💊 Manosphere Jordan Peterson - Internet Daddy Simulator, Post-modern Anti-postmodernist, Canadian Psychology Professor, Depressed, Got Hooked on Benzos

[George Floyd Sneed]

Jordan Peterson is a smart man but he’s an academic, not a leader and it becomes painfully obvious whenever he opens his mouth. He was destined to be that weird but harmless professor who teaches a boring elective class and occasionally publishes a boring paper for a publication that nobody reads. He’s out of his league with all this other stuff and I suspect he knows that and is just riding the wave until everyone moves on from him.

 

[Meat Poultry Veg]

Those of us who follow the Vox Day/Theodore Beale LOLcow thread have an interest in Peterson, namely because of the former's obsession with the latter.

The tl;dr is Vox decided to character assassinate Peterson because of his claim that Ashkenazi Jews have a mean IQ of 115. But since this thread is about Peterson...

A post Vox Day made literally minutes ago claims Peterson is basically a nobody propped up by the explosion of the C-16 controversy.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/12/mailvox-creation-of-jordan-peterson.html
http://archive.li/ihThC

Spoiler: Excerpt

After graduating from Fairview High (1979) Jordan studied Poli-Sci at Grande Prairie Regional College for two years before transferring to the University of Alberta (Edmonton) where he earned a BA (1982). Low grades and a poor LSAT score torpedoed foundational dreams of a legal career; leaving Jordan despondent.

Jordan stayed at U of A; defaulting his major to what was then Canada’s academic catch-basin, Psychology. Transferring credits and completing requisite courses fetched a second BA (Psych) in 1984.

From 1985 to 1991 Jordan studied at Montreal’s McGill University. After getting his Ph.D. he haunted McGill’s halls for three additional years as a Post-Doc before being rescued by a professors’ assistant posting at Harvard. Four years later he landed a teaching professorship at U of Toronto. Despite fictionalised autobiographical accounts of a varied, storied career; Jordy’s a schoolie.

Even his masthead boast about being a Clinical Psychologist is largely bogus. His clinical (private practice) work was a minor sideline. In Map of Meaning (1999) he bemoans his lack of clinical experience. Since then teaching paid the bills. Sorties into the media, writing, and a self-help publishing venture left little room for private practice. When his celebrity career took off he abandoned his few clients.

Peterson’s grooming by state broadcasters began in 2004 when TV Ontario produced a 13-part series based on Map of Meaning. Viewers tuned-out in droves. Following his UN gig in 2012-13, Peterson began uploading his lectures onto YouTube; attracting scant attention. Then a miracle…

On September 27, 2016 Jordan posted the video: “Professor against political correctness.” Within 24 hours, Canada’s main newspaper chain’s flagship, National Post, ran an article plugging the video. Two days later “As it Happens” – Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s weekday evening radio show (1.6 million weekly listeners) – interviewed Peterson, again plugging the video. CBC re-ran this show online titled “I’m not a bigot” accompanied by a flattering photo of Peterson.

While billed as a populist Internet sensation, Peterson is, in fact, a mainstream media balloon. Even his Internet success was amped. In December 2016 Peterson began podcasting. Weeks later he hired a team to record his class-room lectures. These were edited and disbursed across the web. Then YouTube’s gnomes went to work. Peterson’s mug-shot became ubiquitous in YouTube’s spontaneous suggestion columns. Persons not remotely interested in Peterson were persistently shunted to an array of cookie-cutter YouTube sites that exist solely to publicise chosen e-celebs. Comments sections of Peterson’s scatterbrained lecture videos contain numerous complaints of “click-bait.”

 

[Cinderblock]

Vox day article

First of all let me start by saying this shit is the reason we need sources. Fuck me. Fist of all he got the name of the book wrong. It's "Maps of meaning". Not "Map of meaning". I don't know if the title was changed afterwards but a quick google search of the book (or if you had read it even) would tell you the book is now refered to as "Maps of meaning".

That begs the question of how much can we trust the hearsay of someone who publishes an article and gets the freaking title of the book wrong out of all things.

Regardless of that, let's assume the sources are correct. His conclusion about being a created fad in late 2016 and getting viral because of clickbait psychology that was in line with popular "youtube academics" is not wrong imo. Having watched him and what he talks about, it's pretty clear he uses low amount of personal clinical examples, which makes me suspect but not confirm, that he has low clinical experience. Academia and teaching seemed to be his forte.

