By David Futrelle
In addition to being terrible, Canadian fussbudget paleothinker Jordan Peterson is just plain fucking weird, especially when it comes to his diet. You’ve probably heard about his all-meat diet ( The Atlantic goes into great detail about it here).
But have you heard what happens when he drinks apple cider? In the video below, he tells Joe Rogan that when he drank apple cider after going on his all-meat diet it “produced an overwhelming sense of impending doom” and kept him awake for 25 days.
As in, literally no sleep for a month. Which is literally impossible. While one young Frenchman with a rare disorder managed to survive on only a few minutes of sleep a night for several months, no one has ever gone completely without sleep for 25 days in the history of our species; that’s more than twice the world record. Which you’d think that Peterson, as a professor of psychology, would know.
Anyway, the video (below) is only a minute and a half, and it will CHANGE YOUR LIFE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfoKwQ2Cw6A
@Surplus
David has indicated that the correct channel for communicating problems with the blog is to email him directly. He said because of his health issues he doesn’t read all of the comments that come through right now. You can click his name to email him.
Also, I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the correct channel for troubleshooting your electric account probably isn’t a feminist blog. The commenters here certainly aren’t obligated to provide free labor for you.
@Surprlus to Requirements
Hey, just wanted to extend some solidarity to another survivor of medicalized child abuse. I see you, I hear you, I have been through those things too, and I know there will be justice for us some day.
*offers hugs if you want them*
@Jane Done
Wow. It is really brave of you to open up about that. I’m glad you were able to break free – having known a bunch people like your ex-friend myself, the guy sounds like a complete horror show.
@Gaebolga
To be honest, I’ve had a mixed episode where I didn’t think that I slept for days on end. I probably did sleep, but considering that I was having such a difficult time getting to sleep (it did feel like I was on meth and dying), and considering that your brain goes into REM sleep while awake after a few days without sleep (meaning that you essentially start to dream/hallucinate while awake), it’s not unlikely that JP legitimately THINKS that he went 25 days without sleep after he drank cider.
None of which gives him any sort of cover. I’d say that it probably gives him less cover than if he was simply lying. Unfortunately we live in a post-truth world where the right (lol Trump) is constantly lying, and it seems that far to few people give a shit about whether their politicians or authorities are lying as long as some fair words are sent their way.* At least people would be less likely to generalize JP’s reality into their own if they thought that he was “crazy”.
Off topic, but if anyone is interested in the debate I was having with Axe on SAHMs in the forced monogamy thread I’m aiming to have a response posted in that thread soon. I know that I’m hella hella late, but some shit that I won’t bore you with the details of sucked up all my time, and I don’t want to weasel post by giving some strong opinions in old thread where no-one will have a chance to disagree because they won’t see it.
*”Fair words don’t butter any turnips” is the old adage that is most in need of a come back in today’s world.
@Cyborgette:
Thank you.
@ SFHC
Indeed; but perhaps typical of their total disregard for facts. Although as @Pie points out, that’s a right wing shibboleth.
But yeah, as you say a delightful mixture of transphobia and that thing where the worst insult they can imagine is describing someone in female terms.
The bikini thing btw is because Khan banned sexually objectifying adverts on the Underground. So now Trumpists have to survive the whole journey from Picadilly Circus to Covent Garden without seeing boobs.
Re: the Khan balloon – they seem to have got a Robert de Niro one instead.
The cheerleaders for this fantastically witty risposte to the Trump blimp are now suggesting other people they’d like caricature blimps of.
Well, the person, actually: Diane Abbott, the first British woman of colour to become an MP and shadow Home Secretary.
She gets more online abuse than all the other women MPs put together, for some reason.
Ngh, I had to face some hard, festive food-related truths a while ago and admit to myself that I like the idea of mince pies, not the reality. Every year I gravitate towards the plate in the office/kitchen/wherever, eat one, and remember that they are objectively horrible. I feel the same way about Cadbury cream eggs. Fruit cake is delicious though, go figure.
re OP: calling bullshit on ol’ Lobsterman himself like everyone else. I experience pre-menstrual insomnia and it’s a delight, I’ve only hit day 4 once or twice in my life and by that point it was severe paranoia and auditory hallucinations, even with periods of micro-sleep.
The thought of a ‘day 25’ is both hilarious and terrifying, in equal amounts.
This guy is a Martin Short character, right? Come on.
Are we really so sure that Peterson did not die the poisoned Snapple?
I get a distinct “I want to consume the brain matter if my followers” vibe from him.
