Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Jordan Peterson

722 replies

Perimental · 16/05/2018 09:50

dl-tube.com/watch?v=UFwfJVv9P34#.Wvvtj8Hnqjk.link

Thoughts on this man......

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Teacuphiccup · 21/05/2018 13:25

I’m bowing out now too.

I just can’t be arsed anymore.
Thanks to oldman who actually tried to engage with the discussion, I enjoy a good rally.

Like I say I enjoy Peterson’s work but I think there are places where he has fallen flat in his ability to analysis himself and his own arguments.
I don’t think all criticism of him comes from a place of not understanding what he’s saying I think it’s possibke to just not agree with him too.

I think people should listen to what he’s saying and not just decide he’s evil without actually looking at the arguments, but I also think that people should not just dismiss any criticism of him.

Teacuphiccup · 21/05/2018 13:31

Asians as a group perform so well that the best US college allegedly discriminates by giving them higher entrance requirements than other racial minorities

If they are performing so well then they should be allowed to get into Harvard. That Harvard think it’s ok that an Asian person should have to have higher grades than everyone else is disgusting.
It’s literally saying that people of a different ethnicity don’t have to achieve as much to get the same results THERES the discrimination

ReluctantCamper · 21/05/2018 15:09

yes Artemis7, it's somewhat of a shame that fms turned up, he has reduced what could have been a useful and interesting debate into a fight with many hyperlinks which definitively prove that HE IS RIGHT and unbelievably tedious.

I stand by my comment that at least some of what Peterson says is demonstrably guff, so I would hope that those who take him seriously apply critical thinking to all his pronouncements, otherwise who knows what bilge you're swallowing?

Still, I enjoyed the podcast and will look up more of Phillip Dodd, so all is not lost.

flowersonthepiano · 21/05/2018 15:21

Yes Reluctant, Philip Dodd was very sharp and did well in pinning down Peterson. I found it quite telling that, eventually, JP acknowledged that some of their differences in opinion were down to differences in world view. Which is as close as I've heard him come to admitting that he is proffering his own opinions, rather than objective facts all completely rooted in hard evidence.

Before anyone jumps down my throat, I am aware that he does use scientific evidence to back up many of his arguments.

MrGHardy · 21/05/2018 15:54

Scientific "evidence" can still be interpreted in many ways and they don't answer all questions. E.g. it can explain something, but doesn't say whether we can do something and/or should do something.

flowersonthepiano · 21/05/2018 16:06

Agreed, MrGHardy.

OldmanOfTheWeb3 · 21/05/2018 16:49

Thanks to oldman who actually tried to engage with the discussion, I enjoy a good rally.

Likewise I appreciate that whether I agreed or not, you were presenting arguments, not rhetoric. I said a page back that I was pretty much wrapping up. I've just been lingering with a few final replies.

I don’t think all criticism of him comes from a place of not understanding what he’s saying I think it’s possibke to just not agree with him too.

I disagree with him on a couple of things myself. If I were to sum up what I've been saying in this thread it's that I believe he gets far more baseless attacks (as seen in this thread) than he does legitimate criticism and that he makes valuable points that need to be heard. He very seldom says something he can't back up with evidence and I like that.

Faceicle · 22/05/2018 02:30

Slightly tangentially - how the hell did the gender critical posters of fwr get stuck with the Peterson acolyte slur in the first place? Does anyone know where it came from?

Faceicle · 22/05/2018 02:38

I hadn't heard of Peterson at all until after speaker's corner last year, when I had the delightful experience of a dudebro dismissing my gender critical arguments and stating that I was only making them because I was following blindly the blatherings of JP thus making me *rascist as well as the *bigot that he'd already accused me of being.

fmsfms · 22/05/2018 08:39

Just listening to a Peterson talk with Shapiro - episode 48 of Peterson's podcast.

At about 10mins in he brings up the personality model and differences and alleged bias, from memory this is what he said:

He knows the gender difference literature, it's solid

The Big 5 personality model/traits is well established over 30 years, not questioned. All based on empirical data and statistics, no ideological axe to grind with the big 5

Obvious question when model is established is do the sexes differ in personality?

Answer is yes, not massively different but not inconsequential. You can separate men and women with 75% accuracy

Next obvious question is are those differences caused by nature or nurture?

Let's test it, by going around the world, look at cultures and rank by gender equality of social policies.

Hypothesis: if gender differences decrease among more egalitarian societies then nurture is the biggest influence

That's exactly the opposite of what was found, repeatedly.

This is "mainstream science", the relevant studies have "thousands of citations"

"Average humanities paper has zero citations"

Addressing bias: "how do you know you can trust someones judgement about a fact? If the fact emerges despite their ideological background/presupposition

It's well known that social sciences/humanities are Left Wing dominated. No/very few conservatives amongst social psychologists = left wing bias.

It was these social scientists that came up with the data for the gender differences being bigger in more equal Countries.

They wanted to prove that gender differences got smaller as equality increased.

Scandinavia is still pushing the nurture element harder and harder in order to minimise the differences.

Maybe you get the opposite effect and the kids rebel.

Do you really want the State to have this much influence over your children?

I think this is the issue with the whole "bias" claims.

I don't have an ideological position that is firmly entrenched. Until last year I never really gave nature vs nurture much thought. I consider myself pretty left wing but like a lot of people I've been alienated by the PC/social justice authoritarian behaviour of todays far left.

People like Peterson do a far better and more compelling job of convincing me than random unfounded claims of "bias!"

