MNHQ here: How would you feel about a Jordan Peterson webchat?

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

We've been offered a webchat with Jordan Peterson (his new book has a chapter on parenting, although the publishers (Penguin) recognise a webchat is likely to be more wide-ranging than that). We know he's very controversial, to put it mildly, but also as you know we believe in the value of open debate. So we thought we'd ask you what you think: would you like the chance to put questions to him and debate him on-site or would you rather not?

Only if Mumsnet donated the payment they’d receive from the publisher to a worthy, woman-supporting cause.

If Anyfucker is against it, it must be a good idea to have him on.

he says women are chaos, why would he want to talk to people whom he thinks chaotic, unless to provide entertainment for his 'base'?

He wants to sell his book. He wants credibility as a voice on parenting.

"but that women, in general, tend to be more interested in people, men in things"

Oh look. Telling us what women are like. I'm not interested in his opinion on that.

You write "his opinion" but this is a good example, it's not his opinion. It's a finding based upon clinical research. It's not saying so women only like to be a mum, or a nurse, or a carer, and men like to be engineers, or mechanics, and no one can ever be any different. If you immediately filter it through any objection that men and women are different in any way then yes, you would disagree.

This is often used to justify why, in part, there are less women in STEM fields. I think it is possibly a part, but there are other obvious reasons why women don't enter these fields, and many of these are due to gender stereotyping, sexism and reported misogyny. So why not take the chance to put these things to him?

He's right wing, he's sexist, he's absolutely horrible. Please don't give him a platform!!

Bring it on. Open debate and diversity of opinion is good. ‘No platforming’ is for idiots.

Essentially he manages to articulate hate speech without ever losing his temper or getting riled. Kudos to him for his ability to stay blasé and monotone, but if you invite him, you're still giving a platform to hate speech.

Who does he hate?

I disagree with no platforming. I think MNers are perfectly capable of holding their own, and it is good to hear views from outside of the bubble and to question your beliefs. I would hope that MNHQ would deal with any influx of MRAs after the event.

It’s not like we’re an MRA Free Zone anyway.

There is no point putting any points to him, he will simply restate that in his opinion, that's what the research shows and then stonewall/ignore. He isn't going to debate.

I am fed up of the patronising attitude that anyone who disagrees doesn't understand his arguments or the research he refers to.

It is not important or valuable to highlight and focus on the supposed hard wired differences are between women and men. It enables misogyny and hatred, and maintenance of the status quo that does harm to women.

His views are out there. He doesn’t shy away from the spotlight. It’s hardly silencing him to refuse to let him onto MN. Inviting him would lend credibility to someone who now wants to be seen as a voice on parenting.

No thanks, he's a sexist twunt.

Absolutely not. Why would we want to speak with a virulent misogynist?

He’s known as the stupid man’s smart person.

BTW this isn't 'no platform', he's only trying to peddle his book! No, it's about who we invite for that privilege.

Books ! - urghh, horrible things, throw them on the bonfire.

So you know what he's going to say, why he's going to say it, and that he won't debate anything. Ok. I respect your right not to want to hear his views, I respect mine and others to hear them.

Katterina Ballerina
And you think that sexist woman haters don't come here already?
I think it could be really funny, if he thinks that Mumsnet posters are all about knitting, babies, cooking and fluffy things then it may be interesting.
Also as pp have said can't be worse than Penny Mordaunt

Really, @sawdustformypony? That's where you're going with this?

@nicenewdusters Excellent. Seeing as MNHQ have asked for feedback then it's great that everyone gets a chance to put their point of view forward. Good that no one thinks that one person putting their POV across is the same as no platforming and banning freedom of speech. Because that would be ridiculous.

I haven't said anything about no platforming and banning freedom of speech. I said your right to say that you don't want to hear him speak was as legitimate as mine. Neither one of us is wrong or right.

I think the very fact that some people are so angry he might be invited is reason enough to consider whether he should be. Until 18 months ago he was a backwater academic in Toronto. We're now having this debate on MN. I think that's interesting in itself.

No thanks.

Yes. If people don't want to read him they don't have to; if they want to challenge him they can; if they want to discuss and agree they can. The increasing tendency to not engage in debate or with people we don't agree with by just stating that person is a multiple -ist/-phobe and saying the conversation stops there (or rather doesn't even start) isn't good. Nobody learns anything new from an echo chamber.

shrug I just ... can't be arsed with him. I find all that 'controversy' is boring, and I suspect he's not all that bright, really. Surely there's other people we could learn more from?