Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Jordan B Peterson

232 replies

CandyTiger · 27/12/2018 19:13

I was given '12 rules for life' by the above author. At first I was insulted that the person who gave me this book, actually thought I needed a self-help book (I don't btw).

I decided to read it anyway. I am not really impressed by the so called 'intellectual' Peterson. He has a bit of a reputation for arguing with feminists.

I am very interested in what other people think of Peterson.

Thanks, in advance.

OP posts:
PleasingFungusBeetle · 27/12/2018 21:06

He mixes some insightful stuff with quite a lot of outright lies. I strongly advise you to check all of his "facts"

FloralBunting · 27/12/2018 21:09

I'm not a guardianista, so I care not what their opinion is, but his videos are often shared to me with the explicit strap line that he 'demolishes feminism' so I peg him in the 'anti-feminist' category precisely because that seems to be where he is happy to put himself.

That's fine on one level - everyone is entitled to their own view, and I would much rather someone be honest about those views than pretend to claim a label and undermine it at the same time.

But it's not a stretch to call him 'anti-feminist' really. At least anti what he appears to think of as feminism.

ToeToToe · 27/12/2018 21:09

I'm never quite sure whether Person is actually anti-feminist, or just not a feminist, or if we're all even using the same definition of feminism --- but he certainly says he is not feminist in interviews, and poo-poos any talk of the patriarchy.

donquixotedelamancha · 27/12/2018 21:46

A mixture of common sense, snake oil, and stereotypes presented as objective reality.

I think there is a lot of truth to that. I haven't watched huge amounts of his views but....

On the positives:

  • He argues very well (even when wildly wrong).
  • He seems strongly anti-violence and anti fascist.
  • He makes a really good case for free speech and I have a lot of sympathy for his position on things like pronouns (despite coming from a place of disagreement).
  • A lot of his points about the problems with identity politics and the perils of denying individual liberty are not wrong.

On the other hand:

  • He has massive blind spots about the problems with 'leftist' issues in politics and seems pathologically incapable of being even handed.
  • He is intellectually arrogant and allows no room to be wrong. On issues he doesn't understand (like climate change) this leads to childishly stupid conclusions.
  • His (quite reasonable) defense of individual liberty leads him to ignore the effects of systemic disadvantage to an unreasonable degree. It's fine to argue that feminism or black lives matter has the wrong conclusions, but it's daft to argue that there are no equality issues to address.
Jenny17 · 27/12/2018 21:49

When a fellow academic (female) got into trouble by the trans lobby from their university, he supported her by also suing the university. Whatever you say about him that was a top thing to do.

ToeToToe · 27/12/2018 22:05

It was, Jenny. He is strongly for freedom of speech, especially in universities. And I really admire him for that.

MargueritaPink · 27/12/2018 22:10

But it's not a stretch to call him 'anti-feminist' really. At least anti what he appears to think of as feminism

It is frequently said on here - "do you support women having equal rights? - then you are a feminist, whether you call yourself one or not".

I can't imagine for one minute Peterson does not support equal rights so by the definition often used on here he would be, whether he likes it or not; particularly when adding his views on abortion and prostitution. I find the "he's not a feminist" a bit glib. Especially when there are plenty of lefty bros claiming to be feminists who have repellent views.

I assume he doesn't support quotas or all women short lists- neither do I.

userschmoozer · 27/12/2018 22:24

“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”

''Most of his ideas stem from a gnawing anxiety around gender. “The masculine spirit is under assault,” he told me. “It’s obvious.”
In Mr. Peterson’s world, order is masculine. Chaos is feminine. And if an overdose of femininity is our new poison, Mr. Peterson knows the cure. Hence his new book’s subtitle: “An Antidote to Chaos.”''

www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

Enforced monogamy is anti feminist.

FloralBunting · 27/12/2018 22:53

MargueritaPink, for what it's worth, I'm not gung ho about quotas or AWS myself because it's clearly too easy to game.

