Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism
Summary
TLDRIn an interview, controversial psychologist Jordan Peterson debates various gender issues with British journalist Cathy Newman. They discuss topics including the gender pay gap, lack of women in top leadership roles, differences between men and women, equality of opportunity versus outcome, compelled speech laws regarding gender pronouns, authoritarian attitudes among some activists, biological influences on social hierarchies, and accusations that Peterson provokes anger in his followers.
Takeaways
- 😊 Peterson says men need to mature and take on more responsibility, which gives meaning and purpose
- 😕 He believes gender equality of outcome is undesirable and won't happen even in progressive Scandinavia
- 🤔 The gender pay gap is not solely due to gender, but partly due to choices and personality traits
- 😏 Successful women often have more stereotypical masculine traits like assertiveness
- 🧐 Hierarchy and status matter biologically even in lobsters, tracked by serotonin levels
- 🤨 Trans activism stems from the same ideology that killed millions under Mao, in Peterson's view
- 😮 As a professor, Peterson would address a trans student by their preferred pronoun
- 😠 He sees himself as a truth teller, not a provocateur trying to stir things up
- 🙂 Peterson believes his writings have helped thousands back from destruction
- 😉 He is willing to defend his views robustly in adversarial interviews
Q & A
What evidence does Dr. Peterson provide to support his claim that personality differences, not gender alone, account for much of the gender pay gap?
-Dr. Peterson cites research on the personality trait of agreeableness. Studies show that agreeable people, who tend to be compassionate and polite, get paid less than less agreeable people in the same jobs. Since women on average score higher in agreeableness, this contributes to the gender pay gap.
How does Dr. Peterson respond to the interviewer's question about whether bosses should adopt more 'female' traits like compassion?
-Dr. Peterson says it's a reasonable idea for companies to try adopting a more feminine, compassionate orientation. However, he says there's no evidence that those traits actually predict success in the workplace. The market incentivizes intelligence, conscientiousness and toughness.
What does Dr. Peterson mean when he says equality of outcome is undesirable?
-He's referring to forcing exactly equal representation of men and women in all occupations. Peterson argues that even in very egalitarian societies like Scandinavia, men and women make different career and family choices, on average. He thinks forcibly equalizing outcomes would require tremendous social pressure.
How does Dr. Peterson counter the argument that language dictating pronoun use should be updated to avoid offending people?
-Dr. Peterson emphasizes the importance of freedom of speech to freely discuss controversial ideas, even at the risk of offense. Compelled speech limits thought and discussion needed to arrive at truth and understanding.
Why does Dr. Peterson use lobsters to argue that hierarchy is inevitable in human organizations?
-Lobsters' nervous systems run on serotonin like humans' do. Peterson argues this shows hierarchy has evolved across species over hundreds of millions of years, well before human cultural constructs - so it can't be blamed solely on Western patriarchy.
What evidence does Dr. Peterson provide that women are not being excluded from high-level positions purely due to discrimination?
-Dr. Peterson argues that very competent, driven women still choose to balance career and family rather than sacrifice everything for advancement. He says rise to elite levels in business requires working extremely long, inflexible hours - so it's less desirable for many women.
How does Dr. Peterson counter the argument that current workplace culture and practices have been defined by men to benefit men?
-While acknowledging some bias likely exists, Dr. Peterson emphasizes that the market sets the terms of success. Since market economics rewards competence, intelligence and drive - not gender - changing corporate culture would require competing successfully against existing models.
Why does Dr. Peterson bristle at being compared to provocateurs or extremists?
-Dr. Peterson asserts he speaks what he believes is true, not to provoke or stir anger deliberately. He says when listeners find his ideas on topics like gender provocative, it's because the truth challenges dominant narratives.
How does Dr. Peterson counter accusations that he's contributing to societal divides?
-Dr. Peterson highlights the many letters he gets from followers saying his writings prevented them from "destruction" and gave them meaning. He implies this redemptive impact outweighs critics offended by his ideas.
Why doesn't Dr. Peterson provide specific examples of abuse against his critics when asked?
