Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Gynoid

I mean did you ever think you would see the day when a senior UK politician says on a mainstream tv program that babies have no sex.
It is fcuking bewildering what we have arrived at.

20Cent

Gynoid wrote: »

I mean did you ever think you would see the day when a senior UK politician says on a mainstream tv program that babies have no sex.
It is fcuking bewildering what we have arrived at.

Listened to the clip doesn't mention babies or sex.

Wibbs

Gynoid wrote: »

Talking about lunatics, Dawn Butler, front bench UK Labour spokeswoman, today says babies are born without a sex.

https://twitter.com/JammersMinde/status/1229439480064610308?s=19

We're long through the looking glass with some of these so called "progressives". It's like that term "assigned male/female at birth" as opposed to what? Here ya go folks it's a... eh baby... It seems to be a twist on and co-opted by the Right On when an actual intersex baby is born and things are ambiguous. And such assignments often turned out very badly in the old days.

Plus if on the one hand we're being told gender is a social construct, then how the hell do some then feel like they're in the wrong body? It's one or the other folks.

I do NOT deny the existence of Trans people. I would put them into the intersex category and I suspect down the line there'll be a test or series of tests involved that will indeed show a "male brain" in a female body and vice versa. Though I also strongly suspect if such a test came along there would be howls from some quarters, because it could well show a percentage have something else going on, dysmorphia etc.

Gynoid

Fionne Orlander. Very groovy trans person tells the London Mayor a few facts.



https://twitter.com/FionneOrlander/status/1229087625526611969?s=19

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

20Cent wrote: »

Listened to the clip doesn't mention babies or sex.

The second clip does. There’s clearly two clips there and she says it’s in the second clip.

Wibbs

20Cent wrote: »

Listened to the clip doesn't mention babies or sex.

Ehh she does. She directly says "a child is born without sex" Clear as day. And of course goes on to say that anyone who doesn't buy into this stuff 100% is a "dogwhistler". It's like a bloody religion with these muppets. With attendant heresies and heretics.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

It's like a bloody religion with these muppets. With attendant heresies and heretics.

I heard someone say recently Marxism is just Christianity without God..

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I heard someone say recently Marxism is just Christianity without God..

That's a slur on Christianity.

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

I heard someone say recently Marxism is just Christianity without God..

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've yet to hear.

Penn

Wibbs wrote: »

True enough, though there are so called late life lesbians, where women with long term husbands and families who always thought themselves straight fall in love with a woman. Though that's sexuality rather than gender, but maybe there is some crossover in that with grown up families(societal "job" done) and middle age coming along they feel freer to express themselves?

Funnily enough I saw this earlier
https://twitter.com/PinkNews/status/1229492712753123329

She's coming out as non-binary rather than male, and was always lesbian rather than having a husband and kids, but it's along the same lines. I think part of the issue (and it's somewhat evident in this thread too) is that female-to-male transgender is kinda ignored. Not that trans men don't face their own share of difficulty of course, but in terms of public discourse more attention tends to be paid to male-to-females. The discussion about transgender people using toilets/changing rooms is always centered on trans women. Trans people in TV shows/movies are more often than not trans women rather than trans men.

I think it's easier for women (whether transgender or not) to be, look and act masculine than for men to be, look or act feminine. So maybe many women who feel transgender might get to a point of being so masculine without transitioning that they're okay, but I think that same stage might be harder for men who wish to be feminine (and feel that they are transgender).

I think that's changing in the last few years, but I don't think it's on the same level between both sexes yet.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

That has to be one of the dumbest things I've yet to hear.

Have you not been following the thread?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Wibbs wrote: »

We're long through the looking glass with some of these so called "progressives". It's like that term "assigned male/female at birth" as opposed to what? Here ya go folks it's a... eh baby... It seems to be a twist on and co-opted by the Right On when an actual intersex baby is born and things are ambiguous. And such assignments often turned out very badly in the old days.

Plus if on the one hand we're being told gender is a social construct, then how the hell do some then feel like they're in the wrong body? It's one or the other folks.

