What do you mean by that? Equality of outcome is undesirable?
Aka I don't know what that means so please over explain something you say in a ton of your lectures. Doing research before you debate an expert in a field idiot.
Edit: even after he explains it it is still painfully obvious she doesn't comprehend it.
He uses the serotonin based nervous system to make one of the most insightful points I've ever heard that illustrates how tightly locked human nature is to ancient evolutionary circuitry. ..
HER: So you're say we should live like lobsters? U WOT
I imagine she lives with a weak beta male twerp of the variety Henderson mentioned.
The kind of guy who earns a lot less money than her, cooks for her every night and sits listening intently, nodding with girlish understanding, as she describes "her day" in petulant, painstaking detail.
He's probably scrawny, with a huge, well groomed beard. He has a mid-level media job, nothing of any importance or real responsibility. He wears non-prescription Clark Kent glasses that he doesn't need and Peter Pan shirts. He spends half his day trying to look whimsical and the other half planning the dairy and gluten-free, locally sourced dinner he'll be whipping up for this awful harpie later.
I couldn't find his picture but everything else was right.
Her own circumstances benefit from the fact that her husband, John O'Connell, an author and arts journalist whom she met at Oxford, works from home – and is something of a domestic god. "It's a mad rush," she says of the family's typical start to the day. "I only see the kids for that half-an-hour over breakfast before heading off to work. I'm really fortunate that my husband is a freelance writer and does the cooking, the shopping, takes the kids to school and picks them up. I couldn't do what I do without him.
Yeah, the conversation turned sour as fuck after he mentioned weak male partners about 4 mins in.
Her two responses were: "do you think that's what a lot of women are doing?!" & "what gives you the right to say that! Maybe that's how women want it!"
She obviously feels, to some end, that the only way to solve the inequity between men and women is to switch the roles, not even them out. And Jesus Christ did she pick the right guy for the job, with this fruit.
There is no London accent
Talks about a cockney accent
Literally first sentence on wikipedia:
The term cockney has had several distinct geographical, social, and linguistic associations. Originally a pejorative term applied to all city-dwellers, it was eventually restricted to Londoners*...
I'm from London, mate. The cockney accent has never been a majority accent in the city and it's (unfortunately, I think) dying out as young working class white Londoners try to sound like Jamaican kids more and more.
True that, literally only met one guy from London with a cockney accent. Had a ex gf from London, hate the place tbh fam. Why anyone still lives there is beyond me, 1-2k p/m plus for a 1 bed flat
Channel 4 will have edited the whole thing down to around 5 mins for the broadcast news show. They'll have picked the part where Jordan looks least assured.
I was thinking the same thing. It's pretty frightening how an objective approach to any form of discourse is a rarity these days. But that trait is absolutely necessary if one is going to accept 72 genders or the idea that most financial aspects of their life should be paid for by someone else.
The thing about Peterson right now is that the Left is having a very hard time trying to discredit him. The man is posing facts in the right context, while prescribing solutions that both men AND women can follow. Follow that up with his dad jokes online and mannerisms, and he's really the most non-threatening guy that could threaten the "Left ideologues". He knows when to use facts and when to use Real evidence (tangible things, such as a statistics), Demonstrative (a model of what likely happened at a given time and place), Documentary (a letter, blog post, or other document) and Testimonial (witness testimony). He knows how those relate to the truth in a very cogent way and his opponents are essentially people who are arguing ideals, wielding fallacies, and creating straw men out of the arguments of their opponents.
A lot of people who spent any time in university (me included), knew this was - as a whole - born from post-modernism: A great malaise of the reality you're in, based around the privileges we all share in this miracle of a time we're living though. Wanting to tear society down simply comes from the fact that we're bored of what's in front of us, and that there's "nothing new under the sun". Which is depressing, sure, but not worth taking out everything.
The thing that works with him is he doesn't talk like an asshole like the other Conservative pundits, and he's way more well spoken than someone like Ben Shapiro. When he talks he sounds like he genuinely wants you to understand, whereas Shapiro and others get away with rapid-fire speech which sounds like fireworks but is ultimately rehearsed.
Peterson got really famous at exactly the right time. He's not too old, but old enough to speak on shit he's spent his entire life thinking and talking about. It's really hard to catch him off guard, and he doesn't lose his patience. That's an important part, and younger people struggle with that. It's hard to be an expert on anything, it sometimes takes decades to even be even unique if you're doing it right.
But he also happens to be funny, and he's got stories, and he's got a manner of speaking that draws you in, and he's got a certain fashion sense so you don't feel like you're listening to an obnoxious asshole OR an academic bore. That's why nobody knows what to do with him. Their tricks don't seem to work.
The biggest thing that I think benefits him is he's not trying to destroy anything, necessarily. Everything he's doing is positive, he's trying to help and reinforce and make people remember the glory of civilization.
Bennington had that classic takedown of Ant, the best thing anyone has ever said about him and I think it applies to a lot of people like Milo and Gavin and the rest: you're not conservative, you just hate liberals. That's important because at the absolute best, they can only be angry and bitchy and dismissive. That's all you can get out of them. Peterson and others actually stand for something useful, not just for yelling about shit they don't like. That's why his message works.
