lol, I think you guys are misrepresenting the issue somewhat. Are you perhaps offended?
He wasn't fired because he shared an opinion or because someone felt offended. He did share an opinion and I'm sure someone felt offended, but that didn't get him fired.
He was fired because he's a scientist holding a position of authority who used bad science to promote a particular point of view. Offended people may have played a role in his dismissal, but it wasn't offence alone that led to the consequences he's facing.
Gender is a complex issue that needs to be handled with sensitivity. There are a lot of people who would like to take information that might suggest one thing or another without engaging fully with the science to promote their agenda. Agendas which have real world consequences. No one needs convincing of that right? We seen plenty of that in action.
You can make accurate statements about vaccination that sound scary when held out of context. If a member of a DHB started promoting a view using accurate, yet insightful data about vaccinations, would we be surprised or disappointed when they lose their position?
And the science around vaccination is very clear. If that science can be distorted to the point it impacts the health in our community as it clearly has, how much more so is this possible with something as opaque as social science?