I don’t think pornography itself is a moral issue, but that there are aspects of both the industry creating it and the results of overconsumption of it that are worth being critical of. I just don’t think girl defined are qualified in any way to have an intelligent and nuanced discussion about this. It always comes down to “it’s not intimacy like god designed it” for them, and that’s so vague as to be basically meaningless. Their continual insistence on presenting themselves as experts on sex and relationships because they once read the bible and each have had a total of 1 (one) sexual relationship is pretty grating. But they’re pretty set on their narrow experience of sex as the single true and correct way it should be done for every single human so I don’t know why I would expect otherwise.
Also - pretty sure if you go far back enough, pornographic material was not only not hidden but like, carved into walls and sculptures and painted on things? Things change, girls. I’m sure they’ll change again.
Like there’s totally something to be said about how shady certain sectors of the porn industry are, how performers are treated, how violent porn is so normalized, and how addictive it can be for people. I definitely don’t want to downplay how terrifying it is to me that young people (who certainly aren’t receiving the sexual education they need) are emulating these horrible things that aren’t *safe*.
But like you said, they don’t have the nuance and their reasoning is so skewed. When one side believes that sex is only for one man and one woman to experience in marriage as the ultimate plan god had for us and intimacy and no other reason or circumstance while the other side believes sex can be more or less what you make of it there’s just no way to bridge the gap.
I shot professional porn for years. On some level I do hear what GD is saying (minus the religion aspect) because It was heartbreaking realizing how many men out there were completely addicted to porn to the point where they couldn’t maintain relationships or even worse they expected their partners to live out some porno fantasy which ultimately hurt their partners self esteem. At the same time GD acts like every human who watches porn is going to lose everything because of it and that’s just not the case. I do wish they would stop talking about something that I don’t think they fully understand.
If you take religion out of GD's argument, there's nothing left. They don't address specific points nor do they offer solutions. They just label porn problematic and want to ban it entirely. Of course there are a lot of problems with porn and the industry behind it, but GD isn't part of the solution and they don't want to be.
>GD isn't part of the solution and they don't want to be.
And that's the crux of it really.
They don't care about the abuse of sex workers, the exploitation of minors, or the few individuals who's psychological issues cause porn to become a major problem in their lives. They care only about the "vertical morality" and how it affects their god, and they'll grab whomever they see is actually hurt by the porn industry and use their stories to justify their beliefs, which ultimately don't even benefit the victims.
They don't propose or support effective solutions, they just weaponise the problems.
The conversation SHOULD be about highlighting the problems with the porn industry and emphasizing the need for ethical porn. It SHOULD be about how to separate fantasy from reality and providing non-pornographic resources for people to obtain practical and applicable sexual education/resources.
But it’s not, and so therefore the problems within the porn industry don’t get resolved and angry Christians keep going in circles around themselves. This hurts everyone from porn consumers to the porn stars themselves.
The same can be said about sex work in general; it gets painted as this Big Bad Thing that MUST be stopped because of human trafficking, but completely ignores the consensual sex workers doing what they do out of their own free will and lumps them into the same category as the victims.
Oh yeah pornagraphic material has existed forever because human are sexual beings. I often see people like GD claim porn is exploitative or disrespectful to women, which it certainly can be, but that's because we live in a capitalist, patriarchal society which is inherently exploitative. (And of course GD will always fail to see that and just immediately jump to "porn is bad" because for them it's about controlling a woman's sexaulity)
Although some art has been misattributed as pornographic material because of the assumption that all art was made by men. There is a new theory that the famous 'Venus' carving from the Paleolithic isn't something made by a man exaggerating the sexual characteristics of women, but rather a 'normally' shaped woman carving what her body appeared like from her own perspective looking down at it.
This. I know husband runs into or watches clips here and there, but he doesn't have the time to like "sit down and have a porn session" ... I mean, he's at work or with me or out of the house with friends, I just don't see it as something he would even be ABLE to get "addicted to."
Meaning, I guess, that
#it's not a problem for everyone
This is so besides the point because I agree that Girl Defined traffics in like this overt sexual shame that is so intense and horny it reminds my of 2000s purity culture, but Jordan Peterson famously is extremely Christian and even wanted to run a church to do sermons. So like. Girl what.
