Political Discussions for "Adults"

~~jwb~~ · 08-09-2019, 03:11 PM

I mean... That sorta sounds like he's talking from a biological pov rather than a specific policy that is meant to restrict sexuality.

**Frownland** · 08-09-2019, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Have you read the Bell Curve Frown?

Only the free will part

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

I mean... That sorta sounds like he's talking from a biological pov rather than a specific policy that is meant to restrict sexuality.

Philosophers should communicate their ideas beyond a sorta. That's my key issue with Peterson.

Anyways, saying that there's a biological justification for restricting women's rights isn't really any better.

~~jwb~~ · 08-09-2019, 03:29 PM

That's really not what I'm getting from him though. I think he favors monogamy on a pragmatic level as a way to structure society. That doesn't require any actual restrictions imposed on sexuality, if the mechanism by which it is "enforced" is by cultural norms. That basically describes the society we already live in, for the most part.

I don't even really value monogamy that much myself, but I just think what he's actually saying is less sexist than you're reading into it.

OccultHawk · 08-09-2019, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Only the free will part

I haven’t either.

So what informed your opinion?

The Batlord · 08-09-2019, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

That's really not what I'm getting from him though. I think he favors monogamy on a pragmatic level as a way to structure society. That doesn't require any actual restrictions imposed on sexuality, if the mechanism by which it is "enforced" is by cultural norms. That basically describes the society we already live in, for the most part.

I don't even really value monogamy that much myself, but I just think what he's actually saying is less sexist than you're reading into it.

You know how easy it would be to just up and say straight out all of these things people are supposedly strawmanning him for? The fact that he doesn't and actively seems to avoid coming to the ****ing point implies that it's intentional, possibly either because his real beliefs are more right wing than he's comfortable admitting, or because he's got nothing and is just floating sensible sounding BS to sell books to rubes.

OccultHawk · 08-09-2019, 05:31 PM

Or maybe he calls it like he sees it and a hypersensitive subculture extrapolates their own conclusions and then gets worked up about **** he never even really said.

The Batlord · 08-09-2019, 05:41 PM

Bro I know leftists **** on your for calling black people monkeys but that's your damage.

OccultHawk · 08-09-2019, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug McClasky

Bro I know leftists **** on your for calling black people monkeys but that's your damage.

I like monkeys.

~~jwb~~ · 08-09-2019, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Or maybe he calls it like he sees it and a hypersensitive subculture extrapolates their own conclusions and then gets worked up about **** he never even really said.

That's what it seems like to me. There are plenty of real points to criticize him on but it seems like virtually everything he says gets put under the microscope and intentionally misinterpreted.

If it's so easy for him to just say the things you think he is saying, and he already gets blamed for saying them, then he really has no reason not to say them. Unless that's not what his real position is.

I tend to give him the benefit the doubt cause I'm so used to his critics misrepresenting everything he says.

The Batlord · 08-09-2019, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

That's what it seems like to me. There are plenty of real points to criticize him on but it seems like virtually everything he says gets put under the microscope and intentionally misinterpreted.

If it's so easy for him to just say the things you think he is saying, and he already gets blamed for saying them, then he really has no reason not to say them. Unless that's not what his real position is.

I tend to give him the benefit the doubt cause I'm so used to his critics misrepresenting everything he says.

I think you tend to give him the benefit of the doubt cause the people criticizing him are leftists.

08-09-2019, 05:31 PM	#2906 (permalink)
OccultHawk one-balled nipple jockey Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Dirty Souf Biatch Posts: 22,006	Or maybe he calls it like he sees it and a hypersensitive subculture extrapolates their own conclusions and then gets worked up about **** he never even really said. __________________ 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Member of the Year & Journal of the Year Champion Behold the Writing of THE LEGEND: https://www.musicbanter.com/members-...p-lighter.html

08-09-2019, 03:11 PM	#2901 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	I mean... That sorta sounds like he's talking from a biological pov rather than a specific policy that is meant to restrict sexuality.

08-09-2019, 03:29 PM	#2903 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	That's really not what I'm getting from him though. I think he favors monogamy on a pragmatic level as a way to structure society. That doesn't require any actual restrictions imposed on sexuality, if the mechanism by which it is "enforced" is by cultural norms. That basically describes the society we already live in, for the most part. I don't even really value monogamy that much myself, but I just think what he's actually saying is less sexist than you're reading into it.