Posted by strikeout26 on 6/10/2020 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 11:59:00 PM (view original):
Using the word "tyrannical" is hyperbolic, but yes, the patriarchy exists. I don't really have the energy to engage in this topic hardcore right now, but I'm sure coreander is.

The best argument I can put up right now is that men are undoubtedly pushed into certain social positions and roles, while women are as well. I know I have also read studies about women in politics, for instance, and how they are held to a different standard than men are. This can also be empirically demonstrated.

I do think that even in a patriarchy-less world, women and men would occupy different jobs overall. On the other end, I don't think women are making decisions today in terms of their career free from societal norms. The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.

My point from earlier was that if you buy into the redpill stuff, you also believe in the core ideas of the patriarchy. I will defend that statement.

It’s not hyperbole. The reason that the patriarchy is considered evil by those who are misinformed is because it’s considered tyrannical. It’s a complex issue, but given the time I could prove axiomatically that having hierarchies are actually a good thing.

The evidence is actually very clear that the more egalitarian a society becomes, the greater the disparity in job choice.

The last time you got laid was when. Seriously. Answer.

I would agree that hierarchies can be good, just as long as they aren't based on race or gender (or how wealthy your parents are).

I can't speak for everyone of his adherents, but I don't think there is any evidence Peterson ever had any problems getting laid. He also wrote Maps of Meaning (in the late 90s early 00s?) which really should establish him as something more than some YouTube provacateur. I am most familiar with 12 Rules for Life and a lot of the criticism thrown his way always baffles me based on what I have read in that book. Telling men to grow up and take responsibility (and not specifically men but that is the demographic bias of his readership) seems the opposite of coddling young men driven to self-pity through lack of sex. Just my take. Still, I think the work of Jonathon Haidt is more profound and is my go-to (I know some have placed them in the same ballpark)

Posted by Uofa2 on 6/10/2020 12:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/10/2020 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 11:59:00 PM (view original):
Using the word "tyrannical" is hyperbolic, but yes, the patriarchy exists. I don't really have the energy to engage in this topic hardcore right now, but I'm sure coreander is.

The best argument I can put up right now is that men are undoubtedly pushed into certain social positions and roles, while women are as well. I know I have also read studies about women in politics, for instance, and how they are held to a different standard than men are. This can also be empirically demonstrated.

I do think that even in a patriarchy-less world, women and men would occupy different jobs overall. On the other end, I don't think women are making decisions today in terms of their career free from societal norms. The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.

My point from earlier was that if you buy into the redpill stuff, you also believe in the core ideas of the patriarchy. I will defend that statement.

It’s not hyperbole. The reason that the patriarchy is considered evil by those who are misinformed is because it’s considered tyrannical. It’s a complex issue, but given the time I could prove axiomatically that having hierarchies are actually a good thing.

The evidence is actually very clear that the more egalitarian a society becomes, the greater the disparity in job choice.

The last time you got laid was when. Seriously. Answer.

Lol. Let’s see. Saturday. I believe. I’m married with two kids, so.

Posted by tangplay on 6/10/2020 12:27:00 AM (view original):
I would agree that hierarchies can be good, just as long as they aren't based on race or gender (or how wealthy your parents are).

Yep. Need to be based on competency.

Posted by Uofa2 on 6/10/2020 12:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 11:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/9/2020 10:39:00 PM (view original):
You proposed the debate. I’m not particularly interested in engaging in it, but I will.

I find his proposition in the video to be very reasonable. You misinterpreted what he was saying. His argument was that we need to draw a specific line to know what the boundaries are. He gave two extreme examples with the lipstick and negligees, saying that the line falls somewhere in the middle, but it hasn’t been defined.

I find it frustrating that he makes all sorts of claims about the problems with women, but refuses to put an actual prescription out there. Maybe we just view the video differently. I don't disagree with Peterson on most of what he says. My problem, again, is that he leaves the door open for his radical following to justify their hatred of women. If Peterson believes that women belong in the workplace, he should make that position very clear. He failed to do that in this interview.

Peterson is a dude who couldn't get laid in college, hey join the club! I didn't create some weirdass pseudo cult about women being the problem though. I, you know, acknowledged my faults and worked on them. Like an actual man.

Emeril says “BAM!”

Posted by Guitarguy567 on 6/10/2020 5:05:00 AM (view original):
I can't speak for everyone of his adherents, but I don't think there is any evidence Peterson ever had any problems getting laid. He also wrote Maps of Meaning (in the late 90s early 00s?) which really should establish him as something more than some YouTube provacateur. I am most familiar with 12 Rules for Life and a lot of the criticism thrown his way always baffles me based on what I have read in that book. Telling men to grow up and take responsibility (and not specifically men but that is the demographic bias of his readership) seems the opposite of coddling young men driven to self-pity through lack of sex. Just my take. Still, I think the work of Jonathon Haidt is more profound and is my go-to (I know some have placed them in the same ballpark)

https://www.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/comments/8v0234/jordan_peterson_denies_saying_things_hes/

Peterson is a chode. Promote him if you want but I personally don't like to promote chodes. Eff him.

Do not get me started on Jordan Peterson. I have been working to get the subreddit dedicated to him banned...or at the very least quarantined. His ideas are toxic.

Posted by coreander on 6/10/2020 9:54:00 AM (view original):
Do not get me started on Jordan Peterson. I have been working to get the subreddit dedicated to him banned...or at the very least quarantined. His ideas are toxic.

toxic = totally opposite mine

Why must all it's (I've never asked the person what pronoun they would prefer) ideas be wrong and all yours must be right. Pretty close-minded of you.

Jordan Peterson believes there are innate differences between the sexes. Without even mentioning all of his other horrible opinions, that alone should suffice to tell you just how toxic Peterson is. He should not have a platform to spew hate and misogyny.

There ARE innate differences between the sexes. The most basic being that the male brain is larger.

Science has shown that gender is a construct. You are flat out wrong.

Even IF gender is not one of them, there ARE innate differences between "male" and "female" brains, or are isn't size a difference?

Our biological sexual identity exists on a spectrum. We create the words. We create the labels. The culture we live in dictates how we interpret these truths.

Why do you keep dwelling on one thing, that I've already even said MAY not be a difference. That does not mean there are no other differences. Again, the pure size of the brain IS an innate difference. That is a (from what I see when searching) almost unanimously agreed upon fact. You need to stop trying to ignore facts just because they don't agree with your beliefs.