-It's unclear, but he may not have evidence of systematic, widespread harassment. He dismisses the question by saying critics have only provided "vague accusations" while he has "25,000 letters" of support.
Outlines
😕 Discussing why men need to mature and take on responsibility
Peterson explains why he believes men need to "grow up" and mature, taking on more responsibilities. He argues that men who don't mature become resentful, lack purpose and are unable to sustain meaningful relationships. He acknowledges his YouTube audience is predominantly male and that his message resonates with young men who rarely receive words of encouragement in life.
😕 Debating the existence and causes of the gender pay gap
The interviewer challenges Peterson on evidence of unfair treatment towards women, including the gender pay gap in the UK. Peterson argues the pay gap is not solely due to gender, but multivariate factors like agreeableness. He says agreeable people get paid less and that women are more agreeable. The interviewer presses him on whether the gap is unfair, but Peterson focuses on explaining why it exists rather than its fairness.
😕 Peterson argues gender equality of outcome is undesirable
The interviewer asks if gender equality is attainable or even desirable. Peterson argues equality of outcomes is undesirable and unrealistic based on evidence from Scandinavian countries. He claims men and women have innate differences in interests that lead them to make different career and family choices, even in the most egalitarian societies.
😠 Peterson refuses to clearly endorse equal pay for equal work
When asked multiple times if he supports equal pay for equal work, Peterson evades a direct answer. He argues determining what constitutes equal work is not practical. The interviewer accuses him of going back to the dark ages by denying the pay gap exists, but Peterson protests that he did not actually deny it exists while continuing to downplay its significance.
😕 Peterson claims female traits don't predict workplace success
Challenged about why stereotypically feminine traits are not valued in the workplace, Peterson argues compassion and agreeableness negatively predict workplace success. He states intelligence and conscientiousness predict success, while denying saying women lack intelligence. The interviewer presses him on whether companies should try implementing more feminine traits, but Peterson claims there is no evidence it would make them more successful.
😠 Peterson compares trans activists to Chairman Mao
Discussing his refusal to use preferred gender pronouns, Peterson compares trans activists to totalitarian dictators like Mao, arguing they follow the same underlying philosophy. The interviewer accuses him of cruelly equating activists to murderous regimes. Peterson doubles down that the philosophy is the same despite vastly different consequences so far. He maintains trans activists are authoritarian and their demands should not supersede free speech rights.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡gender equality
💡patriarchy
💡dominance hierarchy
💡masculine traits
💡agreeableness
💡gender pay gap
💡free speech
💡identity politics
💡provocateur
💡destiny
Highlights
Men need to grow up because there's nothing good about being an old infant; it leads to bitterness, lack of purpose and hostility.
Young men are starving for encouraging messages about responsibility and destiny that makes life worth living.
Women deeply want men who are competent and powerful, not in a tyrannical sense but in terms of competence and ability.
Multivariate analysis shows the gender pay gap is caused by multiple factors, not just gender.
Agreeable people, who tend to be more compassionate and polite, get paid less than less agreeable people.
Women have a career/family crisis to deal with around ages 28-32 because of the shorter timeframe they have to get major life pieces together.
Enforced equality of outcome is undesirable and has already been shown not to work in Scandinavian countries.
Willingness to offend in pursuit of truth is necessary for free speech and thinking.
Group identity politics, common on the radical left, is the same philosophy that led to the deaths of millions under Mao.
Hierarchies are inevitable and have evolutionary origins going back over 300 million years.
The serotonin system that tracks lobster hierarchy status is similar to the human serotonin system that regulates our emotions.
We can't destroy hierarchical organization in society - it's an inevitable part of our biological nature.
Successful women generally need to adopt more stereotypically masculine traits like assertiveness.
The traits that predict workplace success are intelligence, conscientiousness and low agreeableness.
Peterson has received 25,000 letters from people saying he brought them back from personal destruction.
