• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 25, 2017
20,229
For a professor, Peterson is pretty bad at his job. He seems to have mastered the art of taking a piece of philosophy or historical study and spouting it as fact, but without giving any substansial context as to why he thinks it's fact other than "history". It's the same kind of harmful shit James Damore pulled with his manifesto crap.

This is the argument I saw Shapiro make on what he meant by enforced monogamy:

Apparently if there's less sleeping around and monogamy is "enforced" by society the incels won't be so aggressive?

Who the fuck knows.

No, this is still bullshit and Ben Shapiro is an ass hate. This is basically saying that only women choose the most desirable mate which is complete bullshit.
 
Oct 25, 2017
20,229
Incels are a product of toxic masculinity. They are a product of raising generations upon generations of male children to be violent, insensitive, and non-communicative in the strive to achieve a patriarchal, masculine ideal where one man, through strength, wit, and determination, rules over all others. It's always bothered me that people like Peterson claim that women being more selective than men in the dating process is indicative that men are the victims of some grave injustice that women are largely responsible for, when in fact the reason most women are more selective has much more to do with personal safety than desire.

Men are by far more likely to hurt women than the opposite. Full stop. Domestic abuse, economic coercion, child abuse, rape, murder etc. Incel men aren't being turned violent via rejection. They are being rejected BECAUSE they are violent. This WILL NOT CHANGE if we force women to be with them.

The Reply All episode on Incels was pretty interesting. They traced it back to how it began online in the 90s and the woman who started the original community.
 

Goat Mimicry

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,920
Even a generous take like Shapiro's makes Peterson's argument look stupid as hell. If socially-enforced monogamy really would result in more pairings, most of the incels still wouldn't be getting laid on account of their horrible personalities and lack of social skills.
 

Kusagari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,421
For a professor, Peterson is pretty bad at his job. He seems to have mastered the art of taking a piece of philosophy or historical study and spouting it as fact, but without giving any substansial context as to why he thinks it's fact other than "history". It's the same kind of harmful shit James Damore pulled with his manifesto crap.



No, this is still bullshit and Ben Shapiro is an ass hate. This is basically saying that only women choose the most desirable mate which is complete bullshit.

I don't really get the argument to begin with. I think the assumption that society pressuring people into monogamy will lead to unsatisfied men not existing has no basis in reality.
 

plagiarize

It's not a loop. It's a spiral.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,545
Cape Cod, MA
Even a generous take like Shapiro's makes Peterson's argument look stupid as hell. If socially-enforced monogamy really would result in more pairings, most of the incels still wouldn't be getting laid on account of their horrible personalities and lack of social skills.
They wouldn't be getting 'desirable' women either, and they'd always know that their partner didn't want to be in the relationship with them.

If you just look at it from a global perspective, and reduce everything down to numbers, and squint a bit, then maybe it looks plausible... but as soon as you start thinking about individual human beings it clearly becomes nightmarish. Who gets paired up with the racist sexist bigot? What do you do if she still won't sleep with him? Force her? No one with a shred of intelligence or humanity would dwell on such an idea for more than a few seconds before getting really embarrassed about having thought of the concept in the first place.
 

plagiarize

It's not a loop. It's a spiral.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,545
Cape Cod, MA
And how the fake news is showing their agenda by not knowing what he meant and leaving quotes out intentionally to convey what he actually meant, as not to confuse the reader.

The lack of self awareness is amazing.
I think a *better* question for people trying to spin the comment is 'Well do you agree that this idea, whether Peterson suggested it or not, is a terrible idea?'. I'm sick and tired of people trying to spin away comments that they clearly agree with, you know?
 

Fudgepuppy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,270
DZaxVKVX0AAYPcI.jpg:large


Just wait until he uses womens' reactions to his comments about forced monogamy, as women being offended and falling into victim culture.
 

blinky

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,329
Even a generous take like Shapiro's makes Peterson's argument look stupid as hell. If socially-enforced monogamy really would result in more pairings, most of the incels still wouldn't be getting laid on account of their horrible personalities and lack of social skills.
I think the focus on incels in general is weird and bizarre. If you want to argue in favor of a socially-enforced norm of monogamy, a much better way of going about it is to craft your argument about strengthening the nuclear family. "We need monogamy to keep undesirable men happy" isn't going to persuade anybody. It comes across as a joke, and then just makes everybody uncomfortable when they realize that you're being serious.
 

VikingJoseph

Member
Oct 27, 2017
271
For such a genius intellectual, Jordan Peterson sure needs other people to constantly articulate what he "really" meant.
 

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,176
UK
They wouldn't be getting 'desirable' women either, and they'd always know that their partner didn't want to be in the relationship with them.

If you just look at it from a global perspective, and reduce everything down to numbers, and squint a bit, then maybe it looks plausible... but as soon as you start thinking about individual human beings it clearly becomes nightmarish. Who gets paired up with the racist sexist bigot? What do you do if she still won't sleep with him? Force her? No one with a shred of intelligence or humanity would dwell on such an idea for more than a few seconds before getting really embarrassed about having thought of the concept in the first place.
Man-Seeking-Woman-Season-2-Episode-7-1-2d35.jpg

Man Seeking Woman had an episode ("Cactus", season 2 episode 7) where the protagonist puts into law a Nice Law where if someone is nice to someone else, that woman has to end up in a relationship with them. It's hilarious and basically blasts entitled "Nice guys" to what they usually are, assholes.
 

LogicAirForce

Member
Oct 25, 2017
936
If marrying these disgusting shitbags is the only way to keep them from becoming violent then fuck it, they can come and kill me. I'd rather be dead than subservient.
Also, fuck Stephen Fry for helping to enable this bullshit.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,747
So I guess I'm a day late to this, but is he talking about slavery? Because "enforced monogamy" sounds like slavery to me.
 

apocat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,056
So I guess I'm a day late to this, but is he talking about slavery? Because "enforced monogamy" sounds like slavery to me.

Yeah. It's funny how all these alt right rodents always seem to fall back on the assumption that the major issue with modern society is that white men isn't allowed to own, use and abuse literally everybody else.
 
Nov 1, 2017
1,141
"Being anti-PC means I, a member of the powered class, get to say shitty things about the disempowered class. The disempowered class better watch their tongue though."

Yep. Has never been about anything other than a desire for certain people to know their place.

Even a generous take like Shapiro's makes Peterson's argument look stupid as hell. If socially-enforced monogamy really would result in more pairings, most of the incels still wouldn't be getting laid on account of their horrible personalities and lack of social skills.

This is another good point. Also, there are people out there that aren't into sex much or at all. They'd just wind up paired with someone with no libido, still not get laid and still become violent pieces of shit. Only as noted by others, now they're been given direct access to their first victim.
 

AlecKoKuTan

Member
Oct 29, 2017
2,256
Irvine, CA
This might be off topic as hell, but I have to complain about something. I feel like there is a large majority of people who are just afraid to be single...

Why would any guy, or woman for the matter, want to force someone to be with them? Also, this takes me to the guys who just 'HAVE GOT TO' be married. I have a coworker (male) who always complains about how he has to pay for everything in his marriage and how his wife contributes so little to the house hold, the two have only been married like 2-3 years. This guy goes on to complain about how his wife won't allow him to indulge in his hobbies and controls how he spends his money while she goes on damn near shopping sprees. He strikes me as the guy who totally thinks he can flash a little coin and girls will come running.

This paranoid fuck also said he installed cameras at his house (it was almost implied that he does it to watch his wife's actions) but he comes off as extremely unhappy in his marriage, but he just HAS GOT TO BE married. He's also largely unattractive, skin issues, pot belly, his wife totally scores higher than him in looks. He totally screams of insecurity as he is always trying to put others down and make himself look better and is largely dismissed in the department. I don't understand why she would have married him or why he would want to get married before fixing himself. Why would any man force a relationship with someone, especially if there is only attraction on one side? I don't get people who force marriage, especially for religion... I'm religious too, but I'm not going to run around and force a marriage and potentially fuck up my life, someone elses, or bring a child into this fucked up society just so that I can have an excuse to say that I tried to do things the "right way". I'm also not so insecure to try and force a marriage or relationship just to have one to appeal to society's standards or family expectations. People just need to stand the fuck back, think critically, and improve themselves before committing to life altering shit.
 

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
Peterson is propped up as this great free thinker, one of the best of our time, someone who is supposed to deliver their arguments succinctly and eloquently, yet all I see is

BUT BUT BUT BUT WHAT HE MEANT TO SAY BUT BUT BUT WHAT HE TRULY MEANT BUT BUT BUT

lmao

Genius, literate, and well-spoken man misunderstood again!

