Jordan Peterson

[Herainestold]

The Graun on publishing Jordan P.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... k-contract

[Woodchopper]

Jordan Peterson of ‘Clean up your room!’ fame can’t clean his room, apparently
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/jordan-peterson-room/

[Gfamily]

I don't want him saying the things I say

[jimbob]

I don't want him saying the things I say

No chance of self-reflection, I see.

[Herainestold]

Jordan Peterson of ‘Clean up your room!’ fame can’t clean his room, apparently
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/jordan-peterson-room/

He will have no trouble keeping his prison cell neat and tidy.

[Rich Scopie]

Jordan Peterson ‘shocked’ by Captain America villain Red Skull espousing ‘10 rules for life’

[Herainestold]

Jordan Peterson ‘shocked’ by Captain America villain Red Skull espousing ‘10 rules for life’

I think Coates is misrepresenting Petrson's advice and influence. Although Peterson is alt-right leaning he is more the spiritual leader of the Incels than the Proud Boys.

[jimbob]

cross posting because I find it amusing

https://twitter.com/AdamRutherford/stat ... 85856?s=20

[Tessa K]

cross posting because I find it amusing

https://twitter.com/AdamRutherford/stat ... 85856?s=20

Thanks for that. I follow Adam R but missed that one.

[plodder]

Jordan Peterson ‘shocked’ by Captain America villain Red Skull espousing ‘10 rules for life’

I think Coates is misrepresenting Petrson's advice and influence. Although Peterson is alt-right leaning he is more the spiritual leader of the Incels than the Proud Boys.

really? I know he’s a spiv but isn’t he becoming increasingly irrelevant? Incels are a weird internet enabled subset of unhappy people, whereas Peterson’s grift is more about empowering your normal Joe, hence his mainstream success.

[Tessa K]

Jordan Peterson ‘shocked’ by Captain America villain Red Skull espousing ‘10 rules for life’

I think Coates is misrepresenting Petrson's advice and influence. Although Peterson is alt-right leaning he is more the spiritual leader of the Incels than the Proud Boys.

really? I know he’s a spiv but isn’t he becoming increasingly irrelevant? Incels are a weird internet enabled subset of unhappy people, whereas Peterson’s grift is more about empowering your normal Joe, hence his mainstream success.

a weird internet enabled subset of unhappy people who hate women and are responsible for violent attacks. So although JP may have less presence than he did, he shouldn't be dismissed.

[plodder]

Jordan Peterson doesn't actively promote those things though. He's dubious about some aspects of feminism and makes a lot of noise to get himself noticed, but he doesn't promote misogyny or violence (as far as I know).

[plebian]

Peterson has been very vocal in describing makeup and women's fashion as intended to make women look sexually aroused to men (rouge, red lipstick, heels) and questions whether the "experiment" of women in the workplace has been a success. He questions whether women are happier now they are not shackled to the heteronormative nuclear family.
He is deeply misogynistic, homo and transphobic.

He caused himself permanent brain damage because he knew better than medical professionals about how to treat his benzo addiction (that wasn't an addiction because he's too logical to become addicted). He isn't rational, his talent is sounding like he is and is saying something profound, when it either doesn't make sense or is actively wrong.

[plodder]

Peterson has been very vocal in describing makeup and women's fashion as intended to make women look sexually aroused to men (rouge, red lipstick, heels) and questions whether the "experiment" of women in the workplace has been a success. He questions whether women are happier now they are not shackled to the heteronormative nuclear family.
He is deeply misogynistic, homo and transphobic.

He caused himself permanent brain damage because he knew better than medical professionals about how to treat his benzo addiction (that wasn't an addiction because he's too logical to become addicted). He isn't rational, his talent is sounding like he is and is saying something profound, when it either doesn't make sense or is actively wrong.

Hello plebian!

Ah ok. I'm not an avid Peterson watcher. I think the closest I've come to paying him much attention is not watching the YouTube "watch as Jordan Peterson destroys this feminist on Channel 4 News" video. I'll shut up now.

[JQH]

There's a quiz circulating on that FaceBook which requires you to assign various quotes to either Jordan Peterson or Baron Vladimir Harkonnen.

It's not easy.

[Little waster]

There's a quiz circulating on that FaceBook which requires you to assign various quotes to either Jordan Peterson or Baron Vladimir Harkonnen.

It's not easy.

Does Herbert ever mention how tidy the Baron kept his bedroom?

[JQH]

There's a quiz circulating on that FaceBook which requires you to assign various quotes to either Jordan Peterson or Baron Vladimir Harkonnen.

It's not easy.

Does Herbert ever mention how tidy the Baron kept his bedroom?

Not that I recall; I imagine the Baron had servants to dispose of the bodies tidy up.