Transcripts
Juden peterson you've said that men need
to quote grow the hell up
tell me why well because there's nothing
uglier than an old infant there's
nothing good about it it people who
don't grow up don't find the sort of
meaning in their life that sustains them
through difficult times and they are
certain to encounter difficult times and
they're left bitter and resentful and
without purpose and adrift and hostile
and resentful and vengeful and arrogant
and deceitful and and of no use to
themselves and of no use to anyone else
and no partner for a woman and there's
nothing in it that's good
so you said I mean that sounds pretty
bad yes Isis of masculinity I mean what
do you do about it
you tell you help people understand why
it's necessary and important for them to
grow up and adopt responsibilities why
that isn't a shake your finger and get
your act together sort of thing why it's
more like but why it's more like a
delineation of the kind of destiny that
makes life worth living I've been
telling young men but it's not
I wasn't specifically aiming this
message at young men to begin with it
just kind of turned out that way and
it's mostly you admit it's mostly men
listening I mean it is your audience is
well it's about 80 percent on on YouTube
which is a YouTube is a male domain
primarily so it's hard to tell how much
of it is because YouTube is male and how
how much of it is because of what I'm
saying but you you what I've been
telling young men is that there's an
actual reason why they need to grow up
which is that they have something to
offer you know that that that people
have within them this capacity to set
the world straight and that's necessary
to manifest in the world and that also
doing so is where you find the meaning
that sustains you in life so what's gone
wrong then oh god all sorts of things
have gone wrong I think that I don't
think that young men are here words of
encouragement some some of them never in
their entire lives as far as I can tell
that's what they tell me and the fact
that the words that I've been that I've
been speaking the YouTube lectures that
I've done and put online for example
have had such a dramatic impact is
indication that young men are starving
for this sort of message because like
why in the world would they have to
derive it from a lecture on YouTube now
they're not being taught that they that
it's important to develop yourself
because it doesn't bother you that your
audience is predominantly male does that
isn't isn't that a bit divisive no I
don't think so I mean it's no more
divisive than the fact that YouTube is
primarily male and tumblr is primarily
my female resident tumblr is primarily
female all right you're just saying
that's the way it is
oh it's I'm not saying anything it's
just an observation that that's the way
it is there's plenty of women that are
watching my lectures and coming to my
talks and buy my books it's just that
the majority of them happen to be men uh
it's what's in it for the women though
well what sort of partner do you want
you want an overgrown child or do you
want someone to contend with that's
going to help you your eye on women have
some sort of duty to sort of help fix
the crisis masculinity it depends on
what they want no I mean it's exactly
exactly how I laid it out like women
want deeply want men who are competent
and powerful and and I don't mean power
in in the in in the in that they can
exert tyrannical control over others
that's not power that's just corruption
power is competence and why in the world
would you not want a competent partner
well I know why actually you can't
dominate a competent partner so if you
want more you should dominate is that
what you're saying no I'd say women who
have had their relationships impaired
with impaired their relationships with
men impaired and who are afraid of such
relationships will settle for a weak
partner because they can dominate them
but it's a suboptimal solution do you
know when they were doing I think
there's a substantial minority of women
who do that and I think it's very bad
for them they're very unhappy it's very
bad for their partners although the
partners get the advantage of not having
to take any responsibility what gives
you the right to say that I mean maybe
that's how women want their
relationships those women I mean you're
making these vast generalizations I'm a
clinical psychologist right so you've
you're saying you've done
your research and women are unhappy
dominating men I didn't say they were
unhappy dominating then I said it was a
bad long-term solution okay you said it
was making them Israel yes yes and it
depends on the time frame I mean there
can be there's intense pleasure in
momentary domination that's why people
do it all the time but its nose formula
for a long-term successful long-term
relationship that's reciprocal right any
long-term relationship is reciprocal
firstly by definition so let me put it
quite to you from the bank well you say
there are whole disciplines in
universities forthrightly hostile
towards men these are the areas of study
dominated by the postmodern stroke
neo-marxist claim the Western culture in
