The piece was a reflection of how Petersen behaved. Harsh. His fame came from âdestroying wokiesâ as his supporters would have it in TV interviews. In typical fashion when it comes back at them, they canât take it and cry foul.
I see nothing wrong with the feature as a feature. An awful lot of it is quotation, after all. The Petersonsâ whinge about the feature reflects most poorly on them. As you say, he should take some of his own advice.
The daughter is a hustler, out and out. I severely doubt she (or he) has been eating only beef. What you have is the inverse of the 1970s macrobiotic diet. I am reminded of Robert Christgauâs brilliant and rightly famous essay âBeth Ann and Macrobioticismâ.
And Petersonâs talk about âthe radical leftist frontâ and âthe sleeping rightâ is childish and pathetic. Joe Biden as a rad leftie? Give me a break. Peterson is just toxin signalling to his YouTube crew. He needs to take responsibility for this carry on.
2 Likes
I donât think he was out to destroy anyone. I think most interviewers, at least the more notorious interviews weâve seen, were out to take him down a peg and failed as they let emotion get in the way.
I thought the sneering at Petersonâs daughterâs childhood health problems showed remarkable arrogance, unprofessionalism and lack of decency. Aitkenhead must feel very sure of herself; sheâs probably well versed in the âvalidity of ones own lived experienceâ genre, but obviously sees it as an option rather than a belief or value. I think she even leveled in something about âtoxic masculinityâ, you have to chuckle at such pandering to the intersectional free radical feminist lesbian dance students, or whoever laps up such stuff.
I really canât see how anyone wouldnât question the professionalism and motivation of journalist and editor- maybe one of them fancies Cathy Newman
4 Likes
whether he was or not - he was deemed to have and celebrated for it - look at this thread. It made him famous.
Now itâs put back on him, some of the same lads, and himself are crying foul.
There was a clear sense of triumphalism throughout which I thought was in very poor taste. Whether Peterson should take his own medicine is another story⌠He has just had a mental breakdown after a drug addiction beset by a wife suffering from what looked like terminal cancer. It will be interesting what his new rules for life are given his more recent personal experiences
2 Likes
Heâs back hawking his wares on twitter again
12 Rules. Rule number 1. Self promotion
I wouldnât read into this thread too much kid⌠Shur you know how this place works. As I said earlier, he ignores how law and the use of law is a privilege used , predominantly by men, to climb/sustain hierarchies. In one celebrated interview where a female interviewer was going on about the patriarch society⌠he shuts her down brilliantly by pointing out men suffer more in this system⌠More suicide, less better academically, more jail, more murders, more violence against, more sent to war etc. etc. And while true I couldnât see how he could skip over privilege , class privilege, protected by the law of the land, as a driving force, rather than a natural hierarchy that you or I could climb if we followed his rules.
I would not call the comments about the daughterâs health problems sneering. Then again, I would not believe the Lordâs Prayer out of the daughterâs mouth. She is a scam artist, quite plainly. $70 an hour to tell people to eat only beef⌠Or are you happy to take Mikhaila at Mikhailaâs word? I am not.
Peterson has had a great deal of flinty things to say, in recent years, about a lot of people. He can hardly complain credibly about robustness. And I would see comment about âtoxic masculinityâ in the light of comment about âthe radical leftâ.
1 Like
Iâd say Malarkey must suffer with his self-esteem sometimes, being so self-aware.
Go away and kango by yourself. You have no idea how boring you are.
Distant drums and all that.
This is one if the first interesting things youâve said on this forum.
It would be properly hilarious if the daughter has twigged that her fatherâs fanboys are all gullible idiots throwing their cash at any mumbo-jumbo passing as a veneer of being well-read and every night sheâs stuffing her face with veggie samosas.
Really? Iâm surprised at that. She may well be a charlatan but I fail to see what that has to do with her childhood health problems. The journalist obviously expresses a sneering cynicism about those specific issues, issues which have absolutely nothing to do with either journalist or online consultation etc. But what do I know about what constitutes fine journalistsâŚ
Look, I could not care less what you think â about anything. You are an unpleasant idiot pretending to be a ham.
I do not see âsneering cynicismâ. I see a feature in which a third party came to play an unexpectedly large part â by her own wish. She likes the limelight â even in a bikini.
The fact that JP was not fawned over does not invalidate the piece.
Is that the same thing?
Thatâs certainly what the article wants you to believe. I knew nothing about the daughter until I read the piece⌠I wouldnât be one for the gossipy side of things. But the poor daughter braved the harshness of the Siberian gulag to save her Papa. Thatâs remarkable.
Where would you startâŚ
The more louche bits of Freud, I guess.