Then you already know that Peterson leads himself down some pretty absurd rabbit holes and espouses his pseudointellectualism when his positions are challenged.

When it comes to his religious stances, he irritates me in that he won't be clear what he believes. I think honestly he doesn't believe but wants to maintain the illusion that he might and as such becomes evasive on that topic.

Matt is more straight forward but also boring and uninspired.

In general, Jordan Peterson's best work is his literary analysis of the Bible in the series of college lectures he has on YouTube.

based on what

That's logic for ya. It doesn't become sexy until you assign some beauty to it a la Sagan.

Based on the fact that he secretly likes Peterson.

Nah he's just not an original thinker. His claim to fame is arguing with religious retards on the phone

That's big science right there.

Moving goalposts to strawmanning to ad hominem smh

.... You know what I said is correct

^This message brought to you by a white boy glued to his screen

Nah he's duct taped. He gets more DIY cred that way.

Why the **** haven't you joined a commune yet?

What do you mean supposed to be?

Heh. I started ****ing up in middle school. By high school I would hardly attend class.

My point wasn't too make you say you were unhappy though. A little adversity is good for the spirit. You ever meet anyone who skated through life that was worth talking to?

What kind of right wing junk specifically?

Any American that says they’re going to “university” should immediately be expelled.

https://66.media.tumblr.com/5cd0987b...byf0o1_500.gif

Why didn't you answer my question? I feel it was a very simple one

We all know you have no tolerance for that.

Stop acting like you’re entitled to control the conversation.

I'm entitled to ask him why he didn't answer my question. Just you try and stop me.

My friend that tried to pedal Peterson on to me also tried to tell me that the kissless virgin shooter just snapped because life is so unfair or sumn and I had to tell him that the dude was a spoiled rich brat that felt entitled to women's bodies and threw a temper tantrum when he didn't get it.

Those people are crazy.

So what? Unless they told him they were inviting the other dude its totally reasonable. I dont like Peterson but this is so lol.

:beer:

He wants to study "maths" and wear the school "colours."

Bloody wankers. I'm off to go snog a cat.

Isn’t that pretty much the same thing?

Joe Biden:

Trump staff member tweets:

Biden still way ahead on the polls.

Dems. They’re gonna pick the only guy who couldn’t sell cold beer in Hell.

I've never heard him say anything pro incel or along the lines of men being owed women's attention or bodies

There are plenty of things he's said that I don't agree with but generally speaking his haters don't seem to have a clue what he actually stands for.

Idk man. I remember one talk about makeup in the work place and how women only wear it to appear sexy to men. I can acknowledge there is probably some truth to that but it lacks nuance and even if it isnt pro-incel its certainly something theyd adopt.

There was debate/interview where he was saying that women wear makeup just to be attractive to men and that men just can't control themselves to insinuate that women bring sexual harassment onto themselves. You really need to understand the art of subtlety to get the moral outrage you keep mocking. Nobody is going to out right say these ****ed up ideas. They hide it under layers of watered down language and masked rhetoric to make taboo narratives seem more palatable and thoughtful. It's a technique the KKK adopted once they became unfavorable. I'd find and post the vid but I'm on a phone right now.

Damn, beat me to it.

I saw that interview. Saying that make up plays on some obvious biological and sexual cues isn't telling men they are entitled to rape women. I agree it wasn't his best quote and he should know people are going to read into anything he says beyond what he means but I think your interpretation lacks the same kind of nuance you're accusing me of lacking. You just take the worst possible interpretation and run with it.

Which is what interviews like that are really designed to do... Which is why they took an hour of footage and edited it down to 7 minutes.

Cause he's not going to outright say it.

Not entitled to rape but it was a lame attempt to justify sexual harassment, catcalling, etc

What is it that you think he means?

Can you dig up the link?

My problem with Peterson is that cultural Marxism doesn't really mean anything. It's a weird umbrella term he throws everything and the kitchen sink under when what he's really railing against is intersectionality.

@Lucem I've heard him talk specifically about incels and he's said the opposite. That it's a man's own fault if women don't find them attractive.

I don't think he was defending any of that. He was basically trying to inject some nuance into the discussion over what is acceptable forms of sexuality in the workplace. You can accuse him of being a prude, but not of advocating any sort of harassment.

I'm at work... Maybe later. I think it was a Vox interview


Zizek called him out on that in their debate. It was the only strong moment Zizek had in the debate. Other than that he completely failed to defend Communism.

Possibly. Its been a while maybe im missremembering. I dont see how you can take a paoition against makeup though if that was his point. I didnt say he was advocating harassment i said he was justifying it (with his hyper prude position) and that incels could very easily use his speech to advocate for harassment.

Enforced monogamy (even if he thinks it should be enforced by culture and not the gubmnet) as a way to control women's reproductive rights ("to protect the babies, you see") definitely reeks of male entitlement to women's bodies.

But let's say that none of these examples check the box, why do you think he attracts so many incels?

Enforced monogamy just means monogamy as the cultural norm vs polygamy. You could easily argue women tended to have less rights in most polygamous societies.

I haven't seen any stats on him with incels. I know the self help angle largely appeals to young men who are struggling in one shape or fashion. tbh I've not read his book or anything and was mostly into the biblical lectures.

I'm aware. One of his two key justifications for enforced monogamy is controlling women's reproduction, which is the incelly angle that I was pointing out.

So just the self help angle?

I see him in the same light as the dude who wrote The Bell Curve. They take some form of evidence to draw hasty conclusions to support what they already believe. Then they hide behind the fact that they never directly saying anything racist/sexist/etc., they're just telling everyone the FAXTS and that anyone criticizing their interpretation are criticizing the facts themselves.

But ja he's a solid biblical historian I'll give him that. Definitely the most interesting material he's put out.