Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Options
1185186188190191201

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    I hear you. As someone who is considered "right-wing" on economic issues, I'm used to the tactics you see on this thread, but I can appreciate that others might be taken aback by what happens when one dares disagree with the radical left.

    It doesn't mean, of course, that you're bigoted, backward, etc., just that they are trying to bully you into compliance, or at least shame you into silence.

    Trans rights aren't "radical left", they were introduced by Fianna Gael uncontested. Being against trans people taking a piss is bigoted and backward. Sorry.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    Sorry. Not sorry. You're a horse :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,951 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    20Cent wrote: »
    Trans rights aren't "radical left", they were introduced by Fianna Gael uncontested. Being against trans people taking a piss is bigoted and backward. Sorry.




    Yeah. Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position. I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Gynoid wrote: »
    I just wanted to compile some kind of a list because if people keep throwing the words bigoted, backward, hateful, phobic, etc at you it can feel pretty hurtful. My Da used to say if someone calls you a horse, first time you laugh, second time you tell them to fcuk off, but the third time you might feel like looking in the mirror to check even though you know full well you are not a horse. That is the intended effect of people on here who call dissenters all these very insulting epithets repeatedly, suggesting the other is literally hateful, that they are shocked at people they used to respect, that discussion should be shut down etc etc. They are calling you a horse.

    It can be but somehow I just don’t give a crap anymore. I don’t think I’m wrong about this and I find that that surety gives me a kind of calmness. I’m more likely to be offended if I’m a bit woolly on a topic and unsure if I’m right.

    I’m especially sure of myself on the topic of pubertal blockers because medical ethics is something I’m really interested in and my past work experience and qualifications straddled that field. People say “Surgery isn’t done on the young, nor hormone therapy given! Just puberty blockers which are completely reversible!”. That’s the mantra. But we don’t have any long-term studies so how can that claim be made? And the only way to find this out is to trial them on children which isn’t ethical. But that’s basically what’s happening. I cannot believe it’s being allowed. I just cannot believe it.

    Sometimes medicines were tested on children but that in cases like cancer where certain death was the alternative. The rebuttal here is that children might kill themselves if they are forced to go through puberty. That is not the same thing as certain death from a disease. It just isn’t.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Sorry. Not sorry. You're a horse :)

    If 20cent wants to identify as a horse he deserves total access to stables everywhere, and to eat all the grass he wants..


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Yeah. Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position. I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.

    Clearly you have been brainwashed by George Soros to eradicate males and females in order for socialism to take over the world with a one world order.

    Or maybe you are just a normal empathetic person who thinks we can make life a little easier for a very marginalised group.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    If 20cent wants to identify as a horse he deserves total access to stables everywhere, and to eat all the grass he wants..

    Dehumanising other people.
    Making light of a serious issue effecting them.
    Not very nice.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Yeah. Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position. I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.

    Low blow, trying to shame posters you claimed to once agree with. Bigots, phobics and far right allies. Who have genuine concerns about where this is going.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    20Cent wrote: »
    Dehumanising other people.
    Making light of a serious issue effecting them.
    Not very nice.

    Your whole mantra is dehumanising people who disagree with you. :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,909 ✭✭✭CtevenSrowder


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Yeah. Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position. I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.

    The typical "I'm morally superior to you" post. If you don't understand the intricate details surrounding the discussion there is not much that people can do for you.

    Noone is against helping trans people. It's when (supposedly) helping them disadvantages another (majority) group that the problems arise.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Yeah. Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position. I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.

    But in order to grant that vulnerable minority all the things they want, other people’s rights and safeguards are being chipped away at. But those hard-won rights aren’t important, apparently. Rights clash in this arena and anyone concerned about that isn’t a bigot. Thankfully more and more people are realising that and are getting harder to pigeonhole.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭nkl12xtw5goz70


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Bit shocked to find out that wanting to support a vulnerable minority is a controversial stance and a radical leftist position.

    When you lot start to support safety, privacy, and dignity for vulnerable adolescent girls, let us know.
    I was just trying to be as kind and as decent person as I can.

    Female MMA fighter Tamika Brents was beaten to a pulp by a transgender opponent, suffered a concussion, and fractured the orbital bone in her skull — all thanks to the "trans women are women" ideology you support.

    Until you're willing to condemn natural-born women being overpowered and beaten by biological males, I don't think you can claim to be a kind and decent person.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Gynoid wrote: »
    I just wanted to compile some kind of a list because if people keep throwing the words bigoted, backward, hateful, phobic, etc at you it can feel pretty hurtful. My Da used to say if someone calls you a horse, first time you laugh, second time you tell them to fcuk off, but the third time you might feel like looking in the mirror to check even though you know full well you are not a horse. That is the intended effect of people on here who call dissenters all these very insulting epithets repeatedly, suggesting the other is literally hateful, that they are shocked at people they used to respect, that discussion should be shut down etc etc. They are calling you a horse.

    TBH the time has passed where I'm terribly insulted by most of these words, because the people using them, rarely have earned my respect.

    That's the first part of this. Many (not all) of the posters here on this thread who promote the transgender angle, haven't impressed me with their inability to tolerate another persons opinions. They rant and rave about rights for Transgenders but trample over the rights of other people to do so. They have no appreciation for the concerns that others might have, and no willingness to reduce those concerns. Instead, everything is an attack.

    And that leads me to the second point. The words themselves have lost meaning because they're used so broadly, and commonly. A word rarely used has far more impact and influence, than a word thrown around carelessly. Bigot, sexist, Transphobe, etc. These are all words used repeatedly by those following the transgender brigade of superior moral authority. They fling them around like candy, hitting anyone who disagrees with them regardless of the content of the opposition. They (for the most part) have no real interest in listening, or appreciating another's point of view, so they seek to shut down dissenting voices by throwing out inaccurate labels. .

    And lastly, there's the lack of accuracy. Points are reinterpreted to allow them to phrase questions the way they want. Rather than deal with what's written, they'll use an extreme interpretation of the post, and then try to claim that you're being unreasonable. It's a case of ignoring or disrespecting the content of other peoples posts, just so they can achieve some imaginary points on the moral score card.

    I've seen very little from the regular transgender advocates here that they actually care about transgenders. Instead, they're fighting for the cause. The crusade of good vs evil. They're holy knights fighting against the evil right wing agitators who won't accept the rights of the innocent and pure. It's utterly bizarre, but it is what it is.

    So... no. Being labelled by them has lost all meaning because of who they have shown themselves to be. Utterly intolerant of opposition.

    Have you noticed that none of them have provided any possible solutions? No compromises... it's either their way, or you're wrong. Every solution or constructive suggestion is shot down, but their belief provides nothing to resolve the issue... why? because they don't want a solution that doesn't involve the complete surrender (and humiliation) of their opponents.

    Fin.
    :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    ^^^ Yup. A poster earlier actually said to me and I quote: “I want you to admit that you believe that trans people don't exist.” I hadn’t been bigoted enough for him apparently. Trouble for him is that I do think they exist, I merely think their underlying biological sex can’t be changed. But he was trying to get me to say something I don’t think because it’s easier to argue.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 494 ✭✭creditcarder


    TBH the time has passed where I'm terribly insulted by most of these words, because the people using them, rarely have earned my respect.


    :D


    I agree. The older I get the more I loathe (to use a strong word) people who follow the cause and not the reason for the cause. I think it's because if the society was worse, they wouldn't be the good people if you catch my drift.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,007 ✭✭✭s7ryf3925pivug


    TBH the time has passed where I'm terribly insulted by most of these words, because the people using them, rarely have earned my respect.