That's what I mean. He stands for pragmatism, practicality and conscientiousness. Something the mostly-Left controlled media hasn't talked about AT ALL and they've only gotten worse with their absence of talking about it. How are you supposed to believe in yourself when YOU PERSONALLY KNOW you're a fucking mess? Well the Left doesn't think you are; they just think society is the problem and it should be vanquished. Well maybe its partly to blame, sure, but that doesn't really help you when you're like my ex: completely alone at 35, surrounded by a mess of an apt, no goals or direction, with a family that just cuts you a check every month for living wages, but doesn't think much of you because of see above. You get into your own head when you don't have to strive for anything, while your apt gets dirtier. And she'd say "Well i suffer from depression, I suffer from ADHD". OK: Well life is suffering, that's the fucking package deal. Some get it genetically more than others. You can't change it; only your own lot. So the apt just stays dirty because of your situation? Well CLEAN IT. GET YOUR FUCKING ACT TOGETHER. No one in the media is telling anyone this and all they're doing is throwing out straw men and excuses, while acting like enablers. So no one - NO ONE - gets straightened out. Peterson himself gets cut down to tears, because of how much its TRULY lacking in society, especially among young men: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ER1LOarlgg
The biggest takeaway from this interview, that highlights the extreme cognitive dissonance between conservatives and feminists, is this:
Men aren't trying to make the world difficult for women, especially in the workplace. It's that getting shit done is fucking difficult and--in most industries--is cutthroat. It's the free market, and you sink or swim, and everyone around you us trying to drown you. Of course it's going to favor aggression. This isn't fucking Candyland.
The interviewer just wants to pretend it's Patriarchy that's keeping women down, not that it's just the reality of life in human society. No shit men excel at aggressively fighting each other both literally and figuratively; it's in our literal evolutionary nature. Of course women make good homemakers and mothers; it's in their nature and they are the only sex that can have children.
Feminists have been trying to upend 100,000 years of evolutionary psychology over a 50-year period, and a lot of people are finally pushing back because they realize their position is untenable and ultimately a pipe dream. Too bad they ruined so many generations of otherwise good women's live along the way that were lied to about the nature of reality.
Never heard of the guy, but that clip just gave me a raging boner. Gonna finish watching this and Google him after.
Every word and facial expression he used was measured and incredibly effective. I'm halfway through, and he hasn't even come CLOSE to being vulgar or impatient with her, yet. Hell, it's not even condescending.
It's scary how good this man is at making a point.
What a stupid cunt. Everyone of her questions were suggesting something negative proving she didn't listen to a fucking word he said. That's the problem with the SJW / PC / retard movement. Stop being an emotional autistic bitch and look at things with objectiveness for more than 5 seconds before trying to push your regurgitated agenda. A fucking just stupid person that she even mentions the gender pay gap.
she spends the entire interview intentionally misinterpreting every rational opinion he gives, and then tries to boil it down into some overly-simplistic, black and white version that would be perfect for a clickbait headline or controversial sound bite.
“SO YOURE SAYING WOMEN ARE INFERIOR TO MEN BECAUSE THEYRE STUPID?
“SO YOURE SAYING TRANS PEOPLE WANT TO MURDER MILLIONS?”
“SO YOURE SAYING WOMEN STINK UP THEIR CUBICLES WITH THEIR UNWASHED CUNTS AND DONT GET RAISES?”
then this horrible bitch has the audacity to accuse him of being intentionally provocative.
Why does this idiot interviewer need to try and turn everything he says into something offensive?
"So you're saying all woman should die?"
He's trying to say reconciliatory, optimistic things about gender but she WANTS him to be a misogynist instead
It's like their only method of argument is catching you saying something offensive-sounding (not even offensive, just offensive-sounding) and then shaming you into silence, apology or career loss and ostracism
Actually debating the issues is a foreign concept to them. It's literally not their goal when they enter a debate
They behave that way because that's how they interact with each other from an early age. Female relationships are built on passive aggressive nonsense, fake compliments, and subtle shaming and manipulation. They come at everything from an emotional perspective so when someone throws a bunch of logic and facts in their face they just shut down and resort to the default tactics they use with each other and it makes them look stupid.
A lot of the time it just boils down to wanting attention. She doesn't want anyone to actually help her, she just wants people to sit and listen to her bitch and pay attention to her. A few sympathetic statements and some reassuring words so she can convince herself she's right and she'll be satisfied. She doesn't want logic and conflict resolution, she wants to feel like she was right and that her emotions are validated because she can't do that for herself.
The majority of modern American female behavior is centered around a basic attention seeking formula. If people are giving her their time and attention it means that she's validated and important, even if she doesn't care about the people giving it. That's why women go on social media and post pics so a bunch of thirsty faggots will fawn over them. They get an ego boost and good feels and it reinforces their selfish world view. They don't care about these guys, they just see them as a means to a resource they want, in this case attention and praise.
This is the same reason why a lot of women go nuts as they age and their looks deteriorate. People will give a young woman attention and put up with her nonsense because she looks good, but nobody wants to coddle a fat broad in her 40's or 50's. The whole system that they've built their life on falls out from under them and they're forced to get by on other things like personality, intelligence, and character and a lot of them just can't handle it. So in comes the fake tits and plastic surgery and whore clothes and all this shit in a desperate attempt to reclaim their youth and former status, but it's too late.
Oh, I'm well aware. I just think it's funny. Like when hot chicks wore black in "solidarity to fight rape culture" as their areola is almost poking out. We're like a year away from a chick wearing a merkin and nipple tassles and telling people to stop sexualizing her.
Listening to him, after having listened to the AA show revealed so much about why these guys fail. /u/TriangleDimes nailed it. Jordan Peterson just hammers it in with stoic logic. STOP THE HAMMERING!
Jordan is so intelligent that he's almost robotic in his takedowns. It's all so easy to him. He answered all her questions thoroughly and when she tried to use underhand tactics he made her look small and stupid.
He is highly intelligent and articulate but he's also extremely well read and knows exactly what he's talking about. He doesn't comment on a thing unless he has evidence to back it up. That's just one of the many differences between him and that hysterical, one dimensional bint who's "interviewing him."