I don't even have words...


The ex-girlfriend is killed first almost every time that an ex-girlfriend has been present and a lot of the targets are explicitly female -- down to that guy who murdered the Amish children literally letting all the boys go -- yet somehow the only ways we're acknowledging this is by some dudes saying it's the fault of all womankind for being both too prudish to not give Nice Guys a chance and also too slutty to settle down with these poor aggrieved incels.
 

Deleted member 8561

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
11,284
This might be off topic as hell, but I have to complain about something. I feel like there is a large majority of people who are just afraid to be single...

Why would any guy, or woman for the matter, want to force someone to be with them? Also, this takes me to the guys who just 'HAVE GOT TO' be married. I have a coworker (male) who always complains about how he has to pay for everything in his marriage and how his wife contributes so little to the house hold, the two have only been married like 2-3 years. This guy goes on to complain about how his wife won't allow him to indulge in his hobbies and controls how he spends his money while she goes on damn near shopping sprees. He strikes me as the guy who totally thinks he can flash a little coin and girls will come running.

This paranoid fuck also said he installed cameras at his house (it was almost implied that he does it to watch his wife's actions) but he comes off as extremely unhappy in his marriage, but he just HAS GOT TO BE married. He's also largely unattractive, skin issues, pot belly, his wife totally scores higher than him in looks. He totally screams of insecurity as he is always trying to put others down and make himself look better and is largely dismissed in the department. I don't understand why she would have married him or why he would want to get married before fixing himself. Why would any man force a relationship with someone, especially if there is only attraction on one side? I don't get people who force marriage, especially for religion... I'm religious too, but I'm not going to run around and force a marriage and potentially fuck up my life, someone elses, or bring a child into this fucked up society just so that I can have an excuse to say that I tried to do things the "right way". I'm also not so insecure to try and force a marriage or relationship just to have one to appeal to society's standards or family expectations. People just need to stand the fuck back, think critically, and improve themselves before committing to life altering shit.

They are afraid to be single because a large part of their self worth is tied up in sexual conquest
 

SegFault

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,939
Jordan Peterson: the dumb persons idea of a smart person.

Also, toxic masculinity is a cancerous tumor that needs to be removed from society.
 

IAMtheFMan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,024
Chicago
I talked about this on the old site when something similar came up (moreso about the radicalization of young white men) and I'll see if I can dig up some of those posts still, but the nice guys/incel/gamergaters/alt-right guys really have no insight at all into their issues. I mean, take a look at any of the underbellies of the incel forums and you'll see clear bitterness and talk about how they're incel because of their asymmetry, facial structure, etc. but at the same time, they'll openly mock fat girls, girls with acne, etc. They project outward and blame EVERYONE except themselves for their situation. Now to be fair, some of it is conditioned with societal norms and pop culture and so forth. Media has conditioned men growing up to believe that they're the hero of their own story; that they rightly deserve the hot girl and when it doesn't come to fruition, time and time again, it just goes to reinforce the notion of "what's wrong with everyone else?" It's essentially what Peterson is saying here; it's not the guys' fault that they can't attract a woman, it's the women who should take one for the greater good of society.

Part of the problem is that say someone in that community does try to "better" themselves, the majority of the time it isn't to actually make themselves a better person, have better self-worth and so forth. Everything is done with the goal being "get the girl" and all the betterment is seen almost like raising stats in an RPG to make themselves better equipped to handle the social situation. Girls like guys that work out? Do that. Girls like guys that dress well? Do that. Girls like guys that have interesting hobbies? Do that. But a though such as "you know what, I should take better care of myself... let me start exercising to feel good" never crosses their mind. And the thing is, women (and men for that matter) see right through that. And when this shit doesn't work, it just drives them further into the incel group-think of "fuck everyone else, it's their problem, not mine."
 

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
They are afraid to be single because a large part of their self worth is tied up in sexual conquest

A lot of people are afraid to be single, though, both male and female. For men, as far as how society as a whole seems to view it, it's explicitly about sex and for women it's explicitly your value as a human is tied into whether or not someone chooses to stay after the sex.

It's telling that the suggestion for helping these sexually (and emotionally) frustrated men never seems to be telling them to masturbate and make friends that they actually do things with other than getting angry on the internet so that they can form the kind of healthy relationships that would prepare them for a partner. We don't think a partner is something that just happens eventually when you meet someone who is right for you. We think it's literally the only goal worth achieving for all of humanity and time spent on other forms of self-improvement are only a means to the eventual end goal of a partner that you need as soon as possible.

Peterson says that men who don't have one have failed, full stop. He doesn't give them any alternative other than forcing a system into place that would make them not failures, because being single is still a state of failure, even if you follow his other steps faithfully. (And it can't be that his system or world view are wrong about anything, so it must be the women and their sexual liberation that are in the wrong.)
 

astro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
56,954
This man is a stain on intellectual thought. Anyone following him is making themselves worse.
 

Deleted member 8561

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
11,284
A lot of people are afraid to be single, though, both male and female. For men, as far as how society as a whole seems to view it, it's explicitly about sex and for women it's explicitly your value as a human is tied into whether or not someone chooses to stay after the sex.

It's telling that the suggestion for helping these sexually (and emotionally) frustrated men never seems to be telling them to masturbate and make friends that they actually do things with other than getting angry on the internet so that they can form the kind of healthy relationships that would prepare them for a partner. We don't think a partner is something that just happens eventually when you meet someone who is right for you. We think it's literally the only goal worth achieving for all of humanity and time spent on other forms of self-improvement are only a means to the eventual end goal of a partner that you need as soon as possible.

Peterson says that men who don't have one have failed, full stop. He doesn't give them any alternative other than forcing a system into place that would make them not failures, because being single is still a state of failure, even if you follow his other steps faithfully. (And it can't be that his system or world view are wrong about anything, so it must be the women and their sexual liberation that are in the wrong.)

Yes, the issue is he is telling young frustrated men who view their lack of relationships as a failure on their masculinity, and then find someone who literally tells them if they don't find a partner they literally failed in life.

Now, for a good portion of men who are single (who fit into the category we are talking about), the issue is them. The type of people who gravitate to the alt right, red pill and call Peterson a godsend are the type of people who are fucking miserable and who's lives are most likely already in a sorry state of affairs. They think having a women will fix everything and make them happy, because that's the "end" goal in life and the key to being successful.

Lots of people are afraid to be single because people want to be loved and find connections in others. The issue is we have a society that has catered to men having all the power and the residual side effects are that boys grow up thinking they deserve sexual attention because they have a penis.

The issue isn't society pressuring people to not be single, the issue centuries of practice and traditional values that men need to have a women to be successful in life, and sexually and socially frustrated young men finding each other and forming echo chambers where they blame their ills in life on women who have agency in their life.
 

kaputt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,204
A lot of people are afraid to be single, though, both male and female. For men, as far as how society as a whole seems to view it, it's explicitly about sex and for women it's explicitly your value as a human is tied into whether or not someone chooses to stay after the sex.

It's telling that the suggestion for helping these sexually (and emotionally) frustrated men never seems to be telling them to masturbate and make friends that they actually do things with other than getting angry on the internet so that they can form the kind of healthy relationships that would prepare them for a partner. We don't think a partner is something that just happens eventually when you meet someone who is right for you. We think it's literally the only goal worth achieving for all of humanity and time spent on other forms of self-improvement are only a means to the eventual end goal of a partner that you need as soon as possible.

Peterson says that men who don't have one have failed, full stop. He doesn't give them any alternative other than forcing a system into place that would make them not failures, because being single is still a state of failure, even if you follow his other steps faithfully. (And it can't be that his system or world view are wrong about anything, so it must be the women and their sexual liberation that are in the wrong.)

Yup, it's such a weak statement. It's like saying men are completely worthless pieces of trash, because if they can't find themselves a woman they're just going to be assholes. What the fuck.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,731
Asshole strikes again. Anyone from the 80s/90s getting a strong Dianetics/Scientology vibe from this shithead?

In a decade he's going to be running his own cult. Mark my words.
 
Oct 28, 2017
2,964
Yes, the issue is he is telling young frustrated men who view their lack of relationships as a failure on their masculinity, and then find someone who literally tells them if they don't find a partner they literally failed in life.

Now, for a good portion of men who are single (who fit into the category we are talking about), the issue is them. The type of people who gravitate to the alt right, red pill and call Peterson a godsend are the type of people who are fucking miserable and who's lives are most likely already in a sorry state of affairs. They think having a women will fix everything and make them happy, because that's the "end" goal in life and the key to being successful.

