Was able to discover JP sometime within the last few years ... probably due to the big press and their interest in destroying anyone who’s a threat to their agenda.
So in this sense, even bad press is good press. No press is bad press.
Was quite fascinated by Jordan Petersen and even bought some of his books ; sometimes I find he’s a bit verbose and rambling, yet carries an immense strength and desire to enlighten and educate. It’s so true, that we’ve all been had. By the system. One that imposes the notion that we are all required, from a young age, to be completely and unconditionally selfless, leading one, as Jordan states, to become bitter and resentful, for having totally sacrificed our own souls ... and for whom? others? Just another hoax perhaps, embedded deep in history.
Wise words. What is being lost is critical thinking. Just follow the guidelines and algorithms. "The computer won't allow me to do that." Let's weed out free thinkers. That was the fate of Socrates. And motivated Aristotle to flee Athens.
But stop with the Boomer Bashing. We were a very philosophical and highly engaged generation. We were not a "greed is good" generation. We grew up in the most extraordinary times in American history.
As a Boomer, I'm unclear on how the collective "we" supposedly messed things up so badly for younger generations. But that said, building a decent life for oneself through hard work and determination was entirely possible back in the 1970s. I did it, despite a less-than-ideal childhood and no college education. I recognize the opportunities I had no longer exist for young people.
Particularly in UK where boomers were raised by parents who went through the war, bombs, rationing etc. Sure, some reacted by becoming materialistic but all profited by growing into adults, taking charge, being responsible and accountable. It takes a world of security and prosperity to produce the navel gazing youth of today.
Boomers were more likely TOO responsible and created spoiled children from providing better than they had...Which isn't to say it was bad for the boomers.
Since Korea, the west has known a 'False Sense of Security.' Many people largely forgot what starvation, or many other threats were. After witnessing 'Nightly News' bombing and fighting in Vietnam, the protests led to an end to that War camouflaged as a 'Police Action. Since then, 'Kevlar vests and such technology vastly expanded probability of survival for the rare few participating in such despicable circumstances.
Sometimes, it seems it's all a fantasy...The inherent danger from all the mortally dangerous toys of humanity, that is.
If not kick the crap out of some group in frustration, jealousy, guilt or rage if not all and more negative so prevailing in this time of darkness.
We know it's dark with so many trying so hard to not only blame; but to physically attack, torment or murder others based in some kind of rationalization or lie of socially acceptable mores, norms or concrete ethnic distinctions.
I’m not particularly interested in anything Gen X has to say about Baby Boomers. Saying Boomers are all about profiteering and nothing else knows nothing of history.
I am a female anthropologist, always energized by your insightful writings, and did not feel personally slighted as a woman, in ANY respect, by your intuitive thoughts about Jordan Peterson and Dr. Peter McCullough! I have learned so much from the three of you! A terrific way the start my day!
The responses, citing 'women's considerations' are extraneous to this conversation, serving only to detract from the truly inspirational wisdom of these scholars ... not to speak of their classical, intellectual integrity and logic.
Keep up the great work! The three of you are appreciated FAR more than you know! THANK YOU !
I had to look up the dates of the Boomer generation (1946-1964) and the birth dates of Jordan Peterson and Dr. McCollough. I find it interesting that both men are late Boomers (b. 1962) and as such perhaps mark a transition point for the generations.
As an early Boomer (1946), I agree with an earlier poster that starting out, our generation was a generous, idealistic one. Unfortunately, the radical ideas brought out by our older brothers and sisters in the mid- to late-60s led some of our cohort down a path that led to socialism and all the assorted ills that go along with it. Another large part of our generation pursued careers, money and success (the DINKs) especially in the 80s and many of those are the ones who have been wielding power up to the present.
But there is a small contingent who paid attention to the wisdom of our parents and grandparents and have held on to the old values; albeit, we may have kept quiet too often when we should have spoken out, like our younger brothers Peterson and McCollough.
Do believe there is a difference between the early and late 'Boomers.' Those closer to the WWII years and all the resulting EARLY GLOBALIZATION we're now opposing and resisting had completely different attitudes and characteristics as well as expectations for life; or at least they did in my region, the Midwest.
Don't think anybody born in the late 50's or early 60's could relate to the discipline, sacrifice and rationing necessary to survive those years for everybody on the battlefield and at home producing for the 'War Effort.' We also now know certain forces were literally implementing 'Unrestricted Soft Warfare' beginning in 1954 to undermine the traditional, family-oriented Christian Culture of the United States as it was viewed the foundation behind the U.S. making it too strong for the Totalitarians to take OUT. How many their way from all that's come to be?
Other than that...You're right on target. Some did listen to the Elders and tried to live clean and healthy lives. Current regulations and taxation hardly allow survival in any capacity in this time as 'The Greatest Generation' or the Boomers knew opportunities provided.
I am a Baby Boomer. Let me just say that during my childhood, there were no little princes and princesses. There were rules, chores, spanks and limited conversations with our parents. We respected the law and if we were caught stealing we were dragged before the owner of the store to apologize. We were ashamed of disappointing our parents. We knew right from wrong.
I'm also a Baby Boomer (just - 1961) and no-one would even consider trash-talking their parents. I also recall near-zero one on one conversations with parents, nor any other adult. We received our general-wisdom morality/good behaviour lessons from church, sunday school, and religious education classes in school. There were so many children in those days and we played with them in the street. My brother tried stealing something once, and, exactly as you said, he was dragged to the store to apologise. #Australia
I've got to say it because this perspective seems to be unseen. An entire layer of knowledge is totally ignored and that is the feminine perspective. Everything we know or think comes from the perspective of the male, which is massively different than how females think. But females have to fit themselves into the male constructs which are all we know. And to our detriment because we really don't know much at all.
WE don't even know if the earth goes round the sun or vice versa. Jordan Peterson is a good model for young men but his views are the same old/same old, nothing new. He articulates very well and he is a fine man for boys and men to hold as a model of men rather than the gung-ho we always see. However he doesn't notice the absence of the female perspective, it's just not something men ever think about. It's like we had eons of being prohibited from public life and we have never addressed this - why men want to tell women what to do and why men want to repress and suppress women. It still happens though now it's more veiled. Surely we want to know more about our existence? Hearing only half the story, only men's adventures, that's what history is all about, is leaving us struggling to make sense of the most minor understanding of reality.
Thanks for your comment, Denise. I believe that most boys and men would like to understand the female perspective, but it is not a perspective that it is commonly articulated in a way they can understand. One of my favorite authors is Marguerite Yourcenar. In her book "Memoirs of Hadrian," she presented Hadrian's reflections on his relationships with women, and his perception that he never really knew any of them. As he put it, "The mind, or perhaps the soul, that I searched for was never more than a perfume." The trouble, I suppose, is that relationships between men and women are often encumbered with the birds and the bees. One of my favorite poets is Emily Dickenson, but she too is often amazingly cryptic. Regards, John Leake
Women completely and entirely dominate the child care industry, from preschool through graduate school, to the various arms of Child Welfare/Protection, social work. They generally hold boys up to female standards. Act like a typical boy in third grade and see how your female teacher treats you—story of my life!
That said, I have nearly as many female friends as male, and have a great relationship with my mom, sister, niece, grandmother. But don’t tell me there’s no female influence in a child’s life.
It was the female supporters of the ERA who capitulated to the David Rockefellers of the world, co-opting the movement in order to double the work force and cut labor costs. They did this by demonizing traditional women’s roles and exalting men’s. (“Why do I have to stay home with the kids while my husband gets to sit at a desk all day or be a bricklayer or die in a war?”
Women were sucked into the feminist movement. Which was part of the communist plan to disrupt, maybe destroy the nuclear family. Then abortion. It’s worked out pretty well so far. Hopefully more are onto it.
As a woman, I agree that the feminine perspective is important. Men do well to listen to women instead of dismissing them. But the emotionalism of most women makes them well suited for roles in the family and the community but ill-suited for positions of higher authority. Recently I read about a study of children on playgrounds when disputes over rules arise. The boys worked out their differences and then amicably resumed play. But the girls separated into factions, based on who was on whose side, and then went their separate ways. It should be obvious that the first method is a much better way of getting things done, because it’s not divisive.
Of course, these are generalities. I know women who have the gifts and abilities to run large organizations effectively. We can think of a number who have operated on the world stage, such as Golda Meier and Margaret Thatcher. They do well because they are not ruled by emotion. And there are feminized men—an increasing number, I’m afraid—who behave like women and are very ill-suited to leadership. But of all the women in leadership roles whom I have known personally, most actually were petty and divisive, in that “who’s on my side” way observed on the playground.
There is definitely a difference between men and women beyond physical attributes. Women are emotionally programmed by intrinsic factors to be nurturing, to suit them for having and raising children and supporting their husbands. Men are programmed for hunter (provider) and protector rolls. Women definitely think differently than men. But men and women can share these attributes. Women might solve a complex mathematical question by going about the analysis in a different way than men while still coming up with the same solution. So, we need not pidgeon hole people into rolls solely based on gender. Women need to stop trying to make men more like them. Stop with the “toxic masculinity” stuff. As a woman, I much prefer an alpha male. But I have to admit, when I watch an action movie and I see the female protagonist being able to use martial arts to hold her own in a fight, I’m happy. I always hated it when watching old monster movies and the woman fleeing from the monster would always fall and have to be picked up by the man. I enjoyed “Alias” starring Jennifer Garner as a brilliant, beautiful agent able to hold her own and outsmart the enemy. Sorry for rambling.
Dimensional differences in temperament and personality are greater than our gender differences. Also, women over forty are still valid, even though hormonally they differ dramatically from young women.
From mens' perspective, as much as you and my wife both like it when a female kicks the crapp out of guys twice her size -- saving the day, that is just . . . "come ooooOOOOON!" crazy and, of course, not realistic. So, we go to sleep during THOSE action movies.
In order to make films that are engaging to ALL they have to be REAL, for all.
Thatcher, a good example. Meier, a poor one. She sat around for 6-7 months while the Syrians, Iraqis, and Egyptians built large armies right on the borders of Israel, and she expressly did not prepare for the attack that was coming, which it did. But for Richard Nixon, who supplied the crushed Israelis with desperately needed supplies and intelligence, in particular, insuring that the Israeli Air Force was able to use to wipe the skies of almost all Arab planes, the Jewish state would have ended in 1973.
Of course there are a few great exceptions, Maggie T. . . However, we are dealing in "normal" populations(statistically) and she is in the tail, while most women in the middle 3 sigma.
All my experience as a boomer in a large F. 500 corp. made it obvious that the women moved from tech jobs into mgmt, and MOST took this route, ended up being little tyrants-- often like their male mentors in mgmt. Trained as an engineer I found that most women engineers, smarter book-wise on average than the men, gravitated preferentially to mgmt. They were great in attaining grades in college and moved into the best spots in tech. companies but were "lost" to mgmt and never showed much at all in areas that men mostly succeed at-- bullheaded attack on a problem, never stopping until solution.
Unfortunately all examples stem from a perspective that it's perfectly fine to kill our own kind. In a sane world this belief would be totally abhorrent and wouldn't have a chance of getting off the ground. Anyone who suggested such violence would never be talked to again without having to go through much refinement. Thatcher and any woman you can name were totally psrudo males and not a representation of the fmeinine IN ANY WAY. They are capitulators to the patriarchy. Any woman who wants to succeed in a society that holds women secondary, is a turncoat and a betrayer. What if women want to be like women? What if they don't want to "go to work"? That is a man's thing to get away from the family. Men invented it then had the bnrilliant idea to drag women into it. Rather than give women freedom over herself, his more powerful muscles dictated that men must be great at everything else, and how wrong that is.
Powerful muscles and a phallis does not make one brighter up top, as we can see with eons of men "ruling" exclusively. And now they cannot come up with the solutions to their own concocted problems. The solution will come from the feminine.
I think it has been feminists, not men who have been “dragging” women away from family. Women who wish to be stay at homes moms have been put down by feminists. Being a full-time mother is a very important job. Unfortunately, too many children have been raised by Day Care. Sadly, some women have no choice but to go to work outside of the home. I chose a career but sometimes wish I had children of my own.
If you have kids, being fully present for your children is the most important job in the world. Unfortunately, if a woman has children and her husband leaves before the ten-year mark in some states, she will only receive spousal support for three years. If she has no career she is screwed. Women need education and careers as an insurance policy against penury for herself and her children. Also, an educated mother has more to offer her children.
Yes feminism is patriarchal. It was deisigned to take women out of the home. I appreciate that we are now at least able to get an education, as women were shut out of that too. And we can own businesses and be involved in public life. However "going to work" is what men do. Men disgned it as a way to get away from the noise of the family. A woman would figure out how to cope with both at the same time. Women took up work because they wanted autonomy. I remember even in "my day" women had to have permission to travel overseas, from either their husband or their father. Women were stuck in the home whether they liked it or not but feminism at least gave them that ticket out. However now we need to go the next level. We've been in kindergarten too long. Women are more capable at designing say, an economy just as they are at choosing curtans. The intrisic capabliity of woman has been suppressed, depressed and oppressed so that now we don't see it. It is femininity as definied by the patriarchy, that's the only femininty we see. But femininity is much more. It is honest, kind, empathic and ferocious when it comes to defending life.
I agree. Also, men going to the office is only a recent event in history. A hundred years ago most people lived on a farm and the work was divided in cooperative ways. Children participated in farm work. Women used to make cloth and sew and work at home while raising kids. Men didn't go to the office, so no temptation to stray with the secretary.
Denise, if one is not a Christian and believes in the basic goodness of people, then what you say makes sense. But from wars to murders to abuse of all kinds, including abuse of women, the evidence is that we are not good at all. Only God, through Jesus Christ, can forgive us and change us. In the meantime, people and nations have a right to self-defense. What would happen if every nation that was attacked just gave in to its attackers? That wouldn’t stop wars, it would encourage them. Evil would triumph.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that men are better than women, but they are different. When the female genome was mapped, a 1.5% difference was found between men and women. That’s the same degree of difference between a man and a male chimpanzee. No wonder we have a hard time understanding each other! But we need to try, on both sides. I hear a lot of complaining about how men don’t understand us, but very little about our trying to understand them. We think we do, but it’s typing them, not understanding them. What we don’t love, we cannot truly understand.
The solution is not in the masculine or the feminine. It is in Jesus Christ, who when we allow Him, transforms us, men and women, into His likeness.
" But from wars to murders to abuse of all kinds, including abuse of women, the evidence is that we are not good at all.
Only God, through Jesus Christ, can forgive us and change us"
That kind of incredible ignorance and arrogance used to piss me off, but now I can only shake my head in disbelief and go with Jesus: "Father forgive them, they do not know what they are doing." In this case, Kay has no fucking clue what he is talking about."
Almost all wars are religious wars and the Christians have more than their fair share of it. And all non Christians can't find God because they don't go through Jesus? Poor old Buddha and Laotze and Socrates just all imagined it? You have no clue how you disrespect Jesus by regurgitating 2000 year old Christian propaganda. But it can't be helped. One day, one life you might dispel your ignorance and feel very embarrassed and sorry. I wish you well.
Of course we are good, we are naturally loving. But we have been usurped and you know by what? Money. Yep, think about it. Isn't it money that drives humans to do the most horrendous things, or ugly things even though they are not horrendous, just cause the treatment of others to be ugly. Humans desire for money comes from the money system itself which is designed to give a sense of scarcity but scarcity that is manufactured because there is no scarcity of food, but not everyone can have it. There is no scarcity of housing, but not eveyrone can have that. It all comes down to the system of money we subscribe to. But it forces itself upon us as a monopoly backed by violence. However there are ways we can still transact without going to the beast. Local currencies makes the most sense and bringing back skills to the local area.
Everything is a matter of perspective. YOu can believe in god or the tooth fairy it is your option. but it is my option to challenge all ideas that I find nonsensical. So for 2 thousand years this mythical god has been dangling the carrot on his return. We don't know what he'll do when he returns but we expect he loves us so much that he'll fix things for us. He sounds like an abusive father who goes away and promises his child that he will come and see him and never does. A real loving father would explain things to us. But he can't do that can he - because he isn't real. He's purely a figment of man's imagination that again, makes the man the be-all and end-all. The GOD itself. How self-centered. It's all so inverted that it essentially is insane. Everyone believes it though because we have not only been indoctrinated to believe it but we've also been indoctrinated to think we are helpless little children. Politics carries on that presumption. So we are always looking outside of ourselves, waiting for a rescuer, when really we caused the problems, we still are (by using banker's money and believing in nonsenses like owning land and buying water, and some god in the void coming to save us. How about we actually get down to doing what's right? And what is right is not funding the criminal syndicate. As for defending ourselves, yeah they can say anything and pretend threats are real. Going this route means we will always live in fear and nobody is safe. It is the law of the jumbo-mumbo. Total caveman thinking. The way to ensure safety for everyone is for us to stop killing our own kind, period. WE must not accept this state of affairs where my dick is bigger than your dick. Dick referring to weapons. The idea of using a weapon to bludgeon another should be totally anathema to a sane society. No other species goes to war against its own species. Can you see how insane this is? And yet everyone not only accepts it but defends it. As though there isn't another way of living. Reason and discussion is the antidote to war and violence. Or in a common term - free speech. If we upheld free speech like something precious, we will always be safe. That's all it takes and I can tell you why if you request.
Your railing against the world as it has been for thousands of years is completely futile. People have been murdering each other since Cain. There must be a reason. Perhaps it’s worthwhile to consider what that reason might be.
(Blaming men is a cop out; there is no one potentially nastier than a woman, and I say that from abundant experience.)
"...but it is my option to challenge all ideas that I find nonsensical."
Amen to that.
Let's start with the Christian propaganda and finish with these authors hypocrisy.
John is now jumping on the fashion wagon of trashing the bad old white guys too, he just calls them baby boomers, not realizing his doctor friend is one of these old white males that cling to their doctoral power, brag about it and uses fear to sell questionable Wellness product for exaggerated prices.
The "power-greed paradigm" in full swing.
This level of this ignorance is outright hilarious.
Probably they kick me out after that.....so think about it while you can.
Peterson is no solution either - he trains young men to be decent hard-working slaves for the machine of the elites. Yes, they will get some breadcrumbs thrown to them but it is a disguised feudal system he supports.
His old testament spirituality is exactly the spirituality that supports this feudal hierarchical system that will lead to more and more enslavement of 99% of the populations while the elites rule.
We need a jump in consciousness and awareness to survive as a species. Abrahamic religions have to be abandoned and individual meditation and self-enquiry take their place. There is no point in believing in a God, defined by religions, when we actually can experience God for ourselves by doing the right practices. Then we know God and and we also know our true selves. After that, all ignorance, greed and power will cease in those people. I can't see any other way out of this growing insanity the power-greed system will lead us. And it is not only the elites that are infected by this power-greed paradigm - the ignorant population signs up to their own exploitation and slaughter. Billionaires are now seen as Gods and wise people that should become presidents and tell us what to do.
Fuck me, that is so wise because who else understands the needs of ordinary people better that billionaires?
And the good doctor has the same power-greed mindset - he just changed over to the so called dissident cohort but does exactly what he did before - feeling important, superior, getting rich and sucking up the admiration of stupid ignorant sheep - the same ego-trip bolstered by undeserved Rogan fame.
If that offends anybody - I don't care. I am tired beating around the bush. Soon the hate-speech-laws will shut us all up so I get out what needs to be said while I still can.
Because it is brain and not brawn that leverages a career, women are thriving in academia. It is very difficult for men to adjust their position from reacting to women primarily as sexual objects. The me-too movement was essential, but has gone too far, causing men to fear any normal flirtation. Men have to move from a position of dominance to one of shared power with women. Blaming women keeps men in the one down position. We are creative creatures, we are in transition, secure men will not feel threatened and help forge the way forward together with women.
Yes! Exactly. We must go forward now as peer to peer, not sex objects wanted for our body. And men have to get a grip on that. Men do operate differently and not to make them feel they can't be masculine because we like that, but I don'[t want to be taken for my sexuality, I want to be taken for my mind. In a sexual interst, that is diffrerent but in everyday life, in the work we do, we need to be seen as peers. Well said. I love your name by the way.
Anyone who looks back to the way things were risks 'crystallizing.' None of us has a choice but to go with the onward flow. There are huge problems currently, but we need creative solutions that work for all concerned. I am very anti-pornography, I think it is ruining teen boys especially, in terms of understanding intimacy and so much more. I'm not hearing much in the men's space on this issue. They would be helping themselves enormously if they understood the harm and invested in real people which requires effort and rejection risk, but worth it.
Wow, yes very good point. But we must understand that women have been utterly victimized and traumatized FOR CENTURIES, FOR GENERATIUONS. Our survival meant appealing to a man because the only thing women were allowed was to be hommakers and incubators. Men were just as much in the programming where their choices were narrowed grotesquely. And to do that to women must have cast huge "karmic" returns. Within themselves if not within society. In a fucked up society, everything fucked up looks acceptable.
I so get you on the way women side in packs. That is a remant of the danger of being an independant thinker, of standing alone and into the confidence of what you do stand for. I'd love to see women do things like that - not back down or act "mousey" when a man conflicts with her.
Women have the biggest hurdle - their separation from their sisters. That leaves every woman virtually out=in-the-cold. If only women were sisterly towards other women, we really could fly. We must learn to disagree in dialogue and do it elegantly. Show the guys how it's done. Some women are prepared to do this but not many. I would love to see more.
Women suffer jealousy around beautiful women, and that weakens their power to focus on bigger issues. If most women wore loose clothes, the threat level would drop. Women dress to attract sexual attention; it increases their chances of getting a successful partner. Women generally marry up not down. Men will marry down on the economic scale. These differences cause problems.
That may be the theory, but it doesn’t hold true with everyone, by any stretch. I know lots of people of both sexes who don’t conform, including my husband.
years ago we used to hear things like "if women ran the world, there wouldn't be wars", (with which i almost agree), and "if...abortion would be a sacrament", with which i ferociously disagree and will absolutely fight till my own last breath.
Men's natural instinct is to conquor. In a good man that takes the form of protecting his home and family, and achieving things outside the home. In a bad man --- well, we all know some abusers, narcissists and other "control freaks".
women's natural instinct is to nurture. In a good woman that takes such forms as vigilantly raising the next generation, seeking networks, planning for the future, considering the well-being of others in addition to her own. In a bad woman --- well, neglected kids are just 1 of many sad results.
When both men and women work together for good, life is awesome.
As you mentioned, the feminine view is largely ignored. it would be fascinating to examine crucial documents in light of our [ideally balanced] tendencies, to see if they can be improved or merely need to be followed. Such documents would include anything binding, but examples could include treaties, marriage contracts/vows, oaths of office, charters, Constitutions, corporate business plans and vision or mission statements, education priorities.
i wish we could really combine the best of everything. Germany has one educational track for the college-bound & another for those going to trade schools, because 1 size doesn't fit all. Ecuador's driver education program is graduated, with steps from daytime only/in your own town/no passengers, leading up to greater challenges and permissions as skills & responsibility commend. Many European countries start teaching foreign languages in early grades, while brains can catch on more easily.
wasn't it the industrial revolution that separated families? instead of a family all working together, dad leaves for work elsewhere, mom goes somewhere else, & each of the kids is isolated by age, for most of each day. We don't necessarily have to return to mom making all clothes while dad raises most of their food, but the isolation needs to change. Even churches, which ought to be nurturing strong relationships and strong families, tend to isolate people by grade, etc. Fine if that's what you need, but please allow the option of family group learning. Make it optional, not the only choice. And acknowledge that needs change.
(uffdah, i guess you struck a nerve LOL, didn't mean to go on so long)
good post. Sounds like you advocate for in home education. There are LOTS of people with you on that one. It really works and I wish my wife and I had done that. . .
......... I thought I was clear but let me try again: healthy men's natural main Instinct is to conquer, in healthy ways and for good reason of course. The main instinct of healthy women -- not the only one, but the main one-- is to nurture.
just watch a few under-5 years old kids at play in a sandbox, & if it gets a chance it will be self- evident. The little boys will be carving roads in the sand hills while the little girls make sand pies and decorate them with dandelion blossoms & offer some "dessert" to the boys.......
Girls and boys are different, but there is also more overlap than difference. Lots of girls don't like playing with dolls and prefer climbing trees. Jordan Peterson as a man is very emotional, yet emotionalism is ascribed to women. Our dimensional differences are greater than our gender differences. Denying gender differences is just that denial, but denying our commonality is just as dangerous, and unfortunately leads to rigid stereotyping which is more hurtful than helpful.
Sad. Your belief system is that of victimhood. Not only sad, but destructive to women, men and the nuclear family. I sought the support of a Feminist group, paid by our tax $$, four decades ago and what I discovered: They sat around all day issuing empty, meaningless platitudes. Feminist organizations were and are a fraud. They don’t give a damn about women. Then I went back to school for six years of university. First class, might I add. Though, I’ve always been a critical thinker and obsessively curious. I discovered that the so called feminist movement is really a Neo Marxist movement and of course, strong men who protect women and their families, are a roadblock. Hence, the evil, consistent disparagement of men, especially white men, and the propagandizing of boys in our elementary schools. Feminists today are Marxists allied with Islam. You are frauds. And you are despicable. And you are Pravda bitches. From a woman.
Without feminism you would not have been able to attend college. It has morphed and branched. There are radical feminists who are not in alignment with reality. There are other groups far more grounded.
I think that’s nonsense. What Professor Peterson is relevant to all. There is no sex based wisdom. Wisdom is for all. These thoughtful men have a lot to say to women too.
We need both male and female perspectives, I think the readers here are more than smart enough to see that. But as far as which should predominate in governing, setting norms, and driving society at a macro level, there is no need for delving into deep philosophical arguments. We can answer the question from concrete evidence right in our faces. Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Kamala are landslide winners among females. As are democrats and leftists across the board. Males choose the opposite type. Men think fostering responsibility and self-reliance is the way, not hand-holding (except for the truly helpless who need it). In the last Florida gubernatorial race, men 18-29 favored DeSantis 61% to 36%. Women 18-29 voted 47% to 47% - even in such an obvioius decision, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for clearly the better man. Women always vote blue, predominately. If you are a leftist, or freedom-hater, looking for "leaders" who promise safety but can never deliver, then you are voting from the female perspective. If you're practical, and looking for leaders who foster a life, love, freedom, and prosperity friendly society, you are firmly on the side of men. You pick. Personally, I think the men have it exactly right, the women have it exactly wrong.
Mr Leake, you are a bright guy and have a lot correct. However, you are missing the forest for the trees.
Your last comment sums the problem up: "The guys who run this Complex are, like the guys who run most American universities, rapacious, philistine fools." All correct, except for one thing. They are NOT fools. They know exactly what they are doing.
Dennis Prager often tells the story how he found God at Columbia...he wondered why there was no wisdom there, and realized there was no God at Columbia. No God. No wisdom.
257 Congressional seats still held by Boomers and Silents, POTUS a Silent. They have held unrivaled power in this country for decades, and have therefore been in THE position to pass down wisdom to our American civilization. Who else is to blame? Regards, John Leake
When the Boomers are replaced by the next generations, I certainly wouldn't expect any better outcome. Most of the younger people have been fully indoctrinated into the insanity that the left is spewing out.
This is true. The Boomers are taking the blame because we are the first generation to abandon many the operative civilizational truths that had guided so many generations before us. Succeeding generations have moved even further away from those truths. Thus as they assume control, we can expect even worse outcomes.
Of course, there are always many people in every generation that retain or return to ancient truths, but they often lack the drive toward power and control, so not many end up as leaders. And leaders who desire to serve the people instead of lording it over them are very rare. Trump is in that very rare category, in my opinion.
I lived in Nashville for a couple of the hippy years, and I knew plenty of 18-24-year-old drugged out rebels and a handful of "back to the land-ers" -- all of whom could have been called "hippies." But they were vastly outnumbered by the student populations of Vanderbilt University and Peabody College, and most students looked and acted quite "conventional" (though no doubt some small percentage were experimenting with drugs on weekends).