The documentary I linked earlier, the whole series in fact, interviews both gender/social scientists and psychologists etc.

Only one side comes out of that series with any credibility.

The last episode which explored whether intersex babies could have their sex decided for them destroys utterly, like literally drops 10 nuclear bombs, the social science idea that gender is learnt. It is a must watch.

jordanbpeterson.com/podcasts/48-ben-shapiro/

Relevant part is 10mins to 15mins

Faceicle · 22/05/2018 09:15

Thanks for sharing your views.

Anyone aware of how this board got linked with Peterson in the first place?

MIdgebabe · 22/05/2018 09:40

I think it because he is a bit of a headline grabbing figure at the moment who does appear to hold some bizarre views about women and is happy to suggest that women are innately significantly different to men which leads to men believing they are superior. He can't debate with "crazy women" because he can't hit them isnone of his beauties I think he also has odd views on masculinity which i would call toxic. is he the guy who said no women would sleep with a man who does the cleaning?

He try's to be very careful with his language to avoid directly saying very bad stuff but a lot of insecure men read it a particular way. Given his subject is physcology I can't help but think that is deliberate. He probably knows how to manipulate people

He claims he can prove patriarchy is an illusion

He also scoffs gender identity and islamophobia , so we shouldn't take it personally

Apparently when he sticks to what he knows he is sensible and his self help books have some good common sense in them

His hard science however appears weak. I have done a bit of background since I pointed out a howler earlier in this thread and I am not the only person who thinks this. He talks about something being proven and logical and rational, when it isn't.

fmsfms · 22/05/2018 09:54

@midgebabe "His hard science however appears weak."

See the post from today at 839am

MIdgebabe · 22/05/2018 09:57

Ok i was trying to be polite.

fmsfms · 22/05/2018 10:02

Can you provide any supporting evidence or reasons why "his hard science appears weak" despite the detailed explanation he gave just two posts above?

OldmanOfTheWeb3 · 22/05/2018 10:30

Slightly tangentially - how the hell did the gender critical posters of fwr get stuck with the Peterson acolyte slur in the first place? Does anyone know where it came from?

Dr. Peterson rose to public prominence when he spoke out publicly againg Bill C-16 in Canada which criminalises not referring to people as the sex they wish to be known as / using their demanded pronouns. He then got mobbed by trans activists and heroically attempted to reason with them in defiance of all odds.

Faceicle · 22/05/2018 10:39

Oldman, yes I remember having to look that specific incident up after the first accusation of Peterson fangirl was flung at me, and at the FWR boards by association. My point is, I'd been reading and lurking here vociferously for about 18 months at this point. Occasionally posting. And there was nothing about Peterson, absolutely nada. So did I miss the fwr threads in fawning support of Peterson before my encounter with dudebro in September 2017? Or do I in fact recall correctly and there were none?

flowersonthepiano · 22/05/2018 12:06

Faceicle

Anyone aware of how this board got linked with Peterson in the first place?

I don't think it is "linked" with him. I've only been posting on here a couple of months and I think this is maybe the second thread i've seen. He's bloody everywhere at the moment promoting his book.

To me, his views on relationships between men and women are of interest because of their popularity among disaffected men.

I guess the person who 'accused' you of being a supporter may be aware of his popularity is probably aware of his massive following and assumed (wrongly) because of his refusal to use pronouns, every with issues with the trans agenda is one of his 'followers'.

Did you read the thread? I wouldn't characterise it as fawning support. There are a very wide range of opinions.

flowersonthepiano · 22/05/2018 12:07

Sorry for the terrible lack of proofreading. Hope you get the gist.

MIdgebabe · 22/05/2018 13:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

fmsfms · 22/05/2018 14:04

"I think that he cherry picks results"

Ok, what is he leaving out? Where are your links, sources and supporting evidence for this statement?

"you still fail to accept that that has not been proven at all"

Well it's obviously not proven in the same way the existence of gravity has been, otherwise we wouldn't be debating it.

I'm still not understanding what it is about the multiple studies that have already been posted?

Earlier on I googled the name of Richard Lippa, one of the scientists of one of the studies cited by Peterson. His homepage was very informative, his whole specialty is nature vs nurture and gender differences - again it's more compelling evidence psych.fullerton.edu/rlippa/lipvita2.html

The most common accusation against the scientific evidence cited by Peterson on this thread was "bias", yet as Peterson explained in my post from earlier - this evidence actually came from social psychologists who wanted to prove the influence of nurture/society.

"neither have alternative hypothesis been disproven"

What alternative hypothesis? Again, where is your evidence? You just make blanket statements

"I think perhaps you are not a scientist? "

I could say the same about you. I could also speculate based on your grammar/posts that English might not be your first language

"However I am interested in why you think it important to prove"

I'm not the scientists behind all those studies

"an innate difference between sexes in either personality or cognitive ability"

Haven't said anything about cognitive ability on this thread. Although on Lippa's homepage linked above there seems to be some studies exploring differences in this.

"Perhaps to avoid misunderstandings, state your assumptions about the nature of the innate difference."

Already done multiple times: nature has an influence, so does nurture. Eliminate/Erase all aspects of nurture and there would still be inherent differences between the sexes

NotDavidTennant · 22/05/2018 14:08

I don't think there's any particular association between Peterson and MN FWR.

It's more likely the case that if you're a dudebro then Peterson is probably the only public figure you've heard making these kinds of arguments, so if you meet someone in real life with similar opinions then they must be one of his acolytes (because where else would they have got their crazy views from?).

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread