RE: Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?
August 15, 2018 at 7:28 am
(This post was last modified: August 15, 2018 at 7:33 am by bennyboy.)
(August 15, 2018 at 2:02 am)Khemikal Wrote:(August 15, 2018 at 1:58 am)bennyboy Wrote: My opinion of humanity overall is fairly negative. More and more, I'm convinced by Khemikal and others in their arguments about free will being illusory, and the "Well, what then?" is best answered by evolution-- we act as we do because that's what we are.
The trouble with this...and with peterson...is that even if this is what we are or were..it has no bearing on what we should be. Maybe what we should be is an unattainable goal...but...."don't assault and/or harass your coworkers" seems to set the bar low. I think we can manage, no matter how sexy her red lipstick is. I've never had a problem in that regard. Have you? I'm guessing no.
(August 15, 2018 at 1:58 am)bennyboy Wrote: I would say the majority of women ARE cunts. This is not exactly because they are female, but because human beings are petty, spiteful and selfish, and are so very much because of the success of their cuntiness through millions of years of evolution.
This...those are the nice ones. The good girls. Woe betide the man who comes across a real ball buster. It was awhile back..but min once defined a misogynist as a man who hates women as much as other women hate women. Seems legit. I reserve a special category for people who go above and beyond that. I call them loons. Balls to the wall..and only to the wall..loons. Peterson is among them, his views appeal to them. His views appeal to other people too..granted, but they're still the same views.
-but what would I know. I'm a crypto marxist sjw.
Eh. . . it's a step up from "Fucking Nazi," "whuddryoulookingatfaggit," "witch," or "Republican."
(August 15, 2018 at 2:02 am)Khemikal Wrote:(August 15, 2018 at 1:58 am)bennyboy Wrote: My opinion of humanity overall is fairly negative. More and more, I'm convinced by Khemikal and others in their arguments about free will being illusory, and the "Well, what then?" is best answered by evolution-- we act as we do because that's what we are.
The trouble with this...and with peterson...is that even if this is what we are or were..it has no bearing on what we should be. Maybe what we should be is an unattainable goal...but...."don't assault and/or harass your coworkers" seems to set the bar low. I think we can manage, no matter how sexy her red lipstick is. I've never had a problem in that regard. Have you? I'm guessing no.
I'm not sure how much of this Peterson would disagree with. He doesn't seem to be on a rampage against lipstick. He's mainly focused on the fact that we've evolved to behave certain ways, some of them sexual, and ignoring that reality in favor of identity politics (a term he uses a lot) doesn't actually improve anything.
