home studios equipment staff/friends booking/rates for sale forum contact

Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Vote and debate.

Moderators: kerble, Electrical-Staff

Crap/Not Crap

Crap
67
88%
Not Crap
9
12%
 
Total votes : 76

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 12:42 pm

Madman Munt wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:(the same way James Watson can't really help being a racist because he looks at everything genetically)


Don't quite get this. It seems to conflate a genetic viewpoint with racism. Surely all geneticists are not racist!

Does this mean that if I looked at everything genetically, I'd be a racist too?


sorry, i should have been clearer - I meant that a guy like Watson tends to see ALL human differences as having a predominantly genetic component, including something like IQ, and thus will likely be overly dismissive of cultural explanations of things. There's undoubtedly a genetic component to most things, but I'd hesitate to say that cultural influence can't significantly counteract these.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Riff Magnum on Fri Mar 02, 2018 1:18 pm

I would like to reply to Koko and Grant but I don't have a ton of time and i'm not sure I even have the intellect or capacity (or energy!!) to articulate my thoughts and feelings properly. You both said a ton of good stuff. There's some I agree with, some I don't, and some i'm flat out confused about. Maybe you're inferring opinions in me that I don't have, maybe I don't get it, maybe we're coming at the same idea from different directions, it's hard to tell.
Koko: In no way am I implying that i have ANYTHING figured out. Quite the opposite. I think it's almost impossible to argue that the last 200 years have contained more societal and technological progress and change than maybe the entirety of human history before it. Am I high and just don't know it? I am not some luddite who pines for the "good old days." I've read Stephen Pinkers book......the one with all the graphs.......fuck......."Better Angels?......" anyways, it's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over. I'm just trying to figure out what's causing all this cognitive dissonance in everyone.
Grant: I'm not freaking out about Weinstein, but if i was, I think that would be totally justified. That was some seriously weird shit. I bring it up because it's a perfect example of what Peterson is talking about and the things Bret talks about basically seem to line up with Petersons viewpoint. The guy is an accomplished biologist, if there are holes in his ideas please make me aware of them. I can quit posting stuff about Weinstein now, but there seemed to be new players in the thread and I thought it was relevant. Is he an outlier? God, I hope so. I think that's what your'e basically saying, right?
I might not have my finger on the pulse of academia like you, but my bassist and his wife teach art at a conservative college in Dallas and I hear weird shit coming from his mouth all the time. People are confused and at some point we gotta find some base level of truth claims that at least the majority of us can agree on. I mean if we can't agree on what's male or female how are we gonna solve these other problems?
Blackmarket:
User avatar
Riff Magnum
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:58 am
Location: Fort Worthless

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 1:28 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:It's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over.


Higher rates of addiction, as compared to when babies were given whiskey as a "cure" teething and lazy parenting. Back when people could buy opiates over the counter?

Have you ever entertained the idea that perhaps psychology has a greater understanding of the human mind and that people are now being diagnosed with medical conditions that didn't exist in Western medicine for most of its practice?

The same sort of paranoid, lazy thinking is applied in suggesting there is an uptick in queer folk...that these people haven't been with us all along...and therefore, somehow "proves" a breakdown in Western society is occurring.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 1:45 pm

Riff Magnum wrote: Grant: I'm not freaking out about Weinstein, but if i was, I think that would be totally justified. That was some seriously weird shit. I bring it up because it's a perfect example of what Peterson is talking about and the things Bret talks about basically seem to line up with Petersons viewpoint. The guy is an accomplished biologist, if there are holes in his ideas please make me aware of them. I can quit posting stuff about Weinstein now, but there seemed to be new players in the thread and I thought it was relevant. Is he an outlier? God, I hope so. I think that's what your'e basically saying, right?
I might not have my finger on the pulse of academia like you, but my bassist and his wife teach art at a conservative college in Dallas and I hear weird shit coming from his mouth all the time. People are confused and at some point we gotta find some base level of truth claims that at least the majority of us can agree on. I mean if we can't agree on what's male or female how are we gonna solve these other problems?


I won't deny that what happened with Weinstein was some weird shit, but we need to put it in context: one of the primary battles in academia is existence vs. essence, that is, essentialism (we're born with predetermined characteristics - men are one way, women are another way, etc etc) vs. existentialism (our characters are basically determined by societal restrictions - and this is a terrible explanation i know but for right now it will have to do) - in other words, nature vs. nurture. This debate is an extension of literally 500 years of protestant religious, and later enlightenment, thought.

