Social Is there something wrong with Jordan Peterson?

Do you agree with his explanation?


  • Total voters
    141
No idea how someone like Joe who claims to have high standards with people in his circles is so fond of this odd man.
he's got a phd in clinical psychology. he's probably one of the most educated people rogan ever spoke with in his entire life. how is that not "high standard"?
 
Probably because a lot of the stuff he says is dead on. And yes there is some over-the-top stuff in there too, and there are things one can criticize him personally about, but none of that crap really matters.

Whether or not Jordan Peterson cleans his own room is irrelevant, hypocrisy doesn’t make a point invalid.
Have you ever heard his take on PTSD?

It was so bad that Joe Rogan had to correct him.
 
There are some very attractive plus sized models like Stefania Ferrario.

princess-bride-you-keep-using-that-word.gif


Not one to kink shame, chubby chasers should chase to their heart's content, I don't care what gets people off, but using the word "attractive" for both that woman you mentioned and, say, Salma Hayek...

85c207a92ade2136f1bf11f47148a9fc.gif


And the reality is that more and more women in the West are overweight and obese. What use are models if they're wholly unrepresentative of the population they're modeling clothes to?

For fun, I typed into Google "What are fashion models for?" and one of the first responses explains how a model "not only flaunts and sells your work, they can also be someone who inspires you." Leaving aside the PC crap with fat models, which feels like little more than a push in the acceptance/positivity direction, even if you wanted to make a "utilitarian" argument for fat models, isn't it just depressing, with society just giving up on obesity and accepting that people are fat so let's get other fat people to wear the giant crap we make for the fatties? A model, like a movie star, is supposed to be a glamorous ideal to inspire and toward which we are meant to aspire. Even the majority of out of shape people don't want to look at other out of shape people. So what are we doing and why are we doing it?

 
I am constantly amazed at the emotion this guy inspires. It has been years since he had his moment in the sun, and he still manages to be a polarizing cultural figure to a shocking degree, inspiring tremendous passion from both his admirers and his detractors.
 
princess-bride-you-keep-using-that-word.gif


Not one to kink shame, chubby chasers should chase to their heart's content, I don't care what gets people off, but using the word "attractive" for both that woman you mentioned and, say, Salma Hayek...

85c207a92ade2136f1bf11f47148a9fc.gif
I'm not particularly into chubby women but you're kidding yourself if you don't want to admit that Stefania Ferrario is incredibly attractive. She's also like thirty years younger than Salma Hayek so she almost certainly looks better in person and without make up. I know you're a big Peterson fan so you must feel like you have to defend him here but even some of his fans are calling him out for this cringe take.
For fun, I typed into Google "What are fashion models for?" and one of the first responses explains how a model "not only flaunts and sells your work, they can also be someone who inspires you." Leaving aside the PC crap with fat models, which feels like little more than a push in the acceptance/positivity direction, even if you wanted to make a "utilitarian" argument for fat models, isn't it just depressing, with society just giving up on obesity and accepting that people are fat so let's get other fat people to wear the giant crap we make for the fatties? A model, like a movie star, is supposed to be a glamorous ideal to inspire and toward which we are meant to aspire. Even the majority of out of shape people don't want to look at other out of shape people. So what are we doing and why are we doing it?


A model is supposed to model just like an actor is supposed to act. Some small subset of them become glamorous celebrities but the vast majority are supposed to be rough approximations of an average person. Not every single movie star is some conventionally attractive person like Tom Cruise or Jennifer Aniston, the industry needs people like Steve Buscemi and Danny DeVito and in fact those latter two are probably more well liked than the former two.

Same with modeling. Sure you have your Victoria Secret models like Lais Riberio who represents the pinnacle of human beauty. But you also have to have models that are roughly similar in build to the wider populace so when the models model the clothing line people can get a sense of how it'd look on them.
Maybe the mainstream media is conditioning me, but I think Yumi Nu is kind of hot.

x163483_tk5_00134wmweb.jpg


<mma4><mma4>
She looks just fine. Not necessarily my cup of tea but to publicly call her "not beautiful" is just really rude and crass. Isn't Peterson supposed to stand up for traditionally chivalrous values? Publicly shaming women for their looks isn't very chivalrous.
Up until relatively recently the fashion industry was limited to bone skinny models with eating disorders. A completely unrealistic and unhealthy body standard that is dangerous to use as inspiration for young women. Not to mention unattractive imo.

I find Stefania Ferrario far more attractive than the broomstick model look.
I think most men would agree that Stefania is very attractive, I think that guy is just pretending otherwise because he's a big Peterson fan and he's digging his heels in to defend Peterson's comment. But honestly this comment seems pretty indefensible. I'm actually a lot more sympathetic to Peterson than most on the left but this is was a terrible take that kind of goes against some of what Peterson is supposed to stand for.
 
he's got a phd in clinical psychology. he's probably one of the most educated people rogan ever spoke with in his entire life. how is that not "high standard"?


I know a whole bunch of people with PhDs do you? They are people man..... Not symbols. Some are profoundly flawed and they display a mix of characteristics and range just like everybody else. Of the best people I know not a single one of them are among those with PhDs. Now I'm not in any way saying that the PhD is causal in this scenario or prohibitive of being a good person..... I'm just saying that having a PhD does not inherently make one a quality person.... And based on what my friends say about life in academia there are a ton of outright cunts and immoral ambitious bastards with PhDs too.
 
I know a whole bunch of people with PhDs do you? They are people man..... Not symbols. Some are profoundly flawed and they display a mix of characteristics and range just like everybody else. Of the best people I know not a single one of them are among those with PhDs. Now I'm not in any way saying that the PhD is causal in this scenario or prohibitive of being a God person..... I'm just saying that having a PhD does not inherently make one a quality person.... And based on what my friends say about life in academia there are a ton of outright cunts and immoral ambitious bastards with PhDs too.
the point was connected to the idea that somehow Peterson is not the on "high quality" list of the people JOE FUCKING ROGAN hangs out with.
 
the point was connected to the idea that somehow Peterson is not the on "high quality" list of the people JOE FUCKING ROGAN hangs out with.


Yes I know that and you refuted that possibility based on his PhD hence my response......
 
Yes I know that and you refuted that possibility based on his PhD hence my response......
well if having a phd in clinical psychology does no longer qualify one as a high quality guest or connection, i don't know man. not saying all phds walk on water, or even that they are nice people (real smart people rarely are), but this drive to make Peterson into some intellectual bum is insane to me. it says more to me about the people saying it that the man himself.
 
well if having a phd in clinical psychology does no longer qualify one as a high quality guest or connection, i don't know man. not saying all phds walk on water, or even that they are nice people (real smart people rarely are), but this drive to make Peterson into some intellectual bum is insane to me. it says more to me about the people saying it that the man himself.


You are thinking in black and white terms which is why I asked if you knew any people with PhDs..... They can be really terrible people, they are not defined by having a PhD.....

I think Peterson is exceptionally immature and hypocritical and filled with unresolved inner conflict. If his area of expertise was physics I would not think his limitations were relevant but as a self help guy who is also a psychologist? Yeah... Kick rocks man... I remember being that broken 20 or so years ago.... When I was 20 years old....

I wish him the best but he has a lot of work to do and I find his general demeanor to be toxic and preachy and all from a place of brokenness. I've known a lot of people like him with similar views and attitudes and conflicts. I'm not impressed by it.


It's in this light that a rational person could think someone with a PhD is not a quality guest.

You don't have to agree but don't pretend the poster you replied to is being irrational here.
 
Back
Top