The proper answer to the employees who are complaining about Peterson’s book is “good luck with your job search. “

Why shouldn't these busybodies be in publishing? They're in every other walk of life already. They're in media, politics, HOAs, even cemeteries.

They're calling the police (or the city council) with every minor offense. Not wearing a mask, that's a paddlin'. Not using someone's preferred pronoun, that's a paddlin'. Not wanting men in women's sports, that's a paddlin'. Offending their delicate sensibilities, whoo, you better believe that's a paddlin'.

These people need to be slapped down, and hard.

Speaking of "delicate sensibilities," Conan...

This column demonstrates just how likely it is that one can be brainwashed, not just by one's friends and neighbors, but by "experts" with Ph.D.s, if one doesn't keep working HARD to remember what common sense really is - and used to be. (As opposed to, say, the common ignorance of great-grandparents who tried to argue that the harm caused by second-hand smoke is just a stupid modern myth.)

https://www.djournal.com/lifestyle/living/john-rosemond-adoption-specialists-often-infect-parents-with-anxiety/article_7a1e4d8b-4da9-579a-8086-39dd662b62a4.html

I don't know just how common the lie is that even children adopted in infancy have to treated with kid gloves as they get older, but it's pretty alarming that even ONE doctor would think that way. When most of your neighbors start to think that way...

Test

I copied this from a comment on another forum regarding things that Peterson has actually said:

Homosexuality: On gay marriage Peterson states, "If the marital vows are taken seriously, it seems to me a means where gay people can be more thoroughly integrated into standard society and that's probably a good thing". Before his illness, he was on tour with Dave Rubin and Dave's husband and he is writing the forward for Dave's new book. (Call me crazy but this doesn't sound homophobic to me.)

Equality of opportunity: He believes in equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. Some may disagree but hardly an extreme point of view and one that is rather consistent with what Martin Luther King was asking for.

Men/women: He believes that men and women are more alike than different and are of equal intelligence. However, there are extremes at the ends of the bell curve which can cause differences in such things as certain career choices and who may be more likely to end up in prison. He also believes that biology places a pressure on women that is not generally present in men and this can affect some of their decisions. Namely the limited amount of time they have to start a family. Again folks are free to disagree but hardly an extreme view.

Politics: He describes himself as a "Classic Liberal". He believe that society requires a balance of left/right thinking and states, "The left is to remind those that are benefiting from the hierarchies the the hierarchy comes at a cost and the cost is a clumping of people at the bottom. And that's an eternal cost and it's not trivial. . . The left should be providing the voice of those who are dispossessed by hierarchies." Does this sound "alt-right" to you?

Gender pronouns: He doesn't like forced speech or some newly created gender pronouns. However, he will call a trans female (male who transitioned to female) as "she" and has stated so. (See TVO debate where Peterson and trans person, Theryn Meyer, take the same side.)

Gender discrimination: He accepts that gender discrimination can sometimes explain part of the pay difference between men and women. He just believes it simplistic to rely on one factor when many greater factors are at play such as men taking on more dangerous jobs (which pay more), men being more willing to relocate, women choosing to work part-time after having a family and men willing to work longer hours. (Doesn't sound that extreme to me.)

Personal responsibility: He discourages the victim mentality and promotes personal responsibility. Many people find this view empowering.

Christianity: He may be influenced by Christian doctrine but so is Obama. In my opinion, his spiritual views are more akin to Echart Tolle's. This seems to come as a shock to some but people are actually allowed to have spiritual beliefs.

The classic "Liberal" was ok with people having different views and recognized that people had different values, priorities, and comfort with risk. Debate was assumed to be a good thing. Congress used to pass legislation (not all but many) with large majorities, not just by 1 vote.
The current woke nonsense is scary because they are way too comfortable using force. They don't mind intimidating Trump voters or politicians, canceling people, censoring stuff. If almost exactly half the country does not want something (green nude eel, higher taxes etc) maybe it should not be forced down their throats.

Don’t like what your company does? Quit.
(I have.)

Congress used to pass legislation (not all but many) with large majorities, not just by 1 vote. ~ cc at November 25, 2020 4:23 PM

Parties used to understand that, someday, the other party would be in charge and if they wanted their legislation to withstand changes in the power structure, it had to be passed both parties. So, they were willing to have the other party involved in creating the legislation from the beginning, instead of presenting it to them and demanding they vote it in.

Parties also used to agree to some extent on the issues that needed to be addressed. Today, the parties are miles apart on even agreeing on issues that need to be addressed - with one party insisting the issue has reached a crisis level and the other arguing that it's not a actual issue, or that the other party's planned solution amounts to tyranny - i.e., climate change, systemic racism, freedom of speech, religious freedom, abortion, etc.

As a result, we get presidents governing by executive order and both parties trying to use the courts to enforce their will on the other party versus actually talking to the other. Neither party recognizes the other's position as a valid one.

That's why Supreme Court nomination hearings have gotten so ugly. With the electorate basically split 50/50, each party needs to control the courts to impose its will on the other; and with the courts being the chief way to impose the party's will on the other party, each party wants to control the judicial pipeline - i.e., the Senate and the White House.

AOC has already said she'll be going to Georgia to help Democrats campaign in the run-off "so we don't have to negotiate in that manner." Her view is indicative of both party's feelings in dealing with the other party.

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

Coming soon to a Progressive Re-education Camp near you!

✔ KateC at November 25, 2020 5:29 PM

BT/DT