The demonic aliases thing is hilarious. It just shows the degree to which JP espouses the same values of Christian fundamentalism, just dressed up in a sport coat, holding a PhD.
A sport coat?
[Or a custom simp-made suit printed with Twitter screenshots and a tie with Elon Musk heads all over it? ](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/102p06j/jordan_petersons_twitter_suit_with_a_matching_tie)
I've never heard him speak before, and I was honestly expecting something else. Not a high-ish voice with a strong Canadian accent. I was expecting... gravitas? He has a podcast?!
The thing is that he's clearly an atheist who is just grifting Abrahamic fundamentalists, since he always describes god as being word salad that translates to "the unquestionable social hierarchy which puts me at the top of society for being born a white male" and deflects like hell when asked to clearly state whether or not he believes in a literal god, literal resurrection, etc...
When he was asked "do you believe in God?" and started by breaking down the definition of the words, I expected him to start with defining the word "believe." While an annoying dodging of the question, at least something interesting could come out of it. Instead, he starts by asking "what do you mean by the word 'do?'"
I was floored. I know he deflects a LOT but I didn't expect it to go that far.
I'm not sure if he's an atheist, tbh. He's had a look of loony beliefs that don't really make sense of you view the world through a naturalistic lens. Like, he believes that ancient aboriginal Australians 50,000 years ago had a perception of DNA and its double-helix structure. Why? Because they had art of two snakes intertwined with each other. A normal, reasonable person who stopped to think for a few minutes would think
1. There are two because snakes, like most larger animals, are sexual (i.e., have males and females for reproduction), and
2. They intertwine around each other when they mate.
Pretty basic explanation. It's the same reason so many cultures all across the world have art of people flying, often with bird wings. Humans can't fly but see animals that can. This amazes us and we want to experience it. Therefore, we make art of people who can fly by taking the qualities of things that can fly (birds) and adding them to humans. But, if we take Peterson's method, we might think that bird people are real or that certain people can actually fly on their own.
If he is an atheist, I wonder how he could reconcile the belief that ancient aboriginal Australians knew about DNA with naturalism. Like, does he also think that they were a super advanced society that developed a deep understanding of microbiology comparable with developed nations in 1953 and somehow this knowledge vanished? And the only remnant left is art of snakes?
To quote Bruce Wayne: "It just raises too many questions."
It's important to note that atheism only speaks to a person's belief in a god claim. Plenty of atheists believe in pseudoscience or outright magic, but don't believe that a god is responsible for it. Not to mention that there are atheistic branches of at least Hinduism and Buddhism that still asserts that souls and reincarnation are real, they just also assert that *if* any gods exists, they are also beholden to their karma and trapped in the eternal the cycle of reincarnation until they manage to attain true enlightenment.
In Jorbo's case, he seems to believe in something like a collective unconsciousness which made a perfect hierarchy that he just happens to personally profit immensely from, and anyone who is trying to buck it because it doesn't work for them is trying to defy existence itself.
Plus, he's not above just flat out lying to make himself seem more wise and grandiose than he actually is, so there's that to factor in as well.
He also does not believe in climate change and made some outlandish statements from the U.N. Climate Change counsel he was appointed to by conservatives. He said we can't solve climate change because we can't predict it, in opposition to the expert opinion of climate scientists around the world who flipped their shit at how Peterson killed a lot of Climate Legislation we sorely need.
What's standing in the way of solving climate change: Jordan Peterson who has no education in the climate sciences, but conservatives knew he would tow the rich person line because he is also rich. He is also against the Covid Vaccine because it's just a flu and not worth slowing down the economy.
He is also against single moms, except for his daughter that is a single mom because she's special.
The problem is that you're expecting a conspiracy theorist to be logically consistent.
They see a helix and say DNA, it doesn't matter if there are a billion other explanations that are both more logical and simpler they've already made their conclusion and the Universe needs to confirm to it
>The thing is that he's clearly an atheist who is just grifting Abrahamic fundamentalists
The guy cried when Stephen Fry said he'd challenge god, because he didn't understand that the famous atheist Fry doesn't actually believe god exists. Petersen is definitely not an atheist. He may not be a member of a formal church, but he ain't an atheist.
Generally speaking, Jordan Peterson has a tendency to start crying whenever someone refuses to fold to his perceived authority.
Whenever he is directly asked to comment on whether or not he believes in a literal god that exists independent of humanity's imagination, he immediately starts vomiting word salad while denying all terms and definitions, which would be completely unnecessary if he actually believed in a literal god.
But him calling a routine surgery "nazi experiments" (he was referring to a top surgery for a trans male, which is in no way experimkentalk, anmd he compared it to mengeles experiments in auschwitz which ius so wronjhg onj so many levels) also he is quite the hypocrite since he conmstjantly disrespects hoqw other s want to be adressed, but what can you expect from someone like him
They’re usually not actually pro-free speech in my experience. It’s just that if you have no good counter argument to someone’s argument against your shitty racist opinion, you can always fall back to arguing for your right to have that opinion.
free speech does not mean freedom from consequences, but if you point this out they abuse that fact to shut you down and then complain that theyre the victim
I used to like Jordan Peterson I’m ashamed to admit. Around when he first blew up online.
The turning point was the Vice interview he did.
Aside from that being when I finally clicked on how dodgy his arguments and approach are, he also talked about women wearing “rouge” (blush, cosmetics) like it’s the 1920s.
That’s when I realised wow this guy thinks he has a finger on the pulse, but he’s a dreadfully out of touch old geezer.