The 'nurture' side of the argument accords VERY well with contemporary capitalism, because when one considers oneself free from biological / material restraints, one feels that one can take power over one's circumstances. This mode of thinking is considered absolutely necessary in the more competitive areas in the working world, as well as in art and whatnot. "base level of truth claims" really do not matter here, especially because, in the world we live in, i think there's a general consensus among many that we're not going to find any "essential" truths about our lives (again, this is what the existentialists pointed out in the middle of the 20th century, going so far as to say that even thinking of things in terms of having a set essence is a lost cause - and, given that many were writing in the wake of ww2, can you blame them?). This shouldn't be confused with moral relativism, but it should be considered a practice of trying to get away from any restrictions that *might* be binding and seeing how far you can go with it (especially because that's the way one makes opportunity, to make money - you see?).

I would venture to say that the weirdness coming from college campuses is the after-effect of this kind of thinking. You have lots of kids, many of them privileged but many of them not, who are reading thinkers who teach them to question everything. And again, the people who are good at this will use these observations to make opportunities for themselves in the workplace.

Meanwhile, on the workplace end of things, you can think about it this way: the workplace wants to get as much manpower as possible in the offices... it should be no mistake, therefore, that we want to put forward an image of the human being that emphasizes that both men and women have the capabilities to work, and are equal in most respects, and not alienate anyone by their race or sex. They don't want women sitting at home raising babies or forced to work in one area that they are "biologically" better suited for, because it's a fact that you're going to have some women who are 100x better in STEM than men, etc. Businesses care about output. In fact, I would venture to say that most of the people getting involved in the culture wars, and freaking out about 'basic truths' being undermined, are really simply, well, worried about their jobs.

In regards to your talking about "these other problems" I'm not sure I know what you mean. There's a tendency to internalize the problems of academia in the "culture wars" without recognizing that these problems are not really FOR the world at large unless you're planning on going into one of the bourgeois professions like lawyer or whatnot. Humanities academia is, in a lot of ways, for people whose material comforts have been settled - there are plenty of people (myself included) whose material needs are NOT settled, but i'm not the one dictating the terms of the debate - the people who are are funders who are most concerned with the considerations i mentioned above.

When people freak out about the direction academia is going in, they are not considering that the opinions of the masses, in this case, are not considered important. And in the end that is why i see people like Peterson as an inevitable result of other parts of our culture, where elites have detached themselves so much from most other people that there is barely any effective discourse between them anymore. But, importantly, the ideas that emerge from academia come from societal and market demand, not a cabal trying to convince people to act a certain way. Students of a certain class WANT to think a certain way, and will fund teachers to tell them what they want, just like any other business.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Riff Magnum on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:04 pm

blackmarket wrote:
Riff Magnum wrote:It's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over.


Higher rates of addiction, as compared to when babies were given whiskey as a "cure" teething and lazy parenting. Back when people could buy opiates over the counter?

Have you ever entertained the idea that perhaps psychology has a greater understanding of the human mind and that people are now being diagnosed with medical conditions that didn't exist in Western medicine for most of its practice?

The same sort of paranoid, lazy thinking is applied in suggesting there is an uptick in queer folk...that these people haven't been with us all along...and therefore, somehow "proves" a breakdown in Western society is occurring.


That's not what I'm saying and you know it. You might be more hard headed than I am.
My understanding is that most of these measurements started after WWII. So the bad stuff and the good stuff and both being measured across the same periods of time. Recently. The "modern" age.
Ummm, you can still buy opiates over the counter silly and I know people still rub whiskey on babys gums. It's no more dangerous than acetaminophen and no more lazy than dropping your kid in front of a TV screen while mom and dad roll a bowl. Christ. What a weird fucking example dude.
User avatar
Riff Magnum
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:58 am
Location: Fort Worthless

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Riff Magnum on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:18 pm

GrantMcNeilly wrote:
Riff Magnum wrote: Grant: I'm not freaking out about Weinstein, but if i was, I think that would be totally justified. That was some seriously weird shit. I bring it up because it's a perfect example of what Peterson is talking about and the things Bret talks about basically seem to line up with Petersons viewpoint. The guy is an accomplished biologist, if there are holes in his ideas please make me aware of them. I can quit posting stuff about Weinstein now, but there seemed to be new players in the thread and I thought it was relevant. Is he an outlier? God, I hope so. I think that's what your'e basically saying, right?
I might not have my finger on the pulse of academia like you, but my bassist and his wife teach art at a conservative college in Dallas and I hear weird shit coming from his mouth all the time. People are confused and at some point we gotta find some base level of truth claims that at least the majority of us can agree on. I mean if we can't agree on what's male or female how are we gonna solve these other problems?


