Jordan Peterson: Holding a Baby is What Women Need?

Jordan Peterson: Holding a Baby is What Women Need? July 20, 2018
Some beautiful art glass at the Chrysler Museum in Norfolk, Virginia to look at because I’m inflicting the toxic words of another clueless male cultural enforcer on you…

You may not be familiar with conservative Christian professor Jordan Peterson, I know I was not until Patheos blogger and friend Andrew Hall of ‘Laughing in Disbelief’ started to feature Peterson and his book “12 Rules for Life: An Antedote to Chaos”. An antedote to chaos? Keep him the eff away from my art studio please! Chaos can be creative.

Here’s what Andrew had to say about Peterson’s approach to the Bible:

Just a little snippet of the claptrap that Peterson promotes.

But yesterday one of Peterson’s more loathsome tweets caught my eye. It’s an implicit promotion of some of the crazier ideas in Quiverfull theology, that every women NEEDS to have a baby, or mulitple babies.

How does ‘society’ make it so hard to be holding a baby? Peterson does not explain, he just promotes his theory that women are all walking uteruses that need that baby. I like babies. I like holding babies, but…. in no way does that add or detract anything from my daily life or emotional state, or mental health!

Another stupid man attempting to equate women as less than fully human. More objectification of women that these good Christian patriarchs love to do.

Of all the pieces on Peterson that Andrew Hall posted there is none funnier than his Jordan Peterson fashion line!

It should come as no surprise that Peterson blames women for tempting men in the office with their clothing choices. He even believes women should not wear makeup in the workplace because it’s too distracting for the weak wimpy living by their penis Christian males according to this piece by Ed Brayton of Dispatches From the Culture Wars.

~~~~~~~~~~

FYI for all you Peterson fans that would like to come here and spam our board on how ‘wrong’ I am. Please read our comment rules before posting. If you violate our rules I have no problem banning you.


Stay in touch! Like No Longer Quivering on Facebook:

If this is your first time visiting NLQ please read our Welcome page and our Comment Policy! Commenting here means you agree to abide by our policies.

Copyright notice: If you use any content from NLQ, including any of our research or Quoting Quiverfull quotes, please give us credit and a link back to this site. All original content is owned by No Longer Quivering and Patheos.com

Read our hate mail at Jerks 4 Jesus

Check out today’s NLQ News at NLQ Newspaper

Contact NLQ at SuzanneNLQ@gmail.com

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

I Fired God by Jcoelyn Zichtermann

13:24 A Dark Thriller by M Dolon Hickmon


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Daniella Leona

    Our society doesn’t value children and what it takes to raise them comprehensively, competently, or compassionately enough. Women carry the children via biology, pregnancy. Not because of some covert male patriarchy conspiracy. Same with breastfeeding. Equally biological not political.

    Our society values money over motherhood. That puts incredible pressure on women because they’re now expected to do both. Carry the child in their body, give birth to him/her breastfeed if possible, but oh. Also to be a fiscally productive member of their community.

    It’s not a patriarchal problem. It’s a very Western psycho-social-political issue. Do I value holding my daughter and caring for her over some job potentially devoid of all significant meaning other than making money and conveniently paying taxes at the same time. Hell. Yes. I’m lucky enough to be able to do so full time.

    You’re looking at his tweet through a very narrow lens. Frankly I think he’s absolutely correct, however I concede the wording is potentially inflammatory. But no less correct because of it.

  • Aloha

    Is there a baby shortage I haven’t heard about? Selfish parents never letting friends and families touch their little ones? A dearth of kids in childcare settings who are perpetually “now hiring”? If so, baby dolls are more realistic than ever.

    As far as making pregnancy and a newborn more accessible or more affordable … I’m not sure we can do anything about that. Infertility happens and children are just durned expensive!

  • Tawreos

    If you really want to know why young women are outraged you could try asking them instead of speculating along paths that religious dogma tells you must be the reason.

  • Tawreos

    I wouldn’t bother, they created the account just to defend Peterson. His followers have no interest in discussion, only in blindly defending his crap.

  • Daniella Leona

    Gosh yes. That’s exactly how I see myself as a woman.

  • Daniella Leona

    I didn’t defend Peterson actually only at the end of my post did I mention him. I made my own statement about how I see this situation. In fact I acknowledged Peterson’s wording was problematic. I’m not a follower of anyone. But. Whatevs. Carry on with the conspiracy theory. Totally gives you credability

  • Daniella Leona

    Yep. Brainless baby machine. That’s me all over.

  • Daniella Leona

    I also didn’t say all jobs have no meaning. Some do. However I think everyone will agree with me they’re the luxury/luck/reward for a minority. But please. Don’t let brainless baby machine me interrupt you. Keep on being victimised evil men blah blah as you’re obviously getting some benefit from it.

  • SAO

    I presume young women are outraged by the idea that Peterson thinks they are made to submissively serve men? How does holding a baby change that?

  • AFo

    Yeah, it’s definitely the baby thing, and not that the current administration seems determined to strip away our rights and make our lives a thousand times more difficult. /S

  • Brian Curtis

    “Why ask when you can assume, in the most condescending manner possible?” It’s the unspoken motto of far too many of our fellow (voting) citizens.

  • Brian Curtis

    See Aloha’s post above. There is no baby shortage. Motherhood is one option among many, not some creepy ‘destiny’ that every woman longs to fulfill. History shows that whenever more security, freedom, and education are available to women, the birthrate always drops–voluntarily. Women overwhelmingly do NOT want to be baby-making machines. Some like it and choose to accept the consequences and challenges that come with it (including adding a career if they want); some don’t. Peterson doesn’t seem to be able to process that.

  • Julia Childress

    First, I would like to say that I work among young women, I go to church with them, and this Baby Boomer is blessed by the true friendship of several amazing young women. Only on occasion do I see any expression of outrage. What I mostly see is compassion, their hard work, their love of their families, and their desire to make the world a better place. There are times when they are appropriately outraged, such as when the president appoints utterly unqualified people to cabinet positions, or when a pipeline will be installed in their neighborhood in order to enrich a utility company, or when they discover that they are making $10,000 less a year than their male counterpart.
    Then I would ask why it might be difficult for modern young women to bring babies into the world. One word comes to mind: economics. The high cost of decent housing, the outrageous cost of health insurance and medical care, the loss of jobs with decent pay. We should all be outraged at the greed that is driving the division of the world into two categories: wealthy and poor. And of course, the modern version of Christianity in its marriage to conservative politics aids and abets this division, then turns around and reviles the struggling for not working hard enough. I’m a Christian and love everything that Jesus stood for, but sometimes I just hate Christians.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    It’s not just this tweet, it’s a long list of things Peterson has said, like the Ed Brayton post with a portion of Peterson’s Vice interview where he claimed working women should not wear makeup because it somehow defrauds men by making them lust. This is all CPM wrapped up in a shiny college professor wrapper. Does not make it any less toxic.

  • Martin Penwald

    That puts incredible pressure on women because they’re now expected to do both. Carry the child in their body, give birth to him/her breastfeed if possible, but oh. Also to be a fiscally productive member of their community.

    Nope. Nobody forces women to do both. They can make their own choice. But patriarcal enforcers like you consider that women HAVE TO pop out babies.
    You fanboys aren’t really original in your defense of Peterson.

  • Julia Childress

    First, our society DOES value children, almost to the point of fetishism. Many parents spend quantities of time and money making sure that their children have an abundance of everything and that they never suffer any discomfort. But they have to be the right kind of children. We don’t want to pay taxes to properly educate the children of our poorer citizens, nor do we want to make sure that they all have access to decent healthcare, when in reality, we all benefit from healthy, educated children. This also applies to many in the middle class. One of my nephews, age 31 has a masters in social work and has been a social worker for seven years. He has a group health plan and last year suffered an unexpected health crisis that left him with $8,000 in medical bills. He had to sell his car because he couldn’t make ends meet while paying off those bills. When he and his wife decide to have a child, I can tell you that this experience will be uppermost in their minds. Our economy is hostile to child bearing.
