Society/Culture Jordan B Peterson

Remove this Banner Ad

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
51,865
57,017
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I don’t quite get it?
It seems from my perspective that the self admitted flaws are discussed in a dismissive manner with Peterson, meanwhile the virtue signalling, grandstanding and social advice dished out by other public figures in the other tent is lauded without considering their very real, active and pervasive own issues.

It's like nobody holds you more to the ideals they think you should have than those who disagree with you, which I think shows how uninterested people actually are in that at all.

It's used as a means to end the conversation and probably rightly so, I don't think society has come to grips with how miserable it is now, self medicating with various distractions, drugs and self destructive behavior - let alone where it will be misery wise down the track.

I expect if you turn on the news most of the stories running that evening will be about bad things that happened, perhaps one light hearted cat out of a tree at the end, but most will be the negative.

That's the easy story to write, it's the natural progression for a hungry journalism desk. It also trains us to expect the world is full of bad things, violent crime is worse, home invasions are on the up, you never heard about this before blah blah blah.

If we pause for a moment to consider anything about personal responsibility or cultural values we might realise how deep of a hole we are in.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
51,865
57,017
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I don’t get the “other tent” bit.
Society is currently negotiating between the two ideals of living your best life. They lean either into the nihilistic and hedonistic satiation of function or towards finding some meaning in the value your life brings to others.

Both have their perks and serious cons. I think it would be fair to say that the immediate gratification and ultimate pointlessness of living for later is winning by a long way.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Chief

Chugging Adrenochrome
Dec 1, 1999
94,254
71,591
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Society is currently negotiating between the two ideals of living your best life. They lean either into the nihilistic and hedonistic satiation of function or towards finding some meaning in the value your life brings to others.

Both have their perks and serious cons. I think it would be fair to say that the immediate gratification and ultimate pointlessness of living for later is winning by a long way.
I see, sort of. I think that's a false dichotomy. And society has always had these types of choices.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
51,865
57,017
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I see, sort of. I think that's a false dichotomy. And society has always had these types of choices.
They have, and if you subscribe to the concept that a religion is simply a cult that offered a community value then it shouldn't surprise you that the long lasting social paradigms aren't the radically progressive in modern terms and promote the strength of self for the group, rather than the exploration of the self for the benefit of the self.
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,206
2,490
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
Sure, a new law that creates nothing but 100% effectiveness with no instances of insufficient evidence.
It's common sense that most applications would ensure that they have a sufficient amount of evidence (based on the threshold set in prior cases) before incurring the costs and efforts of a Family Court application.

People can get away with murder in the same court system, but no, gender dysphoria is an absolute pearl of a process that couldn't possibly have any political gerrymandering.

How convenient.
The trans kids are responsible for shifting electoral boundaries now?

What you see as some political/ideological conspiracy theory, is really just the courts rejecting your counter-arguments as being uneducated bunkum.

As they should. As they do. And as they will continue to do.
 

Noidenous

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 2, 2012
5,080
3,990
Melbourne
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Green Bay Packers, Manchester UTD
It's common sense that most applications would ensure that they have a sufficient amount of evidence (based on the threshold set in prior cases) before incurring the costs and efforts of a Family Court application.


The trans kids are responsible for shifting electoral boundaries now?

What you see as some political/ideological conspiracy theory, is really just the courts rejecting your counter-arguments as being uneducated bunkum.

As they should. As they do. And as they will continue to do.
You heard it here first, folks.

Trans lawyers are the only lawyers who fail to argue against a case 100% of the time.

Nothing corrupt here, folks.


Steam Community :: :: Nothing To See Here
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

eastfreo75

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 11, 2011
10,907
9,859
pakenham
AFL Club
Fremantle
Right up until the generation of children who needed to be protected launch legal action against those who had a duty of care over them and then the courts will side with them then too.
Protected from what?
Whenever somebody makes a long altering decision, care should given to the individual.

Issues related to the change need to be fully explored.

Personally I believe in the positive self regard model and let the individual decide.

Building up the individual to see the underlining reasons for the change.

My strong belief is that some people will benefit to gender reassignment and others it won’t and will be harmful.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
51,865
57,017
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Whenever somebody makes a long altering decision, care should given to the individual.

Issues related to the change need to be fully explored.

Personally I believe in the positive self regard model and let the individual decide.

Building up the individual to see the underlining reasons for the change.

My strong belief is that some people will benefit to gender reassignment and others it won’t and will be harmful.
I completely agree, I take particular issue with transgender activists advocating for hormone blockers for children suggesting it is totally reversible and gives them time to figure themselves out when in reality it is a permanent mutilation of their adult lives as complete sexual and potentially reproductive people.

I think the general rule should be that if we don't let children make decisions about things because they aren't capable of either understanding the path to it or the path beyond the choice - then we should apply that consistently, especially when it's regarding the rest of their lives.
 

Chief

Chugging Adrenochrome
Dec 1, 1999
94,254
71,591
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Whenever somebody makes a long altering decision, care should given to the individual.

Issues related to the change need to be fully explored.

Personally I believe in the positive self regard model and let the individual decide.

Building up the individual to see the underlining reasons for the change.

My strong belief is that some people will benefit to gender reassignment and others it won’t and will be harmful.
So... this is very vague.

Care for people? Help them make the right decision? Is that what you mean?

Is that not happening?
 

eastfreo75

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 11, 2011
10,907
9,859
pakenham
AFL Club
Fremantle
So... this is very vague.

Care for people? Help them make the right decision? Is that what you mean?

Is that not happening?
No it’s not.

It’s against the law in Victoria for mental health workers to explore the issues.

If a child wants to have gender reassignment surgery, you can’t ask questions.

Helping for me is for a person to be self aware and be clear minded to make a decision.

See all the pros and cons of a decision and at the same time accepting and loving themselves.

As for the Right decision who knows what that is anyway. Making a decision out of the right head space is more important.
 

Taylor

Community Leader
Jul 16, 2009
51,865
57,017
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Who should be liable when I have to look up laws that turn out not to say what a poster thinks they said?
I'm happy for someone to be held accountable for being wrong if that goes both ways.

Now, who is liable if a child is chemically mutilated and then as an adult decides that it shouldn't have happened?
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,206
2,490
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
I completely agree, I take particular issue with transgender activists advocating for hormone blockers for children suggesting it is totally reversible and gives them time to figure themselves out when in reality it is a permanent mutilation of their adult lives as complete sexual and potentially reproductive people.
No. It is partially reversible - and for Gender Dysmorphic adolescents - it is more reversible than allowing puberty to proceed either with natural hormones or gender-affirming hormones. Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't understand the science.

Endocrine Treatment of Gender-Dysphoric/Gender-Incongruent Persons: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

I think the general rule should be that if we don't let children make decisions about things because they aren't capable of either understanding the path to it or the path beyond the choice - then we should apply that consistently, especially when it's regarding the rest of their lives.
You'll be pleased to know that we don't allow children to make such a decision. That decision must be made by the parents and/or the Family Court - who are capable of understanding the long-term implications of such a decision.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad