#jordan based peterson

[captainjonnitkessler]

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that many people on this site get their opinions on the apparent scourge of edgy far-right atheists not from actually talking to any atheists, but from just assuming that any random edgelord they see online is an atheist and forming their opinions from there

#a couple of shitty youtubers does not a scourge make #i'm still so mad about that one cryptotheism post blaming atheists for jordan peterson the noted christofascist tbh #there's also a post from someone i otherwise respect referring to atheists who 'worship elon musk'. like . . . no? #literally who are you talking about. unless you just assume any 'techbro' on twitter is an atheist based on Vibes of course #and of course the other side of this coin is labeling anyone who openly talks about their atheism in any way as “evangelical” #atheism #skepticism umbrella

[irradiatedsnakes]

my youtube flaw is that i cant resist a leftist video making fun of jordan peterson ever. ro ramdin just dropped a new one and we’re in hell did one recently too. my other youtube flaw is that i unfortunately really enjoy jordan peterson’s ridiculous suits

#from anyone who wasnt jordan peterson having that wild one based on his book #where he SIGNED THE LAPELS #that would slay so hard if it werent Jordan B Peterson. wearing it. #and the chaos/order hell/heaven suit being made half of sheep and half if goat wool that also. really slays. that rules #note: i dont like follow jbp or whatever the suit stuff is all from were in hells recent video

[ef-1]

everything I know about the movie Don't Worry Darling and it's cast, I've learned against my will

#? ¿ ؟ #'yeah harry styles may have spit on chris pine during the venice premier' #'olivia wilde said this movie about an abusive relationship passes the cl¡t test' #'one of the main characters is based on jordan peterson' #'the director made fun of the lead actresses for being uncomfortable with working with a known abuser' #'harry styles went to the VENICE FUCKING FILM FESTIVAL and said he doesn't know what acting is" #what the fuck did they put in their water #venice film festival

[cruelsister-moved2]

its just weird bc with energy usage or whatever, we recognise that telling someone to turn the lights off and not overfill the kettle is a distraction from the unfettered consumption of big industry etc, but when it comes to food suddenly you people are like no no it’s the consumption of tofu that is the real issue here!! I’m so sick and tired of this debate because whether or not you eat meat, as leftists and as people with any care for the environment, we should be united in recognising the harms of industrial animal agriculture.  and at a certain point the choices of foods to get mad at in particular start to just come off like an appropriate outlet for your discomfort over someone else eating differently to you. why is it always soy and quinoa and never corn and wheat?? at a certain point you have to acknowledge that all of us consume plant products, and vegans/vegetarians are a very small proportion of that. plant agriculture is perhaps as ethically and environmentally fraught as animal agriculture, but that means we should desire to improve both, rather than NEITHER

#and alllll of it just feels like a cope to get out of recognising that all of our diets have an impact on the world n people around us #no matter how much we dont like it and how much we try #and the solution is largely a reform to our farming practices; our relationship with the land; and our relationship with food #[guy who constantly buys out of season fruit flown from halfway across the world]: omggg soy milk is destroying the planet #i just find it funny as hell when ppl get mad at the current hated plant based product as a gotcha for people who dont eat meat #like girl............are you jordan peterson? you only eat red meat? #not to be this person but that is literally just a textbook tu quoque fallacy lol #vegetarians r like we should improve the global food supply chain somewhat #and u guys r like UMMM but you consume food? #this is what no ethical consumption under capitalism actually means #although the girlies seem to think it exists to defend ur shein purchases and mass produced anime figures #agiudfhgiapghaidufghdfg

[plasmktan]

Slayyyyyy

#jordan peterson #meme #drag #based

[wild-at-mind]

Beard on the neck looks cute imo.

#i am biased though i am a hairy lovin guy #this is about whether it's ok to say neckbeard discourse im deliberately missing the point #though i agree that appearance based stuff should be out if you claim to hold leftist principles #that should apply to everyone from creepy men to TERFs to idk jordan peterson #if you fall back on lazy personal insult based humour then you just suck at arguing sorry

[realhankmccoy]

Jordan is a stupid person's idea of a smart person. A stupid person upon seeing this: "That's so profound! I didn't realise that I will soon see some 27-yr-old gay man, without parents and living on minimum wage, doing more harm than Hitler, Putin or Stalin! Scary..."

"...and just wait til you see what weak, 82-yr-old Bob Miller, with his dentures in the nursing home, is capable of compared to tough men like General Idi Amin Dada!"