particular is an oppressive structure
created by white men to dominate and
exclude women but then I want to put
minorities - okay but I want to put to
you that here in the UK for example
let's say that as an example the gender
pay gap stands at just over 9% you've
got women at the BBC recently saying
that the broadcaster is illegally paying
them less than men to do the same job
you've got only seven women running the
top footsie 100 companies hum so it
seems to a lot of women that they still
being dominated and excluded to quote
your words back to you it does seem that
way but multivariate analysis of the pay
gap indicate that it doesn't exist nine
percent cap ager that's a gap between
median hourly earnings between men and
women yeah but there's multiple reasons
for that one of them is gender but it's
not the only reason
like if you're a social scientist worth
worth your salt you never do a
univariate analysis like you say well
women in aggregate are paid less than
men okay well then we break it down by
age we break it down by occupation we
break it down by interest we break it
down by personality but you're saying
basically it doesn't matter if women
aren't getting to the top because that's
what's skewing that gender pay gap isn't
it you're saying well that's just a fact
not so you know it's not going to get to
the top no I'm not saying it doesn't
matter either you're saying remindful
reasons for it even though why should
women put up with those reasons why
shouldn't women because he should put up
with it I'm saying that the claim that
the
wage gap between men and women is only
due to sex is wrong and it is wrong
there's no doubt about that the
multivariate analysis have been done
mighty very I'm saying that nine percent
pay gap exists that's a gap between men
and women
I'm not saying why it exists but it
exists now you're a woman wack seems
pretty unfair you have to say why it
exists but do you agree that it's unfair
if you're a woman not necessary and on
average you're getting paid nine percent
less than a man that's not fair is it it
depends on why it's happening I can give
you an example okay there's a
personality trait known as agreeableness
agreeable people are compassionate and
polite and agreeable people get paid
less than just didn't less agreeable
people for the same job women are more
agreeable than men again a vast
generalizations agreeable ears that's
true but that's right and some women get
paid more than men so you were saying
that by and large women are too
agreeable to get the pay raises I see so
I'm saying that that's one component of
a multivariate equation that predicts
celery it accounts for maybe five
percent of the variance something like
that I should be neat about the other
twenty you need about another eighteen
factors one of which is gender and there
is prejudice there's no doubt about that
but it accounts for a much smaller
proportion of the variance in the pay
gap then the radical feminists claim
okay so rather than denying the pay gap
exists which is what you did at the
beginning of this conversation shouldn't
you say to women rather than being
agreeable and not asking for a pay rise
go and ask for a pay raise make yourself
disagreeable with your book oh
definitely there's that but I also
didn't deny it existed I denied it
existed because of gender okay because
I'm very very very careful with my words
so the pay gap exists you accept that
but you're saying I mean the pay gap
between men and women exists you're
saying it's not because of gender it's
because women are too agreeable to ask
for pay rises certainly one of the
reasons okay one of the reason so why
not get them to ask for a pay rise I've
done that many many times in my career
and they just don't sort oh they do it
all the time you can see so one of the
things that you do as a clinical
psychologist is
um assertiveness training so you might
say often you treat people for anxiety
you treat them for depression and you
and maybe the next most common category
after that would be assertiveness
training and so I've had many many women
extraordinarily competent women in my
clinical and consulting practice and we
put together strategies for their career
development that involved continual
pushing competing for higher wages and
often tripled their wages within a
five-year period of course so do you do
you agree that you would be happy if
that pay gap was eliminated completely
because that's all the radical feminists
are saying it would depend on how it was
eradicated and how the how how the
disappearance of it was measured and
you're saying of men that's a problem oh
there's all sorts of things that it
could be at the cost of it could even be
at the cost of women's own interests so
because they might not be happy if they
could equal pay no because it might
interfere with other things that are
causing the pay gap that women are
choosing tonight having children well or
choosing careers that actually happen to
be paid less which women do a lot of but
why shouldn't women have the right to
choose not to have children or the right
to choose those demanding because they
can yeah that's fine
but you're saying that makes them