I don't think it's out of order to say he's not a feminist when he wouldn't attempt to claim the label for himself anyway. And yes, there is a big question mark about what 'brand' of feminism he rejects given the distinct differences in emphasis between libfems and radfems etc and that most of his arguments against feminism seem to be against a hybrid mix of rad and lib fem ideas and thus no coherent answer to either.

Ultimately I agree with a pp who said that he seems incapable of acknowledging any kind of systemic unfairness, and his arguments often boil down to 'The West is really great in comparison to Saudi'. Which ok, yeah, on one level. But I'm not really excited about being told two dead women a week is the least worst option and I should be grateful...

MargueritaPink · 27/12/2018 22:56

I don't think it's out of order to say he's not a feminist when he wouldn't attempt to claim the label for himself anyway

No of course it isn't out of order in that sense but it's used (as far as I can see) as a sort of "gotcha" to dismiss or discredit him

FWRLurker · 27/12/2018 23:04

“The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”

oh, BS.

Monogamy succeeded as a reproductive strategy in humans because our offspring were too helpless for too long to survive without collaboration between both parents (and really a larger social group as well).

Those human ancestors who “went their own way” failed to pass on their genes because their kids (if they had any) died. Those who worked together succeed. So (social at least) monogamy persisted as the predominant strategy. Then humans came up with cultural “reasons” to explain why monogamy is important.

So no. Monogamy did not develop because some guys were sad because they were “rejected” for being virulent misogynists. Sorry PJ.

MagicMix · 27/12/2018 23:07

He essentially argues that society is male dominated because men are just better. I am not sure why saying he's not a feminist could possibly be controversial. His views on feminism are asinine.

FloralBunting · 27/12/2018 23:11

No of course it isn't out of order in that sense but it's used (as far as I can see) as a sort of "gotcha" to dismiss or discredit him

Not to dismiss or discredit on my part - I have said that I value his clear sighted contributions about free speech and liberty. But I think it is fairly crucial to be honest about those we consider allies for very specific reasons. The long threads tediously enunciating the various controversial things people who are GC in a specific sense have said is a good reason to be honest about where people may differ.

It's not a dismissal as much as a note of caution - a 'eat the meat and discard the bones' exhortation, perhaps.

Melanippe · 27/12/2018 23:17

I'm with Floral here, he's great on free speech and free thought, but I don't agree with the vast majority of what he says, especially when it comes to race, women or feminism. I don't know anyone who has read his 12 things book and had their lives changed by it, so he does seem to be making money for nothing, good luck to him

PineapplePower · 27/12/2018 23:27

I think he has value in motivating otherwise worthless men (why, oh why do we have so many?) and getting them out of their basements and doing something useful with their life.

He has nothing much of value for feminist women, however. Maybe I’ll try to get through his book (DH bought it) and see if it gives me a kick in the arse to do better in life.

I do think he’s very vague when it come to women’s social roles, intentially so, because he knows they are somewhat antiquated.

gcscience · 27/12/2018 23:33

He mixes some insightful stuff with quite a lot of outright lies. I strongly advise you to check all of his "facts" Any examples spring to mind?

I'm not that familiar with him, but as a biologist I can see that there are slightly different themes for m & f with regard to sexual selection. This stems from differences between gametes etc. Whether his ideas on enforced monogamy would necessarily spring from that, I don't know, but pretending evolution has not been affected by gamete and other sex-based differences seems illogical.
Our physical sex-based differences are to do with reproductive roles, and any behavioural differences surely would be too. This does not require a pink brain / blue brain idea, it could easily be hormone or Y chromosome based.

pachyderm · 27/12/2018 23:55

I appreciate the reasonable tone of this thread. I agree he's wrong about a lot of things and right about others, and that he's an interesting phenomenon: what is going on with young men? I am tired of echo chambers where he's either God or HitlerSad

Jenny17 · 28/12/2018 00:38

Jordan Peterson claims that people misquote him and I think he is right. After watching him in a few videos I think there are far bigger fish to fry than some of his comments.

