Connect with us

News

Feminist Labels Jordan Peterson a “White Nationalists” and “Incel.” Peterson Responds.

Don’t these people have significantly bigger fish to fry than a Canadian clinical psychologist?

Published

on

Jordan Peterson is a rising star among conservative intellectuals, and despite his incredibly articulate arguments and vast knowledge base of his field, clinical psychology, many on the left find it more convenient to just throw catchphrase leftist insults at him than fire up the brainpower required to critically assess his incredibly nuanced viewpoints.

Such was the case with one angry feminist professor, who recklessly, not to mention baselessly, attacked Peterson as a “committed white nationalist” and a “misogynist incel”, the latter which is particularly preposterous, as Peterson is married with children and “incel” means “involuntary celibate”, a name used by an offshoot of men’s rights activists who are upset they’re not having more sexual encounters with the opposite sex.

Trending: General Flynn Gives Major Endorsement to QAnon Slogan

The Daily Wire explains this kind of inflammatory mischaracterization of anyone slightly on the right is right up this woman’s alley, as a left-wing professor:

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The professor, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania philosophy professor Wendy Lynne Lee, maintains a bibliography of people she claims are “white nationalists,” among them Peterson, Shapiro, David Horowitz, Dave Rubin, and Ann Coulter, TheDC reports.

Though the feminist professor wasn’t willing to preserve her tweet for posterity, she did offer TheDC some follow-up comments on Peterson.

“Jordan Peterson is, as Grant Maxwell puts it beautifully, an ‘intellectual misogynist,'” she told TheDC. “Maxwell shows that Peterson’s reading of Carl Jung is a gross misinterpretation for the sake of pandering to an essentialist and patriarchal worldview: ‘He evidently wants to return to unquestioned patriarchy by paradoxically claiming that “the idea that women were oppressed throughouthistory is an appalling theory.”‘ This is an insidious sleight-of-hand in which, by denying that patriarchal oppression ever existed, men can continue to ignore what many women have been saying for centuries.”

In other words, “anyone who doesn’t agree with me is a big fat meanie!” But isn’t this just the kind of language we’ve gotten used to from liberal professors?

It may be, but according to Peterson, as someone who considers herself an academic, Lee should be ashamed of herself. He was not amused with her tweet, and expertly dismantled her entirely untrue statements in a comment to The Daily Caller:

“It’s clear that [Lee] has decided that it’s entirely acceptable to be careless with her words in relationship to me and my putative beliefs,” he said. “Academics, whose trade-in-stock is words, should know better. She clearly believes (1) that her ill-advised statements are warranted, which they are not, and (2) that such actions, however ill-advised, are acceptable, ethically and factually.”

He continued: “It appears that she is taking her lead from articles like the recent New York Times piece that mischaracterized my views on monogamy. It is not obvious at all where she has acquired the evidence for my existence as a ‘white nationalist source,’ since no such evidence whatsoever exists anywhere. I would counsel those who wish to bring forward such groundless accusations to be duly cautious. Such shots in the dark have a nasty habit of backfiring.”

It is true that when one wants to attack their intellectual opponents, it would certainly be much more effective to stick to the facts instead of fabricate labels because they sound good to SJWs.

But that’s just the problem with these labels the left loves to throw around, they don’t seem to care too much whether or not “racist” “sexist” “homophobic” “misogynist” or “committed white nationalist” is an appropriate title for the person who’s ideas they object to, and this is a very big mistake to make.

The more we throw these labels around, the less they will have any meaning. And if it is still truly wrong to be racist/sexist/misogynist/etc., don’t these people have significantly bigger fish to fry than a Canadian clinical psychologist?

They do–in many non-Western nations across the country in which women still live in the virtual dark ages. But if we pointed that out, we’d just get called “Islamaphobic”, now, wouldn’t we?

*Headline

Daunte Wright Pulled Over for Open Warrant Related to Armed Robbery, Choking A Woman

Wright choked a woman and stole $800 from her!!

John Salvatore

Published

on

Minnesota is once again on fire, this time due to the death of Daunte Wright at the hands of now-former police officer Kim Potter. Potter pulled her gun on Wright, but meant to fire her taser. Is the MSM asking why Potter was forced to pull out a weapon in the first place? Meaning, what actions did Wright take that made Potter act? Wright couldn’t have been resisting arrest, right? He was completely compliant…right!?? It’s all a moot point, now. And the Gopher State will continue to burn. From Fox News: Daunte Wright, the 20-year-old Black man shot by a police officer in a Minneapolis suburb Sunday afternoon, had an open warrant for his arrest related to an aggravated armed robbery attempt when he was killed, according to court records. Wright and another man, identified as Emajay Maurice Driver, a high school acquaintance, had both been charged with first-degree aggravated robbery in a December 2019 incident in Osseso, Minnesota, Hennepin County District Court documents obtained by Fox News show. Here’s a little bit more, but CLICK THE Fox News LINK ABOVE TO READ THE WHOLE STORY!! JUST DO IT! Around 2:30 a.m., two women at the home told Wright and Driver they needed to leave, but the two men said they did not have a ride, the documents say. The women reportedly allowed Wright and Driver to spend the night. In the morning, one of the two women left the apartment to get $820 in cash to pay the other for rent. After paying the rent, she left for work. […] Wright then allegedly choked the woman while trying to pull the cash out from under her bra, where she had tucked it away. https://twitter.com/_mattmckinney/status/1382362210702290952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1382362210702290952%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftherightscoop.com%2Fbreaking-brooklyn-center-police-officer-to-be-charged-with-2nd-degree-manslaughter%2F BLM and lefties are always, always, always defending criminals. Sad.

Continue Reading

News

Dem-Controlled House Unveils ‘Court Packing’ Legislation, Want 13 Justices on SCOTUS

Just 13? Why not 19? Better yet, 89!!! SMH.

John Salvatore

Published

on

All politicians are crooked. That isn’t exactly a secret. But at least Republicans actually love their country. That’s a huge difference. Not great, but it’s something. These Democrats, though, only care about one thing. They crave it, in fact. Complete control. From Fox News: Democratic lawmakers are set to unveil legislation Thursday to expand the number of justices on the Supreme Court. More from The Intercept: The bill would add four seats to the high court, bringing the total to 13 from the current nine. The bill is led by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, Subcommittee chair Hank Johnson, and freshman Rep. Mondaire Jones. In the Senate, the bill is being championed by Ed Markey of Massachusetts. The number of justices on the Court, which is set by Congress, has fluctuated throughout the course of the nation’s history, reaching as many as ten seats before settling on nine in 1869. In 2016, Sen. Ted Cruz suggested that, if Hillary Clinton were elected, the Republican Senate should keep Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat empty, effectively bringing the number of justices down to eight. Republicans currently hold six seats, while Democrats hold just three. Republicans were able to solidify control of the Court under former President Donald Trump, after first refusing to advance Merrick Garland’s nomination under former President Barack Obama, and then confirming Justice Neil Gorsuch after Trump’s election. Then, after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg died in September 2020, Republicans threw out the procedures they had previously embraced and confirmed Justice Amy Coney Barrett in a matter of weeks. By expanding SCOTUS under a radically far-left president, socialists liberals will be able to ensure they get their way on every issue – all. the. time. That is, of course, GOD-willing, until a Republican gets back into the White House. If that…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week