#jordan peterson #peterson #based

[news-folds]

Olivia Wilde Reveals Chris Pine's Villain In Don't Worry Darling Based On 'insane' Jordan Peterson

Olivia Wilde Reveals Chris Pine’s Villain In Don’t Worry Darling Based On ‘insane’ Jordan Peterson

Olivia Wilde has made a surprising revelation about the inspiration for Chris Pine’s “terrifying” character, Frank, in the upcoming movie Don’t Worry Darling. Olivia has confessed that the charismatic leader of the utopian desert community where the thriller is set is based on the controversial Canadian psychologist and author Jordan Peterson. The director’s current beauty, Harry Styles, 28, and…

View On WordPress

#Based #Chris #Darling #dont #Insane #Jordan #Olivia #Peterson #Pines #reveals #villain #Wilde #Worry

[allthecanadianpolitics]

The Ontario Divisional Court recently released its decision on Jordan Peterson’s challenge of the College of Psychologists of Ontario’s order that he complete a coaching program on professionalism in public statements. The Court’s decision, which upheld the College’s order, has generated a fair bit of commentary in the media, much of which argues that the order and decision are assaults on Peterson’s freedom of expression, or will empower “woke” organizations to curtail individual freedoms. However, I look at the matter from a different lens. While I may have the right to freedom of expression, how I exercise that right may have implications. For example, at a very basic level, if someone expresses a strong opinion on one side of a subject, they may risk relationships with family or friends who have strong opinions on the other side. In the case of Jordan Peterson, the potential implications are that the manner in which he is choosing to exercise his right to freedom of expression may impact on the privilege of being licensed as a clinical psychologist by the College of Psychologists of Ontario.   License to practice – A privilege not a right You may note that I referred to being licensed as a privilege; that is by design, as there is no right under the Charter to practice any particular profession. Instead, being licensed to practice any particular profession is a privilege, and many would argue that it imposes certain responsibilities upon those who are licensed. Further, as a self-regulated profession, the College of Psychologists of Ontario has a mandate to regulate the profession in the public interest, and to that effect it has developed Standards of Professional Conduct and adopted the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists. This Code of Ethics provides that “psychologists acknowledge that all human beings have a moral right to have their innate worth as human beings appreciated,” without regard to factors such as ethnicity, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, “or any other preference or personal characteristic, condition, or status.” The Code also provides that “psychologists do not engage in unjust discrimination based on such factors and promote non-discrimination in all of their activities,” and that psychologists must “Not engage publicly … in degrading comments about others…”.

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

#jordan peterson #lol #Ontario #cdnpoli #canada #canadian politics #Freedom of speech #ethics

[thatbitchery]

the "so TBY you keep saying we shouldn't consume action based content, only consume philosophy and knowledge based content. What does that mean?" Masterpost.

The Yes you should consume list

Philosophy (Jordan Peterson, etc)

Science

Fashion & styling

Finance. For God's sake please overconsume finance.

History and culture

Government politics, GOVERNMENT, not social. International politics matter. We are talking economics.

Skills eg sign language, knitting, etc.

The Why Would You Choose To Consume List

Social politics X social justice bs

Action bases self improvement [how to be that Girl, etc]

Out of touch negativity , things you can't solve anyway

Gossip & pop culture

Pseudo X new age bs (manifesting, energy whatever, whatever divine bla bla)

Empty information. Like why do you even know that.

Shortcut; whatever moves your locus point within you, yes. Whatever is outside your locus point, what's the point. Internal locus>>> external locus. What's a locus? Find out ;)

[star-anise]

So I've been watching this series of videos where a research-focused psychologist goes through Jordan Peterson's work to see which of his ideas and arguments are based on solid empirical evidence. I love it, even though she does mistakenly say his background is in counselling psychology (my field) when he's actually a clinical psychologist.

Anyway, that's got me thinking about Jordan Peterson, and how his response to criticism is, "People have been after me for a long time because I’ve been speaking to disaffected young men — what a terrible thing to do, that is. [...] I thought the marginalized were supposed to have a voice.”

So, here's my theory: Young men of the 21st century have grown up in a culture that is specifically hostile and punitive towards them. However, I think that while girls and women can participate in this culture, it is as much or more the work of boys and men. And I think that the problem with Peterson is that he's not particularly good at helping his audience escape the maze they are trapped in--and he's absolutely opposed to any attempt to dismantle a maze that is actually of fairly recent manufacture.

Case in point: The metrosexual.