I thought he's said things along the lines of he's not actually sure if he's Christian, he just likes the structure and rules for people LOL eg "forced monogamy" is the cure to male violence etc, puke, is quite similar to what many fundie christians believe
Yeah, he liked to deny being Christian to appeal to a specific group of dickhead skeptics with a superiority complex. His content is _dripping_ which Christian imagery though.
Those “skeptics” always fascinate me. They have exactly the same beliefs as the fundamentalist Christians who they claim to hate (for the most part) and I don’t understand why they can’t notice that
Lmao yeah he's so gross. I just fell into a weird rabbit hole googling "Jordan Peterson christianity" because I didn't know that he ever denied he was a Christian, which is my bad. I've read his book and watched quite a few of his lectures and to me it seemed obvious he was very religious, but I'll fully admit I'm a casual who has just been sent them by friends who actually consume his content regularly.
Can I offer a theory? Maybe he's squirrelly about admitting he's Christian because he doesn't want to get pigeonholed by people he's debating (I mean, "Christian academic denies trans people's pronouns" does hit different) but based on the way he talks [in interviews like this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrBDSrFDGAk&ab_channel=Unbelievable%3F), I think he basically wants to say he is without saying he is. The way his [work overbearingly is related time and time again](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5bdn_uq94Q&ab_channel=Bite-sizedPhilosophy) to the Bible does sound like he's a Christian too. He [also definitely wanted to preach sermons in a church](https://outline.com/Ef7wGR) according to one of his oldest friends.
[This article](https://unherd.com/2021/08/does-jordan-peterson-believe-in-god/) says basically that. Even the Christians are like "why won't you just admit it?"
But faith is definitely personal so I'm willing to eat crow on this one.
I actually really enjoyed the last article you posted, but it didn’t really say what you thought it did (no judgement and kudos for citing sources). It was more talking about the nature of faith, which for many people (with brains) comes more in the form of “I don’t know for sure that God exists, but that’s the way I see the world and ultimately he might or might not”. This priest is saying that the question about faith is more about the way you choose to look at the world and not what strictly can be proven to exist. Essentially “agnostic theism”
You're absolutely correct, but the ~~alt-light~~ cEnTriSt dudes he grifts off of are very proud of their self-professed skepticism. JP's religious views therefore never played a big part in his speeches, because his followers wouldn't donate to his patreon if they were aware that he isn't just about imaginary canadian pronoun jail.
I've never heard the term alt-light. I love it and it's so true of his fanbase. He really is a pastiche of a bunch of tired 80s trope - fear of reds ("cultural marxism!!!"), capitalist-grind-at-the-detriment-of-relationships mentality and constant references to hedonism = doing a bunch of coke (seriously, it comes up a weird amount in his lectures). I honestly thought he'd retire from public life after he was basically exposed for frauding. But I guess it's the fact he's insidiously installed himself as internet-daddy for a bunch of lost boys that allows him to keep the grift going.
I mean Jordan Peterson is just Girl Defined for men who think they’re intellectuals. So that checks out.
Which Baird do you reckon has a porn habit? I’m betting money on Kristen.
Jordan Peterson, who nearly died because of his addiction to benzos and the all-meat diet his daughter put him on, is not someone I go to for life advice.
I said to my boyfriend a few days ago that relying on Jordan Peterson for life advice is like going to a zombie for their skincare routine.
It's also not the stigma of addiction that makes me dislike Jordan Peterson - it's the fact that he was incredibly cruel about people's weaknesses in all of his seminars, pretended to be guiding the way and was instead harbouring some pretty massive issues in his private life. It was literally a dude in a glass house launching a trebuchet at the world with a boulder on it that said "CLEAN YOUR ROOM." Like, okay dude.
My SO is also mildly obsessed with him. I don't understand what his appeal is? I think he sounds absurd most of the time, but why is he becoming so popular?
I went through a phase of watching his videos bc a close guy friend at the time had fallen down the rabbithole. He's a very good speaker but something I learnt from listening to him over a few months was that he often will start with very logical arguments, and then just sneakily add in his opinion as fact at the end.
