabeth Warren and McConnell's line. What McConnell did (attempt to shut down resistance of the opposite party) was wrong-headed and undemocratic, but the only thing it had to do with gender was the use of a pronoun (edit: yodon is right).
Nobody would have paid much attention to it if he'd said "nevertheless he persisted", but a partisan attack was made into something about gender when there's no reason to believe it was so.
What does it really have to do with coding, anyway? It's inclusion says more about the author's goals than it does about the topic.
King is not "on camera praising sessions." She was a speaker at a public event where she was expected to acknowledge the other headliners in the room. She acknowledged his physical presence, nothing more, and if you watch the tape it's fairly clear she isn't happy about doing so and left him to the end of the list because of it.
"What McConnell did (attempt to shut down resistance of the opposite party) was wrong-headed and undemocratic, but the only thing it had to do with gender was the use of a pronoun"
If that were true, then why were the several men who spoke after her, and read the exact same letter, not disciplined?
For example, the inclusion of Elizabeth Warren and McConnell's line. What McConnell did (attempt to shut down resistance of the opposite party) was wrong-headed and undemocratic, but the only thing it had to do with gender was the use of a pronoun (edit: yodon is right).
Nobody would have paid much attention to it if he'd said "nevertheless he persisted", but a partisan attack was made into something about gender when there's no reason to believe it was so.
What does it really have to do with coding, anyway? It's inclusion says more about the author's goals than it does about the topic.