I do NOT deny the existence of Trans people. I would put them into the intersex category and I suspect down the line there'll be a test or series of tests involved that will indeed show a "male brain" in a female body and vice versa. Though I also strongly suspect if such a test came along there would be howls from some quarters, because it could well show a percentage have something else going on, dysmorphia etc.

The argument I’ve seen put forth is that there is no medical reason to assign sex at birth so there’s no need to assign sex. Or something.

It’s very insidious. At first it was sex is real, gender is a construct. Now they’re going after biological sex. Just look at this wankology:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By2Vi42jUYD1MFZUdjVBb0dRYm8/view?fbclid=IwAR3jhZFJnscyXMZ17GvzRP_IV0wTdv1kU1ZouK-ekOkeFzYXpy9UKLCfjzU

Tony EH

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you not been following the thread?

Most people are on ignore. :pac: *






























*most people are not on ignore

nyarlothothep

Aaaannd here is a great deconstruction on the sophistry of Peterson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas

tjdaly

I used to go to the Jordan Peterson Meetups in Wisconsin for a few years. I was the oldest person there at 30. Nice people, very competitive, so you would think twice before speaking up as some of the uber intellects (there were a few) would slap you down (nicely). Usually after buying a few rounds you could join in with the chat. They could talk about anything. Very clever bunch of younger men. We did some Hemingway nights too.

Gynoid

https://twitter.com/VictoriaPeckham/status/1229127027329990656?s=19

I could go on forever with these kind of posts, just to show it is not isolated lunatics saying odd things.
Lisa Nandy, who wants to be leader of UK Labour party says men who rape children should have their crime recorded as being committed by a female and then be put in women's prison. Note the appeal to emotion re the sad little transgirl in her constituency. Never mind the women who will be imprisoned ie literally confined forcibly with no means of escape to share space with him. This crap goes on and on, more and more every day. A few fringe lunatics, me hole.

Wibbs

Penn wrote: »

I think that's changing in the last few years, but I don't think it's on the same level between both sexes yet.

Oh there's be much of that going on P, though I get the distinct impression that there are simply more male to female Trans types who are louder and more wankerish. The female to male seem to be more likely to just get on with it. Though as you say part of that could be it's easier(relatively) to be a "butch" woman than a "femme" man. That a woman wearing men's clothes can be seen as empowering, but a man wearing women's clothes is more seen as demeaning and M-F Trans types get more social static over it.

The non binary stuff... I dunno. It always sounds to me anyway, like "I don't fit in to category A, so therefore here's an agnostic category of sorts where I feel I do". Which is grand knock yourself out, whatever oils your axle. It's also way better than deciding to irreversibly bugger your body up with surgery and hormones.

I remember watching an interview(at a million words per minute ) with Camille Paglia and she said that if Trans had been around when she was a young woman in college in the 60's she might well have considered herself Trans, because being a lesbian didn't quite fit for her at the time. But she was glad it wasn;t around to the degree of today.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Gynoid wrote: »

I mean did you ever think you would see the day when a senior UK politician says on a mainstream tv program that babies have no sex.
It is fcuking bewildering what we have arrived at.

This is why we need the likes of Jordan Peterson, whatever you might think of him, to dismantle this social constructivist idiocy with facts and logic.

This goes back to the points made earlier about bravery. Most dismayed observers don't have the backbone to take on the left-wing authoritarians and endure the barrage of -ist and -phobic labeling that will inevitably ensue. And the more people sit there silently watching this, afraid to say anything for fear of being castigated, the worse it gets.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I heard someone say recently Marxism is just Christianity without God..

What the hell has an economic theory got to do with Trans issues?

Gynoid

Kassidy Savory Tick wrote: »

This is why we need the likes of Jordan Peterson, whatever you might think of him, to dismantle this social constructivist idiocy with facts and logic.

This goes back to the points made earlier about bravery. Most dismayed observers don't have the backbone to take on the left-wing authoritarians and endure the barrage of -ist and -phobic labeling that will inevitably ensue. And the more people sit there silently watching this, afraid to say anything for fear of being castigated, the worse it gets.

