It was an insult towards me actually. All my posts on Peterson have been eloquent and reasonable. I don’t care anymore because you admitted yourself that you’re unwilling to read them, but here’s the part of the VICE interview on makeup. It’s at about the five and a half minute mark.
When asked if he thinks women who want to be taken seriously in the workplace and who wear makeup are being hypocritical, Peterson says yes. I don’t agree with him, but at least he answered directly and didn’t waffle or equivocate, which is what he’s often accused of doing.
But that’s an insane stance. Being direct about is irrelevant IMO.
It’s definitely an extremely conservative viewpoint.
If conservative = misogynist, sure.
Thinking that makeup isn’t necessary in the workplace is misogynist. Ha, yeah, okay.
This is why words don’t mean anything anymore, the supposed “blue wave” coming this November is going to fall flat on its face, and Trump stands a good chance of being reelected in 2020.
Hopefully he’ll be able to lose the popular vote by less than 2.8 million votes this time.
A win by Electoral College without the popular vote is still a win. I guess some people haven’t figured that out yet.
I’m well aware. I didn’t say otherwise. I just think it’s wonderful that Trump lost the popular vote. And I just find it funny because I guarantee you that almost none of Trump’s supporters would have accepted it if he won the popular vote by 3 million and lost the electoral college. He certainly wouldn’t have conceded as quickly as Hillary did.
Maybe he’ll get impeached for his obstruction of justice before 2020 though.
Entirely possible, but banking on that happening could also be a waste of time.
I’m not banking on anything, I just think it’d be wonderful to see that happen.
Also, way to deliberately misread Frink’s post. It’s misogynist to think that serious women who wear makeup are hypocrites, not that makeup is unnecessary.
Why is it misogynist? What’s the purpose of makeup in a professional setting? Can you articulate a response?
Unfortunately, looking more attractive is still an important in factor in the work place, especially when promotions are up for grabs. Physical appearance is a big part of looking professional. Also, maybe they just want to. I, unlike Jordan Peterson, am all about people doing what they want to do regardless of what anyone thinks.
All that is actually not relevant, though, because what is misogynist isn’t being opposed to makeup, it’s believing that sexual harassment is in any way justified because of makeup.
Interviewer: “Do you feel like a serious woman who does not want sexual harassment in the workplace, do you feel like if she wears makeup in the workplace, she is somewhat being hypocritical?”
Jordan Peterson: “Yeah. I do think that.”
That’s misogynist. I know the right-wing likes to pretend that any and all claims of misogyny are just made up and fake, but this is a clear example of cut and dry misogyny. But beyond that, it’s a clear example of cut and dry stupidity. Something tells me that if some guy found Jordan Peterson’s sexy-ass suit attractive and went up and made unwarranted sexual advances on him, Peterson would not be too pleased. And he shouldn’t be, but by his logic, he’d just be a hypocrite for that.
The idea that women who wear makeup are hypocrites for not wanting to be sexually harassed is misogynist, and it’s pathetic, and it’s disgusting. That’s a fact that civilized men everywhere can agree on. Jordan Peterson is a disgusting and backwards individual for believing that a person’s appearance makes them a hypocrite for not wanting to be sexually harassed. That statement may trigger the fans, but that’s okay, because I don’t care who I trigger.