Too funny:
Jordan Peterson calmly dismantles feminism infront of two feminists
This will be a great thread for posting JP videos. And the title of the thread need not even be changed. Love it.
Too funny:
Jordan Peterson calmly dismantles feminism infront of two feminists
This will be a great thread for posting JP videos. And the title of the thread need not even be changed. Love it.
Originally posted by MythLord
Honestly, enforcing monogamy is stupid, yeah.
Originally posted by Surtur
It's not an example of patriarchy for both men and women to be forced to be faithful. It would be a bad idea, but it's not patriarchy.
If you remember the deceptively cut vice interview the leftists tried to use to smear him, in the full interview he referred to workplace rules regulating things like hugging and flirtation as authoritarian. Then when he proposed that people shouldn't have sex until at least the fourth date, the interviewer was like "isn't that authoritarian and Maoist" and Jordan Peterson responded with "the difference is I'm not saying there should be people forcing them to do this, I'm saying it's a better idea" or something along those lines.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
ESB already correctly pointed out that the meaning of that statement is socially and culturally enforced monogamy, not government compelled monogamy.If you remember the deceptively cut vice interview the leftists tried to use to smear him, in the full interview he referred to workplace rules regulating things like hugging and flirtation as authoritarian. Then when he proposed that people shouldn't have sex until at least the fourth date, the interviewer was like "isn't that authoritarian and Maoist" and Jordan Peterson responded with "the difference is I'm not saying there should be people forcing them to do this, I'm saying it's a better idea" or something along those lines.
Speaking of deceptive editing with JP, watch this if you have time, NBC does it too:
Originally posted by Surtur
YouTube video
Anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders is the alt-right nowadays
Great thread Rocky, love it!! Cuz JP has a lot he says that folk should hear:
And don't you worry bro, more videos will be coming.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
[B]ESB already correctly pointed out that the meaning of that statement is socially and culturally enforced monogamy, not government compelled monogamy.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
No he didn't, he posed a link which literally contradicts his claim. Would it kill you to read discussions rather than cherrypick the parts you like?
Good job at reading the link I provided you. You're defining enforced and NOT enforced monogamy. So, I'll try this again:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3260845/
Read it this time and maybe you'll actually understand the anthropological concept of enforced monogamy.
Alright DMB, tell me, what am I ignoring here. I'm not obliged to consider evidence you or the dude you're defending failed to provide me.
Well, now that you've confirmed you don't actually read people's responses, i'll repeat myself esb. In what you linked me to, "enforced marriage", came up once:
monogamous marriage is both normative and legally enforced
As it stands, you've provided literally no evidence peterson is using "enforced" in a different way then the dictionary says we should use it.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
If you remember the deceptively cut vice interview the leftists tried to use to smear him, in the full interview he referred to workplace rules regulating things like hugging and flirtation as authoritarian. Then when he proposed that people shouldn't have sex until at least the fourth date, the interviewer was like "isn't that authoritarian and Maoist" and Jordan Peterson responded with "the difference is I'm not saying there should be people forcing them to do this, I'm saying it's a better idea" or something along those lines.
A retarded argument to make as no one is "forcing you" to not flirt or hug. Individual companies have their ideas of what comprises as sexual harassment and you agree to abide by those rules when you agree to be employed by them. If you don't like your company's policy on sexual harassment you're free to leave at any time and seek employment elsewhere.
It's always amusing how quickly conservatives drop the "muh free market muh invisible hand mofuka a business should be free to run itself" narrative when it doesn't suit their interests. I guess businesses should only moderate their own employees at their own discretion when said employees are god fearing white men who aren't demanding better pay and benefits, eh?
Originally posted by Tzeentch
A retarded argument to make as no one is "forcing you" to not flirt or hug. Individual companies have their ideas of what comprises as sexual harassment and you agree to abide by those rules when you agree to be employed by them. If you don't like your company's policy on sexual harassment you're free to leave at any time and seek employment elsewhere.It's always amusing how quickly conservatives drop the "muh free market a business should be free to run itself" narrative when it doesn't suit them. I guess businesses should only moderate their own employees at their own discretion when said employees are god fearing white men who aren't demanding better pay and benefits, eh?
I think you missed his point.