unhappy I and large I'm saying that that
no I'm not saying that I'm I and I
actually haven't said that so far you're
saying it makes them miserable no I said
what was making them miserable was
having part was having weak partners
that makes them miserable right I would
say that many women around the age of I
would say between 28 and 32 have a
career family crisis that they have to
deal with and I think that's partly
because of the for short and timeframe
that women have to contend with like
women have to get the major pieces of
their life put together faster than men
which is also partly why men aren't
under so much pressure to grow up so
because for the typical woman she has to
have her career and family in order
pretty much by the time she's 35 because
otherwise the options start to run out
and so that puts a tremendous amount of
stress on women especially at the end of
their 20s I think I take issue
the idea of the typical woman because
you know all women are different and I
want to just put another quote to you
from the book last day in some ways and
the same in others okay you say women
become more vulnerable when they have
children no and you talked to one of
your youtube interviews about crazy
harpy sisters so a simple question is
gender equality a myth in your view is
that something that's just never gonna
happen it depends on what you mean by
equality no if you mean a lien and we're
getting the same opportunities fairly
people we could get to a point where
people were treated fairly or more
fairly I mean people are treated pretty
fairly in Western culture already but we
can look them really not though are they
I mean otherwise why would there only be
seven women running footsie 100
companies in the UK why why would there
still be a pay gap which we've all got
satellite sees why are women at the BBC
saying that they're getting paid
illegally less the men to do the same
job that's not fair sort of the first
question their brothers are complicated
questions seven seven women repeat that
one there's seven women running the top
footsie 100 companies in the UK well the
first it might be um why would you want
to do that why would a minute man want
to do it I don't know a number of men
although not that many who are perfectly
willing to sacrifice virtually all of
their life to the pursuit of a high-end
career so they'll work these are men
that are very intelligent they're
usually very very conscientious they're
very driven they're very high-energy
they're very healthy and they're willing
to work 70 or 80 hours a week non-stop
specialised at one thing to get to the
top so you think women are just more
sensible they don't want that because
it's not a nice level I'm saying that's
part of it definitely and so I worry you
you don't think there are barriers in
their way that prevent them getting to
the top there's some barriers yeah like
other like men for example I mean to get
to the top of any organisation is an
incredibly competitive enterprise and
the men that you're competing with are
simply not going to roll over and say
please take the position absolutely
all-out warfare is gender equality a
myth I don't know what you mean by the
question men and women aren't the same
and they won't be this
that doesn't mean they can't be treated
fairly is gender equality desirable if
it means equality of outcome then almost
certainly it's undesirable that's
already been demonstrated in Scandinavia
because in Scandinavia equality of
outcome is undesirable what men and
women won't sort themselves into the
same categories if you leave them alone
to do it off their own accord I've
already seen that in Scandinavia it's 20
to 1 female nurses to male something
like that it might not be quite that
extreme and approximately the same male
engineers to female engineers and that's
a consequence of the free choice of men
and women in the societies that have
gone farther than any other societies to
make gender equality the purpose of the
law those are in eradicable differences
you can eradicate them with tremendous
social pressure and tyranny but if you
leave men and women to make their own
choices you will not get equal outcome
right so you're saying that anyone who
believes in equality whether you call
them feminists call them whatever you
want to call them should basically give
up because it ain't gonna happen only if
they're aiming at equality of outcome
so you're saying give people equality of
opportunity that's fine
not only fine it's eminently desirable
for everyone for individuals and for
society but still women aren't gonna
make it that's what you're really it
depends on your measurement techniques
they're doing just fine in medicine in
fact there are far more female
physicians than there are male
physicians or there are lots of lots of
disciplines that are absolutely
dominated by women many many disciplines
and they're doing great so let me put
something else to you from the book you
say the introduction of the equal pay
for equal work argument immediately
complicates even salary comparison
beyond practicality for one simple
reason who decides what work is equal
it's not possible so the simple question
