A nominal attention-span and an exceptional interest in systems provide, to a disinterested observer of the world, an ability to perceive easily the fuzzy logic of those with a fetish for IQ tests and socially constructed, soul-destructive gender-norms.
“Most engineers are males. Why? Because men are more interested in things, and women are more interested in people. And you might say, ‘That is socio-cultural.’ No, it’s not! And we know it’s not, because if you stack up countries by their egalitarian social policies, and you look at the overrepresentation of men in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math—the overrepresentation increases as the countries become more egalitarian. So the overrepresentation is not socio-cultural.”
-Jordan Peterson, womanishly equating “egalitarianism” with such terms as kindness, fairness, and justice.
Meanwhile, consider Christmas. Regardless what it may have meant—culturally or even spiritually—at some point in history; Christmas now is rarely ever more than massive masturbation for consumption-addicts to indulge all the more fervently in avoidance of moderation, introspection, etc.
Moreover, for children in “first-world countries” (i.e. colonialism’s most benefitted beneficiaries), Christmas is a time to learn about their divine right: the right to get without giving—which eventually translates into a right to take without compensation.
During the revolutionary era in the United States, when government took without compensation, it was called “taxation without representation.”
In dreary, doomed, cultish countries which place a premium on lockstep conformity, especially through strong central-planning of economic production by strong central-planning of sexual reproduction: taxation without representation is euphemized as, for example, “from each, according to their ability—to each, according to their need.” Or, in a word: egalitarianism.
And in the various shaved, shiny, socialist, Scandinavian shitholes—rife with dyke theorists and self-murdering men—a woman, glib and glutted—conscious of her own holiness and inviolability—should all but always feel at liberty to do as little as she is trained to want—knowing that in virtually no case will she ever be bereft of all the scandinavian Victory Gin she could ever swill.
Meanwhile, many a mediocre dyke theorist bumbles on, unable even to track Peterson’s argument: the humility which prefaces intelligence having been summarily, hastily drained from her sad, sterilized husk—to usher in the “egalitarian” (utilitarian) utopia.
Thus is the state of mythical sate within those oft-cited “egalitarian” States, where manly man-mandates make man-dates for men’s attention to be paid to the tedious details of STEM—and the unified, socialized (eunuchized) maintenance of harems.
And those cursory glances at the pale and sickly nations, which, to the world’s myopic Jordan Petersons, disprove the normative effects of gender roles: such glances miss that such nations exist in a state of perpetual Christmas—where the surly unsung Santas are men-in-general (instead of only over-worked fathers and their malnourished, suicidal elves at the North Poles in China, Bangladesh, Rhodesia, Niggerland, etc.).