Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Glenn said:
I have a friend who is, what I would call, an atheistic moralist. And you get a lot of the same stuff that is highlighted here. Basically ends up as doublespeak. They are blind and oblivious to anything you point out to them. The end justifies the means.
Click to expand...
Whoa, @Glenn! Your description identifies to a tee a friend of mine, an atheistic moralist, with all of the same characteristics as your friend, particularly the above bolded.
 
iamthatis said:
Okay, so queering archaeology didn't start as an 'agenda to change facts'. That said, those steering an agenda doesn't usually announce 'we are going to stage an attack on truth'. Why would they? America always bombs for democracy, not control of oil or punishment of those disobedient states who want something better than exploitation. The idea that 'there is no agenda' creates the primary condition of possibility for an agenda to exist. For instance, the UN recently assured me that there is no agenda. I was so relieved!



So the initiation of queering archaeology was not 'changing facts' but 'challenging assumptions'. 'Challenging assumptions' sure sounds better. 'Changing facts' sounds like being paid to create lies, and teach methods to others for doing so, in service of an ideology ungrounded in reality. I can see why one would opt for the moral-sounding 'challenging assumptions' instead of the hard-to-swallow 'changing facts'.

This is generally the way ideology, as a mind-virus, explains itself to its host - in terms of altruism, or a good cause, something closer to the truth. In this case, its 'challenging assumptions'. But the stated altruistic motive is just the sugar coating on a bitter pill of the full agenda of transformation. A lot of environmentalists, for instance, care so much about the planet that they are not-so-secretly hoping that billions of people die. Communism also began with a decent-sounding premise, ie. to end the exploitation of the workers. Meanwhile, in the gulag...

The point is, I think that 'queering archaeology' - and the 'queering' of most, if not all, disciplines - does the same no matter what language you use to describe it. The effect is to ponerize the institution or field of research. The broader social effect of this is to give evil yet another foothold in the world. In case you're not familiar with the word 'ponerize', I'd very highly recommend Political Ponerology by Lobaczeswki. After reading, you might consider that you've been taught to employ the sorts of language games that he describes when people are under the sway of ideology.

So although you may not see it as such, there is an agenda at play, mostly in the West, and queering archaeology is operating within the context of this broader psychopathic agenda, currently gathered under the term 'woke'. 'Woke' links up with other Big Lies like anthropogenic global warming, CBDCs and digital identities, and in general the immiseration and enslavement of as many humans as possible, according to the C's, to be able to enslave us in 3D prior to the Wave, or in 4D after the transition.

It's kinda like a birdcage. People may see a few bars of the cage (ie., identify a few major lies), but may not see the totality of the frequency fence.

In this way, queering archaeology might seem like an innocent academic pursuit, based on a 'we can never know the mind of the celts' starting point. But outside of the ivory tower, you have paediatricians giving chemical castration hormones to children - sometimes without their parents knowing about it. Young kids are also being taken to drag shows in strip clubs. People of all ages who often have a history of mental illness are being convinced to submit for genital mutilation. Many of them end up as suicides. Institutions are increasingly incompetent on the basis of identity quotas instead of striving for excellence and service. Students of all ages can now identify as cats, and if the teacher doesn't approve of their animalistic fantasy world, then that teacher is liable for a struggle session or a new job. And on and on.

I consider all this to be evil, and an effect of psychopathy on a quite broad scale - a psychopathy that is busy trying to make more of itself. This is what I'm thinking of when I said that a supposedly-innocuous 'queered archaeology' is one bar in the 'woke' cage. It is one part of a very real agenda to to try to change facts. Whether or not it began as 'challenging assumptions' is kinda moot because the result is clearly an increase of suffering and misery, and imprisonment of the mind. As far as I can tell, the current woke madness began in academia, by 'challenging assumptions'. The Captive Mind by Czesław Miłosz would prolly also be useful to further understand the role that intellectuals play in ponerization:
Click to expand...
Kudos @iamthatis. The best rebuttal of the LGBTQ philosophy/nonsense some are attempting to justify, via a mountain of verbal mumbo-jumbo, devoid of any morals or ethics. IE he really has nothing to say of any value, which you have made abundantly clear.
FWIW
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thinking a bit more about the Sam Harris's, and others, like Dawkins, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson, (basically hardcore materialists/atheists), It occurred to me, that the people that I know, that follow these types, all of them have swallowed all the latest narratives hook, line and sinker. In other words, you don't seem to find any of these types of followers that will have even one opinion outside of the official narratives. And it occurred to me that maybe, these narratives that the Harris types spew, is like an opener, an hypnotic opener, (to steal a term). So maybe that is their purpose. Hook susceptible people with this crazy talk, and you pretty much have them for any narrative you want to spin for your purpose.

This is a little hard to explain, so hope this makes some sense. Have others noticed the same thing?
 
