This was posted 4 years 1 month 5 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[Preorder] Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson - $23.00 + $5.90 Shipping @ MightyApe

29210
[Preorder] Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson - $23.00 + $5.90 Shipping @ MightyApe
Go to Deal
djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 13:28 mightyape.com.au (1201 clicks)
Last edited 28/11/2020 - 19:45

Ooooh controversial deal. Do you love equality, diversity, and inclusion? Hate the patriarchy? Think the gender pay gap is unfair and not a product of natural differences between men and women? Agree with new atheism (like Sam Harris) on the foundation of morals? Then you should probably look for another book- here, try this one instead - https://www.booktopia.com.au/a-left-that-dares-to-speak-its-…

If the above doesn't describe you, read on- thanks for making it this far! Love him or hate him JBP has certainly made a huge impact on our culture and the lives of many individuals. This book- "Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life" is a follow-up to his best seller, "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos". This is pretty good for preorder price, comes to $28.90 after shipping so if you've been keeping your eye on any toys/games for Christmas, it's a good idea to bundle for the shipping price.

For reference Dymocks and QBD have a pre-order price (for the paperback version) of $35 and Booktopia has it listed for $31.75 all not including shipping. Book Depository has it for $31.33 including shipping but it's still $2.43 more expensive than this unless you wait for the next great Book Depository cashback deal. Current cashback at CR is 1.4% for existing customers, 8% for new customers - so even if you're a new customer you'll end up 17.4c ahead going via mighty ape and paying for shipping.

Hope this helps someone, maybe more than just financially.

Books & Magazines Book

Related Stores

Mighty Ape Australia
Mighty Ape Australia

closed Comments

        • jacross on 28/11/2020 - 16:54

          It's more that the jews are the people chosen (and who originally so chose) by God to live to those rules. The notion is they are the ones to take on this monumental task. God does not require others to do so, and does not expect them to.

      • RedSky on 28/11/2020 - 20:48

        The advantage of having a lot of commandments (or rules for that matter) is that the preacher can always select the ones that reinforce his own beliefs. Ideally the ones he selects are also not internally self-contradictory.

    • jacross on 28/11/2020 - 16:52

      Mmm I'm intrigued by the first book (haven't read it yet) but this one definitely gives me that 'well why didn't you give us these additonal important rules in the first place' kind of vibe. Like these are the duds/rules that are made up to get another 12 to match the first book.

  • akib on 28/11/2020 - 14:11
    +14

    Nothing like taking life advice from a benzo addicted crackhead

    • Aneurism on 28/11/2020 - 14:27
      +4

      Better to get advice from a benzo addicted crackhead where you have a track history of their education, philosophy and viewpoints, and discussion of intellectual reasoning behind viewpoints rather than from some random anonymous person on a discount forum.

      • akib on 28/11/2020 - 14:36
        +30
        1. I'm not going around giving life advice
        2. He's currently recovering and still addicted (i.e not in a position to give advice to anyone). If he was a recovered addict then giving advice would make sense. This book is just a blatant money grab.
        • jjcf on 28/11/2020 - 14:41
          +21

          In all fairness, he needs money now that his daughter spent it all on bottle service while spreading Covid across Eastern Europe one nightclub at a time.

        • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:07
          +16

          How is he still addicted? He’s gone to extraordinary lengths to rehabilitate himself. If still addicted means he may still be tapering off, then I think that’s a bit harsh. And to call him a crackhead is just plain outrageous. He has to take accountability for where he ended up, but to compare him to a common crackhead is plain wrong. Like him or not, he has helped so many people, that is undeniable…. are you telling me that is not worth something because of his drug issues? But judgemental there buddy.

          • jabroni on 28/11/2020 - 16:16
            +3

            @[Deactivated]: Jordan Peterson has been forced to pursue “emergency” drug detox treatment in Russia after getting hooked on highly addictive psychoactive anti-anxiety drugs, his daughter has said.

            that was this year and hes been on benzos for years

            • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 16:28
              +3

              @jabroni: Yeah I know about that, but that was earlier in the year. I may be wrong with the timeline, but I am almost certain he out of the woods and on the long road to recovery, he made a video a week or two ago to say he is still going through the struggles but is leaps and bounds to where he was.

              He was on Benzos. And it obviously got the better of him. Many people are on benzo's for anxiety etc, it's pretty common. What a lot of people don't understand about it, is that coming off a benzo addiction is literally the worst and can kill you. They say benzo withdrawal is second to none, even worse than heroin. It's a bit harsh how much criticism he hops and the cheap shots about his issues, he's only human afterall, it could really happen to anyone. Prescription medication abuse discriminates against no one, look at the opioid epedemic…. 'normal' familes absolutley gutten by it.

