Woke staff revolt over Jordan Peterson book

[Apollo440]

thepostmillennial.com/publishers-woke-staff-revolt-over-jordan-petersons-new-book

Isn't he regarded as transphobic for refusing to use compelled speech and warning of the consequences (and proven right by Yaniv). Seems like the woke at Random House publishing are appalled that their business is based on making a profit. Peterson may not be your glass of tea but he's hardly Goebals.

‘Men and women are biologically different but we get into dangerous territory (lady-brain etc) if we say that our psychology is inherently different, rather than as a result of socialisation, because then we will get males claiming to be women because they love tidying the house.’

It isn’t about it being inherently different, but there being some group differences on average with a huge overlap, similar to height.

Being a bit nurturing shouldn’t make a man a woman anymore than him being five foot six should.

It is also clearly not what underlies the concept of transgenderism as the gender stereotypes promoted by transgenderism are not about caring for children. They are about women as a male fantasy.

‘In research on lesbian mothers, there’s a much more equal division of work between partners, which suggests that maybe women aren’t naturally hardwired to want to do all of it to the detriment of their career.’

To me the point being demonstrated here is that lesbian parents do better because women care more about kids on average. The world isn’t full of men contributing differently but equally by pursuing their careers. Men on average work fewer hours than women and put a smaller proportion of their income into the household. Children raised by women play more, receive a greater proportion of household resources, attend school more and receive better health care.

Whether women work outside the home or in the home or a combination of the two, they are more likely to be doing so for the good of their children.

Sorry to lower the tone, but is anyone itching for on of the tabloids to cover this under the heading "Snowflake Penguins need to be more Lobster"?

Hahaha I wish headline writers were that witty! :)

In the light of several other threads it's heartening to see that Dr. Peterson's publishers are standing up for him.

It is depressing however to consider if that is as a matter of principle or simply because Dr Peterson would be too big a financial loss for them to cancel.

I think he's just too big and profitable to cancel. A new author would be dropped in an instant if the same thing happened to them.

Having said that, I do get the sense that the tide is turning a bit. I have way more conversations now with people who are questioning the "woke" orthodoxy. I think the knowledge of what's happening is becoming more widespread and people are not okay with it. Look at how alternative media has boomed while traditional newspapers die out. There will be a tipping point and it will be in our favour. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but soon.

@CatsCantCatchCriminals2

... it seems like he uses 200 words where 2 would do, and I've seen a lot of appallingly sexist quotes from him.

Could we have one such quote?

I'd love to be able to discuss on this board an actual JP quote rather than just assertions that he is sexist etc.

"Context is everything" is one of the first lessons I learned on these boards for which I am thankful. (Waves to ROwantrees.)

Anyone?

No-one

No need for evidence. Just hurl an accusation around and bugger off.
I too would like to discuss what he actually said (in context).

Reminds me of what the Repulican have just done, Make unfounded accusations about the election and then follow it up by demanding a report on alleged widespread voter fraud thus hoping to gain acceptance that there was widespread voter fraud (withut any actual evidence that there was any).

I'm a fully paid up woke liberal leftie, but am willing to admit I respect Peterson. He's measured and reasonable, doesn't make claims without evidence and is guided by a pervading respect for evidence and truth. Of course that's still subject to what initial position you're seeking evidence OF, and there he and I would part ways. But I'd much rather have to deal with a right wing that's been listening to him than one listening to Trump or Farage.

That article looks pretty weak though. There's a lot of emotive claims about "reports that people were crying" etc. with very little specificity about what anyone in particular said or did. Maybe I'm jaded from too many years in the trenches of the culture war, but I read it and see an anti-woke agenda looking for fuel for that culture war based on probably not very much at all.

Not quite sure why this thread's been bumped, or what the "come on, tell us what you think" accusations are about.

The general thrust of the thread (which I remember from first time round - bit like Groundhog day here at times) is "love him, hate him, indifferent to him, it's a good thing that his publishers have stuck up for him." And whether or not one agrees with his views is irrelevant to the belief that "cancelling" him would be a bad thing.

Not sure what the ....."come on, tell us what you think" accusations are about

They are not accusations, but questions for those making negative assertions about yer lad Peterson to back up their statements - see above from CatsCantCatchCriminals2 re: appallingly sexiest quotes. Easy enough, one would have thought if true....but no takers. Kinda makes one suspect that they are not true.

BTW This thread was bumped after I read the link that you Cara made on the BDSM thread to the shark cage blog - the author linking there abusers listening to Peterson. The nonsense of it made me smile and I remembered this thread....

''He was angry at God because women were rejecting him. The cure for that is enforced monogamy.''
Enforced monogamous pair bonding doesn't make men less violent. It means violent men are given a socially mandated private punch bag to work it out on.

The quote about women wearing make up; women who do not wear make up or heels are also sexually harassed, because sexual harassment is about power, not sexual attraction.