is do you believe in equal pay well I
made the argument there it's like it
depends and say you don't because a lot
of people listening to you will just say
I mean are we going back to the Dutch
because we're actually not listening I'm
just projecting I'm hearing you
basically saying women need to just
accept they're never gonna make it on
equal terms equal outcomes is what how
you defined it no I I would go
I might as well just go and play with my
Cindy dolls give us a ride at school
because I'm not going to get the top job
I want because there's someone sitting
there saying it's not possible that's
what they said it's a it's a bad social
role I didn't say that women shouldn't
be striving for the top or anything like
that because I don't believe that for a
second striving for the top but you're
gonna put all those hurdles in their way
as has been in their way for centuries
so that's fine you're saying that's fine
no no I think I read the paper
silly I do I think that's silly I really
do
I mean look look at your situation
you're hardly unsuccessful yeah Maya how
do you beg hard to get exactly good
that's ok battling is good this is
inevitable but you talk about man [ __ ]
let me just put another thing to you for
now you're saying you have to be idle
for a high-quality position well I
notice in your book you talk about real
conversations between men containing
quote an underlying threat of
physicality oh there's no doubt about
that what about real conversation
between women is that something or are
we sort of too amenable and reasonable
no it's just that the domain of physical
conflict is sort of off-limits for you
we just to get where I've got yeah but
what does that make me I don't know man
I don't imagine that you've yeah to some
degree I suspect you're not very
agreeable so that's the thing successful
women I'm not very agreeable right
actually in this conversation at least
I'm sure I served your career well
successful women though hmm
basically have to wear the trousers in
your view they have to sort of become
men to succeed is what you're saying
well if the guys had to fight to succeed
better Canadians men certainly masculine
traits are going to be helpful I mean
one of the things I do in my counseling
practice for example when I'm consulting
with women who are trying to advance
their careers is to teach them how to
negotiate and to and to be able to say
no and to not be easily pushed around
and to be formidable and you need to if
you're gonna be successful you need to
be smart conscientious and tough well
here's a radical idea why don't the
bosses adopt some male bosses shall we
say adopt some female traits so the
women don't have to fight and get their
sharp elbows out for the pay rises it's
just accepted if they're doing the same
job they get the same pay well I would
say partly because it's not so easy to
determine what cost
due to the same job an almost because
arguably yeah there are still men
dominating our industries our society
and therefore they've dictated the terms
for so long but women have to battle to
know like them it's not true it's not
true so for example well I can give you
an example very quickly so I worked with
women who worked in high-powered law
firms in Canada for about 15 years and
they were as competent and put together
as anybody you would ever meet and we
were trying to figure out how to further
their careers and there was a huge
debate in Canadian society at that point
that was basically ran along the same
lines as your argument is that if the
law firms didn't use these masculine
criteria then perhaps women would do
better but the market sets the damn game
it's like and the market is dominated by
men no it's not the market is dominated
by women they make 80 percent of the
consumer decisions that's not the case
at all you take people who stay at home
looking after children by and large they
are still women so they're going out
doing the shopping but that is chained
they make all decisions okay so the
market is driven by women not men right
ok and if you're a lawyer you still pay
more for the same sort of goods that's
been proven that men for the you buy a
blue bicycle helmet it's gonna cost less
than a pink one anyway we'll come on to
that partly because men are less
agreeable right so this so they won't
put up with it I want to ask you is it
not desirable to have some of those
female traits you're talking about
I'd say that's a generalization but
you've used the words female traits is
it not desirable to have some of them at
the top of business I mean maybe they
wouldn't they don't predict they don't
predict success in the workplace the
things that predict success in the
workplace are intelligence and
conscientiousness agreeableness
negatively predicts success in the
workplace negative emotion saying that
women aren't intelligent enough to run
these talk no I didn't say that I said
that female traits don't predict success
but I didn't say that intelligence it
wasn't I didn't say that intelligence
and conscientious when you were saying
it's just by implication or not female
traits
oh no I mean that's sorry no dressed her
