Manosphere Jordan Peterson - Internet Daddy Simulator, Post-modern Anti-postmodernist, Canadian Psychology Professor, Depressed, Got Hooked on Benzos

Buggins

kiwifarms.net
These people are so old-fashioned. Don't they know we solve things with MMA matches nowadays?

View attachment 651130
Peterson clearly isn't in shape to wrestle even a 5-year-old, we're speaking of a man who fell gravely ill for a month after having one sip of apple cider.

At least that's what Peterson claims to have occured. Though I'm pretty sure he's a pathological liar and made that up for some asinine reason.
 

Puppet Pal Clem

kiwifarms.net
If we had more fights between philosophers the world would be a better place.
Peterson and Fry teamed up in that Munk debate which was just a shallow facade to attack Peterson and call him racist and it did fuckall to actually convince anybody that political correctness or identity politics is retarded.

 

Slap47

Hehe xd
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/doug-ford-jordan-peterson-meeting-appointment-1.4992909

Ontario Premier Doug Ford held a one-on-one meeting with Jordan Peterson a week after the controversial university professor publicly urged Ford to abolish the province's human rights commission, CBC News has learned.

The meeting was revealed in Ford's appointment calendar for October and November, obtained through a freedom of information request. CBC News made the request because Ford is not providing the media with his daily public itinerary, breaking from the practice of previous premiers.

Ford tweeted about several of his other private meetings around that date: with Dianne Martin, CEO of the Registered Practical Nurses Association, with Susan Le Jeune the British high commissioner to Canada, and with Tim Hudak, the former PC leader who is now CEO of the Ontario Real Estate Association.

Ford met with Peterson "to discuss free speech on Ontario's university and college campuses," the premier's press secretary said Friday in an email to CBC News.

The meeting followed this Oct. 10 tweet by Peterson, calling for the Human Rights Commission to be abolished.

upload_2019-1-29_9-10-28.png


Peterson, who has more than one million followers on Twitter, was reacting to the Ontario Human Rights Commission joining the legal challenge against the Ford government's changes to the sex-ed curriculum.

He put out the tweet in response to an interview that Renu Mandhane, chief commissioner of the province's human rights watchdog, did on CBC Radio's Metro Morning.

Peterson has garnered international attention for his critique of what he calls "politically correct" limits to free speech. The Ford government ordered Ontario's universities and colleges last summer to put in place policies by the end of 2018 guaranteeing free speech, or they would face funding cuts.

Peterson has previously spoken out against the work of the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the federal Liberals' move to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity.

"I know something about the way that totalitarian and authoritarian political states develop and I can't help but think that I'm seeing a fair bit of that right now," Peterson said in a lecture posted to his YouTube channel, which has 1.8 million subscribers.





Ford's calendar for October and November shows no one-on-one meetings with any other Ontario university professors. Peterson and his publicity firm did not respond to a request for an interview or to emailed questions about the meeting.

The appointment schedule also unveils another piece in the puzzle about Ford's request for a customized van, a controversy that erupted in December following the appointment of Ford's friend Ron Taverner, a Toronto police superintendent, to be the next OPP commissioner.



This entry from Premier Doug Ford's appointment calendar, obtained through a freedom of information request, shows he travelled to Mississauga for an appointment entitled 'OPP Car Meeting.' The company does automotive customization, primarily for wheelchair accessibility. (Ontario cabinet office)
OPP deputy commissioner Brad Blair alleges that Ford's chief of staff Dean French told a provincial police officer to obtain a "camper-van type vehicle" for the premier, have it modified by a specific company, and keep the costs off the books.

The calendar shows the premier travelled to Mississauga on Nov. 5 for an appointment entitled "OPP Car Meeting" at a business called A1 Mobility, which adapts vehicles for accessibility.

"The premier went to discuss options for a used OPP vehicle," said press secretary Ivana Yelich in an email. "It's not uncommon or inappropriate for a premier to ask for special accommodations for his/her vehicle."

The allegation that Ford's chief of staff asked for the cost of the vehicle to be kept off the books is "categorically false," said Yelich.

The calendar also shows that Ford had lunch with Taverner on Oct. 9, several weeks before he was named to lead the OPP. The province's integrity commissioner is investigating how Taverner got the job, as he did not meet the original qualifications.

Blair, who made the allegations about the camper van, wants a court to force Ontario's ombudsman to investigate Taverner's appointment as well. Blair's lawyer Julian Falconer could not be reached for comment.

Ford's calendar shows a flurry of activity around GM Canada's Nov. 26 announcement that it intends to cease production at its Oshawa plant by the end of this year.

In addition to phone calls with the CEO of General Motors, Mary Barra, the day before and day of the announcement, Ford got on the phone with the presidents and CEOs of Ford, Honda and Toyota the following day.

Cannabis legalization was another issue that Ford was focused on in October and November. He had a meeting entitled "Illegal Dispensaries" on the afternoon of Oct. 17, the day that recreational cannabis became legal in Canada.

It included representatives for the attorney general, the finance minister, the community safety minister and the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.

On Oct. 26, with delivery delays plaguing the province's online cannabis retailer, Ford spoke on a call with Finance Minister Vic Fedeli, the CEO of the Ontario Cannabis Store, and the CEO of Domain Logistics. It is the company managing the province's secret cannabis warehouse, although neither the government, the cannabis agency, nor the company has publicly confirmed that.

Then in late November, before revealing the province's plans to allow only 25 cannabis retail outlets in the first phase of storefronts, Ford was given two briefings on cannabis. One was labelled "high priority" and another labelled "restricted attendance."

Asked for more details, Ford's press secretary said the briefings were about "the general direction of the government's cannabis policy."



Other entries in Ford's calendar show the following meetings:

  • Neil Bruce, CEO of SNC Lavalin and William Pristanski, registered lobbyist for the company (Oct. 29).
  • Hazel McCallion, former mayor of Mississauga (Nov. 16).
  • Patrick Lilly, CEO, Ring of Fire General Partner (Nov. 22).
  • Toronto Coun. Michael Thompson and Transportation Minister Jeff Yurek (Nov. 28).
Ford's press secretary was asked to describe the topics of these meetings, but did not respond.
Peterson53.png


Perhaps this is the perfect time for Yaniv to get attention.
 

Cheetahman

kiwifarms.net
Perhaps this is the perfect time for Yaniv to get attention.
BC is pretty distant from Ontario (their parties are even all backwards), but I would be hopeful about this potentially setting off a chain reaction that leads to other provinces also killing their fake courts.

http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20130...section-13-of-the-canadian-human-rights-act/#
For decades, Canadians had meekly submitted to a system of administrative law that potentially made de facto criminals out of anyone with politically incorrect views about women, gays, or racial and religious minority groups. All that was required was a complainant (often someone with professional ties to the CHRC itself) willing to sign his name to a piece of paper, claim he was offended, and then collect his cash winnings at the end of the process. The system was bogus and corrupt. But very few Canadians wanted to be seen as posturing against policies that were branded under the aegis of “human rights.”
This was regarding the now-defunct """hate speech""" section of the commission, the fact that Yaniv (and other lawfare goblins, some of which are members of the tribunals themselves) can harass businesses for free is proof that the rest of it also needs to go.
 
Last edited:

lowkey

kiwifarms.net
...abolishing the human rights commission? Can I please get an explanation of how this isn't 'legalise-slavery'-tier Bad Idea, because I know Peterson isn't THAT crazy.
You have to decouple what the name says and what the actual organization does.

E.g.
My organization of puppy cuddlers says that every puppy has the same puppy rights. For this my organization receives state funding to independantly research.

Pretty cool, huh?

puppy.jpg


Certainly any group that seeks to silence or abolish us must clearly hate puppies and think that puppies don't deserve cuddles.

Oh and we've been able to convict numerous people for saying hateful things like "I don't really like puppies, I won't get one". Certainly every canadian home must have minimum of three puppies and anyone that disagres are hateful antipuppers. They should be put in jail without due process. And we've been granted the power to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Human_Rights_Commission_free_speech_controversy

----
This isn't an attack on the Canadian Human Rights Commission, I don't know enough about the latter to do so, or how accurate the wikipedia page is I just linked. I tend to be rather apprehensive trusting wikipedia, knowing how some of those articles get written. But in any case, look further than the name and stated intent before you think an organisation must be a force for good by definition.
 
Last edited:

Harbinger of Kali Yuga

Your city lies in dust, my friend
kiwifarms.net
This isn't an attack on the Canadian Human Rights Commission, I don't know enough about the latter to do so, or how accurate the wikipedia page is I just linked. I tend to be rather apprehensive trusting wikipedia, knowing how some of those articles get written. But in any case, look further than the name and stated intent before you think an organisation must be a force for good by definition.
The HRC is what you get hauled to if you say a naughty mean word or tell an off-color joke.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/mark...comedian-15-000-for-insulting-audience-member

Peterson is not wrong on this issue. At all.


He's answered that before, and this goes to various similar discussions in this thread.

People try to box him in and pin labels on him for ease of dismissal. He doesn't let them do that easily and it drives them crazy.

What they want is something like this. "Do you believe it god?" "Yes." "So you hate gay people and believe in an invisible sky man that heals the sick if you prey enough."
What they get is something like this. "Do you believe in god?" "That depends on what you mean by god, and what you mean by believe." "...Fuck you lobster nazi!" Then the clip appears in a dozen YouTube 'pwning the libs' compilations.
No, people have a general idea of "god," it doesn't need to be a bearded man in the sky, but at least some sort of divine, cosmic intelligence with intentionality and purpose. An actual entity of sorts. By believe, one means "think is true," or in this case, thinks such an entity is actually instantiated in reality. That's what people mean when they say "real," ya dummy Peterson, they mean physically instantiated in reality in some way. Not some hypothetical, not some symbol or "archetype," not some metaphor.

The question "do you believe in god" very well may require some elaboration (what is a god, exactly? what does omnipotence entail, exactly? Can a god make square circles, or is that just a nonsensical feature of language that a god would be "bound" by?) but anyone with clarity to their thinking can summarize their view in a couple of sentences. Peterson can't, because his thinking is completely muddled and incoherent. He can't find the words to explain it, but he has such a feeling of certainty that he probably feels his views are very complex and he can't find the words to communicate with them with. General rule of thumb, if you cannot communicate your idea, it's probably not very well thought out or coherent. Even a scientist can summarize aspects of quantum mechanics for a layman.

