Jordan Peterson

Your favorite books and links
Campitor
Posts: 1064
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Campitor »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:19 am
However, the thought of embarking on a Skinnerian plan to raise the voltage of corporal punishment in this attempt turns my stomach.
I didn't interpret his Rule 5 in this manner. He states that each child is unique and any corrective action needs to be carefully considered. Discipline should start at the lowest level possible and only when required; some children will self correct with a polite warning.

Negative reinforcement is the means of last resort to be used sparingly only when children transgress. Parents are acting as proxies for the outside world. It's better a child learns the negative consequence of acting poorly by someone who loves them than a stranger who might retaliate to an irrational degree.

I think JBP's intentions are in the right place even if in practice he isn't living up to his own 12 rules perfectly - but he does seem to be trying. I don't know how graceful I would be if I was singled out so vehemently by so many.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:16 am
I think this is what Paglia is talking about when the adherents of Lacan, Derrida and Foucault take out their red pens and deconstruct (“easily translated”) the text as sexist or racist.
what paglia is really complaining about is being marginalized from academia, so she’s been ranting about the people who were fashionable in the 70s or 80s when she was trying to get tenure. and yes, academia can be a political cesspit. but just like any other cesspit, nothing special about it. try getting into advertising, lololol.

and parents don’t go reading foucault for child rearing advice (this would be hilarous. also terribly wrong.)
Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:16 am
It is the principle of anti-charity. Being a responsible parent gets equated to enforcing some demented tyrannical patriarchy. The burden is not on Peterson (or others with similar ideas) to prove he is not a fascist. That people believe he should bear that burden demonstrate to me a pathological resistance to even the most reasonable structure.
we all require structure. again, the people who want “no structure” are peterson’s fictions. i’ve only met one real anarchist all my life—and he wasn’t a humanities person, but a scientist. last i heard he’s still taking great personal risks to protest injustices.

the real question to ask is in what amount and on what basis do we establish authority and build our structure. we ask it in politics, we ask it in the family, we ask it in business, we ask it here.

we’re not lobsters, we’re not bronze-age societies, we’re not paleoman. we in the west live in postindustrial societies

and it’s our nature to question— just like the bronze-age greeks questioned. only we’e in different circumstances and *we can’t go back*

in my opinion, peterson just wants people to obey him, and preaches a backwards poisonous pedagogy under the guise of “responsibility.” he makes some good points, then ruins them with dogmatism.

besides, his house is far from perfectly in order, so he disqualifies himself from criticizing the world.

me, i don’t require purity or perfection, only a good argument. so i’ve watched his lectures, debates, etc. and for me peterson’s intellectual demise lies in dogmatism and oversimplification. i.e., “serotonin, hierarchy, the lobster.” too reductionist.

of course, some people want “simple truths” and he provides them. as erich fromm discussed long ago, many people want to escape freedom. not “reedom from” but “freedom to”.

peterson offers his own authoritarism against left authoritarism. i think neither are good. so pass.
Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:16 am
The efforts of Peterson seem to me a reconstruction after and against the deconstruction. The deconstructionists do not seem to have a real, lasting goal.
critical thinking is never going to provide you with dogmas. you’re expecting pears from the elm tree.

the purpose of critical thinking is not to provide certainties, but to debunk them. the “truth” it provides is reached through a sort of via negativa— it’s what’s left over after probing it. then you probe again.

in natural science, a hypothesis that resists falsification proves true. in the social sciences experimentation is not so easily done so we have a lot of ideology and statistics added to the mix. and the rest of the intractable stuff we can’t know empirically we usually leave for philosophy, so one is going to find endless speculation there, and yes, much of it pointless. but that’s part of what makes us human. thinking is not just utilitarian-- thinking can be an end in itself. even if just to kill the boredom of existence.

anyway, i can’t obey and become a lobster and stop thinking, and so i’ll continue to criticize angry dysfunctional dads because i don’t want to live in their perfectionistic, dysfunctional, shame-based houses. i actually shudder at the thought.

-

eta: for a better advocate of traditional values without the angry blowhard angle, i’d highly recommend john bradshaw, who was an alcoholic priest who had an awakening about his condition, left the priesthood, embraced the recovery movement, and dedicated his life to healing people from shame. he was at the same time conservative and anti-authoritarian.

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »

I think what makes him effective is that his opponents are unable to cancel him and so they then have a tendency to hyperventilate.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:27 pm
I think what makes him effective is that his opponents are unable to cancel him and so they then have a tendency to hyperventilate.
sportsball?