    Regarding the “patriarchy conspiracy”, I urge you to do some research on what has been going on in the conservative Christian world of late. The very foundation of the quiverfull movement is the goal of bringing more Christian babies into the world so that eventually, they will grow up, go to the voting booths and turn our country back into the “Christian nation” that they believe it once was. I was raised in this toxic doctrine, and I can tell you that the quiverfull men, the heads of their households, almost all have a 200 year plan, where they plot out how many descendants they should have in 200 years. There is a strong undercurrent of racism as well, although that is never articulated. Basically, the US needs more white babies in order to offset the increase in black and brown babies. The homeschool movement, which channels offspring into colleges such as Patrick Henry in Virginia, has many intelligent, college-educated children working in conservative politics in DC with the goal of influencing legislation. This is not some dark conspiracy. There’s plenty of info out there on it for anyone who looks for it.

  • Brian Curtis

    That’s a fair point, and it certainly can be argued that our economic system makes it hard on the poor to get by. But the choice to have kids is a separate issue; yes, having both kids -and- a career is expensive, but how far should our society go in subsidizing that choice? As already noted, we’re not running low on people. Improving things for the poor isn’t 100% the same as making working mothers’ lives easier.

  • Annerdr

    I have a career and children. My life would be poorer, not financially (although that too) but mentally, emotionally, if I didn’t work. I understand not all women are like me, but Daniella, not all women are like you either.

  • karmacat

    The problem with patriarchy is that it is limits people’s choices and forces people into limited roles. There are plenty of men who love holding their babies. More and more men are involved in their children’s lives, which is a good thing for children. Secondly, people are not valuing money over children. Most Americans, men and women, have to go to work to survive economically. A lot of Western countries, now have comprehensive maternity and paternity leave, so this is not really a “western psycho-social-political issue.” The US is far behind the rest of the developed world on valuing parental leave as important to a society.
    I love my son very much but if I had to stay home all day to take care of him I would have been bored out of my mind. I would have preferred to work part-time but I am working on finding a balance between work and family. It is also important to be role model for my child. Patriarchy assumes that women staying home to take of the children is the only way to raise children. There is plenty of evidence to show this is not true. There are many ways of raising happy, healthy children and many different roles parents can take. You may want to read Betty Friedan’s book, The feminine Mystique.

  • Cynthia

    But he seems to be a huge fan of what I had previously been calling the Ventriloquism Fallacy.

    This fallacy involves speaking for a group by imagining what they think, rather than actually asking them and letting them speak for themselves, and frequently the imagined position is the exact opposite of what actual members of the group think.

    I’m open to renaming this the Jordan Peterson Ventriloquism Fallacy. See his comment about women wearing makeup – apparently, Peterson’s pseudo-intellectual musings about the purposes of lipstick show the intentions of women re desire for sexual interactions more than what a woman might actually say herself.

  • Cynthia

    I know the whole point of a lot of this blog is to call out outrageous statements by patriarchy supporters.

    At the same time – I really hate giving this guy any publicity. Negative publicity doesn’t hurt him in the least – it actually rewards him. His Patreon earnings online FAR exceed his university income (which is a matter of public record in Ontario, Canada). The more outrage and notoriety, the more people hear about him and look him up online, the more a few of them will support him financially, and the more his more noxious ideas will be repeated and spread into the mainstream.

    Meanwhile, there is a University of Toronto professor who lives 2 min down the street from me. He makes far less money than Peterson and is far less known, because he’s a genuinely nice guy who does real academic work and doesn’t peddle crazy stuff.

  • Daniella Leona

    You don’t know what ‘sort of’ woman I am at all. And you have no idea what my ‘situation’ is as a mother.

  • Daniella Leona

    What you’re saying has zero bearing on what I said.

  • Raging Bee

    What?! You’re saying Capitalism doesn’t reward productive work in a rational and efficient manner?! Heaven Forefend!!!

  • Annerdr

    No, but you know. Do you think every single woman wants everything you want?

  • Raging Bee

    By causing men like Peterson to leave you the fuck alone for at least another day?

  • Annerdr

    I agree we aren’t short on humans, but I do think that a society should subsidize child raising, at least to the extent that no child goes with food, a good education, or health care. I think we all pay more if we don’t subsidize these things.

  • Raging Bee

    If his wording is incorrect, then the message is incorrect. You can’t separate the two.

    Also, I notice you blame “our society,” without even mentioning any more specific possible causes or sources for this supposed valuation of money over motherhood. And neither does Peterson. That makes both of you part of the problem, if only small parts.

  • Raging Bee

    However I think everyone will agree with me they’re the luxury/luck/reward for a minority.

    No, they are most certainly not a “luxury.”

  • Annerdr

    I found a job with strict hours, no overtime, worked for me. It allowed me to build a routine, which children generally need. Also, I had an excellent employer who let me take off early on Thursdays to coach soccer. I was an awful coach, but no one else signed up and my son wanted to play soccer. You do what you have to do.

  • Rachel

    Personally, holding babies stresses me out. Don’t get me wrong, I think they’re adorable–but from a distance. But then again, I’ve started coming out as genderfluid and opting for neutral pronouns whenever possible, so many in Peterson’s camp would consider me mentally ill anyway.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    i avoided talking about Peterson for a very long time after many of the other Patheos non-religious folks started using him as a verbal pinata. I hate that this will promote him. But this was a statement I could not ignore and pass unchallenged.

  • Tawreos

    It is always difficult decision to make when you have to decide if the anger a statement makes outweighs the increased exposure that an idiot like Peterson needs to thrive.

  • lady_black

    I never enjoyed the infant stage, even in my own children. I was much happier to see them become little people, and I was the Mom on the block with a house full of teenagers when mine were teenagers. They thought I was the “cool” Mom.
    These days, I can really enjoy babies and children of all ages, and that’s because I know I get to give them back. Being Nana is much more enjoyable than being Mom.

  • lady_black

    My husband married a feminist. So, by the way, did I. Double horror, huh?

  • lady_black

    Too easy.

  • lady_black

    I wonder if he knows any actual women.

  • lady_black

    He hasn’t got a clue, and neither do you.

  • lady_black

    Then please articulate why you believe any woman must do both. In the world I live in, there is no pressure to pop out babies. It’s a CHOICE. Some women choose to have a lot. Some women choose to have a few. Some women choose to have none. And, none of them MUST breastfeed.

  • Daniella Leona

    “The US is far behind the rest of the developed world on valuing parental leave as important to a society.” My point exactly.

  • lady_black

    It’s up to the woman with the job to decide upon whether that job “has value.” YOU do not get to decide for them. You’re nobody. Some people believe that educators don’t have value, because every mother should be home-schooling her own children. I happen to believe educators are pretty darn important.

  • paganheart

    Ugh, makeup…one of the things I appreciate about working from home is that I don’t have to wear makeup if I don’t want to. (And since I have rosacea and have a damned difficult time finding products that don’t irritate my skin and don’t cost a fortune, I generally don’t want to.) I will sometimes put on a little mascara and lipstick if I am going out for a meeting or talking to colleagues on Skype (one of my co-workers once asked me if I was ill, because I appeared very pale when I was makeup-free on a Skype call.) A full face of makeup is generally required when I am performing in concert with one of my choirs. But beyond that, I avoid makeup more days than not. Back when I worked in law offices and the federal court system, the expectation was that women were supposed to wear makeup every day, and to do otherwise was considered “unprofessional.” It was almost always male supervisors who enforced this rule; I still remember my first (male) boss in my first job after college, who enforced a strict dress code that included makeup for women (and being short-haired and clean-shaven for men) because “if you’re sloppy in your appearance, you’re sloppy in your work!” (That was a toxic work environment, to say the least…) It seems to me that if Peterson wants women to stop wearing makeup in the workplace so they don’t tempt weak little boys (they aren’t men) to “lust,” then he needs to have a talk with his fellow men who often enforce the “women must wear makeup” rules. I think a lot of women would prefer not having to put on their “war paint” to go to work every day.

