The Political Correctness Haters' Club

[Cult Icon]

I also don't really like his influence over a certain amount of young men in their 20s (he has sold millions of copies of his book as of right now) as some sort of pseudo father figure.   His mixture of good and terrible advice has the same disastrous pitfalls as being a fanatically devout Christian.

 

Like the feminists and Christians he advocates indirectly (and will never admit) a "servile/slave" position for men- men should "man up" and spend their whole energy serving their employers/greater society and and being as helpful/attractive as possible to their women.  There is little coverage of the duties and responsibilities of employers/greater society and women- in fact he is fanatically anti-SJW and socialism to the point where he sees the former as a non-issue.  This is profoundly idiotic. 

 

Not that he never says anything right but more critically In neither case does he address when these two parties (employers/greater society and women) , social conventions, and the legal system as well, can utterly fail to reward the man as they constantly do in the real world.

[Enrico_sw]

On 1/2/2019 at 2:32 PM, Cult Icon said:

Honestly, if he is dangerous then so are all feminist pundits (in a way)...as he advocates the rigid correctness of a certain lifestyle, mindset, and set of priorities and a set of enemies.

 

I have critiqued him a bit on BZ- if you strip away all his rhetoric he is fundamentally quite straightforward; a Christian conservative who advocates traditional values, conservative behavior, and a more traditional social contract between men and women.   All his arguments and "controversy" point into this direction.

Sure, bigotry and feminism are sometimes two sides of the same coin. However, I don't really see Peterson as this much of a bigot. I don't know all his work, but it seems that "symbols" are one of his favourite subjects. Since the West has a lot of Judeo-Christian symbols, that's not so surprising that he talks a lot about it (but maybe I'm wrong on this one, I'm not an expert on his theories).

 

Furthermore, feminism in the mainstream media is the biggest "prudish" threat nowadays. Series like "The Handmaid's Tale" are "strawman" arguments and cultural objects that fuel a widespread conspiracy theory called the "patriarchy".

 

Also, I kind of agree with this argument of his: he says that the big error in the feminist analyses is that they confuse the tail of the statistical distribution with the average.  For example, they see crazy psychos like Weinstein (who is a genuine asshole) and then... they conclude that all men are aggressors. That's just a confusion between the 0.00x% of men and the average man. Media often relay this type of ideas

[Stromboli1]

Feminists and other crap groups want equality of outcome rather than opportunities. That's just so lazy.

[Cult Icon]

Dr. Fung is an intermittent fasting pundit- the new fad.  While I do agree with him that fasting works (I've done mild forms of it for half my life to keep myself at a certain weight... ) he never addresses the negatives, which are ever-present and never go away: lower energy, hunger,  and then mental energy stored up in the form of cravings for rich meals.  It really seems like his advice is aimed only at very overweight people and not normal people who want to look their very best.  

 

His anti-calorie counting rhetoric is too exaggerated and is only partially correct.  The rest of his message is pretty good though- that fasting does not damage the body as much as people think it does.  Also, the importance of hormones and insulin in fat storage.

 

 

[Cult Icon]

14 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

Sure, bigotry and feminism are sometimes two sides of the same coin. However, I don't really see Peterson as this much of a bigot. I don't know all his work, but it seems that "symbols" are one of his favourite subjects. Since the West has a lot of Judeo-Christian symbols, that's not so surprising that he talks a lot about it (but maybe I'm wrong on this one, I'm not an expert on his theories).

 

Furthermore, feminism in the mainstream media is the biggest "prudish" threat nowadays. Series like "The Handmaid's Tale" are "strawman" arguments and cultural objects that fuel a widespread conspiracy theory called the "patriarchy".

 

Also, I kind of agree with this argument of his: he says that the big error in the feminist analyses is that they confuse the tail of the statistical distribution with the average.  For example, they see crazy psychos like Weinstein (who is a genuine asshole) and then... they conclude that all men are aggressors. That's just a confusion between the 0.00x% of men and the average man. Media often relay this type of ideas

 

The rise of Feminism in culture is heavily linked to the rise of the post-industrial (knowledge-based) economy in developed nations.  Women need to be converted from their traditional roles and into wage labor.  In industrialized economies with less democracy there is substantially less feminism, and for good reason- corporations, gov't, interest groups, etc. don't push it.  

 

Naturally the parties that lose are families, children, and men.  "Equality" was always an excuse, it was about getting more benefits for women.  Ideologically it is tactically sound to present a vision of patriarchy that is ruling over half of the population, who are "victims" that are owed grievances to.   Feminist pundits never think once about "giving back" their advantages over men, like purchasing power, social power, social conventions, etc..... or get more responsibilities for themselves to serve men and their children.  So it makes sense for women to embrace feminism, would you honestly say that you wouldn't if you were a woman???