    That's the first part of this. Many (not all) of the posters here on this thread who promote the transgender angle, haven't impressed me with their inability to tolerate another persons opinions. They rant and rave about rights for Transgenders but trample over the rights of other people to do so. They have no appreciation for the concerns that others might have, and no willingness to reduce those concerns. Instead, everything is an attack.

    And that leads me to the second point. The words themselves have lost meaning because they're used so broadly, and commonly. A word rarely used has far more impact and influence, than a word thrown around carelessly. Bigot, sexist, Transphobe, etc. These are all words used repeatedly by those following the transgender brigade of superior moral authority. They fling them around like candy, hitting anyone who disagrees with them regardless of the content of the opposition. They (for the most part) have no real interest in listening, or appreciating another's point of view, so they seek to shut down dissenting voices by throwing out inaccurate labels. .

    And lastly, there's the lack of accuracy. Points are reinterpreted to allow them to phrase questions the way they want. Rather than deal with what's written, they'll use an extreme interpretation of the post, and then try to claim that you're being unreasonable. It's a case of ignoring or disrespecting the content of other peoples posts, just so they can achieve some imaginary points on the moral score card.

    I've seen very little from the regular transgender advocates here that they actually care about transgenders. Instead, they're fighting for the cause. The crusade of good vs evil. They're holy knights fighting against the evil right wing agitators who won't accept the rights of the innocent and pure. It's utterly bizarre, but it is what it is.

    So... no. Being labelled by them has lost all meaning because of who they have shown themselves to be. Utterly intolerant of opposition.

    Have you noticed that none of them have provided any possible solutions? No compromises... it's either their way, or you're wrong. Every solution or constructive suggestion is shot down, but their belief provides nothing to resolve the issue... why? because they don't want a solution that doesn't involve the complete surrender (and humiliation) of their opponents.

    Fin.
    :D
    well that's because you ignored me.

    My most recent suggested solution:
    Replace segregation by gender with segregation by penis/penislessness.

    Transgender rights!


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    well that's because you ignored me.

    My most recent suggested solution:
    Replace segregation by gender with segregation by penis/penislessness.

    Transgender rights!

    I don't recall you calling us all bigots, right wing, or transphobic. Did you?

    And ODB responded to your idea. Still, an interesting idea. Keep them coming. :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    No, I get it, the not being wounded by false words flung etc and for a long time, even on this site, in different incarnations, I have posted fairly vigorously on this matter, and in the face of regular insult, especially about the appalling harm to children (which blows my mind) and the irrationality of what is being insisted upon. It is a subject I have been following closely for a long time and one I am unlikely to be quiet about because it goes to the heart of so many issues. Postmodern deconstructionism, ideological possession, social entrainment, even the emerging spectre of transhumanism, all forces which are philosophically anathema to my conscience. No matter what though it is very unpleasant to be designated as literally hateful and disgusting by who I am sure are otherwise quite nice, ordinary people I would rub along with in real life, just because they are convinced they are right and that you are consequently vile.

    Meh. Whatever, I suppose. Much worse things happen all the time.
    Bravo to those who speak up publicly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,934 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Gynoid wrote: »
    No, I get it, the not being wounded by false words flung etc and for a long time, even on this site, in different incarnations, I have posted fairly vigorously on this matter, and in the face of regular insult, especially about the appalling harm to children (which blows my mind) and the irrationality of what is being insisted upon. It is a subject I have been following closely for a long time and one I am unlikely to be quiet about because it goes to the heart of so many issues. Postmodern deconstructionism, ideological possession, social entrainment, even the emerging spectre of transhumanism, all forces which are philosophically anathema to my conscience. No matter what though it is very unpleasant to be designated as literally hateful and disgusting by who I am sure are otherwise quite nice, ordinary people I would rub along with in real life, just because they are convinced they are right and that you are consequently vile.

    Meh. Whatever, I suppose. Much worse things happen all the time.
    Bravo to those who speak up publicly.

