Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/9/2020 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 8:06:00 PM (view original):
At this point, I have no reason to assume that guitarguy will defend his statements. I've tried to combat his arguments, but he just ignores them and repeats the same BS talking points. He'll probably do the same with the C-16 stuff.

We hopefully debate arguments, friend, rather than combat. I'm not sure why he won't engage.

Like I tell my wife, I don’t argue with her, I discuss with her. She never seems to believe me.

Racism is just as much of a public health issue as coronavirus. Case closed!

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/9/2020 10:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/9/2020 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 8:06:00 PM (view original):
At this point, I have no reason to assume that guitarguy will defend his statements. I've tried to combat his arguments, but he just ignores them and repeats the same BS talking points. He'll probably do the same with the C-16 stuff.

We hopefully debate arguments, friend, rather than combat. I'm not sure why he won't engage.

Like I tell my wife, I don’t argue with her, I discuss with her. She never seems to believe me.

Yeah, My wife says I never hear what she is telling me. I say that I always hear her, just rarely agree.

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.

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/9/2020 10:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/9/2020 10:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gomiami1972 on 6/9/2020 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 8:06:00 PM (view original):
At this point, I have no reason to assume that guitarguy will defend his statements. I've tried to combat his arguments, but he just ignores them and repeats the same BS talking points. He'll probably do the same with the C-16 stuff.

We hopefully debate arguments, friend, rather than combat. I'm not sure why he won't engage.

Like I tell my wife, I don’t argue with her, I discuss with her. She never seems to believe me.

Yeah, My wife says I never hear what she is telling me. I say that I always hear her, just rarely agree.

my wife says I never listen to her...or something like that.

He is very specific with his language. He would never say that women belong in the workplace. He has made it clear repeatedly that they are welcome in the workplace. They don’t necessarily “belong” anywhere. They are free to choose where they want to be.

I understand your point. I’m not trying to play a semantics game, but that is one of his rules in 12 rules for life. Be precise with your language. It fits here. There is a big difference between women “belonging” somewhere and being welcomed somewhere if they choose to be a part of it.

I only mention the distinction in the language because the feminist movement reached a point where women who chose to be homemakers were looked down on. It was almost like they weren’t doing there social duty for the cause. I know my wife has battled with that.

This has been especially prevalent in the technology sector. The reality is that there are biological differences between men and women despite what humanities and gender studies programs are teaching and women tend to favor careers geared towards people (I.e. healthcare, education) and men lean towards things (I.e technology, engineering).

OK. I don't think we will really disagree with a lot here. I think Peterson has more of an obligation for what his fanbase does. I don't think Peterson himself is a sexist, but many sexists love him and use his work to validate their ideology.

Regarding feminism, anyone who tells a woman that they cannot work in the home if they don't want to hasn't read enough feminist literature. I'm not sure what point you are making with paragraph four.

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/9/2020 8:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 8:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 6/9/2020 8:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 8:20:00 PM (view original):
I'm really interested to see what guitarguy's defense of C-16 would have been had you not intervened. I guarantee he had never actually read the bill or looked into it. Probably heard Jordan Peterson or Andy Ngo mention it and got outraged at all the trannys.

Who is Andy Ngo? Is he Asian or was that a typo?

He's a conservative "journalist" that guitarguy cited earlier.

No, it's not a typo. He's Asian.

I’ll have to take a listen. I like to hear all sides. My listening this morning was a professor that wrote a book titled “Why Marx was right.” The irony is that he spent the first five minutes trying to make money off of a book that bashes capitalism. I found that entertaining.

I forgot to disagree with this take earlier. I don't think it's hypocritical for socialists to succeed or try to succeed in a capitalist system. For instance, Bernie Sanders being a millionaire and having three homes isn't contrary to his worldview. If he, for instance, didn't treat workers well or didn't pay taxes, that would be contradictory.

If someone has an ideology that they believe would improve the world, they shouldn't be expected to live out that lifestyle at the expense of their well-being if the rest of society doesn't conform to it.

Ooh, one more thing on Feminism. I'm not as educated on this topic as I would be in others, but I do know that most "red-pilled" people actually would agree with feminists on many issues. The issues that the Men's rights community talks about are actually explained away by the patriarchy extremely well. Feminists that hate men aren't feminists.

Fighting the patriarchy would absolutely benefit men, women, and everyone in between.

It depends on what you mean by feminist movement. If they’re reading literature from the original feminist movement, you’re correct. I agree with their platform. The new feminist is different. They have almost imposed an obligation on women to join certain sectors and to work period. I was saying that the reason you don’t see many women in those fields has less to do with sexism and more to do with choices made by women. It works in reverse as well. Women aren’t keeping men out of healthcare and education. Men just aren’t signing up.

Posted by tangplay on 6/9/2020 11:41:00 PM (view original):
Ooh, one more thing on Feminism. I'm not as educated on this topic as I would be in others, but I do know that most "red-pilled" people actually would agree with feminists on many issues. The issues that the Men's rights community talks about are actually explained away by the patriarchy extremely well. Feminists that hate men aren't feminists.

Fighting the patriarchy would absolutely benefit men, women, and everyone in between.

There’s no evidence of a tyrannical patriarchy. Don’t fall into that trap and buy this myth.

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.

Fighting the patriarchy would probably rely on more social action and less legislative action, which is why I'm less passionate about it than I am about racial issues.

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.

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.