Jordan Peterson on agiculture…

[kiwi pom]

I wasn't aware that Attenborough has branched into the self-help industry. He seems rather too grounded for that.

When it comes to Peterson, it's his consistent presumptions about women that's the problem. If his e-finishing skool curriculum contains even a tiny amount of sexist or misogynist content within it ~ or the potential for any to be perceived from it ~ that's where the wrongness lies.

Attenborough's product is/was his television programs and his books, by doing the rounds he advertised them.
I'm sure he is/was paid for his public speaking events, as is Peterson.
He claims he meets people (men and women) on a daily basis who say he helped them in their life. Is that a bad thing?

What does he say about women you disagree with?
My wife says he talks a lot of sense, especially over gender pay.

 

[Kiwi Pete]

You Kiwis always have something better

She's right up there....

 

[FonterraFarmer]

View attachment 1067473

Another MP that deserves the Countdown bag.....

 

[devonshirekiwi]

Another MP that deserves the Countdown bag.....

Or a New World bag, remember we have two supermarkets ripping us off!

 

[FonterraFarmer]

Or a New World bag, remember we have two supermarkets ripping us off!

I knew you'd reply, admittedly New World bags are better quailty yet an odd size.
Either way just needed to be used tightly for best... security.

 

[Macsky]

Sorry, you think Liz Truss was voted for by Tory party members because of their misandry?


Nothing whatsoever to do with them preferring a white woman over an Asian man, then?

It could just as easily be argued that it was misogyny that put her there, with all those money men exploiting a (for the sake of argument) dumb and easily coerced woman, to cause market turmoil. Very profitable for those that know it’s coming.

Id put that theory ahead of any ideas of feminism or racism.

 

[SteveHants]

It could just as easily be argued that it was misogyny that put her there, with all those money men exploiting a (for the sake of argument) dumb and easily coerced woman, to cause market turmoil. Very profitable for those that know it’s coming.

Id put that theory ahead of any ideas of feminism or racism.

Well yes, my point was more about the ridiculousness of the notion that society (including tory party members) were so conditioned by misandry arising from feminism that they'd choose a woman over a man simply because she was a woman, which is what the poster appeared to be suggesting.

 

[ollie989898]

So I listened to the bulk of the interview with Piers Morgan. Apart from the anti-trans rant, it just seemed like two old blokes having a rant about the good old days to be honest. The guy became upset when he mentioned championing incels who are apparently just short of an 'encouraging word'. I'd argue that incel culture is a by-product of the erosion of the family unit, the erosion of old fashioned communities and the rise of social media with teenagers who don't know how to socialise apart from through a phone or by playing playstation. The guy seems to think women should be less choosy about their men? WTF? That's a personal decision and applies to both men and women and it's ridiculous to even complain about it. Oh and Piers Morgan got a bee in his bonnet about a supreme court judge refusing to 'define a woman'. Well no, I'd expect a judge to be knowledgeable about legal matters, not sociology and knowing whatever answer she gave would have been seized upon by nutters I'd have refused to comment as well.

Fortunately in the USA their laws are strong when it comes to individual rights and freedoms, and tolerance is a part and parcel of their society and this extends to everyone whatever their background, gender or political persuasion.

As interviews go it was pretty weird. Was agriculture mentioned because I didn't catch it?

 

[essexpete]

So I listened to the bulk of the interview with Piers Morgan. Apart from the anti-trans rant, it just seemed like two old blokes having a rant about the good old days to be honest. The guy became upset when he mentioned championing incels who are apparently just short of an 'encouraging word'. I'd argue that incel culture is a by-product of the erosion of the family unit, the erosion of old fashioned communities and the rise of social media with teenagers who don't know how to socialise apart from through a phone or by playing playstation. The guy seems to think women should be less choosy about their men? WTF? That's a personal decision and applies to both men and women and it's ridiculous to even complain about it. Oh and Piers Morgan got a bee in his bonnet about a supreme court judge refusing to 'define a woman'. Well no, I'd expect a judge to be knowledgeable about legal matters, not sociology and knowing whatever answer she gave would have been seized upon by nutters I'd have refused to comment as well.

Fortunately in the USA their laws are strong when it comes to individual rights and freedoms, and tolerance is a part and parcel of their society and this extends to everyone whatever their background, gender or political persuasion.

As interviews go it was pretty weird. Was agriculture mentioned because I didn't catch it?

I am afraid you might have to listen to another cast.