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1467
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »

Ali-Foreman 30 October 1974

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

bradshaw on: the family (1986)

good night.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@Campitor:

From “12 Rules”, which is currently #12 on Amazon’s charts and available for sale in rural Walmart’s:
If that fails, being turned over a parent’s knee might be required. For the child who is pushing the limits in a spectacularly inspired way, a swat across the backside can indicate requisite seriousness on the part of a responsible adult. There are some situations in which even that will not suffice, partly because some children are very determined, exploratory, and tough, or because the offending behavior is truly severe. And if you’re not thinking such things through, then you’re not acting responsibly as a parent. You’re leaving the dirty work to someone else who will be much dirtier doing it.
What will suffice? He leaves it pretty open ended, IMO.

He also allows for no room for simple development out of less than civilized behavior. For instance, when my children were quite small we lived in graduate student family housing where the playground was filled with kids from all over the world. One day my son picked up a stick and hit a tiny Asian girl over the head, chanting “Ugly eyes. Ugly eyes.” I was enraged, but I simply picked him up, walked him to his room, plopped him on his bed, and shut the door. Then I apologized to the other mother. When I had calmed down, I spoke with him seriously about his behavior, even though I knew that his level of development wasn’t yet at comprehending concepts such as racism. I fully expected that I might see further incidents of similar behavior until his cognitive abilities increased. For instance, his sister at a similar age in loud repeated appeal asking “Why are there so many fat people at this restaurant, Mommy?” You can’t beat a child into developing second order consciousness of feelings of other. You can’t beat a child into appreciating and respecting differences in appearance and culture.

Doesn’t simple common sense and your knowledge of me as a forum mate allow you to predict that my son did not grow into a blustering hateful racist? Wouldn’t it seem more likely that he is now a very well read, well mannered, young man whose best friend was born in India? Isn’t it obvious that beating it out of him wouldn’t have been the correct choice? Isn’t it obvious that Peterson’s paranoia colors his perception of the world?

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6636
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by jennypenny »

@7W5--One of my kids used to bolt for no reason all the time up until about kindergarten ... running into traffic, out into large crowds, into the ocean, etc. I resorted to swatting him because he was too young to understand and it was too dangerous to wait out. Point being, we can all point to anecdotes to confirm or refute that kind of open-ended parenting advice. Taking either extreme, whether too lax or too strict, is a bad idea and some wiggle room is needed to make the advice suit the child and stay within reasonable bounds.


@alphaville -- How can you comment so extensively on JBP when, as you said upthread, you refuse to read his books?

I'm not arguing JBP's strengths or weaknesses. I'm just turned off by this thread. It feels like his ideas are being attacked not because of their merits but because of his perceived conservative bent or the nature of some of his followers. I don't care if people like or dislike JBP but at least be honest about why he turns you off.

The other criticism was that JBP shouldn't be allowed to comment on society because his own house isn't in order. That's seems ridiculous on this forum where people comment all the time on ERE matters even if their own budgets are still bloated and/or they aren't anywhere near being financially independent.


Sorry for ranting, but as someone said in a different thread, the contempt on the forum is palatable at times lately.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@jp:

Oh, I resorted to a swat on the rear with my son on occasion also, but I never constructed it into a rigid edifice of best practice elst cruel world will punish him worse. I’m sure I would find your kids quite likable and vice-versa. Even though my style was admittedly too laissez faire at times. I remember attending a semi-formal event when my son was around 8 or so, and being amazed to see him going up to people, introducing himself, and shaking hands, because I hadn’t even thought to directly instruct him in such matters :lol: Oops!

And I truly don’t believe that it is Peterson’s conservatism that bothers me. As evidence I would offer that I loved Ivan Illich on the loss of gender in culture*. I’m sure I noted somewhere way up thread that I believe there is something to gender dichotomy theory if/when it isn’t bluntly applied.

Maybe it is just that Peterson’s dark paranoia scares me off. One of the themes of gender dichotomy theory is the man you would choose to follow down a dark alley. Peterson is definitely not that man for me.

*Also, I almost voted for John James. Couldn’t do it, because issues, but definitely going with the gut yummy.

Campitor
Posts: 1064
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Campitor »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:24 am
Doesn’t simple common sense and your knowledge of me as a forum mate allow you to predict that my son did not grow into a blustering hateful racist? Wouldn’t it seem more likely that he is now a very well read, well mannered, young man whose best friend was born in India? Isn’t it obvious that beating it out of him wouldn’t have been the correct choice? Isn’t it obvious that Peterson’s paranoia colors his perception of the world?
Yes, yes, yes, no because you assume he's being paranoid and as I highlighted previously, JBP doesn't believe in starting with spankings first. Verbal correction and timeout sessions are the beginning steps and to be administered as little as possible. Picking up your son, walking him to his room, and plopping him on his bed, would be considered physical discipline by JBP and coincidentally it would be one of his beginning steps regarding discipline if positive reinforcement fails.

And the JBP book quote your provided left out some context so I'm including the previous paragraph below - your JBP quoted section is underlined. What you left out is in bold text.
So where does all that leave us? With the decision to discipline effectively, or to discipline ineffectively ( but never to forego discipline altogether, because nature and society will punish in a draconian manner whatever errors of childhood behavior remain uncorrected). So here are a few practical hints: time out can be an extremely effective form of punishment, particularly if the misbehaving child is welcome as soon as he controls his temper. An angry child should sit by himself until he calms down. Then he should be allowed to return to normal life. That means the child wins - instead of his anger. The rule is "Come be with us as soon as you can behave properly." This is a very good deal for child, parent, and society. You'll be able to tell if your child has really regained control. You'll like him again, despite his earlier misbehavior. if you're still mad, maybe he hasn't completely repented - or maybe you should do something about your tendency to hold a grudge.
If your child is the kind of determined varmint who simply runs away, laughing , when placed on the steps or his room, physical restraint might have to be added to the time out routine. A child can be held carefully but firmly in the upper arms, until he or she stops squirming and pays attention.
If that fails, being turned over a parent’s knee might be required. For the child who is pushing the limits in a spectacularly inspired way, a swat across the backside can indicate requisite seriousness on the part of a responsible adult. There are some situations in which even that will not suffice, partly because some children are very determined, exploratory, and tough, or because the offending behavior is truly severe. And if you’re not thinking such things through, then you’re not acting responsibly as a parent. You’re leaving the dirty work to someone else who will be much dirtier doing it.
And JBP later states the following:
A parent who is seriously aware of his or her limited tolerance and capacity for misbehavior when provoked can therefore seriously plan a proper discipline strategy - particularly if monitored by an equally awake partner - and never let things degenerate to the point where geniune hatred emerges. Beware. There are toxic families everywhere. They make no rules and limit no misbehavior. The parents lash out randomly and unpredictably. The children live in chaos and are crushed, if they're timid, or rebel, counterproductively, if they're tough. It's not good. It can get murderous.
Here's a fifth and final and most general principle. Parents have a duty to act as proxies for the real world - merciful proxies, caring proxies -but proxies, nonetheless. This obligation supersedes any responsibility to ensure happiness, foster creativity, or boost self-esteem. It is the primary duty of parents to make their children socially desirable. That will provide the child opportunity, self-regard, and security. It's more important even that fostering individual identity. That Holy Grail can only be pursued, in any case, after a high degree of social sophistication has been established.
A lot of nuance is being left out. To me it's clear that JBP isn't advocating wonted beatings of children. Spanking is only applied when all other methods have failed. And the spanking used must be carefully considered and applied as lightly as possible. And I'm fairly confident that he wouldn't advocate closed-fist remediation either - something that his detractors seem to imply by quoting his disciplinary escalation process.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
@alphaville -- How can you comment so extensively on JBP when, as you said upthread, you refuse to read his books?
the man provides endless bloviating on youtubes, lectures, speeches, articles, public debates, lectures, etc. ad nauseam. hours really, i’ve watched plenty, how much more of this does one need?

if his lectures are part of the publicity tour, i’m not interested in what he’s selling: nature wants to kill us, hierarchy optimizes survival, therefore submit and climb it individually.

sure, fix your posture and climb on the hierarchy, but then what? in such ponzi schemes, the ones at the bottom of the pyramid end up dead. individual climbing is not a cure for this. and hierarchies don’t always work out favorably for the group, so *we replace them*.

john waters clearly saw this coming decades ago :lol:
http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 64-710.jpg
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
I'm not arguing JBP's strengths or weaknesses. I'm just turned off by this thread. It feels like his ideas are being attacked not because of their merits but because of his perceived conservative bent or the nature of some of his followers. I don't care if people like or dislike JBP but at least be honest about why he turns you off.
i am honestly turned off by the man’s paranoia and masochism as underpinnings on how he thinks we should structure society. i find them toxic and dangerous.

