Why is he so obsessed with marriage?

Why is he so obsessed with marriage?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >has a chapter in his book called "take your medication"
    >he himself takes medication
    >gets addicted to the benzos he was prescribed
    >gets flown to russia to be put in a coma because he cant handle the withdrawal

    sad

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I will never trust someone who flies to a shithole country to get medical treatment

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I dont know how any can take him seriously after that episode
      Feel bad for him of course but idk, read your own book?

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For about maybe five years now, it seems like he's been taking a huge amount of dark money from toxic conservative sources so he's heavily pushing their bad narrative.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Toxic sources like mossad. He's pushing the just-world-fallacy christcucks anti-human, pro-slave-goyim messages.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If you do the investigation, it's mostly American republican conservative christian sources. Not sure if I've seen any other proof of anything else.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I'd agree to that, but this board has us constantly blaming israelites or getting dogpiled for not blaming them.

          I'm entirely convinced it's israelites ANR/OR christians pushing the bootstraping, victim blaming BS.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Could be. In my mind, though, it's far more important to realize the organized funding effort than to assign specific blame. Who's doing it is far less important than making sure more people knowing that it IS being done.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "Don't be useless" is what he gets told every day. He's just telling you what all his customers want. No sense of actually doing something beyond "me, me, me"

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this doesn't work for genetic dead ends. if you get into the system other people are only going to bully you

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because marriage is kino in the highest regard
    married people with children are the ones who get things done because they actually have skin in the game and a reason to put up with BS life throws at you

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What if I'm a genetic failure and can't get married

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        well you can for starters, to be a genetic dead end means u had to have

        >and a reason to put up with BS life throws at you
        Then why do people keep traumatizing their children and divorcing? You sound like a psyopper to me anon.

        idk, broader culture that doesnt fully respect the institution or a lot
        not too long ago divorce wasn't even recognized as an option except in EXTREME circumstances, same for abortion.... now they're both just accepted instant-eject buttons you can press without thinking twice about

        No, because marriage creates extra obligation and makes you subservient and more easily exploited by the corporations. That's the only reason why the alt right pushes this message

        eh, thats a little copey, marriage can give you purpose to be even more based than you usually would

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >marriage can give you purpose
          Yes, it CAN do that in some cases. But the important part to remember is that it ALWAYS produces obligation and easier exploitation, which is really the only thing the narrative-makers care about.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what are some ways it can be exploited? im thinking the vaccine but even then, people found ways around it... i still believe you can say FRICK YOU to anyone even if you have a kid, sure it may be less responsible but theres still a line... it's just further back, as in there's slightly more BS you're willing to put up with before pulling that card, compared to a bachelor

            Yes, they really want me to get married and have kids.

            i know it's undue pressure but they likely just really felt strongly about how positive of an experience it was for them and want others to share that joy... like recommending a movie or song to someone

            imagine creating something that's 50% you and locking eyes with it for the first time after it has been in the hyperbolic time chamber for 9 months...

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's very romantic. Now talk about the childcare expenses.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Nice try. No. Frick off. Dead institution.

            >marriage can give you purpose
            Yes, it CAN do that in some cases. But the important part to remember is that it ALWAYS produces obligation and easier exploitation, which is really the only thing the narrative-makers care about.

            The upper class needs the plebs to believe that "family is everything" so guys can be controlled to create value for the rich people who own everything. Nagging women keep the poor bastards in check to "contribute to society" while the upper class gets to enjoy life without working for it.

            No, because marriage creates extra obligation and makes you subservient and more easily exploited by the corporations. That's the only reason why the alt right pushes this message

            this doesn't work for genetic dead ends. if you get into the system other people are only going to bully you

            >t. KHHV robot with a weak jaw

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            where do you think you are.jpeg

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not against the idea of marriage or children. But the people I work with make it sound like it's something I can just do, like it's the easiest thing in the world. That's why I feel so worthless when it's brought up.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            very true, tell those homies to pony up and start introducing you to their single friends / family members... that's how things have been done for a long time before society became much more fragmented

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >But the people I work with make it sound like it's something I can just do, like it's the easiest thing in the world. That's why I feel so worthless when it's brought up
            They are lying and probably hate their parter, and, if they don't, they will soon.