But one thing that I will dispute is that IF (sources needed again) he scored low on LSAT that doesn't mean he is not smart (IQ wise I mean). People can go through periods of depression or apathy and still take the test, and score low even if they are smart. Jordan mentioned he was having an alcoholic phase when he was young, so that can fit too. Also, the non-neutral language in the text really makes me suspect of foul intentions, akin to something we'd see from a KF a-log.

All in all, without sources, title of the book wrong and language, (not to mention the creator is refered to as "a canadian gentleman" so it's an anonymous source) I suspect it's fake news.

 

[lowkey]

A post Vox Day made literally minutes ago claims Peterson is basically a nobody propped up by the explosion of the C-16 controversy.

While billed as a populist Internet sensation, Peterson is, in fact, a mainstream media balloon

Whatever else, I believe this to be true. One should always be suspect when a person is frequently invited by both left and right wing media. This makes some sense if there's a topical story that they're at the center of. But not as much if it's repeatedly for years.

And particular the left doesn't usually keep inviting someone if they're BTFO'd by someone, yet they kept inviting Peterson. At first I thought Peterson was playing the game particularly well and certainly for example milo was invited frequently just as well. But Milo just as frequently fell flat on his face in these type of interviews. Why would the newsrooms keep inviting someone that demolishes their narratives?

Vox Day doesn't get everything right and I think @Cinderblock is accurate in pointing out the flaws of the article. I do think parts of Peterson's fame are organic, but I think people are also missing the orchestrated parts of it and how media is helping to prop him up for their own goals.

Mostly I've avoided talking about this stuff because although I find it interesting, it all isn't very funny.

 

[Meat Poultry Veg]

First of all let me start by saying this shit is the reason we need sources. Fuck me. Fist of all he got the name of the book wrong. It's "Maps of meaning". Not "Map of meaning". I don't know if the title was changed afterwards but a quick google search of the book (or if you had read it even) would tell you the book is now refered to as "Maps of meaning".

That begs the question of how much can we trust the hearsay of someone who publishes an article and gets the freaking title of the book wrong out of all things.

Regardless of that, let's assume the sources are correct. His conclusion about being a created fad in late 2016 and getting viral because of clickbait psychology that was in line with popular "youtube academics" is not wrong imo. Having watched him and what he talks about, it's pretty clear he uses low amount of personal clinical examples, which makes me suspect but not confirm, that he has low clinical experience. Academia and teaching seemed to be his forte.

But one thing that I will dispute is that IF (sources needed again) he scored low on LSAT that doesn't mean he is not smart (IQ wise I mean). People can go through periods of depression or apathy and still take the test, and score low even if they are smart. Jordan mentioned he was having an alcoholic phase when he was young, so that can fit too. Also, the non-neutral language in the text really makes me suspect of foul intentions, akin to something we'd see from a KF a-log.

All in all, without sources, title of the book wrong and language, (not to mention the creator is refered to as "a canadian gentleman" so it's an anonymous source) I suspect it's fake news.

Not saying that his source is correct (no links, so it very well could have been a fake email). Just wanted to point out an instance of LOLcow vs. LOLcow combat.

 

[lowkey]

Just wanted to point out an instance of LOLcow vs. LOLcow combat.

I like that vox day thought the best way to show that Peterson was irrelevant before bill C16, is to use google trends to show that he was even less relevant than vox day.

 

[GranDuke]

I'm not sure if Map of Meaning instead of Maps of Meaning is really a red flag. It is small mistake that someone who hasn't bothered to double cheek could make. But other than Vox often posts this mailvox crap without any sources/validation so it should be taken with a grain of salt unless someone else provides more info.

 

[lowkey]

Vox calls it "maps of meaning" at the bottom of the same page. So either it's a big brained intentional mistake in the quote, or he genuinely received that e-mail. Though receiving that e-mail doesn't necessarily make its source accurate.

 

[Cinderblock]

I'm not sure if Map of Meaning instead of Maps of Meaning is really a red flag. It is small mistake that someone who hasn't bothered to double cheek could make. But other than Vox often posts this mailvox crap without any sources/validation so it should be taken with a grain of salt unless someone else provides more info.

