To wonder why mumsnet hates Jordan Peterson?

[Gogster]

Strange because he's actually keen on women's rights

I mean you could similarly ask, why don't women join street gangs in anything like the same numbers as men?

@MangyInseam in what way? Do they not get angry or upset at being poor, single and without a family?

Yes you could?
Because either we say men are naturally violent, or we say this is about how society raises girls and boys.

Yep this is my issue with him he like a lot of gurus of the alt-right, red pill variety are so clearly out to milk as much money as possible from their followers, its even doubtful how much of his own bullshit he actually believes (in his lucid moments). Some of what he says is unremarkable common sense stuff but a lot of it is flimflam. Its easy for him to deceive uneducated people (like his followers) who have never read a book let never mind any Jung, Nietzsche or Dostoevsky and so on but if you have read the same books as him you see right though him. He's intelligent and a good talker but he's not the visionary his followers see him as, and he is smart enought to know that. He's the low iq persons intellectual and shill.

If he'd stuck to dispensing the common sense self help that first got him noticed then he might be tolerable. He's also a clearly unhappy man which does little to recommend his ideas about how we should live.

That podcast sounds good @SW1amp I will give it a listen.

@MangyInseam

Well intentioned I'm sure but Wow! how far off the mark are you! You have swallowed the incel pill completely!

Why don't you look at the most basic biology to make it much easier to grasp:

We are NOT all born equal. We are also NOT born with a right to sex & relationships.
Forming a family unit has always been a privilege gained by those of healthy body and importantly(!) mind. Money does not figure greatly in these things and a quick glance at any spot in the whole wide world would confirm this.

The only unifying characteristic of all incels is very apparent neuro-divergence.
These individuals would find it near-impossible to form significant relationships even if all of our social constructs were wiped off the face of the earth.
We have instincts that ensure we mate with men that are not on immediate appearances unstable, mad or bad. Those instincts are there to protect our (and babies') chances of survival.

The fact is, not once have I listened to some outcast saying that his troubles with women stem from lack of money (or lack of abs ) and agreed with them. Nope. They're weird. Proper weird. Scarily so. I wouldn't even if they were the last man on this planet (and with abs) !

Jordan Peterson? The fact that he pretends to obtusely not understand our mating basics... For what gain? To appeal to religious zealots and the Incel crowd? Well, I'm glad he's found his lovely, homely tribe...🙄

I can't watch him speak anyways. It's all hot air waffle for hours on end and his hands move so much that I get nauseous.

@QueenCamilla He (Peterson) is also unlistenable becasue he sounds like kermit the frog on a cocaine binge. Anyway good post!

@Wouldloveanother An odious, violent dickhead does not become magically different because he's married. He might just spend more time being odious and violent to his wife and children.

Plenty of terrorists, murderers, rapists, paedophiles are married/in relationships, so it's simply not the case that violence is limited or even mainly confined to single males.

Does he have any other ideas about how to reduce male violence?

I don't like his style of arguing as he flits from one subject to another and uses tricks to win an argument instead of genuinely good arguments.

Because he's an odious asshat is the simple answer.

I'm neither a fan nor a hater.

He has criticisms of feminism but they seem to be on misunderstanding it - in my opinion. When he's been pushed it always seems to come back to the idea that he doesn't think women are the same as men, due to biology and due to evolutionary psychology, but that doesn't make them inferior, it means they have different needs. Their capability and importance isn't any less or any more. Which implies he thinks feminists think men and women being equal means we think we're the same.

His arguments are long and built up carefully (arguments in line with his position as an evolutionary psychologist). This means that it's super easy to take parts out of context. A few years ago I spend some time looking at what he'd said vs what he's reported to have said and they simply didn't match up. And I think incels/MRAs were the first to start cherry picking the lines/clips they liked which gave him a bad name, and then strands of media did the same with other quotes. Whether you agree with his bigger points or not, he's a traditional academic and I really don't think their ways of thinking (long form arguments) are compatible with modern life with fast media and online viewers with short attention spans.

My interest in him is actually due to the attacks made on him. It's quite staggering. I'm not sure anybody else - certainly not a random academic - has received quite so much vitriol. To the point that Marvel made a horrific looking villain character, Red Skull, loosely based on his features and said he was worse than a Nazi. I seem to remember he found this out from Twitter and it basically broke him.

Some posters have mentioned him crying or having poor mental health. He has poor physical health too but that's not used to undermine him. A man crying when he's sad shouldn't be used to denigrate him, and certainly not under a feminist heading as these boards are.

Is he helping you out with money to bring your baby up?

I don't particularly like him, But this just isn't true. You're parroting what the main stream media who don't really don't like him say without actually knowing anything about the guy.

I was really confused by this thread. Then I realised I was mistakenly thinking about Jordan Henderson.

I'll let myself out...

I enjoy listening to him on 80% of topics including men/women, parenting.

I find his symbolic and religious stuff a bit dull personally, and I was disappointed to hear how he talked about climate change and Trump. Very occasionally he makes a conclusion that I think is off. But overall I think he’s a great person.

He's big on personal responsibility and being accountable for your position in life, until some incel shoots ups pubic place and then he's oddly big on understanding and blaming society.

The cunt

When he takes he always sounds like he’s justifying the patriarchy. And it makes perfect sense. But then I remember it makes sense to men, not women. Women would be bit players in the world he describes.

He also ignores a lot of historical reality. He likes to say that everyone, not just women, suffered under patriarchy and ignores the fact that whilst some men had access to certain education and professions, no women did and that’s the difference.

His comments about Scandinavia are daft because it ignores culture and the difference between legal opportunity and real opportunity.

Also his podcasts with his daughter are weird. I feel like the poor girl has had a lifetime of being lectured to.

Oh and his views on religion are purely bonkers. He doesn’t believe in God but he pretends to. Perhaps because so many of his followers are alt Christian Right.

He screams misogynist to me. The recent clip of him almost frothing at the mouth about there being a plus size Sports Illustrated cover model was unpleasant. He seemed genuinely cross that someone he perceived as unattractive could be considered differently by others. Any man with that level of rage about a woman’s appearance sets off all my twattish man alarms.

He's big on personal responsibility and being accountable for your position in life, until some incel shoots ups pubic place and then he's oddly big on understanding and blaming society.

Absolutely! When it comes to women, he’s all “women make individual choices” but when it comes to incels and disenfranchised men, he has no difficulty from seeing it from a societal perspective.

Thanks for articulating another reason I don’t like him!

He's a prick.

Bullshitter.

I don’t think that’s true either. I don’t think mass shooters come from the same place as domestically violent thuggy men.

From my (very) limited reading and listening to his theories, he seems to pretty much disregard the ways in which economic, social and political structures influence human behaviour.

And I disagree fundamentally with that, so even if I did agree with some of his ideas, it would be for completely different reasons.

He doesn’t have to align with all of my opinions for me to find merit in what he says.