 

[Canada Farmer]

So I listened to the bulk of the interview with Piers Morgan. Apart from the anti-trans rant, it just seemed like two old blokes having a rant about the good old days to be honest. The guy became upset when he mentioned championing incels who are apparently just short of an 'encouraging word'. I'd argue that incel culture is a by-product of the erosion of the family unit, the erosion of old fashioned communities and the rise of social media with teenagers who don't know how to socialise apart from through a phone or by playing playstation. The guy seems to think women should be less choosy about their men? WTF? That's a personal decision and applies to both men and women and it's ridiculous to even complain about it. Oh and Piers Morgan got a bee in his bonnet about a supreme court judge refusing to 'define a woman'. Well no, I'd expect a judge to be knowledgeable about legal matters, not sociology and knowing whatever answer she gave would have been seized upon by nutters I'd have refused to comment as well.

Fortunately in the USA their laws are strong when it comes to individual rights and freedoms, and tolerance is a part and parcel of their society and this extends to everyone whatever their background, gender or political persuasion.

As interviews go it was pretty weird. Was agriculture mentioned because I didn't catch it?

The question with regard to the definition of man or woman is actually stupidity important, its a definition definded by nature and something that society can't give the definition to individual as free choice or desire. Its a flawed arguement to even suggest otherwise because of the ramifications that go with this method of thinking, as equally if I have the belief that I'm "Superman" then can I demand everyone to refer to me as so and can I be allowed to fly off the roof of a ten story building without a clearly defined flight plan and or permission from flight control???

 

[SteveHants]

The guy became upset when he mentioned championing incels who are apparently just short of an 'encouraging word'. I'd argue that incel culture is a by-product of the erosion of the family unit, the erosion of old fashioned communities and the rise of social media with teenagers who don't know how to socialise apart from through a phone or by playing playstation.

I'd argue that incel culture has more to do with social media than anything else you've mentioned - it is very easy to create "echo chambers" whereby people can gather, and exchange views without ever really being challenged beyond them and the willingness of "influencers" to exploit these people for money by agreeing with them for followers, or to generate book sales etc etc.

In the past, the kind of young man that became an incel, would probably be quite isolated, and probably more open to having his views challenged by society around him (although, since mysogyny is rife, perhaps not,) but at least he would be tempered by having (hopefully) to interact with women.

 

[fgc325j]

The question with regard to the definition of man or woman is actually stupidity important, its a definition definded by nature and something that society can't give the definition to individual as free choice or desire. Its a flawed arguement to even suggest otherwise because of the ramifications that go with this method of thinking, as equally if I have the belief that I'm "Superman" then can I demand everyone to refer to me as so and can I be allowed to fly off the roof of a ten story building without a clearly defined flight plan and or permission from flight control???

In science class , at school - in the early/ mid 70's, we were taught that women had a XX chromosone, and men had XY. I am not up
to speed on the effects these horomone treatments, given to people who want tochange their gender, but i very much doubt that
it changes their DNA chain. So surely a DNA test should be sufficient to prove gender.

 

[SteveHants]

In science class , at school - in the early/ mid 70's, we were taught that women had a XX chromosone, and men had XY. I am not up
to speed on the effects these horomone treatments, given to people who want tochange their gender, but i very much doubt that
it changes their DNA chain. So surely a DNA test should be sufficient to prove gender.

Gender is more than genetics.
Yes, you were taught that, but that is quite simplistic.

Take, for example, hormones. As farmers, perhaps we, more than most should be aware of how powerful these can be in changing an animal.

A human example would be in bodybuilders who take steroids (growth hormone) - if they take too much, when they come off, the negative feedback loop that keeps the body producing its own testosterone fails and they can physically grow breast tissue because the effect of the oestrogens they produce is not masked by testosterone. They are also prone to behavioural changes.

Levels of hormones produced naturally in the body vary between individuals - for example there are athletes who are (and have always been) women who produce so much testosterone, they get banned from competing.

And that's before we even get into animals that change gender or animals with X, Y and Z chromosomes.

Its quite easy to conceive of a scenario whereby hormone levels differ etc and an individual can perceive that they are not of the gender which they were born into.
The anti trans types would say that these people had a disease and needed to be cured - they used to say exactly the same about homosexuals.

I guess the issue comes when cis men try and take advantage of the above to assault women, but we (hopefully) as a society can deal with those people without maligning people who are genuinely trans.