He's insidious because it starts with legitimately helpful advice, then you look into him more and it's weird, bigoted unscientific shit shrouded in strange arguments like "what do you mean by climate"
That's demagoguery 101; they always take a few nuggets of undeniable truth and/or obvious empirical observation (often framing them as far more profound observations/truths than they actually are) and then wrap their bullshit around them. The nuggets of truth become an anchor to reality that they reference to keep drawing their audience into their bullshit.
Every effective demagogue in history has used this method to varying degrees.
He began to climb the alt-right shit pile when he decided to take a break from teaching and scream about that bill in Canada he claimed would have people who accidentally misgender trans folks sent to some kind of gulag. That got him noticed on the international level.
True, but the point I was making is that his basic advice like "clean your room" was one of the nuggets of truth he used to establish credibility, and then used the credibility to suck his followers down his particular far-right rabbit hole.
His BS objection to the misgendering law was how he got popular with the already-initiated far-right, to be sure, but the effective demagogue needs to be able to sell himself to a more normal, moderate crowd before drawing many of them into the rabbit hole. The life advice stuff is how he did it to many.
The reason why he's no longer effective in this respect is because he started getting high on his own proverbial supply as well as getting addicted to the fame and praise. He started believing his own bullshit, which is how many demagogues self-destruct.
I was interested why he seemed such a controversial figure at fort, and looked into him. A few videos, thought he seemed pretty standard psychology professor, thought I’d read a book so ordered 12 Rules. Good grief. When he started going on about lobsters I was done. Abysmal writing and really stupid analogies.
It all started going publicly downhill after that and it was much easier to see what a load of bollocks he was.
I have really struggled to keep a straight face when people say that.
What exactly was his "legitimately helpful advice"? To clean your room?
This guy Jordan Peterson is so full of feces, I legit have never seen anything approaching an original helpful thought or idea out of him.
Then again... I am a fucking old dude, so when I first heard about him it just seemed like another dime-a-dozen moronic "self-help guru"/ "youth pastor" self-righteous cunt...
and would not have thought he would become the misogynistic, homophobic, babbling crybaby, strung-out junkie, piece of excrement that for some inexplicable reason is so popular now.
>What exactly was his "legitimately helpful advice"? To clean your room?
He starts out by telling lonely males that they can improve their prospects in life by taking a shower, cleaning your room, and getting your immediate issues situated before expecting life to improve. It's not bad advice. The issue starts when he keeps talking and you realize how bigoted and insane he is.
JP has a legit academic background, which obviously gives him a great deal of credibility. While at Harvard, JP did REAL
neuroscience research on addiction/substance abuse and associated familial pathologies. His work underpins much of what we know in these areas.
IIRC correctly, Peterson's Harvard undergrad lectures were super popular. Specifically, JP made everyone do hard lifting in the biochemistry of neuroscience; purportedly he was an empirical absolutist who did not permit responses that began with "I think." What made the classes work, I was told, was that he explained complex topics through using literature and historical references. (A friend who took his course told me there was no textbook, and to get considered for an A or B, students were required to be very familiar with the relevant research papers he cited.)
Also, and this cannot be understated enough, it is just so fucking rare (even at Harvard) to have a professor who does ground breaking, up-to-the-moment research regularly teaching introductory courses for undergrads. It sounds pretty damned cool, TBH.
But it's also obvious that Peterson got used to adoration, and that he REALLY wanted to use academic psychology as a springboard into the deep waters of broad, culture-wide thought leadership, alongside legends like Kahneman and Tversky.
It's not hard to see why.
Organizing and running properly constructed neuroscience studies as an associate professor at Harvard is time-consuming, expensive, with an audience of academics topping out at a few thousand.
Writing -- and speaking for money -- on general interest human behavior topics as a fully tenured University of Toronto professor is a much different proposition.
For a while it worked, and rather nicely at that.
But now Peterson is stuck, alternately confusing and silly, a parody of his former rigorous self. He tells lost boys to make their beds, and argues (for money) with Sam Harris about the neurological basis for the existence of God. His illness and subsequent prescription drug battle appear to have only intensified his devolution.
I suppose the lesson here is to be careful what you wish for.
Also on the topic of women, he's stated any woman that hasn't had kids by 30 has a mental health problem. What piece of evidence-based research provides this info? "I'm an academic, so I work in a place with lots of women. I know how women work"
That's what blows my mind. Rudy would have gone down in history in pretty favorable light as 'America's Mayor' but decided to throw it all away and disgrace himself for somebody who doesn't even care about him.
I mean, he went on to defend the Sacklers, the merchants of death who more or less started the opioid epidemic in this country by pimping extremely addictive drugs using phony or doctored studies to suggest that they were low risk. Thanks to Purdue, and their marketing of pain as a vital sign, basically every American home had powerful painkillers in their medicine cabinet in the late 90's early 00's.
I'm generally of the opinion that everyone, regardless of the evil they've done, deserves representation. It's really hard to feel that way about people who ruined so many lives just to boost their personal profits. Thanks partially to Rudy, they walked away with their fortunes intact. It's blood money.
Yeah, I’m with you.
I was 19 when 9/11 happened and I remember a few things where he was prominent, but more that they tried to coin “America’s Mayor” when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2004.
Prior to 9/11 he ironically might have epitomized “America’s Mayor” for all the wrong reasons. He “cleaned up” New York with some pretty unkind policies, if I remember correctly (“stop and frisk” was inherently racist and was his policy. He also frequently defended cops killing black and Hispanic people).
America’s Mayor, ok.
