Jordan B Peterson

I'm not sure he does that but you might be right

He does, unless the one video and the couple of transcribed interviews I read were coincidentally a blip.

He's not the only cure for young men like that, but he has been fairly successful in getting some of them out of the basements

I find this utterly bizarre.

Do you have any evidence at all that this demographic of men exist? These basement dwelling virgins? It seems a big assumption that all NEETs are virgins hanging round in basements. There are more female NEETs than male but sure... think of the imaginary men.

If we don't engage with the arguments, we get dismissed. In the meantime, providing young men with some structure and ambition isn't a bad thing

Shit, I didn't realise he was running education and training. I thought he was some bloke making videos on Youtube.

If we don't engage with the arguments, we get dismissed

I absolutely agree with this. I think dismissing these people as "misogynists" or "racists" just doesn't help. That said I would have thought on a feminist message board one wouldn't have to spend time deconstructing obviously sexist tropes.

Shapiro resigned from Breitbart for reasons which were wholly honourable and in support of a female employee who also resigned

Right, he's a fucking hero. I suppose the 4 years he worked there were an accident or something.

I mean... he was the editor of fucking Breitbart. They hate him for different reasons now but he was right on the cutting edge back in the day. He's a grade A cunt

Shapiro resigned from Breitbart for reasons which were wholly honourable and in support of a female employee who also resigned.

Don't forget about women and their subconscious desire for brutal domination.

It's also their fault when they are harassed in the workplace, they're hypocrites to expect anything else when they decide to wear makeup for attention.

It is a bad thing if that pride comes from reinforcing the idea that they are better than women.
I'm not sure he does that but you might be right. However I don't want to see depressed NEET incels wasting their lives. I'd rather he turned them into productive members of society, even if they are sexist. There's more use to a sexist electrician than a sexist basement dweller. Plus interaction with the real world always helps. The most sexist young men are those who don't have to interact with women at work or in public spaces. They can then convince themselves of any nonsense about women. He's not the only cure for young men like that, but he has been fairly successful in getting some of them out of the basements. Whereas failing to engage with them is a 100% fail overall.
I don't have to agree with him to see his worth. And I think the best way to counter his patriarchal fantasies is to provide detail on alternatives. If we don't engage with the arguments, we get dismissed. In the meantime, providing young men with some structure and ambition isn't a bad thing.

He disguises his NPD very well

He’s an entitled male who can’t see beyond his own self to consider that there might be other ways to structure / run society that are far superior to anything he or most men can come up with. He’s no friend to women unless it promotes his brand. It’s good he stands up for free speech but his free speech for women is conditional on a male dominant societal structure

I haven’t read the whole thread just the first page. I like that he is a vocal supporter of free speech. I also like that he encourages young men to take responsibility for themselves and talks about morality, when I think there is somewhat of a cultural vacuum regarding talking about moral issues. People are very scared to clearly state guidelines. With his background in social psychology I think he backs up his advice regarding certain behaviours with evidence. This doesn’t mean I agree with everything he says but I admire his courage and willingness to talk about moral absolutes and our responsibility for ourselves and each other.

If he shakes some pride and sense into them that's not a bad thing

It is a bad thing if that pride comes from reinforcing the idea that they are better than women.

I've listened to many interviews of his and I've yet to see him say men are better?

Well in the 2 minutes I just watched he denied that society was male dominated then said that if it was "to some degree" it was based on competence.

He also said that the only men who dominate are the very top tier (ignoring the fact that almost universally women, as a class, are poorer).

He also said more men die in wars, ignoring the fact that there are more women that have died or not existed in the first place just for being female than number of men that have died in all modern wars (that is wars we have accurate figures for and women in the same period of said wars).

He said more men are in prison, I mean....

He then got really mad about the female interviewer bringing up tyranny ever though she hadn't said tyranny.

He also got really mad when she mentioned sexual violence because that's asymmetry but homeless people being mostly male isn't asymmetry it's something else because reasons.

I just watched him say these things.

I couldn't stomach more than two minutes.

But yeah he didn't say "men are better". He just implied they are more "competent" at running society. So yeah, it's fine.

Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish

I mean... he was the editor of fucking Breitbart. They hate him for different reasons now but he was right on the cutting edge back in the day. He's a grade A cunt.

Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish.
They're similar, Shapiro does very well in arguments because he talks very quickly and eloquently.
I like listening to intelligent eloquent people even if I disagree with them.
Frankly if Peterson manages to get some wasted young men to do something with their lives then he's a net positive. There are so many aimless young men about. Perhaps they're lost because the well trodden path is no longer there; in my time arguing with those types I often point out that their vicarious nostalgia for a time when men were men etc is very rose-tinted.
Men in the 50s, for example, didn't all live in a Norman Rockwell painting. Many had difficult, dangerous, dirty jobs, huge amounts of pressure to provide, little social mobility, little opportunity outside their social circle or class and died young.
But incels are determined it was all white picket fences and assigned (beautiful, healthy, loving, didn't-die-in-childbirth) wives.
What they forget is that the power men had then went hand in hand with more responsibility than most of them could cope with, in a world of shotgun weddings, mouths to feed and little welfare support.
Life has improved for men but incels and the aimless youth fail to see or appreciate it, and instead focus on their female classmates outperforming them or the existence of scholarships for minorities.
If he shakes some pride and sense into them that's not a bad thing.

He essentially argues that society is male dominated because men are just better. I am not sure why saying he's not a feminist could possibly be controversial. His views on feminism are asinine.