  • bekabot

    Yeah, the problem is that the walking uteruses eventually have to let go of their babies. Eventually the children must be born. Sooner or later the kids have to detach from the womb and meet the world outside and the whole process only takes a paltry nine months, which isn’t long enough for a man to put his thoughts in order. Plus, whatcha gonna do with the women after that? What use are they? Not to mention that the squalling of the resultant infants becomes audible and bothersome, even if you don’t have to deal with it yourself.

    If only there were some way of keeping women barefoot and pregnant and of eternally staving off the hospital date, maybe a man could live in decency and peace. That’s the way a man’s life ought to work out but doesn’t, further proof that every son of Adam is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward. Nature is chaos, and the ways of God are mysterious indeed. But, for reasons connected with the maintenance of dignity, one has to comport oneself as if these things weren’t aggravating, although they are: which is where the stoicism comes in.

    See, boys? It all fits.

    Any questions?

  • paganheart

    And also it requires them to listen, and have empathy, which they are either incapable of doing, or don’t wanna do because it’s just too hard (and might expose them to some very uncomfortable truths, like the fact that there are women out there who don’t want to have children.)

  • AudreyA

    The makeup thing was blown way out of proportion. The conversation was about women and men mixing in the work place, this is a new thing (all jobs used to be segregated) and it’s a problem; that is, how do you help men an women keep professional boundaries while working together? YOU might not have a problem maintaining the boundary but the guy in IT who has a secret crush on you is in trouble. Just an example. And Peterson suggested that maybe how we dress, how we present ourselves, is part of the problem. I’ve seen women dress in a provacative, absolutely inappropriate way (lots of cleavage showing, short skirts, high high heels) and how are men supposed to ignore that? They are visual creatures. Peterson mentioned makeup because makeup could be part of that conversation, not because he personally has any problem with makeup or thinks there ought to be a law. He’s just saying we need to consider ways to deal with the problem of men and women thrown together in the workforce, because as recent events have shown, we have not figured out how to do this yet. me, I think uniforms could be part of the solution…

  • Daniella Leona

    “First, our society DOES value children, almost to the point of fetishism.”

    And then: “Our economy is hostile to child bearing.”

    You’ve almost counteracted yourself. However I’ll grant you the distinction between society and our economy because…because I can’t as the two are one and the same as our society is primarily a capitalist society above anything else.

    But again. Your second point was my point exactly.

    Whatever else you said way too off my topic I didn’t bother reading it.

  • Daniella Leona

    Very eloquent and explains everything. You win the internet today.

  • Daniella Leona

    Hence the /luck/reward bit.

  • Annerdr

    Well, except where you said, “Frankly I think he’s absolutely correct, however I concede the wording is potentially inflammatory. But no less correct because of it.”

  • AudreyA

    I hope people will google Peterson and listen to one of his longer interviews. People like to say things like “he views women as walking uterus” when there is no evidence of that. But don’t take my word for it, google an interview and listen. Listen to the one with Camilla Paglia, it’s a good one. No, our society does not make it easy for a young woman to hold a baby; the whole dominate media culture practically screams that having a baby is all well and good but you need a CAREER and a FUTURE and don’t have kids until you are well into that career and then you can have (maybe) a 6 week maternity leave after which you better get back to WORK and moving on that career ladder! After all, advancing your career and making money, that’s what women should do, isn’t it? And yet, having and holding and caring for a baby is one of the sweetest experiences of a lifetime. I hope young women will take three years out of that 50 year career path to enjoy one of life’s most fulfilling times…the short time your child is a baby and toddler.

  • Cynthia

    He’s apparently married.

  • Brian Curtis

    I don’t see a conspiracy; I see an awareness that everyone needs to be self-sufficient. Having a career isn’t some sort anti-child choice that’s forced on women; it’s a way to feed yourself and continue breathing. Nobody complains that men are expected to have a career and pay their bills; why should women expect anything different? So yes, everyone does need to work.

    Now, our economic system IS blatantly skewed toward the rich at the expense of the poor, so it’s hard for a lot of people, male OR female, to make a decent living. Too many people are putting in way too many hours for not enough compensation, let alone leisure time. Our society is arguably too capitalist and too materialistic. But that’s a separate issue. It has nothing to do with having kids, which is the real luxury option.

    And before you offer the predictable “But what if nobody can afford kids? Society would DIE OUT” argument: look around. We are not running out of people any time soon. More people SHOULD be looking at the economic realities of raising a child and realizing it’s not a good option for them.

  • Daniella Leona

    “The problem with patriarchy is that it is limits people’s choices and forces people into limited roles.”

    I would say that’s capitalism not the patriarchy. A capitalist government doesn’t care who pays the taxes it only cares that someone does.

    It’s hardly mankind’s fault men can’t be brainless baby machines. Nor is it womankid’s fault that we are the baby machines.

    It would be exactly the same way if our biological roles were reversed. Unless you think women in the same roles as men would behave in some far more superior way and have all men shot once they fulfilled their brainless baby machine duties. Because men are obviously all evil and worse then useless.

    Did I love being pregnant. Hell. No. Do I get bored with my daughter sometimes and is it tiring for reasons I’m not sharing in any public forum? Yes. Do I think our government (Australia) needs to seriously think where it’s priorities lie in terms of paid maternity/paternity leave? Yes. Because what about male homosexual couples? Or single male parents? They face the same struggles as hetero parents or single mother parents. If not more.

  • Cynthia

    So why not:

    – talk to actual women to find out if they are actually “so outraged”
    – if any of them are, ASK them why and let them explain the reasons
    – if it is hard to have kids, talk about things that actually make it hard like difficulties finding well-paid work in your 20s or lack of decent maternity leave in the US

    As opposed to:
    – portraying young women in general as being “outraged” without backing up that statement
    – pulling an explanation out of his ass and not bothering to listen to what actual women say
    – not dealing with the issue at all so the statement simply serves to be dismissive of women and allow any man who ever deals with a woman to conclude that she’s angry and must be in need of baby (as opposed to, say, being upset for a good reason at BS spewed about women like equating them with chaos or suggesting that they shouldn’t expect to be in the workplace without being sexually harassed)

  • Annerdr

    You should read more Peterson. He is big on narrowly defined gender roles for everyone. That’s why you get such pushback when you say you agree with him. Peterson would have all women at home, cooking, cleaning, and popping out a dozen or so kids. His point is that this is what all women want, no matter how much some women say they do not. Peterson believes that men should work and women should stay home – for each and every family. When you say you agree with him and you were/are a SAHM, then we assume that you agree with Peterson on his entire worldview, in which women are home cooking and cleaning and silently waiting on their men, who go out and rule the world. For many of us, this sort of life, the life of a SAHM, is nothing like what we want. So you get pushback.

    Also, FED is best. Some mothers cannot breastfeed. No shame comes from using formula. In the US, formula is strictly regulated and all of them have the same ingredients. Changes have been made recently so that formula fed babies are not behind breast fed babies. I personally found breastfeeding easier than dealing with bottles, but my friend takes medication that means she must either spiral into a deep depression and breastfeed, or maintain her sanity and formula feed.

    It doesn’t matter if only women can have babies. Many women do not want to have babies and those women should not have babies. Baby making is not the only purpose for women. Some women prefer focusing all of the time and attention that it takes to raise a child well into their art or their career or into nothing at all. Some women just don’t like children or they have a body dysphoria or they have an illness that makes pregnancy dangerous. Those women who never have children are just as valuable. Having babies in not especially important when we have 7 billion people on this world. It may seem important because you love your children.

  • Annerdr

    Bless her heart.

  • Daniella Leona

    Wow. I’m amazed at how…I don’t know what the underlying motivation or feelings are behind all this gendered hate. I really find it very strange when Western society is light years ahead of the rest of the world in terms of females having more equality.

    All I know is is it more difficult for women because we BIOLOGICALLY carry and theoretically care for young babies because of breastfeeding and perhaps some other biological reasons? Yes.

    But are these things the result of a mass male conspiracy? I don’t think so. Because no one yet has answered what this patriarchal conspiracy is set up to achieve? Do you really believe all men want women bare foot in the kitchen, as brainless baby machines? Really?

    They may in other cultures but I don’t believe they do in ours. Governments simply DON’T PLACE ENOUGH VALUE ON CHILDRAISING because it costs them money (in the short term) not make it for them via taxes. Which I think is an archaic and dead end strategy long term. For women, children and men.

