This was the reaction at my company (at the time of the memo) as well. The psychology claims were not as big a deal as much as the fact that the author alleged discriminatory hiring policies.

This led an exec to publicly state that our diversity policies "isn't code for favoring women over men" and that "being an equal opportunity employer is a commitment to following anti- discrimination laws and maintaining a workplace where everyone matters, everyone has a sense of belonging, and everyone is held to the same standards."

This was in stark contrast to our diversity hiring policies which include giving larger bonuses for hiring diverse (women and URM), giving diverse candidates two chances at passing the phone screen instead of one, setting "outcome-based goals" for hitting specific % of diverse tech employees, and even setting up a system of reservations for diverse tech workers (though this last one wasn't established until after the memo).

I guess the exec might not be lying if he is speaking from the point of view that anything less than 50/50 is discrimination and that balancing this out with discrimination in the other direction is how to create an equal hiring process.

Equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome. The far left wants the latter, without realizing what they're getting themselves into.

People observe data points, draw conclusions and then expose them to other people. This is a good thing, this is how we start talking about things, by exposing our conclusions to the outside and refining them based on that. Not liking someone's conclusions doesn't give them the right to silence them.