Wank Dad 2: Electric Wankaloo

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/fired4smart/status/1112386176672059392

 

[team filler]

 

[team filler]

 

juan
juan
6 days ago
He cleaned his room in preparation for the debate... to win, he must get inside the mind of his opponent

[benjipwns]

forgot about this lol



https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/therapist-who-told-podcast-listeners-to-shun-their-families-reprimanded/article4846791/

Five years ago, a Mississauga therapist named Christina Papadopoulos took part in an online podcast with her husband and described how one day she cut off contact with her parents, whose company she found phony and stifling.

Ms. Papadopoulos also said she was worried her online musings about shunning her relatives might land her in trouble with "the psychology community."

Her fears came true this week when, in an unprecedented disciplinary case, the College of Psychologists of Ontario found her guilty of professional misconduct because she used the Internet to counsel people to emulate her and sever ties with their families.

A disciplinary panel of the college heard Tuesday that Ms. Papadopoulos, a psychological associate, gave improper advice on a number podcasts made with her husband, Stefan Molyneux.

A self-described Internet philosopher, Mr. Molyneux is behind hundreds of posts, podcasts and videos on his website, Freedomain Radio, that discuss a range of topics from a libertarian mindset. "Stef and I, we have the capacity to help the world," Ms. Papadopoulos says in one podcast.

The couple has garnered little attention in Canada, but several parents from Britain and the United States have told The Globe and Mail that their children consulted Freedomain Radio, then became estranged from their families.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/controversial-podcaster-listened-in-on-therapist-wife-and-clients-lawsuit-alleges/article22158708/

Already controversial for counselling his followers to shun their parents, a Toronto-area podcaster is facing allegations he listened in on his therapist wife as she met with distraught patients.

Stefan Molyneux is a self-described libertarian philosopher. His wife, Christina Papadopoulos, is a psychological associate in Mississauga.

The College of Psychologists of Ontario found Ms. Papadopoulos guilty of professional misconduct in November, 2012, faulting her for adopting Mr. Molyneux's views and using the Internet to counsel people to sever ties with their families.

A civil court complaint filed on Oct. 24 in California says Mr. Molyneux boasted in a 2006 podcast that he would listen while his wife talked with her patients, even interjecting and suggesting they sign up with his website.

The allegations are part of a lawsuit filed by a Texas woman who has accused Mr. Molyneux of abusively invoking U.S. copyright law to silence her criticism of his podcasts.

Her lawsuit said one of her video criticisms quoted from a Molyneux podcast in which he said "that he listens in on his wife's confidential sessions with her patients in her home office and interferes with the therapy sessions to suggest the patients join and donate to Freedomain Radio."

The comments are not in the version of podcast 291 now on Mr. Molyneux's YouTube channel, but are in a longer version Ms. Raven provided after a request from The Globe and Mail.

In the version provided by Ms. Raven, Mr. Molyneux states that it is June 21, 2006. He then speaks about listening in as his wife meets with "messed up and sobbing" clients at her home office.

"I'm in the vent system, listening, and I'm – she calls it heckling, but I don't really call it heckling, I just call it providing suggestions about how things should go and that the people should donate to Freedomain Radio," he says in the podcast.

"I mean, it takes them a while to figure what on Earth that is, but I do, sort of, try to put my two cents in and Christina says that sometimes can be distracting and so on. But even with the combined weight of her, directly in front of them, and me, my ghostly voice floating in through the vents, they still have trouble making the kind of personal changes that really have a positive effect on their lives."

Ms. Raven says in her lawsuit that her YouTube channel was shut down after complaints from an associate of Mr. Molyneux, Michael DeMarco, who invoked the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a U.S. law regulating intellectual property.

Under the DMCA, an Internet provider facing allegations that its clients violated copyright can avoid liability by removing the contentious content, even without investigating the validity of the complaint. As a result, so-called DMCA takedowns have been criticized as an abusive form of censorship.

"Molyneux apparently believes that it is acceptable to use the copyright laws to silence his critics – without any claimed copyright basis – by publishing false accusations," the lawsuit said, noting that Mr. Molyneux previously opposed intellectual property.

https://members.cpo.on.ca/public_register/investigation_detail/124

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The parties presented the Panel with an Agreed Statement of Facts which states as follows:

The member, Ms. Christina Papadopoulos, hereby formally admits the following facts:

The Member has been a member of the College, registered as a Psychological Associate since December 10, 1997. Since that time, the member has been authorized to provide psychological services in Ontario, and provide such services in an autonomous practice in Mississauga.