I do generally agree with you but I must admit I don't need Peterson or anyone else really to dismantle this crap for me. I am bolshie enough, mouthy enough, stubborn enough and intelligent enough to do it for myself!

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

What the hell has an economic theory got to do with Trans issues?

That is an interesting question..

nkl12xtw5goz70

Gynoid wrote: »

I do generally agree with you but I must admit I don't need Peterson or anyone else really to dismantle this crap for me. I am bolshie enough, mouthy enough, stubborn enough and intelligent enough to do it for myself!

We can all sit at home thinking it's a load of crap — as I do myself — but Peterson has the profile to get on TV and challenge this nonsense in front of millions. That's what I mean. People need to see, in a highly visible way, noxious ideas exposed and dismantled. That was the purpose of public intellectuals in the days before free thinkers were expunged from universities. Peterson is a rare throwback to that era.

20Cent

Is Peterson in prison now for refusing to use preferred pronouns?

He said he would be.

Penn

20Cent wrote: »

Is Peterson in prison now for refusing to use preferred pronouns?

He said he would be.

Prison might have been better. He got addicted to painkillers after his wife was diagnosed with cancer, took a bad turn in rehab, was brought to Russia and put in an induced coma. I think last word was he's up and about and in recovery.

The guy has issues. To be honest I don't see why he was ever held in such regard as he was. While he speaks well on several issues and has had a positive influence on many people, I don't think he coped well with his sudden rise to prominence, he went on some weird meat-only diet (yes, I know he didn't advocate people go on it, but he still went on it himself and I don't think it did him much good in the long run) and he's now helping his daughter piggyback off his success so she can sell her (also crazy) diet and stuff.

The man is as fallible as the rest of us. This idea of "Jordan Peterson needs to come back and smack down all these people's arguments" is crazy.

Wibbs

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Aaaannd here is a great deconstruction on the sophistry of Peterson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas

Well worth watching actually and nails most of the problems with Peterson's spiel. Good breakdown of modernism and post modernism. Nails the Western thing too. The part about needing a daddy is a huge part of his appeal IMH. There's a fairly large chunk of young men who because of a few reasons seem adrift from who they are. Hell, they don't even seem to know what questions to ask to find out where they are. So no wonder so many have latched onto ideas and trends like PUA/Red Pill/Peterson etc. It seems like a vacancy in the soul of many men and by extension society.


Oh and I'm with you on Rand. Jaysus...

Wibbs

Penn wrote: »

The man is as fallible as the rest of us. This idea of "Jordan Peterson needs to come back and smack down all these people's arguments" is crazy.

Given his popularity it does illustrate a pretty deep underlying need for a voice to navigate the world among quite a few.

20Cent

Wibbs wrote: »

Given his popularity it does illustrate a pretty deep underlying need for a voice to navigate the world among quite a few.

Always found him to be a bit of a spoofer.
He starts things and throws in stats or comments but doesn't state a particular view. Hence the video at the start of this thread. Puts out a load of points and lets people see it as they want to.

Wibbs

20Cent wrote: »

Always found him to be a bit of a spoofer.

Ditto TBH. Can be good with his early university lectures, though runs with the Jungian stuff to a degree oul Carl(actual proper genius) would likely think WTF? Plus most of it is obvious is obvious stuff, or should be to someone a few years into adulthood. I can see how many college age and younger folks might be thinking fcuk me, that's a revelation. I might well have been the same at that age, though about the single only wise thought that hit and stuck with me and early on too was I know fcuk all, about fcuk all. And that remains. If anything slightly grew as I learned more about more. Oh and most know just as little.

nkl12xtw5goz70

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Aaaannd here is a great deconstruction on the sophistry of Peterson

"A great deconstruction?" Trivial nonsense that relies mostly on mockery and ridicule. Name one substantive point made in this video?

Piers Morgan/Gender

snipped. Too big a box if useless.

if you haven't seen it, it's worth watching. Especially, when you consider the attitudes on Trans advocates here.