not saying that at all a women is
intelligent than men no no they're not
no they did that on that's pretty cool
the average IQ for a woman and the
average IQ for a man is identical there
is some debate about the flatness of the
distribution which is something that
James d'amour pointed out for example in
his memo but there's no difference at
all in general cognitive ability there's
no difference to speak of in
conscientiousness women are a bit more
orderly than men and men are a little
bit more industrious than women the
difference isn't big I don't know about
averages into con men who aren't
necessarily why are they not feminine
traits why are they not desirable at the
top of feminine traits why they not
desirable it's hard to say I'm just
laying out the empirical evidence like
we know that we know the traits that
predict success but we also know because
companies by and large have not been
dominated by women over the centuries we
have nothing to compare it to
it's an experiment true and it could be
the case that if companies modified
their behavior and became more feminine
they would be successful
there's no evidence for it I'm not
neither doubtful nor non doubtful
there's no evidence why not give it a go
as the radically evidence suggests well
it's fine like if someone wants to start
a company and make it more feminine and
compassionate let's say and caring in
its overall orientation towards its
workers and towards the marketplace and
that's a perfectly reasonable experiment
to run my point is that there is no
evidence that those traits predict
success in the workplace and there's
evidence right well that's not that's
not really the case women have been in
the workplace for at least ever since
I've been around the representation of
women in the workplace has been about 50
percent so we've run the experiment for
a fairly reasonable period of time but
not you know certainly not for centuries
let me move on to another debate that's
been very controversial for you and this
is you got in trouble for refusing to
call trans men and women by their
preferred personal pronouns no it's not
actually true I got in trouble because I
said I would not follow that compelled
speech dictates of the federal and
provincial government I actually never
got in trouble for not calling anyone
anything I wouldn't follow the change of
law which was does not once I was law
screaming hell no that's all they said
it was designed to do okay you cited
freedom of speech in that why should
your right to freedom of speech Trump
a trans persons right not to be offended
because in order to be able to think you
have to risk being offensive I mean look
at the conversation we're having right
now you know like you're certainly
willing to risk offending me in the
pursuit of truth why should you have the
right to do that it's being rather
uncomfortable well I'm I'm very glad I
put you well I'm you get my point as
like you're you're doing what you should
do which is digging a bit to see what
the hell's going on and that is what you
should do but you're exercising your
freedom of speech to certainly risk
offending me and that's fine I think
more power to as far as I'm concerned
so you haven't sat there and I'm just
right I've just trying to work that out
I mean ha gotcha
you have got me you have caught me I'm
trying to wake up turn my head yeah I
took a while it did yeah well you have
voluntary cut you have voluntarily come
into the studio and agreed to be
questioned hmm a trans person in your
class has come to your class and said
they want to be called that's never
happened and I would call them she so
you would so you've kind of changed your
Chi no no no I said that right from the
beginning what I said at the beginning
was that I was not going to cede the
linguistic territory to radical leftists
regardless of whether or not it was put
in law that's what I said even then the
people who came after me said oh you
must be transphobic and you'd mistreat a
student in your class it's like I never
mistreated a student in my class I'm not
transphobic and that isn't what I said
well it said you've also called trans
campaigners authoritarian how many I
mean isn't that only in the broader
context of my claims that radical
leftist ideologue czar authoritarian
which they always say someone who's
trying to work out their gender identity
who may well have struggled with that
though I'm a drug use you're comparing
them with you know
Chairman Mao who know just you know the
deaths of millions of people just even
if the activists you know they're trans
people too they have a right to say
these things yeah but they don't have a
brain inside their whole community
heaven too Chairman Mao you know I could
finish a all cost a penny sure I mean
you know this is grossly insensitive and
I didn't compare them to finish it well
I did come here knowing he knows no
authority
he's a right-winger though I was
comparing them to the left-wing
totalitarians and I are left now at
Aryans under Mao millions of people die
right mean there's no comparison Mao and
a trans activist is there why not
because trans activist aren't killing
millions of people the philosophy that's