  • Cynthia

    It’s kinda cute how you start off by saying that a thing was blown way out of proportion and then go on to show us exactly why it was really a problem.

    To be crystal clear – if you seriously think that a woman wearing makeup to work should expect to be sexually harassed just because the IT guy is horny and can’t be bothered to behave normally and follow a workplace policy or check to see if the woman is also interested – then you are part of the problem.

  • Daniella Leona

    I quite agree. Educators are vitally important and I DON’T THINK OUR SOCIETY PLACES ENOUGH VALUE ON OUR CHILDREN OR THE CARE OF THEM. Including their education.

    Lol. I am somebody. And I quite ageee it’s not just up to a woman but to any person to decide what sort of job holds meaning for them. I also said however finding such a job in our society is sadly the anomaly not the norm.

  • Daniella Leona

    In case anyone else wants to reiterate what I said just in different words, great. Saves me staying awake I’m putting my daughter and myself to bed. But do I believe in co-sleeping until 12 months or separate rooms…. wa wa wa waaaaa *evil laugh*.

    Good night America.

  • zizania

    I haven’t worn make-up in forty years. I never really thought it made me look any better, so I just decided to forego the expense and the bother. Fortunately, my job as a second-hand book seller, my very laid-back husband, and my circle of friends who are more at home in a goat barn than a beauty salon make it a non-issue. Mind you, I also live in the kind of community where you can attend a symphony concert in jeans and a T-shirt and not get a second glance.

  • Cynthia

    You can have a conversation about ways that society can make it easier for mothers, including parental leave and benefits (here, leave can be split between parents so mom can be home for 6 months and get breastfeeding established and fully recover from birth, dad can then take 6 months, that way both are involved and having kids doesn’t just affect one career).

    He is not having that conversation, or saying anything productive, or speaking to actual women. He is just making an argument to suggest that women can be dismissed as angry and baby-hungry.

  • Daniella Leona

    The Camille Paglia one was outstanding. I’d never heard her before or read any of her work. But wow. What a mind.

  • zizania

    That’s why I became a cub leader. And why I forced myself to sing when my son was a baby.

  • Annerdr

    I sang until my son put his little two year old hands over my mouth and said “No sing, Mommy. No sing.”

  • Daniella Leona

    Maybe he’s had that discussion. Has he? Or hasn’t he? I’m not sure what context this tweet was tweeted in. So I’ll remain consistent in my interpretation of it as seen through my own lens where yes I think it’s a societal problem regarding the devaluing of child raising work. Including staying at home parents and educators. Of any gender.

  • paganheart

    ^^^This^^^ My husband and I are childless by choice, and there are several reasons for that, but one of the biggest is that frankly there are too many humans on this dying rock, and we need to be actively encouraging everyone to have fewer children, not more. I’ve been told that such a philosophy will collapse our economic system because we might (horrors!) run out of consumers; frankly I’m not sure that’s a bad thing either. We need a new economic system. “We Must Grow And Consume All The Time At All Costs And Never Ever Stop Growing Ever!!!!” Is also the mindset of cancer cells, and we all know how that usually works out…

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    You are off topic. Cosleeping has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

  • zizania

    I can only suppose my son was tone deaf himself, or just naturally polite. Now I only sing in my head.

  • katiehippie

    I believe men can control themselves. So I have a higher opinion of men than you do. If they can’t be professional, maybe they should be there. Men and women mixing in the workplace is only new if you consider the last 60 years new. My mom worked in an insurance office in the 50s with *gasp* men in the same workplace.

  • katiehippie

    I’m not a baby holder. I figured holding my babies would be enough, and it was.

  • Nea

    Because no one yet has answered what this patriarchal conspiracy is set up to achieve?

    Power for men, by derailing any chance a woman has to be autonomous from her biological ability to bear children. That’s why they’re making it as easy as possible for women to become and stay pregnant (anti-abortion TRAP laws, chiseling away at birth control as “chemical abortions,” removing birth control from health care plans) and as dangerous/hard as possible for a pregnant woman or mother to work (no child care, low pay, etc.)

    And that’s before we get into the patriarchical religions insisting that women shouldn’t have higher educations or most careers, advice which this blog quotes constantly.

    You’re half right. Governments don’t place enough value on childraising. But they are also going out of their way to make sure that only rich women can control their fertility and only lucky women can learn and have careers. Because that is patriarchy and patriarchy exists so that the patriarchs are the ones with the money and the power.

  • katiehippie

    So are you working to made sure that women can actually spend that time with their babies? It’s a privilege to be able to do so. I had a good job when I had kids but there was no provision for allowing me to do that. Since I wanted the kids and I to be able to actually eat and have a roof over our heads, I had to go back to work. You seem to be just as inflexible about women should hold and care for a baby as you accuse “dominate media culture” for saying women should have a career. Maybe women should have a choice to do what they want without people like you telling them what they should do. Some women want kids and some don’t. That is perfectly fine. And heaven forbid any woman wanting a FUTURE.
    Peterson is one of psuedo intellectuals who “thinks” about things and then makes pronouncements about things he has no relevant experience about. Everything is an intellectual exercise to him. There are quite a few men that have this problem.

  • NotAgain A Contumelious Puss

    Peterson isn’t like that! But I agree with his idea (that he totally doesn’t talk about wink wink) that women are nothing more than walking incubators and babysitters.

    Look you tell us he is not a misogynist, but then rattle off misogynistic blather that comes from what he said. You do no one any favors by coming here to defend him.

  • NotAgain A Contumelious Puss

    Men should ignore that the way Jesus told them to, pluck out their eyes. Get with the program.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    To be more precise, the question was indeed whether men and women can work together. The answer to that, to him, is not entirely obvious, since we’ve had a relative short period get some actual data on that (Dr. Peterson’s rather fond of anthropological research as a base for his world views). With certain companies now having policies where you cannot hug each other or look each other in the eye for more than 5 seconds, the question does arise: what is proper behavior in the workplace. From there, the discussion turned to appearance.

    It’s clear that coming to work in a suit is fine. Coming to work wearing nothing but a negligé or boxers certainly is not. The answer is therefore somewhere in between, but what is it? Are shorts ok? A short skirt? What about make-up? Should make-up be allowed?

    Dr. Peterson posed the make-up remark as a provocative statement to show that this discussion really isn’t all that easy. It has nothing to do with whether the IT guy can keep his hands to himself (one should always respect someone else’s physical boundaries), but what is and what is not appropriate in a workplace where physical attraction or even love between two people may occur. How many relationships and even marriages started in a work environment? What impact will policies like not being allowed to look each other in the eye for longer than 5 seconds have on this?

  • Raging Bee

    Plenty of people have googled Peterson, and, from following your advice, found him to be a dishonest idiot about far more subjects than women and motherhood. Instead of telling us to keep on listening to more of Peterson than we already have, why don’t YOU do some research and quote him saying something really intelligent or insightful?

  • Daniella Leona

    Hmmm. Isn’t that terribly short sighted for an entire country, or even business or organization to have such nefarious intent? I suspect the US and Australia differ substantially because our government is firmly separated from church. Whereas in the US church and state are still married, so to speak.

    But what’s the point of keeping poor, uneducated women pregnant and healthy and not wealthy educated women? Because wealthy educated women are more likely from a socioeconomic perspective produce more productive (work wise) children. Poor children seem to be a burden on the state not a boon.

    I’m not saying patriarchy doesn’t exist anywhere it certainly does throughout the world in nefarious ways. But I can’t see the benefit for a wealthy and ‘democratic’ society to want to keep poor women ‘brainless baby machines’ and rich women with few to one child, or less.

    I understand wanting to make mothers work so they can be taxed. But I don’t understand the logic of keeping them producing children who are less likely to be fiscally productive adults.

    Which is why I actually believe it’s a child care and value problem. Which women bear the brunt of purely due to biology.

  • Raging Bee

    Camille Paglia? The out-lesbian who mocks gay men for being “unnatural?” The AGW denialist? That Camille Paglia? What a transparently hypocritical self-inflating airhead! She and Peterson belong together. As Molly Ivins said of her, “Sheesh, what an asshole.”