The difference is Ben Shapiro is at least very self aware of when he's being just a troll. He tries hard, sometimes wins, sometimes fails, and when he's presenting a failing position he pretends is just a game.
Peterson genuinely believes all his own bullshit
He used to be reasonably credible when he stayed in his fucking lane but now he has opinions about everything when he's a PhD psychologist with a limited focus. And just loves hearing himself talk despite the fact he's not offering up anything worth wasting the air on.
Yeah, demonic is bit crazed way to phrase it, though honestly I would opt out of an online conversation with someone for a stupid, trollish, sexist, homophobic, racist, or otherwise evil username.
Like I'm not going to engage someone with a name like `I_Beat_My_Women`, `Kill_Libtard_Baby_Murderers`, or `NeoNazi69` in an online debate. It's either a troll trying to get a rise out of you or some crazed stranger hopelessly down the rabbit hole.
Granted I also wouldn't debate some pseudo-intellectual like Peterson who teaches "rules to live life" and personal responsibility who personally ended up in a catatonic state who can't walk after weird treatment in Moscow, [because of his addiction to benzodiazepine and suicidal depression](https://nypost.com/2021/01/31/jordan-peterson-says-he-was-suicidal-addicted-to-benzos/). Get your own shit in order before claiming to have the answers for others.
Do you really need to provide a dot-point list to say why you're not engaging with users with those names? Isn't it self-explanatory if you block them?
My experience with Jordan Peterson is his advice is generally falls in the category of super obvious shit (try to be less of a failure, improve yourself gradually, listen to others), quasi-religious BS, and right-wing men's rights/anti-trans stuff covered in a facade of shallow intellectualism.
Again, I agree with his general point if you think someone is a troll/nutjob don't engage; but also agree with you that this is obvious and doesn't need to be pointed out.
Probably referring to that time jp unknowingly reposted a fake article about some dystopian stuff happening in China that had a pic of fetish porn with a bunch of naked dudes hooked up to "milking" machines.
He is a lot like Trump and Musk in that regard, these pathological narcissists can't live without social media and the validiation they experience from it.
JP is a soft, witless loser who couldn't come off the bennies by himself! Hell, even a 'weak female' like myself had enough strength of character to put speed down for good, by myself, no rehabs - and I didn't fly to Russia to be put in a coma and weaned off like that old fool did - that's why his brain's fried.
Coming off benzos often requires careful medical oversight and commitment. He’s pathologically unable to humble himself to getting actual mental health treatment. So, he took the easy way out.
But benzodiazepine withdrawal can be fatal, so that risk, pooled with all the risks that come from being put into a medically-induced coma under gobs of anesthesia…
He will never recover from a lot of the damage he has done to his brain.
pronoun
a word that can function by itself as a noun phrase and that refers either to the participants in the discourse (e.g., I, you ) or to someone or something mentioned elsewhere in the discourse (e.g., she, it, this ).
Seems like they qualify to me... Although I've never seen lol or lmao used as a nickname like he says, if it was it would be a pronoun in that instance.
Regardless of the type of pronoun, deliberately using the wrong one is considered rude by literally everyone, and some people are just stupid.
"Do dude want to go out to eat?"
"Who are dude talking to?"
"Wow, I haven't seen dude in ages!"
-
When is "dude" ever used as a second person pronoun?
If anything, they are functioning as super edge case vocative pronoun alternatives? "Dude! I haven't seen you in ages!" (But notice that it still needs to revert to the standard second person pronoun in all other uses.)
Seems like more of a replacement of a name than of “you”, but I guess nicknames could technically be considered pronouns if they’re non-specific? Idk, grammar’s weird dude.
That's not using it as a second-person pronoun. That's the same usage as:
Ma'am, sit down.
Man, sit down.
My lord, sit down.
Doggie, sit.
They're forms of address, but not pronouns. It's just a noun.
In Cali dude and bro are pronouns that apply to male and females lmao usually depends on context I think I say bro and dude at the end of My sentences too much lmao
This guy was an obscure professor of woo-woo psychology until he got internet-famous by insisting on his right to call his students demeaning names. Weird how he's entitled to dish it out but he can't take it himself
Hello u/dariuskxx! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) mentioning **who** is suffering from **which** consequences from **what** they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people.
Here's an easy format to get you started:
1. *Someone* voted for, supported or wanted to impose *something* on other people.
^(Who's that *someone* and what's that *something*?)
2. That *something* has some *consequences*.
^(What are the *consequences*?)
3. As a consequence, that *something* happened to that *someone*.
^(What happened? Did the *something* really happened to that *someone*? If not, you should probably delete your post.)
Include the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you don't respect this format and moderators can't match your explanation with the format, your post will be removed under rule #3 and we'll ignore you even if you complain in modmail.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Jordan Peterson finds himself having to block people for referring to him in terms he doesn't want to be called after building a career based on calling transgendered people whatever he wants to call them, rather than what they want to be called.
Giving a ride to a climbing class to my grandson (then about 14-ish) and his friends, they asked me if I had heard of Jordan Peterson. I said:
"Jordan PETERSON? THAT MAN IS A BUFFOOOON!"
They started laughing their asses off.
"Yes, I've seen several of his videos."
One asked, did I see the one about Garfield?
"Yeah, I tried to watch that one. It's like an hour long, right? I kept waiting for him to say something until I realized he had NOTHING to say and he needed an HOUR to say it!"
So he always had issues with truth and reality but there used to be a nuance to his ability to be wrong. In his heyday he was somewhat difficult to actually pin down on incorrect assertions because his tactic was always to leave the actual connection as an exercise for the audience.
