That's funny! I was just complaining to a group of people unfamiliar with why she is so reviled that, even if you agree with her philosophy, her novels are truly painful to get through!
That's funny! I was just complaining to a group of people unfamiliar with why she is so reviled that, even if you agree with her philosophy, her novels are truly painful to get through!
This was a good read and also puts a finger on what made me uncomfortable about Peterson but couldn't quite place. I think it's a shame the phrase "white male" is shoehorned in quite so many...
This was a good read and also puts a finger on what made me uncomfortable about Peterson but couldn't quite place. I think it's a shame the phrase "white male" is shoehorned in quite so many times, as that ignores factors of class which I think are probably just as relevant.
The world isn't Anglo centric and "white male" leaves out swathes of the young male world that are seeing something of value in Peterson's work.
I've long tried to understand the Peterson phenomena. I went into this article thinking "I don't have time to read this" but ended up reading all of it because I enjoyed the writing. I was quite...
I've long tried to understand the Peterson phenomena. I went into this article thinking "I don't have time to read this" but ended up reading all of it because I enjoyed the writing.
I was quite surprised at the end to learn it was written by Laurie Penny. (I know I could've read that at the top, but just skipped it.) I've enjoyed her writing before (like when she reported on the Milo Yiannopoulos bus tour) so it's kind of a nice confirmation to see that, going in unbiased by knowing it's from her, I still enjoy it.
Yes, I find her writing very funny. I came late to the Peterson phenomena, but as I understand it, her analysis is close to the mark. A strange bird, or a cynical opportunist (Anne Coulter?).
Yes, I find her writing very funny. I came late to the Peterson phenomena, but as I understand it, her analysis is close to the mark. A strange bird, or a cynical opportunist (Anne Coulter?).
What's the difference between Jordan Petersen and Ayn Rand?
Ayn Rand could write.
That's funny! I was just complaining to a group of people unfamiliar with why she is so reviled that, even if you agree with her philosophy, her novels are truly painful to get through!
The hilarious thing about Ayn Rand is that Max Stirner would probably mock her for turning egoism itself into a spook.
This was a good read and also puts a finger on what made me uncomfortable about Peterson but couldn't quite place. I think it's a shame the phrase "white male" is shoehorned in quite so many times, as that ignores factors of class which I think are probably just as relevant.
The world isn't Anglo centric and "white male" leaves out swathes of the young male world that are seeing something of value in Peterson's work.
Good point.
There's a much more coherent and funnier takedown here (NSFW warning, uncontrollable laughter): Contrapoints
That was awesome. I forgot how much I love her.
Oooo. Thanks for this!
I've long tried to understand the Peterson phenomena. I went into this article thinking "I don't have time to read this" but ended up reading all of it because I enjoyed the writing.
I was quite surprised at the end to learn it was written by Laurie Penny. (I know I could've read that at the top, but just skipped it.) I've enjoyed her writing before (like when she reported on the Milo Yiannopoulos bus tour) so it's kind of a nice confirmation to see that, going in unbiased by knowing it's from her, I still enjoy it.
Yes, I find her writing very funny. I came late to the Peterson phenomena, but as I understand it, her analysis is close to the mark. A strange bird, or a cynical opportunist (Anne Coulter?).
"There’s no use debating a feeling. It’s time to change how we engage with Jordan Peterson."