The issue is trying to pin Peterson down on what exactly he believes and what makes him a Christian. Peterson's not a pathological liar or trying to manipulate people, he's steeped in the psychoanalytic world of symbols and metaphor and it makes him just plain retarded. Unfortunately, the people that debate Peterson tend to be idiots that don't know how to define their terms, so Peterson can be slippery on this. I suspect Peterson is actually what most people would say is an atheist or agnostic, but believes very strongly in Christianity as a social, cultural and moral phenomenon.

Peterson is extremely confused and severely lacks clarity in his thinking. The problem is, both he and his fans mistake that for depth and sophistication.
 

Repovul

kiwifarms.net
Oh look I'm back on this shit heap of a thread slowly going absolutely nowhere. I did notice the god question though and it's a great example of why I don't like the rambling lobster. His refusal to give straight answers as opposed to just keeping his mouth shut. If he says 'I don't want to answer the question' then whatever. Instead he crawls as far as he can up his own ass spewing word salad. It's like the agnostic thing. Agnosticism isn't a position in and of itself so you can't answer 'do you believe in god?' with 'I'm an agnostic'.
This third option bullshit where a question isn't neither answered nor rejected but instead 'justifiably dismissed' (I don't know a proper term for it) gets on my nerves. The response attempts justify ignoring the question so that the questionee still comes out on top. 'I won't answer your question because you might strawman me after'. Fuck off.
I know why he does it but I don't know why his supporters consider it a good trait.
 

Goku 1000000 O

d91550
kiwifarms.net
These people are so old-fashioned. Don't they know we solve things with MMA matches nowadays?


View attachment 651964

http://archive.md/0Gh5G
>tweeting out and using Facebook to sarcastically bring up a video you definitely don’t care about
Holy shit maybe Sargon got to him and spread some of his cow into him. That’s too reactive for something that came from a small ethnonationalist channel.

I smell blood in the water.
 

lowkey

kiwifarms.net
I smell blood in the water.
Definitely blood in the water.

I am listening to the JP interview with this guy. It's pretty interesting.


Also here is another sargonism.

white.PNG


Pretty interesting at 1:20:10

The first Canadian has been dragged into court for misgendering someone, Bill Whatcott, and may be facing a fine of $500.000

Bill Whatcott said exactly what Peterson said: "I'm not doing it!" (referring to compelled speech of pronouns)

Weirdly, even the prosecution frequently accidently misgenders the person involved.
Conversely, the defendant was frequently stopped during the trial for misgendering the person and was threatened an additional penalty of $35.000 per misgendering.

The creator of the video, Resurrection Europa has shared the details of this case with Peterson more than a month ago and Peterson has not called attention to this case.
 
Last edited:

Bleachedanoos

kiwifarms.net
Pretty interesting at 1:20:10

The first Canadian has been dragged into court for misgendering someone, Bill Whatcott, and may be facing a fine of $500.000

Bill Whatcott said exactly what Peterson said: "I'm not doing it!" (referring to compelled speech of pronouns)

Weirdly, even the prosecution frequently accidently misgenders the person involved.
Conversely, the defendant was frequently stopped during the trial for misgendering the person and was threatened an additional penalty of $35.000 per misgendering.

The creator of the video, Resurrection Europa has shared the details of this case with Peterson more than a month ago and Peterson has not called attention to this case.
Not a trial it's an arbitration, meaning no legal precedent, no defense lawyer, it's just a committee of fat kikes taking random lumps of money out of your pocket. The fact that they are given extrajudicial power, and are funded by the tax payer is just fucking ridiculous. It needs to be nuked from Earth and any similar tribunal as well.
 

lowkey

kiwifarms.net
Not a trial it's an arbitration, meaning no legal precedent, no defense lawyer,
He seems to have had a lawyer present:

At one point, the proceedings seemed to veer toward comedy when Quail’s objections to Whatcott’s lawyer “misgendering” Oger during cross-examination were followed by one Tribunal member, Norman Trerise, himself referring to Oger as “he.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/a...ng-political-candidate-stands-his-ground-befo
 

Bleachedanoos

kiwifarms.net
A lawyer can show up for anything doesn't make it a trial.
Rather than a trial it's a tribunal, maybe arbitration was a bad word choice because that implies an objective observer .
There's no legal precedent . Just greedy goblinesque Jews clutching their hands together waiting to steal your money. Also abolish hate crimes, and other mind reader crimes .
 

ProgKing of the North

^^^^FUCKTARD^^^^
kiwifarms.net
A lawyer can show up for anything doesn't make it a trial.
Rather than a trial it's a tribunal, maybe arbitration was a bad word choice because that implies an objective observer .
There's no legal precedent . Just greedy goblinesque Jews clutching their hands together waiting to steal your money. Also abolish hate crimes, and other mind reader crimes .
Is there anything that doesn't lead back to Jews?