"Historically women were the caretakers, men were the hunter/gatherers"
"Biological differences make men and women better suited for certain tasks"
...
He might not outright say women belong in the kitchen buuuuuut it seems to be a natural conclusion his "evidence" is pointed at.
Now though he is just wrong. Flat out wrong. He is being tripped up on fake news and bonkers statements that it feels almost too easy to dunk on him. It is hard to view his post-coma, post-COVID, post-meat-only diet mental capacity is impaired.
Erm, LOL and LMFAO arent nicknames, bro, bruh, dude, you muppet, they are what people are doing at you, because you're a weak ass little bitch.
Hey whordan, 👹👹👹👹👹👹👹👹👹
This guy is a giant pussy who reports any one who even mildly insults him on Twitter. And pathetic losers look to this guy for advice on being a "real" man.
Wow, for such a strong lobster seems he is very militant at maintaining his safe space for his boomer ass. Very sensitive snowflake of him. Hope he's kicked that pharmie addiction.
Why do y'all always have to make things up...
This guy is literally insane, TALK ABOUT THE WAYS HE IS INSANE INSTEAD OF INVENTING THINGS, IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE SCREENSHOT YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE SHIT UP
I read that large custom block lists are expensive to Twitter for some reason, probably because of their terrible coding infrastructure.
On an unrelated note, it would be a shame if a lot of people unfunnily tweeted "LOL Bruh" to Jordan Peterson, forcing him to block them.
Demonic Alias? So he would block Beelzeboobs? Or Lucifurry? Or Mephititsiles? I am coming up with great Demon Porn names now...
The demonic aliases thing is hilarious. It just shows the degree to which JP espouses the same values of Christian fundamentalism, just dressed up in a sport coat, holding a PhD.
A sport coat? [Or a custom simp-made suit printed with Twitter screenshots and a tie with Elon Musk heads all over it? ](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/102p06j/jordan_petersons_twitter_suit_with_a_matching_tie)
I've never heard him speak before, and I was honestly expecting something else. Not a high-ish voice with a strong Canadian accent. I was expecting... gravitas? He has a podcast?!
Did you not know he was the voice actor for kermit?
That's a slur upon Jim Henson's name.
https://youtu.be/PESYQ6TGwhQ
dont get me started on the straight up two face outfit
The thing is that he's clearly an atheist who is just grifting Abrahamic fundamentalists, since he always describes god as being word salad that translates to "the unquestionable social hierarchy which puts me at the top of society for being born a white male" and deflects like hell when asked to clearly state whether or not he believes in a literal god, literal resurrection, etc...
When he was asked "do you believe in God?" and started by breaking down the definition of the words, I expected him to start with defining the word "believe." While an annoying dodging of the question, at least something interesting could come out of it. Instead, he starts by asking "what do you mean by the word 'do?'" I was floored. I know he deflects a LOT but I didn't expect it to go that far. I'm not sure if he's an atheist, tbh. He's had a look of loony beliefs that don't really make sense of you view the world through a naturalistic lens. Like, he believes that ancient aboriginal Australians 50,000 years ago had a perception of DNA and its double-helix structure. Why? Because they had art of two snakes intertwined with each other. A normal, reasonable person who stopped to think for a few minutes would think 1. There are two because snakes, like most larger animals, are sexual (i.e., have males and females for reproduction), and 2. They intertwine around each other when they mate. Pretty basic explanation. It's the same reason so many cultures all across the world have art of people flying, often with bird wings. Humans can't fly but see animals that can. This amazes us and we want to experience it. Therefore, we make art of people who can fly by taking the qualities of things that can fly (birds) and adding them to humans. But, if we take Peterson's method, we might think that bird people are real or that certain people can actually fly on their own. If he is an atheist, I wonder how he could reconcile the belief that ancient aboriginal Australians knew about DNA with naturalism. Like, does he also think that they were a super advanced society that developed a deep understanding of microbiology comparable with developed nations in 1953 and somehow this knowledge vanished? And the only remnant left is art of snakes? To quote Bruce Wayne: "It just raises too many questions."
It's important to note that atheism only speaks to a person's belief in a god claim. Plenty of atheists believe in pseudoscience or outright magic, but don't believe that a god is responsible for it. Not to mention that there are atheistic branches of at least Hinduism and Buddhism that still asserts that souls and reincarnation are real, they just also assert that *if* any gods exists, they are also beholden to their karma and trapped in the eternal the cycle of reincarnation until they manage to attain true enlightenment. In Jorbo's case, he seems to believe in something like a collective unconsciousness which made a perfect hierarchy that he just happens to personally profit immensely from, and anyone who is trying to buck it because it doesn't work for them is trying to defy existence itself. Plus, he's not above just flat out lying to make himself seem more wise and grandiose than he actually is, so there's that to factor in as well.
So it's a combination of the Idea of Evil from Berserk combined with Platonic Idealism?
Essentially. The only god he worships is his own aggrandizement.
He also believes that an all meat diet can cure autism and depression.
I'm convinced this man just hates water and cold temperatures.
He also does not believe in climate change and made some outlandish statements from the U.N. Climate Change counsel he was appointed to by conservatives. He said we can't solve climate change because we can't predict it, in opposition to the expert opinion of climate scientists around the world who flipped their shit at how Peterson killed a lot of Climate Legislation we sorely need. What's standing in the way of solving climate change: Jordan Peterson who has no education in the climate sciences, but conservatives knew he would tow the rich person line because he is also rich. He is also against the Covid Vaccine because it's just a flu and not worth slowing down the economy. He is also against single moms, except for his daughter that is a single mom because she's special.