  • Raging Bee

    And Peterson suggested that maybe how we dress, how we present ourselves, is part of the problem.

    Yeah, that “suggestion” is an old one. And it’s victim-blaming. And it enables men to avoid responsibility for their actions.

    Also, “blown way out of proportion” =/= “Peterson was right.”

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    It looks like some women in response to that tweet got the meaning quite well. I seriously doubt Dr. Peterson has a problem with women who prefer to work or who simply do not wish to have children; that’s not at all like the message he usually puts out. The question has to do with a society that seems to put pressure on women to have a career even if they don’t want one. There was a recent news article about women in Sweden who are given a hard time, because they prefer to stay at home over having a career. “Sweden has some of the best children care facilities in the world, so why would you choose to not work?” is the question asked of them. “You don’t have to choose between a career and a family, you can have both.” The fact that some of them may not WANT that doesn’t appear to come up at all. After all, now that women CAN have a career, they SHOULD, because the only other explanation is that they are oppressed to stay home. It doesn’t help that the price of everything seems more and more focused on two income families. Buying a house on a single income is getting harder by the year.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Actually, I think this provocative question was put out to start a discussion. As you can tell from some of the reactions from some women in that twitter thread: there’s some truth to it. Society puts a lot of pressure on women to work, even if they don’t want to. What Dr. Peterson always appears to do is try to get people to think for themselves. He doesn’t mind being proven wrong, but it’s the open exchange of ideas that he values.

  • Raging Bee

    The question has to do with a society that seems to put pressure on women to have a career even if they don’t want one.

    Read the Peterson quote again — he wasn’t saying anything about that issue, he was just mocking women and saying they had no good reason to be “outraged” and would shut up and be happy if they had babies to hold.

    Seriously, Peterson is an ignorant asshole, and you’re not fooling anyone by pretending he was saying something totally different from what we all heard him say.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Interesting. Which article/video that he posted himself did you find most profound in showing he is a dishonest idiot?

  • Raging Bee

    I was wondering when some wanker would trot out the old “he was trying to start a discussion” line. News flash: the discussion was already underway, so we didn’t need another wanker “starting” it by saying stupid shit just to insult people.

  • Raging Bee

    Every quote I’ve heard from him shows that. Where’s your quote showing otherwise?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/913531363915128832
    Read the first two reactions to his post. I think that’s EXACTLY what he was saying.

  • Raging Bee

    …the question was indeed whether men and women can work together. The answer to that, to him, is not entirely obvious…

    …probably because he doesn’t have enough real work experience to know what he’s talking about.

  • Cynthia

    Well, I will agree that he tries to be provocative.

  • Raging Bee

    Society puts a lot of pressure on women to work, even if they don’t want to.

    “Society?” Would you, or Peterson, care to be at least a tiny bit more specific?

  • Raging Bee

    So your only response is to repeat the same ignorant-assed quote?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    No, I merely linked to the entire conversation rather than just showing the original tweet. How else could you read the reactions people are giving to it?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, how about the hundreds of lecture hours he’s put online? I think that’s in part what AudreyA was referring to. Feel free to disagree with his ideas, but he’s hardly a dishonest idiot.

  • lady_black

    She has my sympathy.

  • Raging Bee

    You could try quoting the bits you want us to read, and explain how they allegedly support your opinion.

    And while you’re at it, you could explain why other people’s reaction makes Peterson’s words less stupid or dishonest.

  • lady_black

    I don’t know why that ought to make anyone uncomfortable. To each his own, is my philosophy.

  • Raging Bee

    So quote some of the lectures that show his True Genius. We’re waiting…

    Bluff: called.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    There have been several news articles lately of women complaining about other women (and men) pressuring them to work rather than stay at home. They feel like they are looked down upon, because they prefer to stay at home or work part-time rather than pursuing a full time career. I’m happy that you may not feel that way, but some women do, and this tweet was in direct regard to that.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Whether what he says offends someone depends on how you choose to interpret his words. His main message is, and has always been: try to improve your own life and that of those around you one small step at a time. Pay attention to what gives meaning to your life, and try to do the right thing at all times. I merely interpret all his words with that in mind, and if you read his later explanations you’ll find that’s generally what he intended with his words as well. There’s not a single sentence anyone could utter that I could purposely misinterpret to mean something completely different, and that’s no different with Dr. Peterson’s words. Interpreting them in the worst possible way is easy, but it’s rarely correct.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, because the second reaction is his own. People always complain about how Dr. Peterson’s words are quoted out of context; I’m giving you the context in stead. But since you asked:

    Annelise Mitchell:
    I think so. We’re not allowed to be just mothers and we don’t have many role models to look up to.

    Jordan B Peterson:
    So why don’t women who feel that way speak up? Are the more maternal inclined to be more silent?

  • Cynthia

    If this was about an actual woman expressing frustration about ways that society makes things hard for mothers, the tweet wouldn’t be discussed here.

  • Dom S

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9d830954f87515f13e2c10ea816b927abce1599e13cab20ca79b0c0f1b9214a0.gif

    It’s not something all women want to do, breed and have kids, so get over yourself. You don’t speak for all women, nor to their experiences. And fun fact, dumbass, if you want more women to be mothers, maybe, I don’t know, accept the fact they need to work in order to support said kids? You make it seem as if career advancement is a bad thing for a woman in a way it isn’t for a man.

    You know what, just shut up.

  • Dom S

    He literally just said “women are angry because they don’t have kids or aren’t holding babies.” Sure, because a woman’s entire humanity is centered on human spawn, as opposed to literally anything else on the planet. Men are allowed to be angry about all kinds of things (if they’re white, anyway), while women are only outraged because….babies.

    Okay. Way to dehumanize half of the damn planet.

  • Raging Bee

    Citation required. Funny how you seem so reluctant to admit there’s ECONOMIC PRESSURE forcing women to work and denying men the wages they’d need to support a non-working wife and kids. I wonder why that is…maybe because Peterson and his fans are right wing idiots who refuse to support any actual policy that makes it easier for women to raise babies, ‘cuz socialism!!!

  • Dom S

    And who says women aren’t allowed to be “just mothers?” And “not many role models?” I can name that Christian Activist Mommy, Lori Alexander, the mother of the Duggar clan, and pretty much any conservative evangelical woman who literally does nothing but lay on her back and pop out more kids than a queen ant.

    Peterson and Mitchell are full of shit.

  • Raging Bee

    What the fuck makes Peterson think that “women who feel that way” haven’t been speaking up? Fun fact: they HAVE been, and morons like Peterson have been ignoring them, talking over them, lying about them, and/or ridiculing them and telling them to shut up and stop being so outraged.

  • Dom S

    Sigh. I don’t know how many times we have to say it till we’re blue in the face, but the 50s didn’t exist. Dual-income housing is the norm save for the super-rich, and since 99% of us aren’t that, people need to get over the fact that mothers need to work too. People want mothers to “be mothers,” but in 2018, that means working to support your kid, not sitting on your ass and simply child-raising while your man busts his ass in 3-4 jobs, putting his physical and mental health on the line, trying to support the family because Mom isn’t helping out. That’s not a romantic image, that’s awful.

  • Dom S

    But he is a dishonest idiot. So…

  • AudreyA

    sputter spilling my coffee….NO the woman should absolutely not expect to be sexually harassed! How could you possibly get that from my comment that the IT guy might have a crush on her?? But can we agree that men and women do get interested in each other at work and that it can easily become a problem? That behaving normally might be a lot harder when sexual attraction is at play? Good grief we have just had a tsunami of women publicizing the workplace harassment they’ve experienced and you think more policy and more training is the fix? Maybe a dress code would help, or maybe it wouldn’t, but maybe it’s worth a try! That’s what Peterson was saying!

  • Raging Bee

    His main message is, and has always been: try to improve your own life and that of those around you one small step at a time…

    The quotes we’re discussing here have nothing at all to do with his “main message.” They’re just stupid-assed insults from someone who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. (And since you haven’t provided any actual quotes of his, we can’t take your word about what his “main message” really is.)

