keep politics out of the game

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
Status
Not open for further replies.
@Eagles4Life I certainly don’t want to get involved in your exchanges with TC ( noting that they are quite entertaining! ) but I am interested in understanding some of your views better on what the patriarchy actually is and why it appears that you don’t seem to approve of Jordan Peterson views supporting men or supporting men in general. Also what is a anti feminist? I personally don’t agree with Germaine Greer. Would this mean that I am too an anti feminist? I also don’t agree with Judith Butler, author of gender troubles and I am also against extreme socialism as well. Does this make me too all those negative phobic words people like use these days against people that disagree with them? I also don’t agree with any sports whether it is mens or women’s being artificially propped up to meet an ideal social construction.. I have a lot of women in my life that I love in different ways and would like for them all to be afforded opportunity like any other groups on the basis of their merits….
In regards to patriarchy or it’s existence I agree with Jordan’s Petersons views. This is very effectively put forward in his almost famous interview with Kathy Newman. If you have not watched this and you are interested in this topic I suggest you watch it. Its available on youtube. Its always better to witness someone’s views first hand rather than rely of secondary commentary…

Some pretty deep stuff in here, @Red Pill. However, I am also delighted to hear that there is some entertainment value provided in the thread. Often I think I am only entertaining myself, which at the end of the day, is more than enough for me anyway.

Let's start with your construct of people like me versus people like you. You didn't directly state this, but the implication is clear. Firstly, I don't believe there is much difference between us. I, too subscribe to the theory that all people should be afforded opportunities equally, and I also advocate that, where possible, this should be done based on their merits. This cuts across race, gender, religion, sexuality etc. Historically, as we know, this clearly hasn't been the case.

One of your points speaks to women in professional sports, e.g. NRLW "being artificially propped up to meet an ideal social construction". I would argue that the available data on this concept refutes this argument completely. Please refer to the following post.
The post itself is primarily a collection of excerpts taken from the following 200-page report https://origin.go.theaustralian.com...RL-Expansion-Analysis_Final-Report_170621.pdf

I'm afraid I disagree with you on your judgement that I disapprove of supporting men in general. The premise itself is relatively undefined in your post. However, my interpretation is that you believe I advocate solely for the support and empowerment of women only? In practical terms, nothing could be further from the truth. I have lost count of the community programs I have been involved in over decades that have facilitated support for men generally and male youth specifically.

I am not a supporter of Jordan Peterson, as his innately sexist worldview both naturalizes and rationalizes a patriarchal social order. Many of Peterson's ideas I find to be regressive, exclusionary and discriminative across race, gender, religion and sexuality. I also feel that Peterson's views only appeal to a narrow cross-section of men. Generally, this cross-section is predominantly white men who feel disenfranchised and disconnected from an evolving contemporary society, where cultural and social institutions are being rapidly transformed.

I believe that many of Peterson's views are best left in the past. Peterson may be very persuasive in his arguments and debating techniques with students, interviewers and reporters, but he is far less convincing in debates with his academic peers. I would disagree with you on his academic standing in the scientific community overall (One of your previous posts). To me he is a niche populist, who has discovered how to monetise controversial ideas. In this he is highly effective.

Anyway @Red Pill , I will continue to address your other points below in subsequent posts.

Also, what is a anti feminist? I personally don’t agree with Germaine Greer. Would this mean that I am too an anti feminist? I also don’t agree with Judith Butler, author of gender troubles and I am also against extreme socialism as well. Does this make me too all those negative phobic words people like use these days against people that disagree with them?
 
Last edited:
Some pretty deep stuff in here, @Red Pill. However, I am also delighted to hear that there is some entertainment value provided in the thread. Often I think I am only entertaining myself, which at the end of the day, is more than enough for me anyway.

Let's start with your construct of people like me versus people like you. You didn't directly state this, but the implication is clear. Firstly, I don't believe there is much difference between us. I, too subscribe to the theory that all people should be afforded opportunities equally, and I also advocate that, where possible, this should be done based on their merits. This cuts across race, gender, religion, sexuality etc. Historically, as we know, this clearly hasn't been the case.

