If I brought my whole self to my job in Houston it would not go smoothly.

You're right, but I don't understand that perspective.

If my company is doing something that I think is morally wrong, I'm going to be finding employment elsewhere and telling them why. I might even speak out about it... after I leave.

If we're doing something that I think it's great but doesn't justify my quitting, then I'm going to be speaking up internally about it. Going public with a grievance against your employer just strikes me as being counter-productive - you're risking being fired, you're damaging your future prospects for advancement there, and you're potentially damaging the entity to which you've tied your financial future.

The way I see it, when I work for a company I'm part of their public face. Even though I may not (certainly don't, actually) represent the company, my actions and statements still influence people's impression of the brand. If I'm upset about something enough that I'm willing to damage the company's brand to speak out about it, then I'm upset enough that I don't want to be providing material support to them by continuing to work there.

This has got to be an over generalisation, surely?

People in Silicon Valley are highly unlikely to be a homogenous whole.

And given what we know about Gell-Mann Amnesia, it seems likely to me the media’s portrayal of the situation is, at best, amiss, and, at worst, intentionally deceptive.

Probably that a vocal minority generate a kerfuffle, and a huge majority keep mum.

Happy to be proven wrong.