Disgusting Journalism At Its Best: Jordan Peterson VS Cathyn Newman

in #informationwar7 years ago (edited)

Up until now I consciously stayed away from touching "sensitive" subjects that could win me flags, hurt my rep and fuck my rewards. Well, fuck that, time for a change.

So, today I have for you an interview I watched yesterday. An interview of two people I had never heard before. 

Jordan Bernt Peterson, a Canadian clinical psychologist who recently rose to fame for criticizing the Canadian government's Bill C-16 (that one that can possibly give you jail time if you don't use someones preferred pronouns) and Cathyn Newman, who was such a disgusting piece of shit in the interview that I didn't bother to check. Ok let's first see the interview:

Don't have time to watch it? Well, half of the video goes something like this:

Cathyn: What do you think about the pay gap?

Jordan: There's many reasons behind it. For example, women make less money because unlike men they are less assertive when asking for a raise

Cathy: So, what you are saying is that women are stupid?

Jordan: No, what I am saying is that if women asked for a raise as often as men did the pay gap would be smaller.

Cathy: So, what you are saying is that women should stay in their kitchens and just become baby machines?

Jordan: No, what I am saying is that if women embraced that particular male attribute and asked for a raise more often blah blah

Cathy: So, what you are saying is that we should put women in concentration camps and cut their titties?

For fucks shake! 

That bitch used every dirty trick there is on the book for "winning" an argument. Changing the words of your opponent, interrupted him everytime when his arguments made the most sense, ad hominems, you name it! Never again in the history of mankind have so many strawmen been slaughtered singlehandedly.

But what is so impressive is how Jordan dominated the interview remaining calm and didn't break a sweat while responding to one BS after the other. If there is actually something like an "alpha" male, he is. By the end of the interview I wanted to rage so hard. If I was in his chair I would have punched her right in the teeth in the first 5 minutes. But no. He just stayed there, unfazed by all the BS and ridiculed her to the moon and then some. Even now, just by writing this post I get so angry god damn it! XD

So, if you haven't watched it until now, go watch that video. 

Let me close this post with one of the greatest memes I have seen in a while, inspired by the disgusting piece of shit called Cathyn and the tidepod challenge. Oh you haven't heard about it? Well, turns out these days teenagers are eating tide pods to impress their friends... Back in my days we jumped off cliffs or stuff.. WHAT HAS THE WORLD TURNED INTO?!?!

Fuck you Cathyn

Sort:  

I think sometimes Peterson goes a bit out of his way to raise controversy and I personally prefer others like Steven Pinker, but holy fuck this interview...

I read some excerpts. 80% of responses to him seem to follow the format of:

So what you're saying is [not what he was saying]?

That % definitely feels right :)

that could win me flags, hurt my rep and fuck my rewards

You just won a mighty flag from me. Congratulations.

I haven't watched the video yet since Cathyn seems unreasonable in the transcript of the interview you wrote. My laptop is sensitive to such people.

it's not a transcript more like a parody of the interview. Don't watch it, you will probably get cancer XD

Hahahah. I dont want.

What if I flag and upvote you ;)

Kidding!!! Upvotes only :)

A flag is just a name for when you vote something below 0, and an upvote is when you vote something above 0. The steem blockchain doesn't allow you to have both a positive and negative vote cast upon a single post at the same time. In fact, if you flagged at -100% then upvote at 100% you would waste 5.8808% of your voting power as you would first vote at -100 (2% of your VP) then remove that vote (another 2%) and finally vote at +100% (which is another 2%) or 1-0.983 (assuming you start at 100% VP), the full formula is more complex...

My apologies if this is long winded and stuff, I have issues.

Yeah I wa sonly kidding :)

Good to see your autistic powers in action!

Well I gotta do something with it. Why not be a condescending ass that explains everything to everyone as if they don't understand it 😂😂😂😂

🍌

I will take that flag anytime like a champ! Thanks for the support :*

Curated for #informationwar (by @openparadigm)
Relevance:JBP!!!

Thanks for the support <3

Wow, this is some impressive projection that this lady is displaying.
Never heard of her before. Cringed really hard. Is that how she usually treats her interview guests?

"You are certainly risking to offend me in the pursuit of truth. Why should you have the right to do that. It's been rather uncomfortable," with a cunning intonation :D He's really smart!

Dunno if she is always like that, but I bet these were her true colors. Just a piece of unproffesional shit

I would suggest watching Scott Adam's youtube video breaking down this video. He does a really good job of analysis.

What you see in this video is a woman who has a certain world view and ideology that is conflicting with the words being spoken, so she continually mis-hears everything. And several times, her thinking process stops, and she has to reboot.

Ah, found the video:
Scott Adams on the Cognitive Dissonance of Cathy Newman

I promise I will first time when I find some time ! Thanks for passing by!

Lol way to stand up for what you believe in @trumpman. I support you. Jordan Petterson holding down the Canadians!! :D

Thank you for the support :D

Ok, I'm seven minutes in the interview and I can definitely understand where you're coming from... Cannot say anything but holy shit... She's drawing assumptions that make no sense. I think you already expressed it perfectly with that meme, so I'll just leave it there.

Exactly. Holy Fucking Shit!

εκανα upvote πριν καν το διαβασω. εχω πετυχει την ιστορια αυτη απο την αρχη αρχη εχω δει ποσα βιντεο με ολα τα ζωα που του λεγαν την μια μαλακια μετα την αλλη. αυτο δν το χω δει π ανεβασες ηρθε η ωρα!!

Μη το δεις, θα πάθεις καρκίνο

to da to proi, meta ekleisa to pc na m figoun ligo ta neura :p

Almost every time someone interviews this guy they completely misconstrued him to the point that they ruin their own points. There are some cases where females are not given the same standards as their male counterparts but that is quickly changing (and has been for a while)

Personally, I don't think the issue is as simple as females don't ask for a raise (as I know people that say women don't deserve to make any money) but neither is it as simple as the other side states it with females always make less.

I digress. The point is that the methodology of her arguments is quite commonly used against him and in the earlier interviews he had filmed you could actually see his demeanor cracking more than this one. So he has had a lot of practice to get to where he is now.

By the way, I am not a stalker or fan of his, I just have many friends that are on the extremes that will take the interviews with him and argue both ways (how bad he is and how bad the others are, depending on where the person leans) so... yeah. Also you know what they (A lot of Americans I know) say, everyone in Canada knows everyone else in Canada.

Obviously is way more complicated than just women not asking for a raise. But it's like all those crazy feminazis can't even hear anything else without calling it right away "mansplaining" or something if it doesn't fit their views 100 %

I know what you mean and completely agree!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.14
JST 0.029
BTC 67900.86
ETH 3250.85
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.63