Why Can't People Hear What Jordan Peterson is Saying?

Article in the Atlantic and various others. Peterson is an amazing psychologist and his youtube channel is incredible. He is fighting the good fight to dismantle PC culture and the abrasive moves of the Marxists in society to remove rights.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/putting-monsterpaint-onjordan-peterson/550859/

I think this article also highlights the issue with modern "interviewing", from Fox news to CNN, all the way across the pond. I've seen interviewers on all MSM, again, Wapo, Fox, use the "So you're saying" technique to disparage an interviewee, and it is infuriating.

A couple of quotes:

As you can see the woman rails on Peterson and keeps inventing words for him, replacing his utterances with SJW PC bullshit.

This is a dangerous trend and must be stopped.

 

A rebuttal to the arguments could be that if the USA was a perfect capitalist society, and if women were paid less than men, and if the productivity of women was not less than the productivity of men, then a good, economically rational, capitalist, corporation would increase its profits and dividends by employing only women.

 

We voters are the root of this problem. We expect elected officials to perform miracles, provide more services but lower taxes, solve decades-long issues within a single term, have a hyper-local focus on our individual issues but also a grand international focus on the major problems in the world. In response, politicians have learned to lie creatively, making us believe they’re offering everything we want without actually promising anything at all. In turn, interviewers have learned to distrust everything they’re told and try to twist their way through the lies, bluster and misdirection to get through to the facts.

When those same interviewers are faces with a non-political interviewee (or at least non-professional politician) they struggle to shift gear and can tend to fall in to the usual modes, especially if the topic has political overtones as in your example.

The answer is for us to settle for realistic expectations of our elected representatives but I don’t see that ever happening.

 

I find it highly unsettling that this sort of interviewing is allowed on -any- network.

 

exactly.. and the fact that doesn't happen disproves the gender pay gap..

 

Peterson demonstrates precisely why Marxism is a failure and collectivism is a fraud. The univaried/multivaried analysis was spot on, and the idiot interviewer was like a fish out of water.

 

yes the entire interview was interviewer: "so what your saying.." and Peterson replies "no im not saying that.." over and over and over lol

 

It's sheer lunacy.

 

But the productivity of women, on the group average, is considerably less than men, mostly at the female's choosing.

 

because it's stupid as ****. he's a grownass man telling other grownass men to clean their rooms and bitching about how everything he doesn't like is postmodernism all day.

 

Is he the most tedious Canadian of all time or just this week?

 

It's just cognitive dissonance. She believes that women are getting the shaft by not being paid as much as men, so any extra information has to fit within that particular narrative. Since that's not possible, she has to try and change that information so that it can fit. Peterson knows that's what is happening, and the various ways that people use to resolve that dissonance.

 

that women are statistically paid less across the board is a problem regardless of the root cause

 

because...

you can't put anything after the word "because" because your unfounded belief in this "problem" doesn't hold up to any intellectual scrutiny. Not even your own.

 

bitch wait two ******n minutes before you jump to conclusions, this is what i was waiting for. i like my dramatic timing.

the fact that women make less on average puts women as a class at a material disadvantage and breeds situations in which women are dependent on men as a result of their womanhood, which in a culture that only recently came around to the idea that violently raping someone is still rape if they're your wife is an incubator of violence. additionally, it reveals cracks in the logics by which we organize production and culture. the fact that women statistically are more likely to have lower paying jobs raises a great many questions. why are some forms of labor paid less regardless of the amount of effort they take to complete? what allows someone to be branded as part of a class and then put along a pipeline to financial subjugation? after all, isn't it arrogant to assume that this can only happen to women?

 

Of course they are at a "material disadvantage", and yes that "breeds situations in which women are dependent on men". They're the ones who have to deal with a bun in the oven for nine months, and then add another year to having the milk bags conveniently located on their chests. That's just biology 101.

Human biology is not a problem, and women who decide to get married and help raise a family is certainly not a problem. It's just a path that many women choose to follow which necessarily cuts off other paths such as competing with men in the work force.

In other words, your "problem" is with biology and choices that women make. You could take your complaints to women who chose to become mothers, but I don't think it's yours or my business what they decide to do with their lives.

 

**** biology. it sucks. humanity, for all our constant production of **** and death, have at least invented the wonders of drugs and augmentation that allow us to overcome our meat prisons.

and elseways: free will is a myth. we're produced animals, filled with desires that are injected into us through the massive sphere of abstract communication we've superimposed over our reality through the sophistication of our media. all of us are slaves to ideology. i'm not interested in what anyone "chooses", i'm interested in the structures of desire and production that influence those "choices"

 

Thus what comes after "because" devolves into an incoherent rant against reality, biology, free will, and the preferences of women who decide to become mothers.

 

I have been talking about this on other forums for weeks now, this has put JP (whom I have followed for quite a while now) in the spotlight like no other.

The funny thing is that he is actually center Left and is closer to a Democrat than a Republican.

What is most sad of all, the article the Gaurdian posted about him, wow, talk about slanderous and just flat out lies.

Calling him "alt-right" and something like "The Most Dangerous Man in America" (he's Canadian for those that don't know) Here is the article, simly disgusting...

But look at the comments, hyper Leftists are simply going to far, almost every single comment on that hyper Left wing media site disagrees with the article and is calling the Guardian out on their BS. I still cannot believe that Trump winning did not teach them this. Instead they are pushing further and further with articles like this.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...he-rightwing-professor-who-hit-a-hornets-nest

.lol "The Right wing Professor" What a joke, again if anything he is closer to a Democrat than a Republican. He just hates identity poltics and it seems like that is the only thing the Left is actually talking about now days.

 

i can elaborate on any part of that if you wanna zoom in. i'm aware that my thoughts have become so absolutely steeped in my own personal brand of philosophy as to be a bit hard to pick apart for others. my fixations on speculative realist ontology and deleuzian metaphysics haven't brought me to the point where putting them in common language is intuitive yet.

as for reality: eh, reality is overrated. human beings are not rational creatures. we're sensual, shamanistic, raving, screaming, and constantly railing against the prison of our fundamental natural constraints. the world is not here for us. our senses evolved so we would survive, not necessarily to provide us with any kind of truth or understanding. in a world where we can never make contact with reality except through fallible ports, learning to shift the walls of our cognitive prisons is the only freedom we have.

 

No, I think I have the basics. We obviously have to start with a few shared premises, but since you think reality is overrated and biology sucks, we'd be wasting both of our time.

 

Take men out of the equation.. is there a pay gap from women to women?
Of course there is.. a women Dr is going to get payed more then a women nurse.
What you are looking for is equal results and that will never happen in men vs men, women vs women, or men vs women. All you can do is make equal opportunity..

 

why are women disproportionately working in low paying fields? ask some damn follow up questions.

 

Because women are free to choose..
There are plenty of studies on this.. most men are going to put high paying job at the top of the list when looking for a job, or major in school. women are going to put happiness at the top of there list instead..

 

I am not really a fan of his.

That said, this subject has ALREADY been beaten to death in multiple threads.

Carry on.