Linguistic Ambiguity in the “manosphere”

This article is about the Linguistic Ambiguity of Jordan Peterson and Douglas Wilson, not that they are in the “manosphere.” If they are, I hereby revoke any remainder of their cards, although it is highly likely Vox Day and Dalrock beat me to it. 

And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. 2 Peter 2:3


Linguistic ambiguity is a term that states the obvious: words are not clear. However, this phrase is very important when dealing with personality disorders. Ambiguity in this context is created when words, or thoughts, do not connect and do not make any sense. Nothing but garbage is created.

Word Salad” is often used to describe the linguistic ambiguity of narcissists (especially covert, or “fragile,” narcissists, psychopaths, and others with personality disorders). The ambiguity they create with their words, most often in a verbal context, is to distort reality, deflect, and cause confusion. It is a tactical way to gain power over a conversation and an audience. Written communication, although less frequent, does the same thing: the sentence-structure, and logical flow of a writing are … off. Points are confused, not distinct, and the conclusion may not be clear, if there is a conclusion at all. You may find yourself re-reading sentences and paragraphs to decipher the meaning. 

To spot word-salad, ask these questions:

  1. Is the conversation circular? Is it Repetitive?
  2. Are false moral equivalences drawn?
  3. Do they condescend and patronize you?
  4. Do they project, and accuse you of what they do? (Gaslighting to an extent)
  5. Do they switch personas (good cop/bad cop)?
  6. Are they an eternal victim?
  7. You have to explain basic human emotions
  8. They condition you to become grateful for mediocrity (lower expectations, and throw an occasional bone)
  9. Conversations with them leave you drained, and dazed.

In verbal communication, ambiguous words are accompanied with changes in tone, which often soothes the listener into false security and hypnosis. Sometimes the ambiguity is used to make you feel helpless, and reliant upon the speaker/author, or to provoke you to rage. If a person, who is rarely empathetic, fluctuates their voice to sound concerned and caring, they may be heading down the word-salad buffet line. 

Covert Narcissism

Covert Narcissism is also known as hypersensitive/ vulnerable narcissism. These are the manipulative and deceptive narcissists, and often take time to spot. They demonstrate false humility, and can master small talk. They see themselves as gods, and geniuses that are unrecognized by others. No one can recognize or understand their genius. They lash out when criticized, and take criticism in a deep, personal way.  

My point in this article is not to go in depth. It is to make readers aware of what Linguistic Ambiguity is, so that they may spot it. I am particularly concerned with Jordan Peterson, and Douglas Wilson, who seem to influence many over RP issues.

Both seek the spotlight. Both seek influence and power, as well as full control of their audience (or congregants). Both have publicly demonstrated narcissistic traits: exploiting others, a lack of empathy, pervasive patterns of grandiosity, and excessive need for admiration. That does not make them narcissists, but raises red flags that warrant careful examination. The fact that people like Jordan Peterson and Doug Wilson cannot be challenged without incredibly defensive remarks from them, or their followers, suggests these men wield unholy power over others.


Jordan Peterson recently met with Donald Trump Jr. at the Student Action Summit. When asked about abortion, Peterson gave this word-salad answer:

by the time you talk about abortion you are probably having the wrong conversation …” [he is deflecting]. I just started seeing it this way, this past week, … [to paraphrase the rest: the political right in the U.S. is challenging the sexualized culture, and the left is also doing this, albeit in a hypocritical manner, creating a “tense” environment, with some “accruing agreement that there should be a discussion”] . . . “so, it would be, so that is one of the things on my mind.” “Its a consequence to the fact that we haven’t adapted to the birth control pill yet … its only been 50 years, and we haven’t figured out what that means.

Wow. What a brave, concise statement, Jordan.

As another example, Peterson engages in word salad every time he says his speeches/appearances are “conversations” with the audience, where they “converse” with him by giving Peterson verbal cues. Responding, or reacting, to verbal cues is not a conversation. It only proves you are talking to gain the audience’s affirmation.