  • Dom S

    In that context, it seems Mitchell is actually on Peterson’s “pro-mother-only” side. I was going to say the same thing till I re-read but yeah, seems like he managed to find a woman in the minority who genuinely believes in his BS.

  • Dom S

    A dress code? Seriously? Women in Saudi Arabia still get raped and they’re covered from head to toe. Are you really this insipid and stupid? Stop defending Peterson’s monstrous talking points. If you want to save face, just shut up already. You’re stupid and it’s insulting to everyone here, especially to the women.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I don’t recall calling him a true genius, but he IS a professor of psychology at a big university, so hardly an idiot.

    From Rule 8: Tell the truth – or, at least, don’t lie (also relates to the dishonest part of your claim; this is one of his 12 rules):

    You can use words to manipulate the world into delivering what you want. This is what it means to “act politically.”This is spin. It’s the specialty of unscrupulous marketers, salesmen, advertisers, pickup artists, slogan-possessed utopians and psychopaths. It’s the speech people engage in when they attempt to influence and manipulate others. It’s what university students do when they write an essay to please the professor, instead of articulating and clarifying their own ideas (Dr. Peterson prefers his students to challenge his ideas in class than just accept them as axioms). It’s what everyone does when they want something, and decide to falsify themselves to please and flatter. It’s scheming and sloganeering and propaganda.

    It’s the start of a section regarding the dangers of ideology, and how people create problems for themselves by being too agreeable and not stating what’s bothering them. Being too agreeable often ends in people taking advantage of them and/or resentment towards the world. He’s spent a lot of time helping women stand up for themselves in the workplace, and improve their standing.

  • Raging Bee

    “Worth a try?” What, you think no one’s ever tried a dress code before?

  • Dom S

    Yes, for many adults, work is the main place where they can socialize so naturally, relationships may start to form up over time while you’re there. But if that’s the case, have discussions like adults. Meet after work. Whatever. But being a lecherous asshole and staring at people like you’re sex-deprived is not okay in an environment where you’re expected to behave as a professional. The workplace isn’t an adult playground. And quit it with the slippery slope logic. You can maintain eye contact with a person without sexually undressing them with your eyes in a blatant and obvious way. If you can’t divorce your sexual desires from your job, stay home.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I believe I stated in an earlier comment that economic pressure is indeed one of the reasons women are forced to work. I find it odd though that you first criticize him for apparently wanting women to stay home, and now claim it’s partly his fault that policies that would allow this to happen are not introduced.

    FYI: I’m left voting in a left leaning country, even socialist to American standards. Democrats are considered right wing here.

  • AudreyA

    Jordan Peterson: “…when you think about the times when you’re at peace with yourself, with regards to how you’re conducting yourself in the world, it’s almost always conditions under which you’ve adopted a responsibility. At least, the most guilt, I think, that you can experience, perhaps, is the sure knowledge that you’re not even taking care of yourself, so that you’re leaving that responsibility to other people; because that’s pretty pathetic, unless you’re psychopathic, and you’re living a parasitical life. …you’re in guilt and shame, because not only are you not taking care of yourself, let’s say—so someone else has to—but you’re not living up to your full potential. And so there’s an existential weight that goes along with that. ” OMGosh, the man is urging people to be responsible. No wonder he has so many detractors.

  • Raging Bee

    No actual quotes, I see, except for one basic rule that he didn’t exactly make up, and to which he adds nothing.

    …but he IS a professor of psychology at a big university, so hardly an idiot.

    There’s lots of other professors at the same big university who are questioning his teaching and methods. Credentialism won’t work here, especially since you still haven’t provided any quotes proving he has anything sensible to say.

  • AudreyA

    Um, I think she has identified as a trans person. call her what you like, she’s no airhead…

  • Raging Bee

    Vague word-salad and deepities that offer nothing new or useful. All he’s saying is that people feel better when they’re taking responsibility, and guilty when they don’t (or can’t). Most of us ordinary schmucks already know that. That’s all you got?

  • Dom S

    Fun fact, professors are people too, just as flawed, and aren’t automatically geniuses. I went to a private school for my undergraduate career and experienced this first-hand. Just because someone has a degree doesn’t mean they can’t be idiots or can’t be wrong. Case in point, my friend had to do a presentation for her thesis and a prospective professor basically tried to grill her and subtly insulted her work in the process, in front of a crowd of people, including his potential future employers. He let his idiocy and elitism get in the way and what did he have to show for it?

    Fun fact: He didn’t get a position at our school.

    I also find it really rich you say Peterson prefers his students to challenge his shit when he behaves as if he’s automatically correct off the bat, meanwhile his cultist fanboys seem to be willing to do anything BUT challenge him. Indeed, you’re here, right now, defending some of the worst things he’s ever said without making any attempt to see from our point of view why he’s actually quite the dumbass.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    What I put between


    IS a direct quote. I just added a small remark between () in there that was my own to give some context.

    Considering the amount of citations his papers have gotten, I’d say that more than enough academia give credence to his work. Paper citations are usually a good indication for that, and he’s in the top .5% of those. That doesn’t mean he’s always right, nor that he claims to have an answer to every life’s question.

  • Raging Bee

    I’ve read plenty of her drivel. Trans or not, she’s an airhead, and a self-inflating, mean-spirited one at that.

  • Dom S
  • Dom S

    FYI: Left-leaning people can be dumb too. So…?

  • Raging Bee

    So just a lot of vague talk about being truthful instead of not? That’s it? If that’s new to Peterson’s audience, that says a lot more about them then it does about his intelligence.

  • Dom S

    I just find it ironic we have a whole administration that is literally stealing children from their parents, but the same idiot who supports said administration feels like women would be less angry if they all had babies to occupy their time. So which one is it? He wants mothers to be mothers, while supporting shit that would make that hard to even do in the first place.

  • Dom S

    Not mine. Lay down with dogs, and all…

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    That’s not determinative of anything. Some of the biggest idiots I know are college professors. Education does not always make people smarter.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Interesting, so you agree with Annelise Mitchell then. According to Dom Saunders just below, she’s a minority, Perhaps you and he have more to talk about than you and I. 🙂

  • lady_black

    Good point. But I can’t help but think he didn’t show her who he really is before it was too late. Those types never do.

  • AudreyA

    What exactly do you consider misogynist about my comment? Is it woman-hating to tell women that caring for a baby is a wonderful, sweet experience? I’m lost here. You want to work, fine, but know that taking care care of your children is not this mind-crushing drudgery, while work outside the home–for MOST WORKING MOTHERS, is not exactly soul enriching and fulfilling, it’s just a job. For every woman researcher there’s a half dozen lab techs, for every woman doctor a small army of medical transcriptions and insurance clerks and receptionists, most of them women. That these young women are giving up those few years they might have a baby in their arms for time in an office is just sad. But there is no support or recognition for staying home or making the sacrifices that requires. People looked own on me for taking care of my kids. I was out of the work force 8 years and have been working full time for the last 22. Did I lose some advancement? Yes. Do I think it was worth it? Absolutely!

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I found this article interesting in that regard; I can quote more if you really want, since there’s many regarding this topic, but you already agreed tho that when you said that women HAVE been speaking up about this in another reaction above:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/

    “I’d been the woman smiling the faintly superior smile while another
    woman told me she had decided to take some time out or pursue a less
    competitive career track so that she could spend more time with her
    family. I’d been the woman congratulating herself on her unswerving
    commitment to the feminist cause, chatting smugly with her dwindling
    number of college or law-school friends who had reached and maintained
    their place on the highest rungs of their profession. I’d been the one
    telling young women at my lectures that you can have it all and
    do it all, regardless of what field you are in. Which means I’d been
    part, albeit unwittingly, of making millions of women feel that they
    are to blame if they cannot manage to rise up the ladder as fast as men
    and also have a family and an active home life (and be thin and
    beautiful to boot).”