I won't deny that what happened with Weinstein was some weird shit, but we need to put it in context: one of the primary battles in academia is existence vs. essence, that is, essentialism (we're born with predetermined characteristics - men are one way, women are another way, etc etc) vs. existentialism (our characters are basically determined by societal restrictions - and this is a terrible explanation i know but for right now it will have to do) - in other words, nature vs. nurture. This debate is an extension of literally 500 years of protestant religious, and later enlightenment, thought.

The 'nurture' side of the argument accords VERY well with contemporary capitalism, because when one considers oneself free from biological / material restraints, one feels that one can take power over one's circumstances. This mode of thinking is considered absolutely necessary in the more competitive areas in the working world, as well as in art and whatnot. "base level of truth claims" really do not matter here, especially because, in the world we live in, i think there's a general consensus among many that we're not going to find any "essential" truths about our lives (again, this is what the existentialists pointed out in the middle of the 20th century, going so far as to say that even thinking of things in terms of having a set essence is a lost cause - and, given that many were writing in the wake of ww2, can you blame them?). This shouldn't be confused with moral relativism, but it should be considered a practice of trying to get away from any restrictions that *might* be binding and seeing how far you can go with it (especially because that's the way one makes opportunity, to make money - you see?).

I would venture to say that the weirdness coming from college campuses is the after-effect of this kind of thinking. You have lots of kids, many of them privileged but many of them not, who are reading thinkers who teach them to question everything. And again, the people who are good at this will use these observations to make opportunities for themselves in the workplace.

Meanwhile, on the workplace end of things, you can think about it this way: the workplace wants to get as much manpower as possible in the offices... it should be no mistake, therefore, that we want to put forward an image of the human being that emphasizes that both men and women have the capabilities to work, and are equal in most respects, and not alienate anyone by their race or sex. They don't want women sitting at home raising babies or forced to work in one area that they are "biologically" better suited for, because it's a fact that you're going to have some women who are 100x better in STEM than men, etc. Businesses care about output. In fact, I would venture to say that most of the people getting involved in the culture wars, and freaking out about 'basic truths' being undermined, are really simply, well, worried about their jobs.

In regards to your talking about "these other problems" I'm not sure I know what you mean. There's a tendency to internalize the problems of academia in the "culture wars" without recognizing that these problems are not really FOR the world at large unless you're planning on going into one of the bourgeois professions like lawyer or whatnot. Humanities academia is, in a lot of ways, for people whose material comforts have been settled - there are plenty of people (myself included) whose material needs are NOT settled, but i'm not the one dictating the terms of the debate - the people who are are funders who are most concerned with the considerations i mentioned above.

When people freak out about the direction academia is going in, they are not considering that the opinions of the masses, in this case, are not considered important. And in the end that is why i see people like Peterson as an inevitable result of other parts of our culture, where elites have detached themselves so much from most other people that there is barely any effective discourse between them anymore. But, importantly, the ideas that emerge from academia come from societal and market demand, not a cabal trying to convince people to act a certain way. Students of a certain class WANT to think a certain way, and will fund teachers to tell them what they want, just like any other business.


Super fantastic shit Grant!!
I guess I worry that all this idealogical partisan squabbling over every little thing will cause us to miss the ball when it comes to things that most definitely affect the essence of every single person. Things like healthcare, education, nutrition, water, air, jobs, security will get even more fucked because both sides refuse to give an inch on any issue or even concede when the other side has a good idea or does the right thing. It's a toxic environment.
So you don't agree with the idea that what starts in the colleges and universities ends up in the popular culture a generation later? Seems like that's the trend. It's not a good predictor of future trends?
User avatar
Riff Magnum
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:58 am
Location: Fort Worthless

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:33 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
Riff Magnum wrote:It's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over.


Higher rates of addiction, as compared to when babies were given whiskey as a "cure" teething and lazy parenting. Back when people could buy opiates over the counter?

Have you ever entertained the idea that perhaps psychology has a greater understanding of the human mind and that people are now being diagnosed with medical conditions that didn't exist in Western medicine for most of its practice?