The College received two complaints concerning the Member. The first was received in June 2009 and the second was received in April 2011. A panel of the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (“ICRC”) of the College considered each complaint and disposed of it in accordance with the provisions of the Health Professions Procedural Code (the “Code”) by way of a referral, in each case, of specified allegations of misconduct arising from those complaints to the Discipline Committee of the College.

Subsequent to the referral arising out of each complaint of specified allegations of professional misconduct to the Discipline Committee, the College issued an amended Notice of Hearing, in order that, in accordance with the consent of the Member, these two related matters could proceed together by way of one consolidated hearing. There is significant overlap between the specified allegations of professional misconduct and the facts underlying those specified allegations, in each case, and accordingly, a joint hearing is the most expeditious and appropriate manner in which to proceed, given the public interest.

In the course of investigating the second complaint, the College conducted an investigation pursuant to S. 75 of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991. The investigation reviewed 10 records from the Member’s practice, and found that the Member had not recommended deFOOing to any of the clients to whom the 10 records pertained. However the Member made public statements and provided advice to the public via the website www.freedomainradio.com and podcasts available thereon, wherein she discussed and recommended “deFOOing”, or dissociating from families of origin in providing advice to specific individuals. The Member made statements and provided advice in the context of her personal experience and also while relying upon her qualifications and registration as a Psychological Associate. While providing advice to individuals, she did so without properly assessing the circumstances of the members of the internet audience to whom advice was provided.

Ms. Papadopoulos acknowledges and recognizes, that the making of personal disclosures in the context of the podcasts in which she was identified as a therapist and a registered member of the College, were capable of misinterpretation as psychological advice although she maintains that they were not intended as such.

While it may be appropriate to recommend family separation in cases of abuse, the Member did not obtain a sufficient history to ascertain whether the advice was warranted in the circumstances discussed in the podcasts. Although the Member advised that listeners seek professional help in their home communities on a number of locations, she acknowledges that this advice was given in the absence of any meeting or proper assessment, and there was significant risk of misunderstanding by members of the public and the individuals to whom the Member directed advice and comments and such misunderstandings posed a risk of harm.

The Member made general statements and provided advice, both in general terms and directed towards particular individuals that are not supported by current professional literature or consistent with the Standards. One example is the following statement, made in the context of answering the question regarding whether some people are better off single than coupled. The Member replied:

“My immediate impulsive reaction is: no one is better off single than coupled-and sometimes our impulses are correct, and sometimes are (sic) impulses are just that, and need to be explored and debated.”

“Given how dysfunctional many people are in today’s society, I’d say that it is better for them to be single. In fact I do counsel a lot of my clients not to date while they’re going through the process of therapy, because it is far too difficult to manage the relationship while you’re trying to figure yourself out, and often times those relationships will end up failing.”

“… In a perfect world where everybody is psychologically healthy, I think, you know, relationships are absolutely-can be absolutely wonderful. Very stimulating… I can only speak based on my relationships with [her husband] how enormously satisfying and fulfilling it is, and how happy we are. And, I wish that for everybody. I really, truly do… But, I don’t think it’s possibly for everybody until they are able to work through a lot of their own issues.”

Another example is the following statement, made in response to a question about why someone was attracted to women who were not interested in a romantic relationship:

“I would say that it’s because he questions himself that he ends up choosing women who are not interested in him, or-not necessarily interested in him, who are not emotionally available or whom moved him directly into a guy friend status there’s part of you, my dear friend, that doesn’t think you are worthy of having that level of intimacy, or that level of connectedness with someone. There’s a part of you, I think, that’s also quite afraid of it so you’re drawn to people who aren’t going to be able to give it to you.”

There is the risk and certainly the perception of the public, that the Member’s objectivity, competence and effectiveness were compromised by financial interests, since the Freedomain Radio website (although not the Member herself), actively solicited donations from readers and listeners, which promoted and benefited the site managed by the Member’s husband, with the suggestion that the level of donation to the website (her husband) reflect the number of podcasts listened to by any individual. The member’s private practice website (www.mississaugatherapy.com) was also accessible in the “Ask a Therapist” section of the Freedomain Radio website.

In presenting information that is not representative of the discipline of the profession of psychology, and which could be harmful to a member or members of the public, while using and relying upon her qualifications and registration as a registered Psychological Associate member of the College, the Member acted in a manner that would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional.

[close]

[curly]

Nate Silver called Nassim Taleb a cuck
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1115275628390039555

[benjipwns]

there's a whole bunch of deleted tweets and/or intentional subtweets in that exchange that goes back six months which makes it somewhat difficult to spool out the original start of this argument that led to this point, but the latest thing where 538 tested ALL their predictions back to 2008 seems to be getting a lot of Twitter takes that are debating Taleb's theories about the 50% threshold and focused entirely on the elections data while missing an obvious factor in 538's overall report because i assume they aren't familiar with two-thirds of the dataset which are continually updated sports projections

and that's mostly the other people replying, i can't really figure out exactly what Taleb's complaint is even with the article he keeps referencing as he seems more upset with the fact that other people don't understand 538's probabilities and blames Nate for it because he refuses to lecture higher level statistics methods to the political media and that Nate seems to be ignoring this one Taleb paper in his writeups for a casual audience... and Taleb wouldn't respond directly to Nate for months until just the other day which led to this so it's even harder to figure out what he wants

Taleb sure references his and Nate's number of followers a lot though

[curly]

I don't know anything about statistics but Silver seems like he got pretty mad and Taleb seems like his normal levels of mad so I'm going to give Taleb the victory in this one.

[Oblivion]

(Image removed from quote.)

I thought Blaire said she was going to stop being involved in politics after she found out that some of her shitty anti-trans conservative friends weren't genuinely anti-trans enough?

[toku]

[jakefromstatefarm]

Some old stuff (2016) that I wasn’t aware of: https://mobile.twitter.com/classiclib3ral/status/1118539918949658625

and, in wankdad-adjacent news: https://amp.theguardian.com/culture/2019/apr/10/roger-scruton-calls-for-dismissal-islamophobiad-soros-remarks

[chronovore]

I thought JORP preferred logical arguments:

'It seems to me that the packed Cambridge Union auditorium, the intelligent questioning associated with the lecture, and the overwhelming number of views the subsequently posted video accrued, indicates that there a number of Cambridge students are very interested in what I have to say, and might well regard my visit “as a valuable contribution to the University.”'

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_popularity

[Oblivion]

I love every single thing about this exchange:

https://twitter.com/hanton_jeff/status/1118549529047887872

[curly]

Wait Shapiro wouldn't attend a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew???

[Oblivion]

Wait Shapiro wouldn't attend a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew???

Yeah, I was surprised about too, but then not really.

[Nintex]

CoRpoRaTioNs: "We Will Deplatform ALEX JONES!"

Alex: "Strike me down and I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine"

[Oblivion]

you guys ready for the  BATTLE OF IDEAS 

[Oblivion]

IT'S STARTING

LINK:

[Oblivion]

None of you intellectual COWARDS decided to watch?

It was actually way better than I thought, and Zizek really came through.

[agrajag]

three and  half hours breh

spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'll probably watch it later

[close]

[agrajag]

That student's name? Benjamin Pwns

[Oblivion]

My man JP doing studying LIKE A BOSS:

https://twitter.com/HOSTAGEKlLLER/status/1119367322379202562

[curly]

From what I hear Peterson went to the Manifesto because he thought it was the definitive Marxist document which goes to show what an intellectual scrub he is

[Oblivion]

From what I hear Peterson went to the Manifesto because he thought it was the definitive Marxist document which goes to show what an intellectual scrub he is

he also decided to go with that cause it was the shortest

[Crash Dummy]

haven't watched yet but can't wait, my twitter is fuego this morning
https://twitter.com/ironicrep/status/1119453681093681153

[agrajag]

From what I hear Peterson went to the Manifesto because he thought it was the definitive Marxist document which goes to show what an intellectual scrub he is

he also decided to go with that cause it was the shortest

Did he get the audiobook version? 

[Nintex]

I've yet to watch all of it but Peterson got wrecked to a point that I fear even the YouTube algorithm will abandon him. 

[Oblivion]

https://twitter.com/Xenos_RIFS/status/1119441113255825408

[Crash Dummy]

on the other hand https://twitter.com/whotwotewho/status/1119420678376230912

[team filler]

(Image removed from quote.)

[BisMarckie]

When you have read Marx's ethnological notebooks, you realize that he was a complete hack.

[Oblivion]

My favorite part was probably when Zizek pointed out to him how stupid his whole "clean your room before you change the world" advice really is.