Channel 4 are fucking awful. I remember in late 2001 they ran with footage they'd obtained from the battle of Qual-i-jangi in Afghanistan. The SBS (UK's SEAL team 6) were fighting a bunch of Taleban who had killed a CIA agent and taken over the fort. C4 broadcast the footage without pixellating (easy to do) the SBS guys faces (against the law.) They were fined by the MOD and had to issue an apology the next night.
Here's the footage as it should have gone out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Iu7xs74hJw (narrator mislabels them as SAS, there were no SAS in Afghanistan in 2001 - they're Special Boat Service.)
It's because they get a lot of mountain warfare training. Most of them are former Royal Marines. General rule of thumb is that SAS are mostly former Paras. Get more HALO/jungle and desert warfare training and CQB/CT training. SBS more mountain/artic warfare. All are trained in all of it, there's little difference in their skill sets.
Overall, SAS were mostly stationed in Iraq, SBS mostly in Afghanistan but both units saw combat in both theatres.
The interviewer was being a smarmy little prick and was negative from the get go. Imagine getting the same question asked over and over again? A question that undermines his whole filmography.
He was overly dramatic but that's Tarantino. I'd rather his reaction than some media trained robot who will smile and say the right things. That's a bitch.
Jordan is fine but he's an idiot on the whole god thing. Listen to this interview he did with Sam Harris and watch him go full autism on what is "true." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdpyzwOOYY
He's trying to explain that when you're making the claim that Objective Truth should be at the top of the truth hierarchy, you're unknowingly making another claim that Pragmatic Truth should be at the top. This is because the reasoning behind why you may think Objective Truth is the ultimate truth is actually the reasoning behind why Pragmatic Truth is at the top. He's trying to say that Objective Truth is nested inside of Pragmatic Truth. Maybe he's wrong, maybe he's right, but he isn't stupid.
It's the easiest thing in the world to take Sam's positions. God isn't real. Islam is bad. Objective Truth reigns supreme. These are simple, easy positions to take. What Jordan is arguing for isn't an easy thing to argue for, you have to be incredibly nuanced and careful to get your point across. Just because it's difficult to argue for, doesn't necessarily make him wrong (or stupid).
Exactly, instead of listening to him and understanding his point; that she had already done exactly same thing he was accused of, but he never actually did as he had literally just explained in her last question mind you, but she completely failed to see the hypocrisy in it.
She just plowed into her next prewritten question from her producer that has nothing to do with her interviewers' last answer, that would mean she would have to be able to listen and respond intelligibly.
Dude I just started yelling at my computer screen after he says "That's patently absurd. It's not a matter of opinion. It's seriously wrong." and then she just seriously must have zoned out for the entire point, because she doesn't even process a fucking word he said. One of the most frustrating things I've watched in a while.
Seriously, it's like no matter how well he explains something or how deep he goes into a point, she's still going to have the same one determined response. Obviously she went in with a bias and had no intention of listening
I didn't see it yesterday. I'm sorry. Are you sure the mods didn't take it down? I'm expecting them to do this even though it is being discussed pretty widely and deals with issues we discuss here.
I posted as a "Women are faggots" post; I don't think they took it down? I had a lot of comments on the thread, but maybe they shadow banned it anyway, because I didn't see it on the pages after awhile. Shitposting is what this sub has always been about, especially during the quiet stretches of time between the next public embarrassments of O&A&J
Imagine thinking a good response to 'On average men are more X' is '... I know some men who are not X'.
Innumerate people characteristically have a strong tendency to personalize—to be misled by their own experiences, or by the media's focus on individuals and drama.
Jordan Peterson is smart but it’s gay that he won’t talk to a white nationalist. The guy will do an hour long lecture on the Lion King. I refuse to believe that he has nothing meaningful to say about white nationalism.
Debating about the perils of modern feminism and debating someone about whether or not Stone Cold Steve Austin or The Rock was a better wrestler are different things. No reasonable person, that wants to have serious discussions, will publically debate a white nationalist or a wrestling fan.
An absurd false equivalency. Professional wrestling is a sport/theatrical entertainment. Ethnonationalism is an idealogy that currently has millions of adherents worldwide, and historically speaking has been the most common form of political organization. I simply can’t believe that Jordan Peterson, the guy whose entire work is guided by the principle of “Let’s not casually dismiss ideas from the past outright; let’s look at why people held them and what worked about them and try to incorporate it into how we live today” would have nothing substantial to say about ethnonationalism.
It's an outdated ideology. Professional wrestling has millions of adherent fans worldwide, too, so no point there, either. Historically speaking white nationalism is dead, so no point there. He's not lowering his status to talk to retards. That's my point.
Nigger, the guy gives lectures about the Bible, about obscure religious traditions that died out during the Iron Age, about mythological epics that were carved in clay tablets in fucking cuneiform. Jordan Peterson is not the kind of guy to say “That’s outdated; no point talking about it.” He’s able to find something meaningful to say about just about everything.
That's because the Bible isn't fairly tales, it's allegories. I'm no punk bitch on the Bible, I grew up Catholic. Just because some nuts took it literal doesn't mean that it's not important, or doesn't have important points for people. There is nothing in white nationalism that is really worth talking about, because scientifically and objectively it is wrong, and pretty much all of it's proponents are just dudes that hate minorities and are scared of change.
