As the decrepit mainstream media vilifies James Damore — the ex-Googler excommunicated from the tech cult — and his “screed”, more reasonable journalists are discussing the compelling arguments presented in Damore’s treatise.
For those who still need a summary, Damore systematically presented the science behind the general biological differences in abilities and affinities of the two sexes in explaining some of the reasons why more men pursue STEM fields and thus end up in tech companies. Top evolutionary biologists and other scientists studying the differences between the sexes have said that Damore has largely gotten the current paradigm correct on the science of biological differences and have defended his essay. Freelance journalist Dr. Debora Soh, holding a PhD in sexual neuroscience, wrote an exceptional column on the science behind Damore’s work for the Globe and Mail (shocking they published it).
One fascinating angle missed in this explosive story is how Damore’s argument mirrors the new right’s ideological belief system. Damore argues in his memo what the “alt-right” (whatever the hell that lazy and pejorative label means nowadays) Canadian commentators like Lauren Southern, Gavin McInnes, Ezra Levant, Faith Goldy, Stephen Crowder, Gad Saad, Dr. Jordan Peterson and Stefan Molyneux have been elucidating on over the past few years. Damore’s decision to do his first two interviews with the latter two Canadian Youtube thought leaders and him being “a huge fan” of Peterson suggest Damore may have been ideologically influenced by this new wave of conservative thought. His memo certainly argues — practically verbatim — what Peterson says in his lectures about the general differences of the two sexes.
There is something hilariously ironic about Damore doing a popular interview with Peterson on Google’s Youtube about his firing from Google shortly after the former had been fired by the company and the latter had been temporarily banned last week from his Youtube and Gmail accounts — without explanation — at the time Google implemented its new free speech policy, which seems to serve the purpose of censoring and demonetizing thought leaders on the right like Peterson, all so said thought leaders can’t radicalize more dissidents within Google’s and societies’ ranks via the company’s video-sharing platform.
Despite Google’s latest efforts to stifle the new right’s wild popularity on Youtube, Pandora’s box has already been opened. There are now other revenue streams like crowdfunding, advertising and selling of products that will help continue to fuel these new thought leaders, no matter how much Google tries to shut them up.
As the zeitgeist goes through a revolutionary shift (i.e. red pilling) perhaps (tired and hackneyed) third-wave feminist Justin Trudeau’s horrendous government policy will be relooked at and exposed for its pathetically obvious pandering to women, which ignores the facts of the matter.
Back in May I wrote a piece titled “Tinker, Tailor, Sorry, Guys” in which I outlined some of the policies Trudeau’s government has created to favour women. For example, earlier this year, Trudeau decreed that universities give a higher percentage of federally-funded research chairs to women, yet the percentage of women pursuing the STEM fields at the doctorate level being much lower than that of men, echoing Trudeau’s gender-equal cabinet. As I explained in said column, many of the reasons — albeit sexism could still be a factor — I laid out, which I borrowed from second-wave feminist Warren Farrel’s Why Men Earn More (2005), are the same arguments Damore listed in his memo.
An excerpt from the column:
“Although too numerous to list here, among the reasons: jobs ranked the worst (although usually paying above the average income) are male-dominated because women tend to avoid these undesirable or dangerous jobs; men are more likely to take financial risks that can yield high payoffs, while women generally prefer a more secure career; and men work longer paid hours on average than women, which can significantly increase income. Farrel found as little as a 13 per cent increase in hourly work per week translated to a whopping average of 45 per cent more annual income.”
Damore also cites how biological research has found men are generally more interested in systematizing activities while women are generally more interested in people-oriented jobs. Damore, too, pointed out how men are more driven by status, ergo willing to make sacrifices to attain it, because of the importance it holds for them in their ability to reproduce. These are what some in the right call hate facts; they are scientifically backed truths, but they run counter to the safe-space PC narrative.
Damore is a mild-mannered, logical and straightforward techie, with a stellar education from Princeton and Harvard, who has obliterated the left-wing “echo chamber” by expounding the overwhelming evidence in a dispassionate essay. As much as the left-wing mainstream media tries to dismiss Damore as a sexist or a misogynist and his treatise as “a memo” or “a screed” (try Googling “Google memo”, the first five pages of search results are literally all screeds denouncing Damore) the cool-headed Damore and his evidenced-based piece will hopefully withstand the onslaught. Hopefully, if the left fails in its desperate attempts to rebuild its echo chamber, the media will start to confront how SJW policy has created reverse discrimination and a bigotry of low expectations.
Perhaps, one day soon, Trudeau will even have to go past his virtue-signalling policies and journalists will push him to elaborate on what “Because it’s 2015” really means.