-3

I'm curious what women here think of his ideas. There was so much vitriol directed toward him by the same people who hate JKR, so I went to check him out and... while I don't agree with 100% of what he says, since I'm a different human being obviously, but he says a lot of interesting things and I do agree with his take on pronouns and trans people.

Interview here where he explains why he won't use preferred pronouns and explains his view, as a clinical psychologist, on "gender-fluid" people (long story short, they exist, and they're psychologically distinct, but that obviously doesn't mean they're the opposite sex, and 99% of people who are ambivalent about their gender are best served by NOT getting surgery): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3enLBUJ5Od0

He also talks in that video about how "insane" it is that Canadian laws prevent therapists from doing anything but affirming the alleged gender identity of their patients.

Article about his pronoun issue: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695

I'm curious what women here think of his ideas. There was so much vitriol directed toward him by the same people who hate JKR, so I went to check him out and... while I don't agree with 100% of what he says, since I'm a different human being obviously, but he says a lot of interesting things and I do agree with his take on pronouns and trans people. Interview here where he explains why he won't use preferred pronouns and explains his view, as a clinical psychologist, on "gender-fluid" people (long story short, they exist, and they're psychologically distinct, but that obviously doesn't mean they're the opposite sex, and 99% of people who are ambivalent about their gender are best served by NOT getting surgery): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3enLBUJ5Od0 He also talks in that video about how "insane" it is that Canadian laws prevent therapists from doing anything but affirming the alleged gender identity of their patients. Article about his pronoun issue: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695

109 comments

Jordan Peterson is a hack, I'll never understand why anyone finds him particularly compelling, he rides on the success of his own worshippers. He was a chronic alcoholic who developed a benzo addiction, and then went to Russia to get put into a coma (quack treatment), instead of taking responsibility for his problems and enduring medically validated addiction treatment. Is he still on that stupid meat only diet lol... he will follow almost any masculinity cult he can milk for attention to its death. He's run all kinds of scam type services, that increase his followers weird psychological dependence on him, including letting men call him for advice for $200 a month

Peterson's said stupid and offensive shit about abortion (an indisputably "moral wrong" in his eyes) to Betty Friedan (whiny), feminist movements to women in general. He threatened to sue an academic feminist at Cornell in 2018, for defamation, for calling him a misogynist. He also has dumb and dangerous opinions about other stuff, like Russia's war in Ukraine, he defends the idea that Russia is reacting against a "degenerate West". The stuff he says that is correct is so banal as to be unremarkable. I mean really, you should clean your room? lol

There was this exchange recently at a talk in 2021 (https://www.crikey.com.au/2021/06/07/jordan-peterson-dangerous-fraud/)

"Chaos, the eternal feminine, is also the crushing force of sexual selection. Women are choosy maters… "

This weekend he started up again with the same old bullshit.

“Why is the feminine represented as chaos?” a fan asked. “My feminist friends often question that part of your teaching.”

Peterson snarls back: “Well, let’s throw something back at your feminist friends.” And so it begins. It’s a “foregone conclusion” that the patriarchy is represented with masculine symbols.

“And it seems an equally foregone conclusion that the patriarchy is order, so if the masculine symbolism is used by feminists themselves to represent order, what is left for the feminine to be represented by? Order? Well that’s already taken! And the reason your feminist friends object to it is … well, I would say fundamentally there’s two reasons: they object to everything and they don’t understand it and they don’t understand their own behaviour. So you ask them: well why is the masculine represented as order?”

Then he meanders off into Daoism (“Get your feminists to ask the Daoists why yin is feminine?”) before saying the feminine throws the masculine into disorder “primarily through rejection”.

He's an angry weirdo, thinks his nonstandard interpretations of folklore mean that patriarchal symbols literally exist somehow and guide reality, and that violating this symbology causes social problems. Not only is he sexist, but he's a really weird sexist, when you get down to it.

if you are interested just look at any of the 10000 videos on youtube called "Jordan peterson owns feminist", it's hard for women to pull up quotes, because most of his material is actually in talks and interviews, not in written pieces, I think this is partially deliberate as part of selling himself as a guru for young men.

Thank you. It doesn't take two seconds to google this shit and see what he's done to women as a whole. The part he's played in radicalizing men even further then they already are. He's a patron saint of incels for a reason.No man who listens to Peterson has ever ended up better for it. And that's saying something since they start off shitty misogynist in the first place. The bs I see excusing him is pathetic.

"He's a patron saint of incels for a reason"

If he's a patron saint of incels, that tells me they must be even more absolute and utter morons than I thought, because everything I've ever heard him say about incels is that they are losers who have only themselves to blame for their lack of sexual satisfaction.