Surplus to Requirements says:
Possibly. I don’t know how that sort of thing works here in Japan. I think in that particular dude’s case, his main motivation for prescribing Haldol-based drug cocktails was that they were sure to produce dramatic and immediate results—even if it would be like taking a sledgehammer to a car engine that just needed some new spark plugs. He seemed like the sort who thought the appearance of doing something was better than working harder to figure out the right solution.
~*~*~*~*~*~
Full Metal Ox says:
Nope. Nope, nope, noooope.
@A. Noyd:
I’ve seen that sort too, in other areas like bureaucracy. It’s often the motive for trying to railroad some suspects in a criminal investigation: to appear to be doing something, even at the risk of wrongful convictions.
And, of course, it could be both. A physician who just wants the appearance of getting results would be easy for a pharma rep to manipulate…
OT:
This article 8s snarky and amazing. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/01/opinion/sunday/louis-ck-metoo-second-chance.html
Ugh, tonight a friend was talking about Will Wheaton’s banning from Mastodon. As he told it, Wheaton was banned from “a progressive Twitter clone because he pissed off a bunch of tr*nines.” And then repeated it maybe six times. Guess why I haven’t come out to him yet?
And I just sat there and didn’t say a thing… good job me.
About TERFs etc who try to force reality into their mental image of it – I recently wrote a blog post about the idea that LGBT couples were confusing for the children. It’s the same thing – it’s only confusing if you refuse to acknowledge that not all romance is hetrosexual.
In fact TERFs seem to repeat quite a few arguments that the Christian Taliban use against LGB, which is ironic given how many of them are lesbians.
I get that many lesbians have dreadful experiences of men; I think that’s what’s behind the panic about bathrooms, but transwomen aren’t men and they aren’t violent.
@Jane Doe: Here’s what I mean with them being “polite”. Agreeing with so much. Agreeing that of course trans people should transition since it’s been proven to alleviate distress. Agreeing that yes, trans women often have it rough in today’s patriarchal society. Agreeing, agreeing, agreeing… Not begrudgingly after losing an argument, but immediately, in a “how could you even think that I wouldn’t agree with you about that?” way. In a “how could you think so badly about me?” way. They’re even perfectly willing to agree that there are a few feminists out there who really hate trans women and want to take away their rights, but not them, not the people in the thread, because they’ve never argued for anything like that.
And now you might ask: But Dvärghundspossen, if they agree with you about everything, how could you even call them TERF:s? What’s the problem?
Well, there are these two tiny little things they’re still adamant about:
1. Trans women aren’t, after all, real women.
2. TERF is a vicious slur, it’s namecalling, everyone should use “gender critical feminist” instead.
And re 1 they’re not even saying that everyone who disagrees is an idiot or anything like that, they’re like “it’s fine that there’s disagreement, sure, but we should be able to calmly discuss this academic question in which it’s completely legitimate to disagree with each other”. (Also, this is a conceptual or even normative issue, not an empirical one, so you can’t simply win it by bashing someone in the head with, say, a scientific investigation.)
It’s pretty clear to me that at least some of the people I was arguing with in that thread really hate trans women, if you look at one of their Twitter feeds for instance it’s completely obsessed with trans women in a way that she wouldn’t be if it was all about some little disagreement in academia. And it’s pretty clear to me that they take things step by step here: Goal 1 is to get everyone in Academia to agree that saying that trans women aren’t real women is not bigotry but a perfectly legitimate standpoint, and people have to be polite with you (and not call you a TERF) when you calmly argue that point. After all, you’re not being hateful, you’re not arguing for taking away anyone’s rights or for discrimination or anything, just for this little thesis in social ontology. Once goal 1 is established, then you’ll try to roll forward with more and more transphobic stuff.
But you know, I can’t prove that this is the plan, and for someone new to the trans movement and the issue of transphobia etc, I can see how they come across as just nicely and politely discussing an issue in social ontology.
Anyway I’ve withdrawn from the discussion by now. Can’t say I won, exactly, but hopefully I did some good anyway by pointing out stuff like how suggesting that trans women are deceivers causes some real harm and helps justify violence, even if the person talking about deception would never commit acts of physical violence herself (although it was met with “well I’d never say they’re deceitful!”).
Bakunin says:
Don’t beat yourself up for not wanting to engage with a hostile person on their own terms over something that affects you personally.
If you’re worried that your silence is being taken as sympathy for his point of view, maybe look through the archives at Captain Awkward to find scripts for saying “I don’t agree, but I don’t want to discuss it, in fact, let’s change the subject.” You can use the scripts if there’s a next time.
@Bakunin
Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor
Yeah, you can always smell the priviledge on the people smugly declaring themselves objective and above political affiliations and demanding politeness in discussions about discrimination. Reminds me of a time I had an argument with some twit who was all “antifa and alt-right are both just as bad”. ?
This seems like a pointless suggestion IMO. TERF is simply a descriptor, and an accurate one. It has negative connotations because many people are ethically opposed to the thing it is describing, like ‘racist’ or ‘homophobe’. If the above suggestion was used then the language would just shift from, “That sounds like something a TERF would say” to “That sounds like something a GCF would say” – the shitty thing is still the shitty thing, no matter how many wardrobe changes it goes through. *
That sounds like a headmelt of a thread Dvärghundspossen, kudos to you for sticking it out so long.
*Although I’m aware that rebranding is a common tactic by bigoted movements to make their gross ideas more palatable to the public, and this can muddy the waters in dangerous ways. Such as the shift from “white supremacist” to “white nationalist”, and then from “white nationalist” to “identitarian”.
Is bathroom panic really a lesbian thing because just about every time I’ve heard it it’s been from straight folks?
Personally my theory about TERFs is that they seem to be that brand of feminist/woman that believes that women are the the direct descendents of goddesses, and like every secret organization womanhood only stays special™ if it’s an exclusive club.
And to remind any warrior goddesses reading this in the audience, yes some transwomen are entitled pieces of shit, but that’s not because they’re men (or women), but because they’re human beings and some human beings suck. Let me repeat that- trans folks are human beings. It is ALWAYS abusive for one human being to define the reality of another human being.
This article reminds me of this Wikipedia article I stummbled on the other day about orthorexia nervosa. Of course I can’t say whether that’s JPs problem or if he’s just being dishonest.
@ Vicky P
Farage seems to have dissapeared into political oblivion; but ironically he has been in the news again…
https://www.standard.co.uk/go/london/arts/summer-exhibition-portrait-of-nigel-farage-fails-to-attract-a-buyer-at-royal-academy-a3923311.html
Yeah I just read about that on Wil’s blog. apparently what happened was he used a block list to try and keep gamergaters from harassing him on twitter. unknown to him the list was made by a TERF and a lots of transgender people got blocked leading some to believe that Wil is anti-trans.
You know, in the last couple of years, I have been brand new to learning just about anything about transgender issues. I knew the concept existed, and there was one professor at my college who transitioned. Occasionally I’d encounter people I thought were trans. But it was something I knew basically nothing about. (I still don’t know much.)
When I started to notice the TERFS…maybe it’s just that I was never much of a radical feminist, but they astonished me by how NOT nice they were, and how little in touch with the society I was seeing around me they seemed to be.
They made less sense than the conservatives in my life. This was around the time the bathroom issue blew up, and the conservatives I knew were arguing that cis men would get access to women’s bathrooms by pretending to be trans. I was arguing against that idea being a concern, and the underlying transphobia that went with it, but it seemed to be on some kind of plane of reality, (cis men doing shit) as opposed to what I was getting from the TERFs, which was that trans women were men who were cold-bloodedly deciding to become women in order to destroy feminism and harm women, and that they had enormous societal power.
It all left this nice liberal Jewish soccer mom going “Whaaaaa….?” all the way down the rabbit hole. I was first perplexed, and then scared by them, and then just grossed out. I modded a small feminist group around that time, and the only two people I ever had to ban were both TERFs. They’re just…alarming.
So while some of them may clean up better, the bulk of the, um, movement, just comes across as vicious and really deluded.
Fun story I heard on BBC Radio 4 a long time ago:
An American expat like me – grew up with only non-alcoholic cider – which everyone knows kids love! Alcoholic cider is HARD cider.
Come to the UK and cider is all alcoholic and what I know as cider is sometimes called cloudy apple juice, which is fair enough.
Anyway, a woman called into a show talking about how her mother when they first moved to the UK in the 70s used to give her kids cider as a refreshing tonic after school. One day a local friend came over with her child and the American mom offered child a glass of cider. Local woman was shocked and horrified – American mom realising her mistake after some explanation says “I thought they seemed awfully quiet.”
____
“Re his degree, there are multiple real-life examples of people who got a legit degree and did legit academic work, only to gradually evolve into quacks of some kind. It’s lamentable but not that strange. Being a quack inventing the theories you like instead of doing hard research appeals more to some people, and obviously being the kind of cult leader Peterson is now strokes his ego in a way being a real academic won’t.”
I know people like this. My ex is like this except he doesn’t even publish his quack stuff, too lazy for that – his pub record is atrocious – but he’s always doing ‘internet’ research into white genocide and such like – or he was – and little things my son says now and then make me think he’s still doing it. I really wish I could get custody modification for online radicalisation, but I don’t think the system is aware of it enough – and yes, I have consulted a solicitor.