jordan peterson

[YangYing]

1 hour ago, xox said:

I don’t know who this dave rubin is so I tried to find what’s wrong about him but I couldn’t understand exactly without spending too much time on the net investigating, too much contradicting informations... so, can you pls briefly explain it to me? 

You're better of not knowing probably.. he's just a giant idiot. Last I heard of him he was fully on the trump bandwagon and spewing all of that garbage of the election being fraudulent etc.

There is this mini series on him if you really care or want details on his idiocy..

 

[xox]

Is manliness still relevant?! 

[Cryptowen]

13 minutes ago, xox said:

Is manliness still relevant?!

like with any social construct, it is if enough people still feel like it represents something positive that they want to embody. Social relevancy isn't an objective binary which is determined once & for all, but rather a constant negotiation that is taking place across the entire social body, as certain ideas increase or diminish in relative influence amongst certain groups, and the definitions of those ideas gradually evolve as they are continuously dramatized by individual actors attempting to embody the role, moved from the realm of abstract potentials to concrete actualities. It's impossible to say if "manliness" is still relevant because manliness is going to mean completely different things for different people, whether they're trying to promote it or move away from it

[Limo]

20 minutes ago, Cryptowen said:

like with any social construct, it is if enough people still feel like it represents something positive that they want to embody. Social relevancy isn't an objective binary which is determined once & for all, but rather a constant negotiation that is taking place across the entire social body, as certain ideas increase or diminish in relative influence amongst certain groups, and the definitions of those ideas gradually evolve as they are continuously dramatized by individual actors attempting to embody the role, moved from the realm of abstract potentials to concrete actualities. It's impossible to say if "manliness" is still relevant because manliness is going to mean completely different things for different people, whether they're trying to promote it or move away from it

While this is generally true in the case of manliness in the West at least it’s fairly obvious the only people that feel it’s something they want to embody are those whose reserves of cultural and social capital are on the low side.

ie “losers”

 

[Silent Member]

what about childishness?

Proud boys, boogaloo boys etc... most of these guys are too old to pose as boys.

[usagi]

32 minutes ago, Cryptowen said:

like with any social construct, it is if enough people still feel like it represents something positive that they want to embody. Social relevancy isn't an objective binary which is determined once & for all, but rather a constant negotiation that is taking place across the entire social body, as certain ideas increase or diminish in relative influence amongst certain groups, and the definitions of those ideas gradually evolve as they are continuously dramatized by individual actors attempting to embody the role, moved from the realm of abstract potentials to concrete actualities. It's impossible to say if "manliness" is still relevant because manliness is going to mean completely different things for different people, whether they're trying to promote it or move away from it

yes, the problem is that no one knows or can agree on what it means to be "a man" in this time. some people would convince you it means stubbornly maintaining some kind of dickhead old-world aggression in the face of inevitable social change, while others would convince you it means giving up your spine completely and becoming a social NPC, told what to do with their life at every turn. nobody seems to have a healthy, balanced, universal, workable definition as far as I can see. I think that - besides some common underlying virtues such as self-responsibility, humility, integrity, good work ethic etc. - it's going to end up meaning different things for different men and it's going to take a process of individual discovery and negotiation to find the right personal answers. this is one reason why I find people with cheap, easy answers like JBP so distrustworthy. assuming in good faith he really does care altruistically about the plight of lost young men, the notion that you can tell them, as a collective, your take on reality and expect it to fulfil all their individual lives, provide them all with one common answer, is a joke. I think a core part of becoming a man in this age is the struggle to find your own answers and your own peace.

all of which means that it'll be a wicked problem to determine, at a social policy level, how to treat the problems of alienated, disadvantaged young men.

6 minutes ago, rhmilo said:

While this is generally true in the case of manliness in the West at least it’s fairly obvious the only people that feel it’s something they want to embody are those whose reserves of cultural and social capital are on the low side.

ie “losers”

you don't have to be a "loser" to want to know how to fulfil your life and your roles appropriately. that is how I view the question of "being a man" anyway, seems fundamental to me.

[Cryptowen]

10 minutes ago, usagi said:

you don't have to be a "loser" to want to know how to fulfil your life and your roles appropriately. that is how I view the question of "being a man" anyway, seems fundamental to me.