Kay: One of the things you learn (or at least can learn) from ancient truths is humility . . . which is not compatible with a drive toward power and control.
Humility is compatible with a desire to serve, however. Benjamin Franklin was an example of a person who deliberately cultivated virtues in his own character and behavior. His humility was one of the characteristics that led people to be open to hearing and carefully considering what he had to say, and so in some matters, he was an effective leader "behind the scenes."
George Washington was another leader well respected for his character, including humility, and he only reluctantly agreed to become a candidate for the (brand new) presidency. Who else can we count as humble leaders? Abraham Lincoln, I think, and Winston Churchill? I think RFK Jr. is a humble leader, and I wish his candidacy for the presidency had been successful.
AOC, not a boomer. Adam Kitzinger,(sp.?) not a boomer. List is long of non-boomers fucking things up. Who is “voting” these vapid non-boomers into power. Likely not Boomers.
Also, 535 seats between House and Senate. More than 50% non-boomer by my math. It ain’t all Boomers. And then let’s look at who’s funding these politicians…
Well John, those are hard numbers to refute but just because these boomer-morons are present does not mean they actually "represent" their constituents-- boomers and later generations alike.
It is simple, incumbents hold the power until unseated. One needs to ask the question WHY both later generations and boomers have failed to unseat them?
My take: This is the 1st generation where MSM has actualized propaganda to an art-- along with the deep state. It is not a reason to blame the average boomer just because these politicians found the key. . .
Peterson and McCullough are boomers, so there is a balance. I am a boomer and side with Peterson and McCullough, but have stood by on the sidelines mostly. And if I am being honest, protecting my little kingdom without giving that much back. I think boomers of my ilk must participate a bit more, particularly in supporting boomers like Peterson and McCullough.
Really? You're idea of participating is supporting a couple of boomers? I started a construction business, took no profit, trained and supported 20 workers, built a 32 home gated community and donated all of the money to a third world population.
I have yet to see anyone give specifics on boomers. Just generally selfish, like it's supposed to be accepted and understood. Where's the proof? The boomers I know are hard working and generous.
I think the most important point in this discussion has been missed.
I'm a Boomer. I never remember in my younger years, 20s and 30s, watching politicians from either "The Greatest Generation" or the "Silent Generation" continue to grasp power as desperately as we do today. Politicians gracefully retired at some point as they aged. Yes, as hard as the concept is to grasp in this current time, politicians actually had lives outside of Washington, D.C. and families into whose bosom they retired.
Something is very wrong with current politicians. Nancy Pelosi is in her 80s? Harry Reid only left Congress when he received a staggering black eye from a supposed athletic machine malfunction; he seemed never fully to recover afterwards and had to leave the Senate. How old is Chuck Schumer? Robert Byrd died in office after serving 60 years. What about Dianne Feinstein who was cognitively impaired in a wheelchair who died in office and would never relinquish her position? What about our current president who is paraded in front of us stumbling off stages knowing not where he's going; who displays all the symptoms of dementia screaming uncontrollably at people in speeches and then lowering his voice to a whisper; and who spends most of his time in a beach chair at the shore (as he should at his age).
No. You need to look IN BACK of these aging politicians. Stop being so naïvé. Who's giving them power? Who has them so captured and so addicted to power that they can't give up their position in Congress? Are their photos among the hundreds Epstein and Diddy took? Come on. Wise up.
John, I am aware that you often clump all Baby Boomers in a derogatory light. While I agree we could certainly wipe clean most of our Baby Boomer politicians and be better off, I feel compelled to point out that Dr Peter McCullough, your mother and myself are all Baby Boomers. We are not all brain dead and some of us are capable of critical thinking. Having said that, you and Dr McCullough are two of my heroes.
Dear Alva, please note that I was referencing a comedian who was making fun of Baby Boomers in "a hyperbolic and not altogether fair way." I was not thinking about ALL people of that generation. I was thinking about people of that generation who have held positions of power for well over thirty years. Best regards, John Leake
Mr. Leake, you've obviously hit a nerve with your Boomer mentions!! Might be worth exploring the topic further in future posts. I'm amused at how touchy some of my fellow Boomers are, but I'd also genuinely like a deeper understanding of how we messed things up for successive generations. Live and learn, right?
I wonder if you guys could recommend a handful of books that address childhood vaccines - the good, the bad, and the ugly - in a thorough, rigorous manner seeking the truth irrespective of agenda. It would be helpful for me (not educated in medicine) if they were accessible to the layman, but need not be the medical equivalent of watered down oatmeal. ☺️ I just gave birth to our seventh child, and while our instincts and experiences have us leaning a particular way concerning vaccines, we seek more information and sifting through the Internet in order to separate fact from fiction is difficult even when you are quite knowledgeable in what you are researching. Medicine is not our area of expertise, so we would appreciate suggestions from you guys. Enjoy your work - thanks.
I'm the parent of a young adult who is disabled because of vaccine injury as a baby. My child was injured by an unauthorized HepB vaccine at birth (which we didn't know -- until months later -- she had received), and her second DTaP (given at 5 months). The only other vaccines she got were the first DTaP at 3 months and a Hib at 4 months. I give you these details so you can see that "just a few carefully chosen vaccinations, spaced out" doesn't protect your child from vaccine injury.
Like many mothers of vaccine-injured children, I've spent hundreds of hours since my child's injuries studying vaccines and their effects. I'll give you my shortlist of "the best vaccine books" but first I want to say that I think vaccines can cause epigenetic injury, a cruel situation in which hundreds of bodily processes can go wrong. I think autism is one example of epigenetic injury, and I think Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders (HSD) are also the result of epigenetic injury. A shocking number of children these days have both autism and hEDS/HSD. So along with the vaccine books, I will list a book about hEDS/HSD and I urge you to spend at least enough time with that book to grasp the hell that hEDS/HSD is.
Now, here's my shortlist of books:
1) "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers" by Neil Z. Miller -- Essential reading!
2) "Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth" by Anonymous, edited by Holland and O'Toole -- Comprehensive, highly recommended.
3) "Vaccination: The Medical Assault on the Immune System" by Viera Scheibner -- Out of print, but the only book I've read that adequately explains the cycle of "critical days" for adverse effects of vaccination; particularly important information about vaccination and SIDS. You may be able to find some of Scheibner's writing online (using one of the less-censored browsers, of course).
4) "A Shot in the Dark" by Barbara Loe Fisher and Harris Coulter -- The only source I've seen for an adequate description of what pertussis vaccines can do to children. This book was written about DPT vaccine (containing whole cell pertussis vaccine), but acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) can cause exactly the same adverse effects as DPT. (I learned this the hard way.)
5) "The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development" by Russell Blaylock M.D. -- This is an article, not a book, but an excellent discussion of vaccine-related neuroscience (referencing about 170 studies), written by a retired neurosurgeon. This paper can be found online.
6) "Disjointed: Navigating the Diagnosis and Management of Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders" -- Edited by Diana Jovin.
Don't let your kids near vaccines, near completely.
There are very good, medical and statistical reasons to avoid them all.
A simple way to look at it is to document the level of autism, allergies, and skin problems with isolated demographics, Amish, for example. A second simple way is to look at the statistics for occurrence of Autism with time. 50 years ago just a tiny fraction of the occurance today; so what has changed? 4 or 5 kid vaccines vs over 70 are on the "schedule" at your local doctors office!
It's essential to access "Additional File 1" and examine the graphs for individual environmental factors. Pay particular attention to the graph for number of vaccinations; the graph for exposure to aluminum vaccine adjuvants; and the graph for glyphosate use on U.S. food crops. Stephanie Seneff's work on autism helps explain the significance of glyphosate exposure; especially when you understand Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride's work linking autism to disturbances of gut microbiome and her statement that those disturbances make babies more vulnerable to vaccine injury.
Amen. Both Jordan Peterson and Doctor Peter McCullough are heroes and men of the highest order.
Jordan Peterson Reveals a Way To Spot Psychopaths - very useful skills nowadays
Doctor Peter McCullough points finger at them and John Leake seconds him
Was able to discover JP sometime within the last few years ... probably due to the big press and their interest in destroying anyone who’s a threat to their agenda.
So in this sense, even bad press is good press. No press is bad press.
Was quite fascinated by Jordan Petersen and even bought some of his books ; sometimes I find he’s a bit verbose and rambling, yet carries an immense strength and desire to enlighten and educate. It’s so true, that we’ve all been had. By the system. One that imposes the notion that we are all required, from a young age, to be completely and unconditionally selfless, leading one, as Jordan states, to become bitter and resentful, for having totally sacrificed our own souls ... and for whom? others? Just another hoax perhaps, embedded deep in history.
I find myself increasingly impressed by your words of wisdom (and interviews) as well, John Leake.
Thank you Al X G, very kind of you to say that. Regards, JSL
Wise words. What is being lost is critical thinking. Just follow the guidelines and algorithms. "The computer won't allow me to do that." Let's weed out free thinkers. That was the fate of Socrates. And motivated Aristotle to flee Athens.
But stop with the Boomer Bashing. We were a very philosophical and highly engaged generation. We were not a "greed is good" generation. We grew up in the most extraordinary times in American history.
As a Boomer, I'm unclear on how the collective "we" supposedly messed things up so badly for younger generations. But that said, building a decent life for oneself through hard work and determination was entirely possible back in the 1970s. I did it, despite a less-than-ideal childhood and no college education. I recognize the opportunities I had no longer exist for young people.
