Ask Hadley on Jordan Peterson

Christ fms that article is frightening. From a friend too. Has it made you have a rethink about JP?

Sillage

Females with internalized misogyny are here on this thread licking Peterson' odious balls

And that would include Posie Parker? I'm used to that sort of nonsense from you Sillage but as I said on the prostitution thread you really should try getting out of your echo chamber occasionally if you can describe Posy like that.

The ironic thing about the "monogamy is good for men" thing is that it's often men who screw monogamy up. It's men who are much more likely to trade in their wife for a younger model, men who are more likely to be illegal bigamists or start cults where the head guy (it's always a guy!) gets to be polygamous leaving few women for the other blokes dozy enough to join the cult. This is largely a male created problem. Women are happy with one bloke at a time of about their age.

Another "hit" piece but this time written by someone who knows JBP well, considers him a friend. JP even tweeted this himself with "my good friend"

I might be a fan of JP but it does not mean I cannot give this article careful thought and consideration.

It is far more worthy of my time than the identikit "angry white men" style hit pieces written by people that have never checked out any actual JBP material

www.thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html

It always seems so obvious to me - what JP and men like him don't suggest - women are better at people issues and more civilised than men, generally - if that's the case, rather than harnessing women to rescue men, why don't men defer to women's expertise and let them take over the reins of power? That's a healthy response to the problem.

Unfortunately, men generally don't defer to women and won't give up something important to them for the greater good, i.e. money and /or power.

It's always in what these guys don't say and don't go that their entitlement and abuse is obvious. Why should we have to wait until men catch up and become civilised? Why can't our skills and wisdom be put to greater good and men become the worker bees who serve the Queen Bee - not the other way around?

Muttley

sillage I will forgive you. That response is gold.

camper ooh an award I feel like muttley of dastardly and muttley.

and just for clarity, I'm absolutely not saying that no-one should read or agree with JP.

I have zero interest in policing what others do with their spare time or i the privacy of their own head.

Frankly flowers, having read some of JP's prose, I'm inclined to give you some sort of award for getting to the end of the book.

Naturally, ReluctantCamper.

I suppose this is where I have to explain to malicious persons that by "weak women" I didn't really mean "weak" because I meant socially pressured, externalized culture influencing the trajectory of humanity as it regards relations between men and women historically.

Like when I said "here on this thread" I meant philosophically here, obviously no one woman is actually HERE on this thread, it was a rhetorical device to illustrate the intellectual property of thinking qua thinking and anyone who interprets it otherwise is doing so in bad faith.

Where's my book deal?

So sillage what is your point exactly? That JP is a nasty man, so noone should listen to him or agree with him about anything? As Posie said, that's just tribal nonsense akin to the TRA #nodebate strategy.
Given that half of computer owners with a Y chromosome seem to have mistaken him for the second coming, I'm quite curious to figure out what the attraction is...

I don't expect sillage really meant 'internalised misogyny' - it's probably an anthropological term

But thoughts!

Thinking!

The "greatest value" of all values!

allowed....

Damned tramodol.

Hang a minute. I am not sucking Canadian cock here, I refuse to be so fucking tribal that I'm not aloud to even consider his opinion. FFS. No better than TRAs group think bullshit.

"Females with internalized misogyny"

Ahh yes, the magic wand used to wave away the fact that most women don't identify as feminists, or used any time a woman dares express a different opinion to the resident feminists who of course are the authority on the opinions women are allowed to hold.

Sexism, pure and simple

sillage, very neat.

Females with internalized misogyny are here on this thread licking Peterson' odious balls without countering any points, without making any other point than "talking crap is educational for the ones crapped on" for contrarian/male approval points, the same concession to posturing big-mouthed men that weak women have always made.

And that statement may be wrong, but it has value because it made you think.

therealposieparker

What if his message is just to make you think? What if that's his greatest value? Even if your thoughts are that he's wrong you still think

Yes indeed. He is not anti- women as I have seen claimed by some.

Yes @therealposieparker. I agree with this. He’s brought a real freshness to my thinking and I like it. I like him. I like questioning my my long-held slightly lefty assumptions about stuff. I work for a university and he’s helped me to understand why the political atmosphere seems so very stifling and why I’m constantly worried about offending people and how wrong that is. How horrendous it is that you can be brought up on a disciplinary for misgendering someone. How stupid it is that I have friends who are scared to say that they support Brexit. How the diversity agenda doesn’t seem to support genuine diversity of thinking or ideas.

As for whether or not he is a “friend to women”, he is telling young men to sort themselves out properly and to take on as much responsibility as they can bear so that they can be better men, citizens and partners. What message could be more helpful to women?

"Woman have always been used to "civilise" men and male cultures. That's why women were sent to the American West and the colonies. Once women have children they are forced to start regularising society in order to provide those children with the best opportunity to survive."

Pretty sure there's a more important reason for women to start reproducing in those new lands than just regulating male behaviour

What if his message is just to make you think? What if that's his greatest value? Even if your thoughts are that he's wrong you still think.

Woman have always been used to "civilise" men and male cultures. That's why women were sent to the American West and the colonies. Once women have children they are forced to start regularising society in order to provide those children with the best opportunity to survive.

It's not a new idea, and I suppose you could argue it worked on a macro-scale, not necessarily to the benefit of women.

The idea of using women to control individual men by providing them with ready access to sex isn't new either. It's until recently, the law didn't recognise rape within marriage.

The answer to incrls and the like isn't to throw women at them, like a fire blanket over flames, but work out what the real problem is.

And the real problem isn't sex. The real problem is a subset of young men who believe they have been cheated of access to privileges their maleness entitles them to.

Because women, particularly young and beautiful women, have always been a commodity, incels are really complaining about a perceived loss of patriarchal entitlements, as embodied in women and girls.

Another hatchet job (New Statesman). Did someone already post this one? It's new to me and this bit really made me chuckle.

"Still, what’s the harm? I’ve spent hours reading Reddit forums full of young men who are furious at the world, but also vulnerably, sweetly worried that they don’t know how to talk to girls and they are somehow failing at being men. Isn’t it nice they have a role model, someone to tell them to stand up straight and believe in themselves?

Unfortunately, this was an argument that could have been plausibly made about the Jordan Peterson of a few months ago. It’s not one that can be made of the Jordan Peterson of today. As a friend – a geneticist – said to me recently: “It’s ironic. He’s evolved into a bellend in front of our eyes: the selection pressure being attention.”"

Peterson is just another "intellectual" spouting personal opinion as if it were a valid scientific theory. It isn't.