Lots of people are afraid to be single because people want to be loved and find connections in others. The issue is we have a society that has catered to men having all the power and the residual side effects are that boys grow up thinking they deserve sexual attention because they have a penis.

The issue isn't society pressuring people to not be single, the issue centuries of practice and traditional values that men need to have a women to be successful in life, and sexually and socially frustrated young men finding each other and forming echo chambers where they blame their ills in life on women who have agency in their life.

Yeah, I mean there's a lot of reasons why people who'd like to be in a relationship aren't.

Maybe they are just really shy or socially awkward, or lack self-confidence. And sure, if someone's interested in you (and it's not a creep), it can boost your confidence. But a healthy relationship needs a lot of communication to work and if you can't talk openly about issues that might arise with your partner it probably won't last. Better to work on yourself first.

Maybe they are really busy with school or work and have no free time to socialize and meet people. Again, a relationship (or even just dating) is a serious time-commitment and it's not going to last if you can't devote time for your partner.

Dating can be hard, and there are genuinely nice people out there who could be good partners but lack the time or social skills to try their luck.

But Peterson's not talking about them. He's actually talking about a guy who killed ten people because society didn't hand him the magic girlfriend he thought he deserver by the simple virtue of existing. And he's saying we need 'enforced monogamy' to fix that. Why the fuck would any woman want to date such a person? How the fuck would a murderer in the making be a good partner?

It's definitely a problem how society portrays relationships as a magic button to happiness, and people are shamed for having no sex life or being virgins. But at the same time some people are just creeps or have severe mentally health issues that mean they shouldn't get near a relationship until they've worked that stuff out.

I'm 26 and I've only had two pretty short (a few weeks or months) attempts at relationships so far. And for way too long I was caught in some kind of mental trap of 'noone's intested in me anyway'. While looking back, actually there were girls interested in me, and I was the one who ignored them. Either because I was busy fantacising about some girl I idolized but never actually talked to. Or because I had a self-defeating attitude and was just socially awkward, so I didn't notice it until I remembered the situation a lot later. But the solution to that wasn't someone handing me a magic girlfriend. It was actually just living life, following my interests and passions and confronting my insecurities. Because that's how you gain self-confidence and social skills, and that's how you meet people you might click with, not by hiding in online circle-jerks.
 

Antrax

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,284
I have A Modest Proposal with what to do with the incels. And Peterson's own logic can't really argue against it
 

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
Why do people want to have sex with people who don't want to have sex with them by natural attraction. So bizarre

People are so fixated on being in a relationship as the only measurement of their value. You see it too with people who are really biphobic and say they wouldn't date a bisexual because there's twice the chance they'd leave you -- obviously not true -- which suggests that they don't want their partner to actually want them so much as be stuck with them because of a lack of options. Why would you want to be with someone who doesn't actually want you anymore but just hasn't found another option?

It's like a lot of people don't even want a satisfying relationship; just anything at all so that they can feel like they've succeeded. So weird to have what is basically a self-help guru with a slightly larger vocabulary teaching people how to settle for so little just so long as they do it with good posture.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,826
Genius, literate, and well-spoken man misunderstood again!



The ex-girlfriend is killed first almost every time that an ex-girlfriend has been present and a lot of the targets are explicitly female -- down to that guy who murdered the Amish children literally letting all the boys go -- yet somehow the only ways we're acknowledging this is by some dudes saying it's the fault of all womankind for being both too prudish to not give Nice Guys a chance and also too slutty to settle down with these poor aggrieved incels.
It's not his fault that when women are left to their own devices, they inevitably disturb the Natural Order of Things. Something something Archetypes, vaguely related tangent involving biblical myth.
 

PhoenixDark

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,089
White House
Even a generous take like Shapiro's makes Peterson's argument look stupid as hell. If socially-enforced monogamy really would result in more pairings, most of the incels still wouldn't be getting laid on account of their horrible personalities and lack of social skills.

Why frame it as a "generous" take? Or are you saying that Peterson is advocating for women to be forced to marry men, to redistribute sex in a way that lowers the rate of violence? Which...was not his argument, but this thread and twitter have decided to run with that.


Shapiro disagrees with Peterson's view and offers his own view, which likely mirrors that of many people here:
Now, I don't find this argument particularly convincing. I'm a big believer in monogamy, and I believe that both women and men are better off in a monogamous society. But while society would benefit from promotion of monogamy, the solution for incels is to become better potential partners, not to whine about breakdown in the monogamous standard (few incels are complaining that they can't find women to marry; they're mostly claiming they can't find women to have sex with).

