Jordan Peterson hates compelled speech, loves compelled marriage

[Moralgy]

So why bring it up in the first place if you claim you know that isn't what he means? To say shit?

Because it is the only way to get women to marry incel men, because women aren't going to choose by their own free will to be with a toxic asshat. You are trying too hard to gotcha me here, and you need to stop this shit and actually try to make an argument. Don't be like the OP, it is sad. I have already said that the OP's title is misleading and isn't what is being said rofl, I have actually argued that what his actual idea is would do nothing at all and why that is, so what more do you want from me?

[Crissi]

I don't see how r dicing sexual partners will result in everyone having a pair. I'd rather be single my entire life than be with a guy I don't get along with, and I suspect quite a few others are like that. Incels will stay incels, especially since their standards are out of wack

[MalfLFT]

Peterson isnt a fascist, yes, especially not in the formal sense. But, to be frank, the fact that so many of his devotees have asked him to address "The Jewish Question" ought to give him pause. If Im giving a lesson on, say, Klan violence in the 1950s, and a few of my students came up to me and were all like "Wow the KKK is great," I'd certainly give my lesson plan a thorough review.

Stupid people will always take away a few points and loose sight of the overall preach.

[Darkeon]

Incels will stay incels.

Aye, let's demonize those young men and not guide them through change. "Don't care, virgin.", immirite?

[Moralgy]

I don't see how r dicing sexual partners will result in everyone having a pair. I'd rather be single my entire life than be with a guy I don't get along with, and I suspect quite a few others are like that. Incels will stay incels.

It won't, all Peterson did was say a bunch of words that made no sense in the context. I would rather adopt 1000 cats than be with an incel dickwad any day of the week, and that isn't going to be very uncommon of an opinion.

Society would need to go back to shameing women into marrying someone they don't like for these toxic assholes to get a partner.

- - - Updated - - -

Aye, let's demonize those young men and not guide them through change. "Don't care, virgin.", immirite?

Them being a virgin isn't the problem, them being toxic hatefilled assholes is. The way to guide them is to guide them to be less toxic and help them down that path, but changing one's self is too difficult for many so good luck with that.

[Elba]

I don't see how r dicing sexual partners will result in everyone having a pair. I'd rather be single my entire life than be with a guy I don't get along with, and I suspect quite a few others are like that. Incels will stay incels.

The claim that we had perfect analogous pair bonding before the sexual revolution is a myth anyway.

[Crissi]

Aye, let's demonize those young men and not guide them through change. "Don't care, virgin.", immirite?

There's ways to fix that without infringing on women's agency. Again, socially enforced monogamy will still result in incels because most women don't care for the type of guys who end up incels anyways, and incels tend to ignore the women that would be ok with it because those women are "low status/ ugly"

[Elba]

Aye, let's demonize those young men and not guide them through change. "Don't care, virgin.", immirite?

There's countless virgins who aren't violent, entitled shit heads. Hell, there are countless female virgins. They don't shoot up schools, though.

[Dextroden]

Because it is the only way to get women to marry incel men, because women aren't going to choose by their own free will to be with a toxic asshat. You are trying too hard to gotcha me here, and you need to stop this shit and actually try to make an argument. Don't be like the OP, it is sad. I have already said that the OP's title is misleading and isn't what is being said rofl, I have actually argued that what his actual idea is would do nothing at all and why that is, so what more do you want from me?

Probably don't bring up forced marriage if you don't want to be put in the same box as Mormo. No reason to believe you think his post is dumb while also whining about Incels. They do enough whining alone without you and others helping.

Seriously. A phrase that has been on the internet for years is being walked out as a brand new phenomenon to talk abput forced marriage. Why?

[blobthebob]

This https://jordanbpeterson.com/media/on...rced-monogamy/ is his clarification.

So enforced monogamy doesn't involve enforced marriage. That's very insincere of you @Mormolyce. @Endus raises a terrific point, however:

I mean, it's worse. In that explanation, he points out that nobody would be proud that their son or daughter was sexually promiscuous.

Which means monogamy is being socially enforced as a norm.

And we still have this problem, so not only is what he's proposing not a solution, it's already the status quo. By Peterson's own admission.

It would seem that Dr. Peterson's argument is based on the lack of social enforcement. But no one wants their daughter to sleep around, I'm sure. Parents do, in fact, socially enforce monogamy. It still doesn't solve the issue, I would say.

[Elba]

Stupid people will always take away a few points and loose sight of the overall preach.

If you attract tons of stupid people, especially fascists, it is time for self reflection.