 

Peterson is 100%  a christian conservative/libertarian-true believer.   He just hides under sophisticated-sounding rationalizations, which were invented by him using his education and skills.  He was very interesting to me at first glance when I first examined his work, as he is the most sophisticated right wing pundit that uses secular arguments to advance conservatism.   I like his content on Jungian psychology and this is what he is paid to teach in university.  However, I looked at his social media about 2 years ago and found that  his "cool" persona in person hides the fact that he is really a typical angry right-winger with many intense hatreds for his political enemies.  This is not an objective man who is a-political and is trying to find the truth.

 

 

[Cult Icon]

Related to the Jungian "Heroes Journey", (I listened to the audiobook "Heroes with a thousand faces" last year on my members thread and read some books on screenplay writing/story telling), I found when studying the rise of fascism in Germany to the culture of the society, state, and military in the 20s-40s to be, at a core,  a form of state-sanctioned adventurism.  Nowhere was this most obvious than in the culture of the German army, with its peculiar combat doctrine, psychological approach, and system of awards.

 

Take out all the fascist B.S. and you have men going out to "take on the world" though wars of conquest like in any century of human civilization, just like the Vikings or Mongols.  The state guides men through by promising them their own "heroes journey" and then rewarding them with the spoils of war (land, titles, money,  reason of being, importance, legacy, etc.).  All the fascist B.S. can be interpreted as an excuse to serve this basic human need.  In contemporary society, these natural drives are suppressed in the form of drugs; media, music, entertainment, books, games, road trips, careerism, etc.

[Enrico_sw]

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

In industrialized economies with less democracy there is substantially less feminism,

 

Of course, outside the "Occident", women are often oppressed and sometimes it's dire (wives get burnt, they can't go to school, sometimes they are stoned for no reason, raped, etc.). I would definitely be a feminist, outside the West! It's sometimes really hard to live as a woman there. Outside the West, feminists are true heroes.

 

In the Western world, women are rarely oppressed (and the Judeo-Christian culture has a lot to do with it! The Christian Doctrine intrinsically protects women). In fact, in the West, women have never really had oppression. Mostly, in our history, it's the rural populace (men and women alike) who was oppressed. Serfs were oppressed whatever their gender... Men and women were the workforce in the fields (and taking care of children/supper was nothing compared to harvest work).

There is an brief exception to all this: between ~ 1800 and ~ 1940. Common men got the democratic "power" before women, but common men were often factory workers, which was a terrible job at the time (with genuine exploitation). So, common women couldn't vote and they had less autonomy, but common men damaged their health at work.

 

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

  So it makes sense for women to embrace feminism, would you honestly say that you wouldn't if you were a woman??? 

 

If I was a woman, I would be a lesbian, because I love women too much... (and men are ugly ) And I wouldn't be a feminist (if I was in the West). Many western women are not feminists (in fact the majority of them are not feminists).

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/401804-poll-less-than-half-of-female-millennials-identify-as-feminists

 

Western feminist "activists" often ask for privilege, which is not "fair" (and it makes life flavourless for women and men). Since most people (men and women alike) have a strong sense of justice, feminism cannot work outside the mesmerized media.

 

There is a famous French feminist who said "One men out of two or three is an aggressor". She was an advisor to a Minister! But this delirious sentence (that didn't really cause any problem in the media) really discredited the feminists.

[Cult Icon]

2 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

Western feminist "activists" often ask for privilege, which is not "fair" (and it makes life flavourless for women and men). Since most people (men and women alike) have a strong sense of justice, feminism cannot work outside the mesmerized media.

 

The problem with your link is that the majority of women are Christian in the USA...so naturally "feminism" is repulsive to some level due to religious indoctrination.  Also a substantial portion of the electorate is disinterested in politics, myself included.  We have a low participation rate.  I don't really see much downside to supporting feminist movements if one is a woman.  There's much to gain in raising the value of your life through actions other than your own.  If you are a male feminist than maybe you are a useful idiot

 

 

I think the majority of men would like "malism".

Also, what I am saying is that feminism did not really move forward rapidly until the United States and then, the rest of the western post-WW2 world de-industrialized and moved towards a post-industrial economy.  In a post-industrial economy, de-militarized, and then decades later, the globalized economy- military, manufacturing and blue collar work disappeared.  These were also jobs that were more dependent on male "brawn" and less ladylike.  At the same time (1960s onward), there was the pill and proliferation of abortion techniques to really change things.    This is the real reason why feminism grew in scope.   The fights for the woman vote and other rights (as well as academic movements to change the public perception of what a woman was in the 1920s-1930s) were window dressing.