I've listened to many interviews of his and I've yet to see him say men are better? He rejects modern feminism but has stated many times he believes in equal rights. It astounds me how often he is misquoted. And he is far from the alt-right poster boy. Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish.

I think he's a charlatan who just repeats basic self care most people have already heard and teaches young men to be really sexist towards women.

jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/

Here's what he says about enforced monogamy. I'm assuming he means marriage as an institution - because he says 'culturally promoted' (or something) - rather than men actually divvying up the women, Elliott Rodgers style.

But firstly he'd have to persuade the MGTOWs to marry in the first place, and persuade the incels to stop being so bloody creepy, and that women are not some foreign species, or sex dolls, but sentient, individuals with personalities. Some seem to be offended that women are allowed to refuse them at all. (Elliott Rodger & co).

Enforced monogamy is anti feminist

Is he actually advocating enforced monogamy or just arguing that monogamy evolved as a way of pacifying angry horny men. Men divvying up woman as resources. That wouldn’t be unbelievable as men did use to own women’s labour.

Having heard his reputation I was amazed to find that I agree with JP on quite a few things. Disagree on others. He has been appallingly misrepresented in the media (e.g. he is clear that men are the problem WRT incels, not women) and there are certainly bigger fish to fry.

He's not a feminist but neither does he hate women.

Jordan Peterson claims that people misquote him and I think he is right. After watching him in a few videos I think there are far bigger fish to fry than some of his comments.

I appreciate the reasonable tone of this thread. I agree he's wrong about a lot of things and right about others, and that he's an interesting phenomenon: what is going on with young men? I am tired of echo chambers where he's either God or Hitler

He mixes some insightful stuff with quite a lot of outright lies. I strongly advise you to check all of his "facts" Any examples spring to mind?

I'm not that familiar with him, but as a biologist I can see that there are slightly different themes for m & f with regard to sexual selection. This stems from differences between gametes etc. Whether his ideas on enforced monogamy would necessarily spring from that, I don't know, but pretending evolution has not been affected by gamete and other sex-based differences seems illogical.
Our physical sex-based differences are to do with reproductive roles, and any behavioural differences surely would be too. This does not require a pink brain / blue brain idea, it could easily be hormone or Y chromosome based.

I think he has value in motivating otherwise worthless men (why, oh why do we have so many?) and getting them out of their basements and doing something useful with their life.

He has nothing much of value for feminist women, however. Maybe I’ll try to get through his book (DH bought it) and see if it gives me a kick in the arse to do better in life.

I do think he’s very vague when it come to women’s social roles, intentially so, because he knows they are somewhat antiquated.

I'm with Floral here, he's great on free speech and free thought, but I don't agree with the vast majority of what he says, especially when it comes to race, women or feminism. I don't know anyone who has read his 12 things book and had their lives changed by it, so he does seem to be making money for nothing, good luck to him

No of course it isn't out of order in that sense but it's used (as far as I can see) as a sort of "gotcha" to dismiss or discredit him

Not to dismiss or discredit on my part - I have said that I value his clear sighted contributions about free speech and liberty. But I think it is fairly crucial to be honest about those we consider allies for very specific reasons. The long threads tediously enunciating the various controversial things people who are GC in a specific sense have said is a good reason to be honest about where people may differ.

It's not a dismissal as much as a note of caution - a 'eat the meat and discard the bones' exhortation, perhaps.

He essentially argues that society is male dominated because men are just better. I am not sure why saying he's not a feminist could possibly be controversial. His views on feminism are asinine.

“The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”

oh, BS.

Monogamy succeeded as a reproductive strategy in humans because our offspring were too helpless for too long to survive without collaboration between both parents (and really a larger social group as well).

Those human ancestors who “went their own way” failed to pass on their genes because their kids (if they had any) died. Those who worked together succeed. So (social at least) monogamy persisted as the predominant strategy. Then humans came up with cultural “reasons” to explain why monogamy is important.

So no. Monogamy did not develop because some guys were sad because they were “rejected” for being virulent misogynists. Sorry PJ.

I don't think it's out of order to say he's not a feminist when he wouldn't attempt to claim the label for himself anyway

No of course it isn't out of order in that sense but it's used (as far as I can see) as a sort of "gotcha" to dismiss or discredit him

MargueritaPink, for what it's worth, I'm not gung ho about quotas or AWS myself because it's clearly too easy to game.

I don't think it's out of order to say he's not a feminist when he wouldn't attempt to claim the label for himself anyway. And yes, there is a big question mark about what 'brand' of feminism he rejects given the distinct differences in emphasis between libfems and radfems etc and that most of his arguments against feminism seem to be against a hybrid mix of rad and lib fem ideas and thus no coherent answer to either.

Ultimately I agree with a pp who said that he seems incapable of acknowledging any kind of systemic unfairness, and his arguments often boil down to 'The West is really great in comparison to Saudi'. Which ok, yeah, on one level. But I'm not really excited about being told two dead women a week is the least worst option and I should be grateful...

“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”

''Most of his ideas stem from a gnawing anxiety around gender. “The masculine spirit is under assault,” he told me. “It’s obvious.”
In Mr. Peterson’s world, order is masculine. Chaos is feminine. And if an overdose of femininity is our new poison, Mr. Peterson knows the cure. Hence his new book’s subtitle: “An Antidote to Chaos.”''

www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

Enforced monogamy is anti feminist.