The word "metrosexual" was coined in 1994 by Mark Simpson, a gay writer whose settings seem to be perpetually fixed at "critique the shit out of it".

"Metrosexual" describes heterosexual men who might be mistaken as gay, because they are interested in things very common among gay men, including: Caring about whether they're attractive; caring about how their hair is cut and what products they use in it; caring about what clothes they wear; working out to make their bodies look better; frequenting nightclubs. To be "metrosexual" was, in some people's opinions, to be a "man-boy" searching for his "inner girl".

To be metrosexual was, in some ways, to be called someone who looked gay.

The term didn't really catch on until the early 2000s, when media became briefly obsessed with talking about which celebrities were "metrosexual" or not. In that era of hotly divided opinions over the acceptability of homosexuality and queerness, it was implicitly asking, "Who looks gay? Is he gay? Tell me, fellow broadcaster: How gay does this guy look to you?"

(They got to have their cake and eat it too. A liberal audience, desperate to gather as many LGBTQ+ people and allies as possible in their race for 50% acceptance of gay marriage, cherished any signs that people with social clout might be on their side. And a conservative one, watching the same discussion, would heartily enjoy seeing a rogues' gallery of degenerate Hollywood types paraded before them, their every effeminacy pointed out in loving detail.)

Which of course got us: The Retrosexual!

When everybody's helpfully compiling lists of all the things a man can do that look gay or unmanly, dudes who don't want to get the shit kicked out of them by homophobes know all the things not to do!

Therefore, being "manly" became strictly defined by what was off-limits. To be a Real Man meant you shouldn't care about whether you're attractive, or what soap you use, or how your hair is styled. You shouldn't enjoy dancing or get too enthusiastic about music. A Real Man cares about sports and beer and being on top! Dominant!! A WINNER!!!

And, so like, here's a secret: In Anglophone culture, we are very affected by the Puritan legacy that says pleasure is inherently sinful. Vanity and pride--caring about how you look and whether you're attractive--are literal gateways to the Devil. Gluttony, and therefore seeking pleasure at all, is another such. And in Puritan religious theology, women are inherently more sinful. Yes, it goes back to Adam and Eve, and how Eve was tempted into sin first. Long story short, things associated with women became associated with sinfulness, and sinfulness became associated with effeminacy. And for centuries, you haven't even needed to be religious to drink these attitudes from the groundwater.

Okay, that's not the secret, this is the secret: Pleasure is not inherently sinful.

And liking how you look and feeling attractive and paying attention to your sensuality and your emotional life and connecting with art in a real and vulnerable way can feel really good, if you're able to handle it well.

Being raised to be a Real Man in a world where masculinity is perceived to be actively under threat is so uniquely painful, I believe, because every attempt to define yourself as "not gay" means denying yourself one of life's pleasures, and telling yourself you never even wanted it in the first place.

And then those desperate to be Real Men found a way to take some of those things back in what is surely the most painful context possible: They are allowed strictly as tools of your heterosexuality and masculine need for dominance. You are allowed to care about grooming and dancing, etc, purely as a strategy in playing a game called "Getting Girls", where you either score or you don't, where not scoring means you're worthless and unlovable, and scoring is often... strangely unfulfilling and certainly not enough to fill the aching void inside of you.

The mistake both Peterson and his fanbase make is that they get to this point, and then think: The reason I feel so empty inside is... I just haven't gotten enough girls!

Maybe some guys get out of the maze by finding a woman who is allowed to care about things like affection and love and dancing and looking nice, and their connection with her lets them express all the other parts of their souls that didn't fit in the Real Man box, but can come out in roles like Boyfriend or Father.

But humans aren't telepathic, so relationships can only "fix" you so much as you're willing to do the work of nurturing your own soul in a safe environment, so for a lot of men the maze never ends, and sometimes they don't even get the fleeting joys of relationships or sex, since they're so fucked up about them!

At this point, I as a queer woman am like, "Solution's obvious! Dismantle the maze."

And Peterson, who has worked his whole life to achieve the status of Best Maze-Runner in All of Christendom, is clinging to it like, "NO! DOWN, YOU DARK CHAOTIC MOTHER! THIS MAZE GIVES MY LIFE MEANING! THIS MAZE CONNECTS ME TO MY FOREFATHERS! I CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT THIS MAZE!"

At which point, like... what can you do but just leave him there?

At least he's not in my area of specialization. The world would be too unkind if I had to deal with him in any professional capacity. I wish Clinical Psychology all their continued joy of him.