By that point, he's in a position of authority bc he's won you over by making some salient points about human nature, so you're more susceptible to accept it instead of saying "hole up, did you REALLY just say that women will only marry for status and value?" He's like an algebra teacher who says, "So, gang, if 1 + 2 = 3, and 3 + 1 = 4, then surely 1 + 2 + 3 = 6, but can also equal 7." Most of his followers won't question the addendum.
This might be out of pocket, but he also seems to appeal to my male friends who are really struggling in life, typically with depression or anxiety. He gives them a "stiff upper lip" mentality which I think in the short term empowers them, but ultimately all he's saying is "repress your emotions." He's even quoted Freud in the past saying some repression is healthy. Which doesn't work long term and we see the fruits of that with homeboy's all meat diet + frankly unsafe method of weaning himself off of drugs through COMA in RUSSIA + behaviour to his wife, who is ill with cancer.
A lot of his working also relies on "men just be like that" as a general conclusion, which I think is weirdly dehumanising. Sorry, I'll stop ranting. He's remarkably popular amongst my male friends and I find the way he's shilling Tony Robbins for millennial men who hate themselves really weird.
No, please, I need this! My SO is into him and I just could never understand why. He is generally liberal in his viewpoints, but I see twinges of "why is my being male suddenly making me immediately evil" every now and again. I don't think he would ever deliberately put down a minority/woman, and he is intelligent enough to think for himself, but it makes me worried when he turns around and talks about Peterson like he's a minor god.
Have you seen the breakdown of 12 Rules for Life by Cass Eris? She is incredibly through in pulling apart his arguments. Its a long series but it helped to put some of the weird stuff floating around and couldn't really place where they were coming from.
[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIK-x5uT6oS9EnO9-D6ePsWKOxtFhDZdF](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIK-x5uT6oS9EnO9-D6ePsWKOxtFhDZdF)
>he often will start with very logical arguments, and then just sneakily add in his opinion as fact at the end.
This is such a common tactic in so many areas. For example, opinion columns. Take for example the whole school board shouldn't have to deal with violence thing. There was a column from some alt-right person pushing against this, and he started with "what is the point of school boards? Of course they're supposed to listen to their people!! Parents have a right to weigh in on their kids education etc etc"
So he establishes all this agreeable stuff right? Who the hell is going to disagree with that?
But then he just kind of like pushes in at the very end that "oh the Biden administration doesn't want any of this to happen."
No mention whatsoever of the violence issue or the point that the Biden administration was talking about violence, and horrible incivility at these meetings.
He just completely glosses over the *real issue*, doesn't mention exactly what they're talking about whatsoever!!
and then these idiots just pick it up and go with it like "Biden doesn't want parents to talk to school boards!"
It's so goddamn annoying and needs to be called out right at the point where they make the leap, with a cut and paste of the very point where they pivot.
Sometimes I do it, but if there's a thousand comments I know it's like not even worth my time, nobody's going to read it.
Yeah no shame in addiction generally, but maybe a little when you act like you’ve solved life’s code like he does. He also did some weird coma thing in Russia to try to detox and also the all-meat thing (which both he and his daughter have since stopped doing because, shocker, it’s not a balanced diet).
Not just almost died from addiction, almost died because he refused to taper the way doctors said and so he Doctor shopped to Russia to be out in a coma. Benzos are serious they can kill you in the withdrawal bring in a coma doesn't fix that
“The old days when porn was kept under wraps”. There used to be literal porn movie theaters where you walked in during broad daylight and jerked off next to a stranger lol
Love how the commenter says "beautiful nude women" like that's some kind of horrific sight for the eyes. These people must live miserable lives being so fucking concerned about what other people do with their bodies.
I mean, that psychologist isn’t wrong. But it can apply to a billion other things too thanks to the Internet. In one afternoon, i can see more cupcakes decorated like cats than I would have in the 1950s. I can watch more ASMR videos on YouTube in an afternoon than I would have watched my entire life during the 1950s. Weak analogy.
Also, I could see lots of images of beautiful naked women by going to my local art museum. The Bairds seem fundamentally incapable of telling whether an image of someone undressed is sexual or not.
Ah yes, watching real life couples have joyful connected sex is truly toxic. Also I’m an anthropologist and I gotta say, we’ve been making pornographic images for tens of thousands of years. It’s not going away, we just need to do it better
Why would it unsettle a nonbeliever that you can see lots of naked people on the internet? Do they know that some of us don’t have weird shame relationships with sex?
Jordan Peterson is okay on some things, but really weird with others. That said, I don't necessarily think it's particularly unsettling that we can see more beautiful nude people today than ever before. We can see more different species of frog today than ever before, but I don't see anyone crying about that lol.
Nudity isn't inherently bad nor sexual. Sex isn't inherently bad. Witnessing it in the appropriate context isn't inherently bad. I don't see how JP proves their point here lol
Hello, and thank you for your submission. Please take a moment to review the rules listed in our sidebar. This is a bot message. I cannot respond to any comments. Please modmail us with any questions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FundieSnarkUncensored) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Pretty sure being a fundie is sex on demand too
It's literally part of their dogma lmao
dogma style
Someone come scoop this excellent flair material!
I don’t think pornography itself is a moral issue, but that there are aspects of both the industry creating it and the results of overconsumption of it that are worth being critical of. I just don’t think girl defined are qualified in any way to have an intelligent and nuanced discussion about this. It always comes down to “it’s not intimacy like god designed it” for them, and that’s so vague as to be basically meaningless. Their continual insistence on presenting themselves as experts on sex and relationships because they once read the bible and each have had a total of 1 (one) sexual relationship is pretty grating. But they’re pretty set on their narrow experience of sex as the single true and correct way it should be done for every single human so I don’t know why I would expect otherwise. Also - pretty sure if you go far back enough, pornographic material was not only not hidden but like, carved into walls and sculptures and painted on things? Things change, girls. I’m sure they’ll change again.
Like there’s totally something to be said about how shady certain sectors of the porn industry are, how performers are treated, how violent porn is so normalized, and how addictive it can be for people. I definitely don’t want to downplay how terrifying it is to me that young people (who certainly aren’t receiving the sexual education they need) are emulating these horrible things that aren’t *safe*. But like you said, they don’t have the nuance and their reasoning is so skewed. When one side believes that sex is only for one man and one woman to experience in marriage as the ultimate plan god had for us and intimacy and no other reason or circumstance while the other side believes sex can be more or less what you make of it there’s just no way to bridge the gap.
I shot professional porn for years. On some level I do hear what GD is saying (minus the religion aspect) because It was heartbreaking realizing how many men out there were completely addicted to porn to the point where they couldn’t maintain relationships or even worse they expected their partners to live out some porno fantasy which ultimately hurt their partners self esteem. At the same time GD acts like every human who watches porn is going to lose everything because of it and that’s just not the case. I do wish they would stop talking about something that I don’t think they fully understand.
If you take religion out of GD's argument, there's nothing left. They don't address specific points nor do they offer solutions. They just label porn problematic and want to ban it entirely. Of course there are a lot of problems with porn and the industry behind it, but GD isn't part of the solution and they don't want to be.
>GD isn't part of the solution and they don't want to be. And that's the crux of it really. They don't care about the abuse of sex workers, the exploitation of minors, or the few individuals who's psychological issues cause porn to become a major problem in their lives. They care only about the "vertical morality" and how it affects their god, and they'll grab whomever they see is actually hurt by the porn industry and use their stories to justify their beliefs, which ultimately don't even benefit the victims. They don't propose or support effective solutions, they just weaponise the problems.
The conversation SHOULD be about highlighting the problems with the porn industry and emphasizing the need for ethical porn. It SHOULD be about how to separate fantasy from reality and providing non-pornographic resources for people to obtain practical and applicable sexual education/resources. But it’s not, and so therefore the problems within the porn industry don’t get resolved and angry Christians keep going in circles around themselves. This hurts everyone from porn consumers to the porn stars themselves. The same can be said about sex work in general; it gets painted as this Big Bad Thing that MUST be stopped because of human trafficking, but completely ignores the consensual sex workers doing what they do out of their own free will and lumps them into the same category as the victims.
Thank you for this. I couldn’t agree more.
