Lemme guess "angry young white men"?

He got lots of hysterical accusations that a widely accepted term he used in the interview (hitpiece) doesn't really mean what it is means in evolutionary biology, but actually means that he thinks women should be forced at gunpoint to be married.

Burt, you are one of the all time great masturbators.

I love watching Burt masturbate

Dawg if you want to figure out why JP is a ridiculous charlatan you can Google it. There was a good one in Viewpoints mag by Shuja Haider, there was another one recently in the Times Review of Books, I think the NYT profile of Peterson is a good takedown of his ideas (ask yourself, what would socially enforced monogamy actually mean?). But you've already read at least one of those and not come away with even a sliver of doubt, so I'm not going to bother dredging up links.

A specter is haunting North America — the specter of postmodernism. Or at least, that’s what Jordan Peterson would have you believe. Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, has entered into an unholy alliance with all the powers of the alt-right to exorcise this specter. Though he calls himself a “British classical liberal,” Peterson’s appeal feeds into the most reactionary tendencies in contemporary politics. He rose to fame when he was captured on video at a protest on the University of Toronto campus, telling transgender students he refused to use gender-neutral pronouns. He has since joined the ranks of Logan Paul and PewDiePie as a YouTube star. He mostly eschews writing, instead posting videos of lectures online for his primarily young, white, and male audience.

Seriously, tell me how I'm wrong and educate me. I'm not that smart and trying to learn stuff.

So, let’s summarize. Men get frustrated when they are not competitive in the sexual marketplace (note: the fact that they DO get frustrated does not mean that they SHOULD get frustrated. Pointing out the existence of something is not the same as justifying its existence). Frustrated men tend to become dangerous, particularly if they are young. The dangerousness of frustrated young men (even if that frustration stems from their own incompetence) has to be regulated socially. The manifold social conventions tilting most societies toward monogamy constitute such regulation.

That’s all.

No recommendation of police-state assignation of woman to man (or, for that matter, man to woman).

No arbitrary dealing out of damsels to incels.

Nothing scandalous (all innuendo and suggestive editing to the contrary)

Just the plain, bare, common-sense facts: socially-enforced monogamous conventions decrease male violence. In addition (and not trivially) they also help provide mothers with comparatively reliable male partners, and increase the probability that stable, father-intact homes will exist for children.

I will read these. I'm starting with the Haider one. This is the first paragraph:


With whom, exactly, has Peterson entered an alliance? Talk about specters...
"Peterson's appeal"? He has no control over who follows him. Hopefully, the idiots in his audience listen to what he actually says and work on straightening out their lives. He has had no known encounter in which he refused to call a person by the pronoun of their choice. He argues that it is wrong to enforce this by law, and it's a good argument. Yep, YouTube has many stars, some are idiots. He's written plenty. There's nothing wrong with lectures on YouTube. They are much further reaching.

After reading this paragraph, it's clear this woman has no idea what she's talking about. Therefore, I'm not going to read further.