He has extensive experience helping female clients address professional challenges. He has extensive experience helping female clients face and recover from sexual and physical abuse. It’s pretty funny seeing people make these kinds of statements about him. Recently he was editorially accused of being anti-Semitic by one outlet and a Jewish shill by another in the same week.
It’s also very typical for tmb, lets say, “non leftists” (I don’t know what term to use since your over generalizationtion of everyone who doesn’t hate women as a leftist is tough to level set with) to go to bat for a guy without ever explaining how his beliefs align with yours. Also stop calling people leftists. It exposes your ignorance at square one.
None of these guys have taken the time to actually understand JP’s prevailing themes, body of work, etc. That much should be patently obvious by now. They are taking lone sentences completely out of context and focusing in on them with one sole purpose - to marginalize JP generally and paint him as an extremist catering to their favorite boogeyman, the “alt-right”. None of this has any basis in objective reality. As you say, JP has hundreds of hours of lectures, writings, etc. available for their consumption if they really want to know what he’s all about. They don’t. They are employing typical tactics of the left in their (weak) attempts to destroy the man’s character. This is what they do. It’s all they do. It’s pathetic.
Forgive me for stating the obvious - but no one with two neurons firing correctly believes he was arguing for compelled partnership. Which is why I tried to ignore that topic all together. It's beneath any self-respecting adult.
Please direct us to specific statements Peterson has made that are "clearly hostile to female sexual agency". This is a serious claim and while I realize character assassination is your only actual goal here I'm still interested in your response.
The regressive left is in meltdown mode over JP because he can announce a lecture in NYC or London and sell out an arena. He's a big deal now. His ideas have real currency and they are spreading like wildfire. The left realizes he is a clear and present danger to their attempts to radicalize as many gullible young people (like the ones posting here) as they can and thus they are now in full "hit job" mode in an attempt to assassinate JP's character. For the regressive left, dealing with his ideas was never an option. Their MO is character assassination by association. Ideas aren't their thing.
Come on man leftist is plenty accurate for a lot of people on this board. Is that even an offensive term? There’s two masturbatory left threads on here that are clearly labeled that way. I don’t consider calling someone far right an insult if they make it known they are.
We will call them what they are - which is regressive leftists. I don't give a fuck if you like it or not. Their behavior in this thread has earned them the label. And then some.
I don’t consider it being a leftist because to believe in human decency, equality, and rights for everyone. It’s silly and unhealthy to paint with such a broad brush. And I still can’t believe this guy is a thing. It’s like a bad comdey portrayal of a men’s rights activist.
He also agreed with the statement that women in the workplace are hypocritical if they don't want to be sexually harassed but wear makeup. Come the fuck on.
I wish the interviewer had fleshed that out more. At this point you guys are just grasping at straws to paint JP as a misogynist and that's not much to go on. Stating that the "#metoo" movement is rife with hypocrisy is just stating the obvious. I don't agree with JP here but I also don't have enough information to know what he really thinks on the topic since there were no follow-up questions to tease it out.
Yes, I'm really grasping at straws by quoting the exact question he was asked and his answer to it, in which he affirmed a misogynistic point of view. And what possible explanation gained in flushing out that answer more would make the answer ok or tolerable?
You're going to need a lot more to make that statement. Sorry. Taking these snippets and using them to paint a picture that affirms your preconceived notions doesn't pass muster.
an objectivist playing smartest guy in the room is arrogance we haven't seen on TMB since TheChatch's heyday. Please keep posting Shakedown
It's the same guy who said that "the idea that women have been discriminated against across the course history is appalling" and that "there's something not quite right" with women who don't make their primary desire having a child by the age of 30. At some point, there's enough evidence in these "snippets" to confirm a world view in my eyes.
The cause is always righteous and the ends always justify the means. This guy is singing from a very old playbook but lacks the historical knowledge/understanding to know it. He's a useful idiot.
"Do you feel like a serious woman, who does not want sexual harassment in the workplace...Do you feel like if she wears makeup in the workplace, that she's being somewhat hypocritical?" "Yeah. I do think that."
Which is fair. My bad. I've updated my original post. I don't think it changes the tenor of the affirmation coming from Peterson though at all.
Perhaps not. But if your opponent is making the case that you don't actually know what sort of arguments JP is making, exact language is crucial to supporting your own argument.
Pardon the interruption, as I generally have followed Gubbs’ requests for no polotics (and I’m also an admitted regressive leftist sjw libcucktard), but I’m genuinely interested in Peterson’s views on women and feminism. From everything I’ve read on the last few pages, his defenders are saying his statements have been taken out of context, but I haven’t seen anybody clarify what his actual position is. I also understand that he’s got thousands of hours of lectures and books on these topics, but I’d assume that some of his positions can be boiled down into a paragraph or two. If not, my apologies for jumping in.
Pointing out the obvious and inherent hypocrisies of third and fourth wave feminism is not tantamount to misogyny. There are lots of women making these or similar arguments - Paglia, Hoff-Sommers, etc. The problem is no one here is interested in a genuine intellectual discussion. This thread and this forum is increasingly the domain of virtue-signaling, PC Principal types who lack the intellectual depth and maturity to discuss difficult topics honestly.
I get that it's frustrating and the left guys on here are often exasperatingly belligerent, but you yourself don't exactly guide the way with the tone some of your posts take.
Google any of his stuff on hypergamy. It's clear from those clips that he blames female sexual choice for the stress men experience. He'll say it's not women's fault and that its just nature but the causative agent is clearly female sexual agency. And in the NYT piece he quite clearly posits a solution to that "problem" - removing that agency.
Did we ever learn in what ways JP is to the left of Bernie? I've been looking forward to that revelation.
imagine being peterson or defending his belief in this particular quote: The left, he believes, refuses to admit that men might be in charge because they are better at it. “The people who hold that our culture is an oppressive patriarchy, they don’t want to admit that the current hierarchy might be predicated on competence,” he said. knowing that donald fucking trump was elected president.
When you remove all the virtue-signaling and SJW nonsense, Peterson has a point. These are the kinds of discussions we need to be having in an era where Orwellian tactics are employed to stifle speech, stamp out dissent dissent and enforce the status quo. And make no mistake that in America today - particularly in certain spheres - radical leftist thought has become the status quo. "donald fucking trump" has had a pretty successful first 16 months in office - historically successful, actually.