and i’ve said also i’d work with him in an individual basis and have used some of his advice to help friends in trouble. so i don’t know if you saw that.

where i reject him is as a social theorist. his individual advice to climb the hierarchy so you can feel better does not scale, just like a ponzi scheme does not scale.

i also reject the idea that the shape of hierarchies is a given. yes, hierarchies are real, network effects are real, but no we don’t have to submit to them. also in human societies we have hierarchies within hierarchies. we’re a lot more complicated than lobster s (and i’e read the chapter on lobsters), sure, some basic things are the same, but the devil is in the details.

while i agree with him and other hobbesians like paglia that nature is not benevolent, i think it’s also human nature not to submit to nature. (sometimetimes we go overboard with this and try to conquer it, and of course fail). so i refuse to be a lobster (but i wasn’t one in the first place anyway)
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
The other criticism was that JBP shouldn't be allowed to comment on society because his own house isn't in order. That's seems ridiculous on this forum where people comment all the time on ERE matters even if their own budgets are still bloated and/or they aren't anywhere near being financially independent.
that’s not me, that’s his own rule #6, and something he talks about often in public.
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
Sorry for ranting, but as someone said in a different thread, the contempt on the forum is palatable at times lately.
i think it was mister imperceptible who said upthread he finds some people contemptible? that wasn’t me.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
@alphaville -- How can you comment so extensively on JBP when, as you said upthread, you refuse to read his books?
the man provides endless bloviating on youtubes, lectures, speeches, articles, public debates, lectures, etc. ad nauseam. hours really, i’ve watched plenty, how much more of this does one need?

if his lectures are part of the publicity tour, i’m not interested in what he’s selling: nature wants to kill us, hierarchy optimizes survival, therefore submit and climb it individually.

sure, fix your posture and climb on the hierarchy, but then what? in such ponzi schemes, the ones at the bottom of the pyramid end up dead. individual climbing is not a cure for this. and hierarchies don’t always work out favorably for the group, so, as humans, *we replace them*.

john waters clearly saw this coming decades ago :lol: [warning: rape imagery and adult humor]
http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 64-710.jpg
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
I'm not arguing JBP's strengths or weaknesses. I'm just turned off by this thread. It feels like his ideas are being attacked not because of their merits but because of his perceived conservative bent or the nature of some of his followers. I don't care if people like or dislike JBP but at least be honest about why he turns you off.
i am honestly turned off by the man’s paranoia and masochism as underpinnings on how he thinks we should structure society. i find them toxic and dangerous.

and i’ve said also i’d work with him in an individual basis and have used some of his advice to help friends in trouble. so i don’t know if you saw that.

where i reject him is as a social theorist. his individual advice to climb the hierarchy so you can feel better does not scale, just like a ponzi scheme does not scale.

i also reject the idea that the shape of hierarchies is a given. yes, hierarchies are real, network effects are real, but no we don’t have to submit to them. also in human societies we have hierarchies within hierarchies. we’re a lot more complicated than lobster s (and i’e read the chapter on lobsters), sure, some basic things are the same, but the devil is in the details.

while i agree with him and other hobbesians like paglia that nature is not benevolent, i think it’s also human nature not to submit to nature. (sometimetimes we go overboard with this and try to conquer it, and of course fail). so i refuse to be a hierarchical lobster (but i wasn’t one in the first place anyway)
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
The other criticism was that JBP shouldn't be allowed to comment on society because his own house isn't in order. That's seems ridiculous on this forum where people comment all the time on ERE matters even if their own budgets are still bloated and/or they aren't anywhere near being financially independent.
that’s not me, that’s his own rule #6, and something he talks about often in public. i was just pointing it out.
jennypenny wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 am
Sorry for ranting, but as someone said in a different thread, the contempt on the forum is palatable at times lately.
i think it was mister imperceptible who said upthread he finds some people contemptible? that wasn’t me, sorry.
Last edited by Alphaville on Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:00 am, edited 2 times in total.

Hristo Botev
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 3:42 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Hristo Botev »

I tend to be one always looking for "gurus" to follow (or to at least learn something from), whether in the form of Catholic saints, or FIRE folks like Jacob or even (to a much lesser extent) MMM, to environmental activist types like Kingsnorth, Kalmus (or, recently, Rob Greenfield), to all sorts of fiction writers and their writings, and musicians and their music, to inspiring folks I'm lucky enough to be friends with IRL; and yes, even the occasional YouTube prophet--Bishop Barron comes to mind, and so does Peterson. I don't "follow" these folks because I want to emulate every single aspect of their lives or their teachings (I'm not taking Holy Orders, for one); rather, I follow these folks because at least some of the things they are saying (in words or in how they live their lives) are new to me (or at least framed in a way that is new to me) and push me to be a better man/husband/father/friend/Catholic/global citizen. I've had lots and lots of laundry-folding weekend JBP YouTube binge watches, and a lot of what he said spoke to me and prompted me to look at my life and the various roles I play in my community in a different and ultimately more positive and constructive way. A big part of why that is the case for me for Peterson is because he strikes me as coming from an authentic place in a world where authenticity is often lacking in the messages we hear from school, from big business, from politicians, from our parents, from our priests/pastors, etc. etc.

I guess my point is, JBP has some good stuff to say and he's saying it in a way that speaks to a lot of folks (likely, mostly young men in the West) who are really struggling to figure out what being a "man" is in the modern world, where nothing is sacred and where we are encouraged to tear everything down. I really, really don't understand the constant need in our culture to tear down every idea (and every person) which/who says something somewhat different than what is the currently accepted cultural dogma.

Edit to make this point clearer: There's a whole lot of paternalism wrapped up in saying someone or something or some idea is "dangerous." Let people take the good of what JBP has to say and trust people to be able to ignore the bad.
Last edited by Hristo Botev on Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:12 am, edited 2 times in total.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

Hristo Botev wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:56 am
I really, really don't understand the constant need in our culture to tear down every idea (and every person) which/who says something somewhat different than what is the currently accepted cultural dogma.
i can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the dogma that’s the problem. offering one dogmatic school vs an existing one just perpetuates this.

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

also i’ve offered as counterpoints to peterson not stalin and mao or some psychopathic nihilist, but marsha lineham and john bradshaw.

check them out

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsha_M._Linehan

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bradshaw_(author)

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@Campitor:
A parent who is seriously aware of his or her limited tolerance and capacity for misbehavior when provoked
Can’t you see that Peterson is describing himself here, but projecting his own “limited tolerance” on to the general population? All I am really saying is that it seems to me, as a person who has both raised her own children and worked in a variety of settings with very young children over the course of more than 40 years, it seems to me that Peterson is not temperamentally well suited to working with young children. Not everybody is. He seems like he is too much the colicky type himself to be able to be calm and patient with the very young. The funny thing is that he actually reminds me of my first black turtleneck Nietzche reading husband who was an extreme liberal more so than the random Republican I might date.

Maybe paranoid isn’t the right word, but the man filled his house with dark art of the Holocaust. Does that strike you as a great theme for a nursery school?

Alphaville
Posts: 2018
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

here’s a legal movie (i think free with commercials?) of what i imagine as a comedy of @7w5 getting driving lessons from peterson

https://pluto.tv/on-demand/movies/happy ... y-2008-1-1

en ra ha! :lol:

great stuff really, brilliant cast, incredible improv/unscripted performances, highly memorable. sally hawkins is delightful and eddie marsan is great. i don’t like to spoil with plot advances but check it out some day.

Campitor
Posts: 1064
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Campitor »

@7WB

I understand what you're saying. I would agree that perhaps Peterson isn't the best person to run a nursery unless he presents evidence to the contrary.
But that alone is no reason to disregard his viewpoints, as a psychologist, in regards to disciplining children. He has some valid points and adds some value even if not all of it is applicable or true. I'd like to see any psychologist, or any other professional, that gets anything 100% correct all the time or is in agreement with everything their peers believe within the soft sciences.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@Alphaville:

Lol- I’m actually more subdued than that IRL. Absent-minded professor wandering about in a daze xNTP not bouncing off the ceiling Entp. I’m not infrequently mistaken for a dumb sloppy blonde until I start talking. Terrible old men who oogle Britney Spears videos and use phrases such as “Big Polish Girl” like me. The affluent Republican BF I just dumped just texted that he would consider marrying me if I lose maybe 40 lbs. I am so happy that my kids are well grown and I have earned the luxury of resort to the ridiculous.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6612
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@Campitor:

Agreed. Who am I to censor?

Post Reply