I saw some interview when someone asked him about incels being mad that women aren't attracted to them, and he said (I'm paraphrasing), "Well OF COURSE they're not attracted to them! And you can't blame them for not being attracted, who would be?"

He then went on to itemize the character and personality flaws of incels and to advise that if they want anyone to be interested in them, personally or sexually, they need to basically do a full demo and rebuild on their personalities and lifestyles.

This. For god's sake this. Can we just bookmark this thread, not engage with the Peterson apologists in future and just link to all of these comments.

[–] furyosa no, thank you 11 points

The stuff he says that is correct is so banal as to be unremarkable. I mean really, you should clean your room? lol

[...]

Chaos, the eternal feminine

It just hit me about 'the feminine is represented as chaos' and his urging that young men 'clean their rooms'. It's the infamous male projection yet again. He's basically saying that young men are living in chaos and that they need to remedy that by cleaning. It's actually the masculine, not the feminine, that is represented by chaos lol. (I reject masculine and feminine principles of course, just poking fun of his own logic from within his own framework.)

[–] hmimperialtortie AGP = evil 6 points

Bet it comes down to “You need to clean your room because if it’s messy you’re being feminine!” 😱😱😱

And yet they expect their mothers to clean up after them, hmmmm

That's not even remotely what he says, though. I don't know, I'm interested in legit criticism of him (or of any thinker/writer), but attacking misrepresentations of someone's ideas is not legitimate criticism.

Just so it's clear, I don't hear any bad faith in your answer -- it sounds like you genuinely think that's his message, and in response to that, any reasonable person would be horrified.

But it's not what he's said, so with the caveat that I truly don't think you said that in bad faith, it smacks of the "JK Rowling wants trans people dead" school of debate.

Oh god yeah, rhe feminine chaos thing! There is an interview with him and Christina Hoff Sommers where he talks about that, and he even says that the woman represents chaos “from the male perspective,” but without critically analyzing that fact. Like… how did he not stop and think that he is only conceptualizing the world from a male perspective and acting like it is some Total Truth? It is just ridiculous. He is not as smart as he thinks he is!

The chaos thing annoys me too, as mentioned elsewhere on this thread. But...

"how did he not stop and think that he is only conceptualizing the world from a male perspective and acting like it is some Total Truth?"

Isn't his saying "from a male perspective" exactly that? Acknowledging that he's speaking of the world as seen from a male perspective, not a universal-truth perspective?

Maybe I am missing something in his argument here (and it is entirely possible that I am). I felt as if declaring the female as Chaos and the male as Order was sort of declaring that this is a universal truth rather than a subjective truth. I thought otherwise perhaps he could have discussed the way in which, to one sex, the other sex always represents chaos. But I'd be intrigued to learn more about the argument if I'm missing something.

"thinks his nonstandard interpretations of folklore mean that patriarchal symbols literally exist somehow and guide reality"

I mean so does every Jungian psychologist. That's just par for the course with them, that archetypal symbols literally exist and guide reality. And they each have their own spin on interpreting folklore and symbols.

"Peterson's said stupid and offensive shit about abortion (an indisputably "moral wrong" in his eyes)"

Thanks for pointing that out. Based on your comment I google-fu'd and found him talking about that, although prefacing his comment with a statement that he doesn't have a good answer, hasn't thought it through well enough to have a good one, but was willing to "flail about" in an attempt to answer the question.

To very closely paraphrase what he said (I'm not a stenographer and don't have the time to stop and start the video to ensure I get every word right), he said,

"Abortion is clearly wrong... you wouldn't recommend that someone that you love have one. Having clarified that, that mere statement doesn't illuminate the complexity of the situation. First question: should everything wrong be illegal? No. Then additional complication: difference in gravity...

It's actually the wrong question. Leonard Cohen once said in a massacre there's no decent place to stand. Sometimes you're where there is no good decision left; no matter what you do it's wrong. How'd you get there? To where you'd be inclined to seek an abortion?

We have a lot to straighten out about sexual relations between men and women - they're bent, warped out of shape. So the discussion regarding morality of abortion is nested inside a larger discussion about the proper place of sexuality in human behavior. To me that's the level where problem needs to be addressed." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5k9EDgY8UM

So, I obviously disagree -- I HAVE in fact recommended abortion to someone I cared about, and I'm sad she didn't listen because things did not turn out well for her or the child. There absolutely are situations where any reasonably compassionate, intelligent human being would or should recommend abortion as at least an option to consider.