              • jabroni on 28/11/2020 - 16:39
                +2

                @[Deactivated]: yeah but someone giving 12 rules to follow then "whoops i forgot another 12 rule$$" should probably follow his rules

                he should have just made his bed and lobsters and stuff

                • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 16:55
                  +4

                  @jabroni: Ever considered he has changed since his last book and has more to share? No doubt money is a factor but for whom isn't it?

                  Bare-foot investor has new editions each year… why? Because things change.

          • brentsbits on 29/11/2020 - 16:38

            @[Deactivated]:

            He has to take accountability for where he ended up, but to compare him to a common crackhead is plain wrong

            Why? Different drugs, same behaviour.

            • [Deactivated] on 29/11/2020 - 17:26

              @brentsbits: Don't recall him sucking d1ck for a benzo. He is/was a functioning addict.Benzo's are not a long term solution which is where he went wrong. And on top of that, people react differently to the withdrawals. You make it sound like he selling his valuables at a pawn shop for his next hit. I don't blame you for your views as I would say it comes down to ignorance and I would have agreed with you not that long ago.

        • GC1 on 28/11/2020 - 19:38
          +1

          "Nothing like taking life advice from a benzo addicted crackhead"
          "I'm not going around giving life advice"

          Is that similar to giving life advice?
          Asking for a friend.

    • skinnywombat on 28/11/2020 - 15:47
      +11

      I presume you don’t think much of Isaac Newton because of his interest in alchemy/occult. Wouldn’t read Nietzsche because of his insanity? Who would you take advice from?

      • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 15:50
        +7

        Usually the best have a vice or two.

      • jabroni on 28/11/2020 - 16:18
        +1

        lots of ancient people believed in god

        we don't hold it against them as it was the done thing back then but now we know better

        addiction to drugs is something different to "interest in alchemy"

      • cannedhams on 29/11/2020 - 09:55
        +2

        Yes, and Linus Pauling was a brilliant chemist, the best of the 20th century, but he had some interesting views about Vitamin C megadoses.

        And MLK wasn't terribly easy on the women in his life:- https://theconversation.com/im-an-mlk-scholar-and-ill-never-…

    • dmac on 28/11/2020 - 17:03
      +7

      Life advice often is best from people who have constantly struggled to do their best despite the circumstances, as opposed to people who appear to have never struggled.

    • splitatom on 28/11/2020 - 19:22
      +1

      Yet the vast majority of the world still take advice from "influencers" on social media. Pathetic.

    • the urbanite on 28/11/2020 - 21:00
      -1

      Incorrect. He's a benzo addicted crackhead with brain damage from self-induced coma.

  • railspider on 28/11/2020 - 14:12
    +16

    Love getting advice from a drug addict with brain damage locked in a Russian rehab clinic

    • djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 14:14
      +18

      Right, because none of us have ever made any major mistakes in our lives that have taken us a long time to get over the consequences of.

      • TheRealCJ on 28/11/2020 - 14:24
        +35

        Most of us don’t write books telling you how to live your life while making said mistakes.

        • djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 14:27
          +20

          I've always been amazed at how well this logical fallacy convinces people- it's called "tu quoque"- the appeal to hypocrisy. It does nothing to invalidate the content of the book.

          • TheRealCJ on 28/11/2020 - 14:38
            +2

            @djthornton: … it’s absolutely not Tu Quoque. Simply pointing out that it’s hypocritical of a man to claim to be an authority on how all people should live their lives being in extreme non-control of his own life isn’t “turning the tables back on an accuser”

            • djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 14:47
              +28

              @TheRealCJ: This is exactly tu quoque. You're not criticising the ideas of the book, you're critising the person who writes them. Your argument rests on the assumption that someone who's life has major issues can't offer good advice. Maybe that's true but it's not obvious because anyone who gives advice has their own skeletons, it's just that Peterson's are made public so you know what his skeletons are- in order to invalidate the contents of the book you have to actually critise the advice itself, not the person giving it. What am I missing here?

            • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 15:03
              +1

              @TheRealCJ: " it’s hypocritical of a man to claim to be an authority on how all people should live their lives"

              Of course you have a citation for this claim? I've watched/read a bit of his work, I don't recall him ever making this claim. In fact I remember an interview when he said he is exactly NOT this. Something along the lines of his work being for specific people that need his help, not "all people".

          • johnwinkle on 28/11/2020 - 14:39
            +11

            @djthornton: you dont see how the content of a self help book about getting your life together from a person whos life is completely screwed during the writing of the book might invalidate it a bit?

            • djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 14:48
              +3

              @johnwinkle: I understand the argument I'm just saying it's not a good one. It's a criticism of Peterson as a person, not of the actual ideas he espouses.

              • akib on 28/11/2020 - 15:00
                +7

                @djthornton: You wouldn't take financial advise from someone on the dole.

                Same exact scenario here.

                • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 15:06
                  +11

                  @akib:

                  You wouldn't take financial advise from someone on the dole.
                  Same exact scenario here.

                  Depends if you've always been on the dole and never achieved anything like maybe yourself, or you were extremely successful, then encountered some hurdles in life like we all invariably do, then offered advice for others about trying to avoid similar hurdles yourself.

                  So no, not exactly the same at all.

                • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 19:41
                  +3

                  @akib: I'm an alcoholic, I drunk drove, hit a light pole, flipped my car. I went to jail and paid a fine.

                  I tell you: "don't drink drive because it'll lead to grief".

                  Would you take my advice?

              • Deals For Days on 28/11/2020 - 15:08
                +10

                @djthornton: Would I get my car repaired at a mechanic whose own car runs like crap because he can't fix it?

                No, I wouldn't.

                Same deal here.

              • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:15
                +4

                @djthornton: That’s perspective. Maybe it’s a man who has gone to hell and back and is now much the wiser and is sharing it with others. Some of the finest people remembered in our times had severe mental or drug issues.

              • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 15:55

                @djthornton: Perhaps thats the argument that they make because the ideas are sound?

            • Pufff on 28/11/2020 - 15:15
              +7

              @johnwinkle: Its the same group of people and their supporters who preach family values but have affairs, go to church but turn a blind eye to the molestation of children, pro life but force their mistresses to have abortions, homophobic but are gay themselves.
              The hypocrisy and lack of self awareness would be comical if it wasn't so mind blowing.

            • TheEnvelope on 28/11/2020 - 17:45

              @johnwinkle: Do as I say not as I do.

        • FlatulentFrank on 28/11/2020 - 14:37
          +4

          Incredible that a man can muster up such content that many have benefited from, yet here you are on a high horse.

          Unfortunately, your deplorable & antagonistic comment surmises more about you than the man/offer presented.

        • MattyD on 28/11/2020 - 15:13
          +3

          Your opinion does not constitute a valid neg. Please read ozbargain voting guidelines before negging, and state a valid reason from the list provided.

        • dmac on 28/11/2020 - 17:06
          +7

          He is a clinical psychologist, his job it to help people with their life, even if he is struggling to manage his. Mostly it seems that he struggles to manage the pressure of being a celebrity and the hatred that people attack him with but he continues to tour the world because he enjoys helping people - which is probably why he became a clinical psychologist in the first place.

          It's disgusting seeing so many people enjoy seeing others struggling.

    • TheEnvelope on 28/11/2020 - 17:43
      +2

      What do you mean by drug addict, illegal drugs or drugs taken on behalf of a subscription to help deal with anxiety?

      I’m fine with taking advice from someone who’s been succesful enough to go on Rogan a few times.

      Also he’s someone who knows how to overcome adversity, you on the other hand, misleading people by labeling him as a drug user; have problems you need fixed.

    • Mokr on 28/11/2020 - 18:42
      +1

      So anyone with addiction cannot provide advice for living?

  • Theacidictamtam on 28/11/2020 - 14:13
    +8

    The comments here should be fun.

    • Alistair79 on 28/11/2020 - 14:14
      +2

      Except that they are going to be down-voted into non-existence!

  • sitdowndisco on 28/11/2020 - 14:15
    +27

    Here's 12 rules for a successful life. Actually, they weren't quite right because I ended up a drug addict. Here's another 12. Hope they work for you! (suckaz!)

    • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 15:58

      lol.

      Saying that how many of the brightest spark have had personal issues - like Churchill and his drinking, etc.

      • Skinnerr on 28/11/2020 - 17:26
        +4

        It's almost like he's a human too.

        • RedSky on 28/11/2020 - 20:50
          +3

          Frankly, if he wrote a book at this point about overcoming drug addiction, I would view him with more credibility. This is something he has personal experience in and where he can potentially offer some unique insight.

      • johnwinkle on 28/11/2020 - 17:48
        +1

        didnt realise churchill was a self help author

    • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 14:26
      +16

      Could you give some examples of left-wing propaganda that hits people from every angle of life?

      • nascent on 28/11/2020 - 14:28
        +39

        So sickle of channel 7 hammering me to seize the means of production

        • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 14:29
          +10

          sickle

          (profanity) lmao.

          Don't threaten me with a good time…

          Kochie talks about personal finance but if you watch his blinking, it's actually morse code for "take down the imperialists, comrade" over and over.

        • johnwinkle on 28/11/2020 - 14:40
          +17

          see this is why i only watch sky news and other murdoch media for an unbiased non propaganda filled view!

      • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 15:12
        -2

        Media/Social Media/Big Tech, Pro Sports, Education, Movies, Music… pretty much every angle.
        Maybe a better question would be where do you get exposed to right wing ideas?