[Stromboli1]

 

[Cult Icon]

23 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

Feminism is an intolerant doctrine, it says that all men are culprits and all females are victims (that's the ideological framework of all PC movements). Real women don't like to be treated as "eternal victims". French actresses posted a tribune to protest against mad feminists.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5261137/HELENA-FIRTH-POWELL-feminists-need-flirty-Frenchman.html

 

Also, I don't think women like when men are treated like crap (because it makes them lose all their value - I'm sure you'll agree with that)

 

Ahh, the favorite expression of marxists   When was the last time you saw a male feminist? I don't know any..

 

Honestly I don't understand why you hate feminism so much. I find it selfish, fallacious, and annoying- like the other 95% of politics. Just ignore it...

 

You heavily understate the popularity of feminism.  Feminist attitudes are prevalent in my day to day life (I live in a blue/liberal region of the country), it is not just the media.   I would say that hard-core feminists are rare, but working women have some sympathy to feminist concepts, and their minds are exposed to indoctrination from pop culture , advertising, public schooling, and the press, which has a feminist tone.  Huffington post is a woman's news source.   Male Feminists are the same, they are usually not hard-core but sympathize to feminist doctrines.  You are likely a male feminist if you support the Democratic party.

 

Women do not care if men are treated like shit, slave away their entire lives for them, or killed in gigantic mounds, what planet are you living on?  They care only about their self interest- themselves and their children.  Men are appendages to enhance their lives and provide security, when's the last time a woman truly cared about a man's happiness if she had nothing to gain from it?   They wouldn't bat an eyelash if the bottom 20% of men in social status, physical looks, and income were killed in a fire.  Mother nature designed them this way,  they can't help it.  We men are similar- fat, ugly women are pretty much sub-human to us, too.

 

 

[Enrico_sw]

7 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

Just ignore it...

 

I believe that talking is extremely important. In general, and, in particular here as well. It helps the critical thinking (including mine).

 

These extremist feminists and their "hate speech" (let's just use the modern vocabulary ) are able to express their ideas because nobody respond to them. People are too afraid of being bullied. Self-censorship is often what allowed extremisms to succeed.

 

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

and their minds are exposed to indoctrination from pop culture , advertising, public schooling, and the press, which has a feminist tone. 

 

Yes That's exactly why we need to talk about it. Steamrollers like this indoctrination need to be exposed to critical thinking.

 

7 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

Honestly I don't understand why you hate feminism so much.

 

I didn't say that I hated them, and neither did you. They are like the Inquisitors in Spain (five centuries ago), an interesting phenomenon. It's a sectarianism that acts under a code (the feminist code have two pillars: individualism and victimization). I'm trying to analyse them beyond good and evil.

 

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

Huffington post is a woman's news source.

 

They aren't a news source It's an ideological PC fountain, the Pravda of the new world...

 

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

Women do not care if men are treated like shit, slave away their entire lives for them, or killed in gigantic mounds, what planet are you living on? 

 

Maybe your country is very individualist. Here, women like the Community and the order (and safety) it brings them. Sure, on the short term, some of them might feel good to benefit from being treated as a "queen", but in the long term if man lose their manhood, they lose as well. They want to be queens with a king. I believe that they will regret men (who behave like men) when they become scarcer (it's already happenning - the scarcity and the regret).

 

I believe totalitarianisms are unstable by nature if they don't accommodate the majority. And modern feminism is a soft form of totalitarianism.

 

8 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

Male Feminists are the same, they are usually not hard-core but sympathize to feminist doctrines. 

 

They are people who always nod to what they hear in their environment (or they just want to get laid )

[Stromboli1]

Feminism isn't inclusive, whom ever tells you otherwise is full of shit.

[Cult Icon]

I think I should eat my words- I found that there was a recently released WW2 game that was realistic.  But it's very low budget and niche:

 

 

[Cult Icon]

39 minutes ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

I believe that talking is extremely important. In general, and, in particular here as well. It helps the critical thinking (including mine).

 

Maybe your country is very individualist. Here, women like the Community and the order (and safety) it brings them. Sure, on the short term, some of them might feel good to benefit from being treated as a "queen", but in the long term if man lose their manhood, they lose as well. They want to be queens with a king. I believe that they will regret men (who behave like men) when they become scarcer (it's already happenning - the scarcity and the regret).

 

You didn't say that you hate feminists but it looks like you do- Talking, reading, studying something you dislike- in this case,  feminism . is entirely a waste of time.  

 

The main problem with being a male feminist is that it involves fallacious idealization and some self-hatred.  One would think that women are far more noble and honorable than they are, and these can lead to disastrous personal consequences.

 

You talk about "manhood"- in the traditional sense.  However, things are no longer traditional.  To be that sort of man (a gentleman) requires a corresponding social contract with women that no longer exists.   

