(August 12, 2018 at 4:35 am)Tizheruk Wrote:

Quote:As a Canadian, I want to see what happens when Peterson runs for Prime Minister.

Bonhomme has a better chance of being  Prime Minister then Pope garlic butter .

haha!
Then Trump will have a friend.

Quote:haha!

Then Trump will have a friend.

Very likely 

(August 9, 2018 at 11:32 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: He's also said women who wear makeup should not be allowed to complain about sexual assault (soon after he has been accused of sexual assault )

He thinks an argument can be made for rape inside of marriage 

He thinks men and women should not work together 

He thinks Feminists who are not overly critical of Islam secretly crave male dominance

I've never heard of saying anything that comes close to any of these things, and I've watched a lot of interviews talking about these subjects.

Quote:I've never heard of saying anything that comes close to any of these things, and I've watched a lot of interviews talking about these subjects.

I have done the same and he has

(August 12, 2018 at 6:15 am)Tizheruk Wrote:

Quote:I've never heard of saying anything that comes close to any of these things, and I've watched a lot of interviews talking about these subjects.

I have done the same and he has

Which interview?  I've watched some where seems to say he doesn't think the things you mentioned, such as that women who wear make up shouldn't complain about sexual harassment.

(August 12, 2018 at 6:15 am)Tizheruk Wrote:

Quote:I've never heard of saying anything that comes close to any of these things, and I've watched a lot of interviews talking about these subjects.

I have done the same and he has

No, he didn't say that at all.  He's talked about it quite in depth, and his position is clear.  He says:

1)  Makeup and high-heels are sexualized dress, because they simulate physiological responses like red lips and muscle tone that come along with sexual interest.
2)  Harassment is NOT okay nevertheless.
3) An open discussion of the issue, minus identity politics, must be had in order to define harassment and take good steps to prevent it.

He was specifically asked, if makeup and high-heels are sexualized dress, does that mean that women should be made not to wear those items, or that it was their fault if they were harassed?  His response was absolutely not-- that's what they did in Maoist China through identity politics, which is his #1 hated position.

He said there are clearly other, better ways to deal with harassment.  He most certainly did NOT say that women should "not be allowed to complain about sexual assault."

Interestingly, one of his claims is that identity politics is an enemy of truth, because once you know who you think the "good guys" are, you no longer need to tell the truth about your philosophical opposition. Sounds familiar, eh?

(August 12, 2018 at 6:25 am)paulpablo Wrote:

(August 12, 2018 at 6:15 am)Tizheruk Wrote: I have done the same and he has

Which interview?  I've watched some where seems to say he doesn't think the things you mentioned, such as that women who wear make up shouldn't complain about sexual harassment.

So i need to go through this again 

---

(August 12, 2018 at 6:30 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(August 12, 2018 at 6:15 am)Tizheruk Wrote: I have done the same and he has

No, he didn't say that at all.  He's talked about it quite in depth, and his position is clear.  He says:

1)  Makeup and high-heels are sexualized dress, because they simulate physiological responses like red lips and muscle tone that come along with sexual interest.
2)  Harassment is NOT okay nevertheless.
3)  An open discussion of the issue, minus identity politics, must be had in order to define harassment and take good steps to prevent it.

He was specifically asked, if makeup and high-heels are sexualized dress, does that mean that women should be made not to wear those items, or that it was their fault if they were harassed?  His response was absolutely not-- that's what they did in Maoist China through identity politics, which is his #1 hated position.

He said there are clearly other, better ways to deal with harassment.  He most certainly did NOT say that women should "not be allowed to complain about sexual assault."

Interestingly, one of his claims is that identity politics is an enemy of truth, because once you know who you think the "good guys" are, you no longer need to tell the truth about your philosophical opposition.  Sounds familiar, eh?

And Peterson apologetics to cover his ass

(August 12, 2018 at 6:45 am)Tizheruk Wrote: And Peterson apologetics to cover his ass

You keep saying this shit, but the fact is that he didn't say what you said he did, and he did say what I said he did.

Do facts mean so little to you? Of course they do, because you're the exact kind of bullshitter that he's talking about, and you don't like having a mirror held up to your ignorant face. You are pretty much the definition of the kind of unacademic, willful ignoramus that make people like him important right now.

I don't need any apologetics. I can literally just say the truth, and watch you rant hysterically because the truth is so obviously not on your side.

---

(August 12, 2018 at 6:25 am)paulpablo Wrote:

(August 12, 2018 at 6:15 am)Tizheruk Wrote: I have done the same and he has

Which interview?  I've watched some where seems to say he doesn't think the things you mentioned, such as that women who wear make up shouldn't complain about sexual harassment.

Never happened.  Tizheruk will listen just long enough to hear keywords that he knows from his karmic pottery classes or whatever at college that are allowed to trigger him into indignant, own-fart-sniffing outrage, and then he'll happily fill in all the blanks himself.

Quote:You keep saying this shit, but the fact is that he didn't say what you said he did, and he did say what I said he did. 

I keep saying this fact because that what it is and you'll keep cover for pope long john silvers and his word salad to cover his fuck ups .

Quote:Do facts mean so little to you? Of course they do, because you're the exact kind of bullshitter that he's talking about, and you don't like having a mirror held up to your ignorant face. You are pretty much the definition of the kind of unacademic, willful ignoramus that make people like him important right now.

Facts mean plenty that's why i'm stating them .Too bad unlike you and Peterson i'm not a bullshitter and that mirror is a brilliant reflection of you not i .And you can call me unacademic all you like it's false. And no one needs a cultist bullshitter like Peterson accept cultist like you .

Quote:I don't need any apologetics. I can literally just say the truth, and watch you rant hysterically because the truth is so obviously not on your side.

Clearly you do need apologetic s because it's what you engage in when it comes to your cult leader. And the truth is more then on my side which yet another reason you need apologetics .And your hysterical false claims of my supposed hysterics just makes your hysterics all the funnier.

---

(August 12, 2018 at 7:13 am)LastPoet Wrote:

I'll take some of that too extra butter