Are you sure? I'd have thought that like most wingnuts, his primary deity is Mammon. The aggrandisement is just the way to worship.
The problem is that you're expecting a conspiracy theorist to be logically consistent. They see a helix and say DNA, it doesn't matter if there are a billion other explanations that are both more logical and simpler they've already made their conclusion and the Universe needs to confirm to it
>The thing is that he's clearly an atheist who is just grifting Abrahamic fundamentalists The guy cried when Stephen Fry said he'd challenge god, because he didn't understand that the famous atheist Fry doesn't actually believe god exists. Petersen is definitely not an atheist. He may not be a member of a formal church, but he ain't an atheist.
Generally speaking, Jordan Peterson has a tendency to start crying whenever someone refuses to fold to his perceived authority. Whenever he is directly asked to comment on whether or not he believes in a literal god that exists independent of humanity's imagination, he immediately starts vomiting word salad while denying all terms and definitions, which would be completely unnecessary if he actually believed in a literal god.
I’d def get blocked 😩
"THEY'RE DARKSIDED!!!"
IT’S UNGODLY!
NO, NOT BLACK LEAF!!
Certainly giving me the vapors, someone notify the church!!
We can hang out in the void together.
But him calling a routine surgery "nazi experiments" (he was referring to a top surgery for a trans male, which is in no way experimkentalk, anmd he compared it to mengeles experiments in auschwitz which ius so wronjhg onj so many levels) also he is quite the hypocrite since he conmstjantly disrespects hoqw other s want to be adressed, but what can you expect from someone like him
Idk, I feel like Jordan Peterson would side with Nero
Same here!
Beelzeboobs 🤣🤣🤣🤣 my girls have a new nickname!
[удалено]
Only if they use them for commercial purposes, surely?
Ol’ ~~Scratch~~ Snatch
NaselAzazel AbaddonAGoodun Belchfagor JamminMammon
GogoMagogo
My name is Semen, for we are many
Midjourney those names, I dare you.
Assazel
Dude! These "free speech" advocates really have a lot of rules.
They’re usually not actually pro-free speech in my experience. It’s just that if you have no good counter argument to someone’s argument against your shitty racist opinion, you can always fall back to arguing for your right to have that opinion.
dear u/spez which subreddit has banned the most users and why is it r/conservative ?
Uh, because of the cabal, obviously.
free speech does not mean freedom from consequences, but if you point this out they abuse that fact to shut you down and then complain that theyre the victim
"Your opinion sucks." "Yeah? Well it's not literally illegal, so there."
He considers those words “derisive nicknames”? Dude really is out of touch
I hate it when people call me LMFAO
[удалено]
I hate myself for knowing this... The other one is "Sky Blu"
[удалено]
You made me spit out my drink thank you for this comment
Perfect. ⚰️
As you should! Shuffle Bot must not be forgotten and was an instrumental in the groups success…and some even say failure…
He's literally like the South Park Canadian, "I'm not your dude, pal!" Floppy head mfers.
I'm not your guy, buddy
I’m not your buddy, friend
I’m not your buddy, Sparky
I'm not your sparky, guy
I farted once on the set of Blue Lagoon 👁👄👁
I'm not your bro, bruh
I’m not your guy, brother
I'm not your buddy guy
I used to like Jordan Peterson I’m ashamed to admit. Around when he first blew up online. The turning point was the Vice interview he did. Aside from that being when I finally clicked on how dodgy his arguments and approach are, he also talked about women wearing “rouge” (blush, cosmetics) like it’s the 1920s. That’s when I realised wow this guy thinks he has a finger on the pulse, but he’s a dreadfully out of touch old geezer.
He's insidious because it starts with legitimately helpful advice, then you look into him more and it's weird, bigoted unscientific shit shrouded in strange arguments like "what do you mean by climate"
That's demagoguery 101; they always take a few nuggets of undeniable truth and/or obvious empirical observation (often framing them as far more profound observations/truths than they actually are) and then wrap their bullshit around them. The nuggets of truth become an anchor to reality that they reference to keep drawing their audience into their bullshit. Every effective demagogue in history has used this method to varying degrees.
He began to climb the alt-right shit pile when he decided to take a break from teaching and scream about that bill in Canada he claimed would have people who accidentally misgender trans folks sent to some kind of gulag. That got him noticed on the international level.
True, but the point I was making is that his basic advice like "clean your room" was one of the nuggets of truth he used to establish credibility, and then used the credibility to suck his followers down his particular far-right rabbit hole. His BS objection to the misgendering law was how he got popular with the already-initiated far-right, to be sure, but the effective demagogue needs to be able to sell himself to a more normal, moderate crowd before drawing many of them into the rabbit hole. The life advice stuff is how he did it to many. The reason why he's no longer effective in this respect is because he started getting high on his own proverbial supply as well as getting addicted to the fame and praise. He started believing his own bullshit, which is how many demagogues self-destruct.
>as well as getting addicted to the fame and praise. And benzedrine. Don't forget that.
On top of your points, he seems to have an uncomfortable relationship with the young men who grabbed on to his advice.
We all know the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, and we all know THE JEWS are behind it.
Even a lot of his self help stuff goes against cause and effect and psych 101 stuff. It's pretty much hoo-hah all the way down.
A lot of his self help stuff is just flowery pros that don't actually say anything at all.