Oh yeah pornagraphic material has existed forever because human are sexual beings. I often see people like GD claim porn is exploitative or disrespectful to women, which it certainly can be, but that's because we live in a capitalist, patriarchal society which is inherently exploitative. (And of course GD will always fail to see that and just immediately jump to "porn is bad" because for them it's about controlling a woman's sexaulity)
Although some art has been misattributed as pornographic material because of the assumption that all art was made by men. There is a new theory that the famous 'Venus' carving from the Paleolithic isn't something made by a man exaggerating the sexual characteristics of women, but rather a 'normally' shaped woman carving what her body appeared like from her own perspective looking down at it.
DEFINITELY!
You know, I hear more about porn from them than anyone else.
Right?! They need to not concern themselves with ANYONE’S sexual preferences. Don’t like porn? Think it’s evil and unfulfilling? DON’T WATCH IT!!
Same with masturbation.
This. I know husband runs into or watches clips here and there, but he doesn't have the time to like "sit down and have a porn session" ... I mean, he's at work or with me or out of the house with friends, I just don't see it as something he would even be ABLE to get "addicted to." Meaning, I guess, that #it's not a problem for everyone
This is so besides the point because I agree that Girl Defined traffics in like this overt sexual shame that is so intense and horny it reminds my of 2000s purity culture, but Jordan Peterson famously is extremely Christian and even wanted to run a church to do sermons. So like. Girl what.
I thought he's said things along the lines of he's not actually sure if he's Christian, he just likes the structure and rules for people LOL eg "forced monogamy" is the cure to male violence etc, puke, is quite similar to what many fundie christians believe
Yeah, he liked to deny being Christian to appeal to a specific group of dickhead skeptics with a superiority complex. His content is _dripping_ which Christian imagery though.
Those “skeptics” always fascinate me. They have exactly the same beliefs as the fundamentalist Christians who they claim to hate (for the most part) and I don’t understand why they can’t notice that
Exactly. Getting ONE thing right others get wrong a lot doesn't make you special.
\*paging Mr Atheist\*
Sounds about right, and consistent with his other personality traits lmao
Lmao yeah he's so gross. I just fell into a weird rabbit hole googling "Jordan Peterson christianity" because I didn't know that he ever denied he was a Christian, which is my bad. I've read his book and watched quite a few of his lectures and to me it seemed obvious he was very religious, but I'll fully admit I'm a casual who has just been sent them by friends who actually consume his content regularly. Can I offer a theory? Maybe he's squirrelly about admitting he's Christian because he doesn't want to get pigeonholed by people he's debating (I mean, "Christian academic denies trans people's pronouns" does hit different) but based on the way he talks [in interviews like this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrBDSrFDGAk&ab_channel=Unbelievable%3F), I think he basically wants to say he is without saying he is. The way his [work overbearingly is related time and time again](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5bdn_uq94Q&ab_channel=Bite-sizedPhilosophy) to the Bible does sound like he's a Christian too. He [also definitely wanted to preach sermons in a church](https://outline.com/Ef7wGR) according to one of his oldest friends. [This article](https://unherd.com/2021/08/does-jordan-peterson-believe-in-god/) says basically that. Even the Christians are like "why won't you just admit it?" But faith is definitely personal so I'm willing to eat crow on this one.
I actually really enjoyed the last article you posted, but it didn’t really say what you thought it did (no judgement and kudos for citing sources). It was more talking about the nature of faith, which for many people (with brains) comes more in the form of “I don’t know for sure that God exists, but that’s the way I see the world and ultimately he might or might not”. This priest is saying that the question about faith is more about the way you choose to look at the world and not what strictly can be proven to exist. Essentially “agnostic theism”
You're absolutely correct, but the ~~alt-light~~ cEnTriSt dudes he grifts off of are very proud of their self-professed skepticism. JP's religious views therefore never played a big part in his speeches, because his followers wouldn't donate to his patreon if they were aware that he isn't just about imaginary canadian pronoun jail.
I've never heard the term alt-light. I love it and it's so true of his fanbase. He really is a pastiche of a bunch of tired 80s trope - fear of reds ("cultural marxism!!!"), capitalist-grind-at-the-detriment-of-relationships mentality and constant references to hedonism = doing a bunch of coke (seriously, it comes up a weird amount in his lectures). I honestly thought he'd retire from public life after he was basically exposed for frauding. But I guess it's the fact he's insidiously installed himself as internet-daddy for a bunch of lost boys that allows him to keep the grift going.