            >t. seen many a marriage fail or turn into a hellscape

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >what are some ways it can be exploited?... theres still a line... it's just further back

            So, there are several things that are working in tandem to force compliance. First is as you mentioned the leverage that's gained through emotional ties to family. People are much less likely to buck the system if they are bound to a kid or two. And although it may not mean as much on an individual level, these people think of the numbers over a very large population and how they can be better controlled. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly than emotional ties are the very real and always-increasing financial costs of children. In the US, parents on average spend over 300 thousand dollars on their children from birth up until the age of 18. (So that does not even include college) That type of money is of huge significance when dealing with social control because someone who's less financially secure will absolutely be more obedient than someone who's got a few extra hundred thousand to play with. And given that wages are being constantly driven down by a myriad of factors, it's in the best interests of the employers for everyone they hire to have multiple kids, a huge mortgage and a couple of car payments to boot.

            Now, there's an argument that can be trotted out here, namely "you CAn aLWays sPEnd leSs on YouR kIDs!" but that's blatantly dishonest. Remember, none of this is effective on an individual level, these "compliance mechanisms" are meant to apply and be effective against a large group / population. Bottom line, people DO spend this much money on average and so it IS an effective strategy. The fact that you CAN spend less on a child is 100% irrelevant.

            Long winded, I know, but that's my view, hopefully that clarifies.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ok you're right but, i would also say that, you're being controlled just as much if you allow those tactics to dissuade you from procreating... it becomes a case of picking your poison

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I hear you for sure but this type of analysis quickly devolves into the fact that "people don't have much control over what they want or value". If you value personal freedom and being less controlled, you will avoid things that have obligation like marriage and children. If you have other values (and I personally can't quite think of anything that could be more important than personal freedom but whatever) then you'll be drawn to things that will fulfill those values.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You really can't win. If you reproduce you make another slave, if you don't they replace you with Mexicans.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That may not be true from a labor perspective. One of the greatest explosions of the value of workers was right after the black death in medieval Europe. It caused a huge population reduction and the young people that were left were more highly valued because of it. Similarly, our low birth rate may be a huge opportunity for the next generation to make something of themselves due to the economics of labor shortages. This is why I think depopulation only hurts the wealthiest people and it's why they're pushing so hard on the birth rate issue and anti-abortion. It's all greed and only greed.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >This is why I think depopulation only hurts the wealthiest people and it's why they're pushing so hard on the birth rate issue and anti-abortion. It's all greed and only greed.
            B-but /misc/ told me that the WEF wants to cull the useless eaters, even though that would remove most of their slave labor...

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I have honestly never even visited there, just it's reputation alone makes me avoid it. But assuming they grossly misinterpret everything is probably a good basis from which to view their "though process".

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >This is why I think depopulation only hurts the wealthiest people and it's why they're pushing so hard on the birth rate issue and anti-abortion. It's all greed and only greed.
            B-but /misc/ told me that the WEF wants to cull the useless eaters, even though that would remove most of their slave labor...

            All the ruling-class wants is complete control over you, not just like temporary but like in a selectively-bred-for-slavery and blank-state control over future generations.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I agree that that's the ideal but that doesn't invalidate anything of what I said. It's all about increasing systemic control.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            religious teachings really muddy everything for me, concepts like "too much of a good thing", or "becoming a slave to your desires"

            like it gets so paradoxical that even striving for personal freedom can be seen as a prison of a different name... and i think there's merit to these arguments

            >"Dont be useless"
            Jordan Peterson has never worked a real job a day in his life.
            None of his research is truly academic or analytical, it is simply post-fact justification for his preconceived notions.