One of your points speaks to women in professional sports, e.g. NRLW "being artificially propped up to meet an ideal social construction". I would argue that the available data on this concept refutes this argument completely. Please refer to the following post.
The post itself is primarily a collection of excerpts taken from the following 200-page report https://origin.go.theaustralian.com...RL-Expansion-Analysis_Final-Report_170621.pdf

I'm afraid I disagree with you on your judgement that I disapprove of supporting men in general. The premise itself is relatively undefined in your post. However, my interpretation is that you believe I advocate solely for the support and empowerment of women only? In practical terms, nothing could be further from the truth. I have lost count of the community programs I have been involved in over decades that have facilitated support for men generally and male youth specifically.

I am not a supporter of Jordan Peterson, as his innately sexist worldview both naturalizes and rationalizes a patriarchal social order. Many of Peterson's ideas I find to be regressive, exclusionary and discriminative across race, gender, religion and sexuality. I also feel that Peterson's views only appeal to a narrow cross-section of men. Generally, this cross-section is predominantly white men who feel disenfranchised and disconnected from an evolving contemporary society, where cultural and social institutions are being rapidly transformed.

I believe that many of Peterson's views are best left in the past. Peterson may be very persuasive in his arguments and debating techniques with students, interviewers and reporters, but he is far less convincing in debates with his academic peers. I would disagree with you on his academic standing in the scientific community overall (One of your previous posts). To me he is a niche populist, who has discovered how to monetise controversial ideas. In this he is highly effective.

Anyway @Red Pill , I will continue to address your other points below in subsequent posts.

Also, what is a anti feminist? I personally don’t agree with Germaine Greer. Would this mean that I am too an anti feminist? I also don’t agree with Judith Butler, author of gender troubles and I am also against extreme socialism as well. Does this make me too all those negative phobic words people like use these days against people that disagree with them?
Thanks for indulging me @Eagles4Life by kindly responding to some of my questions. I certainly agree that we have a lot more in common with our general views than we don’t. This is why our society genuinely works, to a slightly lesser degree the same applies to you and your sparring pal TC :) you have a lot more in common than you don’t! Ha ha ha
I however am really interested to understand what you think the patriarchy really is that you have referred too? This helps one such as myself understand your post better as you have seemingly defined it like many others in contemporary society as a catalyst for inequality in our society. Please correct me if this interpretation is wrong? So many people these days tell us what they don’t like about something but don’t really explain why. I mean give any supporting evidence to their views. As an example you have clearly outlined to me your view on Jordan Peterson ( which I respect is your view) you have pointed out in great detail what you disagree with but have not given any example of anything Jordan has actually said in his many public broadcasts or books or actual scientific research that support your views. Actually nothing. I mentioned to you his famous interview with Kathy Newman where his lays out his arguments based upon his book 12 rules for life and supporting research on the existence or non existence of the patriarchy. You have mentioned you too have watched this video so you must have something more specific to share.?In short Jordan agrees that a patriarchy exists but quite rightly in my view points out that any power or unfair advantage was only afforded to a very small and insignificant substrate of the population. The holders of power. Yes these were predominantly men. The actual life of an ordinary man was in short pretty ordinary like for the women in general. What movitvated this small substrate of the population was greed and power, not toxic masculinity… greed and power are universal and can exist equally in both sexes but I am again interested in your reasoning based on what I explained above…
Also one quick question on opportunity and merit. Are you a believer in equality of opportunity or equality of outcome? as you would know this is very contentious point of difference in our society atm and is related to this thread.. cheers RP.

Btw, I was only asking about your view on male advocacy. I did this instead of making a judgment. I did not conclude anything. I hope you appreciate the difference.. if you wish, I am more than happy to explain why I felt the need to ask the question. Let me know?
Also in regards to the womens NRL I do believe this is being artificially propped up. I very much sincerely hope to be proven wrong. Let’s wait and see…
 
Last edited:
As an example you have clearly outlined to me your view on Jordan Peterson ( which I respect is your view) you have pointed out in great detail what you disagree with but have not given any example of anything Jordan has actually said in his many public broadcasts or books or actual scientific research that support your views.

I might answer elements of your two most recent posts in chunks.
Let's start with two words @Red Pill "Enforced Monogamy" This is a Peterson concept aimed at reinstating and perpetuating traditional patriarchal views within contemporary society. This speaks to the removal of women's agency when it comes to the matter of sexual selection and reproduction. This idea acts both to disempower women and re-enfranchise men simultaneously. That one example goes a long way to supporting some of the views, as expressed in my previous post.
 
