Jordan Peterson Analyzes his own Cathy Newman Interview on Channel 4

[ChristopherParticipant 2478]

Kind of interesting to hear his interpretation of what happened..

The full 2hour discourse version here…

Feminism was funded by bankers/politicians to create more taxpayers. MGTOW IS FREEDOM https://archive.org/details/mgtowisfreedomblurayready

[Jan SobieskiParticipant 28791]

All The JP fans have just taken the Red Pill.

Love is just alimony waiting to happen. Visit mgtow.com.

[ChristopherParticipant 2478]

Personally I was redpill HSP as a child and then teenager – I am not posting this as Peterson “fan” – although he is obviously one of the persons that has emerged speaking some truths – what I was interested in here is not Petersons macro views per say – rather I was interested his analysis of Newman and the ideological approach taken for the interview.

Feminism was funded by bankers/politicians to create more taxpayers. MGTOW IS FREEDOM https://archive.org/details/mgtowisfreedomblurayready

[OldBillParticipant]

That was fascinating, Christopher. Thank you for sharing it.

For my other brothers, if you take away anything from that clip it should be Peterson’s reference to Jung’s theory of “animus possession” in women.

Even if I felt I understood that concept well enough to explain it to you, I wouldn’t be able to it in a forum post. It’s something you’re going to have to read about and come to grips with on your own. That will be hard, but all things worth doing are hard.

Jung’s theories, like Freud’s, cannot be explained on a 3×5 card. Attempts to easily or quickly explain Jung have led him to be, like Freud, more misunderstood than understood.

Keeping that proviso in mind, Jung theorized that life had a spiritual meaning beyond material goals and that many problems occur when the journey necessary to achieve one’s individual spiritual meaning is thwarted. Jung’s concept of “individuation” was a journey of transformation in which you meet and understand your self.

Jung theorized that part of our spiritual nature was something he called anima and animus:

The “soul” which accrues to ego-consciousness during the opus has a feminine character in the man and a masculine character in a woman. His anima wants to reconcile and unite; her Animus tries to discern and discriminate.

The “anima” is the feminine side of a man while “animus” is the masculine side of a woman. These are not physical attributes, they’re not bits of brain tissue. These are ways of thinking and behaving which are learned during our earliest development by how we perceive the men and women in our lives think and behave.

In the case of animus possession, the woman in question has failed to integrate her animus as part of her individuation. Instead, she’s allowed her animus to control her life and has become a “ball-busting bitch”.

You now should understand why feminists has a lot of trouble with Jung.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[RomulusParticipant 4667]

In the case of animus possession, the woman in question has failed to integrate her animus as part of her individuation. Instead, she’s allowed her animus to control her life and has become a “ball-busting bitch”.

Thank you OldBill. I have read Jung extensively and I think your summation of this is very good. I mean that seriously.

I quoted the part above because it made me laugh. While Jung would never use the term “ball busting bitch” that was precisely his conclusion if you strip away the scientific mumble jumble.

How can a woman be expected to be happy with a man who insists on treating her as if she were a perfectly normal human being.

[EdifyParticipant 84]

As glorious as it was to Watch JP take out Cathy, lets not forget what he preaches, He believes in plantation, he wants men to step up and Man Up, while he very well knows the state of Men in today’s world.

[AFTParticipant 2722]

I admire Peterson’s logic, reasoning and deep thinking. A lot of what he says is spot on, however he lacks a contemporary insight into just how gynocentric society has become, perhaps always was, but is now arguably completely misandrist.
At least he recognises the post modern feminazis for what they are.
I’ve watched that interview, many times, and the Peterson analysis of it once all the way through, I think 1&1/2 hours of it.
Love how he destroys that C~~~y Newman’s emotional propaganda with logic and reason.
He even tells her she is projecting her preconceived notions and not listening to what he is saying.
His frame was stone cold, kept himself in line and pulled her up continuously.
That interview makes a good argument for why men shouldn’t bother talking to women.

Edify wrote:

As glorious as it was to Watch JP take out Cathy, lets not forget what he preaches, He believes in plantation, he wants men to step up and Man Up, while he very well knows the state of Men in today’s world.

I think men should step up and man up, just not for women, for our selfs and fellow men. But I know what you mean, and I agree, Peterson still clings to Jung’s gynocentric hero archiotypes.

When the war cemeteries are half full of the corpses of dead conscripted women, only then will women have earned the right to speak of equality. Sidecar “A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do.” - Bob Dylan

[RhinoParticipant 3477]

The top video was blocked by Youtube I was hoping to see the interview and what he thought. Thanks for giving us a break down of Jung OldBill I understood what you were saying even if it was a forum post you did a great job.

