Because thinking is hard, and when you think about stuff it becomes harder to be outraged.
's the reason why people like Peterson, Watson, and Crowder has the following they do
I've been interested in hearing rebuttals to Peterson, as it's become more and more apparent lately that he's kind of a goofball shielded by some surface-level decent ideas. Anybody interested in hearing Peterson speak at length and actually have his weird ideas challenged should listen to the first podcast between him and Sam Harris. In it, Harris and Peterson basically argue for 2 hours about what the word "true" means, purely because Peterson for some reason insists on taking a very strange, arbitrary "Darwinian" perspective and saying that whatever helps the species survive is true. Here's a timestamped video, watch for like 2-3 minutes and just listen to how Peterson flounders and makes excuses for his goofy definition of truth when confronted with a pretty simple example of why it's bullshit:
https://youtu.be/1gdpyzwOOYY?t=4656
I like this specific video/argument because for all the moaning Peterson does about post-modernists redefining language and taking an overly interpretive view of things that should be objective in the world, that's what Peterson does for 2 fucking hours trying to say that "truth is whatever helps the species survive".
How can people accrue such terrible accents? Dialect doesn't physically change your mouth; there's nothing stopping you from pronouncing the words properly.
Like how the fuck do you pronounce a TH sound as V? As an adult person how is that something that can occur?
A shitton of languages lacka proper th sound, english is one of the only ones to usr it. Its hard for people to make sounds they never had to, so they substitute.
Peterson is such a pathetic pile of human selfishness that it blows me away tbh. His entire following is comprised of other selfish or misguided people, who feel that imaginary rights are being trampled by "being forced" to refer to people in a way that doesn't offend them. It's basic fucking decency to do that anyway, so unless they lack that(hint: they do), why are they so offended???
It isn't homophobic to not want the law to force you to use certain words.
Funny you should say that even though, as you're well aware, a man got convicted of a hate crime for training a dog to make the nazi salute in Britain the other day.
Nice job watching the vid, or at least looking up bill c16. I put the "forced" in quotes because the law doesn't force anything. It updates our previous laws to protect newer minorities(newer as in they have gained awareness recently) such as trans people.
Forcing someone legally to use arbitrary pronouns isn't right imo. It's a point of decency but you can easily misgender someone by mistake, plus I'm not really convinced it should equate to a hate crime for someone to intentionally misgender someone anyway. You're a massive cunt for doing it, but I don't think it should rise to the level of a hate crime to call a trans-man a "she" or vice-versa. There's also the issue of people demanding the use of non-standard pronouns which is pretty flatly absurd imo.
He should've just stuck with what he knows, clinical psychology. He's poking his head into sociological topics where he has no clue what he's talking about but uses his doctorate as a shield to legitimize what he's saying. "You know I'm not wrong, I have a Ph.D", essentially.
Imagine being upset people tell you to be polite, so you throw a tantrum and follow a dude who's entire existence is validated by the fact he shit on trans people as a rise to fame. How about just be polite?
Yeah, the idea that I may face government prosecution for being "impolite", whatever their definition of that is, is fucking terrifying to me.
Woops, I rated this agree since for some reason I thought I was in one of the Count Dankula thread.
On the subject of pronouns, the way I see it is if you accidentally refer to a transgender person by the wrong pronoun the first couple of times when you're first learning that they're transgender, I don't think that's an issue. If you're deliberately using the wrong pronouns and constantly refusing to acknowledge the person's actual gender identity, though, that could count as workplace discrimination, though I don't think the punishment should be anything more severe than a fine.
It's not that hard to understand the difference between freedom of expression and hate speech.
I think there was a poster in the last Peterson thread who talked about how the bill he was against didn't actually imprison anyone for misgendering someone but I could be remembering poorly.
iirc their argument was "he won't go to prison, he'll just be made to pay a fine!", but if you refuse to pay the fine, you go to prison, so..
You could say the US government will imprison you if you don't pay your taxes, yes. Just like you can say the Canadian government will imprison you if you don't pay your fine => if you don't use pronouns correctly.
Reading what Ensign posted makes it seems like this is not the case.
You sound like the kind of person that also complains about not being able to call black people niggers
I'm a big fan of Jordan Peterson's ideas. I first heard of him through the whole controversy over free speech on campus but that interests me far less than what he has to say about psychology, nihilism, self improvement and so on. I don't really understand why he's considered a conservative figure at all, he seems to just abhor both extremes to me but I don't really understand politics so.
The reason he's seen as a conservative figure might be because conservatives (or rather, anti sjw overreactionaries) are all over him because of stuff like his misinterpretation of C16, and other stuff as seen above video
That doesn't make him a conservative figure in my view. Both SJWs and their conservative counterparts are equally retarded in my opinion and one of the reasons I find Jordan Peterson refreshing is that he equally condemns ideologues no matter their side.
You sound like the kind of person that wants to ban "To Kill a Mockingbird" and "Huckleberry Finn" just because they use the word "nigger". Two can play at that game
Did this website have a collective brain drain to forget that we live in a western society and what is generally comprised of the first world meaning that it is literally against the law no matter how funny you think it is to promote racist beliefs in any way. It is considered hate speech by most laws.
Please tell me you are like, a teenager because there is no reason a grown adult shouldn't know this.
How the fuck did you go from my post to "promoting racist beliefs"
Gee you citing a video that has a dog soluting to gas the jews made by a well known shithead who holds racist beliefs might have something to do with that statement.
Do you read the things you type or is it more of a freeform jazz thing? Serious question.
Context matters, calling people niggers is hate speech esp if they are black. Using the word nigger for a character in a piece of media is not. One is an actual person doing hate crime and the other is a fictional character committing the hate crime (also both are part of the set piece of the era). Horrible analogy.
I don't care if the guy is a shithead or if he holds racist beliefs, it has nothing to do with the video. He did not get arrested for being a shithead or holding racist beliefs, he got arrested for making a dumb unfunny joke. That's absolute horseshit. How you can defend that court's decision with such a condescending attitude, no less, is beyond me.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