Last edited:
I might answer elements of your two most recent posts in chunks.
Let's start with two words @Red Pill "Enforced Monogamy" This is a Peterson concept aimed at reinstating and perpetuating traditional patriarchal views within contemporary society. This speaks to the removal of women's agency when it comes to the matter of sexual selection and reproduction. This idea acts both to disempower women and re-enfranchise men simultaneously. That one example goes a long way to supporting my views as expressed in my previous post.
Thanks @Eagles4Life . Without disrespect I am not sure you fully understand JBP’s view on this. It does seem to imply how you are perceiving it. “Enforced Monogamy” is not a term created by JBP either. Btw if i interpreted this as you seem to have I would 100% agree with you. JBP is just saying that it should be ( monogamy) celebrated more and given more respect in society. I do not see how this could possibly influence a women’s sense of sexual freedom and enforce patriarchy.. btw I look forward to your response on what you believe this is mate… Note the link and hear him explain it himself. He starts talking about it at the 3 min &27 seconds. Also I know a lot about JBP’s work..I have an interest in topics discussed in his Maps of meaning book :) …..where did you get your facts on this as it is actually a anthological term not a concept created by Peterson himself as you imply.

 
Last edited:
Thanks @Eagles4Life . Without disrespect I am not sure fully understand JBP view on this. It does seem to imply how you are perceiving it. “Enforced Monogamy” is not a term created by JBP either. Btw if i interpreted this as you seem to have I would 100% agree with you. JBP is just saying that it should be ( monogamy) celebrated more and given more respect in society. I do not see how this could possibly influence a women’s sense of sexual freedom and enforce patriarchy.. btw I look forward to your response on what you believe this is mate… Note the link and hear him explain it himself. He starts talking about it at the 3 min &27 seconds. Also I know a lot about JBP’s work I have an interest in topics discussed in his Maps of meaning book :) …..where did you get your facts on this as it is actually a anthological term not a concept created by Peterson himself as you imply.


The first time I came across Jordan Peterson (circa 2018) was around the concept of enforced monogamy and precisely how that concept was interpreted and embraced by the incel movement in the US. The Toronto sidewalk terrorist attack had just happened, and I was interested in understanding the influences that had provided both background and the context for that attack (and other later attacks). So that was my introduction to the world of Jordan Peterson, and you know what they say about first impressions.......

I have read some subsequent comments in interviews where Peterson attempts to distance himself from these movements and where he attempts to spin his original remarks about compulsory monogamy in an entirely different direction. Will all due respect, @Red Pill I am not buying what Person is trying to sell through his attempts at spin on this topic. His elaboration on enforced monogamy is self-serving, and the context of his original remarks (and the impact of same) doesn't change what I believe was his original intent.

"Jordan Peterson is a man who has said that feminists have an “unconscious wish for brutal male domination.” He’s a guy who rails against divorce and the birth control pill because women would likely be happier if they “allow themselves to be transformed by nature into mothers,” and because allowing women to choose anything other than motherly transformation leads to declining birth rates “in the West” that might “do us all in.”
Tabatha Southey, Macleans, 2018

Don't you find it rather disturbing that his ideas on this (enforced monogamy et al.) have so heavily influenced the incel movement and the alt-right movement as a whole? I found it particularly alarming that Peterson quickly became a guru for these movements and that their perception of him hasn't changed regardless of his public denials of influence.

Finally, I also agree wholeheartedly with Southey that "Peterson talking about the importance of enforced monogamy isn't alarming because it's been taken out of context; it's alarming precisely because of its context."

Hope this helps.
 
The first time I came across Jordan Peterson (circa 2018) was around the concept of enforced monogamy and precisely how that concept was interpreted and embraced by the incel movement in the US. The Toronto sidewalk terrorist attack had just happened, and I was interested in understanding the influences that had provided both background and the context for that attack (and other later attacks). So that was my introduction to the world of Jordan Peterson, and you know what they say about first impressions.......

I have read some subsequent comments in interviews where Peterson attempts to distance himself from these movements and where he attempts to spin his original remarks about compulsory monogamy in an entirely different direction. Will all due respect, @Red Pill I am not buying what Person is trying to sell through his attempts at spin on this topic. His elaboration on enforced monogamy is self-serving, and the context of his original remarks (and the impact of same) doesn't change what I believe was his original intent.

