Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

[Approaching Infinity]

Just finished this podcast with Peterson on the Duncan Trussell Family Hour (recorded in January). Don't let the intro fool you, it's actually a pretty good show, and the host has some surprisingly insightful things to say, despite some stoner New Agey-ness.

http://www.duncantrussell.com/episodes/2017/1/15/jordan-b-peterson-1

After getting through the standard Peterson stuff, they get into psychedelics and religious experience, and Peterson shares some of his personal mystical experiences. Peterson even mentions Strassman's DMT research and the very strange finding that all of the subjects reported OBEs where they encountered alien beings - and reported them not as hallucinations, but as actual experiences. Trussell gently chides Petersen for always falling back on "scientific" explanations, which leads in some interesting directions.

Great discussion on self-authoring, too, and how 'heaven and hell' are basically coded into our neurobiology and thus our approaches to life. I noticed that one of Peterson's gifts is coming up with clear, concise definitions for concepts that are usually hard to define. E.g., "Order is where you are when the things that you're doing are working the way you want them to. Chaos is all those places and times where what you do produces something other than what you were predicting and desiring." Knowledge protects! Related quotes: "Untruth produces more suffering than truth." "Good is whatever takes you the farthest possible away from evil."

On predicting the future:

"I realized about 10 years [after worrying about WWIII] that I couldn't worry any more about the future because it's so indeterminate that I became convinced that no matter what I was worried about what was likely to happen, that was unlikely the thing that was going to happen. ... In times of radical uncertainty it's necessary that the hero be born, because the hero isn't the person who deals with something specific - the hero is the person who deals with uncertainty itself, and that's the great dragon of chaos. So I would say that what's necessary is for the individual to become prepared for everything and anything. And the way that you do that is by developing your character.... It's incumbent on you to take on the role of the supporter of the world, the pillar of the world."

And he brings that down to earth by saying the first step to get there is simple things, like making your bed, cleaning your room, shouldering all the little responsibilities you have that are immediately in front of you. Then you become stronger.

 

[luc]

Great discussion on self-authoring, too, and how 'heaven and hell' are basically coded into our neurobiology and thus our approaches to life. I noticed that one of Peterson's gifts is coming up with clear, concise definitions for concepts that are usually hard to define. E.g., "Order is where you are when the things that you're doing are working the way you want them to. Chaos is all those places and times where what you do produces something other than what you were predicting and desiring." Knowledge protects! Related quotes: "Untruth produces more suffering than truth." "Good is whatever takes you the farthest possible away from evil."

Yeah, I feel the same way, he really has a knack putting horribly complex things into clear words. It's interesting because he also says that's what we need to learn - actualize the knowledge that is already there in the unconscious by formulating it. And he practices what he preaches.

I think he's consciously embodying the hero archetype himself, the way he stood up against political correctness and such, with the full weight of his knowledge and being that he accumulated over the years. As such, he can unleash great energies of the universe, and he did indeed - I mean, he gets millions of views on his videos and became quite the phenomenon! And his message is desperately needed now.

I find it incredible how his journey led him to many of the same ideas that we discuss here. Granted, he still misses things, most notably the geopolitical angle. But maybe that's his proper place for now, the position the universe and his own struggles have brought him to at this point; I guess he wouldn't have the audience he has if he talked about 9/11, the horror show the CIA unleashed on the planet etc. Well, I don't know, just some thoughts.

 

[Laura]

And he brings that down to earth by saying the first step to get there is simple things, like making your bed, cleaning your room, shouldering all the little responsibilities you have that are immediately in front of you. Then you become stronger.

That's what was so interesting to me about the Molyneux video: that he talked about explaining this to his students and conducting experiments.

I don't know how many times I've said to people: if you see something that needs doing and you are there and able to do it, DO IT only to have them ask me "why? what difference does it make?"

 

[Joe]

I agree that Islam has to be criticized and transformed because it's a dangerous ideology (basically, it's a polemist outgrowth of Jewish messianim with a proselytist dimension).