You don't have to spend much time observing incel communities to see they have very little interest in marriage. Their dominant focus is on sex.

I found the NYT piece to be poorly argued and incredibly condescending. There are some things within Peterson's general arguments that I agree with, but overall I view him as a pretty well crafted cult leader for miserable men. If anything he has gained his status in part because he spends his time embarrassing liberals like the author of this piece, who who seem to have no ability to challenge his views and instead either demand he be erased/ostracized or lampooned. Well, that's not working. There are some pretty large flaws in many of his arguments (as noted below), but he is rarely confronted with them. Like Ta-Nehisi Coates, he's an intellectual who benefits from not having his views criticized, debated, or sharpened from the left or right. Instead he's simply presented as a shiny toy, for one side to praise and another side to denigrate.

 
OP
OP
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,325
If anything he has gained his status in part because he spends his time embarrassing liberals like the author of this piece,

The only way you could argue that the author of this piece was somehow embarrassed by him is to argue the piece which is largely constructed of quoting him is out of context or a hit piece.

This piece embarrasses Peterson not the other way around.
 

dusteatingbug

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
Why frame it as a "generous" take? Or are you saying that Peterson is advocating for women to be forced to marry men, to redistribute sex in a way that lowers the rate of violence? Which...was not his argument, but this thread and twitter have decided to run with that.


Shapiro disagrees with Peterson's view and offers his own view, which likely mirrors that of many people here:


You don't have to spend much time observing incel communities to see they have very little interest in marriage. Their dominant focus is on sex.

I found the NYT piece to be poorly argued and incredibly condescending. There are some things within Peterson's general arguments that I agree with, but overall I view him as a pretty well crafted cult leader for miserable men. If anything he has gained his status in part because he spends his time embarrassing liberals like the author of this piece, who who seem to have no ability to challenge his views and instead either demand he be erased/ostracized or lampooned. Well, that's not working. There are some pretty large flaws in many of his arguments (as noted below), but he is rarely confronted with them. Like Ta-Nehisi Coates, he's an intellectual who benefits from not having his views criticized, debated, or sharpened from the left or right. Instead he's simply presented as a shiny toy, for one side to praise and another side to denigrate.



This is why I think Nathan Robinson's piece on Peterson (which spawned a zillion-page-long thread here) is so good. The reason Peterson is so popular is that, in spite of him being a fraud and an awful reactionary, liberalism doesn't actually have a counter to his bullshit. His lonely disaffected fans aren't going to be won over by the kind of takedown these liberal media hacks keep attempting.
 

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,926
This is why I think Nathan Robinson's piece on Peterson (which spawned a zillion-page-long thread here) is so good. The reason Peterson is so popular is that, in spite of him being a fraud and an awful reactionary, liberalism doesn't actually have a counter to his bullshit. His lonely disaffected fans aren't going to be won over by the kind of takedown these liberal media hacks keep attempting.

Quoting someone is now being a liberal media hack.
 

dusteatingbug

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
Quoting someone is now being a liberal media hack.

A non-hack would hear "enforced monogamy" and go "hold on, what do you mean by that?"

No one ever tries to even argue with him. They just go "you said a thing, that thing is racist and/or sexist." Which gives him endless opportunities to dissemble and prevaricate and JAQ off. And it lets his incel dork fanbase pretend like he's been taken out of context.
 
OP
OP
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,325
A non-hack would hear "enforced monogamy" and go "hold on, what do you mean by that?"

No one ever tries to even argue with him. They just go "you said a thing, that thing is racist and/or sexist." Which gives him endless opportunities to dissemble and prevaricate and JAQ off. And it lets his incel dork fanbase pretend like he's been taken out of context.


But aside from interventions that would redistribute sex, Mr. Peterson is staunchly against what he calls "equality of outcomes," or efforts to equalize society. He usually calls them pathological or evil.

He agrees that this is inconsistent. But preventing hordes of single men from violence, he believes, is necessary for the stability of society. Enforced monogamy helps neutralize that.

In situations where there is too much mate choice, "a small percentage of the guys have hyper-access to women, and so they don't form relationships with women," he said. "And the women hate that."

She did hence why she got him to admit his stance was completely hypocritical to every other stance he basically has.
 

