Here's what James Damore actually wrote:

"My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)."

(um, so Damore actually agrees with Henein's key points about focusing on the person, not the gender).

Do you see what's going on?  Notice how Henein is manipulating the story ("don't read the essay") in order to portray Damore as an idiot so that she can monopolize the narrative, control the readers' knowledge inputs, and dictate terms.  Lawyer indeed.