Perhaps a minor point, but I think your argument would have been stronger and more convincing if you didn't refer to people you disagree with as "termites".
I think the top NYT comment on this article highlights a very real problem that infested a lot of academia and places in corporate America. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that many of these places, especially in academia, have done real soul searching and considered that there are real problems that they were responsible for. Instead, I feel that in a lot of places you just see a "backlash to the backlash", i.e dismissing fair criticism as "the tide of unintellectual MAGA-ism":
> “When Google conducted a study recently to determine whether the company was underpaying women and members of minority groups, it found that more men than women were receiving less money for doing similar work.”
Obviously, this conclusion does not fit the politically correct mindset of most Google employees and management (or, for that matter, of the New York Times.)
> So, Google is searching for more data, and some explanation, of why the initial conclusion, that salary disparity may not put women at a disadvantage, must be wrong. I’m sure that if the results of the study were the reverse of what they showed, and demonstrated a bias against women, there would have been no head-scratching and no quest for further study.
> This illustrates a problem likely present with a great deal of scientific research, especially work in the social sciences. People look for results that match their preconceived notions, and keep looking until they find what they expect. When they find the expected, they stop looking. It’s a potent and pernicious source of bias.
> Pay disparities are both complex and important. By all means, Google, and society at large, should study the problem carefully and thoroughly. But we should leave open the possibility, that the truth may not be what we initially believe.