  • Martin Penwald

    Seriously, “Daniella Leona” started posting just at the same time this article was posted, they only has 2 comments on another blog : they is here just to praise Peterson whatever they pretends.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    That’s odd though, isn’t it? If this was expressed by a woman, and several women have said this recently, it wouldn’t have been an issue, but since it’s Dr. Peterson that says it, a man so many love to hate, it MUST be misogyny, because: what else could it possible be?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    No, he didn’t say that. He ASKED: is it possible that … It’s a question to provoke a discussion regarding a topic. It seems it worked, considering it’s not only discussed in twitter, but also in here. 🙂

  • Raging Bee

    Yeah, like i said, this sort of debate has been going on long before Peterson showed up; and Peterson has nothing useful of his own to add to it. He’s just another right-wing asshole using sentiments like this as an excuse to attack feminism, and mock women for having careers or wanting to be anything other than mommies.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, he’s the first to admit that his 12 rules are common sense, but the problem is that common sense isn’t common. In his book he tries to explain WHY these rules are common sense, and why they are important. It’s odd how some people claim that his rules are just common sense, and nothing special, while others claim they’re obviously wrong. Perhaps those two groups should have a discussion first about who’s right, because they can’t both be right…

  • Anonymous person

    Thank you for your all your effort, particularly against these irrationally biased people who refuse to see anything truthful or wise in his words. I know its a futile effort, but thanks none the less. Maybe just maybe you might be able to get a few of them to take their blinders off and at least give him a fair shot.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Certainly, but as I already stated: the quality of a professor is often found in the amount of citations his papers get, and in his field he’s one of the most cited professors. Seems like at least some of his colleagues agree with what he teaches.

    He’s given his ideas a LOT of thought, so obviously he believes he’s correct, but has often stated that that doesn’t automatically mean he’s right. He’s been debating Sam Harris a lot lately, and they hardly agree on everything. He likes to learn; one of his rules being: “Assume that the person you’re listening to might know something you don’t.”

    I’m not defending things he’s said; I’m merely claiming that some of the interpretations of his words are not in line with his general views on life, and therefore probably incorrect.

  • Cynthia

    Ok, let’s break this down.

    One employee may have a crush on another. So what?

    If company policy allows relationships between employees where one is not in a position of power over the other, the employee with the crush can ask the other out for coffee, and the answer might be yes or no. If the answer is no, employee with the crush accepts it and moves on. That’s not harassment.

    If they do go out and start dating, they follow any policies on workplace romances. Nobody gets to use their position at work to coerce a date or keep someone from being able to break up with them.

    If company policy does not allow the relationship, employee with crush needs to get over it.

    What does any of this have to do with a dress code?

    BTW, I worked as a lifeguard for years and now my daughter is doing so for the summer. Shouldn’t she be able to expect normal behavior from co-workers?

  • smrnda

    So, I’m a STEM university professor with cats and no kids, married to another woman. I actually have held babies on a few occasions, either through volunteer work or the children of friends/family members.

    First, dealing with infants doesn’t rely on *magical intuition* it’s knowledge and experience. Answering ‘why is the baby crying’ isn’t that different than asking ‘why does the server keep crashing?’

    Second, many outraged women have kids. I know of at least one woman fired when her employer refused to offer reasonable accommodation while pregnant. Others are outraged because their kids are being criminalized in a ‘school to prison’ pipeline.

  • Annerdr

    Yeah, but tilting at windmills is my thing. I’m hoping someday in the future, a windmill may fall.

  • smrnda

    the guy in IT who has a secret crush on you is in trouble.

    I didn’t think they let grade school kids work full time in IT, though I don’t doubt some have the technical skills. Seriously, what adult has a ‘secret crush?’ That’s not how adult relationships work. If the guy in IT has a ‘secret crush’ on a woman he barely knows I think that’s a maturity issue on his end.

    I’ve seen women dress in a provacative, absolutely inappropriate way (lots of cleavage showing, short skirts, high high heels) and how are men supposed to ignore that?

    You realize that women have been wearing clothes like that for nearly 50 years? Society got over the shock long ago.

  • smrnda

    Have you ever read dress codes for women? Some go several pages. Their only intent is to give supervisors the ability to screw with employees or give men excuses for harassing women.

  • Cynthia

    It’s a problem because he’s making an assumption that women are “so outraged” today where there’s nothing to support that this is the case. This is coming from the guy who calls order masculine and chaos feminine.

    It’s also a problem because he is dismissing the POV of any woman who does feel angry (and among half the population, someone is bound to be upset at some point). If someone is angry and you want to know why, you can actually listen to what she is saying herself.

    Imagine if someone wrote “I wonder if young men are so outraged today because they feel inadequate because penis size is shrinking”. How would people react?

  • Galen Ballentine

    Is Jordan Peterson a trump supporter?

  • paganheart

    I agree, it shouldn’t be a big deal and people should just move on and mind their own business. Unfortunately, there a lot of people out there (especially in my family) who look at you like you are some kind of four-headed freak of nature when you tell them that no, you don’t have children; no, you don’t want to have children; no, you don’t hate kids (in fact we love our nieces and nephews dearly); and no, we aren’t looking to adopt or foster. (We considered both of those options, but ultimately decided against them. Long story, but ultimately it comes down to our own health issues, expenses, and the fact that my husband’s family had an adoption experience that went terribly wrong.) Luckily hubby and I aren’t being asked as much about our childless status…maybe because we’re in our 50s, or maybe because at this point I’m not afraid to tell certain relatives to mind their own damn business.

  • Annerdr

    Just curious, what idiot company came up with the “cannot look each other in the eye for more than 5 seconds” rule? That rules is completely unenforceable. Although, if you try looking at someone for more than 5 seconds during a conversation, you might find it feels a bit weird.

  • Annerdr

    That isn’t odd. When I talk about my life, I know what I’m talking about. When Peterson talks about what women want, he doesn’t.

  • NotAgain A Contumelious Puss

    I don’t even know where to begin. I have looked up Peterson and he is a typical mansplaining misogynist.

    Your comment implied that all women should stop and have children and must stay home for three years at least to care for them. That women who have careers are bad and having a future is bad. I care for my children very well, and I work, at a job you think is unimportant or whatever, I still take great care of my children. I am far more fulfilled working and caring for my children than I ever was when I was home alone tending to their every whim. That makes me happier, which makes them happier and provides a much better upbringing than me being depressed and bored. If you find the way you care for your children to be totally fulfilling, fantastic. I’m all for it, you go girl. Do you your way. But god dam it let me do me my way. You don’t have the secret to every woman’s happiness and Peterson is even less qualified than you to present the secret to all women’s happiness.

    Don’t lecture me on how to raise my kids. You cannot speak for anyone but yourself.

  • smrnda

    The question has to do with a society that seems to put pressure on women to have a career even if they don’t want one

    I’m sympathetic to struggling mothers stuck in shitty, unfulfilling jobs. But those are jobs, not careers. There’s a difference.

    Now, am I sympathetic to young women upset that they can’t follow the path of ‘go to college and get an MRS degree?’ I met one such person when I was younger. she wasn’t meeting many guys who wanted that arrangement, and wasn’t happy about that. My take was that you can want anything in a relationship but you can’t be assured of getting it.

    And it’s not like the vast majority of women were always working anyway. supporting families on a single income was a historical anomaly and was only open to certain classes of people. It wasn’t like white suburban women weren’t hiring African American women to work as ‘household help.’

  • smrnda

    That sounds like standard motivational fluff that’s aimed at mostly privileged people. I mean, let’s lecture migrant laborers or people who work in dangerous factories about their need to lift existential weight. They’re having trouble lifting real, physical ones.

  • smrnda

    The problem I find with the terms ‘common sense’ :

    1. ‘Common sense’ is a bit like ‘everybody knows’ – it’s a ‘let’s repeat this over and over again because that makes it true.’

    2. Many ‘common sense’ things are so vague as to be totally meaningless. Most life advice is – it’s full of motivational buzzwords but short on anything concrete.

  • NotAgain A Contumelious Puss

    I can say there are articles out there pressuring working moms to stay at home. This is the same thing. The mommy Wars are not real, they are a made up conflict meant to sell ads on blogs and magazines. My friends know that I like working and they don’t judge me, I know my friends that want to want to stay at home with their kids and I don’t judge them. But online there are twitter fights and comment threads beating the other sides down to drive ad dollars. The thing is, Peterson has shown his ignorance with the tweet and he doesn’t get it. It isn’t his place to say anyway. He has no dog in the hunt and he is observing on the periphery without context or experience and making overreaching “expert” declarations. Those declarations being completely wrong.