#feminist discourse #masculinity #jordan peterson tw #to be honest #the moment I learned he was from Fairview and went to the UofA I was like 'OH IT ALL MAKES SENSE' #it's not that all of Fairview is one way because Rachel Notley and other very fine people come from Fairview #but there is a specific breed of Guys Who Come From Fairview #Who Study Psychology At the UofA #Who Like To Monologue About Conservative Politics #I can't explain it #it's a type #iykyk i guess

[yuri-alexseygaybitch]

Andrew Tate + Jordan Peterson et al. I have an exciting business opportunity on how to expand your loser woman-hating chud base if you're willing to broaden your definition of a man just a smidge

[normal-horoscopes]

The thing is, he didn't NOT go into a coma because he ate too much meat.

Jordan Peterson's Benzodiazapine Addiction Induced Breakdown Exacerbated By Severe Beef Based Malnourishment is a bit of a mouthful

[thealogie]

there was this panel with DT and krysten Ritter where she was talking about not letting then jobs she lost to someone else get to her and he asked “but behave you ever lost a job to someone you really hate” and she said “no, I’m lucky that’s never happened to me” to which dt responded “it has to me”

now I’m really really curious because I’ve never heard him talk negatively about anybody. Do you or anyone on here have any idea about who it may be? (I know if anyone has the info it would be us tumblerina’s)

God I want to know so badly but DT is so so guarded I doubt he has ever let the actual name slip in a public forum.

The only publicly confirmed instance of him losing out on a job (that I know of!) is when Bryan Fuller said DT was the best in the Hannibal auditions but that Hugh Dancy wanted Mads (highly uncomfortable for all three of those actors…why would Bryan Fuller say that…). I absolutely have no reason to believe DT would have any beef with mads nor do I follow news about him but just based on stuff I’ve seen floating around about him I would not be surprised if that were him. Apparently he likes Jordan Peterson and made vague comments about how casting has to be PC nowadays

#to be clear I’m not saying that’s the only time he’s lost out on a job but idk if we know of the other ones so we can compare who it’s more #likely to be.

[mrsbsmooth]

Future Islanders: My thoughts

My predictions about the Islanders we haven't seen yet, based on their character designs. This information will be 100% accurate, guaranteed*

*Not at all guaranteed

Spoilers under the cut. 18+. Contains gratuitous swearing.

Love his style, love his vibe, love his earring. He's so cute, and seems like he's gonna be really fun and flirty. But dear God, when I saw his surprised face, I just:

Those eyes - those fucking eyes. They are lifeless. Like this man has seen either seen some shit or had some serious plastic surgery, and I worry about him. I just… oh god, I got the ick so fast it's not even funny. And then I realised he got the same as Ozzy and got the Rocco flirty face which ends up looking like this emoji specifically

Definitely has a cool job though - maybe a runway model, artist, or some other artistic profession. Definitely from a cool part of Inner London.

*Editing to add:

It’s been brought to my attention that the way I worded this criticism is rather offensive, and I want to clarify what I meant. When I mentioned Andy’s eyes, I was referring to the way they were drawn. Usually when animating a character you’ll give them smile lines or crinkles to show a smile “reaches their eyes” etc, but this looks like they just slapped a shocked mouth on him and nothing else. My intention isn’t to make fun of his eye shape itself, or of any aspect of his ethnicity, it was a poorly worded/thought out criticism and I’m sorry 🤍

Villain. Calling it now, she's a villain. Her pose is too cool and confident to be anything other than a villain, because GOD FORBID Fusebox give us a strong, confident WOC that doesn't have some deep, unbridled desire to get her claws into whichever man we tell her we want.

I LOVE her design though. She's got super cute outfits, and isn't afraid to show a bit of skin (THAT CORSET TOP GIVE IT TO ME!) so definitely great style. I'm calling it now - she's a model. Might even be French. If she's French and a complete and utter bitch I might just fall in love with her, give me the pain, urgh.

SNAAAAKE SNAAAAAKEEE AHHHH IT'S A SNAAAAAKE

Don't let the glasses fool you. This man is a snake. I knew it from the second I saw him, and it's only been confirmed in the Casa postcards that @oliverslove posted. Never trust a blonde man (except Lewie, trust him with your life and ass).

Judges you on your book choices, but hasn't read one himself in years. Namedrops philosophers but has never had a unique thought in his life. Thinks some of Jordan Peterson's ideas "aren't actually that bad, when you think about it".

