Jordan Peterson

[Perimental]

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

Thoughts on this man......

We're going to see him in July with Sam Harris and Douglas Murray, which should be interesting. I don't agree with everything he says, but I respect him. I've found the people I know who object strongly to him don't like his didactic manner, which I like, and have rarely listened to more than 5 minutes of him, but I think he's worth listening too. Far better than Robert Webb and the journ alists of the Guardian ( and there can't be much wrong with someone the Guardian hates that much)

@womanformallyknownaswoman

"The countries with the highest number of females in STEM in Europe are the old communist bloc where women were allocated men's jobs - they had to obey - turns out it was the best thing for them, their earning capacity, independence and for their kids"

The Quillette article I linked to goes into more detail about that – less equal Countries have more women in STEM because STEM is one of the best routes for women to improve their social standing. In more egalitarian Countries with bigger welfare states then women have more freedom to pursue their own interests

I must say there's a real lack of women in these positions of social influence.

Or perhaps a lack of real women in these positions of social influence

Or perhaps a lack of women with real experiences of being systemically subjugated at every turn for the crime of rejecting abusive men

In more egalitarian Countries with bigger welfare states then women have more freedom to pursue their own interests

Caveat- until they leave abuse and find that the system re-abuses where the abuser left off and it's too late to try and regain a career

There's so much not measured in this research like the views of women leaving abuse for a start- but I will read the article and come back to you. (Muttering to self - none of this so called research is women-centred so you never hear their side of the story - only what the men want us to read and think)

To sum up fmsfms without waffling, he is going to write 1000s of words telling you there is no pay gap because women like looking after people and men do stuff with things.

To sum up fmsfms without waffling, he is going to write 1000s of words telling you there is no pay gap because women like looking after people and men do stuff with things.

LOL!! Yep the people and things argument all over again. And what I observe is that men who see people as objects are abusive - so is he telling us all men are abusers……??

Plus men are more demanding so will insist on a pay rise, and men are more likely to want to put in the 70 hours a week or whatever necessary to become a top banker.

Instead of mocking fmsfms argument, why don't you try countering it with evidence?

@PicassosPaintbrush

"To sum up fmsfms without waffling, he is going to write 1000s of words telling you there is no pay gap because women like looking after people and men do stuff with things."

“To sum up fmsfms without waffling, he is going to write 1000s of words telling you there is no pay gap because women like looking after people and men do stuff with things.”

If you can quote one of my posts where I’ve said there is “no pay gap” then I will donate £100 to a charity of your choice.

You won’t be able to because you’re strawmanning me, which makes another logical fallacy to go with your ad hominem attacks on me from the “pay gap” thread

Guys, this thread is about Jordan Peterson not the pay gap.

@PicassosPaintbrush has brought the pay gap because she followed hereme from the "pay gap" thread. I pointed out to her that many posters in this thread were requesting some of the same information that I had posted here - eg the Quillette article and the documentary.

Now she's here straw manning what I said over there.

You may disagree with what JBP says about the pay gap, but I find his arguments and evidence very compelling and convincing

Instead of mocking fmsfms argument, why don't you try countering it with evidence?

Because it's not worth countering, only mocking.

"so is he telling us all men are abusers……??"

He argues that, yes. Or not so much that all men are, but at least have the capability, including himself, and that childrearing is a matter of socializing men (specifically), not to grow up to be psychopaths.

His argument is not 'fuck men, men are bastards', but 'all men have the innate potential for evil, and society, parents and men individually need to strive against that potential and grow up to be Good'.

He likes to talk about concentration camps and such like from the perspective of 'these were ordinary men perpetrating this'

I think he concentrates on men on the basis that nearly all the evil in the world is from men, specifically, and he is asking 'how do we stop men from turning into incels and monsters'

They really did not request it.

@PicassosPaintbrush "They really did not request it."

Actually @CuckooCuckooClock said

"He said something about how societies that are further along the path to gender equality actually have more people choosing traditional gender roles. Or something like that. I'd be interested to hear more on his evidence for that. Anyone point me in the right direction?"

Anyway, shouldn't you be finding where I said "there is no pay gap?" Remember £100 on offer to charity of your choice if you can quote me saying that.

Picasso

Because it's not worth countering, only mocking

Right. 🤔

Just to flip the scenario, how do you feel when the pro-trans lobby won't engage with anybody even slightly gender critical, because 'they aren't worth debating, only mocking?'

That isn't the position of somebody who is right, it's the position of somebody who can't defend their own position.

If you say so.

@PatriarchyPersonified Can we ignore Picasso, by her own admission she's not interested in debate. Engage with her and she'll just straw man and ad hominem you.

Is Peterson's work considered gender critical?

What I've seen of his it (which matches what other people are describing here) is that his arguments are the opposite of gender critical.

what I've seen of his it

Depends what you mean by gender critical.

I think he sees biological sex as important, and doesn't feel under any obligation to affirm your self declared gender.

He is oft quoted because he refused to use bollocky pronouns at work, which raised his profile substantially. This is because he thinks it's an imposition though, not because he is pro women.

I like Peterson. I don't agree with all of his views but I share the same concerns about third wave intersectional feminism.

I'm also going to see him in July with Sam Harris and Douglas Murray, really looking forward to it.

There's a great discussion between Peterson and Camille Paglia on YouTube

Mumsnet meet-up at the o2?

Yeah, I'm increasingly wondering what people mean when they say "gender critical".

I thought it meant, "being critical of the concept that gender is an innate biological concept; and believing that gender is a set of roles and expectations imposed by a society upon its members according to whether it perceives them to have a female body or a male body."

Peterson is very clear that he behaves differently to people according to whether he perceives them to be male or female – for example when he's talking about debating with men and with women. He explains that he has expectations of roles each will take according to whether his interlocutor is male or female. He doesn't explain this as "because socialization", but as though both he and they are behaving according to something innate.

I'd struggle to describe that as anything other than imposing gender.

I was going to ask if anyone was familiar with Camille Paglia - because someone linked this clip on Twitter, which I think might have been what got me reading about Peterson in the first place. I like her forthrightness.