Islam has been 'weaponized' into 'radical Islam' by Western powers in the service of imperial conquest of resource rich regions of the globe. People in the West never hear a thing from 99% of the world's Muslims because they, like most other normal people, want to live, and do live a normal life. We should, I think, all take note of the fact that the "clash of civilizations" that is currently brewing, has been and is being actively and aggressively stage-managed in order to make it a hard, and painful, reality.

 

[mkrnhr]

Islam has been 'weaponized' into 'radical Islam' by Western powers in the service of imperial conquest of resource rich regions of the globe. People in the West never hear a thing from 99% of the world's Muslims because they, like most other normal people, want to live, and do live a normal life. We should, I think, all take note of the fact that the "clash of civilizations" that is currently brewing, has been and is being actively and aggressively stage-managed in order to make it a hard, and painful, reality.

Exactly, and that's why the oversimplification above (JP video) is astonishing. It is not a coincidence that modern radical Islam was born in those areas under British empire's influence. Without an unbiased view of history (and a network), even a fine intellectual like JP can fall into such generalizations as "all Muslims", including the most anonymous nobody who works all day long who has no involvement with radical Islam, and who is more likely to end up a victim of that same Western-sponsored and armed ideology.

 

[Nielow]

I stumbled across this interview with Peterson and his daughter Mikhaila by chance, really interesting. Turns out they both battled depression and various autoimmune issues with... tada: pretty much the diet recommended here on the forum!

https://youtu.be/A6g_geYeL4U

Quite an impressive family apparently, and I guess it makes sense - the kind of deep research of the human condition Peterson devoted his life to probably wouldn't be possible without some kind of strong and steadfast support (and a great deal of suffering), osit.

Thanks for sharing luc. I was a little shocked when Mikhaila revealed that she was taking Anti-Depressants since 12 years old and how casually this was announced and discussed, as if that is perfectly normal. Or is it nowadays? Am I just old fashioned or something?

Also, when JP talked about his sleeping habits, that he could stay up until 4 in the morning without getting sleepy, just exhausted, and then fall asleep anywhere from one moment to the other, I was thinking: "Duh, that is probably due to the amount of drugs/meds you were taking at that time!"

 

[Timótheos]

Islam has been 'weaponized' into 'radical Islam' by Western powers in the service of imperial conquest of resource rich regions of the globe. People in the West never hear a thing from 99% of the world's Muslims because they, like most other normal people, want to live, and do live a normal life. We should, I think, all take note of the fact that the "clash of civilizations" that is currently brewing, has been and is being actively and aggressively stage-managed in order to make it a hard, and painful, reality.

Exactly, and that's why the oversimplification above (JP video) is astonishing. It is not a coincidence that modern radical Islam was born in those areas under British empire's influence. Without an unbiased view of history (and a network), even a fine intellectual like JP can fall into such generalizations as "all Muslims", including the most anonymous nobody who works all day long who has no involvement with radical Islam, and who is more likely to end up a victim of that same Western-sponsored and armed ideology.

I watched the video again, and while it is rather simplistic in its ideation and presentation, at no point did I see JP make any broad generalizations about "all Muslims" as a group. The closest he got was when he asked "Muslims worldwide" a question whether or not it acceptable to them that the cartoon face could be a depiction of the prophet Muhammad. Perhaps he meant it as a rhetorical question aimed at moderate Muslims in general, so that they might examine their own feelings about those who may publicly question or criticize their religion?

Certainly it seems that Muslims as a group have been deliberately demonized by the media and PTB in the west since 9/11 (and even before that) and that this clash of civilizations has been carefully managed to achieve this outcome. I also agree that a large majority of Muslims aren't radical jihadists and probably just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace.