Edit: I think I found the interview here at least.

[ZarathustraParticipant 2246]

OldBill wrote:

That was fascinating, Christopher. Thank you for sharing it.
For my other brothers, if you take away anything from that clip it should be Peterson’s reference to Jung’s theory of “animus possession” in women.
Even if I felt I understood that concept well enough to explain it to you, I wouldn’t be able to it in a forum post. It’s something you’re going to have to read about and come to grips with on your own. That will be hard, but all things worth doing are hard.
Jung’s theories, like Freud’s, cannot be explained on a 3×5 card. Attempts to easily or quickly explain Jung have led him to be, like Freud, more misunderstood than understood.
Keeping that proviso in mind, Jung theorized that life had a spiritual meaning beyond material goals and that many problems occur when the journey necessary to achieve one’s individual spiritual meaning is thwarted. Jung’s concept of “individuation” was a journey of transformation in which you meet and understand your self.
Jung theorized that part of our spiritual nature was something he called anima and animus:
The “soul” which accrues to ego-consciousness during the opus has a feminine character in the man and a masculine character in a woman. His anima wants to reconcile and unite; her Animus tries to discern and discriminate.
The “anima” is the feminine side of a man while “animus” is the masculine side of a woman. These are not physical attributes, they’re not bits of brain tissue. These are ways of thinking and behaving which are learned during our earliest development by how we perceive the men and women in our lives think and behave.
In the case of animus possession, the woman in question has failed to integrate her animus as part of her individuation. Instead, she’s allowed her animus to control her life and has become a “ball-busting bitch”.
You now should understand why feminists has a lot of trouble with Jung.
#ICETHEMOUT Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty

I am just getting into Jung and although I understand his ideas, generally, I struggle to apply them to my life. Good analysis Old Bill. Thanks for sharing I found that very helpful.

[ZarathustraParticipant 2246]

AFT wrote:

I admire Peterson’s logic, reasoning and deep thinking. A lot of what he says is spot on, however he lacks a contemporary insight into just how gynocentric society has become, perhaps always was, but is now arguably completely misandrist.
At least he recognises the post modern feminazis for what they are.
I’ve watched that interview, many times, and the Peterson analysis of it once all the way through, I think 1&1/2 hours of it.
Love how he destroys that C~~~y Newman’s emotional propaganda with logic and reason.
He even tells her she is projecting her preconceived notions and not listening to what he is saying.
His frame was stone cold, kept himself in line and pulled her up continuously.
That interview makes a good argument for why men shouldn’t bother talking to women.

Good point. I think JP has a lot in common with our views but I think he diverges with MGTOW because, to hear him tell it, he actually has a happy marriage. This may be so but he got married during an age before things got REALLY bad, and I think, as you say, he is clueless about the reality of dating and interacting with women today.

[Ranger OneParticipant 16836]

Edify wrote:

As glorious as it was to Watch JP take out Cathy, lets not forget what he preaches, He believes in plantation, he wants men to step up and Man Up, while he very well knows the state of Men in today’s world.

Jordan Peterson believes that men should step up and take a hit for the team. The same team that gladly throws men under the bus.

My response is “F~~~ the team. F~~~ the bus.”

I’ll be glad to “man up” when “God” comes down to Earth and shoots lighting out of his eyes and disintegrates family court judges and lawyers.

Despite my mixed feelings about JP, my analysis of Cathy Newman is that she is a brainwashed, clueless f~~~ing Marxist retard. When society collapses and with it, rule of law, I’m looking forward to meeting people that are just like Cathy Newman.

All my life I've had doubts about who I am, where I belonged. Now I'm like the arrow that springs from the bow. No hesitation, no doubts. The path is clear. And what are you? Alive. Everything else is negotiable. Women have rights; men have responsibilities; MGTOW have freedom. Marriage is for chumps. If someone stands in the way of true justice, you simply walk up behind them and stab them in the heart-R'as al Ghul.

[DorkShitParticipant 4353]

If you search “Jordan Petrson Cries” you will see a recent video where he speaks about us.

It is interesting to follow his conversations over the last year.

I do not believe he is the man he was a year ago. He has met our dragon of chaos. It was an out growth of the pronoun bill issue.

He now cries for the boys. He shed a tear. A real tear.

He has changed. Remember brothers, it is a journey.

Feeling a man’s pain is one thing. Being a professor with thousands of hours of debate and study is another thing.

He is not a trailer park red neck. (No offense to our dense brothers intended)

He is imminently prepared for this. His life prepared him.

I am very intelligent and well read, but that feminist would have ate my lunch.

If you think what Petrson did was easy, watch Milo’s evaluation of the interview.