[Fishnut]

Peterson is one of those "gateway" pundits who seem reasonable enough to the casual listener not to raise alarm-bells but who help funnel their fans (particularly young men) into communities like the MRAs, incels and the alt-right.

Don't forget, Peterson first hit media prominence in 2016 after he vocally opposed proposed new legislation that would ban discrimination against people on the basis of “gender identity” or “gender expression. According to a Vox article from 2018,

Experts on Canadian law said that Peterson was misreading the bill... But it worked for him. Peterson’s videos on [the bill] and political correctness racked up more than 400,000 views on YouTube within about a month of posting. There were rallies both for and against Peterson in Toronto; he made the rounds on Canadian television.

In 2018 Peterson was making $80,000 per month from Patreon donations thanks to YouTube videos with titles like “Leftist Host SNAPS At Jordan Peterson, Instantly Regrets It.” and “Dr. Jordan Peterson gives up trying to reason with SJWs”. He railed against "Marxism" (and from what I can tell he denounces anything even vaguely progressive as Marxist) and claims that he's being logical and "rational" while those SJWs and BLM activists are the crazy ones. From the Vox article,

Peterson’s position helps claim the mantle of “facts” and “reason” for the anti-PC right. Because postmodern theorists are skeptical about the notion of an entirely objective reality, Peterson argues, the entire project of “identity politics” is grounded in an irrational rejection of logic and discussion. It’s not only right to reject identity politics; it’s a sign of irrationality not to...

“The underlying mass-appeal of [Peterson] is that he gives white men permission to stop pretending that they care about other people’s grievances,” writes Jesse Brown, host of the Canadaland podcast and a longtime Peterson watcher. “He tells his fans that these so-called marginalized people are not really victims at all but are in fact aggressors, enemies, who must be shut down.”

After Alek Minassian killed 11 people and injured 15 others after targetting pedestrians with his car in a misogynistic terrorist attack, Peterson said in an interview with the New York Times,

“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.”

This is incel ideology. He uncritically repeats Minassian's justification for the attack and shows support for it by his proposal for a "cure" that would give Minassian what he wanted. Peterson did try to walk back his comments, unconvincingly in my opinion (he goes on about how just because men get frustrated from not having sexual partners doesn't mean they should get frustrated, but rather than try to adjust society to make being single less stigmatised he instead still proposes that society should culturally enforce monogamy. Of course, this assumes that everyone is heterosexual and wants monogamous relationships which is far from the case.)

David Futrelle has an excellent piece on how Peterson has either picked up his ideas from, or at least shares his ideas with, the "manosphere".

Peterson features prominently in a chapter of Laura Bates' book Men Who Hate Women, explaining in the chapter Men Who Exploit Other Men, how Peterson (and others like him) act as the respectable, academic face of the manosphere.

you end up with a chain, which starts in the most extreme online forums: men like Matt Forney explicitly advocating beating women, and incels discussing keeping women as sex slaves. Then there are the direct leaders of those communities: men like Valizadeh, who have egged their followers on, and Elam with his ‘Bash a violent bitch month’. Next, men like Yiannopoulos, who sing their hearts out while Nazi salutes rain down around them, but maintain a wide-eyed innocence if they get caught; who repeat some of the most outrageous ideals of the online mob, but always claim they’re ‘just being ironic’; who tread the line between online icon and offline provocateur, and sometimes get their toes burned. Then there are the go-betweens, men like Bannon, who are familiar with this territory and with the groups behind them on the chain – even perhaps in direct and close strategic communication with them – but who distance themselves further, using more muted rhetoric. Or men like Peterson, who produce sanitised versions of very similar ideas. Finally, you reach the top of the chain: politicians and powerful media commentators, who are yet another step removed, and will use that removal to maintain plausible deniability at all costs, but whose rhetoric and watered-down policies are socially acceptable versions of the same messages. The men in the middle are capable of alerting and mobilising support further down the chain and, at the same time, are just respectable enough to attract new, more moderate thinkers to begin their own journey of exploration. And the people at the top of the chain don’t need to repeat the ideology from the bottom verbatim. Indeed, if they did, it would ruin everything: exposing them to criticism against which the existing pattern cleverly protects them, disgusting new recruits before they’ve had time to be radicalised. [Kindle Locations 3677-3689]

[jimbob]

Peterson is one of those "gateway" pundits who seem reasonable enough to the casual listener not to raise alarm-bells but who help funnel their fans (particularly young men) into communities like the MRAs, incels and the alt-right.

Don't forget, Peterson first hit media prominence in 2016 after he vocally opposed proposed new legislation that would ban discrimination against people on the basis of “gender identity” or “gender expression. According to a Vox article from 2018,

Experts on Canadian law said that Peterson was misreading the bill... But it worked for him. Peterson’s videos on [the bill] and political correctness racked up more than 400,000 views on YouTube within about a month of posting. There were rallies both for and against Peterson in Toronto; he made the rounds on Canadian television.