I mean, it is a small mistake. But when you are trying to publish a "journalistic" account on someone's bio, and you can't even bother to double check the name of one of the only 2 books, I'd say it speaks about the quality.

 

[Steamboat_Bill]

I mean, it is a small mistake. But when you are trying to publish a "journalistic" account on someone's bio, and you can't even bother to double check the name of one of the only 2 books, I'd say it speaks about the quality.

That was supposed to be journalistic?

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

I like that vox day thought the best way to show that Peterson was irrelevant before bill C16, is to use google trends to show that he was even less relevant than vox day.

View attachment 626345

The difference is, Vox has been promoting himself incessantly for years, while Peterson has been largely outside the public eye until very recently.

For this reason, I don't think the Google Trends data particularly vindicates Vox. If anything, it just demonstrates that Peterson has been far more successful at promoting himself than Vox has in just a fraction of the time.

I also find Vox's highly selective data cutoff points very funny, because including the more recent data paints a very different picture:

 

[lowkey]

The difference is, Vox has been promoting himself incessantly for years, while Peterson has been largely outside the public eye until very recently.

What's the difference? I know that he promoted himself, but are you saying that Vox was in the public eye?

 

[Steamboat_Bill]

What's the difference? I know that he promoted himself, but are you saying that Vox was in the public eye?

Vox was never in the public eye. He's been trying to be noticed, though, and you can tell he's incredibly desperate for attention.

 

[Hellbound Hellhound]

What's the difference? I know that he promoted himself, but are you saying that Vox was in the public eye?

What I am saying is that Vox is trying to frame his popularity relative to Peterson in a heavily skewed light, because while Vox was spending decades working tirelessly to get himself in the public eye (both as a science fiction author as well as a political thinker), Peterson was mostly working in academia and not actively courting publicity.

When Peterson eventually did try his hand at courting publicity, he managed to beat Vox by just about every metric, and this is something Vox's version of events doesn't accurately convey.

 

[Cinderblock]

When Peterson eventually did try his hand at courting publicity, he managed to beat Vox by just about every metric, and this is something Vox's version of events doesn't accurately convey.

A person with zero self-introspection and such self-righteousness as to name himself in his avatar "vox day / popoli" (Voice of god / voice of the people IN LATIN) was doomed to fail from the get-go. Petty jealousy was the obvious next step.

 

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

Jordan Peterson is a smart man but he’s an academic, not a leader and it becomes painfully obvious whenever he opens his mouth. He was destined to be that weird but harmless professor who teaches a boring elective class and occasionally publishes a boring paper for a publication that nobody reads. He’s out of his league with all this other stuff and I suspect he knows that and is just riding the wave until everyone moves on from him.

He hasn't shown himself to be out of his league when being interviewed by journalists. Most people just keep on walking right into obvious journalistic smear traps. JPB indicates he knows what the game is and what their bias is straight away, and I love that. I may think he's a big goofy guy with exceptionally dumb views on religion and stuff, but I have to give the man credit for that. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone like JPB (only in the public eye until recently) so well able to handle journalists.

 

[Freeman]

He's leaving Patreon as of January 15, he's at least aware that the issue is the payment processors rather than Patreon itself.

 

[Jeb-sama]

He's leaving Patreon as of January 15, he's at least aware that the issue is the payment processors rather than Patreon itself.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=h8_OrrvaVVw

That's pretty big. Wasnt he getting like 100k a month from that alone?

 

[Jeanne d'Arc]

He's leaving Patreon as of January 15, he's at least aware that the issue is the payment processors rather than Patreon itself.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=h8_OrrvaVVw

Sargon just blew his fucking load so hard. This shocks me like you wouldn't believe.

That's pretty big. Wasnt he getting like 100k a month from that alone?

At time of me posting this, he has ~5500 Patrons, meaning at minimum (his lowest tier was $5 dollars) he's making ~$335k a year off Patreon.
It's not unreasonable to assume people went for his higher tiers though (he had up to a $500 tier), so he very well could've made some obscene amount of money like $100k a month off of Patreon.

This is kind of a huge deal, jeez.

 

[George Floyd Sneed]

Get woke, go broke. Fuck Patreon.