The fact that he says he accepts the consequences doesn't mean that he doesn't waste all of his time bitterly complaining about them and how outrageous and unfair they are to literally anyone with a sympathetic podcast. If what you say and what you do aren't in alignment, I'm going to pay most attention to what you do.

The rest of this diatribe is quite Peterson like, in that is seeks to set up an intellectual sounding framework for what is essentially an emotional reaction. 🙄 Due to that, it doesn't actually say anything meaningful or on point. Perhaps you should take your own advice, and pursue some knowledge about how to comment in a way that actually addresses the topic, rather than continually lobbing credibility bombs because you don't have anything substantive to say.

For example, I haven't relied on any "popular narratives" or in fact, any narratives at all. I've stated what Peterson has said and done (both in public record), often using his own words to describe it, and then demonstrated how that is inconsistent with his loudly and vociferously stated values.

Your consistent inability to interface with what I've actually said is always interesting and a bit comical.