guiding their utterances is the same
philosophy the consequences are yet
you're saying that trans activists know
it leads to the deaths of millions of
people well no I'm saying that the
philosophy that drives their utterances
is the same philosophy that already has
driven us to the deaths of millions okay
tell us how that philosophy is in any
way comparable sure that's no problem
the first thing is is that their
philosophy presumes that group identity
is paramount that's the fundamental
philosophy that drove the Soviet Union
and Mao is China and it's the
fundamental philosophy of the left-wing
activists it's identity politics doesn't
matter who you are as an individual it
matters who you are in terms of your
group identity you just say murder so to
provoke on you I mean you are a
provocateur never say a lightly they
don't write that you hate to be compared
to you want to stir things up I'm only a
provocateur insofar as when I say what I
believe to be true it's provocative I
don't provoke maybe four heroes out now
and then I'm not interested in provoking
what about leading about you know
fighting and the lobster tell us about
the lobster ha well that's quite a segue
well the first chapter I have in my book
is called stand up straight with your
shoulders back and it's an injunction to
be combative not least to further your
career let's say but also to adopt a
stance of ready engagement with the
world and to reflect that in your
posture and the reason that I write
about lobsters is because there's this
idea that hierarchical structures are a
sociological construct of the Western
patriarchy and that is so untrue that
it's almost unbelievable and I use the
lobster as an example because the
lobster we we divulged from lobsters in
evolutionary history about 350
million years ago common ancestor and
lobsters exist in hierarchies and have a
nervous system attuned to the hierarchy
and that nervous system runs on
serotonin just like our nervous systems
do and the nervous system of the lobster
and the human being is so similar that
antidepressants work on lobsters and
it's part of my attempt to demonstrate
that the idea of hierarchy has
absolutely nothing to do with
socio-cultural constructions which it
doesn't let me just get it straight
you're saying that we should organize
our societies along the lines of the
lobsters I'm saying that it's inevitable
that there will be continuity in the way
that animals and human beings organizing
organize their structures it's it's
absolutely inevitable and there is one
third of a billion years of evolutionary
history behind that right that's that's
so long that a third of the billion
years ago there weren't even trees it's
a long time you have a mechanism in your
brain that runs on serotonin that's
similar to the lobster mechanism that
tracks your status and the higher your
status the better your emotions are
regulated so as your serotonin levels
increase you feel more positive the
emotion and less negative emotion so
you're saying like the lobsters we're
hardwired as men and women to do certain
things to sort of run along tram lines
and there's nothing we can do about it
no I'm not saying there's nothing we can
do about it because it's like in a chess
game all right there's lots of things
that you can do although you can't break
the rules of the chess game and continue
to play chess and biological you're your
biological nature is somewhat like that
is it sets the rules of the game but
within those rules you have a lot of
leeway but the idea that but one thing
we can't do is say that hierarchical
organization is a consequence of the
capitalist patriarchy it's like that's
patently absurd it's wrong it's not a
matter of opinion it's seriously wrong
on you just whipping people up into a
state of anger and not of all the
divisions between men and women you're
disturbing people up you know you have
any critics of you online get absolutely
lambasted by your followers young
generally sorry your critics get
lambasted by you I mean if there are not
at all if an academic is gonna come to
me and tell me that I'm not qualified
and that I'm not I don't know what I'm
talking about now quit the abuse quit
the anger well we need some substantial
examples of the abuse and the anger
before I could detail that quest there
'he's a lot of alpha4 well let's take a
more general perspective on that so I
have had 25,000 letters since June
something like that from people who told
me that I've brought them back from the
brink of destruction and so I'm
perfectly willing to put that up against
the rather vague accusations that my
followers are making the lives of people
that I've targeted miserable Jordan
Peterson thank you my pleasure nice
talking me
you
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
HOW TO BECOME IRRESISTIBLE FOR WOMEN?
B4L7 課文動畫(無字幕版)(Iceland's Road to Gender Equality)
(Kelompok 11) Feminisme dan Disorientasi Sesksual Dalam Perspektif Islam
Man’s World - Full Episode 01
True gender equality is when both women and men have a voice | Deepika Bharadwaj | TEDxGatewayWomen
2030- SDG 5- Gender Equality- Ted talks
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)