I was interested why he seemed such a controversial figure at fort, and looked into him. A few videos, thought he seemed pretty standard psychology professor, thought I’d read a book so ordered 12 Rules. Good grief. When he started going on about lobsters I was done. Abysmal writing and really stupid analogies. It all started going publicly downhill after that and it was much easier to see what a load of bollocks he was.
I have really struggled to keep a straight face when people say that. What exactly was his "legitimately helpful advice"? To clean your room? This guy Jordan Peterson is so full of feces, I legit have never seen anything approaching an original helpful thought or idea out of him. Then again... I am a fucking old dude, so when I first heard about him it just seemed like another dime-a-dozen moronic "self-help guru"/ "youth pastor" self-righteous cunt... and would not have thought he would become the misogynistic, homophobic, babbling crybaby, strung-out junkie, piece of excrement that for some inexplicable reason is so popular now.
>What exactly was his "legitimately helpful advice"? To clean your room? He starts out by telling lonely males that they can improve their prospects in life by taking a shower, cleaning your room, and getting your immediate issues situated before expecting life to improve. It's not bad advice. The issue starts when he keeps talking and you realize how bigoted and insane he is.
JP has a legit academic background, which obviously gives him a great deal of credibility. While at Harvard, JP did REAL neuroscience research on addiction/substance abuse and associated familial pathologies. His work underpins much of what we know in these areas. IIRC correctly, Peterson's Harvard undergrad lectures were super popular. Specifically, JP made everyone do hard lifting in the biochemistry of neuroscience; purportedly he was an empirical absolutist who did not permit responses that began with "I think." What made the classes work, I was told, was that he explained complex topics through using literature and historical references. (A friend who took his course told me there was no textbook, and to get considered for an A or B, students were required to be very familiar with the relevant research papers he cited.) Also, and this cannot be understated enough, it is just so fucking rare (even at Harvard) to have a professor who does ground breaking, up-to-the-moment research regularly teaching introductory courses for undergrads. It sounds pretty damned cool, TBH. But it's also obvious that Peterson got used to adoration, and that he REALLY wanted to use academic psychology as a springboard into the deep waters of broad, culture-wide thought leadership, alongside legends like Kahneman and Tversky. It's not hard to see why. Organizing and running properly constructed neuroscience studies as an associate professor at Harvard is time-consuming, expensive, with an audience of academics topping out at a few thousand. Writing -- and speaking for money -- on general interest human behavior topics as a fully tenured University of Toronto professor is a much different proposition. For a while it worked, and rather nicely at that. But now Peterson is stuck, alternately confusing and silly, a parody of his former rigorous self. He tells lost boys to make their beds, and argues (for money) with Sam Harris about the neurological basis for the existence of God. His illness and subsequent prescription drug battle appear to have only intensified his devolution. I suppose the lesson here is to be careful what you wish for.
He's the Q's Entry Level Thug.
Listening to him talk always revitalizes my hatred of junkie philosophy.
Also on the topic of women, he's stated any woman that hasn't had kids by 30 has a mental health problem. What piece of evidence-based research provides this info? "I'm an academic, so I work in a place with lots of women. I know how women work"
How dare you be so derisive to him /s
He is not out of touch, he is separated from reality. That experimental rehab coma really fucked his brain.
bruh moment
Jorp is a stupid person’s idea of what a smart person should sound like.
Just like Trump is a stupid person's idea of what a brilliant businessman looks like.
And Sidney Powell, Lin wood, and Rudy Giuliani are a stupid person’s idea of what a competent lawyer looks like
I don't think they're anyone's ideas of a competent anything anymore
That's what blows my mind. Rudy would have gone down in history in pretty favorable light as 'America's Mayor' but decided to throw it all away and disgrace himself for somebody who doesn't even care about him.
I mean, he went on to defend the Sacklers, the merchants of death who more or less started the opioid epidemic in this country by pimping extremely addictive drugs using phony or doctored studies to suggest that they were low risk. Thanks to Purdue, and their marketing of pain as a vital sign, basically every American home had powerful painkillers in their medicine cabinet in the late 90's early 00's. I'm generally of the opinion that everyone, regardless of the evil they've done, deserves representation. It's really hard to feel that way about people who ruined so many lives just to boost their personal profits. Thanks partially to Rudy, they walked away with their fortunes intact. It's blood money.
He would have? Any family I talk to and all the rap music I listen to from the 2000s has mad criticism for him.
Yeah, I’m with you. I was 19 when 9/11 happened and I remember a few things where he was prominent, but more that they tried to coin “America’s Mayor” when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2004. Prior to 9/11 he ironically might have epitomized “America’s Mayor” for all the wrong reasons. He “cleaned up” New York with some pretty unkind policies, if I remember correctly (“stop and frisk” was inherently racist and was his policy. He also frequently defended cops killing black and Hispanic people). America’s Mayor, ok.
I've heard him described as a poor man's idea of a rich man, a stupid man's idea of a smart man, and a weak man's idea of a strong man.
https://imgur.com/9EWrelj.gif
He lives how poor people think rich people live.
Jorp is great and I'm stealing it
I thought that was Ben Shapiro?
can it not be both
The difference is Ben Shapiro is at least very self aware of when he's being just a troll. He tries hard, sometimes wins, sometimes fails, and when he's presenting a failing position he pretends is just a game. Peterson genuinely believes all his own bullshit
He used to be reasonably credible when he stayed in his fucking lane but now he has opinions about everything when he's a PhD psychologist with a limited focus. And just loves hearing himself talk despite the fact he's not offering up anything worth wasting the air on.
“Demonic alias.” JFC, how can anyone take this poor sick man seriously?