            He has a PhD in clinical psychology, yet has NEVER provided clinical care to a single human being. Would you respect a surgeon that has never performed a surgery, but simply read a ton of books on it and wrote his own papers that aren't important enough to ever be published as academic texts?
            He's a fricking joke, and only famous because of his arguments about pronouns with high school trannies like 12 years ago.
            More recently he's become a pillpopping Black person with a prostitute daughter, just a complete and total fricking loser.
            His existence is fricking surreal, and is a great example of how dogshit academia is.

            yeah i dont think he's positing anything novel for sure... kinda just someone who is well read on the teachings of other big names in psychology and Christianity and packages all their knowledge in a way that's easy for people to understand

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's why I try to avoid religious-based thought and analysis altogether. I've never found anything in religion all that helpful or insightful. YMMV though

            I don't care for politics but I am in academia. I despise anyone not in my field (mathematics) and I consider them beneath me. At the bottom of this totem pole are psychologists, which I unfortunately have to share a building with. Even among psychologists, his work is garbage, he should not have a PhD, and has no business teaching in a university.
            It is also ironic how hard he rails against his detractors in Canada that wish to take away his credentials and license, yet isn't capable of reflecting on how useless his life has been, that his work can simply be invalidated due to the thought in vogue and political climate, its opinion based and has no true concrete or logical foundation. I respect Sonic the Hedgehog fanlore speculators more.

            >yet isn't capable of reflecting on how useless his life has been
            If he were being 100% honest in responding to this criticism, he'd probably just say "Hey, I got paid a buttload of cash to spout what I spout, that's really all that matters to me". I'm very certain that most academics can't even begin to approach a tenth of his net worth so in my view, that's his main achievement.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >not too long ago divorce wasn't even recognized as an option except in EXTREME circumstances,
          Mostly for financial reasons that got ingrained into our culture, not the other way around. People stayed together because they had to, and if they didn't have to they would be shamed by the collective for the divorce. It's why so many old people are still together despite their relationships being abusive.
          Also I think abortion is only "accepted" in a lot of woke countries like America Sweden Britland etc.. It's not common around the world.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ye i speak from an American perspective, and i'd imagine the adoption of regular abortion coincides with the undermining of the sanctity of marriage... as in countries that it's uncommon in will also naturally have stronger marriages, even if they may be pre-arranged or whatever third worlders do, they still are willing to endure and do what is best for the kids

            That's very romantic. Now talk about the childcare expenses.

            i know nothing about that... just give em some titty milk, pirate their education and entertainment and it's all good no?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            A lot of countries where marriage is kept divorce is still frowned upon from a cultural perspective, and the man often has a lot more power in the marriage so women cannot even decide if they want to get an abortion.
            I don't think abortions are good I think they're very bad but I also don't think marriage is "good" either, it's neutral in my eyes, even though I do believe in God.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Then jump, you are worthless.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >and a reason to put up with BS life throws at you
      Then why do people keep traumatizing their children and divorcing? You sound like a psyopper to me anon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No, because marriage creates extra obligation and makes you subservient and more easily exploited by the corporations. That's the only reason why the alt right pushes this message

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      People at work keep harassing me with this shit. It makes me feel worthless.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        what? that you should "settle down and have kids" or something?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, they really want me to get married and have kids.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nice try. No. Frick off. Dead institution.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the ones who get things done because they actually have skin in the game and a reason to put up with BS life throws at you
      Ohohoho, very nice friend you almost got me. Anyone not paying attention or already predisposed to the breeder mentality might have easily fallen for your bait. But not me. See my friend you're not wrong they have skin in the game, and that they have "a reason to out up with the BS life throws at you". Here, you just to change "life" for "The State" and now it all makes perfect sense. People with families will lower themselves to whatever degree if it means it keeps their children fed and clothed, EVEN incurring in treason and that is exactly the reason they fear lone wolves.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      FRICK NO!
      Married people with kids are the biggest responsibility dodgers.

      Otherwise, their kids wouldn't have to go to debt when they turn 18.