    This post sums up what I dislike most about Peterson.
    He gives an "intellectual" justification to prejudice and totalitarianism with bulls*t.
    "Postmodern deconstructionism, ideological possession, social entrainment, spectre of transhumanism"


  • Registered Users Posts: 29,033 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Chimepiece wrote:
    Jordan Peterson makes a lot of good points, he dispels the myth of the "Wage Gap" very well.


    Men are more productive or something?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    20Cent wrote: »
    This post sums up what I dislike most about Peterson.
    He gives an "intellectual" justification to prejudice and totalitarianism with bulls*t.
    "Postmodern deconstructionism, ideological possession, social entrainment, spectre of transhumanism"

    Your opinions are totalitarian. Obey or else. You are entitled to them. You just don't offer any intellectual justification for them. One line insults and put downs, that's all.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,042 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Your opinions are totalitarian. Obey or else. You are entitled to them. You just don't offer any intellectual justification for them. One line insults and put downs, that's all.

    What “or else” is implied by 20cent? I haven’t seen him threaten consequences.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    What “or else” is implied by 20cent? I haven’t seen him threaten consequences.

    Or you're a bad bad person.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,042 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Or you're a bad bad person.

    That’s hardly totalitarian. It’s an insult to anyone who’s lived under a totalitarian regime.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Men are more productive or something?

    Life choices. Where and how you choose to invest your time each day/week/month/etc, affects your income.

    There are plenty of threads on the subject, and considering your post count, you really want to play dumb? Ok. Watch some vids.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    That’s hardly totalitarian. It’s an insult to anyone who’s lived under a totalitarian regime.

    A totalitarian regime. Yes. You put in "Regime". You needed to do that to make the sentence mean something different. Just as he used the phrase to mean something else.

    Brian? What's got into you? This is pretty basic stuff and you're nitpicking. Not like you at all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭Gynoid


    A totalitarian regime. Yes. You put in "Regime". You needed to do that to make the sentence mean something different. Just as he used the phrase to mean something else.

    Brian? What's got into you? This is pretty basic stuff and you're nitpicking. Not like you at all.

    Yes, totalitarian can be used as an adjective to describe a position that countenances zero objection. Slander may be used in this case to stamp out all opposition but death and rape threats are used elsewhere.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭nkl12xtw5goz70


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Yes, totalitarian can be used as an adjective to describe a position that countenances zero objection.

    A good litmus test is when you point out the real-world consequences of their ideology — for children, for women, for athletes, for lesbians, for female inmates, and so on — and they just don't give a damn.

    As klaz said in his post, trans activists see themselves as holy knights fighting against evil. Filled with an unshakable belief that they hold the moral high ground, they see everyone who opposes them as a hate-filled right-wing transphobic bigot. The Labour Party in the UK wants to define women's groups that wish to preserve separate spaces for natural-born women as "hate groups" and expel from the party everyone who disagrees.

    Trans activists have have staked their position on defending ontological absurdities such as that that a biological male with a penis can be every bit as much a woman as someone born and raised female. Because they can't defend these absurdities with logic, facts, or common sense, their only recourse is to attack and threaten all who challenge them.

    This passage from Orwell is worth quoting again, because it's an apt analogy to the MO of transgender ideology: "In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense."


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,042 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    A totalitarian regime. Yes. You put in "Regime". You needed to do that to make the sentence mean something different. Just as he used the phrase to mean something else.

    Brian? What's got into you? This is pretty basic stuff and you're nitpicking. Not like you at all.

    I despise people throwing around terms like totalitarian, while having the neck to accuse people of extremism.

    It’s lowers the debate to name calling.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,042 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Gynoid wrote: »
    Yes, totalitarian can be used as an adjective to describe a position that countenances zero objection. Slander may be used in this case to stamp out all opposition but death and rape threats are used elsewhere.

    I really don’t think it can. But have at it.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




Advertisement