"Jordan Peterson is a man who has said that feminists have an “unconscious wish for brutal male domination.” He’s a guy who rails against divorce and the birth control pill because women would likely be happier if they “allow themselves to be transformed by nature into mothers,” and because allowing women to choose anything other than motherly transformation leads to declining birth rates “in the West” that might “do us all in.”
Tabatha Southey, Macleans, 2018

Don't you find it rather disturbing that his ideas on this (enforced monogamy et al.) have so heavily influenced the incel movement and the alt-right movement as a whole? I found it particularly alarming that Peterson quickly became a guru for these movements and that their perception of him hasn't changed regardless of his public denials of influence.

Finally, I also agree wholeheartedly with Southey that "Peterson talking about the importance of enforced monogamy isn't alarming because it's been taken out of context; it's alarming precisely because of its context."

Hope this helps.
Thanks for sharing your views and I respect that this is your opinion which I disagree with :)
I do find it sad that people such as yourself would believe that someone like Jordan Peterson is somehow responsible for the incel movements…it’s kind of like saying all muslims are responsible for ISIS and other fundamentalist terrorist groups because of the way they have chosen to interpret the Koran which they also ascribe to. I think this kind of belief or judgment is a way of straw manning someone to silence / disregard their wider message because it conflicts with their vision of the world. This is a tactic also used against the left by the right…
I also feel if there was truely a lot weight behind this that others much more savvy than you and I would have taken Jordan Peterson apart by now!! Say like the Kathy newmans etc of the world and his reputation would be universally in tatters.. however he nevertheless remains a contemporary figure in society and can command a relatively moderate audience…
But again I do sincerely appreciate you sharing the inspiration so to speak behind your views…
Cheers RP
 
Last edited:
Pardon my ignorance but have never heard of people like Jordon Peterson and Kathy Newman . Are they in the category of influencers or representative of some type of a radical fringe grouping . Wonder how much influence they might have had in a pre twitter or pre computer era
 
I'd also like to ask. If Jordan Peterson was misinterpreted in his views on enforced monogamy, what are his views?
 
I'd also like to ask. If Jordan Peterson was misinterpreted in his views on enforced monogamy, what are his views?
Mate if you look at my posts above you will see some links to a YouTube video and a pod cast where he explains his views… they only go for a few mins…
 
Pardon my ignorance but have never heard of people like Jordon Peterson and Kathy Newman . Are they in the category of influencers or representative of some type of a radical fringe grouping . Wonder how much influence they might have had in a pre twitter or pre computer era
Mate, Kathy Newman is a popular UK based journalist. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist who has spent most of his career teaching at Universities and practicing psychology. He is also a peer reviewed scientist. He is most famous for his self help books predominantly 12 rules for life.
He is also known to be very strong advocate for free speech and has been involved in what some people, would say we’re controversial public exchanges that appear mainly on YouTube. He also has a YouTube channel that has a lot of followers, social media has certainly extended his reach…
I hope this answers your questions…
 
Thanks for sharing your views and I respect that this is your opinion which I disagree with :)
I do find it sad that people such as yourself would believe that someone like Jordan Peterson is somehow responsible for the incel movements…it’s kind of like saying all muslims are responsible for ISIS and other fundamentalist terrorist groups because of the way they have chosen to interpret the Koran which they also ascribe to. I think this kind of belief or judgment is a way of straw manning someone to silence / disregard their wider message because it conflicts with their vision of the world. This is a tactic also used against the left by the right…
I also feel if there was truely a lot weight behind this that others much more savvy than you and I would have taken Jordan Peterson apart by now!! Say like the Kathy newmans etc of the world and his reputation would be universally in tatters.. however he nevertheless remains a contemporary figure in society and can command a relatively moderate audience…
But again I do sincerely appreciate you sharing the inspiration so to speak behind your views…
Cheers RP
Thanks for the response @Red Pill Just to clarify that I don't believe that Jordan Peterson is responsible for the evolution of the incel movement, or the alt-right hydra, that incorporates contemporary white supremacism and white nationalism, particularly in North America. Clearly, Jordan Peterson has had some significant influence on some of these groups. This is a simple fact that cannot be denied. Peterson himself acknowledges his influence, spokespersons for the groups acknowledge his influence, and there are examples of where he displays empathy for individuals within these groups.

"Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married

“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.”

Mr. Peterson does not pause when he says this. Enforced monogamy is, to him, simply a rational solution. Otherwise, women will all only go for the most high-status men, he explains, and that couldn’t make either gender happy in the end.

“Half the men fail,” he says, meaning that they don’t procreate. “And no one cares about the men who fail.”


Here is another commentary that I feel is relatively well-balanced as it provides some support for Peterson and his views, but also demonstrates the darkness of the movement that he both empathises with and influences.

 
Thanks for the response @Red Pill Just to clarify that I don't believe that Jordan Peterson is responsible for the evolution of the incel movement, or the alt-right hydra, that incorporates contemporary white supremacism and white nationalism, particularly in North America. Clearly, Jordan Peterson has had some significant influence on some of these groups. This is a simple fact that cannot be denied. Peterson himself acknowledges his influence, spokespersons for the groups acknowledge his influence, and there are examples of where he displays empathy for individuals within these groups.

"Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married

“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.”

Mr. Peterson does not pause when he says this. Enforced monogamy is, to him, simply a rational solution. Otherwise, women will all only go for the most high-status men, he explains, and that couldn’t make either gender happy in the end.

“Half the men fail,” he says, meaning that they don’t procreate. “And no one cares about the men who fail.”


Here is another commentary that I feel is relatively well-balanced as it provides some support for Peterson and his views, but also demonstrates the darkness of the movement that he both empathises with and influences.

Thanks mate,
I think we need to agree to disagree on this. :)
I don’t honestly understand what you mean by saying that it’s disturbing the influence he has had on the incel movement, but you now also say that he is not responsible but at the same time still say….look at his influence!
I am at a loss with how to process this other than to see this as an attempt censor him or discount his view.
I could go and find some articles from the likes of tucker Carlson , Rowan dean and a like and you could go out and find more contrary points from left leaning media like the NY post and SBS Australia. As I hope you would agree, that is just silly.
I have read a couple of his books and watched his university lectures during COVID.
Yes JBP is advocate for men, all men and a very good teacher of philosophy and psychology. To conclude based upon my first hand knowledge I don’t believe he is out to impede the progress of women… or some tyrannical male supremacist leader.
Btw read some of the twitter comments in the SBS article..
 
Thanks mate,
I think we need to agree to disagree on this. :)
I don’t honestly understand what you mean by saying that it’s disturbing the influence he has had on the incel movement, but you now also say that he is not responsible but at the same time still say….look at his influence!
I am at a loss with how to process this other than see this as an attempt censor him or discount his view.
I could go and find some articles from the likes of tucker Carlson , Rowan dean and a like and you could go out and find more contrary points from left leaning media like the NY post and SBS Australia. As I hope you would agree, that is just silly.
I have read a couple of his books and watched his university lectures during COVID.
Yes JBP is advocate for men, all men and a very good teacher of philosophy and psychology. To conclude based upon my first hand knowledge I don’t believe he is out to impede the progress of women… or some tyrannical male supremacist leader.
Btw read some of the twitter comments in the SBS article..
We do disagree on this @Red Pill and that's fine mate.
I will try to rephrase my previous statement for you.
Peterson's influence on the incel and alt-right movements is obvious.
However, he is not responsible for the evolution of these groups in contemporary society.
These groups have multiple influences. Friedrich Nietzsche for example.
I am not going to claim that Friedrich Nietzsche is responsible for the evolution of these groups in contemporary society either.
 
On game day I am not interested in anything other than the contest that my side is about to compete in. I want to watch the sport and not be force fed issues that are not relevant to the game itself. Social, political. religious and cultural issues will not be solved on the football field. The game should not be used as a podium to advocate views in respect of these issues. By "politcs" I mean government and not the running of the NRL or the football clubs. Sponsorship is tolerated on playing strips because the clubs need financial support from sponsors to survive and provided the sponsors are not cigarette companies and alcohol companies then they are permitted to display their brand. Because gambling, whilst destroying lives of many and their families, generates so much income those in control turn a blind eye to this aspect of social harm. There is an appropriate forum for all issues to be ventilated and our game is not one of them. When I played football and was in the change room getting ready to play when I looked around I didn't give a hoot about what my team mate's sexuality was, or their religion or which political party they followed. These were personal issues which quite frankly were none of my business. I was just interested in what they would produce on the footy field.
 