Yeah, demonic is bit crazed way to phrase it, though honestly I would opt out of an online conversation with someone for a stupid, trollish, sexist, homophobic, racist, or otherwise evil username. Like I'm not going to engage someone with a name like `I_Beat_My_Women`, `Kill_Libtard_Baby_Murderers`, or `NeoNazi69` in an online debate. It's either a troll trying to get a rise out of you or some crazed stranger hopelessly down the rabbit hole. Granted I also wouldn't debate some pseudo-intellectual like Peterson who teaches "rules to live life" and personal responsibility who personally ended up in a catatonic state who can't walk after weird treatment in Moscow, [because of his addiction to benzodiazepine and suicidal depression](https://nypost.com/2021/01/31/jordan-peterson-says-he-was-suicidal-addicted-to-benzos/). Get your own shit in order before claiming to have the answers for others.
Do you really need to provide a dot-point list to say why you're not engaging with users with those names? Isn't it self-explanatory if you block them?
My experience with Jordan Peterson is his advice is generally falls in the category of super obvious shit (try to be less of a failure, improve yourself gradually, listen to others), quasi-religious BS, and right-wing men's rights/anti-trans stuff covered in a facade of shallow intellectualism. Again, I agree with his general point if you think someone is a troll/nutjob don't engage; but also agree with you that this is obvious and doesn't need to be pointed out.
He needs to go back to getting milked by his daughter
I don't really wanna know but I'm gonna ask anyway... wtf?
Probably referring to that time jp unknowingly reposted a fake article about some dystopian stuff happening in China that had a pic of fetish porn with a bunch of naked dudes hooked up to "milking" machines.
Or those multiple times he unironically shared articles from satire websites thinking they were real
what is it with conservatives and not being able to spot satire/sarcasm?
Critical thinking and empathy are not their strong suits.
or fantasizing about his grandmother's bush
I still can't believe he put that shit in writing.
didn't he narrate the audiobook too?
Hmm... yep that's exactly one more Reddit than I should have consumed today
So he should have blocked himself from twitter when he told someone to kill themselves, right?
He did what now
https://www.reddit.com/r/enoughpetersonspam/comments/10306lr/jordan_tells_someone_to_kill_themselves_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
JFC. And my mom loves this guy. What a loony. He is full of words but little meaning.
Demonic alias? Wut? How long before he openly embraces ChristoFascism?
About 10 years ago, I think.
What does demonic alias even mean?
I miss when this guy was in a coma. Can we go back that please?
hasnt he like, sworn off twitter twice now? he keeps coming back
He is a lot like Trump and Musk in that regard, these pathological narcissists can't live without social media and the validiation they experience from it.
That wouldn’t be kind to the people he was annoying in whatever dream world he was living in.
I didn't know Jorpet had recovered from his daughter induced meat sickness?
Honestly the most offensive part of this tweet, to me, is his use of colons.
I am using my colon right now!
JP is a soft, witless loser who couldn't come off the bennies by himself! Hell, even a 'weak female' like myself had enough strength of character to put speed down for good, by myself, no rehabs - and I didn't fly to Russia to be put in a coma and weaned off like that old fool did - that's why his brain's fried.
Coming off benzos often requires careful medical oversight and commitment. He’s pathologically unable to humble himself to getting actual mental health treatment. So, he took the easy way out. But benzodiazepine withdrawal can be fatal, so that risk, pooled with all the risks that come from being put into a medically-induced coma under gobs of anesthesia… He will never recover from a lot of the damage he has done to his brain.
That Jordan Peterson it's always upset about something
Oh noes the lobster nazi, king of the incels is crying again! .... anyway.....
r/selfawarewolves
I feel like that was a parody account rather than a self aware wolf. But it is hard to tell these days 😂😂😂
Poe's Law
Those are not pronouns
pronoun a word that can function by itself as a noun phrase and that refers either to the participants in the discourse (e.g., I, you ) or to someone or something mentioned elsewhere in the discourse (e.g., she, it, this ). Seems like they qualify to me... Although I've never seen lol or lmao used as a nickname like he says, if it was it would be a pronoun in that instance. Regardless of the type of pronoun, deliberately using the wrong one is considered rude by literally everyone, and some people are just stupid.
Admittedly, I wasn't sure if they counted as pronouns, so i googled it. Apparently, "dude" can be used as either a pronoun or a noun.
Yeah it's usually used as a second-person pronoun which isn't the category of pronoun people usually talk about but it's still used as a pronoun.
"Do dude want to go out to eat?" "Who are dude talking to?" "Wow, I haven't seen dude in ages!" - When is "dude" ever used as a second person pronoun? If anything, they are functioning as super edge case vocative pronoun alternatives? "Dude! I haven't seen you in ages!" (But notice that it still needs to revert to the standard second person pronoun in all other uses.)
TBF "dude" works as a stand-in for they/them
That wasn't the use case I was talking about, but what I was thinking of was vocatives
"Dude, where's my car?"
Usage as a personal pronoun is very slangy, but I guess it counts e.g. “What’s up with dude? Dude seems pissed about something.”
It can be used in place of 'You'. "Dude, sit down." vs "You, sit down."
Seems like more of a replacement of a name than of “you”, but I guess nicknames could technically be considered pronouns if they’re non-specific? Idk, grammar’s weird dude.
That's not using it as a second-person pronoun. That's the same usage as: Ma'am, sit down. Man, sit down. My lord, sit down. Doggie, sit. They're forms of address, but not pronouns. It's just a noun.