The same sort of paranoid, lazy thinking is applied in suggesting there is an uptick in queer folk...that these people haven't been with us all along...and therefore, somehow "proves" a breakdown in Western society is occurring.


That's not what I'm saying and you know it. You might be more hard headed than I am.
My understanding is that most of these measurements started after WWII. So the bad stuff and the good stuff and both being measured across the same periods of time. Recently. The "modern" age.


You may be too thick to understand what I wrote and how it fits. Psychology, the understanding of addiction, and access to mental health care has increased exponentially since 1945. But you still don't think this has anything to do with the "rise" in these mental conditions. OK.

Ummm, you can still buy opiates over the counter silly and I know people still rub whiskey on babys gums. It's no more dangerous than acetaminophen and no more lazy than dropping your kid in front of a TV screen while mom and dad roll a bowl. Christ. What a weird fucking example dude.


For someone prone to addiction, using opiates in place of acetaminophen is a danger. Absolutely.

Boozing kids up to keep them quiet is very different from sitting them down in front of PBS Kids. :roll: Father of the year, here.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:33 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:Super fantastic shit Grant!!


Thanks! Being in the humanities is really interesting but after studying in Europe you can definitely see how in America both academia and anti-academics have burrowed themselves into separate opposing sides without seeing quite how they got there, which is unfortunate. If people got the bigger picture I feel like there'd be a lot more understanding.

I guess I worry that all this idealogical partisan squabbling over every little thing will cause us to miss the ball when it comes to things that most definitely affect the essence of every single person. Things like healthcare, education, nutrition, water, air, jobs, security will get even more fucked because both sides refuse to give an inch on any issue or even concede when the other side has a good idea or does the right thing. It's a toxic environment.


I totally agree, but the issue really has become about class and the workplace - it doesn't take a Marxist to see that. There are a lot of people in this world born into communities that place an iron fist on their childrens' behaviors and morals etc... who don't take kindly to the idea that patterns of behavior can be fluid, and this unwillingness to budge not only prevents dialogue, but prevents NEW cultural mores from springing up that might be beneficial for everyone.

So you don't agree with the idea that what starts in the colleges and universities ends up in the popular culture a generation later? Seems like that's the trend. It's not a good predictor of future trends?


I do think this happens to an extent, depending on the lawyers who come out of these colleges and how they end up making the laws. One idea that a lot of college students have is that changing the "discourse" can end up changing behavior (and this leads to a lot of the most irritating behaviors, people curbing other people's speech for microaggressions, etc.) Thankfully, most of this stops by the time you get out of college, BUT, there will always be a few people who leave those colleges, especially the most powerful colleges, with new ideas and new vocabularies and those are the people who will end up changing society, providing for gay rights, etc.
Think about it: as soon as women got protections in the workplace, a lot of sexual harassment (on the lowest employment levels) became taboo. The same has happened with race, and sexual orientation. Once you can get sued for talking a certain way, it becomes taboo, and this is the way these sort of speech acts changes behavior.

I DO think that we are at something of a crossroads, simply because the economy itself is changing, and we're being confronted with choices we've never had before. For example, if most jobs become mechanized, and there is no *productive* excuse to give women and minorities jobs, will their rights end up getting taken away? Or the transgender issue - that is a fall-back on gender essentialism which very much runs counter to centuries of trying to shed essentialist ideas (for example, my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body, and now we are being asked to look at women as being a matter of "spirit" rather than physicality and the judgment of others). These are all difficult questions, but notably: a) the idea that we can come up with 'right' or 'wrong' answers about essential questions is quite doubtful, and b) the people who will end up answering these questions for our society are, in large part, lawyers, politicians, etc... who need to be well-versed in all those annoying campus quibbles. This will end up being their argument. And that's why they are the loudest on college campuses.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:49 pm

GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:52 pm

blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman, what feminism is i appreciate it.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:53 pm

GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused about it, so no problem.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:54 pm

For example, when FM blackmarket says the following:


blackmarket wrote:Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.[/quote]

You seem to be confused, so no problem.[/quote]

This is someone trying to control the space in which I talk about what my experience is, or the way I've perceived my experience, with a kind of verbal definition. His belief that feminism has nothing to do with bodies - and stating it DEFINITIVELY AS SUCH - runs entirely counter to my experience / my learning, but he's telling me that I'm confused. This is, in general, the way bullies tend to try to control situations, and this is why the Jordan Petersons of the world think liberal culture are bullies when trying to control discourse - because people who have certain definitions will argue against other people's actual lived experiences (and then they'll be ironic and insist that we shut up and listen to OTHER PEOPLE'S experiences, which is good but they're always only certain people's voices, etc... these are language games, 85% of the time).