I never said the Bible’s not important. But just as you’re trying to dismiss an entire political ideology as being completely irrelevant and unworthy of any discussion, the academy is full of fedora tipping faggots who would say the exact same thing about your religion. Peterson roundly rejects that dismissal as being too simplistic. If you think there’s nothing about white nationalism that relates to any of the topics Jordan Peterson discusses regularly, you haven’t listened to him enough. He talks all the time about tribe, the organization of the state, power structures, group dynamics, features that bind a culture together and separate it from other cultures, etc etc etc. ANY discussion about ethnonationalism, even a highly critical one, would be right up his academic alley. So it’s remarkable that he won’t have one.
He talks about them separately, though. You can see trends in ethnicities, sure, but you need to look at separate things that may not make the white nationalist ideals very true. Turns out that is the case. White nationalism is retarded. Just because it might have something in common with another ideology does not mean that it doesn't get swept away by all the other points that it conveniently ignores. That's some Colin Flaherty shit.
I’m literally not even arguing for its validity here. I’m arguing for its relevance and worthiness of discussion. You think I want Jordan Peterson to get up there and just parrot everything I already believe? No, I want him to give his honest thoughts. Which I’m almost positive are more extensive than the weak and insubstantial dismissals he gives when asked about it. It just strikes me as incredibly inconsistent with the rest of his academic and philosophical approach.
104 comments
6 FORKinmyDICK 2018-01-18
Aka I don't know what that means so please over explain something you say in a ton of your lectures. Doing research before you debate an expert in a field idiot.
Edit: even after he explains it it is still painfully obvious she doesn't comprehend it.
1 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
This wahmen, BTW, is getting REEMED online over the beating she took.
5 Ant_Sucks 2018-01-18
He uses the serotonin based nervous system to make one of the most insightful points I've ever heard that illustrates how tightly locked human nature is to ancient evolutionary circuitry. ..
HER: So you're say we should live like lobsters? U WOT
6 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
imagine having the live with this cunt
8 McGowan9 2018-01-18
I imagine she lives with a weak beta male twerp of the variety Henderson mentioned.
The kind of guy who earns a lot less money than her, cooks for her every night and sits listening intently, nodding with girlish understanding, as she describes "her day" in petulant, painstaking detail.
He's probably scrawny, with a huge, well groomed beard. He has a mid-level media job, nothing of any importance or real responsibility. He wears non-prescription Clark Kent glasses that he doesn't need and Peter Pan shirts. He spends half his day trying to look whimsical and the other half planning the dairy and gluten-free, locally sourced dinner he'll be whipping up for this awful harpie later.
6 Ant_Sucks 2018-01-18
I couldn't find his picture but everything else was right.
9 McGowan9 2018-01-18
Haha, fucking hell. Peterson's comments on weak men inevitably making their female partners miserable really got her goat. Now we know why.
6 Ant_Sucks 2018-01-18
Found the alpha dog's picture
And his twitter
Jordan Peterson cut that woman's life open with surgical precision.
8 DeafandMutePenguin 2018-01-18
OMG /u/McGowan9 hit the nail on the head.
She probably had to close her office door and flick her bean after Peterson talked to her like that.
7 McGowan9 2018-01-18
Oh dear. It's worse than I thought. Thought he'd be moderately good looking, in a wimpish way. He looks like a child killer.
1 SickleSellout 2018-01-18
A wimpish child killer too. Nothing worse than that.
5 McGowan9 2018-01-18
No brigading his twitter, lads. For real. Don't want Antwan to get his wish, especially without shelling out 5000 big ones.
3 TriangleDimes 2018-01-18
i'm very sad and frustrated now
1 metatarsal_underwear 2018-01-18
Lol, that's why she got so defensive when he said relationships where women dominate their partners are ultimately negative experiences.
1 GiygasFetus 2018-01-18
He wrote a book about spices.
6 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
Yeah, the conversation turned sour as fuck after he mentioned weak male partners about 4 mins in.
Her two responses were: "do you think that's what a lot of women are doing?!" & "what gives you the right to say that! Maybe that's how women want it!"
That really, really hit a sore spot
1 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
Now that I'm seeing this fag's twitter: Holy Moley (https://twitter.com/thebookofspice/status/728527649405022209).
She obviously feels, to some end, that the only way to solve the inequity between men and women is to switch the roles, not even them out. And Jesus Christ did she pick the right guy for the job, with this fruit.
No wonder she got pissed at that part.
4 sjeffiesjeff 2018-01-18
I believe Jordan Henderson plays for Liverpool
3 McGowan9 2018-01-18
Peterson. I'm a mongoloid. And tired. Jordan Henderson is the captain of Liverpool F.C. Freudian slip.
1 SpeckofCoppah 2018-01-18
Not a bad player. He gets a lot of hate but he works hard and is always eager. Sadly, injuries have taken their toll.
1 sjeffiesjeff 2018-01-18
Shut up
1 SpeckofCoppah 2018-01-18
How wude !
0 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
ROIGHT, HE FOOKEN PLAYS FOR LIVERPOOL, INNIT? IS YOU A LIVERPOOL SUPPOR'ER?!
2 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
that's a London accent, people from Liverpool speek lyyke the beeet-uls
1 McGowan9 2018-01-18
There is no London accent. Middle and upper class from London sound like every RP/Hugh Grant "yah." Foreigners have their own different patois.
You mean indigenous, white working class - cockney. In which case it would be -
"Let's ave it rite. He fackin plays for Liverpool, innit. You a fackin Scouser, you dozey slag?" etc
1 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
Literally first sentence on wikipedia:
The term cockney has had several distinct geographical, social, and linguistic associations. Originally a pejorative term applied to all city-dwellers, it was eventually restricted to Londoners*...
1 McGowan9 2018-01-18
I'm from London, mate. The cockney accent has never been a majority accent in the city and it's (unfortunately, I think) dying out as young working class white Londoners try to sound like Jamaican kids more and more.
1 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
True that, literally only met one guy from London with a cockney accent. Had a ex gf from London, hate the place tbh fam. Why anyone still lives there is beyond me, 1-2k p/m plus for a 1 bed flat
1 sjeffiesjeff 2018-01-18
No, I'm not from England. We look across the canal at them with disgust.
2 RocoTheLoveMonkey 2018-01-18
I fuck French girls that come here to study for university. I hate the French but the girls are slutty as it gets
1 Krambazzwod 2018-01-18
It reminded me of the time Big A schooled one Fez Whatley and Ronnie B had to stop the fight http://www.atomsmotion.com/uploads/bigafinal.mp3
5 d4n4n 2018-01-18
And the saddest part about this is that about half the tv viewership of this will think she owned him there.
2 decmcg 2018-01-18
Channel 4 will have edited the whole thing down to around 5 mins for the broadcast news show. They'll have picked the part where Jordan looks least assured.
1 sjeffiesjeff 2018-01-18
22:05 was pretty undeniable
1 RichHeads 2018-01-18
I was thinking the same thing. It's pretty frightening how an objective approach to any form of discourse is a rarity these days. But that trait is absolutely necessary if one is going to accept 72 genders or the idea that most financial aspects of their life should be paid for by someone else.
4 InHell1979 2018-01-18
The thing about Peterson right now is that the Left is having a very hard time trying to discredit him. The man is posing facts in the right context, while prescribing solutions that both men AND women can follow. Follow that up with his dad jokes online and mannerisms, and he's really the most non-threatening guy that could threaten the "Left ideologues". He knows when to use facts and when to use Real evidence (tangible things, such as a statistics), Demonstrative (a model of what likely happened at a given time and place), Documentary (a letter, blog post, or other document) and Testimonial (witness testimony). He knows how those relate to the truth in a very cogent way and his opponents are essentially people who are arguing ideals, wielding fallacies, and creating straw men out of the arguments of their opponents.
A lot of people who spent any time in university (me included), knew this was - as a whole - born from post-modernism: A great malaise of the reality you're in, based around the privileges we all share in this miracle of a time we're living though. Wanting to tear society down simply comes from the fact that we're bored of what's in front of us, and that there's "nothing new under the sun". Which is depressing, sure, but not worth taking out everything.
7 TriangleDimes 2018-01-18
The thing that works with him is he doesn't talk like an asshole like the other Conservative pundits, and he's way more well spoken than someone like Ben Shapiro. When he talks he sounds like he genuinely wants you to understand, whereas Shapiro and others get away with rapid-fire speech which sounds like fireworks but is ultimately rehearsed.
Peterson got really famous at exactly the right time. He's not too old, but old enough to speak on shit he's spent his entire life thinking and talking about. It's really hard to catch him off guard, and he doesn't lose his patience. That's an important part, and younger people struggle with that. It's hard to be an expert on anything, it sometimes takes decades to even be even unique if you're doing it right.
But he also happens to be funny, and he's got stories, and he's got a manner of speaking that draws you in, and he's got a certain fashion sense so you don't feel like you're listening to an obnoxious asshole OR an academic bore. That's why nobody knows what to do with him. Their tricks don't seem to work.
The biggest thing that I think benefits him is he's not trying to destroy anything, necessarily. Everything he's doing is positive, he's trying to help and reinforce and make people remember the glory of civilization.
Bennington had that classic takedown of Ant, the best thing anyone has ever said about him and I think it applies to a lot of people like Milo and Gavin and the rest: you're not conservative, you just hate liberals. That's important because at the absolute best, they can only be angry and bitchy and dismissive. That's all you can get out of them. Peterson and others actually stand for something useful, not just for yelling about shit they don't like. That's why his message works.
In summary, yes I am a fag.
3 InHell1979 2018-01-18
That's what I mean. He stands for pragmatism, practicality and conscientiousness. Something the mostly-Left controlled media hasn't talked about AT ALL and they've only gotten worse with their absence of talking about it. How are you supposed to believe in yourself when YOU PERSONALLY KNOW you're a fucking mess? Well the Left doesn't think you are; they just think society is the problem and it should be vanquished. Well maybe its partly to blame, sure, but that doesn't really help you when you're like my ex: completely alone at 35, surrounded by a mess of an apt, no goals or direction, with a family that just cuts you a check every month for living wages, but doesn't think much of you because of see above. You get into your own head when you don't have to strive for anything, while your apt gets dirtier. And she'd say "Well i suffer from depression, I suffer from ADHD". OK: Well life is suffering, that's the fucking package deal. Some get it genetically more than others. You can't change it; only your own lot. So the apt just stays dirty because of your situation? Well CLEAN IT. GET YOUR FUCKING ACT TOGETHER. No one in the media is telling anyone this and all they're doing is throwing out straw men and excuses, while acting like enablers. So no one - NO ONE - gets straightened out. Peterson himself gets cut down to tears, because of how much its TRULY lacking in society, especially among young men: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ER1LOarlgg
1 krankortega 2018-01-18
The biggest takeaway from this interview, that highlights the extreme cognitive dissonance between conservatives and feminists, is this:
Men aren't trying to make the world difficult for women, especially in the workplace. It's that getting shit done is fucking difficult and--in most industries--is cutthroat. It's the free market, and you sink or swim, and everyone around you us trying to drown you. Of course it's going to favor aggression. This isn't fucking Candyland.
The interviewer just wants to pretend it's Patriarchy that's keeping women down, not that it's just the reality of life in human society. No shit men excel at aggressively fighting each other both literally and figuratively; it's in our literal evolutionary nature. Of course women make good homemakers and mothers; it's in their nature and they are the only sex that can have children.
