Do you want to learn how to improve your life?

Most people in the modern world have no identity and no culture. Mass media put regional divides to the sword as the massive consumerist monoculture sucked everything into its stale, grey, profitable bubble. People use whatever words in their lexicon seem appropriate for the statement at hand. It’s a readers vocabulary for this guy I assume.
At this point, “culture” means silly costumes and holidays corrupted by shopping promotions and media exclusives.

I'd also like to ask what the fuck the use of "y'all" is with these fucking shitstains?

Like, I get that southerners say Y'all, but over the past like 5 years the useage of the word has probably fucking tripled and it's always by these freaks

s a g e

I don't know why, but I'm starting to find it really irritating.

>Trans-volk
I identify as African. Can I rape now?

Thanks. I just watched this guy's video on campus indoctrination, and it was eye popping.

This is a fascist board, please refrain from using this nu-speak.

Sick burn!

While Peterson frogs annoy the crap out of me with their ridiculous dad worship of him, he did genuinely improve my life.

Albeit I could probably have got similar advice from Oprah.

Violence doesn't = language.

autism?

When Jordan Peterson denies a trans person their identity, he denies them their dignity and so he denies them their humanity.

I like his stuff on personality and the big five. It's like a slightly less pseudoscience mbti.

>pic
jesus fucking christ

Peterson posting is worse than all the other waves of shitposting that have preceded it, precisely because of the embarassing sincerity that's often attached to it.
Bring back the Veeky Forums shitposting I say.
This is your friendly reminder that psychology is NOT a science.

>When Nietzsche denied religious persons their identity, he denied them their dignity and so he denied them their humanity.
In the same way a religious person has to ""de-humanize"" atheism to give meaning to their belief, in denying atheists and believers of other creeds the ability to act morally, claiming that eternal damnation awaits them, etc..
If your (((identity))) is just a subjective, unsubstantiated belief, noone has any responsibility to go along with it. Sure, it's not "nice" to tell someone why you think their god doesn't exist - at least in the way they conceptualize him, it denies everything that person believes to be in a sense, but you can't infer a moral responsibility to allow them to continue deluding themselves from that.
If there is truth in what they are saying, then the two viewpoints can be mediated. Whereever there are weakpoints in the positions they bleed into each other, merge into a new, higher truth which for the most part only takes away the parts of both groups positions which are plainly unreasonable.
If people really thought your views through to the end they'd realize that you can't protect an individuals identity without totally isolating them. People are always "modifying" each others identities by exchanging information and making claims about reality. What you're saying is that being human itself is dehumanizing.

If you refer to a man as she/miss/mrs/ms/madam or a woman as he/master/mr/sir, you are not treating them with the same dignity that all humans should be treated with in a civilised society and you are driving them away from studying at your university. Trans folk suffer this and other aggressions regularly. They suffer from a very high suicide rate and you are contributing to the problem if you misgender them. Atheism and theism are beliefs. Someone's gender is not just a belief.

>epistemic violence
nice

this has been more and more evident if you look to the gay pride movement.
Buisnesses are advertising directly to alot of gay people now.

I'm not the guy you're responding to and I agree, but what the fuck are we supposed to do with non-binary folks, people who invent their gender out of thin air et similia?

bait level 1/10
just you wait til the day of the rope, you'll know what real violence is.

>They suffer from a very high suicide rate
because they're loopers to begin with.
no great loss.

>Atheism and theism are beliefs. Someone's gender is not just a belief.
I thought gender was socially constructed whereas sex was biologically anchored. Hence there being ten quadrillion genders. Or do you reject that in favor of the more traditional "transgendered people feel trapped in a body of the opposite sex thanks to some kind of neurological phenomenon"? Cause if that's the case, then it's just a mental illness, and it would need to be treated, not normalized.

In any case, I'm not advocating for misgendering people, if someone wants to be called she, and they're not using their supposed identity as a tool to show that they can get other people to use the pronouns they want them to by political force, it's just common courtesy to go along with at least that much. The question is whether they can actually expect to be treated as a woman beyond that. I'd argue that this is still something each person has to be allowed to decide for themselves without being called a bigot.

Veeky Forums is not a leftist board.

They/their works pretty well and Ms., as 'Miz', was only introduced fairly recently, even though Ms., as 'Mistress' is much older, so I think Mx, as maybe 'Mix', or something similar could be introduced in the same way. If they're really snowflakey then maybe just their name should be used.
I think sir/madam is the hardest thing to replace. In most contexts something like mate would work at least in Britain and then something similar in other countries. When being formal like when dealing with customers in somewhere posh or serious I'm not sure. Comrade or citizen would work but I don't think people would like that or maybe everyone could be sir. I think non-binary people in english speaking countries will just have to accept an occasional sir/madam for now.

>I think sir/madam is the hardest thing to replace. In most contexts something like mate would work at least in Britain

Dear Mate,

I writing to inform you that your idea is stupid.

Yours gender-neutrally,

Mx Anonymous

While I do think most of the people in this thread should be put in prison, it is kind of refreshing to see a leftist thread on lit again

The way it works is that gender is a social construct that people of both sexes are told to conform to. A trans individual does not wish 'to become' the other gender. They want to be able to express their true selves. For trans people that means that their true self is closer to the other gender or in the case of non-binary folk neither gender.

Some things aren't treatable though, for people with dementia you actually do try to normalise them and accept some of the memory mistakes they make to avoid distress.

Miz pronounced Meesz sounds cool, it has an esoteric kinda vibe. Anyway, what i was trying to say is that while I have no problems with trans folk I don't think we should encourage non-binaries. Humans are social animals and most of them need something bigger than them to give them an anchor. I can't see how pure subjectivity can result in anything other than social disorder.

society is prison.

I want JBP to be my interwebz daddy, where do I start? His Youtube channel has lectures on his books and school stuff, but that's not what I'm after. Where's his motivational/self-help shit at?

People need to look beyond the bullshit and realise it's capitalism that causes many woes.

>come into the far right through old blog posts and books
>realize that most everyone else got into it through brainlet podcasts and YouTubers

Did you know guys that post modernists are ebil? They are infecting are institutions with culinary marxism. They must be stopped.

Why not treat the words as words, not parrot-like utterances?

Exactly, Satan. However, the problem with questions like transgender issues, fat acceptance, etc. is that people (see ) start not only wanting to be tolerated and respected despite, but celebrated because of their (clearly unhealthy) conditions, which they redefine as "identity", whether they're self-inflicted or something they were simply born with. It's just mental gymnastics.
Being disabled isn't an identity, it's something which cuts you off from the possibilities your life might have if you were healthy. If we had the technology to re-grow peoples limbs, no one in their right mind would chose to remain a cripple. Your limits shouldn't be something which you want to be defined by, something to construct your entire identity around.
In the same way, sexual preference isn't the center of your being, it's just an epiphenomenon. The question is whether, given the objective problems certain ways of interacting with the world lead to, you're able to integrate your sexuality into your life. It's not like your current self-image is your "true self", which you need to preserve at all costs. Shouldn't we help people to feel comfortable in their own body, rather than rejecting it, if it were possible? Of course, if we could transform their entire biological structure to be in line with their body-image that would be just as well, but that's only going to happen much farther down the line.

Why can't it be an identity? It's an identity if people identify with it. Some deaf people have deaf as an identity. If a group of people have a shared experience they can create an identity around it.

>Some deaf people have deaf as an identity.

Then they try to stand in the way of cures for deafness.

I have no problem with trannies, which are not even seen as unusual in many cultures, but muh gender identity has become a fad. Wonder why pretty much all 'nonbinary' people just happen to look like dumpy tumblr white girls with neon hair? The cult of the 'true self' is blatant self defeating narcissism. We actually live in an age characterized by unprecedented conformity and the impoverishment of all aspects of life, that's why people feel a need to cling to increasingly contrived labels, because once you remove the labels there is nothing left. Middle class lefty are compelled to paint themselves as victimized subalterns, they are always vaguely no unfalsifiably 'queer', 'disabled' etc. we are condemned to a bureaucratic managerial hellscape which only understands inclusion in terms of exclusion, eventually, everyone will be reduced to a permavictimized 'marginalized' subject of unending management, utterly dependent on institutions for existential validation

Undermining an ideology through discourse, literally wrongthink

AAVE is a revolutionary praxis, though they show themselves how forced it is when even non American blacks and even white SJWs appropriate it. Imma be screaming y'all *exhales*

>In the mid-20th century,
sociologist and intellectual Pierre
Bourdieu introduced the concept
of symbolic power as it exists in
modern societies. For Bourdieu, this
was a ‘worldmaking power’ (Swartz,
1997), giving those holding the power
the ability to impose their vision
of the social world, and its divisions,
as legitimate. From this theory came
that of symbolic violence. Bourdieu
understood this to be synonymous
with ideology, as having the ability
“to impose the means for comprehending
and adapting to the social
world by representing economic and
political power in disguised, taken-for-granted
forms” (Swartz, 1997,
89). Expanding on his belief that all
actions have a purpose, those with
social power use this power to establish
and impose norms through misrecognition
– the disguising of the
economic and political interests driv
ing these practices. Stemming from
the concept of symbolic violence is
epistemic violence, which focuses on
the discourse involved in the practice
of othering. Othering, to this
efect, is the marginalization of those
who are distinctly diferent from the
majority ‘us’, and uses diferences
between beliefs and customs to defne
them as the out-group (Rawls &
David, 2003). Traditionally, societies
have used the discourse of otherness
to create a common bond within the
in-group for example, feelings of patriotism
or nationalism. Often in an
asymmetrical confict in which one
group has markedly more symbolic
power, the powerful will exercise this
power through epistemic violence
(Maoz & McCauley, 2008). Te discursively-produced
sense of division
that follows deeply and negatively
afects the oppressed and often leads
to physical violence and confict.

Soz, thought I was posting a paragraph.

>If a group of people have a shared experience they can create an identity around it. It's an identity if people identify with it.
This is literally just a rerun of protagoras "man is the measure of all things"-argument. Human identity isn't a question of "shared" group experience, because no experience is truly shared - it's not even identical with itself, Identity is something which always escapes from its own claims to universality into the particular and then tries to find answers to the questions that apparent contradiction poses, transforming the whole system in the process.
Deaf people don't create their own reality where sound doesn't exist, they live in the same world we do, knowing that it does. Just like we don't pretend that the color spectrum we're able to see is the objective reality, just like deaf people try to, in their own way, understand what sound might be, we too want to grasp the world which lies beyond our own immediate sensory range, artistically, philosophically and scientifically.

Actually, all things are the measure of man, and the things we experience are just a small, constantly shifting subset of that ultimate, unquantifiable totality. If you delude yourself into thinking that identity means subjective belonging, being identical with yourself and your group you're depriving yourself of the possibility of becoming an individual. A trans person putting a shit-ton of effort into trying to change sex, to construct their identity around superficial criteria, is chasing a dream, something that doesn't even matter, they're simply being mislead by their own neurology.

They both sound retarded actually