And I'm not just talking about the obvious situations of rape/incest or medical need (which JP's response completely misses, he's just talking about abortion as birth control). I have recommended abortion for the exact reason spoken of by Megan Thee Stallion in her recent oeuvre "Plan B," where she says "Poppin' Plan B 'cause I ain't planning to be stuck with you."

I think Peterson is a misogynist asshole who happens to be right about this trans identity stuff. Same as Matt Walsh and Fucker Carlson. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

I remember after Walsh started talking about all the gender stuff, I looked into him and listened to a couple of his podcasts before stopping in abject disgust. In one of them he actually talks about how embarrassed he was once that some fans saw him sitting in the passenger seat of his car while his wife drove. He said he felt their judgment because he knows how much he judges a man when he sees him sitting in the passenger seat of “his” car. That was it for me… I vommed

He really, really hates women.

And you say that based on...?

That one unhinged rant he went on about how women shouldn't be allowed to wear make up in the workplace because it makes men too horny. Or the other unhinged rant where asserted that being unable to punch women in a socially acceptable way is a flaw of society. Or his unhinged rants about women representing chaos. Or his unhinged rants on why all women should have children. Or his unhinged rants about the gender pay gap being an acceptable market force. Or his unhinged rants about how women are being tricked into having careers.

Basically, its his unhinged rants about hating women, that gives me the impression he hates women.

Stopped clock! Right twice a day! Begone with the 'he makes some good points' schtick. He makes way more bloody awful points (women are 'chaos'). Or tediously obvious points (tidy your room boys!). He's intellectually all over the fucking place. A psychoanalyst by training if I recall, yet bangs on about evolutionary psychology.

He's not a friend of women. For god's sake the worst people gain traction precisely because the things they have to say are not completely mental. It's the bits that are mental you need to focus on. OMG!

He's a loser, can we stop trying to shill him on here. Like Christ, I assure you he hates women and he loves his fame and bullshit takes. If some stuff hits it's because he plagiarized it, which is also well known. He's an idiot who borrows from better minds and tries to pass it off as his own. I can find his like easily if I scroll through Reddit.

The fact that there are women on here defending him is actually so depressing. Newsflash ladies, 95% of males, including Peterson, would never expend any effort to defend a woman he does not know without any ulterior motives. Can we please spend our energy uplifting/defending radical feminist women instead of mediocre males just because they agree with us on one issue?

[–] [Deleted] 12 points Edited

They defend Matt Walsh too. "But he's saying one thing right!" Who gives a shit, he thinks raped little girls should be forced to carry a baby. He hates women. I don't know why women keep giving attention and unearned applause to these scrotes. Same men who would happily destroy all women's rights. No Petterson is not right, he's a fucking hack and a con artist. Sure the MAGAs and Redditors of the world fall for his faux intellectual shit, but it's sad to see it here.

"95% of males, including Peterson, would never expend any effort to defend a woman he does not know without any ulterior motives"

Do you mean physically defend, or otherwise? Because Peterson has defended Helen Joyce, J.K. Rowling, etc., and he's repeatedly blasted incel types as losers who need to take responsibility for their own lives instead of blaming women.

About the latter, he said something to the effect that it's idiotic for incels to be mad that women don't want to sleep with them, because OF COURSE we don't, incels are making zero effort to develop any of the attributes of mind, body or character that make human beings attracted to each other. He said it's "very rational" for women to reject incel types, and if incels want sexual partners they need to make themselves into better human beings.

[–] adobo 13 points Edited

If you think he doesn't have ulterior motives I really don't know what to tell you.

So he's saying common sense stuff that women have been saying for ages? Wow, what an incredible guy! The fact that you feel the need to credit a male for saying as something as basic as incels are stupid is kinda sad. It's obvious from your comments that you're a Peterson fan. Have you ever asked yourself why so many misogynist males worship him?

Yeah, one thing I always did appreciate about him was that he tries to help young men actually stop being losers instead of encouraging them to be entitled. It is actually kind of rare nowadays.

