Cathy Newman stumped by Jordan Peterson

[deadpan]

This twitter post by Sall Grover shows Cathy Newman interview Jordan Peterson on Channel 4 news.
She's challenging him about his views on trans people and asks if he cares about how his right to free speech could offend anyone.
I'm no fan of Peterson but his reply is fantastic and completely stumps Cathy Newman.

https://x.com/salltweets/status/2027540464191287329?s=20

I don't have twitter anymore but I could view the video without it.

She walked right into that one. "Why does your right to free speech trump someone else being offended" 🤦‍♂️

Is this the very old one?

Thank you, OP.

I find myself ambivalent about Peterson; I'm not a fan of his stance on many (most) topics, but he argues his points with an intellectual cohesion that all to often shows up the interviewer. It's irritating, since the result of the interview is often the opposite of the outcome we wanted to see.

Probably. Sall Grover posted it on 28 February 2026 but it doesn't give the date of the interview.

Sorry if it's old, I didn't know about it at all til I had a check in with Sall's account this morning.
It's a point I've thought for a long time us missing in the discussions - why doesn't it matter that females are offended by what's said and done. It's only trans people or TRAs we're all supposed to care about being offended.

I know what you mean, he seems to have the ability to go round in circles to the extreme.
But in this clip he makes a very good point

Yes. It's from 2018.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

I thought he looked young

This was years ago. It was great to watch.

I have mixed feelings about JP but he did very well here. It was an important time in the trans debate too.

Clever.

It's a point I've thought for a long time us missing in the discussions - why doesn't it matter that females are offended by what's said and done. It's only trans people or TRAs we're all supposed to care about being offended.

This is something that I’ve thought too.

Cultural appropriation, from Jamie Oliver cooking a jerk chicken dish (or whatever it was), wearing Rasta hats with fake dreadlocks, the black and white minstrels, right up to claiming to be black, is slammed down as offensive; a man calling himself a woman is stunning and brave and given every women’s award on offer.

I mean… you can’t be a feminist and a fan of that idiot. He’s a thick person's smart man who’s mastered the art of word salad.

I mean… you can’t be a feminist and a fan of that idiot. He’s a thick person's smart man who’s mastered the art of word salad.
OK, I'll bite. What did you disagree with in that interview?
I am ambivalent about Peterson, and don't listen to him now, because I think he's become the victim of his own publicity, but, back in the day, he was a useful voice in this debate.

Nobody here is, but your statement is simply wrong. Most adults can absolutely hold two (or even more) opposing thoughts in the same head at the same time.

The question, really, is why your pathological hatred ("He’s a thick person's smart man who’s mastered the art of word salad.") for Peterson. Is it a stance you came to after careful, studious analysis of what he's actually saying or...?

Unfortunately Cathy Newman made a dog's dinner of that interview. He ran rings around her. Like others, I'm not a fan of his but he's been a solid and impressive opponent of gender ideology for a long time

In some ways it was a wake-up call about the way modern media would change. Jordan Peterson pretended not to understand CN’s questions when they were uncomfortable and didn’t play a straight bat. It wasn’t done to test ideas or debate as had been normal in the UK up to that point, but to create content for his followers on YouTube.

JP followers are not rational when it comes to his (evident) shortcomings. Hugo Rifkind once made a joke in his Times column that JP’s premise that male = order and female = chaos was an idea refuted by a glance at their respective teenage bedrooms and his supporters went full tantrum in the comments.

I agree and I’m also a feminist. I think JP takes an overly rational view (i.e. over intellectualises and rationalises things he doesn’t fully understand like why women are on way and men another) but he has some very well developed ideas too that can withstand scrutiny. He is human so imperfect like the rest of us but when I heard his sound bites that I totally didn’t agree with particularly around feminism, I listened some more and there are definitely nuggets in there. Like the previous poster he has jumped the shark a bit for me these days but he is a deep thinker which was sorely lacking at the start of the whole rise of trans.

I’m not sure ‘studious analysis’ is actually required to decipher his pseudo academic ramblings, but it definitely takes work.
He uses big words where they’re not needed and talks in circles and riddles. A lot of the time he’s not saying much at all. Just the usual anti woman, anti minority, alt right bull shit.
He is notorious for appealing to the uneducated.

JP is very ill atm and unlikely to return to work so we won’t see him interviewing anyone again.

I'm not defending Peterson, but even with my natural opposition to him I think one of the last phrases I'd ever use to describe him is "pseudo academic". That just makes us look intellectually envious, and ridiculous.
He clearly is, or at least was before his illness, an extremely academic person. The fact you don't personally like him doesn't really have any effect on that fact.

I’m not sure ‘studious analysis’ is actually required to decipher his pseudo academic ramblings, but it definitely takes work.
He uses big words where they’re not needed and talks in circles and riddles. A lot of the time he’s not saying much at all. Just the usual anti woman, anti minority, alt right bull shit.
He is notorious for appealing to the uneducated.
You can't do it, can you? Just point to one statement in the interview that's incorrect.
Or carry on flailing around, accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being thick/Hitler.

Jordan Peterson is what he is. I'm more astonished by the self -
delusion that made Cathy Newman think she could take him on.

CN has form on being not as bright as she thinks she is
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31443076