 

[toquark]

I think a lot of Peterson’s popularity can be explained by the breakdown of the family unit and the subsequent generation of young men growing up with no meaningful male role models. I mean the guy literally wrote a book advising people to sit up straight and clean their rooms for gods sake. And it sold millions. Fundamentally, he offers very simple advice and guidance (aimed at men) which traditionally would have been delivered by their fathers. He’s hit on something - there is huge demand for this from a generation of lost, aimless young men who don’t know how to deal with their masculinity as everywhere they look, it’s ignored or denigrated.

If you read the comments in any of his YouTube videos, there are literally dozens of people telling their own tales of how useful they found his lectures or teachings in getting their lives in order. I find it as sad as it is inspiring that someone like Peterson has become such an important figure, but cometh the hour cometh the man I suppose.

 

[essexpete]

I'd argue that incel culture has more to do with social media than anything else you've mentioned - it is very easy to create "echo chambers" whereby people can gather, and exchange views without ever really being challenged beyond them and the willingness of "influencers" to exploit these people for money by agreeing with them for followers, or to generate book sales etc etc.

In the past, the kind of young man that became an incel, would probably be quite isolated, and probably more open to having his views challenged by society around him (although, since mysogyny is rife, perhaps not,) but at least he would be tempered by having (hopefully) to interact with women.

Is not the subject of this thread an influencer?

 

[SteveHants]

Is not the subject of this thread an influencer?

Of course

 

[Ffermer Bach]

I think a lot of Peterson’s popularity can be explained by the breakdown of the family unit and the subsequent generation of young men growing up with no meaningful male role models. I mean the guy literally wrote a book advising people to sit up straight and clean their rooms for gods sake. And it sold millions. Fundamentally, he offers very simple advice and guidance (aimed at men) which traditionally would have been delivered by their fathers. He’s hit on something - there is huge demand for this from a generation of lost, aimless young men who don’t know how to deal with their masculinity as everywhere they look, it’s ignored or denigrated.

If you read the comments in any of his YouTube videos, there are literally dozens of people telling their own tales of how useful they found his lectures or teachings in getting their lives in order. I find it as sad as it is inspiring that someone like Peterson has become such an important figure, but cometh the hour cometh the man I suppose.

I think the left has been determined since the 60's to destroy the family as a unit.

 

[toquark]

I think the left has been determined since the 60's to destroy the family as a unit.

Because the family is an inherently conservative concept. Individuals depend on each other, not the state. By breaking the dependency on family members, it transfers it to the state.

So many of today's problems could be improved by simply encouraging families to stay together, instead of making it ever easier (and socially acceptable) for them to split apart. Future success is very closely linked to the presence of a stable family. Other cultures know this, the family breakdown rate amongst British Indians is only about 6%, how many British Indian kids end up in street gangs?

It's an uncomfortable truth which people don't like discussing, but Peterson gives a voice to those who have grown up without decent father figure. He is one to them. I think he is basically conservative though which is why the hysterical left hate him.

 

[ollie989898]

The question with regard to the definition of man or woman is actually stupidity important, its a definition definded by nature and something that society can't give the definition to individual as free choice or desire. Its a flawed arguement to even suggest otherwise because of the ramifications that go with this method of thinking, as equally if I have the belief that I'm "Superman" then can I demand everyone to refer to me as so and can I be allowed to fly off the roof of a ten story building without a clearly defined flight plan and or permission from flight control???

No, it isn't. If a person wants to be a man or a woman or a tree or an attack helicopter that is their prerogative and the law of the land (and common morality) is live and let live with no impingement.

How people choose to identify is not solely down to nature and a lot more to do with psychology and sociology. A judge has no bearing on this.

I honestly couldn't care less what folk get up to or choose to be or do. I believe it makes the world a richer place but in all honesty none of it affects me and so I care even less.

For a forum that complains about woke or similar 'isms' this place could do a lot better than learning the subtle art of not giving a fudge a little bit more.

 

[toquark]

No, it isn't. If a person wants to be a man or a woman or a tree or an attack helicopter that is their prerogative and the law of the land (and common morality) is live and let live with no impingement.

How people choose to identify is not solely down to nature and a lot more to do with psychology and sociology. A judge has no bearing on this.

I honestly couldn't care less what folk get up to or choose to be or do. I believe it makes the world a richer place but in all honesty none of it affects me and so I care even less.

For a forum that complains about woke or similar 'isms' this place could do a lot better than learning the subtle art of not giving a fudge a little bit more.

Live and let live cuts both ways, when one group compels another to use language only they deem appropriate then that’s not living and letting live, thats asserting dominance.