Peterson, Harris, etc....
- Thread starter prath92
- Start date
Exceptionally dumb thing for a "scientist" to post, basically saying you can't model stock prices (though you can and are paid a ton if you do), so you can't model anything else.
Damn shame he didn't die from his self-induced coma after getting addicted after writing books about how not to get addicted. But I guess this reduced Twitter ghoul is cosmic irony enough.
I'm still amazed that he's deemed a controversial figure.
Peterson is very mad because a trans person won a race, predicting the incomming fall of all women's athletic records. It's an interesting reaction, considering that the winner is a trans man who is still competing in the women's category because he hasn't started hormone therapy.
So basically none of the athletic components of being a man. And, eventually, I assume he will compete against men which may even give him a disadvantage. I am supportive of trans causes, I do wonder how athletics (especially combat sports) will adapt. In the end, will we no longer have the classic binary women's/men's sport categories in favor of something different (hormone levels, body mass, something)?
In combat sports weight class is always the deciding factor. Think they can just keep it that way?
No, a 135lb woman would typically not be as strong as a 135lb man. Naturally the man would normally have a higher proportion of muscle and a different skeletal structure. I think men's and women's categories will stay for a long time, it's as good an arbitrary distinction as any.
Yeah that's fair enough.
Would love to know what any female athletes feel about this. I believe we had another thread going on the topic.
For me it's a tricky one. I'm all for trans folk doing as they please,but don't believe that women athletes who choose to remain binary should be at a disadvantage in their respective sports. And all the science/results point towards 'males' having real advantages.
For me it's a tricky one. I'm all for trans folk doing as they please,but don't believe that women athletes who choose to remain binary should be at a disadvantage in their respective sports. And all the science/results point towards 'males' having real advantages.
Yep. Peterson, and by proxy his followers, saw "trans" in the headline and blew a gasket because they thought a trans woman won and they were ready to predict the end of the world. Even funnier, a trans woman did compete as well. She didn't win.
Something similar is happening in this tread now, but thankfully without the transphobic vitriol. This is a story about a trans man winning a women's race, and he's competing against women because he hasn't started hormone theraphy yet. This is not a story about trans women. Yet the talk automaticically goes to be about how women's sport is potentially under threat by trans women, even though Iszac Henig beat a trans woman in this very race.
This is an opportunity to laugh at how Peterson is making himself look like an idiot because he jumped the gun, or to congratulate Henig with a great race. If we want to talk about trans people then it's an opportunity to talk about trans men, who people seem to forget exist at times. Or we can talk about trans women competing against cis women. Again.
Here are a few quotes/articles from some of the most high profile cases that came to mind.
- Quote by a female MMA fighter who fought the trans woman Fallon Fox.
I've fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can't answer whether it's because she was born a man or not because I'm not a doctor. I can only say, I've never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right.
- Hannah Mouncey was not selected for Australia Women's handball team, as her teammates refused to shower with her. Link.
I am sure opinions are very diverse on the matter, and will obviously vary across sports, geographies, etc. These are just the first examples that came up from the cases I knew about.
Is that recent? Peterson looks terrible.
Maybe he'd just drunk a cider?
Jim Jeffries, a comedian, was infinitely more effective against Peterson than Phd Professor Michael Eric Dyson
There was a similar one with Joe Rogan, where he completely exposed his hypocrisy on equality of outcome.
To be fair, it is actually quite commendable that Peterson concedes when he's wrong in this clip. The vast majority of people do not do so, ever, regardless of the proof put in front of them.
It was either that or condemn the Civil Rights movement though
not really a tough call.It was either that or condemn the Civil Rights movement though
True, although usually people just change the subject rather than say they were wrong.
It should tell us something about this supposed intellectual that all it took for him to change his mind in the span of thirty seconds was for a comedian to point out the obvious contradiction. I don't really give him a lot of credit for saying he's wrong, because the alternative is for him to say on TV that the civil rights movement was a mistake.
To change his mind on a question he was asked 10 seconds earlier and gave a quick, relatively indecisive response to.
Okay, so why care about what he thinks, then? Either he's a heavyweight intellectual or he's not.
And obviously he's not.
And obviously he's not.
i genuinely think Jim Jefferies is smarter than Peterson
Jim Jefferies seems quick on his feet. But I guess plenty of comedians are quick on their feet.
Cocaine is a stimulant, while benzos are depressants. Might have given Jefferies the edge.
He is very good at getting to the core of arguments. His gun routine nailed so many of the bullshit arguments around guns for example.
I think many really talented comedians are very bright. Bill Burr is another one. Being able to see things in a way that you can cut through them so quickly and decisively, and then to be able to effectively articulate that, is a rare and impressive skill
I wouldn’t be too praiseworthy. When he went on Rogan after that clip (few years ago now) he was complaining that they just took that clip to make him look worse. I don’t even think he thought they edited it, just didn’t show 10 minutes before that question or something
That’s a few years ago now
Listened to a bit of the Peterson Rogan podcast this morning, he almost starts crying when he’s talking about this concert he went to.
it’s really quite bizarre the poor guy isn’t well at all
it’s really quite bizarre the poor guy isn’t well at all
I wouldn’t be too praiseworthy. When he went on Rogan after that clip (few years ago now) he was complaining that they just took that clip to make him look worse. I don’t even think he thought they edited it, just didn’t show 10 minutes before that question or something
I also think he has spouted the same nonsense after the Jeffries interview in podcasts/interviews with people who refuse to challenge him. He changed his opinion in the Jeffries interview but he quickly reverted to the norm thereafter in more friendly confines.
I just watched both clips. Jeffries uses logic and reason to dismantle a stance where as Phd Professor Michael Eric Dyson uses racist insults, which would get him banned on the CAF for insulting the person and not the post