‘Birthgap’ producer touted by Jordan Peterson canceled at Cambridge; film shut down, called misogynistic

[–]63daddy 185 points186 points187 points 3 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+]Delicious-Agency-824 24 points25 points26 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mobile_Lumpy 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]RunDiscombobulated67 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]steph-anglican 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zook-Cantaloupe-7970 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]JMB613 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoSpinach4025 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aspiengineer 65 points66 points67 points 3 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

[–]PlzSendDunes 47 points48 points49 points 3 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]utopista114 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom -4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

Ah fuck off.

We allready have plenty of taxes related to renting out houses, and laws protecting the renter. Even if we quartered the housing prices, with our current loan laws, most arent going to afford a home.

(minimum 15% downpayment, average house cost is 421k, maximum debt you can have is 5x your yearly salary, low salary and cardebt and similar can bring your total amount down in a greater magnitude than 1to1 ratio, also a minimum cost of living estimate to see what they belive u can afford to pay. Oh btw average salary in norway is around 61k... so you do the math)

There are some offsets like having a better income, help from parents, some state programs, moving to not central places where prices are lower. But even with a quartered price, most cannot afford and HAVE to rent, or live with their parents.

So landlords arent the problem, they are a symptom. A symtom of a system who is currently experiencing a sellers marked from excessive growth: u can sell high, because there arent enough new homes being built. Causing a supply and demand issue that heavily favors the owners. And owning is by far one of the most effective roads to riches, at least here.

U could argue state power to change who can buy or such.... but i don't trust our govurment to do it equally and well. Especially considering the heavy favoring of single mothers. As a childfree man, i wouldnt own a home in decades

[–]Planimation4life 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dapper_Platform_1222 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom -4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Planimation4life 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]shit-zen-giggles 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]shit-zen-giggles -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 23 points24 points25 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]CentralAdmin 35 points36 points37 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Behind that feminism was capitalism.

The Rockefeller Foundation bankrolled feminism in the 70s when women were demanding to enter the workforce and be paid the same as men.

Women got the right to work the same jobs for the same pay, essentially doubling the workforce over night.

Wages stagnated while the media promoted work as freedom (Arbeit Macht Frei) and blamed men for holding women back.

Meanwhile, women's happiness has declined to a point lower than it was at the alleged height of sexism in the 1960s/70s. The minimum wage is at $15 when it should be almost double that. And now when people need those capitalists to consider better pay, conditions and rights for workers, they have vanished. They keep spreading propaganda about how work from home is terrible for everyone but good luck getting paternity leave.

Feminists should take some blame here for not engaging with men fairly. Women were freed from their gender roles thanks to men who agreed that women could be whatever they wanted and it would not affect their suitability as a partner or parent.

However, women still generally hold the belief that men need to earn more than they do, be taller, be willing to protect and do the dirty work to be valuable as partners. A man cannot have preferences for someone younger, more pleasant to be around and who enjoys lots of sex without being shamed for his sexuality. These double standards stem from the fact that women expect men to compromise for women's benefit, but women may never be expected to do the same or it is sexist.

A man's value is attached to his earning potential or his job. A woman's is not. So all women entering the workforce en masse did was raise the bar for what an acceptable partner is. We are suffering the consequences of women feeling entitled to more (thanks to feminism and so many women working) without being willing to negotiate a new social contract about what a good man actually is.

If a man was still valuable for being charming, great with kids, a homemaker and as an organizer without being expected to shoulder the bulk of the financial burden (including being more likely to work dangerous jobs) then maybe the strides women have made wouldn't have harmed men as much.

But women in general don't value those aspects of men and no matter how much feminist women will try to convince everyone they don't need men, women's happiness keeps declining and men keep quietly quitting society.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 7 points8 points9 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PlzSendDunes 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aspiengineer 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PlzSendDunes 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]asdf333aza 16 points17 points18 points 3 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Look into "herbivore men". It's basically their version of the RP, where their men reject masculine career oriented women and the notion of breaking their backs to provide for a woman and children that don't respect them. Instead, they choose to work low paying jobs, not pursue education, live alone, reject marriage and kids and play games. They just live their lives for themselves instead of chasing women.