I only wish that Dr. Peterson would not have used the “gotcha” phrase. Just look her in the eye and let silence rein. But hey, he was gloating because he had just won a chess match with a grand champion. Understandable. She was a worthy foe.

Good luck brother Jordan

Peace brothers

[AFTParticipant 2722]

Peterson needs to encompass the idea that manning up and voluntarily offering yourself as cannon fodder for society, in order to take part in passing along your genes, IS the weak and ugly side of masculinity.
It allows the perpetuation of tyranny and corrupt domination against men.
Taking a stand and overcoming the need to fulfill basic biological imperatives is the nobelist, most responsible act of strength and wisdom a man can make.
It is attempting to live life on his terms, to take steps to protect himself and offer an example of protest against gynocentric tyranny.

When the war cemeteries are half full of the corpses of dead conscripted women, only then will women have earned the right to speak of equality. Sidecar “A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do.” - Bob Dylan

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

He’s the opposite of a trad con cuck. He’s an intellectual leftist who uses all the right words with notions that men should be heroic and strive for some unknowable goodness of helping others. Being “good” in his own personal moral philosophy is what is important to him. Personal issues are secondary and not important.

He is also very enamored of his book, naming the book, the publisher, Penguin, the area’s in the book covered by his conversation.

He is very concerned with his reputation. He is not concerned with the welfare of the woman supposedly getting hatefully comments.

He merely wants to have an interview on his terms that will be a “good” victory.

He still wants to dominate.

He talks nice but doesn’t have that much to say that’s new. He’s very far behind us here at MGTOW.com in many ways.

Even on us he flip flopped. First hating our idea’s then coming to appreciate them.

Seems to blow with the wind. I think he thinks he’s alt-right when he’s really alt-left. Canada is all left, there is no right left in Canada. Even the right to free speech has been taken away from Canadians.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[SkeptiskParticipant 3679]

OldBill wrote:

That was fascinating, Christopher. Thank you for sharing it.

For my other brothers, if you take away anything from that clip it should be Peterson’s reference to Jung’s theory of “animus possession” in women.

Here: https://appliedjung.com/animus-possession/

"Expecting to find a decent woman on a dating site is like dumpster diving and expecting to come out with a gourmet meal." Won'tGetFooledAgain

[ChristopherParticipant 2478]

Ranger One wrote:

Despite my mixed feelings about JP, my analysis of Cathy Newman is that she is a brainwashed, clueless f~~~ing Marxist retard. When society collapses and with it, rule of law, I’m looking forward to meeting people that are just like Cathy Newman.

Yep. I understand those beautiful insights and sentiments Ranger One !

Feminism was funded by bankers/politicians to create more taxpayers. MGTOW IS FREEDOM https://archive.org/details/mgtowisfreedomblurayready

[ChristopherParticipant 2478]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

I think he thinks he’s alt-right when he’s really alt-left.

Interesting analysis Puffin Stuff. It would be interesting to hear more about that and why you think that.

Feminism was funded by bankers/politicians to create more taxpayers. MGTOW IS FREEDOM https://archive.org/details/mgtowisfreedomblurayready

[DorkShitParticipant 4353]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

Even on us he flip flopped. First hating our idea’s then coming to appreciate them.

I don’t see it as a pre defined agenda Puff.

I think he had been a professor doing his thing for decades and the pronoun bill was the catalyst where he got up on the pedestal of truth.

What you see as a flip flop, I see as a journey.

We don’t start out knowing everything.

He is a traditional conservative, etc. He is on a book tour doing interviews. On a book tour you promote your book.

It isn’t disingenuous. It probably is an attempt to become independent of the university if they choose to fire him.

Where he started out matters not. Where his journey leads him matters.

It appears that butting heads with pink pussy hat wearing trigglypuff feminists has opened a rabbit hole that he is going down.

We went down it before him. We may not agree with him on everything but hee is the best advocate I have seen.

If he thinks I’m a weasel, I’m good with that. MGTOW weasel reporting for duty.

Peace brothers

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

Christopher wrote:

why you think that

Because he uses leftist ideas like “universal fairness” and “inherent goodness of people” to sell books to tell men to submit.

A trad con cuck would have just said, in essense, “because god said so” to sell his books to tell men to submit.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

He smells like a phony to me. Just a hunch.

I like that he fights feminists.

Check out the feminist rock star of about 5 years ago.

The Hugo Problem
March 26, 2014 Mona Gable Crime 20 Comments

He was L.A.’s most prominent male feminist, a professor of gender studies who used his online presence to burnish his reputation. Then Hugo Schwyzer’s bad behavior—sex with students, substance abuse, and a chilling act of violence—came to light.

The Hugo Problem

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Author]

Posts