Peterson handled this interview well, but I still find his equivocation of Mao with trans-activists to be ridiculous.
I heard about that too. Stupid. Being a warehouse worker is obviously tougher than being an attendant, and I'd imagine that male attendants are also paid less than warehouse workers for that very reason. Unless the women can link the disparity in wages directly to gender, I don't see their case going very far.
you're going to be alone forever, sucking his nipple.
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
He said “I'm saying that the philosophy that is guiding their utterances is the same philosophy that already has driven us to the deaths of millions”
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
...what? How does Peterson fiat anything on the basis of his academic credentials? He gives one snarky comeback to Cathy asking him why he has a “right” to say something but for the rest of the debate doesn’t try to fiat from authority anywhere...?
I do like how you will go after low hanging fruit like mocking Trump’s ****ups while accusing Surtur of making shitposts but always come in threads that are tougher for your position to say you aren’t interested in responding to things though.
Because a trans-activist asking to be referred to by certain pronouns (and thus choose how they are defined), in no way puts them in the same ideological quadrant as Mao. It's an absurd exaggeration. And simply using different pronouns for a tiny slice of the population won't set us on the path of a Marxist police state seizing the means of production and agriculture.
Except that they don't share an ideology in common. The primary goal of trans-activists is to obtain equal rights and opportunities for trans-people and encourage the adoption of gender-neutral pronouns. Neither of those goals are inherently Marxist in nature. And although some trans-activists may be Marxists, that isn't justification for tarring all/most trans-activists with that label and lumping them in with Mao.
Last edited by lazybones on Feb 8th, 2018 at 05:16 PM
Not "encourage," and not "obtain equal rights," in the case Peterson is referring to, they want the government to enforce the law that when speaking to a trans person, you state their pronoun of choice, or face legal and violent repercussions.
Suggesting that someone face criminal charges for not saying the specific words another person dictates to them is pure insanity, as I'm sure you can agree. It's against free speech and is tantamount to thought-policing.
He's not dangerous at all. He doesn't advocate for violence or harassment, and has publicly spoken out against it. He is quite vehement about his stances, such as his belief that equality of opportunity is a far better way to go than equality of outcome, and what he says about freedom of speech and how the government shouldn't be allowed to tell people what they can and can't say.
He made a show of Newman, though. It was crazy to the point where she actually started to agree with him and see his point.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured... the first thought forbidden... the first freedom denied – chains us all irrevocably."