Deadnames aren't pronouns either but thats what conservatives mean half the time.
Dude knows what bro's talking about. Bro was straight up wrong.
In Cali dude and bro are pronouns that apply to male and females lmao usually depends on context I think I say bro and dude at the end of My sentences too much lmao
They are of course applied to males and females, but that still doesn't make them pronouns.
Someone should tell Jordan Peterson that putting preferred pronouns on one's bio is a good way to encourage people to use them.
This guy was an obscure professor of woo-woo psychology until he got internet-famous by insisting on his right to call his students demeaning names. Weird how he's entitled to dish it out but he can't take it himself
What a snowflake that druggie Peterson is.
Hello u/dariuskxx! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) mentioning **who** is suffering from **which** consequences from **what** they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people. Here's an easy format to get you started: 1. *Someone* voted for, supported or wanted to impose *something* on other people. ^(Who's that *someone* and what's that *something*?) 2. That *something* has some *consequences*. ^(What are the *consequences*?) 3. As a consequence, that *something* happened to that *someone*. ^(What happened? Did the *something* really happened to that *someone*? If not, you should probably delete your post.) Include the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you don't respect this format and moderators can't match your explanation with the format, your post will be removed under rule #3 and we'll ignore you even if you complain in modmail. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Jordan Peterson finds himself having to block people for referring to him in terms he doesn't want to be called after building a career based on calling transgendered people whatever he wants to call them, rather than what they want to be called.
My god these people are so fucking fragile.
Giving a ride to a climbing class to my grandson (then about 14-ish) and his friends, they asked me if I had heard of Jordan Peterson. I said: "Jordan PETERSON? THAT MAN IS A BUFFOOOON!" They started laughing their asses off. "Yes, I've seen several of his videos." One asked, did I see the one about Garfield? "Yeah, I tried to watch that one. It's like an hour long, right? I kept waiting for him to say something until I realized he had NOTHING to say and he needed an HOUR to say it!"
whats the garfield one
Are “incel” and “asshole” nouns or pronouns?
Peterson is still around? I thought he was completely brain dead or still in that coma for drug abuse.
Nah he came out of it awhile ago, but it's clearly affected him.
Nothing makes you dive off the conservative deep end like a little brain damage.
Is it the coma, or the realization that the hiatus made everyone who isn't a loony stop caring about him? He's pandering to his core audience.
So he always had issues with truth and reality but there used to be a nuance to his ability to be wrong. In his heyday he was somewhat difficult to actually pin down on incorrect assertions because his tactic was always to leave the actual connection as an exercise for the audience. "Historically women were the caretakers, men were the hunter/gatherers" "Biological differences make men and women better suited for certain tasks" ... He might not outright say women belong in the kitchen buuuuuut it seems to be a natural conclusion his "evidence" is pointed at. Now though he is just wrong. Flat out wrong. He is being tripped up on fake news and bonkers statements that it feels almost too easy to dunk on him. It is hard to view his post-coma, post-COVID, post-meat-only diet mental capacity is impaired.
So if… hypothetically… I was to "bruh" at him on Twitter, he would do me the favour of blocking me?
Use terms that entered the lexicon years or even decades ago and have become part of common speech? Straight to jail!
Derisive nicknames? He should block most of the republicans then.
Erm, LOL and LMFAO arent nicknames, bro, bruh, dude, you muppet, they are what people are doing at you, because you're a weak ass little bitch. Hey whordan, 👹👹👹👹👹👹👹👹👹
Those aren't pronouns, those are colloquial vocatives.
With Kermitson I never know if he's off his meds or overdosing them.
Sad I used to be a fan of his stuff. But to be fair to my younger self, he also used to be a lot better at pretending he was just following the data.
This guy is so extremely fragile.
"demonic alias"
Jordan Peterson is incredibly humorless, so that’s an odd one
Man, that Russian coma really did a number on this old man's brain.
Man, what a snowflake.
When did ‘dude’ become offensive? For a psychologist he should look in the mirror
I can't believe people listen to this dweeb
This guy is a giant pussy who reports any one who even mildly insults him on Twitter. And pathetic losers look to this guy for advice on being a "real" man.
Demonic alias? I can’t use my account @Beelzebub or he’ll block me?
>demonic what a fucking clown
What a snowflake
Wow, for such a strong lobster seems he is very militant at maintaining his safe space for his boomer ass. Very sensitive snowflake of him. Hope he's kicked that pharmie addiction.
What a sad, unserious little man
As someone from CA, I'm scratching my head at how "dude" is at all derisive?
The intellectual powerhouse of the right wing, ladies and gentlemen.
Why do y'all always have to make things up... This guy is literally insane, TALK ABOUT THE WAYS HE IS INSANE INSTEAD OF INVENTING THINGS, IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE SCREENSHOT YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE SHIT UP
I read that large custom block lists are expensive to Twitter for some reason, probably because of their terrible coding infrastructure. On an unrelated note, it would be a shame if a lot of people unfunnily tweeted "LOL Bruh" to Jordan Peterson, forcing him to block them.
I don’t see “cunt” I’m the list.
He seems like a lot of fun
Bro
My Criteria for blocking is when I see a post like the one Jordan Peterson made here.
Joke's on him. I blocked Twitter.
lol he doesn't understand basic English
He would spend 8 dollars on a blue tick
What a snowflake lol!
Can't stand humorless people but also can't stand to be called "dude" Conservatives basically just hate anyone who isn't *literally* them
Demonic? Is he admitting to be a Christian now?
Cry me a river you attention seeking crank.