 

 

[Cult Icon]

Related to the above, women are mindlessly programmed to be attracted and repulsed by certain actions of men, despite how honorable or reasonable (or lack there off) they could be.  They are controlled by their instincts and emotions far more than the gender-neutral social conventions would admit.   Female love is not something to be universally respected or admired, in fact the vast majority of time it is steeped in vulgarity, no where higher than male love.  Men are mindless and pathetic slaves to their sexuality and are crippled by their inadequate instincts and emotional intelligence- far more than they would admit either.    It is ever-common for a woman, no matter of "intelligent" she is, to fall prey to her emotional programming and engage in unethical and unfair behavior without knowing that she is.  It is idiotic but ever-common for a man to be  a slave to a woman's approval, phony displays, half-truths/lies,  and backwards rationalizations.

 

It is true that women are not really attracted to male feminist behavior despite vocalizing their approval but neither should a man with an ounce of self-respect and self-esteem seek to "behave" in an unnatural way just to seek their approval, like a slave.  One can fake these things for years or half-fake them but eventually all these suppressed emotions cause a lot of damage and psychological issues.

 

In a fully civilized culture, which we are not, men and women would be fully conscious of their human weakness and educated to be competent in this manner in order to liberate their souls and improve their actions and quality of  life.  However, this skillset is not being taught anywhere except in certain graduate schools!!

[Enrico_sw]

On 1/7/2019 at 12:07 AM, Cult Icon said:

 

Talking, reading, studying something you dislike- in this case,  feminism . is entirely a waste of time. 

 

I disagree. Talking and trying to understand something is rarely a waste of time.

That's a human need (more or less big, depending on the person, depending on the moment in time). I feel it's strongly important to discuss issues, any issue that is key in our life.

 

This issue is key: healthy relationships between men/women. Not "ideal" relationships (they don't exist), but healthy ones (the ones that meet a minimum standard). Sadly, they slowly degraded over the past decades and they strongly degraded over the last few years.

 

Not talking is making people bitter. Bitter people become resentful. Resentful people become blindly violent, and then it becomes ugly.

Talking is saner, even when we disagree with sby.

 

On 1/7/2019 at 12:07 AM, Cult Icon said:

You talk about "manhood"- in the traditional sense.  However, things are no longer traditional.  To be that sort of man (a gentleman) requires a corresponding social contract with women that no longer exists.  

 

Yes, it's a social contract that's threatened. However, since a social contract is mutually beneficial, women will endure severe hardships from its disappearance (and they already do, same as men).

 

On 1/7/2019 at 12:07 AM, Cult Icon said:

One would think that women are far more noble and honorable than they are, and these can lead to disastrous personal consequences.

 

You know I've always agreed with this point: nobody is ideal. Women are neither goddesses (as the media and other sycophant think), nor slags. Men are neither the scum that the feminists (and the media) want us to be, nor the perfect good "dude".

[Enrico_sw]

On 1/7/2019 at 3:15 PM, Cult Icon said:

Related to the above, women are mindlessly programmed to be attracted and repulsed by certain actions of men, despite how honorable or reasonable (or lack there off) they could be.  They are controlled by their instincts and emotions far more than the gender-neutral social conventions would admit.   Female love is not something to be universally respected or admired, in fact the vast majority of time it is steeped in vulgarity, no where higher than male love.  Men are mindless and pathetic slaves to their sexuality and are crippled by their inadequate instincts and emotional intelligence- far more than they would admit either.    It is ever-common for a woman, no matter of "intelligent" she is, to fall prey to her emotional programming and engage in unethical and unfair behavior without knowing that she is.  It is idiotic but ever-common for a man to be  a slave to a woman's approval, phony displays, half-truths/lies,  and backwards rationalizations.

 

It is true that women are not really attracted to male feminist behavior despite vocalizing their approval but neither should a man with an ounce of self-respect and self-esteem seek to "behave" in an unnatural way just to seek their approval, like a slave.  One can fake these things for years or half-fake them but eventually all these suppressed emotions cause a lot of damage and psychological issues.

 

In a fully civilized culture, which we are not, men and women would be fully conscious of their human weakness and educated to be competent in this manner in order to liberate their souls and improve their actions and quality of  life.  However, this skillset is not being taught anywhere except in certain graduate schools!!

 

Ah, that's a more balanced post than your previous one! And I agree with a lot of this (not all of it, but a lot).

 

Anyway, that's another evidence that talking is not so much a "waste of time"

[Enrico_sw]

On 1/6/2019 at 11:35 PM, Stromboli1 said:

Feminism isn't inclusive, whom ever tells you otherwise is full of shit.

 

That's why this ideology is less and less popular (outside the "mesmerized" mainstream media).  Fortunately (for both men and women)!