      Married people with kids are work hogs, constantly taking up positions, hours, etc in jobs and using "MUH KIDS" as a reason to entitle themselves to more... but their kids are still in poverty somehow. And they barely do the extra work they bully others out of it.

      I'm not anti-marriage but I am anti-couples-getting-screw-singles-over which is our current economic nightmare entails.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Married people with kids are work hogs, constantly taking up positions, hours, etc in jobs and using "MUH KIDS" as a reason to entitle themselves to more..
        I think the real issue here is that you're a loser, working in a wage rather than salary position. You're then extending the traits you're observing in the gutter, and applying it to the rest of people with kids.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He advocates for what used to be considered the "bourgeois virtues", because as far as I can tell he sincerely believes that people who possess those virtues are mentally healthier than those who don't. And anyone who deals with the shitbag NEETs around here for ten minutes probably would have to agree with him.

    And, for men anyway, traditional marriage tended to push them into further development of those bourgeois virtues. Employers used to prefer to hire married men over single guys, because single guys are much more erratic and prone to just about every failing than married guys.

    Of course, the counter-narrative from the antiwork crowd would be that married men don't develop greater "virtue", they just have more to lose and that makes it easier to turn them into "capitalism's slaves". The two narratives are, in their core, essentially the same, insofar as they describe identical phenomena; one side just sees the phenomena as admirable, and the other sees them as detestable and shameful.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is a good point but my counter to it all is this. The two narratives could be considered the same if it weren't for the outcomes they produce. Following these "virtues" have only resulted in a lower standard of living for the working class and a higher profit margin for the owner class. So based just on that, it should be considered detestable.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Following these "virtues" have only resulted in a lower standard of living for the working class and a higher profit margin for the owner class.

        That's not really true.

        People who get married and stay married and exercise 19th century type virtues of thrift, temperance, industriousness, studiousness, etc., have overwhelmingly better economic outcomes than people who don't.

        The lower classes have been destroyed in large part because the welfare state allowed lower-class women to throw all those virtues aside, both personally and in terms of the mates they chose, and allowed them to indulge their core preference that they value above all others, namely the desire to suck Tyrone's wiener and have his bastards. The people from single-parent families are the ones who are the most poor and who have no hope of ever digging out.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There are lots of holes in what you've said, but I think the main one is your cherry-picking. "People who stay married are more industrious, etc etc" and yikes, right there is a pretty huge assumption. About half of all marriages end in divorce which is *ruinous* for everyone involved so just off the cuff starting with that is like saying the lotto is a great investment because someone wins a million every week. As for your blaming of the welfare system, I'd actually place the blame more on corporations eroding the earning power of the working class, there's far more evidence of that being the culprit. And by bringing up single-parent families you've actually further proven the point of the antinatalists. To the addled conservative brain, "being responsible" by trying your best and keeping an unhappy marriage together for the kids is acceptable but if someone choses to "be responsible" by avoiding the high risk and high cost of marriage and family altogether, that's somehow terrible. Classic "not like that!!" thinking.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There are lots of holes in what you've said, but I think the main one is your cherry-picking. "People who stay married are more industrious, etc etc" and yikes, right there is a pretty huge assumption. About half of all marriages end in divorce which is *ruinous* for everyone involved so just off the cuff starting with that is like saying the lotto is a great investment because someone wins a million every week.

            I didn't say it was in your individual control to stay married. I said that the family units that stayed intact performed better economically than the ones that didn't. And that is unquestionably true. There's simply no room to debate it, statistically.

            >I'd actually place the blame more on corporations eroding the earning power of the working class, there's far more evidence of that being the culprit.

            No, there isn't. Because the "earning power" of the working class hasn't actually been eroded. That is a statistical illusion, created by the fact that the welfare state has encouraged family groups to splinter into multiple households. *Household* income has stagnated in the US since 1970, but the average household size has also plummeted in the same time frame. If you pointed fricking rifles at the heads of all US adults, and FORCED them to recombine into household units of the average size in 1970, the average household income would be vastly higher.

