Jordan Peterson thread
- Thread starter DAIR
- Start date
Man of Honour
No, he was talking about the famous actor formerly known as actress Ellen Page - but now calls themselves Elliot Page and is apparently a man, because they said so a while go - having his female breasts removed in the ongoing work to transition from woman to man (crucially different from female to male, of course), because simply saying they're a man wasn't enough to make them a man (although you must still call them a man and acknowledge them as such). To clarify, they were removing female parts, so that they could be closer to being a man (in their eyes), because they couldn't be a man without removing the parts. Seems pretty clear to me.
But regardless of one's own beliefs and this linguistic spaghetti, you must already refer to them as a man because they said so a while ago. The penalty for not doing so is banishment from public discourse for "hateful" content, which is equated to violence.
:edit: I had to edit the above about 6 times to get the male/man wordage right. Because of course they're completely not the same thing at all and we cannot accidentally mix them up.
Haven't you heard? That Jewish Ben Shapiro character is a total Nazi.
Soldato
I already told you, i don't agree with it. And you already told me twice, i must not understand it. circular argument. Your position wont change because i won't ever agree with Peterson on this one.
Peterson isn't referring to that person as a male now, let alone even attempting to use his correct name.Zefan said:
In the tweet he was, yes. But in his comments in response to being banned on twitter, he wasn't.
11m20:
"And i believe firmly that Ellen slash Elliot, or whatever the hell her name or his name is, bears moral culpability for that."
^^ nothing past-tense about that, and pretty insulting too.
Permabanned
How come everyone who wages war on woke ends up looking like a ****. 
Last edited by a moderator:
Permabanned
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,555
Posting Ben Shapiro YouTube links with no comment.
Great insight in to your YouTube rabbit hole/views
Great insight in to your YouTube rabbit hole/views
Soldato
I lol'd.
Man of Honour
He should go back to telling weed and sex jokes, or melting down himself in hilarious PMs to Scottish ****posters.
Oh look, an overweight guy with a chequered shirt and a beard, who would've guessed.
As a pastafarian I am offended.
Man of Honour
I await the mob of radical carb rights activists.
:edit: might start referring to it as progressive linguine actually. It's funny because linguine comes from lingua, as in "tongue" both biological and as in language. Overly explaining jokes is also fun.
1) This guy has restricted replies to people he follows. So brave when tweeting something like this.
2) Jordan Peterson has at least stood up for his beliefs. Rightly or wrongly he's always said he won't be compelled to use speech he doesn't believe is right.
Personally I wouldn't have misgendered Elliot Page. If they want to be called he then that's fine by me. But I get where JP is coming from in not wanting to be compelled to use language he doesn't agree is right. Interestingly a lot of Halifax customers seem to agree with him.
Halifax customers upset by pronoun badges close accounts and cut up credit cards
One furious customer said they refused to pay for 'communist propaganda'.
metro.co.uk
Soldato
Jesus, some people are really taking this personally huh?
1) Don't care.
2) He doesnt get points for doubling down on a ****take.
Yeah, well, the great JP did *shrug*
How many of those would be begrudged to use somebody's correct name? Rhetorical question, pretty sure i already know the answer.
It's ironic how you have that quote of Picard saying "There are four lights" while mocking Jordan Peterson for referring to a biological female as her and refusing to retract following a suspension. I suppose the analogy is lost on you, but the parallels are obvious.
This forum is super interesting. There is a group of individuals who are always "pro" something quite specific, and I don't believe they "sync up" beforehand on what it is. Then there are a group of people who had no idea what the thing is about but express an opinion on what is at surface level available. The pro group then get their back up, unreservedly jump to the subjects defence, claim the indifferent folk who express an (albeit relatively uniformed) opinion are ignorant/woke/'retarded'.
Is this an identity thing? Does this group of individuals seek out this content? One post I found particularly interesting was referencing this blokes book and knowing specifically that of his friends, 2 girls in particular bought the book. Now I don't know about you chaps but I know of almost no-ones book buying habits, let alone in such a very specific area.
The echo chamber comment is particularly hypocritical given those observations.
Is this an identity thing? Does this group of individuals seek out this content? One post I found particularly interesting was referencing this blokes book and knowing specifically that of his friends, 2 girls in particular bought the book. Now I don't know about you chaps but I know of almost no-ones book buying habits, let alone in such a very specific area.
The echo chamber comment is particularly hypocritical given those observations.
Soldato
Oh there are a number of ways i could reply to this but really, i'll just say; sure, ignore the fact that JP was refusing to use his correct NAME, nevermind pronoun, because you know it's damn well childish. But uhh, yeah, irony and 'analogy' etc. etc. whatever.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,555
I remember reading the book comment, thinking it was weird.
I have no idea what books any of my friends are reading, male or female*
*(I don't have any friends that identify as non binary)
I can only assume the group identity hypothesis I have made is correct. I'd say it is a higher tier to the old English Defence League crowd. Being "anti-woke" is the gateway drug; it seems to sit just above "auditing" videos, and seems to go hand in glove with political "reaction" videos on YouTube. "None of these opinions are my opinions, but I closely align with the conviction in which they are delivered".
Never thought I'd be a "attacked" for being indifferent to these specific interests that some folks are being fed.
Never thought I'd be a "attacked" for being indifferent to these specific interests that some folks are being fed.
You don't know of anyone's book buying habits? You don't discuss interests and popular culture with people? I'm not sure what to tell you. People share their interests on social media, then you're able to strike up a conversation which leads onto other interests if you wish.