Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

Summary

In 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

00:00

😕 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.

05:01

😕 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.

10:02

😕 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.

15:02

😠 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.

20:03

😕 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.

25:03

😠 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.

Keywords

💡gender equality

The concept of achieving equal rights, treatment and opportunities for women and men. Peterson argues this is unrealistic due to innate psychological differences between genders. He states that aiming for equality of outcomes is 'undesirable'.

💡patriarchy

A social system dominated by men, which some feminists view as inherently oppressive towards women. Peterson contests that Western culture is a patriarchal structure purposely created to exclude women.

💡dominance hierarchy

Peterson's theory that all human and animal groups organize into hierarchies based on dominance. He uses lobster hierarchy as evidence these structures are ingrained by evolution rather than social constructs.

💡masculine traits

Traits like aggression and assertiveness that Peterson associates more with men and as beneficial for success in capitalist hierarchies. He advises women to embody these traits to advance their careers.

💡agreeableness

A personality trait stereotypically linked to women involving compassion and empathy. Peterson argues this makes women less inclined to negotiate salaries or dominate men.

💡gender pay gap

The average difference in earnings between working men and women. Peterson denies this stems solely from gender discrimination but partly reflects women's career sacrifices and personality differences.

💡free speech

Peterson presents himself as a defender of free speech against censorship and argues this principle can supersede transgender people's rights to be referred to by their preferred pronouns.

💡identity politics

A tendency for political positions based on group identities over individual interests. Peterson argues this is the underlying mentality linking transgender activists to oppressive political movements.

💡provocateur

Peterson is accused of being deliberately provocative to gain notoriety. He rejects this but causes controversy by equating principles underlying transgender activism to 20th century totalitarianism.

💡destiny

Peterson's belief that men need a strong sense of heroic purpose and responsibility to provide meaning and fulfillment in their lives.

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