In 2018 Peterson was making $80,000 per month from Patreon donations thanks to YouTube videos with titles like “Leftist Host SNAPS At Jordan Peterson, Instantly Regrets It.” and “Dr. Jordan Peterson gives up trying to reason with SJWs”. He railed against "Marxism" (and from what I can tell he denounces anything even vaguely progressive as Marxist) and claims that he's being logical and "rational" while those SJWs and BLM activists are the crazy ones. From the Vox article,

Peterson’s position helps claim the mantle of “facts” and “reason” for the anti-PC right. Because postmodern theorists are skeptical about the notion of an entirely objective reality, Peterson argues, the entire project of “identity politics” is grounded in an irrational rejection of logic and discussion. It’s not only right to reject identity politics; it’s a sign of irrationality not to...

“The underlying mass-appeal of [Peterson] is that he gives white men permission to stop pretending that they care about other people’s grievances,” writes Jesse Brown, host of the Canadaland podcast and a longtime Peterson watcher. “He tells his fans that these so-called marginalized people are not really victims at all but are in fact aggressors, enemies, who must be shut down.”

After Alek Minassian killed 11 people and injured 15 others after targetting pedestrians with his car in a misogynistic terrorist attack, Peterson said in an interview with the New York Times,

“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.”

This is incel ideology. He uncritically repeats Minassian's justification for the attack and shows support for it by his proposal for a "cure" that would give Minassian what he wanted. Peterson did try to walk back his comments, unconvincingly in my opinion (he goes on about how just because men get frustrated from not having sexual partners doesn't mean they should get frustrated, but rather than try to adjust society to make being single less stigmatised he instead still proposes that society should culturally enforce monogamy. Of course, this assumes that everyone is heterosexual and wants monogamous relationships which is far from the case.)

David Futrelle has an excellent piece on how Peterson has either picked up his ideas from, or at least shares his ideas with, the "manosphere".

Peterson features prominently in a chapter of Laura Bates' book Men Who Hate Women, explaining in the chapter Men Who Exploit Other Men, how Peterson (and others like him) act as the respectable, academic face of the manosphere.

you end up with a chain, which starts in the most extreme online forums: men like Matt Forney explicitly advocating beating women, and incels discussing keeping women as sex slaves. Then there are the direct leaders of those communities: men like Valizadeh, who have egged their followers on, and Elam with his ‘Bash a violent bitch month’. Next, men like Yiannopoulos, who sing their hearts out while Nazi salutes rain down around them, but maintain a wide-eyed innocence if they get caught; who repeat some of the most outrageous ideals of the online mob, but always claim they’re ‘just being ironic’; who tread the line between online icon and offline provocateur, and sometimes get their toes burned. Then there are the go-betweens, men like Bannon, who are familiar with this territory and with the groups behind them on the chain – even perhaps in direct and close strategic communication with them – but who distance themselves further, using more muted rhetoric. Or men like Peterson, who produce sanitised versions of very similar ideas. Finally, you reach the top of the chain: politicians and powerful media commentators, who are yet another step removed, and will use that removal to maintain plausible deniability at all costs, but whose rhetoric and watered-down policies are socially acceptable versions of the same messages. The men in the middle are capable of alerting and mobilising support further down the chain and, at the same time, are just respectable enough to attract new, more moderate thinkers to begin their own journey of exploration. And the people at the top of the chain don’t need to repeat the ideology from the bottom verbatim. Indeed, if they did, it would ruin everything: exposing them to criticism against which the existing pattern cleverly protects them, disgusting new recruits before they’ve had time to be radicalised. [Kindle Locations 3677-3689]

I suspected he was something like that. But good to see it set out like that.

[Martin_B]

Welcome back plebian!

[basementer]

Welcome back plebian!

Endorsed.

[plebian]

Welcome back plebian!

Did you miss the ceremony? Steph laid on a buffet in the penthouse magazine.

Not sure it's a good idea for the mods to be stockpiling munitions but Fanny's spread was enjoyed by all.

[Stephanie]

Welcome back plebian!

Did you miss the ceremony? Steph laid on a buffet in the penthouse magazine.

Not sure it's a good idea for the mods to be stockpiling munitions but Fanny's spread was enjoyed by all.

hahaha, missed you, plebian :)

[jimbob]

So I see he's left Twitter in only the way he could... By whining about a backlash, stating that he's left, and continuing to tweet.

[Little waster]

So I see he's left Twitter in only the way he could... By whining about a backlash, stating that he's left, and continuing to tweet.

zOmG TeH LeFt-FaSciStS HaV CaNcElLeD HiM!