            >by bringing up single-parent families you've actually further proven the point of the antinatalists. To the addled conservative brain, "being responsible" by trying your best and keeping an unhappy marriage together for the kids is acceptable but if someone choses to "be responsible" by avoiding the high risk and high cost of marriage and family altogether, that's somehow terrible.

            When did I say that? I simply said you're less likely to have what were once considered the bourgeois virtues, and every word of your post SCREAMS that I'm right about that.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >If you pointed fricking rifles at the heads of all US adults, and FORCED them to recombine into household units of the average size in 1970, the average household income would be vastly higher.
            Hm, shame the dollar is worth much less, and the economy is far worse since then, so even if your point were true you still would be incorrect; the earning power has eroded.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Marriage was a good idea until divorce became a common thing. Now a woman is more tied to you by not marrying her so at least she is not tempted to leave you for the alimony.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The upper class needs the plebs to believe that "family is everything" so guys can be controlled to create value for the rich people who own everything. Nagging women keep the poor bastards in check to "contribute to society" while the upper class gets to enjoy life without working for it.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ever notice how women and old men love marriage? What changes in men over time that makes them adopt what is, among young people, mainly a female view? Do men get more woman-like with age?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've noticed that older men who have been married avoid it, hence the mgtow movement. It's only those that haven't experienced marriage want it and (not so coincidentally ) seek it out when they are aging and physical tasks like keeping a household gets difficult.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's so funny that his wife "developed" a condition that only lets her meat from lambs. How stupid are these rich people? When I get a terminal illness, I'll go out killing as many of these useless parasites as I can. It's crazy that Lora modules for a couple bucks could be used to remotely detonate ordinance in a radius of 10 km with minimal programming effort.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because marriage is objectively good for people and society.
    read a damn book

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Those inspired by this kind of love turn to the male, with an affection for that which is naturally more vigorous and has more sense.
    Pausanias (Symposium 181c)

    >I will choose a boy-loving life. That is far better than a wife; Boy-friends in war a man stand by, While the wife goes home to cry.
    Antiochus the Great (Deip. 15)

    >The love for what I speak of reaches higher. Woman's too much unlike, no heart by rights ought to grow hot for her, if wise and male.
    Michelangelo (Sonnet 258)

    >There's gratitude in boys. A woman loves her current man; no loyalty's in her.
    Theognis 1367-8

    >The only sensible choice is to dispense with women and turn instead to men.
    Ihara Saikaku (Nanshoku okagami)

    it's so over straight bros..

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've reached similar conclusions. Women are okay as friends, but you have to be sacrificial to deal with women as her husband/spouse. I would much rather keep my time and resources by topping a gigh

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Forming lasting long term bonds with another person helps ground people to their surrounds and brings meaning and motivation. If you only think of yourself your life becomes a void of mediocrity where you chase temporary highs. He is right in this regard, where he is wrong is that our society has destroyed marriage by promoting vapidness, narcissism, and not working through challenges. You would need to bring back at fault divorce, and criminalize adultery to restore things.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hope everyone here experiences marriage and fatherhood, its the best curse i can wish to you guys. Imagine wasting years and years developing yourself, o get a good job/place/car, only to give those benefits to a woman and children. I hope EVERYONE here, gets to be in a marriage have many children so they can se the worst the future can give to them when you are not around. May your child see the end of commodities and civilization

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Marriage and reproduction are like the biggest investments into the system you can make. Everyone has to pay taxes, but a wife and kids are optional burdens that men take on willingly. You look at the anti marriage crowd like the red pill and mgtow and you'll often see a larger dissatisfaction with the current system and its trajectory as well. So a lot of it depends on your perception of where we are and where we are headed, JP must be awfully optimistic.

    Also he has never been divorced, so he thinks he has the magic formula to make marrige work. "If more men were righteous and strong like me, thier marriages would work, its not the fault of the system or women". Remember hardcore conservative right winger goldly manly man Steven Crowder was exactly the same, anti red pill and super pro marriage until he himself got divorced and saw it can happen to good men too.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Additionally, I'd like to make the observation that Peterson is exceedingly wealthy at this point, wealthier than probably 95% of people around him. So for him "taking on obligation" is largely irrelevant to begin with and he will likely not even notice the extra expenses that a child brings.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why is he so obsessed with marriage?
    Because he's a Christian.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Adopt responsibility
    To whom?

