Norman Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 41 minutes ago, Lambchop said: I’d heard of him over his opposition to the C-16 bill, but that’s not really the point. His theories about postmodern relativism and the complexity of competing oppressions are nonsense, if for no other reason than that he claims to oppose the stifling of free speech by attempting to stifle free speech. He’s a great example of how attempts to promote the rights of the individual at the expense of the group ironically lead to taking an authoritarian position. You disagree with anyone who isn't a feminist. That's how you've heard of him. Still nothing on his teachings of gender pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 25 minutes ago, StringerBell said: women have a higher propensity to neuroses. 3 minutes ago, StringerBell said: Omfg Exactly. You are blaming the gender pay gap on women being more neurotic, a view which was discredited in the 19th century. Do you really expect to be taken seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 Just now, Norman said: You disagree with anyone who isn't a feminist. That's how you've heard of him. Still nothing on his teachings of gender pay? All you’ve done is throw out a name and say google it. If you think his theories add anything to the debate then explain why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 7 minutes ago, Lambchop said: All you’ve done is throw out a name and say google it. If you think his theories add anything to the debate then explain why. He has whole seminars on it, easily available on YouTube. Why would i repeat what he says more eloquently? It's probably 40 minutes long with diagrams. You have tried to discredit him because you know who he is and what he does. Give him a go. It's nice outside echo chambers at the minute. It would be a case of intelligence wasted if you're going to sit there and tell me you can't google his name followed by gender pay. But more likely, you don't want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 8 minutes ago, Lambchop said: Exactly. You are blaming the gender pay gap on women being more neurotic, a view which was discredited in the 19th century. Do you really expect to be taken seriously? Oh the irony. Discredited in the 19th century? I don’t live in the 19th century. According to modern science women score worse on every facet of neuroticism apart from anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 18 minutes ago, Norman said: You disagree with anyone who isn't a feminist. That's how you've heard of him. Still nothing on his teachings of gender pay? Do you know the difference between a feminist and a mysogynist? Both recognise the existence of a glass ceiling, but whereas a feminist wants to break it, the mysogynist would prefer females to walk across it while they watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 1 minute ago, eddie said: Do you know the difference between a feminist and a mysogynist? Both recognise the existence of a glass ceiling, but whereas a feminist wants to break it, the mysogynist would prefer females to walk across it while they watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 3 minutes ago, eddie said: Do you know the difference between a feminist and a mysogynist? Both recognise the existence of a glass ceiling, but whereas a feminist wants to break it, the mysogynist would prefer females to walk across it while they watch. You'll probably get a few likes for that. Unfortunately you got sand in your vagina 3 months a go otherwise you'd have many more . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 9 minutes ago, Norman said: It would be a case of intelligence wasted if you're going to sit there and tell me you can't google his name followed by gender pay. But more likely, you don't want to. More likely I don’t see why I should be the one to do the work, especially as I think there’s very little chance of finding anything worthwhile. In any event, this discussion isn’t really between me and Jordan Peterson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 31 minutes ago, StringerBell said: I don’t live in the 19th century. Are you trying to tell us that this is 2018? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, Lambchop said: More likely I don’t see why I should be the one to do the work, especially as I think there’s very little chance of finding anything worthwhile. In any event, this discussion isn’t really between me and Jordan Peterson. Nice one. So I named someone who is highly qualified in the field, has seminars on it you can watch, but instead you want someone who block paves drives to cut it down into small paragraphs for you? There's plenty in there that is polar opposites of what you have written. I think it would be worthwhile. You could have watched it by now. I've watched it, so if you reply disagreeing with the content, I will know which bits you are talking about. I'd be happy for you to change my mind on it. I find it uneasy trusting a Canadian who sounds like Kermit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 4 minutes ago, Lambchop said: Are you trying to tell us that this is 2018? Its time for our daily reminder that it’s the current year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 38 minutes ago, Norman said: You'll probably get a few likes for that. Unfortunately you got sand in your vagina 3 months a go otherwise you'd have many more . Cry me a bloody river. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 13 minutes ago, Norman said: You could have watched it by now. I've watched it, so if you reply disagreeing with the content, I will know which bits you are talking about. Ok, I’ll have a look at some point, although the first time he says ‘weaponised compassion’ it’s going off. I like the way you use your line of work to suggest other people are patronising you on the one hand and to get out of having to explain your own viewpoints on the other. Is that called ‘waeponised employment’? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRainy Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 18 minutes ago, StringerBell said: Its time for our daily reminder that it’s the current year. Thought so. I’m so forgetful in January, although it might be something to do with my neuroses or my weaponised compassion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 2 hours ago, Lambchop said: Thought so. I’m so forgetful in January, although it might be something to do with my neuroses or my weaponised compassion. You seem to be taking the notion that there might be traits more associated with women personally. Free yourself of the gender communism. Join us. It doesn’t matter what year it is here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 15 hours ago, Norman said: He has whole seminars on it, easily available on YouTube. Why would i repeat what he says more eloquently? TBF you can't even repeat what @StringerBell says more eloquently BTW Apologies if I'd already discounted that Gordon Peterson fella as a tit once before. I tend to wipe my memory banks of stuff not worth remembering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 4 minutes ago, StivePesley said: TBF you can't even repeat what @StringerBell says more eloquently BTW Apologies if I'd already discounted that Gordon Peterson fella as a tit once before. I tend to wipe my memory banks of stuff not worth remembering Awww, don't apologise. We know it's not sincere. Because you pretended not to know who he is on purpose. And we all know why . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 16 hours ago, StringerBell said: Obviously public sector workers are never going to be extremely well paid. As for everyone else, that’s for the market to determine. Why is that obvious? In a well-functioning meritocracy, shou;dn't those who bring the most to society be paid the most regardless of who employs them? So women get paid less because of "reasons" that mean men are better than them in lots of areas and public sector workers get paid less because...help me out here? It feels a bit like a lot of excuses as to why the meritocracy doesn't work As for the market determining the rest. That's also sadly untrue. I know plenty of people at work who are by far the best at what they do, but they are also deeply principled and refuse to suck management ass and therefore don't get on. Funnily enough those that do get on, aren't the best, they are usually the weakest. I'm sure you know the Dilbert Principle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 18 minutes ago, StivePesley said: Why is that obvious? In a well-functioning meritocracy, shou;dn't those who bring the most to society be paid the most regardless of who employs them? So women get paid less because of "reasons" that mean men are better than them in lots of areas and public sector workers get paid less because...help me out here? It feels a bit like a lot of excuses as to why the meritocracy doesn't work As for the market determining the rest. That's also sadly untrue. I know plenty of people at work who are by far the best at what they do, but they are also deeply principled and refuse to suck management ass and therefore don't get on. Funnily enough those that do get on, aren't the best, they are usually the weakest. I'm sure you know the Dilbert Principle They aren’t selling anything. Christ alive! Who pays their wages? You want to make it so that the people who pay public sector wages earn less than the people in the public sector? How the hell does that work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.