Particularly in UK where boomers were raised by parents who went through the war, bombs, rationing etc. Sure, some reacted by becoming materialistic but all profited by growing into adults, taking charge, being responsible and accountable. It takes a world of security and prosperity to produce the navel gazing youth of today.
Boomers were more likely TOO responsible and created spoiled children from providing better than they had...Which isn't to say it was bad for the boomers.
Since Korea, the west has known a 'False Sense of Security.' Many people largely forgot what starvation, or many other threats were. After witnessing 'Nightly News' bombing and fighting in Vietnam, the protests led to an end to that War camouflaged as a 'Police Action. Since then, 'Kevlar vests and such technology vastly expanded probability of survival for the rare few participating in such despicable circumstances.
Sometimes, it seems it's all a fantasy...The inherent danger from all the mortally dangerous toys of humanity, that is.
It seems many need go find a group to blame...
If not kick the crap out of some group in frustration, jealousy, guilt or rage if not all and more negative so prevailing in this time of darkness.
We know it's dark with so many trying so hard to not only blame; but to physically attack, torment or murder others based in some kind of rationalization or lie of socially acceptable mores, norms or concrete ethnic distinctions.
I’m not particularly interested in anything Gen X has to say about Baby Boomers. Saying Boomers are all about profiteering and nothing else knows nothing of history.
Indeed. We are not all like the greedy old American politicians who should have retired years ago. We think and listen to the same people.
Dear Mr Leake,
I am a female anthropologist, always energized by your insightful writings, and did not feel personally slighted as a woman, in ANY respect, by your intuitive thoughts about Jordan Peterson and Dr. Peter McCullough! I have learned so much from the three of you! A terrific way the start my day!
The responses, citing 'women's considerations' are extraneous to this conversation, serving only to detract from the truly inspirational wisdom of these scholars ... not to speak of their classical, intellectual integrity and logic.
Keep up the great work! The three of you are appreciated FAR more than you know! THANK YOU !
Joyce Wright
Idaho
well said.
Period.
Thank you very much!
I had to look up the dates of the Boomer generation (1946-1964) and the birth dates of Jordan Peterson and Dr. McCollough. I find it interesting that both men are late Boomers (b. 1962) and as such perhaps mark a transition point for the generations.
As an early Boomer (1946), I agree with an earlier poster that starting out, our generation was a generous, idealistic one. Unfortunately, the radical ideas brought out by our older brothers and sisters in the mid- to late-60s led some of our cohort down a path that led to socialism and all the assorted ills that go along with it. Another large part of our generation pursued careers, money and success (the DINKs) especially in the 80s and many of those are the ones who have been wielding power up to the present.
But there is a small contingent who paid attention to the wisdom of our parents and grandparents and have held on to the old values; albeit, we may have kept quiet too often when we should have spoken out, like our younger brothers Peterson and McCollough.
Oops, spelled Dr. McCullough's name wrong. Sorry about that.
Do believe there is a difference between the early and late 'Boomers.' Those closer to the WWII years and all the resulting EARLY GLOBALIZATION we're now opposing and resisting had completely different attitudes and characteristics as well as expectations for life; or at least they did in my region, the Midwest.
Don't think anybody born in the late 50's or early 60's could relate to the discipline, sacrifice and rationing necessary to survive those years for everybody on the battlefield and at home producing for the 'War Effort.' We also now know certain forces were literally implementing 'Unrestricted Soft Warfare' beginning in 1954 to undermine the traditional, family-oriented Christian Culture of the United States as it was viewed the foundation behind the U.S. making it too strong for the Totalitarians to take OUT. How many their way from all that's come to be?
Other than that...You're right on target. Some did listen to the Elders and tried to live clean and healthy lives. Current regulations and taxation hardly allow survival in any capacity in this time as 'The Greatest Generation' or the Boomers knew opportunities provided.
I am a Baby Boomer. Let me just say that during my childhood, there were no little princes and princesses. There were rules, chores, spanks and limited conversations with our parents. We respected the law and if we were caught stealing we were dragged before the owner of the store to apologize. We were ashamed of disappointing our parents. We knew right from wrong.
I'm also a Baby Boomer (just - 1961) and no-one would even consider trash-talking their parents. I also recall near-zero one on one conversations with parents, nor any other adult. We received our general-wisdom morality/good behaviour lessons from church, sunday school, and religious education classes in school. There were so many children in those days and we played with them in the street. My brother tried stealing something once, and, exactly as you said, he was dragged to the store to apologise. #Australia
I've got to say it because this perspective seems to be unseen. An entire layer of knowledge is totally ignored and that is the feminine perspective. Everything we know or think comes from the perspective of the male, which is massively different than how females think. But females have to fit themselves into the male constructs which are all we know. And to our detriment because we really don't know much at all.
WE don't even know if the earth goes round the sun or vice versa. Jordan Peterson is a good model for young men but his views are the same old/same old, nothing new. He articulates very well and he is a fine man for boys and men to hold as a model of men rather than the gung-ho we always see. However he doesn't notice the absence of the female perspective, it's just not something men ever think about. It's like we had eons of being prohibited from public life and we have never addressed this - why men want to tell women what to do and why men want to repress and suppress women. It still happens though now it's more veiled. Surely we want to know more about our existence? Hearing only half the story, only men's adventures, that's what history is all about, is leaving us struggling to make sense of the most minor understanding of reality.
Thanks for your comment, Denise. I believe that most boys and men would like to understand the female perspective, but it is not a perspective that it is commonly articulated in a way they can understand. One of my favorite authors is Marguerite Yourcenar. In her book "Memoirs of Hadrian," she presented Hadrian's reflections on his relationships with women, and his perception that he never really knew any of them. As he put it, "The mind, or perhaps the soul, that I searched for was never more than a perfume." The trouble, I suppose, is that relationships between men and women are often encumbered with the birds and the bees. One of my favorite poets is Emily Dickenson, but she too is often amazingly cryptic. Regards, John Leake
Women completely and entirely dominate the child care industry, from preschool through graduate school, to the various arms of Child Welfare/Protection, social work. They generally hold boys up to female standards. Act like a typical boy in third grade and see how your female teacher treats you—story of my life!
That said, I have nearly as many female friends as male, and have a great relationship with my mom, sister, niece, grandmother. But don’t tell me there’s no female influence in a child’s life.
It was the female supporters of the ERA who capitulated to the David Rockefellers of the world, co-opting the movement in order to double the work force and cut labor costs. They did this by demonizing traditional women’s roles and exalting men’s. (“Why do I have to stay home with the kids while my husband gets to sit at a desk all day or be a bricklayer or die in a war?”
Women were sucked into the feminist movement. Which was part of the communist plan to disrupt, maybe destroy the nuclear family. Then abortion. It’s worked out pretty well so far. Hopefully more are onto it.
As a woman, I agree that the feminine perspective is important. Men do well to listen to women instead of dismissing them. But the emotionalism of most women makes them well suited for roles in the family and the community but ill-suited for positions of higher authority. Recently I read about a study of children on playgrounds when disputes over rules arise. The boys worked out their differences and then amicably resumed play. But the girls separated into factions, based on who was on whose side, and then went their separate ways. It should be obvious that the first method is a much better way of getting things done, because it’s not divisive.
Of course, these are generalities. I know women who have the gifts and abilities to run large organizations effectively. We can think of a number who have operated on the world stage, such as Golda Meier and Margaret Thatcher. They do well because they are not ruled by emotion. And there are feminized men—an increasing number, I’m afraid—who behave like women and are very ill-suited to leadership. But of all the women in leadership roles whom I have known personally, most actually were petty and divisive, in that “who’s on my side” way observed on the playground.
There is definitely a difference between men and women beyond physical attributes. Women are emotionally programmed by intrinsic factors to be nurturing, to suit them for having and raising children and supporting their husbands. Men are programmed for hunter (provider) and protector rolls. Women definitely think differently than men. But men and women can share these attributes. Women might solve a complex mathematical question by going about the analysis in a different way than men while still coming up with the same solution. So, we need not pidgeon hole people into rolls solely based on gender. Women need to stop trying to make men more like them. Stop with the “toxic masculinity” stuff. As a woman, I much prefer an alpha male. But I have to admit, when I watch an action movie and I see the female protagonist being able to use martial arts to hold her own in a fight, I’m happy. I always hated it when watching old monster movies and the woman fleeing from the monster would always fall and have to be picked up by the man. I enjoyed “Alias” starring Jennifer Garner as a brilliant, beautiful agent able to hold her own and outsmart the enemy. Sorry for rambling.
Dimensional differences in temperament and personality are greater than our gender differences. Also, women over forty are still valid, even though hormonally they differ dramatically from young women.
Spelling correction, “roles” not “roll.”
You can edit original comment by clicking the three dots at the bottom right.
Thanks, I think that editing ability is new since the last time I looked. Editing feature much better.
Well stated, and I don't mind your rambling.
From mens' perspective, as much as you and my wife both like it when a female kicks the crapp out of guys twice her size -- saving the day, that is just . . . "come ooooOOOOON!" crazy and, of course, not realistic. So, we go to sleep during THOSE action movies.
In order to make films that are engaging to ALL they have to be REAL, for all.
Those movies are fiction, but entertaining.
Yeah, not realistic. Men have four times the muscle mass of women.
Thatcher, a good example. Meier, a poor one. She sat around for 6-7 months while the Syrians, Iraqis, and Egyptians built large armies right on the borders of Israel, and she expressly did not prepare for the attack that was coming, which it did. But for Richard Nixon, who supplied the crushed Israelis with desperately needed supplies and intelligence, in particular, insuring that the Israeli Air Force was able to use to wipe the skies of almost all Arab planes, the Jewish state would have ended in 1973.
Danny Huckabee
There were lots of reasons for Golda’s lack of action. But I agree about women in leadership. Petty and divisive describes it!
Of course there are a few great exceptions, Maggie T. . . However, we are dealing in "normal" populations(statistically) and she is in the tail, while most women in the middle 3 sigma.
All my experience as a boomer in a large F. 500 corp. made it obvious that the women moved from tech jobs into mgmt, and MOST took this route, ended up being little tyrants-- often like their male mentors in mgmt. Trained as an engineer I found that most women engineers, smarter book-wise on average than the men, gravitated preferentially to mgmt. They were great in attaining grades in college and moved into the best spots in tech. companies but were "lost" to mgmt and never showed much at all in areas that men mostly succeed at-- bullheaded attack on a problem, never stopping until solution.
Yep.
Thank you for the correction.
Unfortunately all examples stem from a perspective that it's perfectly fine to kill our own kind. In a sane world this belief would be totally abhorrent and wouldn't have a chance of getting off the ground. Anyone who suggested such violence would never be talked to again without having to go through much refinement. Thatcher and any woman you can name were totally psrudo males and not a representation of the fmeinine IN ANY WAY. They are capitulators to the patriarchy. Any woman who wants to succeed in a society that holds women secondary, is a turncoat and a betrayer. What if women want to be like women? What if they don't want to "go to work"? That is a man's thing to get away from the family. Men invented it then had the bnrilliant idea to drag women into it. Rather than give women freedom over herself, his more powerful muscles dictated that men must be great at everything else, and how wrong that is.
Powerful muscles and a phallis does not make one brighter up top, as we can see with eons of men "ruling" exclusively. And now they cannot come up with the solutions to their own concocted problems. The solution will come from the feminine.
I think it has been feminists, not men who have been “dragging” women away from family. Women who wish to be stay at homes moms have been put down by feminists. Being a full-time mother is a very important job. Unfortunately, too many children have been raised by Day Care. Sadly, some women have no choice but to go to work outside of the home. I chose a career but sometimes wish I had children of my own.
If you have kids, being fully present for your children is the most important job in the world. Unfortunately, if a woman has children and her husband leaves before the ten-year mark in some states, she will only receive spousal support for three years. If she has no career she is screwed. Women need education and careers as an insurance policy against penury for herself and her children. Also, an educated mother has more to offer her children.
Yes feminism is patriarchal. It was deisigned to take women out of the home. I appreciate that we are now at least able to get an education, as women were shut out of that too. And we can own businesses and be involved in public life. However "going to work" is what men do. Men disgned it as a way to get away from the noise of the family. A woman would figure out how to cope with both at the same time. Women took up work because they wanted autonomy. I remember even in "my day" women had to have permission to travel overseas, from either their husband or their father. Women were stuck in the home whether they liked it or not but feminism at least gave them that ticket out. However now we need to go the next level. We've been in kindergarten too long. Women are more capable at designing say, an economy just as they are at choosing curtans. The intrisic capabliity of woman has been suppressed, depressed and oppressed so that now we don't see it. It is femininity as definied by the patriarchy, that's the only femininty we see. But femininity is much more. It is honest, kind, empathic and ferocious when it comes to defending life.
I agree. Also, men going to the office is only a recent event in history. A hundred years ago most people lived on a farm and the work was divided in cooperative ways. Children participated in farm work. Women used to make cloth and sew and work at home while raising kids. Men didn't go to the office, so no temptation to stray with the secretary.
Denise, if one is not a Christian and believes in the basic goodness of people, then what you say makes sense. But from wars to murders to abuse of all kinds, including abuse of women, the evidence is that we are not good at all. Only God, through Jesus Christ, can forgive us and change us. In the meantime, people and nations have a right to self-defense. What would happen if every nation that was attacked just gave in to its attackers? That wouldn’t stop wars, it would encourage them. Evil would triumph.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that men are better than women, but they are different. When the female genome was mapped, a 1.5% difference was found between men and women. That’s the same degree of difference between a man and a male chimpanzee. No wonder we have a hard time understanding each other! But we need to try, on both sides. I hear a lot of complaining about how men don’t understand us, but very little about our trying to understand them. We think we do, but it’s typing them, not understanding them. What we don’t love, we cannot truly understand.
The solution is not in the masculine or the feminine. It is in Jesus Christ, who when we allow Him, transforms us, men and women, into His likeness.
" But from wars to murders to abuse of all kinds, including abuse of women, the evidence is that we are not good at all.
Only God, through Jesus Christ, can forgive us and change us"
That kind of incredible ignorance and arrogance used to piss me off, but now I can only shake my head in disbelief and go with Jesus: "Father forgive them, they do not know what they are doing." In this case, Kay has no fucking clue what he is talking about."
Almost all wars are religious wars and the Christians have more than their fair share of it. And all non Christians can't find God because they don't go through Jesus? Poor old Buddha and Laotze and Socrates just all imagined it? You have no clue how you disrespect Jesus by regurgitating 2000 year old Christian propaganda. But it can't be helped. One day, one life you might dispel your ignorance and feel very embarrassed and sorry. I wish you well.
Of course we are good, we are naturally loving. But we have been usurped and you know by what? Money. Yep, think about it. Isn't it money that drives humans to do the most horrendous things, or ugly things even though they are not horrendous, just cause the treatment of others to be ugly. Humans desire for money comes from the money system itself which is designed to give a sense of scarcity but scarcity that is manufactured because there is no scarcity of food, but not everyone can have it. There is no scarcity of housing, but not eveyrone can have that. It all comes down to the system of money we subscribe to. But it forces itself upon us as a monopoly backed by violence. However there are ways we can still transact without going to the beast. Local currencies makes the most sense and bringing back skills to the local area.
Everything is a matter of perspective. YOu can believe in god or the tooth fairy it is your option. but it is my option to challenge all ideas that I find nonsensical. So for 2 thousand years this mythical god has been dangling the carrot on his return. We don't know what he'll do when he returns but we expect he loves us so much that he'll fix things for us. He sounds like an abusive father who goes away and promises his child that he will come and see him and never does. A real loving father would explain things to us. But he can't do that can he - because he isn't real. He's purely a figment of man's imagination that again, makes the man the be-all and end-all. The GOD itself. How self-centered. It's all so inverted that it essentially is insane. Everyone believes it though because we have not only been indoctrinated to believe it but we've also been indoctrinated to think we are helpless little children. Politics carries on that presumption. So we are always looking outside of ourselves, waiting for a rescuer, when really we caused the problems, we still are (by using banker's money and believing in nonsenses like owning land and buying water, and some god in the void coming to save us. How about we actually get down to doing what's right? And what is right is not funding the criminal syndicate. As for defending ourselves, yeah they can say anything and pretend threats are real. Going this route means we will always live in fear and nobody is safe. It is the law of the jumbo-mumbo. Total caveman thinking. The way to ensure safety for everyone is for us to stop killing our own kind, period. WE must not accept this state of affairs where my dick is bigger than your dick. Dick referring to weapons. The idea of using a weapon to bludgeon another should be totally anathema to a sane society. No other species goes to war against its own species. Can you see how insane this is? And yet everyone not only accepts it but defends it. As though there isn't another way of living. Reason and discussion is the antidote to war and violence. Or in a common term - free speech. If we upheld free speech like something precious, we will always be safe. That's all it takes and I can tell you why if you request.
I agree with you.
Your railing against the world as it has been for thousands of years is completely futile. People have been murdering each other since Cain. There must be a reason. Perhaps it’s worthwhile to consider what that reason might be.
(Blaming men is a cop out; there is no one potentially nastier than a woman, and I say that from abundant experience.)
"...but it is my option to challenge all ideas that I find nonsensical."
Amen to that.
Let's start with the Christian propaganda and finish with these authors hypocrisy.
John is now jumping on the fashion wagon of trashing the bad old white guys too, he just calls them baby boomers, not realizing his doctor friend is one of these old white males that cling to their doctoral power, brag about it and uses fear to sell questionable Wellness product for exaggerated prices.
The "power-greed paradigm" in full swing.
This level of this ignorance is outright hilarious.
Probably they kick me out after that.....so think about it while you can.
Peterson is no solution either - he trains young men to be decent hard-working slaves for the machine of the elites. Yes, they will get some breadcrumbs thrown to them but it is a disguised feudal system he supports.
His old testament spirituality is exactly the spirituality that supports this feudal hierarchical system that will lead to more and more enslavement of 99% of the populations while the elites rule.
We need a jump in consciousness and awareness to survive as a species. Abrahamic religions have to be abandoned and individual meditation and self-enquiry take their place. There is no point in believing in a God, defined by religions, when we actually can experience God for ourselves by doing the right practices. Then we know God and and we also know our true selves. After that, all ignorance, greed and power will cease in those people. I can't see any other way out of this growing insanity the power-greed system will lead us. And it is not only the elites that are infected by this power-greed paradigm - the ignorant population signs up to their own exploitation and slaughter. Billionaires are now seen as Gods and wise people that should become presidents and tell us what to do.
Fuck me, that is so wise because who else understands the needs of ordinary people better that billionaires?
And the good doctor has the same power-greed mindset - he just changed over to the so called dissident cohort but does exactly what he did before - feeling important, superior, getting rich and sucking up the admiration of stupid ignorant sheep - the same ego-trip bolstered by undeserved Rogan fame.
If that offends anybody - I don't care. I am tired beating around the bush. Soon the hate-speech-laws will shut us all up so I get out what needs to be said while I still can.
Have a good day.
Because it is brain and not brawn that leverages a career, women are thriving in academia. It is very difficult for men to adjust their position from reacting to women primarily as sexual objects. The me-too movement was essential, but has gone too far, causing men to fear any normal flirtation. Men have to move from a position of dominance to one of shared power with women. Blaming women keeps men in the one down position. We are creative creatures, we are in transition, secure men will not feel threatened and help forge the way forward together with women.
Yes! Exactly. We must go forward now as peer to peer, not sex objects wanted for our body. And men have to get a grip on that. Men do operate differently and not to make them feel they can't be masculine because we like that, but I don'[t want to be taken for my sexuality, I want to be taken for my mind. In a sexual interst, that is diffrerent but in everyday life, in the work we do, we need to be seen as peers. Well said. I love your name by the way.
Anyone who looks back to the way things were risks 'crystallizing.' None of us has a choice but to go with the onward flow. There are huge problems currently, but we need creative solutions that work for all concerned. I am very anti-pornography, I think it is ruining teen boys especially, in terms of understanding intimacy and so much more. I'm not hearing much in the men's space on this issue. They would be helping themselves enormously if they understood the harm and invested in real people which requires effort and rejection risk, but worth it.
Wow, yes very good point. But we must understand that women have been utterly victimized and traumatized FOR CENTURIES, FOR GENERATIUONS. Our survival meant appealing to a man because the only thing women were allowed was to be hommakers and incubators. Men were just as much in the programming where their choices were narrowed grotesquely. And to do that to women must have cast huge "karmic" returns. Within themselves if not within society. In a fucked up society, everything fucked up looks acceptable.
I so get you on the way women side in packs. That is a remant of the danger of being an independant thinker, of standing alone and into the confidence of what you do stand for. I'd love to see women do things like that - not back down or act "mousey" when a man conflicts with her.
Women have the biggest hurdle - their separation from their sisters. That leaves every woman virtually out=in-the-cold. If only women were sisterly towards other women, we really could fly. We must learn to disagree in dialogue and do it elegantly. Show the guys how it's done. Some women are prepared to do this but not many. I would love to see more.
Women suffer jealousy around beautiful women, and that weakens their power to focus on bigger issues. If most women wore loose clothes, the threat level would drop. Women dress to attract sexual attention; it increases their chances of getting a successful partner. Women generally marry up not down. Men will marry down on the economic scale. These differences cause problems.
Women become less emotional as their estrogen levels start to drop in their thirties. Men become more emotional as their testosterone levels drop.
That may be the theory, but it doesn’t hold true with everyone, by any stretch. I know lots of people of both sexes who don’t conform, including my husband.
Yes, ultimately once size does not fit all.
agreed!
years ago we used to hear things like "if women ran the world, there wouldn't be wars", (with which i almost agree), and "if...abortion would be a sacrament", with which i ferociously disagree and will absolutely fight till my own last breath.
Men's natural instinct is to conquor. In a good man that takes the form of protecting his home and family, and achieving things outside the home. In a bad man --- well, we all know some abusers, narcissists and other "control freaks".
women's natural instinct is to nurture. In a good woman that takes such forms as vigilantly raising the next generation, seeking networks, planning for the future, considering the well-being of others in addition to her own. In a bad woman --- well, neglected kids are just 1 of many sad results.
When both men and women work together for good, life is awesome.
As you mentioned, the feminine view is largely ignored. it would be fascinating to examine crucial documents in light of our [ideally balanced] tendencies, to see if they can be improved or merely need to be followed. Such documents would include anything binding, but examples could include treaties, marriage contracts/vows, oaths of office, charters, Constitutions, corporate business plans and vision or mission statements, education priorities.
i wish we could really combine the best of everything. Germany has one educational track for the college-bound & another for those going to trade schools, because 1 size doesn't fit all. Ecuador's driver education program is graduated, with steps from daytime only/in your own town/no passengers, leading up to greater challenges and permissions as skills & responsibility commend. Many European countries start teaching foreign languages in early grades, while brains can catch on more easily.
wasn't it the industrial revolution that separated families? instead of a family all working together, dad leaves for work elsewhere, mom goes somewhere else, & each of the kids is isolated by age, for most of each day. We don't necessarily have to return to mom making all clothes while dad raises most of their food, but the isolation needs to change. Even churches, which ought to be nurturing strong relationships and strong families, tend to isolate people by grade, etc. Fine if that's what you need, but please allow the option of family group learning. Make it optional, not the only choice. And acknowledge that needs change.
(uffdah, i guess you struck a nerve LOL, didn't mean to go on so long)
good post. Sounds like you advocate for in home education. There are LOTS of people with you on that one. It really works and I wish my wife and I had done that. . .
I agree, however women will fight tooth and nail to protect their kids. We are not all nurture.
That's just part of being a mom.
......... I thought I was clear but let me try again: healthy men's natural main Instinct is to conquer, in healthy ways and for good reason of course. The main instinct of healthy women -- not the only one, but the main one-- is to nurture.
just watch a few under-5 years old kids at play in a sandbox, & if it gets a chance it will be self- evident. The little boys will be carving roads in the sand hills while the little girls make sand pies and decorate them with dandelion blossoms & offer some "dessert" to the boys.......
better? :-)
Girls and boys are different, but there is also more overlap than difference. Lots of girls don't like playing with dolls and prefer climbing trees. Jordan Peterson as a man is very emotional, yet emotionalism is ascribed to women. Our dimensional differences are greater than our gender differences. Denying gender differences is just that denial, but denying our commonality is just as dangerous, and unfortunately leads to rigid stereotyping which is more hurtful than helpful.
Sad. Your belief system is that of victimhood. Not only sad, but destructive to women, men and the nuclear family. I sought the support of a Feminist group, paid by our tax $$, four decades ago and what I discovered: They sat around all day issuing empty, meaningless platitudes. Feminist organizations were and are a fraud. They don’t give a damn about women. Then I went back to school for six years of university. First class, might I add. Though, I’ve always been a critical thinker and obsessively curious. I discovered that the so called feminist movement is really a Neo Marxist movement and of course, strong men who protect women and their families, are a roadblock. Hence, the evil, consistent disparagement of men, especially white men, and the propagandizing of boys in our elementary schools. Feminists today are Marxists allied with Islam. You are frauds. And you are despicable. And you are Pravda bitches. From a woman.
What an succinct review of the situation from a woman with brains, and ALL woman.
Without feminism you would not have been able to attend college. It has morphed and branched. There are radical feminists who are not in alignment with reality. There are other groups far more grounded.
I think that’s nonsense. What Professor Peterson is relevant to all. There is no sex based wisdom. Wisdom is for all. These thoughtful men have a lot to say to women too.
We need both male and female perspectives, I think the readers here are more than smart enough to see that. But as far as which should predominate in governing, setting norms, and driving society at a macro level, there is no need for delving into deep philosophical arguments. We can answer the question from concrete evidence right in our faces. Obama, Hillary, Biden, and Kamala are landslide winners among females. As are democrats and leftists across the board. Males choose the opposite type. Men think fostering responsibility and self-reliance is the way, not hand-holding (except for the truly helpless who need it). In the last Florida gubernatorial race, men 18-29 favored DeSantis 61% to 36%. Women 18-29 voted 47% to 47% - even in such an obvioius decision, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for clearly the better man. Women always vote blue, predominately. If you are a leftist, or freedom-hater, looking for "leaders" who promise safety but can never deliver, then you are voting from the female perspective. If you're practical, and looking for leaders who foster a life, love, freedom, and prosperity friendly society, you are firmly on the side of men. You pick. Personally, I think the men have it exactly right, the women have it exactly wrong.
Spot on! Thank you for bringing this up!!
Mr Leake, you are a bright guy and have a lot correct. However, you are missing the forest for the trees.
Your last comment sums the problem up: "The guys who run this Complex are, like the guys who run most American universities, rapacious, philistine fools." All correct, except for one thing. They are NOT fools. They know exactly what they are doing.
They are still fools, and worse so if they know what they are doing. Because they are going to pay and the knowing ones it is gonna cost their lives.
Dennis Prager often tells the story how he found God at Columbia...he wondered why there was no wisdom there, and realized there was no God at Columbia. No God. No wisdom.
I don't think God likes pornography. Prager is not against it.
Could have done without the divisive boomer beat down. Not impressed.
257 Congressional seats still held by Boomers and Silents, POTUS a Silent. They have held unrivaled power in this country for decades, and have therefore been in THE position to pass down wisdom to our American civilization. Who else is to blame? Regards, John Leake
When the Boomers are replaced by the next generations, I certainly wouldn't expect any better outcome. Most of the younger people have been fully indoctrinated into the insanity that the left is spewing out.
This is true. The Boomers are taking the blame because we are the first generation to abandon many the operative civilizational truths that had guided so many generations before us. Succeeding generations have moved even further away from those truths. Thus as they assume control, we can expect even worse outcomes.
Of course, there are always many people in every generation that retain or return to ancient truths, but they often lack the drive toward power and control, so not many end up as leaders. And leaders who desire to serve the people instead of lording it over them are very rare. Trump is in that very rare category, in my opinion.
I'm tired of being labled for a handful of drugged hippies in Height Ashbury. No one I knew was a hippy and I've never seen one.
I lived in Nashville for a couple of the hippy years, and I knew plenty of 18-24-year-old drugged out rebels and a handful of "back to the land-ers" -- all of whom could have been called "hippies." But they were vastly outnumbered by the student populations of Vanderbilt University and Peabody College, and most students looked and acted quite "conventional" (though no doubt some small percentage were experimenting with drugs on weekends).
and, I will second that one too!
Kay: One of the things you learn (or at least can learn) from ancient truths is humility . . . which is not compatible with a drive toward power and control.
Humility is compatible with a desire to serve, however. Benjamin Franklin was an example of a person who deliberately cultivated virtues in his own character and behavior. His humility was one of the characteristics that led people to be open to hearing and carefully considering what he had to say, and so in some matters, he was an effective leader "behind the scenes."
George Washington was another leader well respected for his character, including humility, and he only reluctantly agreed to become a candidate for the (brand new) presidency. Who else can we count as humble leaders? Abraham Lincoln, I think, and Winston Churchill? I think RFK Jr. is a humble leader, and I wish his candidacy for the presidency had been successful.
To make a sweeping generalization, each generation is progressively weaker, stupider, more cowardly & gullible, more selfish & lazy.
We might be looking at AI governance, who knows.
AOC, not a boomer. Adam Kitzinger,(sp.?) not a boomer. List is long of non-boomers fucking things up. Who is “voting” these vapid non-boomers into power. Likely not Boomers.
How about our very own Ilhan Omar from Minnesota and that other vapid, islamic terrorist from Michigan? Come on, man! Don't miss . . . THEEEEMMMMM.
Also, 535 seats between House and Senate. More than 50% non-boomer by my math. It ain’t all Boomers. And then let’s look at who’s funding these politicians…
Well John, those are hard numbers to refute but just because these boomer-morons are present does not mean they actually "represent" their constituents-- boomers and later generations alike.
It is simple, incumbents hold the power until unseated. One needs to ask the question WHY both later generations and boomers have failed to unseat them?
My take: This is the 1st generation where MSM has actualized propaganda to an art-- along with the deep state. It is not a reason to blame the average boomer just because these politicians found the key. . .
Peterson and McCullough are boomers, so there is a balance. I am a boomer and side with Peterson and McCullough, but have stood by on the sidelines mostly. And if I am being honest, protecting my little kingdom without giving that much back. I think boomers of my ilk must participate a bit more, particularly in supporting boomers like Peterson and McCullough.
Really? You're idea of participating is supporting a couple of boomers? I started a construction business, took no profit, trained and supported 20 workers, built a 32 home gated community and donated all of the money to a third world population.
I have yet to see anyone give specifics on boomers. Just generally selfish, like it's supposed to be accepted and understood. Where's the proof? The boomers I know are hard working and generous.
I think the most important point in this discussion has been missed.
I'm a Boomer. I never remember in my younger years, 20s and 30s, watching politicians from either "The Greatest Generation" or the "Silent Generation" continue to grasp power as desperately as we do today. Politicians gracefully retired at some point as they aged. Yes, as hard as the concept is to grasp in this current time, politicians actually had lives outside of Washington, D.C. and families into whose bosom they retired.
Something is very wrong with current politicians. Nancy Pelosi is in her 80s? Harry Reid only left Congress when he received a staggering black eye from a supposed athletic machine malfunction; he seemed never fully to recover afterwards and had to leave the Senate. How old is Chuck Schumer? Robert Byrd died in office after serving 60 years. What about Dianne Feinstein who was cognitively impaired in a wheelchair who died in office and would never relinquish her position? What about our current president who is paraded in front of us stumbling off stages knowing not where he's going; who displays all the symptoms of dementia screaming uncontrollably at people in speeches and then lowering his voice to a whisper; and who spends most of his time in a beach chair at the shore (as he should at his age).
No. You need to look IN BACK of these aging politicians. Stop being so naïvé. Who's giving them power? Who has them so captured and so addicted to power that they can't give up their position in Congress? Are their photos among the hundreds Epstein and Diddy took? Come on. Wise up.
Look for those who control these puppets.
John, I am aware that you often clump all Baby Boomers in a derogatory light. While I agree we could certainly wipe clean most of our Baby Boomer politicians and be better off, I feel compelled to point out that Dr Peter McCullough, your mother and myself are all Baby Boomers. We are not all brain dead and some of us are capable of critical thinking. Having said that, you and Dr McCullough are two of my heroes.
Best regards,
Alva McGovern
Dear Alva, please note that I was referencing a comedian who was making fun of Baby Boomers in "a hyperbolic and not altogether fair way." I was not thinking about ALL people of that generation. I was thinking about people of that generation who have held positions of power for well over thirty years. Best regards, John Leake
Mr. Leake, you've obviously hit a nerve with your Boomer mentions!! Might be worth exploring the topic further in future posts. I'm amused at how touchy some of my fellow Boomers are, but I'd also genuinely like a deeper understanding of how we messed things up for successive generations. Live and learn, right?
Ha ha, same here!
I wonder if you guys could recommend a handful of books that address childhood vaccines - the good, the bad, and the ugly - in a thorough, rigorous manner seeking the truth irrespective of agenda. It would be helpful for me (not educated in medicine) if they were accessible to the layman, but need not be the medical equivalent of watered down oatmeal. ☺️ I just gave birth to our seventh child, and while our instincts and experiences have us leaning a particular way concerning vaccines, we seek more information and sifting through the Internet in order to separate fact from fiction is difficult even when you are quite knowledgeable in what you are researching. Medicine is not our area of expertise, so we would appreciate suggestions from you guys. Enjoy your work - thanks.
I'm the parent of a young adult who is disabled because of vaccine injury as a baby. My child was injured by an unauthorized HepB vaccine at birth (which we didn't know -- until months later -- she had received), and her second DTaP (given at 5 months). The only other vaccines she got were the first DTaP at 3 months and a Hib at 4 months. I give you these details so you can see that "just a few carefully chosen vaccinations, spaced out" doesn't protect your child from vaccine injury.
Like many mothers of vaccine-injured children, I've spent hundreds of hours since my child's injuries studying vaccines and their effects. I'll give you my shortlist of "the best vaccine books" but first I want to say that I think vaccines can cause epigenetic injury, a cruel situation in which hundreds of bodily processes can go wrong. I think autism is one example of epigenetic injury, and I think Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS) and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders (HSD) are also the result of epigenetic injury. A shocking number of children these days have both autism and hEDS/HSD. So along with the vaccine books, I will list a book about hEDS/HSD and I urge you to spend at least enough time with that book to grasp the hell that hEDS/HSD is.
Now, here's my shortlist of books:
1) "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers" by Neil Z. Miller -- Essential reading!
2) "Turtles All the Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth" by Anonymous, edited by Holland and O'Toole -- Comprehensive, highly recommended.
3) "Vaccination: The Medical Assault on the Immune System" by Viera Scheibner -- Out of print, but the only book I've read that adequately explains the cycle of "critical days" for adverse effects of vaccination; particularly important information about vaccination and SIDS. You may be able to find some of Scheibner's writing online (using one of the less-censored browsers, of course).
4) "A Shot in the Dark" by Barbara Loe Fisher and Harris Coulter -- The only source I've seen for an adequate description of what pertussis vaccines can do to children. This book was written about DPT vaccine (containing whole cell pertussis vaccine), but acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) can cause exactly the same adverse effects as DPT. (I learned this the hard way.)
5) "The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development" by Russell Blaylock M.D. -- This is an article, not a book, but an excellent discussion of vaccine-related neuroscience (referencing about 170 studies), written by a retired neurosurgeon. This paper can be found online.
6) "Disjointed: Navigating the Diagnosis and Management of Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders" -- Edited by Diana Jovin.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Thank you so much for sharing your story and resources! I truly appreciate it and, if you don’t mind, will keep you and your family in my prayers.
You're welcome! And all prayers are appreciated.
Turtles All The Way Down & Dissolving Illusions are two very good books full of citations.
YES, I will second that!
Read them both.
Thank you!
Read the 2 books mentioned by STH and:
Don't let your kids near vaccines, near completely.
There are very good, medical and statistical reasons to avoid them all.
A simple way to look at it is to document the level of autism, allergies, and skin problems with isolated demographics, Amish, for example. A second simple way is to look at the statistics for occurrence of Autism with time. 50 years ago just a tiny fraction of the occurance today; so what has changed? 4 or 5 kid vaccines vs over 70 are on the "schedule" at your local doctors office!
So, the answer is READ!
Here's another excellent way to look at autism and vaccines:
"A Comparison of Temporal Trends in United States Autism Prevalence to Trends in Suspected Environmental Factors" by C. D. Nevison
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177682/#MOESM1
It's essential to access "Additional File 1" and examine the graphs for individual environmental factors. Pay particular attention to the graph for number of vaccinations; the graph for exposure to aluminum vaccine adjuvants; and the graph for glyphosate use on U.S. food crops. Stephanie Seneff's work on autism helps explain the significance of glyphosate exposure; especially when you understand Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride's work linking autism to disturbances of gut microbiome and her statement that those disturbances make babies more vulnerable to vaccine injury.
As JBP simply puts it to his many young male followers , "Clean up your room!"
— N O O N E H A S T H E “ RIGHT”, NOR, PERMISSION TO RESCUE, DESTROY, REMOVE, NOR, MOVE ANY OF MY VERY APPROPRIATE
TRUE COMMENTS - E V E R … ‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️
- A M E N … !!!!
- … “ V E R Y GODLY — MANLY ( humanly) “ … ••••
!!!