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"It's your responsivity to serve the army, get married and wage slave yourself until you die!"
    >"What do you mean "Why?" Because you have to, ok?"

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's most likely because he is christian that he feels that people should get married. There is something nice about adopting responsibility and having children; but you must be ready for it and you must actually want to do it.

    Religion tells people to pump out babies. But what that ends in is misery for both the children and the parents. The parents because they never wanted to do so, and the children because they grow up in broken homes most often lacking love.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >"Dont be useless"
    Jordan Peterson has never worked a real job a day in his life.
    None of his research is truly academic or analytical, it is simply post-fact justification for his preconceived notions.

    He has a PhD in clinical psychology, yet has NEVER provided clinical care to a single human being. Would you respect a surgeon that has never performed a surgery, but simply read a ton of books on it and wrote his own papers that aren't important enough to ever be published as academic texts?
    He's a fricking joke, and only famous because of his arguments about pronouns with high school trannies like 12 years ago.
    More recently he's become a pillpopping Black person with a prostitute daughter, just a complete and total fricking loser.
    His existence is fricking surreal, and is a great example of how dogshit academia is.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Harsh but not unfair. It does go to show however that conservatives are deeply against academia but only if the academic in question doesn't hold conservative viewpoints. The moment that they find an academic that does, it's a sudden about-face to completely supporting that person.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I don't care for politics but I am in academia. I despise anyone not in my field (mathematics) and I consider them beneath me. At the bottom of this totem pole are psychologists, which I unfortunately have to share a building with. Even among psychologists, his work is garbage, he should not have a PhD, and has no business teaching in a university.
        It is also ironic how hard he rails against his detractors in Canada that wish to take away his credentials and license, yet isn't capable of reflecting on how useless his life has been, that his work can simply be invalidated due to the thought in vogue and political climate, its opinion based and has no true concrete or logical foundation. I respect Sonic the Hedgehog fanlore speculators more.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Frick off, troon.

          I have as much contempt for psychology as you claim to, but as soon as you try to single this one guy out and implicitly stand up for the Canadian government in this dispute, I can be ABSOLUTELY SURE that you're a fricking troon.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            cringe post, bro
            couldn't be more rent free if you tried, ngl

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >couldn't be more rent free if you tried, ngl

            Wow, you actually admitted that you're a troon? Surprising. That usually doesn't happen.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not him. I guess you lose again, Mr. Rent Free

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Jordan Peterson has never worked a real job a day in his life
      kek, just like Mike Rowes bootstrap boomer discourse

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because he's a racist dip shit who subscribes to white replacement/genocide theory

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because someone has to breed and raise future Israel meatshields.....

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We have to wash our penises of which there are over 9,000, eat xanax, and support israel.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why is he so useless he thinks MEN are CHOOSING to be un-married.
    Once again, midwits can't figure out what REJECTION is and won't blame the gatekeepers of sex -- women -- for selecting out men who want to get married and giving sex to tall pretty boys who don't.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      last time you asked a woman on a date with details and when?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A few years ago. I'm incel. I've asked out women my entire life and just gotten every "no" a man can take. I don't want to hear it. I'm tired of hearing it.

        Want us to get married and frick and have kids?
        Tell that to the females turning us down.
        It's all their fault.

        It's like blaming the underemployed or unemployed for being broke and never daring to blame the corporate HR roasties not hiring the people begging for work.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Man, I can see your fat, lazy, stinky ass in my head like you were right here

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >psychologist
    dude's just a politician

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because he is a de-radicalizer and wants people to remain invested in this system

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    He is a mentally ill religious nutcase who pretends his psychology degree makes him a real scientist. Hopefully he'll die soon and people will forget about him completely

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *