If Mort Divine ruled the world

[rms]

look, either you stand by the 'right' to make stereotypical jokes or you don't. you don't act like "red people" being "alcoholics" is anything other than obvious

i dont know what peterson's response is but its that simple

 

[CiG]

Did you even read the link? The joke had NOTHING to do with ethnic stereotypes and was referring to a single, specific personal event between JP and this Gregg guy.

This is yet another case of pearl-clutching cunts assuming racism on the part of someone and in turn making themselves look racist.

For the record, I will always support the 'right' to make stereotypical jokes.

 

[rms]

and in turn making themselves look racist.

this doesn't make sense

and he used Indian, not bar tender or her name in that joke. not going to try and convince you anyways but the deep hatred and resentment of white canadians towards indians isnt hard to draw a conclusion there

 

[CiG]

this doesn't make sense

Yes it does, he mentioned an Indian who just failed to deliver a bottle of alcohol to Gregg, everybody else has assumed he was smearing all Indians as alcoholic thieves because of a racist stereotype they themselves harbour in their own minds.

If he had said bartender or woman, and for some reason the Tweet was dredged up 2 years later, he would just instead be smeared as a sexist or as someone who looks down on bartending or some such horseshit.

It's not about being genuinely upset about a Tweet, it's just confirmation bias for people who are buttmad that he slaughtered that British feminist on TV.

but the deep hatred and resentment of white canadians towards indians isnt hard to draw a conclusion there

You seem to have a very low opinion of white Canadians. Noted.

 

[rms]

You seem to have a very low opinion of white Canadians. Noted.

they are self righteous and arrogant as fuck. similar to Californians. they think their shit doesnt stink

~edit

he was smearing all Indians as alcoholic thieves because of a racist stereotype they themselves harbour in their own minds.

to act like this historical and ethnic connection is hard to connect is hilariously arrogant of you. woke twitterists or those that live near reservations are well aware of this connection and all citizens should be in Canada and the U.S

it's just confirmation bias for people who are buttmad that he slaughtered that British feminist on TV.

he had one good come back and really just stood there like a dope taking her shit for 25 minutes.

to act as if JP is the only one getting heat for stereotypical attempts at humor is hilarious

 

[CiG]

to act like this historical and ethnic connection is hard to connect is hilariously arrogant of you. woke twitterists or those that live near reservations are well aware of this connection and all citizens should be in Canada and the U.S

Not sure what it is with you lately, it's almost as if you can't even be bothered to think anymore, but I'm not saying the connection doesn't exist or that the connection at the very least isn't a stereotype that exists, the point however is that the context suggests it had nothing to do with that stereotype and was tied to a very specific personal incident. It was essentially an in-joke that people are now turning into a generalized statement on all indigenous people by Jordan Peterson, which is inaccurate and dishonest.

Thanks for not trying to convince me though.

he had one good come back and really just stood there like a dope taking her shit for 25 minutes.

Haha right, you're fucking delusional. He annihilated her.

to act as if JP is the only one getting heat for stereotypical attempts at humor is hilarious

Not doing or thinking that.

 

[rms]

It was essentially an in-joke that people are now turning into a generalized statement on all indigenous people by Jordan Peterson, which is inaccurate and dishonest.

and if it was, JP is responsible for his words in which he communicated poorly in a public space.

He annihilated her.

he allowed her to mischaracterize his entire thinking and didn't do anything. 'slaughter' and 'annihilate', are you 12? come on

 

[CiG]

and if it was, JP is responsible for his words in which he communicated poorly in a public space.

To some degree that's obviously true, but I also think the public have a responsibility to consider context and not jump to wild conclusions.

Of course since the Tweet is so old, this is obviously just a case of manufactured outrage.

he allowed her to mischaracterize his entire thinking and didn't do anything. 'slaughter' and 'annihilate', are you 12? come on

He corrected every single mischaracterization while remaining calm, jovial and avoiding looking like a male tyrant picking on the woman presenter. It was basically a blueprint for how to handle an adversarial interview.

Also if I'm 12, you're 5, since you don't seem to be able to handle basic shit like posting a comment that is formulated correctly.

 

[rms]

It was basically a blueprint for how to handle an adversarial interview.

if you're a bitch, yeah

but I also think the public have a responsibility to consider context and not jump to wild conclusions.

he's an adult, he's a communicator, he uses twitter to bolster his success. he is responsible, not 'to some degree.'

 

[CiG]

if you're a bitch, yeah

I think you've been tackled too many times by sweaty men that you can't think straight.

he's an adult, he's a communicator, he uses twitter to bolster his success. he is responsible, not 'to some degree.'

Fuck that dichotomy, it's not 0% responsible or 100% responsible, he has some responsibility to be very careful with his words and everybody else has some responsibility to consider context, they're also adults.

Also I could be wrong but I believe the Tweet in question is before his video on Bill C16 that rocketed him into fame, or at least they both occured around the same time.

Edit: yep, that Tweet is from March 2016 and he didn't become famous (or whatever) until around September 2016. So this has zero to do with using Twitter to further his fame, as Ein also insinuated when he claimed this was just about being a provocateur.

lol.

 

[Einherjar86]

I admittedly didn't know the context of the comment, which makes the entire scenario seem less douchey.

I do, however, stand by my comment about Peterson being a provocateur. He knows what pushes buttons and acts accordingly. I don't think he's particularly intelligent, based on what I've seen from him.

 

[CiG]

I admittedly didn't know the context of the comment, which makes the entire scenario seem less douchey.

Nobody did, that was the point.

I do, however, stand by my comment about Peterson being a provocateur

Add 'provocateur' to the list of words being rendered basically meaningless these days tbh. Along with fascist, populist, liberal, marxist, racist, journalist, radical etc.

I don't think he's particularly intelligent, based on what I've seen from him.

lmao. This is like when a right-winger calls Noam Chomsky a dumb ass. Blinded by bias.

 

[Einherjar86]

No, it really isn't, and I'm not. He's nowhere near Chomsky's level. He's a good speaker and has absorbed a certain amount of sociological analysis, but he basically regurgitates the data that work for him. He's not a critical thinker.

I don't want to get into a spitting match, but the lengths you go to defend him are absurd.

 

[CiG]

The lengths you go to dismiss him are more absurd.

I'm not arguing that he's on Chomsky's level, I'm arguing that often is the case someone belittles the intelligence of blatantly intelligent people due to ideological biases, like you with JP.

I also disagree that he's not a critical thinker, he may have his blindspots much like anybody else (ie Chomsky and his 'all roads lead to it being America's fault' tautological thinking) but I think you're being unreasonable.

I think you have a feeling about JP that you go with, which is why your criticisms of him are usually either quite vague, a mischaracterization or an accusation with little specificity.

 

[CiG]

Btw, just to spread some charity, after that argument about JP's use of and conflation of postmodernism and marxism when you explicitly stated that they are too at-odds with each other to be conflated I physically cringe now every time I see or hear it being done.

Same with cultural marxism though that cringe goes back a bit further.

I just know it's going to be like 'liberal' for me all over again, constantly trying to correct people who misuse it.

Anyway my point is, that's a large area where JP is and should be wide open to criticism. Somebody should take him to task over it imo.

 

[Dak]

With JP being a psychoanalyst, I'm not sure the degree to which his practicing of psychology utilizes "mechanisms of behavior" in his formulations and therapy. If he does, his conflation makes functional sense.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

Not gonna defend the specific tweet as it is fairly offensive but it is rather telling that that's the worst thing I've seen anyone dig up on him and the guy has been on social media for ages + has hundreds of hours of media on his youtube account, much of it from before he got famous.

 

[Einherjar86]

The lengths you go to dismiss him are more absurd.

I'm not arguing that he's on Chomsky's level, I'm arguing that often is the case someone belittles the intelligence of blatantly intelligent people due to ideological biases, like you with JP.

I also disagree that he's not a critical thinker, he may have his blindspots much like anybody else (ie Chomsky and his 'all roads lead to it being America's fault' tautological thinking) but I think you're being unreasonable.

I think you have a feeling about JP that you go with, which is why your criticisms of him are usually either quite vague, a mischaracterization or an accusation with little specificity.

I appreciate the pomo/marxism comment. I can't honestly say that I don't have an opinion on Peterson, and it's certainly not high; but at this point I just feel like I've seen enough of his work to defuse any potential interest I may have in reading further.

In all fairness, I feel like I've attended to the specifics of what he's said/written, at least when they've been provided. Those pages from his book are one example. I've also carefully read positive assessments of his work online (which I have no reason to assume are mischaracterizations) and used those as sources. As I've said before, it's difficult when the only options are to read his book(s) or watch his videos. Videos really aren't my preferred mode of communication, and I find it very difficult to digest them.

 

[CiG]

Not gonna defend the specific tweet as it is fairly offensive

No it isn't. What are you offended by, the word Indian? lmao.

As I've said before, it's difficult when the only options are to read his book(s) or watch his videos. Videos really aren't my preferred mode of communication, and I find it very difficult to digest them.

That's fair enough, I'm sure there's a lot of reading material out there you could use to measure the man, if this is anything to go by: http://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ

 

[Dak]

Those are social science papers though. That's outside of Ein's area. Frankly personality research is even out of my area if we want to get specific. I imagine the papers on fiction reading and psychological constructs might at least be interesting to him.