Heard the women have gotten so desperate over there that they pursue men. That's why when military dudes go over there, they hardly ever want to come back. Even the biggest of losers in America manage to find a Japanese girl over there whose totally into them. Ask any of your military friend who went to Japan and they'd likely have a story or two about how the girls over there we all over them. A dude who can't get laid or date in America can be placed in Japan and suddenly have a social life and be an eligible bachelor.

[+]Sad-Supermarket-9793 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]asdf333aza 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Sad-Supermarket-9793 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Scandi_Navy 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AspirationsOfFreedom 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Current_Finding_4066 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

i welcome it. The biggest chance to our housing crisis would be a reduced number of people buying, reducing prices, so more people can get in earlier. And if i was planning to have kids, i'd want my own home first. (Even tho im not).

We do know that crazy housing prices are very detrimental. Reasonable people try to prepare situations suitable for having kids. Where I live you need 40 years' worth of median income after taxes (all of it) to buy a place suitable for raising kids. It is obscene and I welcome people creating fewer wage slaves.

Then you have pensions. In countries with low wages, having kids is the only guarantee of surviving into old age.

Of course, there are other factors too. But forcing people to live from pay check to paycheck is a great way to convince them that they cannot afford children.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Current_Finding_4066 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reverbiscrap 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Its easy to see what causes it. The more education and options to control birth for whatever reason women have and this all comes with economic development, the birth rate craters.

While it is true, does that imply your solution would be to tank women's education and their access to careers?

No, the documentary presents another cause for that. The cause being the difficulty of bring financially secure, which pushes women down their long careers. They want to be financially independent and who would not? It is understandable. Problem is, companies 1) know and abuse it by exploiting them just like they exploit men, 2) make it harder for them to take maternity leave because when they come back companies do not pay them as much as they used to be.

With all that, women start looking for mates at age 30-35, which is too late for most of them. 80% of childless women are not childless by choice.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

While it is true, does that imply your solution would be to tank women's education and their access to careers?

If you want to fix the birth rate without resorting to artificial wombs which I'm sure feminists will fight against, then yes.

But why are you framing it like I want to do anything? I'm just speaking truth. I have no power to do anything.

Like it or not, thats the facts.

No, the documentary presents another cause for that. The cause being the difficulty of bring financially secure, which pushes women down their long careers. They want to be financially independent and who would not? It is understandable. Problem is, companies 1) know and abuse it by exploiting them just like they exploit men, 2) make it harder for them to take maternity leave because when they come back companies do not pay them as much as they used to be.

And this is just false. Countries that are poor have high birth rates. Countries that are rich have low or no birth rates.

This is just a cope argument made by peterson.

For a family anecdote, my grandmother on my mothers side has 11 kids. Her children which include my mother have either have 1 kid or 2 kids or no kids at all cause lesbian or single.

And many of them are wealthy and have property that my grandmother didn't have cause she was just a housewife.

Again, economics argument doesn't work.

With all that, women start looking for mates at age 30-35, which is too late for most of them. 80% of childless women are not childless by choice.

And this supports my position. Feminism is the cause. Cause feminism leads to education, choice and career.

Thanks for proving my point twice.

Why do this? You prove my point but then go with no, its the economy.

[–]LouisdeRouvroy 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

Well, I don't disagree with the viewpoints of either Jordan Peterson or the birthgap creators, specifically about the issue presented... I think the awkwardness comes when you start talking about what exactly would have to happen to have a sincere discussion about how to handle the issue of how to increase birthrates other than to say, raise the budget for childcare to 50% of state GDP or institute measures that might appear similar to the Taliban, and I suppose should any of a feminist persuasion stumble on such a conversations, they might be quite understandably worried about their quality of life. I can see why people would feel so worried to need to shut it down. It's going to be a really awkward subject to begin to approach. Our pink elephant in the living room.

If things are ever so bad that we have to sign away most of women's rights, I would not be jealous of the person who tries to get it into law. I think we'd rather let society fall if that were to be the result instead. I think humanity will be in for some real hard lessons because of that attitude though.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 12 points13 points14 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that the rate that we are going to develop technologically in the 21st century is going to confound absolutely every factor we could have conceived. The projected population growth of the world isn't even set to peak until like 2050-2070; while people are discussing population collapse, they're implying that immigration isn't a valid solution to some of the economic concerns of the West--mostly because of internalized racist sentiments that see the U.S. as a prominently white nation, for example.

Beyond that, though, humanity will before long need to grapple with a transhuman future where geriatric immortality is possible. In all likelihood, it will probably turn out for the best that we're experiencing a slow population decline. AI is being rapidly developed, and humanity has far greater concerns than a stagnating birth rate--we need to grapple with questions of economic equality in an emerging future marketplace where human labor is easily and affordably replaced.

First of all, though, this argument is predicated on the assumption that civilization will collapse if the birth rate is reduced, without taking into consideration any of the technological developments that made the population explosion of the 20th century possible in the first place. We're assuming that we need to maintain a massive population so that we can A) continue to compete in global-scale economic warfare with the East, and B) so that we can continue to maintain our vast infrastructure. People who fearmonger about demographic collapse have no sense of human life from the perspective of our greatest traits: our ability to transform and adapt to changing circumstances.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I never said that it would. Just that society will have to make a decision eventually of either we find a way to make artificial wombs work or well women have to have kids or die out/be replaced. It may not like the fact it has to make a decision but it will have to make one cause it has no choice.

Depending on immigration just creates its own issues and it doesn't fix anything cause those migrants eventually have low birth rates too and the countries they come from are also slowing down in birth rates.

All it does is delay.

As for what protections of feminism? Hmm, no welfare for women and likely men and women having to depend on men for income support as part of a household rather then being allowed to work themselves would be a start and likely contraceptives being banned.

I've never really thought the policies out myself cause its irrelevant. I will be long dead when the problems we're talking about reach a boiling point.

[–]Felarhin 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Which is why I have seen people say that societal collapse is the only way to fix birth rates barring artificial wombs.

I can see the logic.

The person who has to sign the bill to dismantle the welfare system, remove women from the workplace, and ban contraception

It may be possible to keep the welfare system but the other things cannot be avoided.

People think I mean the kill all men types when I talk feminism but Im talking even more broadly when I say feminism.

Women having access to contraceptives, freedom of choice to not have kids and pursue hypergamy and careers and education are proven to destroy birth rates. This is all part of feminism which is why I say that feminism lowers the birth rate.

Again, my grandmother had 11 kids. Her daughters either have 1 or 2 or zero. And they are not poor. My grandmother was a housewife and helped her husband who was a farmer. Her daughters have properties and cars and high income husbands but yet can't match her in number of kids.

Is what it is.

[+]Azihayya -3 points-2 points-1 points 3 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

It seems like you have a vested interest in the narrative that women's reproductive freedom will result in the collapse of civilization, and that the narrative is especially useful to you as a form of attacking feminism.

I'd like to hear you actually qualify what it is that you think is so important about the world that only became possible post the demographic explosion of the 20th century that you think is so important to preserve that you'd rather sacrifice women's liberties on the altar than to see it fade away, and how you actually qualify the argument that A) demographic decline will result in the collapse of civilization and that B) immigration results in problems.

My impression is that your views are a lot more bigoted than you're willing to accept, and that you disguise them rather behind a veil of truthseeking, and that you intentionally lack creativity because your interest is more in fearmongering over women's agency and posing feminism as a threat to humanity than it is in presenting an honest and accurate picture of the world and what the future will look like.

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Perfect_Sir4820 -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Felarhin 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stonkuser[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]EatM3L053R 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hehimCA 33 points34 points35 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]susar345 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SleeplessAndAnxious 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Current_Finding_4066 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zestyclose-Repair-86 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]coolnavigator 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OnlyUSPolitics 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dapper_Platform_1222 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AR-2022 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lewandisney69 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]coffeeinvenice 2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jackass93269 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -33 points-32 points-31 points 3 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]shit-zen-giggles 10 points11 points12 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 21 points22 points23 points 3 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -41 points-40 points-39 points 3 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]reeeegert 15 points16 points17 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 20 points21 points22 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -36 points-35 points-34 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Okay, lmao--you're absolutely telling on yourself here. Obviously this attitude doesn't surprise me. I think a lot of the guys here share your reactionary anti-liberal values, but aren't as open about it, and care less about men's issues as they do about vilifying women through veiled accusations against feminism. Maybe you just haven't put much thought into this, but you're essentially saying that you believe that women shouldn't be allowed access to education or reproductive care because you think that men's right to breed with them is more important than their freedom. How is that not misogynist? It seems like you're pretty openly misogynist, and this thread is like a honey trap for men who are willing to eat up anything that's remotely anti-feminist, and this is how you're representing them.

[–]Greg_W_Allan 14 points15 points16 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 17 points18 points19 points 3 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 9 points10 points11 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 3 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 8 points9 points10 points 3 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Since you are a woman, can I have your opinion on this post of mine, if you don't mind?

There are feminists on twitter who when talking about South Korea are perfectly happy to say that birth rate is low and will go lower aka no population cause the men are not feminist and thus bad and that Korea deserves this aka its a good thing.

Maybe having women take some responsibility for this means I'm le bad instead of blaming men who we all know the government and society will blame for the low birth rate instead of women means I'm the devil.

++++++

separate from the above.

I'm for abortion up to a certain point but the push to make it happen at any time even at 9 months plus people saying that they had multiple abortions and celebrating it instead of just using contraceptives makes me reconsider.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't think the low birth rate is because men aren't feminists (hope I read that correctly) I believe there are a lot of social issues in countries like south/North Korea and other Asian countries that have non Western ideologies. I don't know what the specific ideologies in Korea are but I know China had the 1 child law for a long time where female children were killed because they couldn't serve in the military so China had no use for them and lawfully committed mass genocide on female babies but that has been some time ago. I don't believe low birth rate will ever be because men aren't feminists because there are still traditional values and gender roles in most countries even while feminist are trying to stamp them out ESPECIALLY in countries that have rural populations not indoctrinated by vast amounts of outside media.

[–]KochiraJin 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because before a certain point, a fetus doesn't have the capacity for sentience. It can not think, feel, or experience anything. This is why we have no problem killing it. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_perception%23:~:text%3DThe%2520earliest%2520fetal%2520response%2520to,its%2520mother%27s%2520voice%2520from%2520others.&ved=2ahUKEwjVo_HOu4b_AhXtMlkFHZLDCIgQFnoECBIQBQ&usg=AOvVaw1lv_rXTgo8LhhiUWGjp5A2

It's been proven that access to abortion lowers the poverty rate for children. I'd rather kill a nonsentient fetus, than starve a sentient child. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.npr.org/2022/05/26/1101570014/abortion-access-tends-to-lower-child-poverty-rates-economists-say&ved=2ahUKEwi00pb9u4b_AhV0EVkFHScwCfkQFnoECBcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3QZk1beosIBu9Nab1Pn5aL

If you don't have the resources to support a child, especially a disabled child, the most humane thing to do is have an abortion.

[–]KPplumbingBob 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]plumberack 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]plumberack 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]Azihayya -1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]plumberack 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Greg_W_Allan 11 points12 points13 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Medill1919 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tiredfromlife2019 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	‘Birthgap’ producer touted by Jordan Peterson canceled at Cambridge; film shut down, called misogynistic
Author	Heavy_Grand2526
Upvotes	256
Comments	113
Date	May 21, 2023 12:39 AM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/13ne1tw/birthgap_producer_touted_by_jordan_peterson/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/birthgap-producer-touted-by-jordan-peterson.1219873 https://theredarchive.com/post/1219873

Comments