Comments by "Rob McCune" (@robm6645) on "James Damore on the David Pakman Show!" video.

  1. Great comment, it triggered the alt-litists.
    3
  2. Actually he's been interviewed by sychophants ranging from neo-reactionaries like Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin to fascists like Stefan Molyneux and Mike Cernovich. He could stand to be interviewed by someone who is left-wing and not pushing a pro-misogyny agenda, and for that matter he could also stand to be interviewed by someone intelligent.
    2
  3. Chaos Theory No what Damore did was run to online misogynist safe spaces where people wouldn't challenge his ideas about women being genetically inferior. And yes you can see a trend of him finding validation with other misogynists, for example one of the first people he sought out was Stefan Molyneux who believes women having sexual freedom destroys civilizations.
    1
  4. Damore circulated his manifesto in order to spread his ideas, claims to the contrary are just white washing to suit his victim narrative. The idea that he would make broad sweeping claims about human nature and ask for criticism from a bunch of other people who have no educational or professional background in anything dealing humans or evolution, is to say the least highly dubious. Saying women evolved to not be software engineers does imply women are genetically inferior. "I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership." "These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs," "Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance)." Saying women are neurotic because of their biology is saying they are inferior. Saying group X posses bad traits while group Y posses good traits is saying that one group is superior over another. To deny this shows either blatant ideological bias, detachment from reality or just plain dishonesty.
    1
  5. Well you're never going to me seriously because I don't reinforce political opinions you don't want to hear. You clearly aren't taking the argument seriously because you're pulling out semantics and unearned condescension because you can't argue the substance. Case in point the fact that even in Damore's cherry picked research the differences between men and women are small percentage differences across entire populations, contrary to the memo this shows that inequality is not based in biological reality or merit because that large overlap is not reflected in the workforce. This is a one of the many errors in the logic you and Damore are using.
    1
  6. The issue isn't David asking hard questions, it's whether or not he accepts stupid answers to his hard questions. That's the difference between him going easy and actually challenging his guests, for instance when he interviewed William Gairdner in "Right-Winger Tries to Explain Things...Does He Succeed?" he let almost nothing slide, but when he interviewed Dave Rubin he would maybe repeat the question once or ask a follow up question. This is despite the fact that Rubin and Gairdner were basically making similar points.
    1