Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i voiced a valid criticism concerning his absolute claim of authority on the matter, which he clearly suggested. i am not allowed to say that without then being obligated to dissect his entire dissertation?oh well, i guess i'll just have to face the consequences. what are they? 😮
You didn't really voice a valid criticism. You repeated leftist cuck talking points.
Can you name anything this man has said you disagree with?
Peterson handled this interview well, but I still find his equivocation of Mao with trans-activists to be ridiculous.
Originally posted by EmperordmbI 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.
Speaking of the wage gap myth, a bunch of feminists are suing this company tescos... because warehouse workers who are mostly men make more money than attendants in stores or something who are mostly women...They're literally pissed that people get paid differently for two different jobs and are trying to sue over it lol
Originally posted by Surtur
Peterson isn't perfect this is true. Just nowhere near as delusional as his opponents.And I honestly forget the context of the Mao thing, what was it he said?
Originally posted by Emperordmb
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”
Lol and I don't see how that is wrong at all to say. Seems like he is saying the shit we're seeing now is how it starts and it can lead us down an even darker path potentially.
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i am under no obligation to counter anyone. i made an observation on page 1 that the clown was declaring himself an infallible authority based on a phd, who's every marginal hypothesis must be accepted. since when is it my responsibility to pay audience to everyone who got ass-blasted by my comment? also, think what you want of me bruh. i'm not here to impress you. *shrug*
...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.
Originally posted by SurturBecause 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.
Lol and I don't see how that is wrong at all to say. Seems like he is saying the shit we're seeing now is how it starts and it can lead us down an even darker path potentially.
Originally posted by StigmaExcept 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.
He specifically said he refers to the ideology that they share in common.
Originally posted by lazybones
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.
One may venture what percentage of those activists are adherents of Marxism (I'd guesstimate that a vast majority, if not virtually all of them, but it's just my hunch.)
TLDR: They share Marxism, a totalitarian ideology.
Originally posted by lazybonesNot "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.
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.
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.
Originally posted by lazybones
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.
Originally posted by Stigma
I am aware of what you're saying, but it does not negate his point (at least not entirely).One may venture what percentage of those activists are adherents of Marxism (I'd guesstimate that a vast majority, if not virtually all of them, but it's just my hunch.)
TLDR: They share Marxism, a totalitarian ideology.
I was agreeing with lazybones but I see your point, Stigma.
Dictating how others should speak is usually a bad idea. It should not be done from a governmental standpoint.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I was agreeing with lazybones but I see your point, Stigma.Dictating how others should speak is usually a bad idea. It should not be done from a governmental standpoint.
And also it's very true that it can also lead to a slippery slope that eventually leads to some truly horrible shit going down.
Its fun when Cartoons DEBUNK almost everything Real People say about this guy....Jordan Peterson that is....
Looks like some snowflakes got their Fee Fee's hurt... Lets see how long it lasts this time...
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Looks like some snowflakes got their Fee Fee's hurt... Lets see how long it lasts this time...YouTube video [/B]
Hilarious, I love seeing people get triggered by him. Kinda like this article from The Guardian:
How dangerous is Jordan B Peterson, the rightwing professor who 'hit a hornets' nest'?
How dangerous is he? The answer is: he's not dangerous at all.
The most hilarious part is them labeling him right wing.
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.