The context here which I think is missing, is that of all the three mainstream monotheistic religions, Islam is the only one where blasphemy against its ideology is codified and entrenched into the belief system itself and depending on the place where the law is applied comes with very real and often horrific punishments. What I got from JP's video is that because of motion M103, any public criticism of Islam is now about to be codified into Canadian law under the guise of Islamophobia, also with real punishments. It is the precedent being set which is worrisome, and I understand why he might find this alarming.

As far as belief systems go, when looking at these 3 main religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam, all of them could easily be lumped together at the very bottom end of the "truthiness" scale, if you know what I mean. The difference between them is evidenced by looking at which religion one is allowed to criticize or make fun of.

In this respect, Christianity appears to be the most tolerant of the three. Whereas most Christians would probably be offended or upset about a piece of modern art that depicts a crucifix submerged in a glass of human urine, they probably wouldn't issue a worldwide fatwa calling for the assassination of the artist by other Christians. So, this particular religion is fair game to critics, comedians, pundits and cartoonists, and rightly so I might add, because its entire theology is mostly based on lies and rather ridiculous when you think about it.

Judaism, on the other hand, even though it's not codified into Jewish law, has its own built-in criticism censor, whereby anyone who might object to the mutilation of young boys during circumcision or question the brutal policies of the Zionist government of Israel towards their Palestinian neighbours, is simply labelled as an anti-semite, or guilted in to silence by purveyors of the Holocaust industry. Notice how the artists at Charlie Hebdo hardly ever illustrate cartoons critical of Judaism. And not that Judaism as a belief system is any closer to truth in that respect, I mean how can you trust a religion that forbids its followers the choice to eat sweet delicious bacon!

With this in mind, I would say that Islam is the worst of the three, even though, in an objective sense, there is not much difference between them. The way their ideology prohibits any criticism of Islam, subjugates females, condemns any type of alternative sexual orientation, among other things. These principles are part of the official doctrine of Islam. Many may not agree with me here, but it is my opinion that as a belief system, the values of Islam, as they exist today, are incompatible with the values of western civilization. And if the M013 motion gets passed through Canadian parliament, there may soon exist the possibility that just by saying something like that in public could result in real legal consequences.

When one looks back ay the history of Christianity, with the burning of heretics and the tortures of the Inquisition, it is a history of horrible intolerance and abuses. Over time things have changed somewhat for better, and religions do serve a necessary purpose in society. If Islam has any hope of remaining relevant and becoming more accepted in the west, the 99% percent of the moderates around the world, who just want to live normal lives, need to stand up and challenge the regressive policies of their religion and the fundamentalist leaders who promote them. But alas, it is probably a little too late for any of that now.

 

[Hindsight Man]

Islam has been 'weaponized' into 'radical Islam' by Western powers in the service of imperial conquest of resource rich regions of the globe. People in the West never hear a thing from 99% of the world's Muslims because they, like most other normal people, want to live, and do live a normal life. We should, I think, all take note of the fact that the "clash of civilizations" that is currently brewing, has been and is being actively and aggressively stage-managed in order to make it a hard, and painful, reality.

Exactly, and that's why the oversimplification above (JP video) is astonishing. It is not a coincidence that modern radical Islam was born in those areas under British empire's influence. Without an unbiased view of history (and a network), even a fine intellectual like JP can fall into such generalizations as "all Muslims", including the most anonymous nobody who works all day long who has no involvement with radical Islam, and who is more likely to end up a victim of that same Western-sponsored and armed ideology.

I watched the video again, and while it is rather simplistic in its ideation and presentation, at no point did I see JP make any broad generalizations about "all Muslims" as a group. The closest he got was when he asked "Muslims worldwide" a question whether or not it acceptable to them that the cartoon face could be a depiction of the prophet Muhammad. Perhaps he meant it as a rhetorical question aimed at moderate Muslims in general, so that they might examine their own feelings about those who may publicly question or criticize their religion?

Certainly it seems that Muslims as a group have been deliberately demonized by the media and PTB in the west since 9/11 (and even before that) and that this clash of civilizations has been carefully managed to achieve this outcome. I also agree that a large majority of Muslims aren't radical jihadists and probably just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace.

The context here which I think is missing, is that of all the three mainstream monotheistic religions, Islam is the only one where blasphemy against its ideology is codified and entrenched into the belief system itself and depending on the place where the law is applied comes with very real and often horrific punishments. What I got from JP's video is that because of motion M103, any public criticism of Islam is now about to be codified into Canadian law under the guise of Islamophobia, also with real punishments. It is the precedent being set which is worrisome, and I understand why he might find this alarming.

As far as belief systems go, when looking at these 3 main religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam, all of them could easily be lumped together at the very bottom end of the "truthiness" scale, if you know what I mean. The difference between them is evidenced by looking at which religion one is allowed to criticize or make fun of.

In this respect, Christianity appears to be the most tolerant of the three. Whereas most Christians would probably be offended or upset about a piece of modern art that depicts a crucifix submerged in a glass of human urine, they probably wouldn't issue a worldwide fatwa calling for the assassination of the artist by other Christians. So, this particular religion is fair game to critics, comedians, pundits and cartoonists, and rightly so I might add, because its entire theology is mostly based on lies and rather ridiculous when you think about it.

Judaism, on the other hand, even though it's not codified into Jewish law, has its own built-in criticism censor, whereby anyone who might object to the mutilation of young boys during circumcision or question the brutal policies of the Zionist government of Israel towards their Palestinian neighbours, is simply labelled as an anti-semite, or guilted in to silence by purveyors of the Holocaust industry. Notice how the artists at Charlie Hebdo hardly ever illustrate cartoons critical of Judaism. And not that Judaism as a belief system is any closer to truth in that respect, I mean how can you trust a religion that forbids its followers the choice to eat sweet delicious bacon!

With this in mind, I would say that Islam is the worst of the three, even though, in an objective sense, there is not much difference between them. The way their ideology prohibits any criticism of Islam, subjugates females, condemns any type of alternative sexual orientation, among other things. These principles are part of the official doctrine of Islam. Many may not agree with me here, but it is my opinion that as a belief system, the values of Islam, as they exist today, are incompatible with the values of western civilization. And if the M013 motion gets passed through Canadian parliament, there may soon exist the possibility that just by saying something like that in public could result in real legal consequences.

When one looks back ay the history of Christianity, with the burning of heretics and the tortures of the Inquisition, it is a history of horrible intolerance and abuses. Over time things have changed somewhat for better, and religions do serve a necessary purpose in society. If Islam has any hope of remaining relevant and becoming more accepted in the west, the 99% percent of the moderates around the world, who just want to live normal lives, need to stand up and challenge the regressive policies of their religion and the fundamentalist leaders who promote them. But alas, it is probably a little too late for any of that now.

I largely agree.
Just to preface what I'm about to say,I hung out with Muslims in high school and we got along fabulously and as a result I don't see them as some kind of monolith or anything like that.I also hung out with asians,idians and people from all over the place really.Interestingly enough I find that asian people,particularly from china tend to be the more secular (at least here in Oz) and have noticed that 1st gen chinese immigrants tend to really stick together,to such a degree that many won't even hire white people when they open shops.Can you imagine the backlash a white shop owner might receive if he were to deny an asian guy a job just because he's asian?

Having said that though,after some research,I do find a lot of things about islam as it is traditionally practiced quite abhorrent.Honor killings for one.A fairly recent high profile case was where an actress from harry potter (muslim girl) dated a hindu guy and so her brother and father beat her and branded her a prostitute.Now she did survive,but only because she ran from home,otherwise they would've killed her.Do we simply accept it because ''it's just their culture''?What about young brides/pedophilia?Execution of gays?Public stoning?That last one is so strange to me.So sadistic.Beheadings look humane compared to that.

Yes they have been villified and abused,many are simply people who are looking for a decent life, and this clash is manufactured,but that doesn't mean we should simply close our eyes to the vile shit that takes place within that religion,just as we wouldn't ignore it in christianity or judaism or in corporate halls of power.

 

[Laura]

<snip>

The context here which I think is missing, is that of all the three mainstream monotheistic religions, Islam is the only one where blasphemy against its ideology is codified and entrenched into the belief system itself and depending on the place where the law is applied comes with very real and often horrific punishments. What I got from JP's video is that because of motion M103, any public criticism of Islam is now about to be codified into Canadian law under the guise of Islamophobia, also with real punishments. It is the precedent being set which is worrisome, and I understand why he might find this alarming.

Actually, in former times, blasphemy in Judaism was punished by stoning. They just got with the modern program and realized they weren't big enough to impose that on everyone else.

Blasphemy against God/Christ was also severely punished right up until rather recent times. Many professors and persons of influence were punished by losing their jobs/positions for questioning the truth of Christianity. In fact, most recently, biblical scholar, Gerd Ludemann was subjected to "the treatment":

Following a series of historically critical publications culminating in the publication of his book Der große Betrug: Und was Jesus wirklich sagte und tat (The Great Deception: And What Jesus Really Said and Did) in 1999, in which he argued that only about five per cent of the sayings attributed to Jesus are genuine and the historical evidence does not support the claims of traditional Christianity, the Confederation of Protestant Churches in Lower Saxony called for his dismissal from the Chair of New Testament Studies. Lüdemann stated that his studies convinced him that his previous Christian faith, based as it was on Biblical Studies, had become impossible: 'the person of Jesus himself becomes insufficient as a foundation of faith once most of the New Testament statements about him have proved to be later interpretations by the community'.

Although the call for his dismissal was rejected by the state government of Lower Saxony, the members of the faculty, under pressure from the Church, complained to the University President that Professor Lüdemann had "fundamentally put in question the intrinsic soundness of Protestant theology at the University". As a result the Chair of New Testament was renamed the Chair of History and Literature of Early Christianity, his research funding was cut and his teaching was no longer part of the curriculum. Lüdemann complained that 'most of my colleagues have long since left the principles of the Church behind them yet still seek to attach themselves to this tradition by symbolic interpretation and by other interpretative skills'.

Of course, that's nothing like being beheaded or inflicting punishments on "infidels" for criticizing your faith as Islam seeks to do. Back when Judaism (first) and Christianity (later) went after unbelievers, it was usually just going to war with them - i.e. crusades or the Protestants vs. the Catholics. And don't forget the endless Jewish pogroms beginning in the early centuries AD.

Islam operates as though time has stopped; it is still in the 8th or 9th century.

<snip>

In this respect, Christianity appears to be the most tolerant of the three. Whereas most Christians would probably be offended or upset about a piece of modern art that depicts a crucifix submerged in a glass of human urine, they probably wouldn't issue a worldwide fatwa calling for the assassination of the artist by other Christians. So, this particular religion is fair game to critics, comedians, pundits and cartoonists, and rightly so I might add, because its entire theology is mostly based on lies and rather ridiculous when you think about it.

Actually, that is not entirely the case. The Christianity that Paul created is actually rather similar to things the Cs have said about our cosmic reality - and Jordan, in his assessment of some of the ideas - the existence of the antipodes of goodness, for example - touches on some of these important points. But, all of the theological issues are something I'm still working on writing about.

Judaism, on the other hand, even though it's not codified into Jewish law, has its own built-in criticism censor, whereby anyone who might object to the mutilation of young boys during circumcision or question the brutal policies of the Zionist government of Israel towards their Palestinian neighbours, is simply labelled as an anti-semite, or guilted in to silence by purveyors of the Holocaust industry. Notice how the artists at Charlie Hebdo hardly ever illustrate cartoons critical of Judaism. And not that Judaism as a belief system is any closer to truth in that respect, I mean how can you trust a religion that forbids its followers the choice to eat sweet delicious bacon!

Yup, that's what is interesting about Judaism and which should make us most suspicious of it. It's a very materialistic religion and only some sects believe in survival of the soul/spirit after death. So that naturally raises some questions. Islam, on the other hand, has a more "Christian" view of the "other worlds", or densities/dimensions as we might call them. This it derived from the Jewish sectarians that are at its origins AND partially influenced Paul's thinking as well.

With this in mind, I would say that Islam is the worst of the three, even though, in an objective sense, there is not much difference between them.

True enough to a certain level. But the devil certainly is in the details in more ways than one! There are some interesting sociological observations that have been made about the three in comparison to primitive religions. (See Mary Douglas) It seems that cosmology affects sociology and sociology is expressed via the body and close relationships. It's a very scary world that Muslims live in, cosmically speaking, and to a certain extent, they are not wrong in that assessment. They sure have a pretty good handle on the djinn! The issue is the ignorance of the theology in terms of how to deal with such a reality. They think that maintaining absolute purity will prevent bad things from happening to them by "angry spirits"; or that purity will please Allah who will bless them. It's an extremely primitive system of managing things despite the fact that they managed to preserve a rather decent concept of "energies". So, yeah, they need to grow up theologically. But, as we see with Judaism and Christianity, growing up is risky because the system often dumps the baby out with the bathwater. And that is often a consequence of overreaching and overreacting.

The Inquisition sickened Christianity and brought about the great schism where protestants turned on the Church; the holocaust sickened the world and changed the attitude toward Jews though that has been totally artificially overblown so it is hard to make a comparison. Perhaps that experience is what it affecting the Muslim/anti-Muslim situation today?

The way their ideology prohibits any criticism of Islam, subjugates females, condemns any type of alternative sexual orientation, among other things. These principles are part of the official doctrine of Islam.

All of those things were part of Judaism and Christianity. Most of it was lost along with any real perception of other realities. How to keep the latter and still "grow up"?

Many may not agree with me here, but it is my opinion that as a belief system, the values of Islam, as they exist today, are incompatible with the values of western civilization.

What are the "values" of "Western Civilization"? Most of our "values" are Judaeo/Christian and have led us to the present truly awful global situation.

When one looks back ay the history of Christianity, with the burning of heretics and the tortures of the Inquisition, it is a history of horrible intolerance and abuses. Over time things have changed somewhat for better, and religions do serve a necessary purpose in society. If Islam has any hope of remaining relevant and becoming more accepted in the west, the 99% percent of the moderates around the world, who just want to live normal lives, need to stand up and challenge the regressive policies of their religion and the fundamentalist leaders who promote them. But alas, it is probably a little too late for any of that now.

Well said, and true enough: the threat exerted on Islam from the outside will only serve to strengthen their belief that they are right. And, based on the sociological studies I've read, this is pretty well known and MUST BE DELIBERATE.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= Timótheos]And if the M013 motion gets passed through Canadian parliament, there may soon exist the possibility that just by saying something like that in public could result in real legal consequences.[/quote]

It's worrying but take note how the public reacts to it. Laws such as those doesn't stop Islamphobia, it only increases it. And it also makes the public hatefull against the current Establisment. The Left is in full self-destruction. And the death of the Neo Liberal World Order is resurrecting the Extreme Right. The Left have gone so insane that the Extreme Right is becoming attractive again. Now it's capable of rebranding itself and this couldn't have happened otherwise.

I am not saying that this is orchestrated on a human level. But taking into account 4D varieties. Something may be at play. Ultimately we also have to pay attention how the populace reacts to certain laws, movements, situations etc. And not only the supposed intentions about it. So this Law may sell it self as defending those who practice Islam. (It's censorship and in a subtle way painting all Muslims as radicals) But seeing how people react to it, in reality it will only do the opposite.

As for the Death of the Neo Liberal World Order. If this new form of the Extreme Right has committed it's crimes of global genocide. (It better not happen!!) The Liberal New World Order can make in return create it's comeback. You can think of it as a cycles that will become more extreme and extreme each turn. Because people simply don't know how society should be run. They are unable to see positive alternatives

Besides all this, the Liberal New World Order is also perfectly capable of committing a global holocaust. The Right labels them as undesirables, the Left labels them as intolerant. They just use different words.


Trump isn't part of this Extreme Right. I wasn't talking about him, I am talking about the population in general. Because something is brewing. Os so it seems? I pray Trump can stop Gladia B in it's tracks. Because if that operation goes full steam. The second holocaust is all but certain...

OSIT.

 

[Deleted member 4320]

I have nothing special to say, but have a comment which is pushing on my tongue. I really wanted understand why I don't have such job which I want to have, I don't earn money that I need. I compared myself to others and examine my character and I assumed that that what I did it not match with my genetics. I don't have a proper moving/instinct center giving specific capabilities which can build with other two centers good functioning machine to do the job which I did. After I start doing my current metier, I have better and worse days but merely I DO it with little doses but factually I DO.

And, when I see that difference, are just cultural or come from nurture, it's funny. I see, in me and in other men differences. So if, the men can be different from each other about a lot. Then think about women. They are yet more different than men between each other. The genetic predisposition are facts, but it is not like that they are judgment. But it's important to take them into account.

 

[Hindsight Man]

[quote author= Timótheos]And if the M013 motion gets passed through Canadian parliament, there may soon exist the possibility that just by saying something like that in public could result in real legal consequences.

It's worrying but take note how the public reacts to it. Laws such as those doesn't stop Islamphobia, it only increases it. And it also makes the public hatefull against the current Establisment. The Left is in full self-destruction. And the death of the Neo Liberal World Order is resurrecting the Extreme Right. The Left have gone so insane that the Extreme Right is becoming attractive again. Now it's capable of rebranding itself and this couldn't have happened otherwise.

I am not saying that this is orchestrated on a human level. But taking into account 4D varieties. Something may be at play. Ultimately we also have to pay attention how the populace reacts to certain laws, movements, situations etc. And not only the supposed intentions about it. So this Law may sell it self as defending those who practice Islam. (It's censorship and in a subtle way painting all Muslims as radicals) But seeing how people react to it, in reality it will only do the opposite.

As for the Death of the Neo Liberal World Order. If this new form of the Extreme Right has committed it's crimes of global genocide. (It better not happen!!) The Liberal New World Order can make in return create it's comeback. You can think of it as a cycles that will become more extreme and extreme each turn. Because people simply don't know how society should be run. They are unable to see positive alternatives

Besides all this, the Liberal New World Order is also perfectly capable of committing a global holocaust. The Right labels them as undesirables, the Left labels them as intolerant. They just use different words.


Trump isn't part of this Extreme Right. I wasn't talking about him, I am talking about the population in general. Because something is brewing. Os so it seems? I pray Trump can stop Gladia B in it's tracks. Because if that operation goes full steam. The second holocaust is all but certain...

OSIT.
[/quote]

Well put.Cassies mentioned that later on much of the world will be unrecognizable,but not totally destroyed.Combine that with the wave and we may just have a chance at breaking this cycle.Unfortunately,the only thing that will stop the spiraling insanity is a really big shock,something so unexpected that it blows people away (maybe even literally).Until something like that can distract people from their petty squabbles,and force them to cooperate or perish,the show will go on.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= Hindsight Man]Well put.Cassies mentioned that later on much of the world will be unrecognizable,but not totally destroyed.Combine that with the wave and we may just have a chance at breaking this cycle.Unfortunately,the only thing that will stop the spiraling insanity is a really big shock,something so unexpected that it blows people away (maybe even literally).Until something like that can distract people from their petty squabbles,and force them to cooperate or perish,the show will go on.[/quote]

I think so to Hindsight Man. Sadly the only thing that can people shake out of apathy seems to be planetary destruction, comets etc. But if it can prevent a global holocaust, than I have to say that I am all for it. However extreme that may sound.



