Jordan Peterson interview on C4

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’d expect stylists or barbers to know more about cutting or styling hair than someone who is neither a barber nor a stylist. It’s easy for that person to say “cut the fcuking hair”, but when they expect someone else to do it, then they have to respect that person’s boundaries.

Of course if they imagine themselves to be above people they view as only existing to serve them, then they’re always going to have a horrible attitude towards other people, who don’t just exist to serve them.

You compared that person that an animal a few posts back so that's a bit rich. Surprised a freedom loving chap like yourself would be so against others just because they are a little different and don't fit in a box for convenience sake.

20Cent wrote: »

You compared that person that an animal a few posts back so that's a bit rich. Surprised a freedom loving chap like yourself would be so against others just because they are a little different and don't fit in a box for convenience sake.

I think you may have me confused with someone else? I never compared anyone to an animal?

I’m not against anyone’s freedoms btw, I’m very supportive of people’s freedom, that includes people’s freedom from being compelled to do something they have no wish to do.

That’s not being against anyone for any reason, it’s saying that in just the same way as the complainant expects their boundaries to be respected, there is that same obligation on them to respect other people’s boundaries.

If someone is intellectually challenged, I think they could be forgiven in those circumstances for failing to understand the concept of social responsibility and acting in good faith towards others, but otherwise? No.

20Cent wrote: »

Mixed u up with permabear apologies.

Your ok with bigotry then, at least you are honest.

You’re mixing me up with someone else again who said they were fine with bigotry, because I certainly didn’t say that.

20Cent wrote: »

Your said you are ok with someone refusing to serve someone due to "boundaries". People shouldn't be compelled to do something they don't wish to do. Serve food to a black person etc .

Be putting words in my mouth now at all. I said there was an obligation on everyone in society to respect other people’s boundaries in the same way as they expect their boundaries to be respected. No need for the inverted commas around the word boundaries. I also said that if someone is intellectually challenged I could be forgiving in those circumstances where they may not understand the concept of social responsibility and acting in good faith towards other people.

You appear to have inferred from that something which is entirely different to what I said, but it’s one of the fundamental articles of the UN Declaration of Human Rights -

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Unless you’re under the impression that some people you favour should be exempt from their obligations towards others? You’re not going to get very far with that idea, but as I actually did say - I can be forgiving in circumstances where a person is intellectually challenged, as they may not have the capacity to understand concepts such as dignity, empathy, respect and so on.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

‘Cept when it comes to understanding why many women want to preserve spaces for biological females or protect women’s sports, amiright?

If it means excluding others than no I'm not for that.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well then you are picking and choosing who to be understanding towards.

If someones issue is they want to exclude others then yes they shouldn't be accommodated.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Lol, I know, silly broads.

The vast majority of women have no problems sharing spaces with transwomen.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Source?

And tbh even if only, say, 30% of women object, that would be a lot of women.

If 30% of women objected to black women using the facilities should they be accommodated?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Man, black people must get utterly fed up as being used as examples.

Are all the black people at a significant physical advantage to all the white people? Do you understand why people are objecting?

But that you had to resort to that...

It's a fair analogy.
Some people feel uncomfortable around people or different races.
Should we accommodate them?

Same as with trans people.

20Cent wrote: »

Why would they feel uncomfortable?

Well we’ve finally arrived back to the days of ‘Go on now, don’t be making a show of us. Sure it’s the parish priest’