[BisMarckie]

I'm at 2:23:00 and it still sucks, just don't watch if you respect your time.

Hang on. Do people here really watch amateur philosophers 'debate' for hours?


I though the whole wank dad thing is just getting funny soundbites and tweets.

[team filler]

[agrajag]

Zizek really is disgusting 

[agrajag]

pretty sure they get paid for their wankery breh

[BisMarckie]

pretty sure they get paid for their wankery breh

Stoicists like Seneca would say that a true wise man and philosopher would never take money for their philosophical teachings.

Therefore amateurs.

[agrajag]

Seneca can suck my hog!

[BisMarckie]

Seneca can suck my hog!

That's what Nero said.

[team filler]

[agrajag]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/jordan-peterson-the-intellectual-we-deserve.30669/post-20026797

 

[BisMarckie]

Hagel.

[jakefromstatefarm]

I booted this shit up at 1:30 last night, skipped to when Peterson started reacting to historical materialism with: “well golly guys, I dunno, seems kinda out there,” then skimmed to where zizek keeps circling around the same four sentences to ask Peterson one question.

So i guess it all went according to keikaku?

[agrajag]

if they edited out all the parts of Zizek sniffling and rubbing his face, the video would be 45 minutes

[Crash Dummy]

I'll have to watch when I'm back in the country but I'm sure JoPe got owned even if Zizek is an incoherent hack

haven't watched yet but can't wait

I'm at 2:23:00 and it still sucks, just don't watch if you respect your time.

watching at work now and just got through jp's opening statement - dude hasn't done any of the reading you would have assumed one would do not just to prepare for this debate but to have a base level of credibility as a public dank web intellectual, so instead does some weird attempted psychological reading of marx and engels before lapsing into his usual talking points? wtf? zizek should be able run rings around this clown

[Crash Dummy]

pretty sure they get paid for their wankery breh

i think zizek said that he's going to donate his share from ticket sales to charity

[benjipwns]

Even I can't stand watching this whole thing, but I love that Zizek actually took this seriously while Peterson totally blew it off and figured he could just handle it on the fly.

also talk about spoilers in the title, we already know "Capitalism" is winning the debate simply by the fact that they're selling tickets to Zizek rambling and mocking Peterson and whatever other random topics come into his head for two hours

correct

Zizek won't debate or stay on topic anyway, he's fundamentally incapable of it. This is why Peterson's obsession with him is so great. He thinks Zizek is the postmodern Marxist dragon that if he can just somehow battle it he can forever end totalitarianism by besting it in debate. When Zizek can't commit to anything that's not currently attracting his attention by being shiny.

It's like the ultimate endgame of Peterson's whole mile wide, centimeter deep adventure.

shockingly incorrect

Peterson should just debate an actual raccoon instead.

still most correct

[benjipwns]

Then again, reading only The Communist Manifesto the night before you plan to debate a "Marxist" professor is quite the alpha lobster move though.

When you have read Marx's ethnological notebooks, you realize that he was a complete hack.

I think this is actually close to Zizek's usual position on Marx and why he doesn't like to call himself a Marxist. He likes the critique but thinks the rest is distracting nonsense. Notice in the clip Esch posted, he doesn't mention Capital, only the articles from a certain period. IIRC, this is closer to his actual position than defending it all, which he probably realized early on he thankfully didn't have to do thanks to Peterson being an epic loser complete chad alpha.

[benjipwns]

I was kinda hoping that the debate would illustrate exactly why Peterson has chosen to shadowbox Zizek for like two years and why he decided he was the great Marxist foe, but I'm now wondering if he even bothered to look up the guy on wikipedia

hell, at this point I'm not even sure that Peterson has looked up Marx on wikipedia

now I'm kinda curious how his full fledged fans are taking this, but I don't exactly know where to go to find Peterson fans, reddit I guess? the "I like Peterson cuz he hates people I do" circles I sometimes visit seem to be agreeing with more left and other places that he mostly embarrassed himself for no real advantage outside of the money

[agrajag]

I wish Assy was here to tell us austys how Daddy P really won the debate without having watched the debate.

[benjipwns]

i guess etoliate secretly was giving us a preview of Peterson's whole gameplan before he was unjustly banned by the corrupt mods

"why do you support Marxist crimes like the Holodomor?"
"but i don't"
"but why don't you? checkmate "

[Mandark]

iirc part of what set him off was curly pointing out that he only referenced the manifesto and asking if he'd read any of the other stuff.

It's like poetry, it rhymes.

[team filler]

 

[Himu]

AHAHAHAHAHA

apparently wank daddy just read his first piece of marxist lit like three-four days ago after years of railing against marxists and marxism. He doesn't even know the basics of his opponents arguments and he acts like he's some fucking philosopher lmao

[benjipwns]

I always thought attacking just The Manifesto was something like only Fox News hosts did because their audience doesn't really care about it, but then the last two years have disabused me of this notion, regarding people of all kinds of different levels of sympathy towards "socialist" ideas

[Himu]

Assy truly picked the right hero lmao

[Himu]

I always thought attacking just The Manifesto was something like only Fox News hosts did because their audience doesn't really care about it, but then the last two years have disabused me of this notion, regarding people of all kinds of different levels of sympathy towards "socialist" ideas

At the very least be familiar with the Manifesto, but also Das Kapital, and Why Socialism by Einstein. Much of this shit is free! And this was a tenured professor.

[toku]

now I'm kinda curious how his full fledged fans are taking this, but I don't exactly know where to go to find Peterson fans, reddit I guess? the "I like Peterson cuz he hates people I do" circles I sometimes visit seem to be agreeing with more left and other places that he mostly embarrassed himself for no real advantage outside of the money

I casually browsed the jp subreddit after the debate and it's hard  to get a real read on what ''''''they'''''' think because it's getting brigaded by chapotraphouse fans engaging in the Protracted Poster's War and counter flooded with by the regulars with memes about gulags.

There was some acknowledgement of JP being unprepared. And also weird weird people imitating JPs entire mythic affect responding to irony poisoned ancom types with "BEGONE FOUL DEMON" gandalfspeak.

Edit: and honestly, a lot of them played up how nice and civil it was and the things they agree on like political correctness, claiming that it was a "great discussion" etc etc. Which is what it is since Zizek didn't press him at all.

Did you see that bit last week where the chapo sub was in a tizzy because the chapo dudes told somebody it was actually okay to have kids despite climate change?

[benjipwns]

One thing I noticed in watching this is that JoPe didn't seem to have any awareness of different interpretations or schools of Marxism or his intellectual successors.

Usually a good sign for that is when a person seems to want to blame Marx, personally, for everything. When the real world criminals like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc. all did their own accurate discovery of the scientific principles of TRUE Marxism. If you can't even recognize this difference with huge figures of history, you'll never get to the internecine academic Marxist wars...

Even if Peterson had bothered to read the very good historiography that's attached to Penguin Books' version of The Manifesto he would have realized that Engels rewrote tons of stuff including translations of The Manifesto in Marx's name after he was long dead. I have to imagine from the fact that Peterson is a tenured and apparently once respected PhD, this would have set off alarm bells no matter how far away from his field he's going. Even if he was being too lazy to read anything else but The Manifesto. Or even apparently wiki The Manifesto. (So perhaps I am being fantastical in imaging him reading a book.)

One thing I personally like to emphasize when teaching The Manifesto is how it was written in response to political events, namely the wave of 1848 Revolutions. Both Marx and Engels wanted to get it out and read, they would finesse any details or theory later. It's almost irresponsible* to treat the work as standing alone and disconnected from these events.

*in the historian/academic parlance of "not actually important" except to nerds

[benjipwns]

Other than an extended sub period I have not been part of a history department in like five years or so. I'm almost always in poli sci officially.

There's a valid non-benji reason for this. I only have a masters, history is far far more PhD dominated. Poli sci almost lets any moron with a masters in power.

I personally teach tons more history in any version of a poli sci course I do except methods. Ten times as much or more depending on how deficient the others are at this. At a former place, neither of the other Intro to American Politics instructors taught any form of history in the course except Presidential elections back to 1960 or so, and a brief day on the Constitution debates.

Most Intro to Poli Sci aka 100/101 teaches a brief section on ideologies/similar, covering liberalism (John Stuart Mill/John Locke liberalism), communism, etc.

[benjipwns]

Teaching anything about Communism/Marxism in a way that seems not negative is how you expose the College Republicans. It's the one thing you're always taught in Graduate School Political Science.

oops, wasn't supposed to reveal that

I do cheat, for Communism, the recommended reading is something like The Communist Manifesto (they just ask why if you don't include it), Critique of the Gotha Program and The Conquest of Bread/Mutual Aid