Yeah this. I want to better understand the positive potentialities of the thing I was born as & how to interpret the cultural heritage I've inherited, without simply rejecting it all out of hand. To me the question of masculinity isn't any particular set of behaviour traits (ie being an aggressive loudmouth) but rather the entire field of possibilities insofar as they relate to particular aspects of my biology & social conditioning. It's an open question, and not particular pre-defined traits. This idea that masculinity (or rather, some particular model of it) is exclusively something to be associated with toxicity, loserdom, throwbacks etc is a narrative that's being pushed by particular groups with particular ends, just like the idea that some other model of masculinity is inherently good, eternal, and should be aspired to by every member of the male sex.

[usagi]

agreed. 

2 minutes ago, Cryptowen said:

This idea that masculinity (or rather, some particular model of it) is exclusively something to be associated with toxicity, loserdom, throwbacks etc is a narrative that's being pushed by particular groups with particular ends, just like the idea that some other model of masculinity is inherently good, eternal, and should be aspired to by every member of the male sex.

it strikes me as overcorrection type risk. or I guess, overcorrection from the woke crowd, undercorrection from the conservative crowd.

[ignatius]

3 hours ago, zkom said:

No, for some reason I have multiple women as just only friends. Maybe I'm just plain ol' deeply closeted homosexual if I get so well along with women without hating them or constantly trying to bang them.

peterson did a long bit on alpha males and those weaker males who pretend to be allies of women because it's the only way they can get in their pants and procreate. I'm simplfying obviously. he goes back to cavemen and tribal human hunter gatherers for his example and brings that all the way forward to say that men who are allies of feminists are just weak non-alpha males trying to get close to women the only way they can since their non-alpha-ness limits their reproductive opportunities. 

this for me was one of the big red flags i had about him because what the fuck are you talking about peterson...  i also don't get his absolute bonkers reaction to post modernism. i mean.. i get how he takes it 3 steps or leaps down the road and makes it communism but i see no reason why existentialism can't exist within post modernism and it all is just brain mush and i don't care. 

wtf good morning can't sleep this blows. 

[cern]

Post Modern Neo-Marxism.. Describe that in one sentence if you can 

[ignatius]

8 minutes ago, cern said:

Post Modern Neo-Marxism.. Describe that in one sentence if you can 

 

Neo-Marxism is a Marxist school of thought encompassing 20th-century approaches that ... The terms neo-Marxian, post-Marxian, and radical political economics were first used to refer to a distinct tradition of economic theory in the 1970s and 1980s ... "Noam Chomsky and Marxism: On the roots of modern ' authoritarianism'.

 If at first you are baffled at what a ‘Postmodern Neo-Marxist’ is then you’re not alone, Peterson himself doesn’t even seem to be able to define it coherently and is used to describe an extremely diverse vague group of people from leftist groups, social justice activists, HR departments as well as universities and college campuses.

https://medium.com/@charlietaylor105/on-petersons-postmodern-neo-marxism-b33f6f425066

Edited March 5, 2021 by ignatius

[xox]

Nobody knows?! Who should tell us? you ppl would be able to relativize even your own existence! Let’s call it a extreme solipsism in a form of post modern watmmism!
Morality of masculinity and morality of femininity are not some social constructs that came out of thin air! Men and women knew and know exactly what they want from one another and if you cross reference within each group and between them you’ll find regular patterns of similarities and patterns of differences.

[chenGOD]

6 minutes ago, xox said:

Men and women knew and know exactly what they want from one another

That's a bold claim. lol

[ignatius]

3 minutes ago, xox said:

Nobody knows?! Who should tell us? you ppl would be able to relativize even your own existence! Let’s call it a extreme solipsism in a form of post modern watmmism!
Morality of masculinity and morality of femininity are not some social constructs that came out of thin air! Men and women knew and know exactly what they want from one another and if you cross reference within each group and between them you’ll find regular patterns of similarities and patterns of differences.

idk.. i mean.. some do but many do not know what they want from each other or even from themselves.

i think solipsism could be partly relieved by a move towards a more collective society where the individual's desires and needs don't outweigh the greater good. not in totality but a move in that direction a little bit i think would ease lot's of modern problems here in the ol USA. 

[xox]

5 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

That's a bold claim. lol

I know you understood me! Just stick with that and youll be able to stop your brain from over-relativizing basics of human interactions 

[chenGOD]

7 minutes ago, xox said:

I know you understood me! Just stick with that and youll be able to stop your brain from over-relativizing basics of human interactions 

Ummm I'm assuming you're talking about sexy time? Cause i gotta say, even that basic human interaction is fraught with pitfalls, and it always has been, at least for as long as I've been having sex, which is from like pre-history (did anything exist before the internet?).

[fxbip]

4 hours ago, MIXL2 said:

You're better of not knowing probably.. he's just a giant idiot. Last I heard of him he was fully on the trump bandwagon and spewing all of that garbage of the election being fraudulent etc.

There is this mini series on him if you really care or want details on his idiocy..

 

Into the third video and i want to throw up.

Dark shit.That Stefan nazi guy.

Ugh.

Edited March 5, 2021 by fxbip

[jaderpansen]

yeah i mean y would anyone be afraid of women taking over n shit? did you ever armwrestle one? lemme tell ya they're really weak imo arm like spaghetti LOL.

[Alcofribas]

1 hour ago, xox said:

Nobody knows?! Who should tell us? you ppl would be able to relativize even your own existence! Let’s call it a extreme solipsism in a form of post modern watmmism!
Morality of masculinity and morality of femininity are not some social constructs that came out of thin air! Men and women knew and know exactly what they want from one another and if you cross reference within each group and between them you’ll find regular patterns of similarities and patterns of differences.

what do you think the morality of gender is? 

[xox]

7 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

Ummm I'm assuming you're talking about sexy time? Cause i gotta say, even that basic human interaction is fraught with pitfalls, and it always has been, at least for as long as I've been having sex, which is from like pre-history (did anything exist before the internet?).

Actually not just about sex! Sex is just one (but important) aspect. 
How to solve your or my problem and how to solve society’s? 
..... I could write about this for months! But that would just be my personal lamentations! i even started with something in this post but I deleted it bc what’s the point really? (sorry, nothing personal!)
 

**plays ae**

**googles dank memes** 

[YangYing]

just merge w the old thread and lock pls

[ignatius]

5 minutes ago, MIXL2 said:

just merge w the old thread and lock pls

[xox]

4 minutes ago, Alcofribas said:

what do you think the morality of gender is? 

That’s easy... The morality of gender is to be that gender as best as you can.

The thing is that gender is only one part of your personality, we can only didactically see it as isolated from the rest the personality as a whole, and personality lives in the biopsycosocial model. So, to know what means to “be that gender” is only possible if we take into account everything that we know about humans and the world. The problem is that we today live in a society that’s unable to think holistically bc it’s hard and bc politics (it’s dangerous!). Science evidently can’t help us here and we see that theorists are either nonexistent in public (see above why) or they waste their time in political wars doing nothing worthwhile!

[jaderpansen]

8 minutes ago, xox said:

That’s easy... The morality of gender is to be that gender as best as you can.

think i need to self-check, where can i find the official gender swellness scale? link pls.

8 minutes ago, xox said:

we today live in a society

 

Edited March 5, 2021 by jaderpansen

[Alcofribas]

11 minutes ago, xox said:

That’s easy... The morality of gender is to be that gender as best as you can.

The thing is that gender is only one part of your personality, we can only didactically see it as isolated from the rest the personality as a whole, and personality lives in the biopsycosocial model. So, to know what means to “be that gender” is only possible if we take into account everything that we know about humans and the world. The problem is that we today live in a society that’s unable to think holistically bc it’s hard and bc politics (it’s dangerous!). Science evidently can’t help us here and we see that theorists are either nonexistent in public (see above why) or they waste their time in political wars doing nothing worthwhile!

if knowing the meaning of gender requires this vast scope of knowledge how are you so certain of the morality here? why should anyone care about "being a gender" and what does "being a gender" even mean? what are some examples of someone who is the best at being a gender?

i find it genuinely confusing to claim that it's "easy" to know to morally perform gender while simultaneously claiming understanding gender requires knowledge of the entire scope of humans and the world.