I had mixed-to-positive feelings about him for a while. I felt he was bizarrely painted as a poster boy for the alt right, when really all he did was talk about the foolishness of gender neutral pronouns and the danger of compelled speech, as well as discussing certain fundamental sex differences while acknowledging they were not always true, just statistically significant enough to differentiate the sexes in a general sense. But over time, he began to grate on me as his rhetoric became increasingly similar to that of an American talk show media Republican. I think because he was rejected by the mainstream media and elite, he was pushed into the arms of conservative media and then he began to be influenced by them. Now he predictably spouts all the conservative media stuff—and I am not saying I disagree with all of it, but I certainly disagree with much of it—and my bigger issue is that it just seems so… regressive that he so obviously “picked a side” and now doesn’t even seem like an independent thinker anymore. What made me finally just go “no” was that stupid tweet he made about the Sports Illustrated model being “not beautiful.” I then saw his unhinged rant on his daughter’s social media channel about it. Dude was practically shaking and crying as if the “conspiracy” of the media to promote chubbier women is the worst thing to happen to society. I just don’t understand why a supposed “intellectual” would go down such a rabbit hole over women’s bodies. Does he really think it was better in the 1990s when women were basically told they had to be anorexic with breast implants in order to be hot? And then where he truly lost the plot was the idiotic “women are chaos” thing. He even admitted that this was from a male perspective, but didnt stop to think about the fact that maybe to women, men seem like chaos, and the male perspective is not the only “correct” one. As I mentioned in another comment on here, he is definitely not as smart as he thinks he is. But I don’t think he would be spouting as much of the pro-male and seemingly misogynistic crap if he hadn’t been alienated by all his academic buddies for his views on compelled speech for trans pronouns. He has been radicalized, despite having written on radicalization. Funny, that.

Anyway, TLDR, for a while I thought he had okay things to say, even if I didnt always agree with him, but his overly emotional rhetoric was his downfall, and he fell into a boring and predictable “American conservative media” box.

Edit: more detail haha.

Yeah, I agree he does seem to have moved rightward and it's probably at least in part because he found no home whatsoever anywhere on the left, including in GC circles. That might not be a BIG part of why he drifted that way, but it's a part.

It's unfortunate because he could've been a good meeting point or common-ground type of thinker for GC people and the non-insane conservatives (the ones who understand that Trump is a worthless and horrifying human being).

Definitely agree. Have you heard of Africa Brooke? She is a very interesting writer and consultant who has a very positive online presence. Her big thing is, "You are not my enemy just because we disagree on some things." She was actually interviewed by Peterson even though she is most definitely a feminist, but she vibed with him about the experience of being "cancelled" for not conforming to the "woke" ideology and actually having nuanced views. I would like to see Peterson do more interviews with people like her, but I think he's making bank on selling books and doing talks for directionless men (I don't have an issue with him doing that, fundamentally, but I just think he has started to play into all the expectations associated with it, which isn't a good thing).

[–] sealwomyn 15 points Edited

He's misogynistic, gender essentialist, male chauvinist garbage whose drivel isn't worth the pages it's printed on. There are so many intelligent women we could be discussing instead of pathetic scrotes like him.

I wish we could hear more from people like Kathleen Stock! She is amazing, and ten times the intellect Peterson is. But I think she isn’t quite as famous because she is too smart. Peterson has nailed the “art” of talking down to young men of mediocre minds with cheesy self-help books. For that reason, he is super famous.

He believes misogyny does not exist. I can't even begin to consider the ideas of such a person seriously. He also would call any TIM "she", he just objects to made up pronouns.

I haven't been able to find anything via google that supports your first claim re what he believes. Do you have a cite?

As for the second, from everything I've read he would object to absolutely any law/rule/social norm that would punish people for refusing to use preferred pronouns, regardless of whether it was a real pronoun (he/she) or a made-up one. He did say that if a person asked him politely to call them by the opposite-sex pronoun, with a willingness to respect that he could refuse if he wanted to, then he might well honor their request.

Perhaps I misspoke. Although this seems to be his opinion, I can't find him saying it directly. The actual quote is “The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory”. in an interview with Tucker Carlson. He also seems to lament that it isn't acceptable to use physical violence with "crazy women." Which is also on Youtube. I don't recall where I saw the video where he was interviewed along with the TIM, and when he was asked what he would call the TIM, he said "She"

It's funny to me how men flip flop throughout history. Women are chaos! Men are order! When it comes to art and such? Men are emotion, passion, creativity! Women are stability, tradition, utility! It's the same old shit, we're whatever suits them best. I inherently dislike someone who speaks about my sex in this way. I also find his hatred of pomo kind of funny, considering how convoluted and nonsensical some of his writing is.

We're just a blank sheet for them to project on. Endlessly whatever they want us to be. Yet a mystery. Unknowable. What is it that we want? They muse and opine but wouldn't, you know, ask us, because we're imaginary.

Sigh.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

He is a misogynist.

“The people who hold that our culture is an oppressive patriarchy, they don’t want to admit that the current hierarchy might be predicated on competence”

“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.”

[+] [Deleted] 0 points
Load more (13 comments)