> Some feel it's not something inherent and can be changed.

That's a fair position. But it's not an indisputable position, clearly. The biggest issue here isn't about whether there are fair points against the google manifesto. It's about whether thoughts, hypotheses, and opinions like this are harmful and punishable.

> ...many people feel very bad...

And many people feel bad that someone expressed himself earnestly in good faith and has been treated this way. Do we decide where to go from here from how people feel? How do we decide which feelings are important to us?

I think he was fired because he offended people in the company (with his opinions). If this is the case they should fire everybody because someone is going to be offended by the opinions of others. I found very stupid what google did without taking some time to analyse what happened and the consequences. The research community is turning against google with this type of articles now.

Nobody asked for his opinion, though. You arent required to voice your opinions. He shared his thoughts and now he deals with the reactions. Just like he is entitled to his opinions, those of others should be respected. Thats life. He was treat horribly? Who initiated the treatment? He did with his 10 page write-up.

> Who initiated the treatment? He did with his 10 page write-up.

No, the person or persons that leaked it to the press did that.

Will google go on a witch hunt to fire all those people too? Likely not...

> Nobody asked for his opinion, though.

I though google was an open company when anyone can raise a concern when they feel like. It is what the CEO said after firing him probing that the company is not that open.

He send the manifest to a select closed group of people, not all the company. But it got leaked. You can blame him and you can also blame all the people who get angry with his opinions, because his intention was to improve the company not hurting people.

The more important point is, that when people feel strongly about something, facts presented that counter their opinion trigger cognitive dissonance. That's why nearly everyone I follow on Twitter was complaining about a memo (usually calling it a manifesto) that had little to nothing to do with the one I read.