Yes they did. Mesmerizing to watch.
Learning to play casino games seems quite a masculine thing to do, so the Atlantis tangent seems fine!
1 Like
I hate casinos. They are vile and evil places. I find a walk in the forest much more fulfilling.
3 Likes
Now thatâs manly!
quite Apt that they have the big lobster ripping to shreds the little lobster and gouging on its remains in the entranceâŚ
cue a @klopptomist story of seeing someone at the pokies not losing all of thier moneyâŚ(i jest mate)
Play poker weekly mate, Iâve seen lossâŚâŚ
Theyâre not when you hit repeatedly on a river-boat in New Orleans 
Granted still slightly hung over.
So this essay starts from the opposite question, but then if you search and replace âwomanâ by âmanâ, it will be as valid in most cases.
Itâs long and the basic idea is that woman / man are a cluster of traits and you can get closer or further to one cluster.
Thatâs a very good read. Possibly because it all lines up with my own thinking but does it better than I was trying to explain in another thread. Even covers klopptimists what if I want to be a brick âargumentâ.
Good stuff.
Those arenât his rules. They arenât original ideas. Common sense polished with academic language and anger
3 Likes
Can you stop using my name without tagging me in please? Thanks.
I think its time to move away from the Peterson debate - as somebody rightly mentioned this is fast becoming the Jordan Peterson thread.
I would add that I, along with over a million social media followers, 5 million readers of his books, and thousands of attendees at his numerous sold-out tours do not agree that he is dangerous or even a bad influence. Everyone, having considered and digested his work, is entitled to their own views.
Petersonâs âcrimeâ is giving listeners and students tools they can use to improve their lives and connecting these tools to literature, mythology, and clinical experience. I struggle to think of anyone whose views are so often, often deliberately (see Cathy Newman), misinterpreted, manipulated and/or misunderstood.
If this was some âhackâ who had produced pop psychology literature I would have more truck with the idea that he was a charlatan. He has impressive credentials - A bachelorâs degree in political science and psychology from the University of Alberta. A Ph.D. in clinical psychology from McGill University. A 5-year stint as a professor at Harvard before moving to the University of Toronto. His free recorded lectures at the University of Toronto have been viewed by more people than have ever attended the University. He is nearing the level of academic citations occupied by Nobel prize winners.
Other academics might not like what he says - but his credentials cannot be ignored. My thoughts are that his academic detractors bear a lot of resentment towards him fueled by ego and jealousy. They resent the fact that he has become the biggest lobster in the pool.
But all of the above is pretty much moot. As I mentioned in a previous post he is the âcounter-revolutionary.â Advocating individualism, not group think. Equality of opportunity not equality of outcome. Personal responsibility, not victimhood. Self-identity, not group labels. If you are part of the ârevolutionâ you will not and probably will never agree.
And that is good.
3 Likes
Thatâs you moving away from the Peterson debate? 
These are not revolutionary ideas. Standard in 6th form psychology and every social service and charity/NGO
Oh the irony
1 Like
When has he ever stated that his ideas are revolutionary? - The opposite in fact - he constantly states that he has drawn from historical texts, especially in terms of his writings on mythology.
You seem to be missing the point - Peterson is railing against the post-modernists. He is railing against some of the absurdities in the new âcultural revolutionâ He doesnât claim to have invented individualism, or equality of opportunity - he is re-stating them to an audience of predominantly young people caught up in the fog of social media, confusion and absurd expectations. He rails equally against illogical attitudes from both left and right (mostly left).
Have you read /actually listened to what he says?
Here is one of his âhatersâ
Thats it - no more - on JP from me. We can agree to disagree.
will let you have the last word. Jordan would be proud.
1 Like
But the problem with Peterson isâŚjust kidding
And if anyone was in doubt about what one of his fanboys looks like, they will probably repeatedly mention that heâs sold over 5 million books and assume that the only way you can have a negative opinion of him is if youâve never read/listened to him.
1 Like
The use of language.
Fanboy as a derogatory termâŚI was guilty of using it with Tory âfanboysâ to reduce their legitimacyâŚ
There is surely a better way than this? @BigJon states an unpopular viewpoint, so use divisive language to reduce his argument.
Actually the term âderanged fanboysâ was used earlier in the thread. I was actually trying to be polite by removing the deranged part.
4 Likes
1 Like