        Assuming you do not consider yourself left or right, what do you think the balance is?

        • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:17
          +14

          I asked for an example, mate, not a list of different forms of media. I think you would struggle to find any examples of left-wing ideas in the mainstream media in Australia. And I am not talking about culture wars stuff, I am talking about economics and inequality. There is some media that talks about things like feminism or racism, but not the economic roots of them.

          I do consider myself left, so feel free to write this off as biased, but the vast majority of media in this country is dictated by Murdoch and other big business interests. The Overton Window has moved far enough in Australia that any economic discussion that does not accept neoliberalism is labelled populist or communist (see how the media frames Katter or One Nation as populism, and the Greens as communism/socialism). The economic and media status quo benefits those who are currently large and in charge. They control the vast majority of the debate. I'd love to see an example of left-wing media. I really would. But I don't think you or anyone else here can provide one.

          • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 15:29
            +5

            @[Deactivated]: Here you go:
            https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-26/gender-pay-gap-narrow…

            The gender pay gap has been debunked numerous times but is a darling subject of the victim narrative of the left which just keeps getting press.

            I see stuff like this every day, which I don't have a problem with if there was a counterpoint, but there almost never is.

            • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:40
              +10

              @1st-Amendment: Have you ever seen sky news? Or really any other Australian media other than the ABC? This stuff is either not covered at all or debunked as "cultural marxism".

              And also, the gender gap is a very real thing. People just misunderstand it. The gap is manifested in women and men being encouraged to do different careers that pay differently, and in unequally shared domestic duties that render women less able to focus on their careers. That's without even mentioning the (often invisible, but proven) discrimination in hiring. How many women are CEOs or even heads of government departments?

              If you have any education in social science, politics, even economics (any mainstream economist can point out everything I just did, too) you would understand that this is a real thing. Bro science bros with engineering degrees """debunk""" the gender pay gap with income figures from the ABS or similar. In doing so, they totally miss the point.

              And if this was your best example…

              The use of "victim narrative" is very childish too.

              • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 16:13

                @[Deactivated]: I think its clear from the evidence that the majority of people who are in power (CEOs, Government, Senior public service, etc) basically have devoted their lives to get to that position.

                For example when Steve Jobs got a diagnosis of cancer, he still kept working for apple, even though he was more than rich enough to retire.
                I looked at his last interviews and truth be told he was totally committed to Apple, literally a heartless corporation.
                Do you think the PM (of any political persuasion) is not completely devoted to the job? That s/he doesn't work weekends and won't wake up at 2am if s/he needs too?
                How many CEOs work 12-14 hour days then on the weekends and done that for 30 years plus to get to their position? (every Bank CEO).

                (and mainly for what? A side note in the pages of history?)

                Perhaps women are not dumb enough to fall into it as men are.

                • TheRealCJ on 28/11/2020 - 19:42
                  +5

                  @Ti-au: Hmm, is Scott Morrison totally dedicated to the job? Let's ask all the people who's homes were burning as he relaxed on a pacific beach thousands of kilometres from Australia.

                  • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 20:52

                    @TheRealCJ: You don't get the Job unless you demonstrate to your Party you are 100% committed. And your right - Scott Morrison was "caught"

                    Did he face Massive criticism????? and was he flogged by the Media ????? Yes!!!! And why? For NOT showing -> TOTAL <- dedication to the job.
                    Will he do it again? I would BET money he would not.

                    And Why did he go on the trip? Because he wouldn't be having any holidays over Christmas? Yes.
                    So no XMas holiday with the kids. Do you get time off during Christmas? Most people do.
                    & Why didn't Albo criticize him? Hmmmm. Probably because he knows the commitment required.

                    The criticism proves my point. That ANY excuse was not going to be good enough because we require TOTAL dedication.

              • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 16:14
                +4

                @[Deactivated]:

                Have you ever seen sky news?

                You asked for examples I gave you one.

                And also, the gender gap is a very real thing.

                Proof?

                The gap is manifested in women and men being encouraged to do different careers

                Men and women are different. They do different things, therefore there are different results.
                Disparity is not discrimination.

                If you have any education in social science, politics, even economics (any mainstream economist can point out everything I just did, too)

                Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell are world leading Economists who disagree with you, but sure..

                you would understand that this is a real thing. Bro science bros with engineering degrees """debunk""" the gender pay gap with income figures from the ABS or similar. In doing so, they totally miss the point.

                Lol, Jordan Peterson has actually covered this with supporting data and he's a Clinical Psychologist specialising in this exact area. Bro, Science Bro but only when it agrees with me…

                How many women are CEOs or even heads of government departments?

                How many are qualified to be so? How many men who want to be CEO's but aren't?

                This gender pay gap bunk relies purely on average data of all men and all women. It's the most amateur-hour science there is.

                But feel free to post data if you have anything different. As I said, it's been debunked by world leading experts in Psychology, Economics and Politics so you argument from authority is lame.

                The fact that you are arguing for this shows how deep the left bias is that you are actually arguing that left is centre.

                The use of "victim narrative" is very childish too.

                The left play victim for every cause, what else do you call this?

              • Binchicken22 on 28/11/2020 - 16:30
                +7

                @[Deactivated]: I don't know why sky News always gets brought up, it's a subscription news service, that in itself rules it out from being a major source of Australians "news", we all know foxtel is dying. It probably rates 6th in the nightly News programming, definitely in the bottom half anyway.

                I could go through each of your points and cite sources disproving all or them, but really I don't have time. So I'll stick with the one you state is "proven". The fact there is an unconcious bias is hiring practices, favouring Men. The funny thing is the left leaning HR department in our government already ran a little experiment based on this little concept that someone with a gender studies degree thought up… The problem was it not only disproved their theory, it showed the bias was the other way, women were more likely to get a job if their gender was known 😅.

                So of course after that was found out it was quickly and quietly cancelled… If the bias favours us then it's a good thing! 😅 You really can't win with lefties logic.

                Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tri…

              • dmac on 28/11/2020 - 17:22
                +2

                @[Deactivated]: In the current climate companies are looking for female CEOs and the absense of female workers in any career type doesn't prove anything, its a correlation not causation.

                If you look at Nordic countries that have narrowed the wage gap partly by making pay for 'prestigious' jobs much lower e.g. nurses and doctors pay are much closer. With pay for careers being a less important factor, women choose to work typically female careers more often than women in US.

                You could have a decent argument that we over value masculine careers and pay them more than necessary but you've argued that women want masculine careers but are being stopped by men, which has been true historically but thankfully has largely changed, with the help of fairer laws.

      • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:18
        -4

        Unlimited genders.

        Hormone treatment for kids who can barely wipe their own ass because mummy wanted a girl.

        Drag-time story hour

        Black Lives Matter.

        Cultural appropriation

        If you don’t agree you are a racist, bigot or nazi.

        Shall I continue??

        • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:31
          +15

          None of this is left wing.

          These are culture wars issues made popular by the exact same media I am criticising. They are non-issues for the vast majority of people. You can ignore them and move on.

          I would like to see some actual left wing content. Discussion about wage theft, unions, increasing the pension, nationalising industries (or at least stopping privatisation of them), building hospitals etc etc. None of what you mentioned actually matters (for most people) and none of it is 'left wing'.

          You can be a transgender drag queen BLM supporter who culturally appropriates left right and centre while calling people a nazi and still have no criticism of neoliberalism or capitalism.

          Comments like yours show exactly how bad Australian education in economics and politics is.

          • Popid on 28/11/2020 - 16:15
            +4

            @[Deactivated]: If it's not (far) left wing, what is it? I dunno about snagseb, but I don't disagree with your main contention that there are other issues with great real-world ramifications to consider, but that's kindof that point; call these people whatever you want - the 'far left'/sjws, bleeding hearts, whatever, there is a VERY vocal minority who are insisting that the issues snagseb raises are the only ones on the agenda - both on social media, and to a large degree in mainstream media (since the latter largely feeds off the former these days.) Whoever you want to attribute it to, or what you want to call them, it's a problem. These people are getting their way, far too much of the time, in terms of setting the agenda, and framing it, in what we're allowed to discuss at all, and in things like what gets published (in this instance it doesn't seem Random House will back down, thankfully, but there're plenty of examples of books due to be published that then haven't been, because of outcry from people who haven't even read said books) or what we're allowed to play re videogames or watch re movies etc. There is a vocal movement of censorious people who are having an outsized impact on the culture. That is worth discussing, IMO.

            These people are like 100% Moral Consequentialists in their thinking. Most of us tend to think and act with one foot in rule-based ethics and one foot in Consequentialism/Utilitarianism, but for these people the only moral concern appears to be human well-being. At the expense of virtues most of the rest of us hold in conjunction, that can sometimes come in conflict with wellbeing, such as Truth, or Freedom. Most people consider those to be self-evidently worthy as well, but to these people they're dispensable in the pursuit of a Utopia where there would be total equality of outcome, and nobody's feelings would ever get hurt and nobody would feel offended. But so to the extent that concern for human welfare is what (ostensibly) drives their increasingly authoritarian nature, and given that concern for human welfare is a fundamental backbone the leftist ideology, I'd happily label these people 'far-leftists'. Of course it's complex but I'm already sick of saying 'these people' just in these two paragraphs ;) We all know what is meant by 'sjw' or 'the far left', isn't it somewhat disingenuous to act otherwise?

            And just to reiterate my former point, I don't think this really is, or should be, a 'non-issue' for the vast majority of people; whether people are interested or not, this stuff is affecting our culture. Debating the normative content of any of those issues isn't the point (and anyway you can't debate the content of any of those issues with 'these people', they'll just scream and cry), the point is to have the debate about this pervasive, vocal infantilization of our culture that affects us all

          • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 19:54
            +3

            @[Deactivated]:

            They are non-issues

            Not if public funds are being used to force questionable content down my kid's throat: Safe Schools indoctrination.

            None of this is left wing

            Documentary.

          • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 20:58
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: You are talking about economic left ideas.
            What about social left ideas?

            • abuch47 on 29/11/2020 - 01:18
              +2

              @Ti-au:

              social left ideas

              science, equality, divesting in the destruction of our planet, education
              quite radical

              • BenDoverson on 29/11/2020 - 10:33
                +1

                @abuch47: Pseudo-science, equity, having Australia stop it's major export industries when it produces a very insignificant proportion of global emissions, indoctrination.

                Yes quite radical.

          • the urbanite on 28/11/2020 - 21:05
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: Great post.

        • labyrinthinecities on 28/11/2020 - 15:49
          +5

          jrowls is talking about economic leftism not social progressivism. While they're linked and heavily associated, they're not necessarily the same thing…

        • nascent on 28/11/2020 - 15:52
          +8

          Multiple genders has been a thing in many societies. Given sex is a spectrum between male and female, it's logical there would be a spectrum of neurological sex identifications (genders).

          Transgender people as adults struggle to secure hormone treatments due to the gatekeeping nature of medicine. Zero children are getting hormones. Teenagers will get hormone blockers initially and progress from there if their identity is persistent, insistent and consistent. It's not a "Mum wanted x" strawman argument.

          Drag story time hour is an issue… why? The young liberal who was spearheading protests against it killed himself. That's the result of making people hate their own identity.

          You have made zero points against BLM or whatever you label "cultural appropriation".

          You don't have to agree, but I strongly recommend you get an education so you can achieve the skill of critical thinking. When it goes beyond disagreement (contributing to making people's lives significantly worse), being just labelled a bigot/racist/nazi is probably the lesser form of deserved reaction. But often people only do this online, because that's their safe space.

          • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 15:59
            -1

            @nascent: There are only 2 genders.

            BLM is a terrorist organisation, countless videos of them attacking innocent bystanders. I don’t know how many videos now I’ve seen of people just casually dining getting terrorised and assaulted. Or knocked unconscious because they are wearing a maga hat.

            Cultural appropriation like the countless stories you hear of people having a tantrum because a white person has dreadlocks or is cooking non-white food.

            There are many cases of children under 10 beginning the transitions required to change their sex at a later age.

            Drag time story hour because …. have you seen the videos? Drag queens twerking in front of kids in primary school and trying to corrupt young minds.

            Then you finish it off with a thinly-veiled attack on my intelligence because why, you ask? Because I don’t agree with you. Downplaying that it’s ok to call someone something disgusting as a racist or a nazi because you believe it’s better than getting physically assaulted. Then topping it off with a keyboard warrior jab when you don’t even know me. I’m the same in written or verbal form. If I was a betting man I would say you are more the keyboard only type.

          • Ti-au on 28/11/2020 - 16:46
            +6

            @nascent: Children as young as 13 are accessing hormone blockers (even though guidelines suggest 16). To me thats a child.
            Also it seems to affect young autistic females in greater numbers.
            Since 2016 there has been a 400% increase in the number of children accessing this service.
            And these services were available for over 15 years,they weren't hidden, so why the increase now?
            https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51034461

            In terms of drag reading time - perhaps its because of the reason they are there.
            Are they there to teach the children reading?
            Or because they have an agenda to push?
            I think its more than fair to be wary of the motives of some of the individuals connected to the movement and if they were there for the Children's sake.

            BLM activists have literally attacked people for having an opinion they don't agree with (go look at youtube lol).

          • Popid on 28/11/2020 - 17:11
            +4

            @nascent: Well, to bolster snagsebs argument(s) for the second time in this one thread - I hope they appreciate it! ;):

            Except sex isn't defined as a spectrum, by biologists, who should know, since it's a matter of biology. There may be a 'spectrum of neurological sex identifications' but you'd have to explain what on earth that means - just a 'felt' sense of 'gender'? How is it possible to even know what it feels like to be a gender different from what your own is, whatever it may be? How is it possible to even know what your own gender feels like? To me, if I introspect, it seems that it just 'feels like' either 'nothing', on a pure base level, or it 'feels like' something that has been inculcated in me through nurture, not something deep in my nature. I do understand that some people may feel like they don't fit the stereotype of how their gender or sex ought to feel, behave, etc - I certainly am not a 'manly man', on many levels, despite being male; there have been times where I have felt 'unmanly' because of this - or even perhaps 'felt feminine' - for instance when having long hair, if I were to tuck it behind my ear a certain way or something, I might be aware that I 'feel girly' - but that's a kind of self-consciousness born of it being the case that the vast amount of people I've seen with long hair who tuck it behind their ear like that are girls, rather than something innate in me about tucking my hair that way or how it feels to do so. How could it be innate, given that girls having long hair on average and boys short hair on average is entirely socially contingent? So I wonder (and if this sounds arrogant, I apologise) whether some people maybe are conflating this sortof… sense of the gendered self as mirror to what society is telling them that they should and shouldn't be, with something that is actually within them fundamentally and born as…?