Feminists have been trying to upend 100,000 years of evolutionary psychology over a 50-year period, and a lot of people are finally pushing back because they realize their position is untenable and ultimately a pipe dream. Too bad they ruined so many generations of otherwise good women's live along the way that were lied to about the nature of reality.
4 feltingmeces 2018-01-18
Never heard of the guy, but that clip just gave me a raging boner. Gonna finish watching this and Google him after.
Every word and facial expression he used was measured and incredibly effective. I'm halfway through, and he hasn't even come CLOSE to being vulgar or impatient with her, yet. Hell, it's not even condescending.
It's scary how good this man is at making a point.
1 Dawgsie 2018-01-18
How the fuck are you a Reddit user but have never heard of Jordan Peterson?
1 feltingmeces 2018-01-18
I have now, though.
4 FORKinmyDICK 2018-01-18
What a stupid cunt. Everyone of her questions were suggesting something negative proving she didn't listen to a fucking word he said. That's the problem with the SJW / PC / retard movement. Stop being an emotional autistic bitch and look at things with objectiveness for more than 5 seconds before trying to push your regurgitated agenda. A fucking just stupid person that she even mentions the gender pay gap.
3 momomike 2018-01-18
she spends the entire interview intentionally misinterpreting every rational opinion he gives, and then tries to boil it down into some overly-simplistic, black and white version that would be perfect for a clickbait headline or controversial sound bite.
“SO YOURE SAYING WOMEN ARE INFERIOR TO MEN BECAUSE THEYRE STUPID?
“SO YOURE SAYING TRANS PEOPLE WANT TO MURDER MILLIONS?”
“SO YOURE SAYING WOMEN STINK UP THEIR CUBICLES WITH THEIR UNWASHED CUNTS AND DONT GET RAISES?”
then this horrible bitch has the audacity to accuse him of being intentionally provocative.
3 FatMosque 2018-01-18
lol her Pinochet comment
3 i_dont_give_a_care 2018-01-18
What a profoundly unintelligent woman
3 RapistWithAIDS 2018-01-18
Why does this idiot interviewer need to try and turn everything he says into something offensive?
"So you're saying all woman should die?"
He's trying to say reconciliatory, optimistic things about gender but she WANTS him to be a misogynist instead
It's like their only method of argument is catching you saying something offensive-sounding (not even offensive, just offensive-sounding) and then shaming you into silence, apology or career loss and ostracism
Actually debating the issues is a foreign concept to them. It's literally not their goal when they enter a debate
2 Pr0gNuT 2018-01-18
They behave that way because that's how they interact with each other from an early age. Female relationships are built on passive aggressive nonsense, fake compliments, and subtle shaming and manipulation. They come at everything from an emotional perspective so when someone throws a bunch of logic and facts in their face they just shut down and resort to the default tactics they use with each other and it makes them look stupid.
2 tomo89 2018-01-18
Sometimes I wish you'd just listen, though, instead of trying to solve it..
Or, as my ex used to put it "You always just think you're right." No shit. That's why I said it.
3 Pr0gNuT 2018-01-18
A lot of the time it just boils down to wanting attention. She doesn't want anyone to actually help her, she just wants people to sit and listen to her bitch and pay attention to her. A few sympathetic statements and some reassuring words so she can convince herself she's right and she'll be satisfied. She doesn't want logic and conflict resolution, she wants to feel like she was right and that her emotions are validated because she can't do that for herself.
The majority of modern American female behavior is centered around a basic attention seeking formula. If people are giving her their time and attention it means that she's validated and important, even if she doesn't care about the people giving it. That's why women go on social media and post pics so a bunch of thirsty faggots will fawn over them. They get an ego boost and good feels and it reinforces their selfish world view. They don't care about these guys, they just see them as a means to a resource they want, in this case attention and praise.
This is the same reason why a lot of women go nuts as they age and their looks deteriorate. People will give a young woman attention and put up with her nonsense because she looks good, but nobody wants to coddle a fat broad in her 40's or 50's. The whole system that they've built their life on falls out from under them and they're forced to get by on other things like personality, intelligence, and character and a lot of them just can't handle it. So in comes the fake tits and plastic surgery and whore clothes and all this shit in a desperate attempt to reclaim their youth and former status, but it's too late.
Sorry for that long post, I'm a wordy faggot.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
Oh, I'm well aware. I just think it's funny. Like when hot chicks wore black in "solidarity to fight rape culture" as their areola is almost poking out. We're like a year away from a chick wearing a merkin and nipple tassles and telling people to stop sexualizing her.
1 Nah_Ming 2018-01-18
http://mashable.com/2016/01/25/still-not-asking-for-it/#68yQzNManPqW
https://worldwideweber2014.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/still-not-asking-for-it/
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
I stand corrected. We're already here. Yikes.
3 Carbonainducedcoma 2018-01-18
This hoser beat this limey like a rental mule. Got her right in the five hole.
3 marty82 2018-01-18
all commies on suicide watch. i listen to this guy on politics, not ant and his alt-right hack friends
1 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
and they cant beat him, which is the remarkable thing.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
Listening to him, after having listened to the AA show revealed so much about why these guys fail. /u/TriangleDimes nailed it. Jordan Peterson just hammers it in with stoic logic. STOP THE HAMMERING!
2 McGowan9 2018-01-18
You could say that he humiliated her but she did a pretty good job of humiliating herself.
"So what you're saying is..."
He didn't say that.
Repeat.
4 tomo89 2018-01-18
"What gives you the right to say this?"
"..I'm a clinical psychologist.."
It's like she just wandered into a studio having no idea what is going on and someone just threw a dress on her and told her to conduct an interview.
2 decmcg 2018-01-18
Jordan is so intelligent that he's almost robotic in his takedowns. It's all so easy to him. He answered all her questions thoroughly and when she tried to use underhand tactics he made her look small and stupid.
Channel 4 news are a horrible leftie outfit.
They were responsible for the Tarantino "I'm shutting your butt down interview - https://youtu.be/GrsJDy8VjZk
3 ADoucheNamedBag 2018-01-18
Peterson really shut this girl's butt down! WHAAAAT? WOOP WOOP!
2 McGowan9 2018-01-18
He is highly intelligent and articulate but he's also extremely well read and knows exactly what he's talking about. He doesn't comment on a thing unless he has evidence to back it up. That's just one of the many differences between him and that hysterical, one dimensional bint who's "interviewing him."
Channel 4 are fucking awful. I remember in late 2001 they ran with footage they'd obtained from the battle of Qual-i-jangi in Afghanistan. The SBS (UK's SEAL team 6) were fighting a bunch of Taleban who had killed a CIA agent and taken over the fort. C4 broadcast the footage without pixellating (easy to do) the SBS guys faces (against the law.) They were fined by the MOD and had to issue an apology the next night.
Here's the footage as it should have gone out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Iu7xs74hJw (narrator mislabels them as SAS, there were no SAS in Afghanistan in 2001 - they're Special Boat Service.)
1 Ant_Sucks 2018-01-18
Trust the limeys to send the Special Boat Service to a landlocked country. No afternoon tea and fish'n'chips for them plonkers.
1 McGowan9 2018-01-18
It's because they get a lot of mountain warfare training. Most of them are former Royal Marines. General rule of thumb is that SAS are mostly former Paras. Get more HALO/jungle and desert warfare training and CQB/CT training. SBS more mountain/artic warfare. All are trained in all of it, there's little difference in their skill sets.
Overall, SAS were mostly stationed in Iraq, SBS mostly in Afghanistan but both units saw combat in both theatres.
3 Ant_Sucks 2018-01-18
Sound like a bunch of pussies if you ask me. Playing HALO and going to the theatre. FAGS.
1 McGowan9 2018-01-18
Fawk yeah! Tsss.
1 decmcg 2018-01-18
ITN who produce Channel 4 news also ran with a story once using footage that was from a video game.
Daft cunts https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/sep/27/ira-footage-video-game-itv
1 Uboat1940 2018-01-18
Jordan Peterson's interviewer sucked but sorry, Tarantino was a little bitch here.
1 decmcg 2018-01-18
The interviewer was being a smarmy little prick and was negative from the get go. Imagine getting the same question asked over and over again? A question that undermines his whole filmography.
He was overly dramatic but that's Tarantino. I'd rather his reaction than some media trained robot who will smile and say the right things. That's a bitch.
-3 saessea 2018-01-18
Jordan is fine but he's an idiot on the whole god thing. Listen to this interview he did with Sam Harris and watch him go full autism on what is "true." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdpyzwOOYY
4 frrunkis 2018-01-18
He's trying to explain that when you're making the claim that Objective Truth should be at the top of the truth hierarchy, you're unknowingly making another claim that Pragmatic Truth should be at the top. This is because the reasoning behind why you may think Objective Truth is the ultimate truth is actually the reasoning behind why Pragmatic Truth is at the top. He's trying to say that Objective Truth is nested inside of Pragmatic Truth. Maybe he's wrong, maybe he's right, but he isn't stupid.
It's the easiest thing in the world to take Sam's positions. God isn't real. Islam is bad. Objective Truth reigns supreme. These are simple, easy positions to take. What Jordan is arguing for isn't an easy thing to argue for, you have to be incredibly nuanced and careful to get your point across. Just because it's difficult to argue for, doesn't necessarily make him wrong (or stupid).
2 I_Hate_Knickers_Deux 2018-01-18
I don't understand any of this.
Does Opie still have a bosom?
1 DeafandMutePenguin 2018-01-18
22:05 is the best for those interested but the whole thing is gold.
3 saessea 2018-01-18
Ha! Gotcha.
2 Bougiegan 2018-01-18
He fawkin buried her!!!!
1 [deleted] 2018-01-18
[deleted]
2 noisimus 2018-01-18
Did she take that as a literal statement and celebrate it like a victory?
2 Three_Finger_Brown 2018-01-18
Exactly, instead of listening to him and understanding his point; that she had already done exactly same thing he was accused of, but he never actually did as he had literally just explained in her last question mind you, but she completely failed to see the hypocrisy in it.
She just plowed into her next prewritten question from her producer that has nothing to do with her interviewers' last answer, that would mean she would have to be able to listen and respond intelligibly.
1 FORKinmyDICK 2018-01-18
Every time he finishes speaking she instantly has some sort of combative response.
2 FORKinmyDICK 2018-01-18
Watching the entire thing. Thank you for sharing this but this bitch is going to make me angry for the rest of the night.
2 tomo89 2018-01-18
Dude I just started yelling at my computer screen after he says "That's patently absurd. It's not a matter of opinion. It's seriously wrong." and then she just seriously must have zoned out for the entire point, because she doesn't even process a fucking word he said. One of the most frustrating things I've watched in a while.
2 FORKinmyDICK 2018-01-18
Seriously, it's like no matter how well he explains something or how deep he goes into a point, she's still going to have the same one determined response. Obviously she went in with a bias and had no intention of listening
1 literalotherkin 2018-01-18
I could find a better interviewer in a mental hospital. She makes Opie look like Ron Bennington.
1 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
I posted this yesterday. He swept her right at the legs.
1 DeafandMutePenguin 2018-01-18
I didn't see it yesterday. I'm sorry. Are you sure the mods didn't take it down? I'm expecting them to do this even though it is being discussed pretty widely and deals with issues we discuss here.
4 TangerineReam 2018-01-18
I posted as a "Women are faggots" post; I don't think they took it down? I had a lot of comments on the thread, but maybe they shadow banned it anyway, because I didn't see it on the pages after awhile. Shitposting is what this sub has always been about, especially during the quiet stretches of time between the next public embarrassments of O&A&J
1 JimSharky 2018-01-18
In the morning
1 kvetaak 2018-01-18
Imagine thinking a good response to 'On average men are more X' is '... I know some men who are not X'.
Innumerate people characteristically have a strong tendency to personalize—to be misled by their own experiences, or by the media's focus on individuals and drama.
2 tomo89 2018-01-18
If you're Colin Flaherty, you have the personal experiences and the statistics.
1 The_Sharpie_Is_Black 2018-01-18
30 minutes of a woman trying to twist his words
"So you're saying niggers are indeed, not people? That's what you just said"
1 StutterinPrickYou 2018-01-18
What am I looking for?
1 StutterinPrickYou 2018-01-18
Daniel Day Lewis mothafucka!
1 Uboat1940 2018-01-18
This bitch is the master of the "leading question". It didn't work though with this dude.
1 SlamballReunionTour 2018-01-18
Jordan Peterson is so many orders of magnitude more intelligent than anyone who ever tries to antagonize him that it's parodically comical
1 deep_legal_shit 2018-01-18
how is this thread getting past the Bennington snowflake army?
-1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
Jordan Peterson is smart but it’s gay that he won’t talk to a white nationalist. The guy will do an hour long lecture on the Lion King. I refuse to believe that he has nothing meaningful to say about white nationalism.
4 rahtin 2018-01-18
He finds them to be deplorable and he's horrified that he's associated with them.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
But he talks to all types of people he strongly disagrees with.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
Debating about the perils of modern feminism and debating someone about whether or not Stone Cold Steve Austin or The Rock was a better wrestler are different things. No reasonable person, that wants to have serious discussions, will publically debate a white nationalist or a wrestling fan.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
An absurd false equivalency. Professional wrestling is a sport/theatrical entertainment. Ethnonationalism is an idealogy that currently has millions of adherents worldwide, and historically speaking has been the most common form of political organization. I simply can’t believe that Jordan Peterson, the guy whose entire work is guided by the principle of “Let’s not casually dismiss ideas from the past outright; let’s look at why people held them and what worked about them and try to incorporate it into how we live today” would have nothing substantial to say about ethnonationalism.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
It's an outdated ideology. Professional wrestling has millions of adherent fans worldwide, too, so no point there, either. Historically speaking white nationalism is dead, so no point there. He's not lowering his status to talk to retards. That's my point.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
Nigger, the guy gives lectures about the Bible, about obscure religious traditions that died out during the Iron Age, about mythological epics that were carved in clay tablets in fucking cuneiform. Jordan Peterson is not the kind of guy to say “That’s outdated; no point talking about it.” He’s able to find something meaningful to say about just about everything.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
That's because the Bible isn't fairly tales, it's allegories. I'm no punk bitch on the Bible, I grew up Catholic. Just because some nuts took it literal doesn't mean that it's not important, or doesn't have important points for people. There is nothing in white nationalism that is really worth talking about, because scientifically and objectively it is wrong, and pretty much all of it's proponents are just dudes that hate minorities and are scared of change.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
I never said the Bible’s not important. But just as you’re trying to dismiss an entire political ideology as being completely irrelevant and unworthy of any discussion, the academy is full of fedora tipping faggots who would say the exact same thing about your religion. Peterson roundly rejects that dismissal as being too simplistic. If you think there’s nothing about white nationalism that relates to any of the topics Jordan Peterson discusses regularly, you haven’t listened to him enough. He talks all the time about tribe, the organization of the state, power structures, group dynamics, features that bind a culture together and separate it from other cultures, etc etc etc. ANY discussion about ethnonationalism, even a highly critical one, would be right up his academic alley. So it’s remarkable that he won’t have one.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
He talks about them separately, though. You can see trends in ethnicities, sure, but you need to look at separate things that may not make the white nationalist ideals very true. Turns out that is the case. White nationalism is retarded. Just because it might have something in common with another ideology does not mean that it doesn't get swept away by all the other points that it conveniently ignores. That's some Colin Flaherty shit.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
I’m literally not even arguing for its validity here. I’m arguing for its relevance and worthiness of discussion. You think I want Jordan Peterson to get up there and just parrot everything I already believe? No, I want him to give his honest thoughts. Which I’m almost positive are more extensive than the weak and insubstantial dismissals he gives when asked about it. It just strikes me as incredibly inconsistent with the rest of his academic and philosophical approach.
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
Just watch some of his videos. I'm sure he addresses it somewhere.
1 AyeThatsAGoodNagger 2018-01-18
Eh I’ve seen many hours of them already but I’ll keep watching.
1 sindrone7 2018-01-18
Then that’s fucking pathetic. His hero Solzhenitsyn would agree with many alt right critiques
2 tomo89 2018-01-18
If you're Colin Flaherty, you have the personal experiences and the statistics.
1 SickleSellout 2018-01-18
A wimpish child killer too. Nothing worse than that.
1 Nah_Ming 2018-01-18
http://mashable.com/2016/01/25/still-not-asking-for-it/#68yQzNManPqW
https://worldwideweber2014.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/still-not-asking-for-it/
1 tomo89 2018-01-18
Just watch some of his videos. I'm sure he addresses it somewhere.