[quote author= lux]And, when I see that difference, are just cultural or come from nurture, it's funny. I see, in me and in other men differences. So if, the men can be different from each other about a lot. Then think about women. They are yet more different than men between each other. The genetic predisposition are facts, but it is not like that they are judgment. But it's important to take them into account.[/quote]

Being different doesn't mean that we have to be indifferent to each other. We can always learn to understand each other better. :)

[quote author= lux]I have nothing special to say, but have a comment which is pushing on my tongue. I really wanted understand why I don't have such job which I want to have, I don't earn money that I need.[/quote]

Welcome in my life ;) I know it can worn people out. But I am happy to have found purpose in my life thanks to this network. That helps me to see the situation in a less negative daylight. And who knows what kind of job can come along over time that is more fulfilling.


[quote author= lux]I compared myself to others and examine my character and I assumed that that what I did it not match with my genetics.[/quote]

You mean lux, that you didn't found a job that matches your talents? If something is bothering you, feel free to share. Unless you just wanted something of your tongue. :)

 

[Deleted member 4320]

[quote author= lux]I compared myself to others and examine my character and I assumed that that what I did it not match with my genetics.

You mean lux, that you didn't found a job that matches your talents? If something is bothering you, feel free to share. Unless you just wanted something of your tongue. :)
[/quote]

Well, in fact I don't have any special talent :P But what I understand is that, the best way for me is for long-term education in especially in the subjects required strict thinking, sciences. The good thing is, that I work on be programmer. What saves me is that there are quite good amount of jobs offers and a good salary even at the beginning of carrer.

But back to the main subject. My intuition tell me that this "equality" may lead to blurring the characteristics of each gender and mishmash, which is to make people lifes more difficult, for example, to young people, as late as they were able to find their place in society and lead a life of giving them satisfaction. And to find in society need to know self - this, whom the puzzle somebody is, how he have shape. But what if all the puzzles will look the same? Then, this is a problem.

Taking two people, average man and average woman. Let say they will at the same intellectual intelligence, and level of emotional maturity, and what will make a diference will, for example, range of instinctive behaviour, responses, then the "equality" will only lock their potential. It will be a waste of their additional capabilities flowing from coded instincts and giving certain advantage in certain situations.

 

[Joe]

The context here which I think is missing, is that of all the three mainstream monotheistic religions, Islam is the only one where blasphemy against its ideology is codified and entrenched into the belief system itself and depending on the place where the law is applied comes with very real and often horrific punishments.

Note that blasphemy and apostasy in Islam are centered on Middle Eastern countries, with the most severe punishments in Saudi Arabia, a ridiculous farce of a 'nation' that practices a ridiculous and farcical interpretation of Islam (there are many interpretation of the Koran depending on the country). Note also that most Middle Eastern countries are, to one extent or another, the creation of Western powers and have been interfered with since their creation less than 100 years ago. Then note that these same Western powers have posited the 'clash of civilizations' i.e. "radical Islam" Vs the West, which necessitates Western military and corporate intervention in these resource rich areas.

In this respect, Christianity appears to be the most tolerant of the three. Whereas most Christians would probably be offended or upset about a piece of modern art that depicts a crucifix submerged in a glass of human urine, they probably wouldn't issue a worldwide fatwa calling for the assassination of the artist by other Christians. So, this particular religion is fair game to critics, comedians, pundits and cartoonists, and rightly so I might add, because its entire theology is mostly based on lies and rather ridiculous when you think about it.

Do you really think that the fact that Christianity in western nations can be lampooned and ridiculed to high heaven with not only complete impunity but often with enthusiastic encouragement from the establishment and media, is a good thing for Western society at large? The campaign to destroy Christian values in the West and promote 'multi-culturalism' has been pursued by "leftists" for many years. The same people who lampoon Christianity in the West want you and I to embrace gender fluidity. Maybe that could eventually be turned into a religion to replace Christianity?

"All hail the great gender queer god?!"