 I am especially concerned with Wilson, due to his very public history of questionable practices in handling sexual deviants at his church. I say this, as there is a strong correlation between sex offenders and sexual aggression, and narcissism.See this link. See Also. Wilson’s language in describing feminists is often sexually charged, and aggressive. I  make this point because Narcissists objectify and dehumanize their prey, often sexually. If you are familiar with Wilson’s writings on relationships, and sex within marriage, your eyes may be starting to open. These articles are easy to find, but I don’t want to link them, because he disgusts me, is a false teacher,  is unrepentant, and leads a cult. His writings demonstrate he does not meet the basic Biblical qualifications to be an Elder, per 1 Timothy and Titus. Why any discerning Christian would view him as such, is beyond me.

I will point readers to Dalrock, who has waged a long war, and has extensively covered Wilson’s history of attendance at the word-salad buffet. I will also ask readers to do the following: Read Wilson’s “Federal Vision No More.”  If you need to be walked through it, read this link. Many reformed Christians took this article, and celebrated, thinking Wilson gave up federal vision. He did no such thing. He never retracted (or repented) his signing of the Joint Federal Vision Statement, a document declared heresy by every reformed denomination, save for Wilson’s CREC.


I hope this helps others in seeing past people who wish to lead you astray. 

7 thoughts on “Linguistic Ambiguity in the “manosphere”

  1. The word salads of these men are a consequence of the mangling of our dictionary by feminists and their NPC allies.

    Remember the time when C.S. Lewis referred to the time when the word “gentleman” had a specific meaning

    “The word gentleman originally meant something recognizable; one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone “a gentleman” you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact. If you said he was not “a gentleman” you were not insulting him, but giving information. There was no contradiction in saying that John was a liar and a gentleman; any more than there now is in saying that James is a fool and an M.A. But then there came people who said – so rightly, charitably, spiritually, sensitively, so anything but usefully – “Ah but surely the important thing about a gentleman is not the coat of arms and the land, but the behaviour? Surely he is the true gentleman who behaves as a gentleman should? Surely in that sense Edward is far more truly a gentleman than John?” They meant well. To be honourable and courteous and brave is of course a far better thing than to have a coat of arms. But it is not the same thing. Worse still, it is not a thing everyone will agree about. To call a man “a gentleman” in this new, refined sense, becomes, in fact, not a way of giving information about him, but a way of praising him: to deny that he is “a gentleman” becomes simply a way of insulting him. When a word ceases to be a term of description and becomes merely a term of praise, it no longer tells you facts about the object: it only tells you about the speaker’s attitude to that object. ”

    CS Lewis – Mere Christianity.

    The way these men express themselves is simply a product of the way that feminists and their NPC allies have tried to grab control of the dictionary on the grounds that “He who controls the dictionary will win the argument”.

    I personally maintain that nothing will change until the control of the dictionary taken away from the NPC’s.

    I gain enormous satisfaction at seeing these gentlemen hoist those NPC’s on their own petard.


    1. You are correct in noting our whole society has issues defining terms and speaking clearly.

      However, with the 2 men I describe, they deliberately obfuscate, and rarely come to conclusions. Wilson knows this, and has a background in philosophy. He should know better, especially since the core texts of his profession are very clear. Wilson is a growing influence in Christianity. This is a problem as he has signed a document declared heresy by every denomination in the reformed Protestant world, of which he hails. He then publishes an article saying he no longer likes the label, because of the name. He Never retracts his erroneous positions. Wilson lacks basic integrity- as a man, as a philosopher, and as a Christian. He is a false teacher.

      Peterson gives non answers. He’s been in the public eye for years and his positions on issues such as abortion have not seen any growth. I believe his contradiction in values over time, his admission of his own mental health problems, and his penchant for lying (staying awake for one month) do him in.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s