Dragon3 · 28/12/2018 00:54

Having heard his reputation I was amazed to find that I agree with JP on quite a few things. Disagree on others. He has been appallingly misrepresented in the media (e.g. he is clear that men are the problem WRT incels, not women) and there are certainly bigger fish to fry.

He's not a feminist but neither does he hate women.

IfyouseeRitaMoreno · 28/12/2018 00:57

Enforced monogamy is anti feminist

Is he actually advocating enforced monogamy or just arguing that monogamy evolved as a way of pacifying angry horny men. Men divvying up woman as resources. That wouldn’t be unbelievable as men did use to own women’s labour.

ToeToToe · 28/12/2018 01:25

jordanbpeterson.com/media/on-the-new-york-times-and-enforced-monogamy/

Here's what he says about enforced monogamy. I'm assuming he means marriage as an institution - because he says 'culturally promoted' (or something) - rather than men actually divvying up the women, Elliott Rodgers style.

But firstly he'd have to persuade the MGTOWs to marry in the first place, and persuade the incels to stop being so bloody creepy, and that women are not some foreign species, or sex dolls, but sentient, individuals with personalities. Some seem to be offended that women are allowed to refuse them at all. (Elliott Rodger & co).

endchauvinism · 28/12/2018 02:12

I think he's a charlatan who just repeats basic self care most people have already heard and teaches young men to be really sexist towards women.

Rachelle3211 · 28/12/2018 02:44

He essentially argues that society is male dominated because men are just better. I am not sure why saying he's not a feminist could possibly be controversial. His views on feminism are asinine.

I've listened to many interviews of his and I've yet to see him say men are better? He rejects modern feminism but has stated many times he believes in equal rights. It astounds me how often he is misquoted. And he is far from the alt-right poster boy. Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish.

FlyingOink · 28/12/2018 04:08

Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish.
They're similar, Shapiro does very well in arguments because he talks very quickly and eloquently.
I like listening to intelligent eloquent people even if I disagree with them.
Frankly if Peterson manages to get some wasted young men to do something with their lives then he's a net positive. There are so many aimless young men about. Perhaps they're lost because the well trodden path is no longer there; in my time arguing with those types I often point out that their vicarious nostalgia for a time when men were men etc is very rose-tinted.
Men in the 50s, for example, didn't all live in a Norman Rockwell painting. Many had difficult, dangerous, dirty jobs, huge amounts of pressure to provide, little social mobility, little opportunity outside their social circle or class and died young.
But incels are determined it was all white picket fences and assigned (beautiful, healthy, loving, didn't-die-in-childbirth) wives.
What they forget is that the power men had then went hand in hand with more responsibility than most of them could cope with, in a world of shotgun weddings, mouths to feed and little welfare support.
Life has improved for men but incels and the aimless youth fail to see or appreciate it, and instead focus on their female classmates outperforming them or the existence of scholarships for minorities.
If he shakes some pride and sense into them that's not a bad thing.

Miffer · 28/12/2018 04:17

I've listened to many interviews of his and I've yet to see him say men are better?

Well in the 2 minutes I just watched he denied that society was male dominated then said that if it was "to some degree" it was based on competence.

He also said that the only men who dominate are the very top tier (ignoring the fact that almost universally women, as a class, are poorer).

He also said more men die in wars, ignoring the fact that there are more women that have died or not existed in the first place just for being female than number of men that have died in all modern wars (that is wars we have accurate figures for and women in the same period of said wars).

He said more men are in prison, I mean....

He then got really mad about the female interviewer bringing up tyranny ever though she hadn't said tyranny.

He also got really mad when she mentioned sexual violence because that's asymmetry but homeless people being mostly male isn't asymmetry it's something else because reasons.

I just watched him say these things.

I couldn't stomach more than two minutes.

But yeah he didn't say "men are better". He just implied they are more "competent" at running society. So yeah, it's fine.

Ben Shapiro also gets touted as alt right and he is hated by them because he is jewish

I mean... he was the editor of fucking Breitbart. They hate him for different reasons now but he was right on the cutting edge back in the day. He's a grade A cunt.