            Personally I don't think that not falling into quintessential/archetypal gender norms makes my gender actually female, or that my sex should be female (in order to match); I think to think that would be to fall into the same damn binary trap that everyone at large falls into. For decades feminists and others have fought to broaden what these labels mean, and to help us understand that it's a bell curve of traits and most people fall roughly in the middle and so are 'representative' of that 'archetype', but plenty of people do not; it doesn't mean they shouldn't be considered in the category; categories can be broad (and even have fuzzy boundaries.) To go (dangerously hah) further, I struggle to see how it isn't a philosophical fallacy to assume a logical necessity between gender and sex; even if it were the case that some brains are differently developed or organized ie there's an 'essentially female' brain and an 'essentially male' brain, and say some people have a 'male' brain in a 'female sexed' body - so what? Why should there logically, or in any event necessarily, be a connection between having a 'male brain' be in a 'male body' or a 'female brain' be in 'female body'? Why can't someone just be like 'yep, dude brain, female gametes'? You mention other cultures with multiple genders, but so in fact as far as I'm aware/was taught, most of those cultures don't see any such mismatch, like we (apparently) do. The only thing I can think of is if certain brains has less good…control….for wont of a better term, over that body. Maybe something like that is in fact where some true gender dysphoria comes into play. I just… worry (which I know probably comes off as concern trolling code for, 'I wanna be a transphobic (profanity)'; I don't) that maybe some people are, as I put it before, is buying into a bullshit dichotomy that doesn't exist anyway, and making a not even emotional or mental but philosophical error, which our society, again in its infinite wisdom of black-white binaries, is encouraging them to make. And that's a concern when it is being 'taught' to kids. And with regards to those kids, no they don't get hormones, but blockers may actually mean that they don't 'grow out' of their dysphoria like they otherwise might (because statistics show that an awful lot do, left unattended.) I mean think about it - you feel like your gender is the opposite of your sex and you buy the going idea in the culture that they must match, if they don't something is wrong, so you delay the hormone flood that might give them that very sense of the 'correct' gendered self. Any adults ought to be allowed to do with their bodies anything they like, obviously. Also, I don't think it's complete bullshit that there are some mums (and dads?) out there who… get overly excited about or push for or just run with this stuff way too soon. But that's just basing on my experience and hearing some parents talk about their (like 3 yo) kids in ways that disturb me (and who clearly conflate things like, oh she plays with trucks so absolutely he's a boy, etc…it's like they're so aware of this stuff and 'on alert' for it that they see it in everything. And I really believe there is some element of moral grandstanding about it.)

            I wont touch the BLM issue right now - geez that'd be POISONOUS, surely I know better than that ;) lol. Sincerely though, anyone reading this who disagrees with me, especially if its lived experience for you, that's perfectly fine and if you wanna tell me how I'm wrong then that's even better. I'm just interested in a lot of this stuff for a buncha reasons and think about it a lot but I do realise that talking about it when it doesn't strictly matter to me, literally speaking, in the same way as it does to someone who lives it, could seem gouche at best but those're my honest thoughts on the matter and (profanity) SNAGSEB brought it up, so Nascent there's your hopefully not OBVIOUSLY stupid, obviously bigoted defense of one of the issues they raised haha. I am sure I will regret hitting Post Comment, but I do a lotta things I regret so I spose I'll live

            • nascent on 28/11/2020 - 18:00
              +2

              @Popid: Except biologists do define it as a spectrum. Since it is a matter of biology. For every time you try to define it as binary, you get exceptions, which literally leads to a spectrum. It is mostly a bimodal distribution, but it is a spectrum.

              As for the rest of your comments, they are more a publication of various internal thoughts. There is nothing to comment on as it is just a bunch of beliefs you have, so there is no discussion really. And that's fine. The issue is not about having an opinion. It's about how people who pretend it's 'just' an opinion, yet they end up injecting their own poisonous agendas to make people's life worse, who already have it hard.

              • Popid on 28/11/2020 - 18:38
                +1

                @nascent: Exceptions to categories or fuzzy boundaries to categories don't negate categories. Categorisation is a human construct and is done largely because it's instrumental; same with definitions. However that doesn't make them arbitrary or non-meaningful. There's a reason why biologists consider sex mainly from the perspective of reproduction - namely because it is those sex characteristics which are found reliably throughout nature and which by and large in fact do correlate strongly with the kinds of traits that we also associate with gender. So, most males of most species in the animal kingdom both a) have male sexual and reproductive characteristics, but b) also exhibit a lot of the traits that we consider to be 'masculine'. The fact that there are examples otherwise doesn't mean the category has no truth or utility. The fact that some people are born intersex doesn't mean there aren't meaninful categories of 'man' and 'woman.' You're free to define things however you like or categorise things however you like, but definitions need to be shared to have a conversation, and categories should be meaningful. I know what you mean when you say 'literally leads to a spectrum' - it's almost semantics at a certain point, sortof like the non-binary worldview versus the…what ill call 'broad conception' view of gender; are they really meaningfully different? People who are saying that gender is broad and so 'men' can have or lack various masculine traits, ditto women with female traits…well that's a 'spectrum' of traits - non-binary people who say there are 'x' number of genders are essentially saying the same thing, only they want to put a bunch of labels on each of the parts of that bell curve. The tricky thing I think is to actually perceive where the genuine differences are and not end up talking past one another but it's clearly extremely difficult because all the conversations I listen to almost always fall into the latter..(or fall into people preaching to their converted, or to each other when they completely agree.. and so nothing is ever new or edifying bleh, but anyway)

                And fair enough regarding the rest, yes it's a bunch of beliefs I (tentatively) have, partly written out as an exercise while getting them straight in my own head, but also offered for others to engage with or critique as they see fit…ie, engaging in a discussion about the issue? But also, primarily written because you were criticizing snagseb for not offering thoughts or arguments to bolster their opinions/contentions. With, I would add, perhaps a tacit argument in there that none can be reasonably made. So I disagreed with that and offered up a retort. Ultimately I guess I just wanted to make a point that 'reasonable people can disagree'. I appreciate that it was quite navel-gazing in nature rather than with reference to hard facts or whatever, but that's because facts on these issues are tough to come by for a variety of reasons but also because I think that's where a problem lies, in the philosophical conception of some of these things

                and I know there are people who do that; thanks for not lumping me in with them I took pains to try to make sure that people wouldn't, but wasn't counting on it working

      • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 19:49

        Gender is a rainbow

  • sorasora on 28/11/2020 - 14:21
    +24

    Do you love equality, diversity, and inclusion? Hate the patriarchy?

    So I have to hate equality, diversity and inclusion, as well as love the patriarchy to read the book?

    • djthornton on 28/11/2020 - 14:24
      +4

      Yep! Gotta be pro-inequality, uniformity, exclusion, and stay-at-home mums. I don't make the rules, I just tell people what they are…

    • 1st-Amendment on 28/11/2020 - 15:31

      So I have to hate equality, diversity and inclusion, as well as love the patriarchy to read the book?

      No. Is that what you heard in Facebook? Maybe time to get more educated friends…

      • sorasora on 29/11/2020 - 07:45

        That's what original poster wrote for this book description.

        • 1st-Amendment on 29/11/2020 - 08:36

          Oh right, my apologies I didn't read the blurb…

  • singlemalt72 on 28/11/2020 - 14:22
    +29

    Goddammit,
    Toilet paper is getting so expensive nowadays.

  • makkapakka on 28/11/2020 - 14:22
    +13

    Will it be like most self help books where the useful information can be condensed down to one paragraph and the rest of the book is padded out with filler and repetition. Sure do love reading 200 pages of completely made up stories and anecdotes.

    • buckethat on 28/11/2020 - 16:07

      Likely.

    • Vulvasaur on 29/11/2020 - 06:54

      Yes.

      If you know JBP his core message never changes. "Take some responsibility for your life and start getting your shet together."

      Or to condense it even further, "Clean up your room."

  • Ponka on 28/11/2020 - 14:23
    +5

    The only advice that I'll take from this guy:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiwTYctDVfw

    • buckethat on 28/11/2020 - 16:10

      Lmfao, I get that this is probably out of context but what the fk none the less.

  • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 14:25
    +28

    Jordan Peterson is a goon who writes endlessly about things he knows very little about.

    He may be a halfway decent neuro-psychology academic but anyone with any social science knowledge will see through his ideas straight away.

    If you want a book that really helps you think - without the wank about political correctness and culture wars - and is written by a critically acclaimed academic, I suggest you get a copy of Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow.

    • [Deactivated] on 28/11/2020 - 14:31

      "social science", there is no "science" in "social science" at best its "social opinion"

      real social science would be described as data analytics like what facebook and google do to send you advertisements and sell you stuff.

      But anyone who did social science at uni wouldn't understand analytics, statistics or math

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join