I am not sure if JP is guilty of violating the code of conduct or not.
But it is a fact that he does everything except being a psychologist.
But it is a fact that he does everything except being a psychologist.
Jordan Peterson says Ontario psychologist licence may be suspended over public statements
- Thread starter Knuckle Ball
- Start date
You don't accept the findings of the CPO, who know the profession and what Peterson said?
Are you trying to say it's wrong to ask questions of authority?
If we accepted the ludicrous argument that JP and AT primarily to incels, what is the alternative? Rather than have successful men telling incels to become better, are we supposed to leave it to the constant mainstream messaging of female empowerment to somehow address the incel population? Are we to expect that will reduce rampage killings by incels?
Even when it comes to a subset of the male population that is clearly problematic and in need of help, the proper approach is to call them names, humiliate them further, or ignore them.
How's that working out?
Even when it comes to a subset of the male population that is clearly problematic and in need of help, the proper approach is to call them names, humiliate them further, or ignore them.
How's that working out?
1. Andrew Tate is not a "successful man". He is a criminal, a glorified pimp, and a scumbag who is currently in jail being investigated for human trafficking.
2. Female empowerment does not create incels.
Helping men doesn't have to come cloaked in sexism and misogyny. These guys dont even mean to help men. They only want to exploit the men they say they want to help, for their own benefit.
I had not heard anything about Peterson’s stance against masturbation until reading about it in this thread. Looks like it’s on brand for JP and his followers, though:
Daily Show’ Correspondent Explores How Not Masturbating Fuels Alt-Right Anger
Jon BlisteinNovember 7, 2019 8:51AM EST
Popular on Rolling Stone
Daily Show correspondent Michael Kosta examined the daunting question of what makes the alt-right so angry… and discovered one very unexpected possibility: They don’t masturbate enough, if at all.
The segment, which aired Wednesday, centered around an interview with clinical psychologist Dr. David Ley and featured plenty of delightfully dumb masturbation jokes. Ley noted that the biggest contemporary proponents of this “no wank philosophy” (Kosta’s words) were the Proud Boys, who believe not masturbating increases their testosterone and makes them more desirable to women. Ley countered that not masturbating can actually reduce testosterone, and added that there’s research to suggest that those who watch pornography can develop more egalitarian and feminist views.
But the Proud Boys, as Kosta puts it, represent “just the tip” of the “stroke shamers” on the alt-right: Jordan Peterson tells his followers there’s nothing noble about masturbation, while David Duke believes pornography is a Jewish conspiracy meant to get men to masturbate instead of procreate. In fact, this “far-right moratorium on salami wrestling” (again, obviously, Kosta) dates back to Nazi Germany, where young men were taught not to masturbate as a way to make them more malleable to other practices and ideas.
Trending
“First they came for our Fleshlights, and I did nothing…” Kosta deadpanned in response.
By the end of the segment, the whole issue had made Kosta so mad, he took a 41-minute personal break in the bathroom. After emerging, a little disheveled, but certainly more calm, he cracked, “If you or anyone you know seems to be getting drawn into the alt-right, before buying that tiki torch, try lighting the one inside your khakis first. I’m Michael Kosta, telling all you young, angry men to stop hatin’, and start batin’.”
www.rollingstone.com
Daily Show’ Correspondent Explores How Not Masturbating Fuels Alt-Right Anger
Jon BlisteinNovember 7, 2019 8:51AM EST
Popular on Rolling Stone
Daily Show correspondent Michael Kosta examined the daunting question of what makes the alt-right so angry… and discovered one very unexpected possibility: They don’t masturbate enough, if at all.
The segment, which aired Wednesday, centered around an interview with clinical psychologist Dr. David Ley and featured plenty of delightfully dumb masturbation jokes. Ley noted that the biggest contemporary proponents of this “no wank philosophy” (Kosta’s words) were the Proud Boys, who believe not masturbating increases their testosterone and makes them more desirable to women. Ley countered that not masturbating can actually reduce testosterone, and added that there’s research to suggest that those who watch pornography can develop more egalitarian and feminist views.