In contrast, actively questioning me, like kokodorko has in this thread, is a way of making one change one's mind. It tends to be more productive, overall.
Last edited by GrantMcNeilly on Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Riff Magnum on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:55 pm

I've been pretty patient with you, ignoring your insults and condescending tone, but please just take it down a notch, huh? Please.
I hope you didn't think I meant YOU as a parent. Seems I might've inadvertently touched a nerve. I don't know you. I don't even know if you have kids. I'm sure you're a good parent if you do have kids.
I got a 16 year old son and a 14 year old daughter. I've raised them by myself for the last 3 years. I never gave them booze to shut them up, but i've heard overusing acetapminophen and ibuprofen isn't healthy either. Who the fuck knows at this point......The fuck are we even talking about..........
......Oh yeah, so I don't have the studies in my back pocket but i'm pretty sure the things i'm hearing are recent. Like recent enough that we know it's a trend and not due to emerging understandings of the brain. Seems that our understanding of addiction and depression have gone from "quit being such a pussy" to "its a chemical imbalance in the brain or a disease of the brain" to "maybe it's a little bit of that but mostly we think it's that people legitimately aren't happy and have real reasons to be depressed or self medicate." It's pretty easy to distinguish between a trend and "we didn't have a name for this 20 years ago." Something like autism, you probably have a point, but i'm not talking about autism. I realize I said mental illness above and that might be a fuzzier area to discern than suicide, drug use and depression. My bad.
User avatar
Riff Magnum
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:58 am
Location: Fort Worthless

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:57 pm

GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused, so no problem.


Quit being cute, I specified what it meant to me and most feminists have different definitions of it. Just because second wave feminism is unfashionable doesn't mean it's extinct.


Feminism has always meant an equality of the sexes. People have different interpretations of how that comes about in practice, but the meaning of the word has not changed, since whenever you came up.
Last edited by blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:59 pm

blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused, so no problem.


Quit being cute, I specified what it meant to me and most feminists have different definitions of it. Just because second wave feminism is unfashionable doesn't mean it's extinct.


Feminism has always meant an equality of the sexes. People have different interpretations of how that comes about in practice, but the meaning of the word has not changed, since whenever you cam up.


Do you not get it? I think that the primary barrier between equality of the sexes (feminism) is the materiality of the female body. In fact, I think the resistance to thinking it's about bodies is just a sign of the degradation of the material in all respects that has happened over the last 40 years. Quit telling me what the definition of feminism is as if i haven't read all the same shit you have.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby kokorodoko on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:00 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:Koko: In no way am I implying that i have ANYTHING figured out. Quite the opposite. I think it's almost impossible to argue that the last 200 years have contained more societal and technological progress and change than maybe the entirety of human history before it. Am I high and just don't know it? I am not some luddite who pines for the "good old days." I've read Stephen Pinkers book......the one with all the graphs.......fuck......."Better Angels?......" anyways, it's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over. I'm just trying to figure out what's causing all this cognitive dissonance in everyone.

Don't worry, I didn't read any of those things into your post.

You're right about the rapid change, but as I was pointing out, the change that has taken place is to a large part nothing strange to me myself living right now. Some of the thing that might create confusion are:
1. Realizing that change has happened at such an unprecedented rate, by looking back at history, thinking "wow, a lot sure has happened". People living 20,000 years ago weren't able to do this.
2. Because of the gap this creates between generations, there is less of a guiding fatherly voice to look to. You just can't count on someone older knowing what's up the same way as before, since conditions change so fast, skills that were useful before become obsolete and so on.
3. Tieing into point 1, being able to get information about everything happening in the world, everything we have learnt about ourselves, thus realizing how much is actually going on (and getting anxious over all the things you don't know).

Standards of living are improving... at the price of working oneself to death and being worried sick over maintaining your appearance and having a good reputation and choosing career path or keeping your job and getting the right insurance and planning your pension and planning your children's future and being healthy and being successful and looking good and having the right this or that and and.
There are a whole bunch of stress factors that are unique to modern life and also completely unnecessary. No surprise people are depressed. But the cause for this depression? We don't talk about that. If life makes you sick, you should change how you live. But we aren't taught to do that.

