Have you listened to him at all? The hundreds of hours of his recorded and publicly available actual words on the subject might be relevant here when reading about a 5-second snippet of a much larger dialogue.
I've seen a decent amount of his stuff, prompted by this site. I find him literally insane. He rants about Disney moves and enforced monogamy. He's a fucking lunatic
These are new comments following a high profile attack that referenced abhorrent sexual politics. Quite frankly what he has said before this is not nearly as important as his response to specific questions about it. He says explicitly “enforced monogamy” is the answer to pathetic men that lash out at sexual rejection with violence. That’s a disgusting and sexist thought.
It's also just entirely insane. Like a normal sexist just says weird derogatory shit. "We should make these chicks fuck these losers for the better of society" is absolutely bat shit
And for the love of Christ, whose resurrection will soon be proven for $24.99, please refer to him as Dr. Peterson. He’s earned that much.
Honestly I can’t tell if this is satire or not. Either way, I got a kick out of it. Evolutionary biologists/psychologists have all kinds of weird theories about the sexes. It doesn’t make them right and they’d be the first to admit so. Peterson is a liberal Canadian university professor free speech radical. He is so far left of anything in the US that he would make Bernie Sanders seem like a viable Republican candidate. So you think the Toronto killer was a normally functioning member of society?
What lecture does he rant about enforced monogamy on? He’s big on Jungian archetypes, which does get very tiresome, but I’ve never heard him talk about enforced monogamy.
There are quotes in this thread. Is the rant not long enough for you or something? Or is he just so smart that normal people don't understand his point?
Your first three paragraphs have nothing to do with the fact that what he says is sexist offensive and dangerous. Harvey Weinstein is famously liberal. That doesn’t mean he respects female sexual agency either. The Toronto killer was a functioning member of society, he just resented the fuck out of it. Because the woman/women he wanted to fuck wouldn’t fuck him. To suggest that society should capitulate to his desires to prevent future killings by enforcing monogamy is ridiculous, but that’s exactly what Peterson said. You can choose to believe he’s right, but that makes you an awful person too.
the default when faced with something problematic he said to refer to his endless stream of youtube clips is an odd defense
I'd also be curious what political policies Peterson has expressed support for that put him left of Bernie, but I can understand that part of the post was meant to be a tangent sooo
The single quote on that subject ITT is a reference to a new NYT article, which is disputed, and objectively consists of two sentences of a much longer interview. As far as I know, the full interview hasn’t been released. So....maybe you were just lying about hearing him lecture on favoring enforced marriages?
The issue is that theres nothing all that sympathetic about incels. I guess they are a big group, but the killers in the group seem to be hyper materialistic people who think other people are objects that exist for their amusement. But there is $80,000 a month at stake to cape up for disaffected millennial men, so Peterson goes along with it.
The guy was asked specifically about the incel attack and his response was to say “you know the killer that thought he should be able to fuck whichever woman he wanted had a point.” Whatever he posted in his online lectures before that is irrelevant to determining how awful his response to that question is.
i dont know whether being a snake oil salesman who realized creating a quasi intellectual argument to prop up the white male status quo mixed with a little self-helpness or if hes really a true believer is worse
Fair enough...not that they don’t all suck, but people like Peterson and Shapiro are different than a straight up mongoloid like Hannity imo
Only because hannity has access to make money and be just as corrupt as the people he supports. Shapiro and Peterson are small fish and don't get to exploit those benefits, doesn't mean they wouldnt
No, I completely believe he said that one sentence. I even said you’re more than welcome to disagree with him, I kinda do myself. I specifically asked you if you had ever listened to him, because I have a hunch that single sentence might have a bit of context around it given the tone of the piece. You responded that you’d actually heard him lecture on this subject. Since the interview isn’t available, I asked where you’d heard it at? I’d gladly be proven wrong.
Weird that a guy who is so far left of anyone in the United States somehow attracts right leaning dudes who are too embarrassed too identify with Rs.
It's more than one sentence. I never said I heard him lecture on the subject. I said yes I have watched his weird ass rants. I then incorporated all mediums that a person can use when I described him as a fucking nut job. Are we only supposed to use lectures to gauge someone and ignore other aspects?
Hes just out of his lane. Hes smart guy, but hes worked himself over time from a free speech radical/hyper logical nerd/Jungian into an international celebrity who is expected to have brilliant right leaning insights on everything, and the check depends on it.
My point was that I think Peterson and Shapiro actually have the capacity for intelligent thought...unlike Hannity
He’s a tenured social science professsor of psychology at a major university in a country much further to the left than the US. The chances of him being a raving anti-feminist championing arranged marriages are so infentesimal that it’s almost laughable.
Debatable all around. I think hannity sings a different tune that isn't nearly as bad if his current character wasn't built to enrich the shit out of him. it's a hard thing to figure out with the dynamic
I used “lectures” to encompass any of his available media. Again, please point me to his “rants” supporting enforced monogamy and I’m happy to admit I’m wrong.
The article is linked in here multiple times. As are the quotes. If you're clinging to the rants distinction, then you do you. How about if I change that to his opinion? Does that make you feel better? Is he now validated that it's only his opinion that enforced monogamy is a thing and not a rant?
I doubt anyone thinks he supports enforced monogamy...but that doesn’t really matter since he’s pretending that it’s a legitimate argument...because he’s in the business of selling bullshit to loser alt right types
I have. I told you I did. It's interesting you're more interested in calling me a liar than admitting your boy literally stated he believes in enforced monogamy
Again, for the hundredth time, please direct me to anything other than that one quote where he says that and I’ll happily eat crow. You said you’d heard him talk about it all the time along with Disney movies.
No, I did not say that. I made a statement about his beliefs. I'm sorry you misunderstood the direction of my post. I was making a statement about how absolutely bat shit he is in general. I find it hilarious you just roll with the Disney thing like "yeah frozen conspiracy theorists are totally normal people". Do you man
My hunch is the interviewer was acting about as cuntish as you are right now and he said something a little on edge to intentionally provoke her. But again, the crux of his argument—that societies that have employed and married young men are on average better than the opposite—is fairly well established.
yeah the interviewer totally baited him into it. There's no possible way he could have ever said that. He's so weak that it's all interviewer prompted and he can't help himself
Yes, I said I've seen his stuff. I have. I then said I find him insane and stated things that are insane and didn't mention a medium. Why are you so tied up in our misunderstanding on my medium reference and ignorning that he's a Disney movie conspiracy theorist?
Surely in the hours and hours of lectures you’ve listened to you can find better evidence than “he’s a tenured professor and he’s from Canada”? Come on, guy.