But the Proud Boys, as Kosta puts it, represent “just the tip” of the “stroke shamers” on the alt-right: Jordan Peterson tells his followers there’s nothing noble about masturbation, while David Duke believes pornography is a Jewish conspiracy meant to get men to masturbate instead of procreate. In fact, this “far-right moratorium on salami wrestling” (again, obviously, Kosta) dates back to Nazi Germany, where young men were taught not to masturbate as a way to make them more malleable to other practices and ideas.
Trending
“First they came for our Fleshlights, and I did nothing…” Kosta deadpanned in response.
By the end of the segment, the whole issue had made Kosta so mad, he took a 41-minute personal break in the bathroom. After emerging, a little disheveled, but certainly more calm, he cracked, “If you or anyone you know seems to be getting drawn into the alt-right, before buying that tiki torch, try lighting the one inside your khakis first. I’m Michael Kosta, telling all you young, angry men to stop hatin’, and start batin’.”
'Daily Show' Correspondent Explores How Not Masturbating Fuels Alt-Right Anger
'Daily Show' correspondent Michael Kosta examined how a "no wank philosophy" might be making the alt-right more angry.
www.rollingstone.com
I'm saying why do you think you might know more about psychologist's professional standards than the experts in the field?
Dammit, I agree with all of this. Excuse me, I have to go shower!!!!
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Of course he's successful. Being a world champion in sport, worth millions of dollars, having a close loving family, and plenty of relationships with beautiful women is winning.
Your envy is clouding your judgement (and pre-judgement) of the man.
I didn't say that it did. It's the overriding message promoted throughout all facets of the Western world, and while that may be a positive force for women, it does nothing for men in need of help. The point was that there is no equivalent positive messaging for males, - certainly not for incels to improve themselves.
There is no sexism or misogyny coming from JP and Tate.
Being proven guilty in a court of law is a procedural matter. Many guilty people get away with it especially in corrupt countries. Lets see what happens. Having millions earned through criminal activities, and being surrounded by whores, running a webcam operation etc, is nothing to be proud about or emulate. And envy? Yeah I am not jealous of being imprisoned in a Romanian jail being investigated for sex/human trafficking.
Incels are incels because they are entitled scumbags. Not necessarily people that need help. What they need is a kick up their asses. And no, there is no overriding message promoted by feminism that impacts men in such a way to become incels. Are there double standards and such? Sure. But that has nothing to do with someone being an incel.
Maybe that is because you are misogynistic and therefore dont find what Tate says misogynistic.
When political correctness masquerades as professional conduct, we are in trouble.
Most incels are males that can't get a companion for a relationship or get laid because they don't have the looks, wit, confidence, or social skills to attract a female partner.
You're proving what I wrote earlier... demonizing a subset of men for no apparent reason. It's in vogue to do so, but why?
It's like beating down someone that is mentally challenged because they're mentally challenged. Calling them scumbags and retards. Who does that? Does it make you feel better? Why do you tolerate it?
Instead of making things up, you can easily look up the background of the board members and the committee members. Professional organizations are fully public.
I doubt any of them are as accomplished a grifter as JP though.
If you read the back and forth and the decision, part of the complaint hinges on leveraging his credibility as a licensed psychologist to opine on things outside the field.
You can interpret that as people in the profession not liking that he is making big bucks.
You can also interpret that as people in the profession finding that damaging to the profession.
There is a long-standing bias in many scientific circles against people who are too into being "public intellectuals" or who mainly focus on writing things for the general audience and not actually working in the "serious" parts of the field. Peterson admits he doesn't have a clinical practice anymore and he doesn't do research anymore, which fits in with that profile.
What an asinine statement (my free speech). You have the freedom to say what you want. You don't have the freedom to decide how other people use their freedoms in response.
Why? Does it challenge my statement that this is far less news worthy than much of what is going on in the world?
Or does that freedom of speech not apply to editorial boards deciding on what stories to report on?
The alt-right think making dumb statements are a reasonable contribution to the conversation.