Sblargh

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,926
A non-hack would hear "enforced monogamy" and go "hold on, what do you mean by that?"

No one ever tries to even argue with him. They just go "you said a thing, that thing is racist and/or sexist." Which gives him endless opportunities to dissemble and prevaricate and JAQ off. And it lets his incel dork fanbase pretend like he's been taken out of context.

She followed on that, I am on the phone now and it is horrible to copy paste things, but go back to the article. She follows on that and he doubles down.
This is so stupid. The dude is a professor and we should be holding his hands and bending over backwards to interpret correctly what the very clear sentence "enforced monogamy" means.
Yeah, I don't think he wants a law forcing people to marry, but he is at the very very least saying women should voluntarily give up the freedom gained after the 60s because men are sad
Every time he is asked for clarification he rambles with condescension (like the witch part), when people try to make sense of what he is saying, it becomes this circus of he didn't really mean it.
It is so frustrating. His shtick is the very basic conservative dream of going back to the 50s with all the bad this represents, yet we are accused of not knowing what to do with his very deep insights.
 

Sub Boss

Banned
Nov 14, 2017
13,441
I think the focus on incels in general is weird and bizarre. If you want to argue in favor of a socially-enforced norm of monogamy, a much better way of going about it is to craft your argument about strengthening the nuclear family. "We need monogamy to keep undesirable men happy" isn't going to persuade anybody. It comes across as a joke, and then just makes everybody uncomfortable when they realize that you're being serious.
Nah thats just more subtle imo, its not even neccessary.

Culturally enforced monogamy has made many women and men miserable across the world and history. because it involves a game of lack, you suddendly feel lacking because you don't have a 'proper' family, and thus are undesirable in society and this creates resentment, loneliness fear and sadness , the reasons for not having a family/wife can be very complex after all and don't have a single, perfect solution .

Besides life isn't objectively just about making lots of babies or having the biggest families.thats not the only degree of success.

These men aren't angry and killing others because they want/need children to leave descendants, and for some reason these selfish women don't want to sleep with them, they are angry because they feel entitled to their bodies, and ignore personal responsibility, a thing Peterson himself explains, because they were led to believe successful guys have the prettiest women , houses and cars thus they themselves are failures.they won't accept their suffering in healthy ways, yet Peterson keeps insisting the problem is with progressive society /liberals/women/feminists
 

dusteatingbug

Member
Dec 1, 2017
1,393
She followed on that, I am on the phone now and it is horrible to copy paste things, but go back to the article. She follows on that and he doubles down.
This is so stupid. The dude is a professor and we should be holding his hands and bending over backwards to interpret correctly what the very clear sentence "enforced monogamy" means.
Yeah, I don't think he wants a law forcing people to marry, but he is at the very very least saying women should voluntarily give up the freedom gained after the 60s because men are sad
Every time he is asked for clarification he rambles with condescension (like the witch part), when people try to make sense of what he is saying, it becomes this circus of he didn't really mean it.
It is so frustrating. His shtick is the very basic conservative dream of going back to the 50s with all the bad this represents, yet we are accused of not knowing what to do with his very deep insights.

She didn't actually get him to define the term though. And I wish she'd actually used quotations instead of (imo inexplicably) just reporting about the exchange in third person.

I'm not talking about holding his hand, I'm talking about actually opposing his arguments instead of trying to own him with his own words. He's an incredibly disorganized thinker and nonstop bullshitter. It shouldn't be too hard to actually dissect the ridiculous shit he says.

Look, I really, really dislike the guy and am frankly horrified by the things he stands for. But he has a following, among young white men but also among 'centrist' media and other adults who should know better. People need to be offering alternatives to his vision and pointing out why the things he says are untenable on historical, political, moral and logical grounds. When he says something as batshit as "enforced monogamy" journalists need to fucking skewer him, not after the fact in a profile but in the actual moment, before he and his fans can do the old "he was taken out of context" rigamarole.
 

Burrman

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,633
The problem with my male friends is that they're too picky. Not all of them ar good lookers and they won't settle for anything less than an 8. They're gonna be single forever. I have a friend who is really overweight, bald, no money etc. But doesn't want anything to do with an average looking women. He's an idiot that's gonna be single and living off porn for the rest of his life. He went on a date once with a chubby girl that I thought was pretty cute and he didn't even bother to call her back. He is almost turning 40 and still lives with his parents.... There's too much of these males around nowadays form my view.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.