I won't go on because that would be a rant in itself. But this is one of The Problems, from my perspective.
Janeway wrote:those cat-food-for-lunch-deserving motherfuckers 8)
User avatar
kokorodoko
deep blue
deep blue
 
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:46 pm
Location: The Ultra Zone

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Riff Magnum on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:03 pm

GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused, so no problem.


Quit being cute, I specified what it meant to me and most feminists have different definitions of it. Just because second wave feminism is unfashionable doesn't mean it's extinct.


In that weinstein interview, his wife Heather said something interesting and i'm paraphrasing here: "Symmetry is not the same thing as equality" as it relates to male/female relations. I think I know what she means by that, but I wonder what you thought about that if you watched it?
User avatar
Riff Magnum
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
Saint Who Rules w/ Extensive Magnanimity
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:58 am
Location: Fort Worthless

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby GrantMcNeilly on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:07 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused, so no problem.


Quit being cute, I specified what it meant to me and most feminists have different definitions of it. Just because second wave feminism is unfashionable doesn't mean it's extinct.


In that weinstein interview, his wife Heather said something interesting and i'm paraphrasing here: "Symmetry is not the same thing as equality" as it relates to male/female relations. I think I know what she means by that, but I wonder what you thought about that if you watched it?


Honestly I really hate views like that, i don't take a symmetrical view of the sexes and when we talk about equality we're talking about humanity, not men and women (or at least we should be). I think in many ways male anxiety about the female body is the cause for a lack of equality between the sexes, and that anxiety can come from many different places but traditionally it has not been coming from the women themselves.
TheMilford wrote: We're talking about TV here, not a Slint record or Albert Camus....
User avatar
GrantMcNeilly
dr. j
dr. j
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:20 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:18 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:
blackmarket wrote:
GrantMcNeilly wrote:my own personal definition of feminism has always been defined as male discomfort / hatred for the female physical body


Feminism strives for equality of the sexes. It has nothing to do with hatred of one thing or another or even bodies for that matter.


Thank you for telling me, a woman what feminism is i appreciate it.


You seem to be confused, so no problem.


Quit being cute, I specified what it meant to me and most feminists have different definitions of it. Just because second wave feminism is unfashionable doesn't mean it's extinct.


In that weinstein interview, his wife Heather said something interesting and i'm paraphrasing here: "Symmetry is not the same thing as equality" as it relates to male/female relations. I think I know what she means by that, but I wonder what you thought about that if you watched it?


I haven't seen that interview and probably won't, but...symmetry would means that two things are exactly the alike. If used as an attempt to take down Feminism, it's a straw man argument. A logical fallacy. Feminism seeks an equal right of self-determination among the sexes. No two people are exactly alike, man and man/woman and woman/woman and man, so saying that Feminism wants symmetry is laughable on it face. Symmetry is an impossible thing. People often want very different things for their lives. Anyone who proposes that Feminism seeks symmetry can be discounted immediately as a likely misogynist shill.
Last edited by blackmarket on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:30 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
blackmarket
meatball enthusiast
meatball enthusiast
 
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:14 pm

Re: Alt-right darling: Jordan Peterson

Postby Anthony Flack on Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:24 pm

Riff Magnum wrote:it's pretty obvious that OVERALL basic standards of living are improving for everyone, in almost every category. Yet we have higher rates of depression, suicide, addiction, mental illness, right? Maybe these numbers are debatable, but that's what i'm hearing and reading over and over. I'm just trying to figure out what's causing all this cognitive dissonance in everyone.


Don't overlook the possibility that environmental toxins play a role.

I think in times past, worrying that the harvest might fail and everybody in the village will starve must have been a constant cause of stress, certainly comparable to the modern pressure to make mortgage payments.

One thing we are living with now which past generations didn't is the knowledge that we are heading towards what is likely to be a fairly grim future and potentially human extinction in the near term. That's something that weighs on me. My natural lifespan might take me to 2050 or thereabouts; my children to 2100. I know what is predicted for those dates.

I dreamed about nuclear war last night. I haven't dreamed about nuclear war since I was a kid.
Anthony Flack
Present-day God
Present-day God
 
Posts: 9112
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:27 am
Location: New Zealand

PreviousNext

Return to Crap / Not Crap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests