Big fan too and seen them live several times. However, that description is magnificent (if undeserved) and I l9ve using it in other contexts.I will not have a bad word said about the Flaming Lips.
Repent now!!!
Big fan too and seen them live several times. However, that description is magnificent (if undeserved) and I l9ve using it in other contexts.I will not have a bad word said about the Flaming Lips.
Repent now!!!
I do believe it can be defined, to use the immortal words of SuperHans describing the Flaming Lips, as "Bullshitters turning wank into cash".
Saying any old controversial crap for money and outrage. Or fun, even. Bit like the Benitez thread!
Kubrick is a master story-teller and i enjoy watching his films. They`re multi-layered which stops me getting bored after repeated viewings of the few that i`ve seen but I haven`t "studied" him, i haven`t even seen all his films. His name got brought up through a passing comment of mine about the nature of good/evil etc.
What do you reckon on him?
I wouldn`t throw random names out to appear clever, it was a specific point that Peterson, Kubrick and Solzhenitsyn agree on, i didn`t just throw it out there to be a smartie Alec and it seemed the members who slagged Peterson off weren`t aware of it. They just layed into Peterson as per usual so maybe "one of the most famous film makers" ideas haven`t got through to some people. btw- What`s your bestest fave Plato allegory?I think he's great, but I don't throw his name out randomly in discussion to act smarter than people because he is one of the most famous film makers of all time and most people are already aware of his work.
As always with people like you, you are floundering when asked where you get your alternative media from. As far as I can see you've citied two of the most well know film makers of all time, John Pilger (extremely well know documentary maker) and a load of right wing idiots who pray on people like you to earn a living.
Nothing you have said is evidence to suggest that Peterson isn’t a grifting bigoted scumbag whose rhetoric has radicalised a lot of neurodivergent easily influence lonely men into the incel mindset. Or do you think that him calling Yumi Nu “not beautiful” because she’s a plus-sized woman on a magazine cover, or deadnaming Elliot Page and saying his mastectomy was done by a criminal physician is completely fine?I wouldn`t throw random names out to appear clever, it was a specific point that Peterson, Kubrick and Solzhenitsyn agree on, i didn`t just throw it out there to be a smartie Alec and it seemed the members who slagged Peterson off weren`t aware of it. They just layed into Peterson as per usual so maybe "one of the most famous film makers" ideas haven`t got through to some people. btw- What`s your bestest fave Plato allegory?
So you`ve "studied" Kubrick and your summation is "he`s great" - i bet that got you a Bsc, way to go Epstein.
The "right-wing idiots" isn`t the point, its their guests or the subject matter. Stop shooting the messenger already
Do you want the accepted definition, the proper definition or the one I made up?I dont know what grifting means.
By the sounds of it its a bunch of morally bankrupt lefties scrapping with morally bankrupt right.
In the Rowe case, no official body would support them. They were left high and dry to defend themselves, i thought that if the authorities were to step in they would be opening themselves up to in effect "prosecute themselves" thereby setting a precedent. The result was they all backed out and placated the Rowes with a Governmental review or something of that nature.Are you? Apologies. You might have to remind me.
As an aside, I've continued to be polite and civil with you, I'm not sure why you're being insulting and defensive. I don't really understand what gaslighting I'm supposed to be doing making the observation I did.
Edit: we were also having a conversation about the Rowe case and you mentioned precedent for the decision. I'm not sure I got a response to that.
When was this brought up?Nothing you have said is evidence to suggest that Peterson isn’t a grifting bigoted scumbag whose rhetoric has radicalised a lot of neurodivergent easily influence lonely men into the incel mindset. Or do you think that him calling Yumi Nu “not beautiful” because she’s a plus-sized woman on a magazine cover, or deadnaming Elliot Page and saying his mastectomy was done by a criminal physician is completely fine?

That's not legal precedent. That's just a more elaborate way of saying what you've already said.In the Rowe case, no official body would support them. They were left high and dry to defend themselves, i thought that if the authorities were to step in they would be opening themselves up to in effect "prosecute themselves" thereby setting a precedent. The result was they all backed out and placated the Rowes with a Governmental review or something of that nature.
No.When was this brought up?
Peterson is a Clinical Psychologist who defended himself against compelled speech, he has become embroiled in the culture war and i`ve yet to see him "taken down", though many media organisations have tried to set him up for a fall. Why would the scumbag media want to silence him? ? He is also entitled to his opinion and you should defend his right to say it.
Compelled speech is literally just not being a cruel, rude [Poor language removed] though. I’m never going to defend anyone’s rights to outright be a nasty bigot.When was this brought up?
Peterson is a Clinical Psychologist who defended himself against compelled speech, he has become embroiled in the culture war and i`ve yet to see him "taken down", though many media organisations have tried to set him up for a fall. Why would the scumbag media want to silence him? ? He is also entitled to his opinion and you should defend his right to say it.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.