r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
In which a poster pontificates about why giving trans people rights will end Western civilization. Also throws in that January 6th was a peaceful meeting that was misunderstood. (https://np.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/mfdyn3/the_first_lie_of_social_justice_is_that_we_create/gsn72y8/)
63

As usual when I miss a post that is OFF FUCKING TOPIC FOR THE SUB I will leave it up when there’s already people chatting in the comments, because I’m such a nice fucking guy

However, since I am in a bad mood about trying to work with my bank I am not going to be nice about it this time

STOP FUCKING POSTING SHIT THAT DOESN’T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH FUCKING SNEERCLUB, READ THE FUCKING ROOM.

That's it. That's the energy we want you to bring to your bank. We're just trying to help.
Is Jorp not on topic? I definitely think of at least some of his followers as rationalist or adjacent.
Peterson is not on topic.
There’s a long-standing policy here that JP is too tangential to the rationalists and too already over-discussed to be on topic here
[deleted]
I was definitely not trying to litigate or complain about a mod decision, and I'm sorry for coming across that way. I was asking for clarification, that's all. (When i want to *complain* about mod decisions, i do it in the completely unrelated Discord server.)

Notice how they completely reject the idea that trans people experience oppression and instead opt to argue that actually trans people are just fine today, no issue at all, instead it’s those darn post modernists!

It’s as if they recognize that if trans people are actually advocating for civil rights they would be the morally wrong ones, so instead they create a fake enemy to focus their ire on, in the hopes of avoiding the uncomfortable realization that they are just attempting to “rationalize” their internal bigotry. It’s pathetic.

What kinda unstated assumptions do you gotta have to believe the series of propositions in this post follow each other? Also highly enjoy the self own of admitting to a worldview that can be atomized by “.01%” of the population existing outside gender norms

Completely irrelevant minority except we should specifically repress them because their political and social rights will destroy civilisation but also they're not important. This is a coherent worldview. /s
“We shouldn’t change our habits one iota for such a tiny minority, also it’s critical that we use the power of the state to repress them with force” is a depressingly typical worldview.
Ironically, the most critical of critical theorists agree with this writer that "Western Civilization" is about the imposition of rigid categories in the service of dominating and destroying the vulnerable. The difference is that critical theorists think that's bad, and this guy thinks it's good.

Dude’s seeing postmodern ghosts. Such an unhinged understanding of the left. I seriously wonder if he’s ever considered that understanding transexuality better is in fact a result of continued search for truth, scientific processes, and growth of knowledge. Newp must be some invisible mass movement of postmodernists looking to deconstruct all social reality and conjure up utopia.

Step 1. Make words have no meaning

Step 2. ???

Step 3. Utopia!

Also gotta love the unironic use of Obama’s presidency as evidence for the end of racism, and somehow people over there are thinking this is some great piece of thinking

And if everything is a narrative, then we can simply speak ourselves into utopia.

Like the one where there’s a loving god who hates all the same people and things that we hate?

Or the one where all our enemies are being secretly rounded up by the military?

The projection is strong with this one.

I stopped reading after it was clear this person apparantly doesnt know trans people are not a recent thing but have always existed.

Guess ancient nonwhite cultures always were infected with postmodernism.

E: and tbh normally a jordan sub post would be a bit out of scope for sneerclub, but iirc this person posts in ssc.

Out of scope because it's not directly tied to SSC or some other reason? JP seems right in line with this stuff to my admittedly untrained eye.
JP is the IDW, not a Rationalist, LW, NRx, themotte or EA.
Maybe this is wishful thinking, but it seems lik "IDW" is a dead term. I rarely ever hear it anymore. Plus it was neither intellectual nor dark, so it made no sense from the outset.
Yeah it is one of those 'you had to be there' terms. And the idw being neither roman holy or an empire isnt that odd, it just has the edgy aesthetics to pull southpark kids in. Magic pixie dreamgirl but for intellectuals.
Ah makes sense, thanks. I guess I see those two things as very closely linked but maybe I'm wrong and either way I understand the emphasis on managing the scope of the subreddit.
Yeah the line is weird and im obv not a mod so only repeating the vibr here. The IDW is just too popular and mainstream to be part of sneerclub, they dobt have robot gods or dustspecks.
For sure, still appreciate you providing some context
Thats one of those complicated issues where I tend to fall on the "all categories are historically contingent", and so yes, the category was invented sometime in the 19th century. Which does not mean that there were not various complicated systems of gender in various societies that go way beyond the male-female binary, but these werent "transgender" people the same way a roman aristocrat wasnt "gay" (or "straight" for that matter)

“The reason we all hear about miscegenation issues every single day has nothing to do with”“the freedom to marry”. There aren’t that many racemixers out there, and their “rights” aren’t being violated in any institutionalized matter.

The reason we all hear about miscegenation issues every single day is because this is postmodernism’s big push. If the majority can be forced to say (or at least not publicly contradict) that race is subjective, fluid, and completely socially constructed with no inherent ties to biology, then postmodernism has won the war.

If a negro can marry with a white woman, then nothing is real, nothing is objective, nothing is “natural”. Everything is just a narrative. And if everything is a narrative, then we can simply speak ourselves into utopia.”

The Daily Lobster, 1966

The reason we all hear about trans issues every single day has nothing to do with “trans rights”. There aren’t that many trans people out there, and their “rights” aren’t being violated in any institutionalized matter.

A clear show of how the privilege blinds them from reality. Imagine thinking that trans people aren’t facing any institutional discrimination.

The reason we all hear about trans issues every single day is because this is postmodernism’s big push. If the majority can be forced to say (or at least not publicly contradict) that gender is subjective, fluid, and completely socially constructed with no inherent ties to biology, then postmodernism has won the war.

Ofcourse totally nothing to do with conservatives and their friends trying to mostly manufacture outrage and getting more clicks after finding a new favorite scapegoat.

Like, I mean, I'm a leftie who knows what the words "social construct" actually mean, so I'm not exactly on the "pro-trans people are denying objective reality" train, but it's not like the poster and their ilk are all up in the "only defending demonstrable facts". They're arguing that gender is a real, inherent thing, which is I think wrong but is at least somewhat arguable. And then there's the unstated "and gender is perfectly correlated to your external genital presentation at birth", which is *demonstrably* not the case, cf this whole damn argument! But of course they never, ever say premise #2 out loud, because it makes it very hard to claim to be defending objective reality against the seething relativistic hordes.

The reason we all hear about trans issues every single day, even though gender dysphoria occurs in less than 0.01% of the population–and in any rational world would be of absolutely no interest or impact to most people–is at the core of the current postmodern project.

Great! So we agree that everyone who hates trans people is irrational, right?

I always like seeing that “they’re only a tiny proportion of people” argument, albeit in a bad way, because it implies that whoever’s making it is ignoring the fact that *they’re still fucking people*
According to the USA stats (0,7%) he is also off a factor of at least a 100. (And stats are bad at best, in europe lot of countries req a doctor for you to be officially counted as trans or worse, sterilization). If we just assume 0.7%, that is still an enormous amount of people worldwide. I dont get how people can just throw away 1 in a 100 people like this. (And that is ignoring the fact that when you start throwing away people, there is a risk of throwing away other groups, historically we know the disabled and people with severe mh issues are next, and then people go after a certain religious minority).

[deleted]

Let's learn about Chaos Dragons from a guy whose entertainment empire is totally controlled by his wackjob daughter.

There aren’t that many trans people out there, and their “rights” aren’t being violated in any institutionalized matter.

From only three days ago.

These people are writing fanfic. Nothing is based in reality, and the refutations for their points are simply “What you just said is the opposite of what is happening.” There’s no reasoning or debating anymore once someone stoops to this level, and this is the most popular place to have your head at on the right.

But hey, JP just converts people from the alt right into moderate conservatives who only care about the individual and reject group identity politics. This is totally what happens.

That's Nadroj T. Nosretep, JBP's time-reversed counterpart. Easy mistake to make.

“but why?”

“THE NARRATIVE”

If there's one thing postmodernists love, it's narrative.
But there the conspiracy theory jumps in, see postmodernists dont really believe all this, they just say they do because it fits their narrative, they actuall plan to *lights flicker, thunder is heard in the distance* destroy western civilisation!

because this is postmodernism’s big push

As JP has said, be precise in your speech.

He knows basically nobody agrees on a single definition for postmodernism, right?

I was under the impression that it’s basically a slur and not a meaningful description nowadays.
It's a lot like "liberal," thanks to the same people deliberately turning it into a highly flexible term of abuse.
It’s kind of funny how “liberal” now means “super far left”. Chances are that change is probably permanent. Semi-related fact; in Europe the word “libertarian” used to describe anti-state left wing ideologies, specifically ones their opponents called “anarchists”. The right self consciously coopted that term in America.
i'm not very educated in philosophy but it seems to me that a political organization of postmodernists fighting in unity for common goals would be hard to maintain, they seem like they would be a fractious bunch. correct me if i'm wrong, which is pretty likely
'Postmondern philosophy' isn't really a thing in the way many assume it to mean. At most, it's a handful of different, and rather incompatible, critical projects that occurred in France around the 1960's to 80's. When those who throw it around are pressed, though, it's usually a conflation of Michel Foucault and Jean-François Lyotard, always a superficial distortion of their views, but most of the ire is for Foucault. However, it's precisely Foucault's work, despite his own political activism while he was alive, that is skeptical of reform and activism, either as part of the structures of power it seeks to overturn or accomplishing only newer, 'sanitized' forms of oppression. In general, Foucault's philosophy doesn't provide a positive political program.
It doesn't help that many people seem to conflate "postmodern philosophy" with other things labelled "postmodern", like postmodern art, which is its own thing altogether.
What about modern people who post? Never log off! Is also post modern.
the coen bros are destroying western civilization
As an addendum to what /u/shitgenstein said, while “postmodern” philosophers were indeed a fractious bunch, they did associate with each other and to some extent acted in solidarity on certain political issues. Foucault and Derrida both marched together for example, in spite of their differing philosophical views.

Very good sir!

Fucking LOL