We do disagree on this @Red Pill and that's fine mate.
I will try to rephrase my previous statement for you.
Peterson's influence on the incel and alt-right movements is obvious.
However, he is not responsible for the evolution of these groups in contemporary society.
These groups have multiple influences. Friedrich Nietzsche for example.
I am not going to claim that Friedrich Nietzsche is responsible for the evolution of these groups in contemporary society either.
Ok mate, I accept this is your view. What is this implication of this so called influence? That should be the whole point right? Otherwise why mention it.? As I mentioned before the Koran and the bible for that matter has influenced terrible acts against humanity but that does not mean that all Muslims or Christians because they ascribe to the same source can be painted to some degree with the same brush.. .as you mentioned in a earlier post there is a thing called agency.
You have lost me with these kinds of associations especially if we believe in the premise of agency…
 
Last edited:
Mate, Kathy Newman is a popular UK based journalist. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist who has spent most of his career teaching at Universities and practicing psychology. He is also a peer reviewed scientist. He is most famous for his self help books predominantly 12 rules for life.
He is also known to be very strong advocate for free speech and has been involved in what some people, would say we’re controversial public exchanges that appear mainly on YouTube. He also has a YouTube channel that has a lot of followers, social media has certainly extended his reach…
I hope this answers your questions…
Thanks for taking the time to provide some detail . Don "t have to agree or take interest in all social forums out there but freedom of expression should take precedent over most other considerations
 
Ok mate, I accept this is your view. What is this implication of this so called influence? That should be the whole point right? Otherwise why mention it.? As I mentioned before the Koran and the bible for that matter has influenced terrible acts against humanity but that does not mean that all Muslims or Christians because they ascribe to the same source can painted to some degree with the same brush.. .as you mentioned in a earlier post there is a thing called agency.
You have lost me with these kinds of associations especially if we believe in the premise of agency…

I think we are definitely posting at cross-purposes now @Red Pill
So let's focus on the alt-right movement for the sake of this debate.
This movement is multi-headed (note my previous reference to its Hyrda-like composition) and has evolved, based on multiple influences, in terms of philosophies and ideologies.
Peterson is just ONE of those influences.
I would argue that in some sub-cultures of the alt-right, he would be considered a primary influence, in others perhaps a secondary influence, and in others again, he may well be reviled and vilified, and his influence denied utterly.
Where I think we are posting at cross-purposes is potentially your premise that somehow I believe he is responsible for the development of the alt-right movement as a whole?
Clearly, that is not the case.
 
I think we are definitely posting at cross-purposes now @Red Pill
So let's focus on the alt-right movement for the sake of this debate.
This movement is multi-headed (note my previous reference to its Hyrda-like composition) and has evolved, based on multiple influences, in terms of philosophies and ideologies.
Peterson is just ONE of those influences.
I would argue that in some sub-cultures of the alt-right, he would be considered a primary influence, in others perhaps a secondary influence, and in others again, he may well be reviled and vilified, and his influence denied utterly.
Where I think we are posting at cross-purposes is potentially your premise that somehow I believe he is responsible for the development of the alt-right movement as a whole?
Clearly, that is not the case.
Thanks mate.. I clearly understand that you do not think he is responsible… so that still does not explain why it’s disturbing ( in your words ) that he has supposedly influenced others to do wrong. What is the purpose of making the association? I get the impression you were saying that you don’t agree with some of JBP ideas because in part it has influenced others to do wrong. Am I also misunderstanding this?
Here is the quote of yours I am referring too:
“Don't you find it rather disturbing that his ideas on this (enforced monogamy et al.) have so heavily influenced the incel movement and the alt-right movement as a whole? I found it particularly alarming that Peterson quickly became a guru for these movements and that their perception of him hasn't changed regardless of his public denials of influence.”

Aspects of the left media do claim that his ideas are dangerous and make very similar comments to the above. This implies some kind of responsibility in my mind.. that is why they make these associations to discredit ideas and censor debate…And yes! the right use similar tactics.
 
Last edited:
Thanks mate.. I clearly understand that you do not think he is responsible… so that still does not explain why it’s disturbing ( in your words ) that he has supposedly influenced others to do wrong. What is the purpose of making the association? I get the impression you were saying that you don’t agree with some of JBP ideas because in part it has influenced others to do wrong. Am I also misunderstanding this?
Here is the quote of yours I am referring too:
“Don't you find it rather disturbing that his ideas on this (enforced monogamy et al.) have so heavily influenced the incel movement and the alt-right movement as a whole? I found it particularly alarming that Peterson quickly became a guru for these movements and that their perception of him hasn't changed regardless of his public denials of influence.”

Aspects of the left media do claim that his ideas are dangerous and make very similar comments to the above. This implies some kind of responsibility in my mind.. that is why they make these associations to discredit ideas and censor debate…And yes! the right use similar tactics.

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.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom