keep politics out of the game

[Red Pill]

Thanks, @Red Pill At this point, we are just going around in circles without any real prospect of finding a mutually agreeable perspective on Jordan Peterson. I agree with you that the fundamentalist left and the extreme right both employ similar tactics to discredit each other's arguments. So at least, we can find agreement on something.

I find rigid fundamentalism (in any form or any ideology) to be dangerous and harmful
because of its very nature and inherent intolerance of dissent. My perspective on Jordan Peterson is heavily influenced by the fact that his views are disseminated/utilised/interpreted/twisted by any number of (what I consider to be) fundamentalist groups. It's doubtful that my perspective on JPs views will change anytime soon.

Thanks @Eagles4Life I have enjoyed our little exchange of views nevertheless and it’s great that we could do this without dissenting into cyber biff which would have made it more entertaining for others in some ways. I know if provoked both of us are quite adept at throwing the bombs so to speak🙂
I don’t particularly want to convince you that JBP is great etc. I just don’t think he is the champion of toxic masculinity you appear to believe he is. But we agree to disagree.
I personally would never negatively categorise someone’s ideas and in the case of Peterson his life’s work because others have interpreted it in a way that promotes their dark agenda. If we adopted this kind of thinking to all ideas etc we as a race would be virtually intellectually bankrupt.
I think Petersons biggest flaw is a lack of empathy when conveying some of his opinions he Is almost ruthless in this regard. This does not serve him well as it can be polarising in some instances.
From my understanding of him his biggest pet hate and source of motivation is in fact rigid fundamentalism and the ideology that drives it, though his focus is directed at left extremes and the pitfalls or the dead end that he believes postmodernism represents…. so in some ways you have something in common with him 🙂 please take this with a pinch a salt 😂

Looking forward to a big season next year mate…

Cheers RP

 

[lsz]

Thanks @Eagles4Life I have enjoyed our little exchange of views nevertheless and it’s great that we could do this without dissenting into cyber biff which would have made it more entertaining for others in some ways. I know if provoked both of us are quite adept at throwing the bombs so to speak🙂
I don’t particularly want to convince you that JBP is great etc. I just don’t think he is the champion of toxic masculinity you appear to believe he is. But we agree to disagree.
I personally would never negatively categorise someone’s ideas and in the case of Peterson his life’s work because others have interpreted it in a way that promotes their dark agenda. If we adopted this kind of thinking to all ideas etc we as a race would be virtually intellectually bankrupt.
I think Petersons biggest flaw is a lack of empathy when conveying some of his opinions he Is almost ruthless in this regard. This does not serve him well as it can be polarising in some instances.
From my understanding of him his biggest pet hate and source of motivation is in fact rigid fundamentalism and the ideology that drives it, though his focus is directed at left extremes and the pitfalls or the dead end that he believes postmodernism represents…. so in some ways you have something in common with him 🙂 please take this with a pinch a salt 😂

Looking forward to a big season next year mate…

Cheers RP

This is an internet first

Two people with opposing views respectfully stating their views....then moving on.

I am shaken up

 

[Woodsie]

This is an internet first

Two people with opposing views respectfully stating their views....then moving on.

I am shaken up

We can only hope it doesn't catch on...

 

[lsz]

We can only hope it doesn't catch on...

Evidence suggests it is not likely

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

This is an internet first

Two people with opposing views respectfully stating their views....then moving on.

I am shaken up

I’ve never understood why that doesn’t happen more often.

We aren’t made to agree on everything.

I just don’t get this need to argue until the cows come home to try and convince the other person to change to your view.

But you are right , it’s rare to see it happen.

 

[Technical Coach]

Again you miss the point entirely @Technical Coach As I have stated in previous posts you seem to exist in a very narrow world of self-delusion and self-justification, predicated upon a dangerously patriarchal and closeted worldview.

The worldview that you express on here is clearly learned, parroted and almost certainly plagiarised, from websites, blogs, and online forums promoting masculinity, misogyny, and opposition to feminism. I'm pretty confident that many of your "ideas" actually come straight out of Andrew Tates and Jordan Peterson's playbooks, and from some of your other heroes in the "manosphere".

This is particularly evident in your consistent denial (Rule One: Manosphere for Dummies) of what is obvious to me, and many other Silvertails. The underlying themes in your posts are pretty self-evident mate. These include (in no particular order) bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, discrimination and interpersonal racism. Your "screeching" denials of the obvious in rebuttals say a lot more about you than it does about me (or any other poster) that has previously called you on your expression of these themes.