Redrock12 said:
Kudos @iamthatis. The best rebuttal of the LGBTQ philosophy/nonsense @Revolucionar is attempting to justify, via a mountain of verbal mumbo-jumbo, devoid of any morals or ethics. IE he really has nothing to say of any value, which you have made abundantly clear.
FWIW
Click to expand...
My bad, it's not @Revolucionar I was referring to, but @siftingmaterials. Sorry, but I reported the error. Hope a mod will fix it.:-[
 
A clip from Disney-owned ABC broadcasted in 2018 has recently resurfaced and gone viral for promoting an 11-year-old "drag kid" being given gifts from adult drag queens on live TV. Matt Walsh ("What is a woman") commented on the many wrong things that this clip reveals:

 
bjorn said:
This is also part of the new normal

https://twitter.com/x/status/1564272390443454466
Click to expand...
That is probably the best way to describe it, sadly. The new normal.

I was just having a conversation with someone about this video:


And it strikes me like the above, the exposure of children to this kind of behavior is akin to eating them, or maybe not quite eating them, but scarring them enough, psychologically, to lead them to troubled adult lives.

And it is really shocking to see such a level of ideological possession, to the degree that it would override one of the oldest programs written in our DNA, protecting the youngest of our species from harm.
 
Years ago I talked to a psychologist specialized in children. Basically what she said was that there are people (at that time we were talking about prostitution cartels) who subjected children to traumatic sexual experiences. The victims then, as a defense mechanism, internalize those practices and normalize them so that later they adopt that "lifestyle" as an imperative to protect their shattered psyche. I can't help but view this playing out at an unprecedented scale almost everywhere with the tacit encouragement of the PtB. There is a special place in hell for those who do this to children, including the parents who allow this to happen.
 
Vanessa Beeley on UKColumn Aug 26 (23:09 - The WHO's Sexualisation of Infants) briefly discussed two WHO/UNICEF/et al documents (below) and she reviewed some examples of child grooming contained in WHO Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe, focusing on "the sexual education" of ages 0-4 and 4-6. She had coughing fits throughout her presentation and I wonder if she weren't viscerally protesting the articulation of even a few of the document's bizarre and perfidious contents. Just a few examples below.

International technical guidance on sexuality education
“Abstinence-only programmes have been found to be ineffective and potentially harmful to young people’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.” (Pg. 18)

“Sexuality is linked to power ... CSE can address the relationship between sexuality, gender and power, and its political and social dimensions.” (Pg. 17, 2.1, Box 1)

WHO Regional Office for Europe and BZgA Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe
Ages 0-4
Emotions -- [there are] different types of love
Sexuality -- physical closeness is a normal part of life, an expression of love and affection
-- [you can] express own needs, wishes and boundaries, for example in the context of “playing doctor” [???]
Sexuality and rights -- the feeling that they can make their own decisions, can say “yes” and “no” [to what?]
-- differentiate between “good” and “bad” secrets [???]
Sexuality, health and well-being -- if the experience/feeling is not good, you do not always [???] have to comply

Ages 4-6
Sexuality, health and well-being -- if the experience/feeling is not good, you do not always have to comply
Sexuality -- the meaning and expression of sexuality (for example expressing feelings of love) [in kindergarten?]

Ages 9-12
Sexuality, health and well-being -- take responsibility in relation to safe and pleasant sexual experiences for oneself and others

And it goes on ad infinitum (139 pages in one document, 68 in the other).
 
nypost.com

10-year-old trans model Noella McMaher, who has 2 trans parents, already a New York Fashion Week vet

Noella McMaher, 10, made her debut at NYFW in February as one of several trans and non-binary models walking for Trans Clothing Company — and was the youngest to ever take part in the event.
nypost.com nypost.com

Some excerpts:

Noella McMaher, whose parents both identify as transgender and who has an infant sibling referred to as a “theybie,” made her debut at NYFW in February as one of several trans and non-binary models walking for the Trans Clothing Company. She was the youngest person to ever take part in the event.

“Noella’s first show was Chicago Fashion Week at 7 years old,” her parent, Dee, told Forbes earlier this year. “An out trans teen told her about open auditions, and she watched YouTube videos to prepare. She booked two designers at her very first audition. Since then she has been in two Chicago Fashion Weeks and a handful of smaller shows.”

Dee told The Post Wednesday that Noella didn’t like wearing boy clothes even as a toddler and often acted out. Dee said they eventually took her to a gender clinic and she came into her own once she felt freed up to be a girl.

“At 2 years old, she started telling us she wasn’t a boy. At 4.5, she socially transitioned and at 7 she legally transitioned.”

“My spouse and I are also transgender,” Dee added. “Noella transitioned way before we did. She is the most self-assured person I know. I tell her all the time I want to be like her when I grow up.”

More commemnts from Matt Walsh:


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom