Jordan Peterson thread

Don
Joined
15 Jan 2006
Posts
31,577
Location
Tosche Station
But he was talking in the past tense, he was kinda talking about pre-transition where "Ellen" had his/her breasts removed no?

No, he was talking about the famous actor formerly known as actress Ellen Page - but now calls themselves Elliot Page and is apparently a man, because they said so a while go - having his female breasts removed in the ongoing work to transition from woman to man (crucially different from female to male, of course), because simply saying they're a man wasn't enough to make them a man (although you must still call them a man and acknowledge them as such). To clarify, they were removing female parts, so that they could be closer to being a man (in their eyes), because they couldn't be a man without removing the parts. Seems pretty clear to me.

But regardless of one's own beliefs and this linguistic spaghetti, you must already refer to them as a man because they said so a while ago. The penalty for not doing so is banishment from public discourse for "hateful" content, which is equated to violence.

:edit: I had to edit the above about 6 times to get the male/man wordage right. Because of course they're completely not the same thing at all and we cannot accidentally mix them up.

Do you actually know what the far-right is, or are you one of those delusional types that thinks the 'far-right' is anyone to the right of Marx?

Haven't you heard? That Jewish Ben Shapiro character is a total Nazi.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2003
Posts
20,006
Location
Woburn Sand Dunes
OMG, I had my name changed to Zefan, you bigot. You should have known this. Cancellation squad en route.

I really do think he explains it fully in the video. I'm not trying to get in to an arguement, I just think he ties it up quite nicely.
I already told you, i don't agree with it. And you already told me twice, i must not understand it. circular argument. Your position wont change because i won't ever agree with Peterson on this one.

Zefan said:
But regardless of one's own beliefs and this linguistic spaghetti, you must already refer to them as male because they said so a while ago.
Peterson isn't referring to that person as a male now, let alone even attempting to use his correct name.


But he was talking in the past tense, he was kinda talking about pre-transition where "Ellen" had his/her breasts removed no?
In the tweet he was, yes. But in his comments in response to being banned on twitter, he wasn't.

11m20:

"And i believe firmly that Ellen slash Elliot, or whatever the hell her name or his name is, bears moral culpability for that."

^^ nothing past-tense about that, and pretty insulting too.
 
Don
Joined
15 Jan 2006
Posts
31,577
Location
Tosche Station
As a pastafarian I am offended.
I await the mob of radical carb rights activists.

:edit: might start referring to it as progressive linguine actually. It's funny because linguine comes from lingua, as in "tongue" both biological and as in language. Overly explaining jokes is also fun.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
28,133
Location
Surrey
1) This guy has restricted replies to people he follows. So brave when tweeting something like this.
2) Jordan Peterson has at least stood up for his beliefs. Rightly or wrongly he's always said he won't be compelled to use speech he doesn't believe is right.

Personally I wouldn't have misgendered Elliot Page. If they want to be called he then that's fine by me. But I get where JP is coming from in not wanting to be compelled to use language he doesn't agree is right. Interestingly a lot of Halifax customers seem to agree with him.

 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2003
Posts
20,006
Location
Woburn Sand Dunes
Oh look, an overweight guy with a chequered shirt and a beard, who would've guessed.

Jesus, some people are really taking this personally huh?

1) This guy has restricted replies to people he follows. So brave when tweeting something like this.
2) Jordan Peterson has at least stood up for his beliefs. Rightly or wrongly he's always said he won't be compelled to use speech he doesn't believe is right.
1) Don't care.
2) He doesnt get points for doubling down on a ****take.

Personally I wouldn't have misgendered Elliot Page
Yeah, well, the great JP did *shrug*

Interestingly a lot of Halifax customers seem to agree with him.
How many of those would be begrudged to use somebody's correct name? Rhetorical question, pretty sure i already know the answer.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
8,349
Location
Leeds
It's ironic how you have that quote of Picard saying "There are four lights" while mocking Jordan Peterson for referring to a biological female as her and refusing to retract following a suspension. I suppose the analogy is lost on you, but the parallels are obvious.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
12,783
This forum is super interesting. There is a group of individuals who are always "pro" something quite specific, and I don't believe they "sync up" beforehand on what it is. Then there are a group of people who had no idea what the thing is about but express an opinion on what is at surface level available. The pro group then get their back up, unreservedly jump to the subjects defence, claim the indifferent folk who express an (albeit relatively uniformed) opinion are ignorant/woke/'retarded'.

Is this an identity thing? Does this group of individuals seek out this content? One post I found particularly interesting was referencing this blokes book and knowing specifically that of his friends, 2 girls in particular bought the book. Now I don't know about you chaps but I know of almost no-ones book buying habits, let alone in such a very specific area.

The echo chamber comment is particularly hypocritical given those observations.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2003
Posts
20,006
Location
Woburn Sand Dunes
It's ironic how you have that quote of Picard saying "There are four lights" while mocking Jordan Peterson for referring to a biological female as her and refusing to retract following a suspension. I suppose the analogy is lost on you, but the parallels are obvious.

Oh there are a number of ways i could reply to this but really, i'll just say; sure, ignore the fact that JP was refusing to use his correct NAME, nevermind pronoun, because you know it's damn well childish. But uhh, yeah, irony and 'analogy' etc. etc. whatever.

3yZkPQT.jpg
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
25,298
This forum is super interesting. There is a group of individuals who are always "pro" something quite specific, and I don't believe they "sync up" beforehand on what it is. Then there are a group of people who had no idea what the thing is about but express an opinion on what is at surface level available. The pro group then get their back up, unreservedly jump to the subjects defence, claim the indifferent folk who express an (albeit relatively uniformed) opinion are ignorant/woke/'retarded'.

Is this an identity thing? Does this group of individuals seek out this content? One post I found particularly interesting was referencing this blokes book and knowing specifically that of his friends, 2 girls in particular bought the book. Now I don't know about you chaps but I know of almost no-ones book buying habits, let alone in such a very specific area.

The echo chamber comment is particularly hypocritical given those observations.

I remember reading the book comment, thinking it was weird.

I have no idea what books any of my friends are reading, male or female*

*(I don't have any friends that identify as non binary)
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
12,783
I can only assume the group identity hypothesis I have made is correct. I'd say it is a higher tier to the old English Defence League crowd. Being "anti-woke" is the gateway drug; it seems to sit just above "auditing" videos, and seems to go hand in glove with political "reaction" videos on YouTube. "None of these opinions are my opinions, but I closely align with the conviction in which they are delivered".

Never thought I'd be a "attacked" for being indifferent to these specific interests that some folks are being fed.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
8,349
Location
Leeds
This forum is super interesting. There is a group of individuals who are always "pro" something quite specific, and I don't believe they "sync up" beforehand on what it is. Then there are a group of people who had no idea what the thing is about but express an opinion on what is at surface level available. The pro group then get their back up, unreservedly jump to the subjects defence, claim the indifferent folk who express an (albeit relatively uniformed) opinion are ignorant/woke/'retarded'.

Is this an identity thing? Does this group of individuals seek out this content? One post I found particularly interesting was referencing this blokes book and knowing specifically that of his friends, 2 girls in particular bought the book. Now I don't know about you chaps but I know of almost no-ones book buying habits, let alone in such a very specific area.

The echo chamber comment is particularly hypocritical given those observations.

You don't know of anyone's book buying habits? You don't discuss interests and popular culture with people? I'm not sure what to tell you. People share their interests on social media, then you're able to strike up a conversation which leads onto other interests if you wish.
 
Top Bottom