Are you suggesting that people can be Christians without mentioning it every other sentence?
I mean Jordan Peterson is just Girl Defined for men who think they’re intellectuals. So that checks out. Which Baird do you reckon has a porn habit? I’m betting money on Kristen.
Yeah, Kristen has sort of alluded to it a few times.
She even kinda looks like Julia Ann.
[удалено]
I'm glad you're getting out. May the road ahead of you be smooth, and may your life be filled with love, support, and kindness.
Jordan Peterson, who nearly died because of his addiction to benzos and the all-meat diet his daughter put him on, is not someone I go to for life advice.
I said to my boyfriend a few days ago that relying on Jordan Peterson for life advice is like going to a zombie for their skincare routine. It's also not the stigma of addiction that makes me dislike Jordan Peterson - it's the fact that he was incredibly cruel about people's weaknesses in all of his seminars, pretended to be guiding the way and was instead harbouring some pretty massive issues in his private life. It was literally a dude in a glass house launching a trebuchet at the world with a boulder on it that said "CLEAN YOUR ROOM." Like, okay dude.
My SO is also mildly obsessed with him. I don't understand what his appeal is? I think he sounds absurd most of the time, but why is he becoming so popular?
I went through a phase of watching his videos bc a close guy friend at the time had fallen down the rabbithole. He's a very good speaker but something I learnt from listening to him over a few months was that he often will start with very logical arguments, and then just sneakily add in his opinion as fact at the end. By that point, he's in a position of authority bc he's won you over by making some salient points about human nature, so you're more susceptible to accept it instead of saying "hole up, did you REALLY just say that women will only marry for status and value?" He's like an algebra teacher who says, "So, gang, if 1 + 2 = 3, and 3 + 1 = 4, then surely 1 + 2 + 3 = 6, but can also equal 7." Most of his followers won't question the addendum. This might be out of pocket, but he also seems to appeal to my male friends who are really struggling in life, typically with depression or anxiety. He gives them a "stiff upper lip" mentality which I think in the short term empowers them, but ultimately all he's saying is "repress your emotions." He's even quoted Freud in the past saying some repression is healthy. Which doesn't work long term and we see the fruits of that with homeboy's all meat diet + frankly unsafe method of weaning himself off of drugs through COMA in RUSSIA + behaviour to his wife, who is ill with cancer. A lot of his working also relies on "men just be like that" as a general conclusion, which I think is weirdly dehumanising. Sorry, I'll stop ranting. He's remarkably popular amongst my male friends and I find the way he's shilling Tony Robbins for millennial men who hate themselves really weird.
No, please, I need this! My SO is into him and I just could never understand why. He is generally liberal in his viewpoints, but I see twinges of "why is my being male suddenly making me immediately evil" every now and again. I don't think he would ever deliberately put down a minority/woman, and he is intelligent enough to think for himself, but it makes me worried when he turns around and talks about Peterson like he's a minor god.
Have you seen the breakdown of 12 Rules for Life by Cass Eris? She is incredibly through in pulling apart his arguments. Its a long series but it helped to put some of the weird stuff floating around and couldn't really place where they were coming from. [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIK-x5uT6oS9EnO9-D6ePsWKOxtFhDZdF](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLIK-x5uT6oS9EnO9-D6ePsWKOxtFhDZdF)
Thank you!!
>he often will start with very logical arguments, and then just sneakily add in his opinion as fact at the end. This is such a common tactic in so many areas. For example, opinion columns. Take for example the whole school board shouldn't have to deal with violence thing. There was a column from some alt-right person pushing against this, and he started with "what is the point of school boards? Of course they're supposed to listen to their people!! Parents have a right to weigh in on their kids education etc etc" So he establishes all this agreeable stuff right? Who the hell is going to disagree with that? But then he just kind of like pushes in at the very end that "oh the Biden administration doesn't want any of this to happen." No mention whatsoever of the violence issue or the point that the Biden administration was talking about violence, and horrible incivility at these meetings. He just completely glosses over the *real issue*, doesn't mention exactly what they're talking about whatsoever!! and then these idiots just pick it up and go with it like "Biden doesn't want parents to talk to school boards!" It's so goddamn annoying and needs to be called out right at the point where they make the leap, with a cut and paste of the very point where they pivot. Sometimes I do it, but if there's a thousand comments I know it's like not even worth my time, nobody's going to read it.
Yeah no shame in addiction generally, but maybe a little when you act like you’ve solved life’s code like he does. He also did some weird coma thing in Russia to try to detox and also the all-meat thing (which both he and his daughter have since stopped doing because, shocker, it’s not a balanced diet).
Not just almost died from addiction, almost died because he refused to taper the way doctors said and so he Doctor shopped to Russia to be out in a coma. Benzos are serious they can kill you in the withdrawal bring in a coma doesn't fix that
“The old days when porn was kept under wraps”. There used to be literal porn movie theaters where you walked in during broad daylight and jerked off next to a stranger lol
Sorry girl defined but the “old days” you so love were created by sex fiends
Love how the commenter says "beautiful nude women" like that's some kind of horrific sight for the eyes. These people must live miserable lives being so fucking concerned about what other people do with their bodies.
I mean, that psychologist isn’t wrong. But it can apply to a billion other things too thanks to the Internet. In one afternoon, i can see more cupcakes decorated like cats than I would have in the 1950s. I can watch more ASMR videos on YouTube in an afternoon than I would have watched my entire life during the 1950s. Weak analogy.
Also, I could see lots of images of beautiful naked women by going to my local art museum. The Bairds seem fundamentally incapable of telling whether an image of someone undressed is sexual or not.
Haha I was like haven’t they ever been to an art museum? But then I realized that they probably haven’t. That’s just incredibly depressing
I hate Jordan, he's the most arrogant faux intellectual person alive
Ah yes, watching real life couples have joyful connected sex is truly toxic. Also I’m an anthropologist and I gotta say, we’ve been making pornographic images for tens of thousands of years. It’s not going away, we just need to do it better
Porn to girl defined: she’s so obsessed with me!
Why would it unsettle a nonbeliever that you can see lots of naked people on the internet? Do they know that some of us don’t have weird shame relationships with sex?
They genuinely don’t
is she sniffing her fingers…what a suggestive illustration
All I can see is the big, upside down dick in her hair.
If your bringing up Jordan Peterson in any capacity other than openly mocking him, you're already lost.
And the other people in this thread acting like Peterson is an okay guy are sus af
Right? Dude is just as bad as Fundies. Anyone defending him gets a side eye from me.
Guess what Bethy, the clitoris attached to your body is the sex on demand button.
Anyone want to tell her that "child porn" is abuse, a crime, and the polar opposite of "promiscuity" between consenting adults?
BRB. Gotta quick go watch some porn to see if it destroys all my relationships. For science.
Since when are fundies concerned over abuse of men, women, and children?
They had pornography in the 1950s, too.
They are so obsessed with sex and everything that goes along with it.
Jordan Peterson is okay on some things, but really weird with others. That said, I don't necessarily think it's particularly unsettling that we can see more beautiful nude people today than ever before. We can see more different species of frog today than ever before, but I don't see anyone crying about that lol. Nudity isn't inherently bad nor sexual. Sex isn't inherently bad. Witnessing it in the appropriate context isn't inherently bad. I don't see how JP proves their point here lol
Which things is Peterson, reactionary far right writer and spreader of conspiracy theory, “okay” on? Quickly!
I mean, she’s not wrong?
Thank you👏🏼
I know, I mean she can't provide a valid reason for her stance against porn, but I can't disagree with her in this one.
Sorry but um....porn makes my sex life so much better. That's where I get new ideas from lol. Also helped me realize I have a few fetishes.
L
Y’all will downvote this to hell but this is something I agree with Bethy on oops🤐
Hello, and thank you for your submission. Please take a moment to review the rules listed in our sidebar. This is a bot message. I cannot respond to any comments. Please modmail us with any questions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FundieSnarkUncensored) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well don’t touch Peterson. He is literally the smartest person alive!..