This is a man who looks innocent on the outside. "Oh, look at me, I'm a cute little nerd who reads books and plays D&D". But I guarantee, he's a fucking asshole. The kind of guy who thinks women owe him something, so treats them like dirt when they don't give him what he wants.

THAT SAID, his daywear is super basic but very cute, and he's wearing Versace underwear, so he's probably loaded. Jobwise - I'm putting my money on marketing or some other office-type job.

Okay, yeah, she cute. But I am suspicious of her too. Something about her screams Lily from S3 to me, like she's gonna come in purely to take my man. And what's worse, in the Casa postcard she's in bed with a girl, so she might even be taking my girl too!!!!

Love her style, but don't love her vibe. I can't even develop any thoughts outside of wild jealousy.

🤢 sorry, let me just *throws up in my mouth*, 🤢 Felix 2.0, God, I hate his character design so much. When I saw him briefly in his daywear I got SO EXCITED because I thought we might be getting a dadbod, but no, apparently the guy who walks around in the camel-hair woven poncho has a FUCKING EIGHT-PACK (FUSEBOX IN WHAT UNIVERSE?!!??!?!??) Then I thought he might be an environmentalist type, you know, vegan, save the animals and that. But then I saw his LEATHER JACKET and SHARK TOOTH NECKLACE and God damn it, I've lost all faith. This guy wants so bad to be Rocco it's not even funny, at least Rocco was decent looking, this guy has a pig snout for a nose and a smooshy face, don't ask me to elaborate, I hate him, and don't get me started on the fact he's wearing SANDALS with his FORMALWEAR

Smokes so much weed he can't get it up, will disappoint anyone who comes near him. Stay away, 0/10.

Gold diggers come get your man! It's Lucas Beresford-Smug the third. If this guy doesn't have a double-barrelled last name and a numeral in his name I will buy a hat and fucking eat it. Absolute guaranteed 100% arrogant FUCKHEAD, giant twat, thinks he is God's gift to women until he inevitably meets MC and falls so desperately in love that he changes his ways to show her he's the man she deserves. Yeah, okay, the storyline's predictable. Yes, he's likely an insufferable, sheltered, self-obsessed pig. But does that make me want him any less? ... No it does not.

Already posted it in response to @rebelrayne's husband's thoughts but what kind of spoilt little asshole wears a US$20,000 watch IN THE FUCKING SHOWER!!!!!!!

I don't care that it's water resistant to 100m you don't wear a $20k watch IN THE SHOWER and expect people to not think you're a complete and utter fucking asshole. He's a Jasper/ Lucas / Tom hybrid, with Taron Egerton's body and face, I'm getting a short king vibe but maybe that's just from the way his suit is way too big through the shoulders for him, making him look like a 1920's gangster. Works in finance or medicine, I will stake my life on it.

Blindfold this man, kidnap him, and handcuff him to the bed in the hideaway, he may very well be the death of my loyal Lewie route. He is so fine I can't breathe, it's something about the beard. Bearded men are the death of me. And if he's Ozzy's older brother, sorry, suddenly I can't breathe.

I have very few thoughts about him other than the fact he's a fucking stunning piece of artwork that, if real, I would physically need to take a bite out of. I am barking at him, god fucking damn. The arrogance and confidence and big dick energy required to wear an all-cream outfit is just... urgh, someone splash me with water.

Unfortunately, like his brother and Andy, our beloved and holiest daddy (Marshall) also got the Rocco treatment for his flirty face

It's not as bad because his beard covers the smirk, but holy shit, Fusebox, do better. I don't want to be doing a steamy scene with the boys and they whip out THIS. It makes me want to punch something. DO BETTER.

What an absolute waste of a hot-guy name. This dude looks like John Travolta had a child with Littlefoot from The Land Before Time. His mouth looks like it was slapped on his face as an afterthought, his eyebrows are too thick, and the only hot face he has is his angry one, which I'm going to be trying to elicit as often as possible. He looks like he's been to prison, Wentworth Miller vibes but not in a sexy way. Tried to join the skinheads but they didn’t want him. Tried to get a teardrop tattoo to look hard but everyone just ignored him. Strongest of strong dislike, 0/10, I will slander Toby until the day I die. Boooo. BOOOOO.

#litg s6 #litg season 6 #litg dt #litg doublte trouble #litg character review #litg andy #litg chloe #litg elliot #litg flo #litg francis #litg #litg marshall #litg toby #litg hamish

[sophiaphile]

Dream Scenario accurately depicts how some people don't have empathy or compassion for other people until they have something similar happen to them. It also captured how frustrating it is to be boxed in and marginalized for things that are outside of a person's control.

Paul (Nic Cage) is a straight, white tenured professor teaching university courses on evolutionary biology.

He repeatedly invokes Rationality™ (as if rational thought can be fully divorced from emotion or normativity). At one point, he cuts Tim Meadows's character off and scoffs at him when he thinks Meadows is considering the "lived experience" of the students who are having heinous nightmares about Paul.

Early in the movie, his wife says she's not having these dreams, but she says that if she did, she'd want him in David Byrne's big suit coming onto her (or something like that I think). He laughs at her fantasy, not listening to what a real life woman is telling him she wants because it is inconsistent with the cultural messages he receives. After he criticizes her, she frustratingly says something like "fine you have a big cock, is that what you wanted to hear?"

He is an evolutionary biologist who thinks that he is smarter and more logical than everyone else. In a lecture, he discusses how zebra's stripes don't blend in with things in their natural habitat; it is a little baffling at first glance why they developed them, but when zebra are in a group their stripes protect them from easily being targeted by predators.

Human psychology (which Paul seems to reject as a field of study) might seem counterintuitive to nature. Given that we are rational beings, why would we judge things based on appearance when we know that there is evidence otherwise (these are just dreams or socialized biases about class, race, gender, etc.; we think we should know better)? Unfortunately, our own psychology is not always clear to us, and there are things going on below the surface of our stated beliefs and intentions, even if we haven't done the work to reflect on it.

On the other hand, developing a defense against traumatic events (real or imagined) can be a healthy defense mechanism, but such thinking is also harmful to those who get thrown under the bus for the group to feel safe (the singled out zebra and society's scapegoats). The dynamic is not fair, but it does make sense despite seeming irrational or arational.

He wants his academic work to be acknowledged, but he is famous for appearing in peoples' dreams. He is frustrated that he can't control his image or the narrative around it.

He hates that people make assumptions about him based off of their dreams, which he has no control over. He doesn't want to be boxed in. He starts to lose his status due to the box he's being put in.

He loses his job, and his wife also loses work opportunities because she's married to him. He continues to spiral and not consider his wife or kids' pov when they ask him to stop feeding into the media hype. He makes decisions that actively ignore his family's reported feelings and experiences because he feels he knows best. His wife leaves him.

Eventually, he is such a social pariah that only Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, France, Tucker Carlson, etc. will have him, but he doesn't want to be associated with right-wing hate.

Because he is boxed in such a stifling way, he can choose only between railing against his box, which gets him nowhere and leaves him with no financial prospects, or conforming and being allowed to participate in society in some compacity (much like people who are marginalized due to their perceived social identity).

Paul didn't care about other peoples' experiences (his wife and kids' reported lived experience of being uncomfortable and wanting him to stop what he was doing) because the system was serving him well enough that he didn't feel the need to question it, which is also why during his downfall, he threw in the school admin's face that he has a PhD and she just has a BA (even though she had her master's); he wanted to reinforce the hierarchy that had served him until it singled him out (via society forming bias against him based off things outside his control, like most marginalized people).

It is ironic because Paul keeps talking about the zebras, but he can't apply the same logic to human beings and that was his hubris. He thinks psychology is bullshit, but it does make sense from an evolutionary standpoint, just like the zebra's stripes do.

He took his privilege for granted and didn't realize he won the social lottery by being white, straight, and upper middle class. He scoffed at the idea of "lived experience" and griped that people need to grow up and that they are too sensitive.

Ironically, the discrimination he faced was his lived experience and other people didn't care because they couldn't help the way their brains formed negative associations with him/his image.

He wanted people to acknowledge his lived experience and check their biases towards him that were informed by their nightmares, but he ignored his wife and kids' lived experience, and he was unwilling to consider whether he was biased in his thinking that he knows best or that they were being too sensitive.

The final scene was crushing. He goes to his wife in a dream to give her the fantasy she described earlier in the movie: him in the DB over-sized Stop Making Sense suit. I wonder whether the suit was maybe meant to symbolize that Paul needed to let go of thinking he was right about everything and that all life adheres to Rationality™ (and instead adheres to a kind of logic he previously rejected). He needed to stop trying to make sense and be more open minded to others' views.

#dream scenario explained #dream scenario #nicolas cage #kristoffer borgli #a24 #philosophical movies #social epistemology #epistemic injustice