The constancy of these themes in your posts makes the provision of examples superfluous.....
However, here we go again.........
You have been called for being a bigot in multiple threads, by multiple posters, not just by me.

Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey

I don't have an issue with what you say here besides the section about not having association with gay or bisexual men because of their personality types. The reality is that they can be any kind of different personality types, there isn't really a set "personality" for gay people. You just...

silvertails.net

You have declared yourself as a bigot in your posts as well (numerous times. Here is just one Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey
TC on homophobia (self-declared)
TC on homophobia and discrimination Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey
TC on misogyny (self-declared) *Note that the underlying theme (misogyny) of this thread as expressed in some of your comments is taken straight out of a Reddit forum on the same topic - Women in Sports.

https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/b2k63x

Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey

Yeah man but I am still interested in your response to my question? I would not have an issue with being friends with gay people but one should be free to choose in this way on whatever prejudice they like. It’s personal….I know of a few lesbian women who would never be friends with hetro...

silvertails.net

Clearly this is sexism at its best, but it also speaks clearly to discrimination
TC on discrimination Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey
TC called on implicit and impersonal racism (Womens Team) Discussion

(Womens Team) Discussion

In all the time I've been here very few posts get taken down or edited. (In the last few days I've seen a few that I definitely wish were taken down!)

silvertails.net

(Womens Team) Discussion

In all the time I've been here very few posts get taken down or edited. (In the last few days I've seen a few that I definitely wish were taken down!)

silvertails.net

This post by @Top End Eagle is a pretty good summary of your standing within the group here in relation to bigotry and other themes

Poll added - Sea Eagles Everyone in League jersey

That is still nurture and not nature. Absolutely agree, people's upbringing and education have a huge impact on how they develop :thumbsup: Nevertheless, they also have frontal lobe function to make decisions and change. That is something many homosexuals cannot do Cool… religion is not...

silvertails.net

(Womens Team) Discussion

If you don't waste your time watching the NRLW, how can you possibly know the standard on display? Well "they" say you should try everything once before judging right.(there are enough small highlights on the news to footy shows also) Men are mostly watching the womens game to support a...

silvertails.net

The list goes on etc, etc, etc, etc .............

Self-realisation is obviously not your strong suit @Technical Coach, However, one day you might understand that living your life based on patriarchal bigotry is a thing of the past. Perhaps its time for you to get out of that old-fashioned closet and embrace the new world mate.

Hope this helps.

Linking to full posts/threads and making lazy remarks like "this is clearly this, this is clearly that",is not what i mean by asking you to link to my comments, why don't you mention the direct comment and quote it, then explain why in your own words why it falls under one of your negative categories.

These are the facts:
1) Never once have i shied away from my comments in regards to not wanting anything to do with gay or bisexual men in terms of befriending in any sort of way.(i could care less how i am viewed or come across in that regard call me what you want.)

2)I have not once made a racist remark here, one poster pathetically wanted to link my "general" views in relation to tattoos and give it some "racist appeal" by the mere fact it is part of Polynesian culture, so my general dislike of tattoos now also makes me a racist----yeah good one. That same poster when put to task in finding a racist quote i made failed to do so just mumbling on what i just stated above.

Lets be clear, i hate tattoos on every skin colour equally(and never once singled out any race) and more so on whites if anything(there you go if you want a "racist" comment to link to)

Another poster states "specifying that Polynesians have better recovery times is leaning towards a negative viewpoint", it is like the poster has drawn his own conclusion that my thoughts are leaning towards "this is all they are good for" when the thread and my post had nothing to do with that and was merely stating a positive in regards to player mix in a squad.

3)I've mentioned several times i follow and support female sports and athletes just not interested in team sports and women playing rough contact sports. I've also stated there is not much appeal in female contact sports and financially it wont succeed mid to long term, my opinion so be it. The Feminist should be supporting the game in droves with large crowds---why is that not happening? Maybe because women are not really interested in watching women contact sports.

Listen to Draymond Green in regards to commenting on the WNBA recently, he had to bite his tongue and hold back, luckily he did i say.

I know of JP and have no interest in Andrew Tate, i don't like how he presents himself, some views might have substance but i have no interest in watching his vids full stop.

Sorry for the late reply the recent storms in Sydney killed my router and i've been too busy to get back online.(nah nah nah i was defeated crying in shame scared to return and show some humility and almost "woke" up----not)

 

[Eagles4Life]

1) Never once have i shied away from my comments in regards to not wanting anything to do with gay or bisexual men in terms of befriending in any sort of way.(i could care less how i am viewed or come across in that regard call me what you want.)

This is clearly a direct comment from your last post @Technical Coach
I am sure you will attempt to argue that this direct comment of yours is taken out of context somehow.........but you have stated it very clearly as a "fact"

This comment alone clearly defines you as a bigoted homophobe. I have no issue with you defining yourself as a bigoted homophobe mate, that would seem to simplify our discussion.

Hope this helps.

 

[Technical Coach]

This is clearly a direct comment from your last post @Technical Coach
I am sure you will attempt to argue that this direct comment of yours is taken out of context somehow.........but you have stated it very clearly as a "fact"

This comment alone clearly defines you as a bigoted homophobe. I have no issue with you defining yourself as a bigoted homophobe mate, that would seem to simplify our discussion.

Hope this helps.

“To take things out of context” first you would have to directly quote me(for which it appears you lack the skill-set to do so) and to then make it out to mean something different to how I intended it.

If you could achieve that pathetic level I would have more respect for you, but you go far below that by just throwing around your viewpoints as facts in a “this is clearly so” way.

For example I’ve been labelled “Anti Feminist” ----here is the definition of “Feminism” for you.

“The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes”----now go ahead and link a quote where I have shown I don’t support the “rights” of women on the ground of equality of the sexes.

The pattern of your responses and a few others is to blanket me with “viewpoints” and label them as facts.

Another example is how you see me as racist, where have I targeted in my comments a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalised. Can you please link me the direct quote that formed this opinion of me, or did you mindlessly become converted by following the posts of another person who can’t quote me either.

Technically I am a racist as racialism is a form or racism and by me promoting Polynesians as physically superior in terms of injury recovery times and explosiveness over another I am guilty as charged. If this is the quote you are referring to, game set and match to you but I very much doubt a quote that is elevating a minority or marginalised community inspired you to label me as a racist, that really would be a pathetic angle to take in the “context it was delivered”.

Also I have been productive and offered one version of a “compromise” in regards to the “inclusivity” promotions which may bring both parties together more so than at present, what have you or others on the opposing side of the fence offered up as a compromise in regards to this topic?----zip, zero, nothing. Let me guess the best you can do is the PR department paid option of “Make Jake the captain” like that has anything to do with the beliefs of the seven.

What this shows me is the opposing side doesn’t want compromise but the appearance of wanting to find a middle ground just in words to come across as “fair and open minded” but in reality all that is being offered is “conform to our ideals or nothing”.

 

[Eagles4Life]

Thanks for your response @Technical Coach
In case you missed it, you will find a direct quote from one of your previous posts in the response below. In fact, I am using the same direct quote (yours) that I used as part of my answer to "Point One" of that post.

(Please also note that I am only focusing on "Point One" in my response to you tonight. There seems to be little point ( yes, the pun was intentional) in moving on from point one until you can fully understand the implicit meaning of your own words. To assist you in interpreting your own comments, I have both underlined and bolded your direct quote below.

The inherent meaning of your words (taken from your direct quote) is underlined only.

Technical Coach said:
1) Never once have i shied away from my comments in regards to not wanting anything to do with gay or bisexual men in terms of befriending in any sort of way.(i could care less how i am viewed or come across in that regard call me what you want.)

This is clearly a direct comment from your last post @Technical Coach
I am sure you will attempt to argue that this direct comment of yours is taken out of context somehow.........but you have stated it very clearly as a "fact"

This comment alone clearly defines you as a bigoted homophobe. I have no issue with you defining yourself as a bigoted homophobe mate, that would seem to simplify our discussion.

Hope this helps.

I will reiterate only that "Point One" of your direct quote defines you as a bigoted homophobe. Once you have accepted this reality, we can then move onto "Point Two"

Hope this helps. (again)

 

[Woodsie]

The pattern of your responses and a few others is to blanket me with “viewpoints” and label them as facts.

I feel your frustration ... I am often told what I am "really" saying .. by the comrade.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I feel your frustration ... I am often told what I am "really" saying .. by the comrade.

No need to thank me, its just a community service to cut through the occasional obfuscation that appears around here

 

[Brookie Bob]

Happy to chip in with what is hopefully 'anti-obfuscation'. If it's even possible to put 'anti' in front of 'obfuscation' - I don't know.

Bigot: Bigot Definition & Meaning | Britannica Dictionary, The Surprising Origin Of The Word “Bigot” - Dictionary.com

OK - so 'strongly', 'unfairly' are part of it. Don't be at all 'wishy-washy' with your perceived dislike of other people or ideas - or you may be accused of a 'vague partial intolerance', or something like that. Go all in, to earn the label - if that's the plan - personal happiness is probably not in your future. Though I'm 100% sure that I've never come across someone on this planet who has not exhibited that trait in some way, at some point in their lives. Even the guy who looks back at me in the mirror. If you are without this sin completely, please feel free to cast the first stone.

Phobia (as in 'homophobia', or 'trans-phobia', or 'any-phobia'): Phobia - Harvard Health

So it's based in fear; it's persistent, excessive and unrealistic. These phobias cannot be prevented, but often can be treated with psychotherapy or medication. It is able to be diagnosed and treated by medical professionals. It's so nice to know that all the folk who label others a 'something -phobe' are really qualified medical professionals who have others' best interests at heart, and just want those they have labelled to get the best treatment. That's so kind.


If our integrity come from our intent (which it does), how often do we see what we think is perceived intent, and then manufacture a label for it? Are we always right in our assumption?

Our ideas about others, rightly or wrongly. are grounded in a context our our lives, what we have seen and experienced. Context is everything.

Headline from the distant future: "ALL so-called people of Australia in the 21st century are declared unenlightened bigots with multiple phobias" - 'as a result all media, images, published and unpublished thoughts will be heavily censored or deleted'. Your carefully cultivated present-day enlightenment is tomorrow's barbarism.

Beware of labels - I don't know of any post on this forum that has been improved in tone when someone has 'labelled' someone else.

We're very quick to cite things as hate-speech these days. If I said that I prefer to holiday in Hawaii more than anywhere else, does that mean that I hate the rest of the planet? Or if I prefer green eyes - does it mean that I hate people with blue or brown eyes?

Perhaps Voltaire's biographer, Evelyn Beatrice Hall, got it right when she coined, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". When we talk of tolerance and democracy - doesn't it start there?

 

[Red Pill]

These label words seem to used more as weapons to suppress open discussion and honest opinion. If you can point one of these labels at someone you can can undermine their credibility and reputation and essentially cancel their view point. It is an easy way for normally unintelligent people to appear more influential than they normally would be. It’s funny to point a few names and labels of your own at these people and laugh when they cry foul. The hypocrisy is hilarious.

 

[Eagles4Life]

These label words seem to used more as weapons to suppress open discussion and honest opinion. If you can point one of these labels at someone you can can undermine their credibility and reputation and essentially cancel their view point. It is an easy way for normally unintelligent people to appear more influential than they normally would be. It’s funny to point a few names and labels of your own at these people and laugh when they cry foul. The hypocrisy is hilarious.

It's even funnier @Red Pill when someone effectively "labels" themselves as one of the aforementioned "label" words/phrases, e.g. bigoted homophobe, and then doesn't quite have the intelligence to understand exactly what they have done. That's almost (not quite) a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it ..... 😉

 

[Woodsie]

It's even funnier @Red Pill when someone effectively "labels" themselves as one of the aforementioned "label" words/phrases, e.g. bigoted homophobe, and then doesn't quite have the intelligence to understand exactly what they have done. That's almost (not quite) a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it ..... 😉

As an observer ... I am amused to find that you appear to have prematurely awarded yourself victory in your dispute ...

On a similar point ... I choose not to mingle or socialise with anti vaxxers and vegans ... I am not afraid of them or dislike them ... it is simply that I can't enjoy a rational conversation with them.

Your insistence that if one doesn't wear a tshirt celebrating the gay community or actively befriend .. them is evidence of homophobia is a very loose rationale ...

Why can't one simply not give a shiite what other people's sexuality is?

 

[Eagles4Life]

Thanks @Woodsie but there will be no premature declaration of victory in this discussion. In fact I highly doubt there will be any declaration of victory (or admission of defeat) by either protagonist at any stage.

And that's perfectly fine by me.....

 

[Red Pill]

It's even funnier @Red Pill when someone effectively "labels" themselves as one of the aforementioned "label" words/phrases, e.g. bigoted homophobe, and then doesn't quite have the intelligence to understand exactly what they have done. That's almost (not quite) a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it ..... 😉

I think that person is extremely honest. This kind of honesty is something I find quite rare. I think rather than condemn this person and seek to assert your moral higher standing…. you might consider trying to help this person in some way! maybe see the error of their ways. I agree that this view ( not willing to accept certain people as personal friends because of their mere sexuality) is very self limiting to say the least but it is TC’s choice to make…. and his choice alone. He has a right to pick and choose his personal friends in what ever way he wishes….and not be condemned for being honest about how he chooses to do this…. There is no law on how you have to choose your personal friends…. Sorry mate but that is my 2 cents on this.

 

[manlyfan76]

Well worth five minutes of your time:

 

[Technical Coach]

Thanks for your response @Technical Coach
In case you missed it, you will find a direct quote from one of your previous posts in the response below. In fact, I am using the same direct quote (yours) that I used as part of my answer to "Point One" of that post.

(Please also note that I am only focusing on "Point One" in my response to you tonight. There seems to be little point ( yes, the pun was intentional) in moving on from point one until you can fully understand the implicit meaning of your own words. To assist you in interpreting your own comments, I have both underlined and bolded your direct quote below.

The inherent meaning of your words (taken from your direct quote) is underlined only.

Technical Coach said:
1) Never once have i shied away from my comments in regards to not wanting anything to do with gay or bisexual men in terms of befriending in any sort of way.(i could care less how i am viewed or come across in that regard call me what you want.)

This is clearly a direct comment from your last post @Technical Coach
I am sure you will attempt to argue that this direct comment of yours is taken out of context somehow.........but you have stated it very clearly as a "fact"

This comment alone clearly defines you as a bigoted homophobe. I have no issue with you defining yourself as a bigoted homophobe mate, that would seem to simplify our discussion.

Hope this helps.

I will reiterate only that "Point One" of your direct quote defines you as a bigoted homophobe. Once you have accepted this reality, we can then move onto "Point Two"

Hope this helps. (again)

What is the point of your post, we have already established and i have never shied away from others defining me as such and if i am a homophobe so be it, it is not against the law in thinking in such ways. I certainly have no fear around gay or bisexual men, just choose not to make friends with such males, i just treat all with respect in public, private and the workplace and that is as far as i wish to go.

I don't attend Rugby League to be dictated to on sexuality, politics or any agenda, along with anyone who enters the workplace should not be subjected to such topics, this is the reason why i support the sevens actions.

Now lets move on to my supposed Racist and Anti Feminism comments, good luck with that.

Also where is your effort in trying to find a compromise, everyone talks like they are the compromise type but offer nothing other than the word "compromise".

 

[Eagles4Life]

I think that person is extremely honest. This kind of honesty is something I find quite rare. I think rather than condemn this person and seek to assert your moral higher standing…. you might consider trying to help this person in some way! maybe see the error of their ways. I agree that this view ( not willing to accept certain people as personal friends because of their mere sexuality) is very self limiting to say the least but it is TC’s choice to make…. and his choice alone. He has a right to pick and choose his personal friends in what ever way he wishes….and not be condemned for being honest about how he chooses to do this…. There is no law on how you have to choose your personal friends….

Btw, I was not thinking of you at all when I was writing my initial post. I thinking of someone somewhat less honest….

Thanks @Red Pill Self-limiting is definitely a term we could run with here. Many other terms/labels would also have some utility to this specific discussion. I find it incredibly difficult to imagine actively discriminating against anyone because of their sexuality. I understand that others will have a completely different perspective on this. Each to their own, I guess, but I have always found that active discrimination generally leads to vilification. Vilification on any grounds, whether it's according to race, gender, sexuality, religion etc., is completely unacceptable to me.

Your insistence that if one doesn't wear a tshirt celebrating the gay community or actively befriend .. them is evidence of homophobia is a very loose rationale ...

Actually @Woodsie (and this might surprise a few people), I believe that the concept of wearing a t-shirt one day a year would be incredibly tokenistic and ultimately useless if it's not paired with other practical actions.