[Endus]

I don't see how r dicing sexual partners will result in everyone having a pair. I'd rather be single my entire life than be with a guy I don't get along with, and I suspect quite a few others are like that. Incels will stay incels, especially since their standards are out of wack

We already live, in the Western world, in a state where sexual exclusivity (which I'll prefer over "monogamy" for clarity) is already the socially-enforced norm; even aside actual marriage, which is an exclusive partnership, there's the fact that cheating is "bad", that someone who sleeps around is considered "loose" or "slutty" or a "dog", etc.

So Peterson's not actually talking about that as a solution. If it were one, this would never have arisen as an issue in the first place, because it's already the status quo.

As for why he's making the argument, I have opinions on that, but I think pointing out this fundamental dishonesty does enough to lead people to those kinds of thoughts that I don't need to expand on it myself.

[Slybak]

Stupid people will always take away a few points and loose sight of the overall preach.

Counterpoint: Why Do All These Homosexuals Keep Sucking My Cock?

[Dextroden]

It won't, all Peterson did was say a bunch of words that made no sense in the context. I would rather adopt 1000 cats than be with an incel dickwad any day of the week, and that isn't going to be very uncommon of an opinion.

Society would need to go back to shameing women into marrying someone they don't like for these toxic assholes to get a partner.

- - - Updated - - -



Them being a virgin isn't the problem, them being toxic hatefilled assholes is. The way to guide them is to guide them to be less toxic and help them down that path, but changing one's self is too difficult for many so good luck with that.

If being a virgin wasn't a problem or some kind of gate, the response wouldn't usually be "Get laid, scrub".

[MalfLFT]

If you attract tons of stupid people, especially fascists, it is time for self reflection.

Don't be stupid, by far the biggest of this following are reasonable people, likely more intelligent than your average joe but far rights are just a bit louder and sexier to talk about. Also, if the left wing disagree with him its pretty easy to jsut say everyone of his followers are alt rights and people like you believe it.

[Endus]

It would seem that Dr. Peterson's argument is based on the lack of social enforcement. But no one wants their daughter to sleep around, I'm sure. Parents do, in fact, socially enforce monogamy. It still doesn't solve the issue, I would say.

What "lack"? Parents don't want their kids sleeping around. Cheating is presented as heinous to your partner. Even just generically being non-exclusive is seen as skeezy a lot of the time, unless it's specifically agreed to beforehand or otherwise made clear to your partner(s). Social enforcement of norms basically boils down to "people generally don't approve of this". I'd argue we're not only there, when it comes to social enforcement of monogamy, but we've been there the whole time. The few exceptions, like the hippie "free love" movement, were only ever counterculture movements and relatively short-lived.

[draynay]

So the guy who says stupid shit professionally said some more stupid shit?

[Elba]

So enforced monogamy doesn't involve enforced marriage.

It can, marriage being a societal tool to enforce said monogamy.

The reprehensible part here is the insinuation that it is somehow societies place to regulate women's sexuality, that male violence is anybody's fault but the violent males, that women somehow have a duty to pair up with men to reduce violence (which doesn't work anyway), and that social coercion to enforce pair bonding is not inherently reprehensible.

[Crissi]

We already live, in the Western world, in a state where sexual exclusivity (which I'll prefer over "monogamy" for clarity) is already the socially-enforced norm; even aside actual marriage, which is an exclusive partnership, there's the fact that cheating is "bad", that someone who sleeps around is considered "loose" or "slutty" or a "dog", etc.

So Peterson's not actually talking about that as a solution. If it were one, this would never have arisen as an issue in the first place, because it's already the status quo.

As for why he's making the argument, I have opinions on that, but I think pointing out this fundamental dishonesty does enough to lead people to those kinds of thoughts that I don't need to expand on it myself.

Academics can have some of the most awful egos, and I think that's why he's speaking out his ass on this personally.

[Moralgy]

Probably don't bring up forced marriage if you don't want to be put in the same box as Mormo. No reason to believe you think his post is dumb while also whining about Incels. They do enough whining alone without you and others helping.

Seriously. A phrase that has been on the internet for years is being walked out as a brand new phenomenon to talk abput forced marriage. Why?

It is your problem if you see me in that category, not mine considering i keep responding to his actual argument throughout this thread. Maybe read instead of shitpost and all will be better, but we had this discussion once before and all you want to do is shitpost and gotcha people so I'm not too hopeful.

If you would actually read you wouldn't act like the OP of this thread, and we would all be better off.