  • Dom S
  • Dom S

    White supremacists give their views a lot of thought too. Doesn’t mean they’re right. And don’t drop Sam Harris’ name of all names into this. He’s on my shit list too. I don’t like either one of them so you can save that BS.

  • smrnda

    “Is it woman-hating to tell women that caring for a baby is a wonderful, sweet experience?”

    Most mothers I know tend to view those years as the most stressful and difficult, and are kind of happy once the kids get older and no longer require so much care. Maybe we should be more realistic about what taking care of babies is actually like?

    That these young women are giving up those few years they might have a baby in their arms for time in an office is just sad.

    So, if a woman works, are you suggesting that she will have no contact with her child? This seems a bit hyperbolic. Do they take the kid away at birth and she gets it back when the kid is 5?

  • Dom S

    A discussion on WHAT? It’s been several decades since we’ve had full-on dual-income households and families, and decades since women started entering the workforce. You may as well be trying to have a discussion on why the sky is blue in 2018 and it’d have the same intellectual merit. These are just known facts, it’s just reality, not something we need to debate over or talk about. Peterson is talking about things that don’t actually fucking matter and he’s just doing it to rile up all the misogynist He-man woman haters and pseudo-intellectuals who make up his rabid fanbase.

    Just shut the fuck up, Pieter. Blocked.

  • smrnda

    Even in workplaces with lax dress codes, this is assuming that the women targeted for harassment will be the ones who dress ‘hottest’ at work. I’m not really seeing that, and give that sexual harassers tend to be serial offenders, it’s really more them than what anyone is wearing.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Not here!~ Our regular comments know an abusive misogynist pos when they see one.

  • smrnda

    “Hell. Yes. I’m lucky enough to be able to do so full time.”

    Just curious, what do you think about men who aren’t inclined to have children with women who intend to drop out of the labor force? Is there some obligation that a man must do so? Should a man work 60 hours a week at some soul-crushing job so his partner can stay home with the kids?

    I mean, if the issue is lousy jobs that offer little, that’s not really a men or women issue. It’s a workplace issue that applies to more than one gender. Shouldn’t we be concerned for men stuck working in horrible, tedious jobs who never see their kids?

  • Cynthia

    Again, Ventriloquism Fallacy. If you want to know what someone is thinking or feeling, you can ask them and then listen to the response, and give them a chance to speak for themselves.

    The undercurrent is that women are unusually angry, and that instead of listening to any particular women who is angry, you can dismiss her by assuming she just needs to hold a baby.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    I have read those 12 rules. No common sense or uncommon sense there, just a lot of Bible legalism and false equivalencies. Go blow your idol elsewhere

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Clearly she is another Peterson apologist/defender and is likely not even female.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Interesting. What makes you say that? There’s a huge amount of anthropological research done on these topics, and while it doesn’t say anything about what a SPECIFIC person wants, it does tell a lot about a group. Take aggression for instance. If you take a random man and a random woman out of the population, the chance that the man is the more aggressive one is 60%, which is pretty close to the 50% you’d expect if things were equal. If you look at the 1% most violent people however, almost all of them are male. These statistics say very little about a specific man, but it does give some general insight into why for instance 9 out of 10 people in jail are men.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I have no idea how “people” would react, but I’d probably point to some statistics that show that this reasoning is incorrect. There’s anthropological studies done on almost any topic, so there’s bound to be one that gives some insight on this. It doesn’t say anything about why a specific man is outraged, but it might give some insight on what % of men is outraged over their penis size.

  • Daniella Leona

    Yes. We should. Again that’s been my point. Childcare is not valued.

    And no one in the world understands what I mean by I’m ‘lucky’ to be able to stay home with my young daughter. I haven’t specified what that luck looks like to me. Or that it doesn’t imply sacrifice. For the most part I’m just grateful I have my daughter and I want to spend as much time with her as possible before I one day die.

  • Annerdr

    Good news! Sweden pays dads for paternity leave. You can take 16 months off work to stay home with your baby!

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Have you actually seen the crowd he speaks to these days, over 150,000 this year alone? Many of those are women and people of color. His latest book is actually bought more by women than by men. Perhaps if you actually listened to what the man IS saying rather than what you THINK he’s saying, you might learn something. No need to agree with everything he says, God knows I don’t, but he’s hardly the misogynist you make him out to be.

    If you don’t like what he’s saying, just ignore him. Why do you get so riled up about people you disagree with? I’ve noticed that if you don’t specifically search for his name, you’re very unlikely to read about him at all, and should you encounter an article about him: why not ignore it? After all: he’s talking about things that don’t actually matter, right?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, I could if I was living in Sweden, which I don’t. 🙂 Ours are past that stage anyway, so it doesn’t matter to me.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Those are the people who, despite their hard life, actually take responsibility. Dr. Peterson would agree with you that more should be done to help such people, which is why he credits the left for standing up for them. He’s talking more to the people leaning towards the extremes on the political spectrum (left and right) to stop playing identity politics, and work on improving their own lives and that of others in stead. He’s probably pulled more people from the alt-right back to the center than anyone here.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, there’s a set of rules that most people would agree with, even though they may not exactly know why (perhaps because they’re so vague). 12 rules for life is an attempt to explain why some of those are important. While i agree that most advice is motivational buzzwords, Dr. Peterson’s words are simple yet effective: work hard to improve yourself and those around you, and pursue that which gives meaning to your life. Its hardly consoling words, and perhaps many people don’t need to hear them, but some people certainly do.

  • Dom S

    When people go out of their way to make claims that women should only do one thing, and have their rhetoric seen as acceptable by people in positions of power, who can use said power to make things for women or other groups of people worse, then yes, I am going to get “riled up” about it. I disagree with anti-civil rights BS. I disagree with anything that violates basic human rights, so to make it seem like I shouldn’t be riled up by that tells me everything I need to know about you. It’s not just a matter of disagreement. People literally suffer because of this kind of rhetoric.

    So he speaks to crowds, big whoop. Trump speaks to crowds of people too, doesn’t mean either of them are decent or morally right people. Don’t throw argument-from-popularity fallacies in my face and pretend that makes you intelligent. People hate-watch things, people come just to see a train wreck, and that means nothing. The people who do actually believe his nonsense, women and men alike, are idiots and if they want to take life lessons from him, and take bad advice from a guy who doesn’t live in the real world, let them do that. But for him to propagate bad ideas that we know hurts people in the long run, don’t ever in your ignorant life tell me I shouldn’t be upset by that.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I just finished it actually; gift for father’s day from my girlfriend. Some parts certainly were too philosophical for me, I picked up a few helpful things here and there. I think the book can be very helpful to some people though; it gives some insight as to why certain things are important in life, and true: some of those explanations are pulled from religious sources, though I’d hardly consider Dr. Peterson a devout Christian. His YouTube readings on the topic are from a philosophical perspective, not a religious one. He sees the Bible mostly as a book of stories that contain meaning and some wisdom towards life.

  • Anonymous person

    What has he ever done that was abusive?

  • Annerdr

    Taking care of an infant is indeed mind-crushing drudgery. Add in some sleeplessness, and you get “baby-brain.” Working outside the home was vastly better, as far as I was concerned. I did what my child needed, but my favorite time period is the teenage years. Infancy was my least favorite time period.

  • Annerdr

    Yet he would vote for Trump again, so he’s not overly concerned with helping the poors.

  • Annerdr

    “…the quality of a professor is often found in the amount of citations his papers get…”
    Not always. For scientists, maybe that is one good yardstick, although it tells you little about about well they teach. For social scientists, not as much. For engineering professors, like my father, they rarely seem to publish.

  • AudreyA

    And I bet they don’t have any existential angst, guilt or shame either.

  • AudreyA

    Oh lordy. I know personally two families doing this…live simply, live in a much cheaper house in a much cheaper neighborhood, Dad’s working at one job mom raising kids for awhile, not forever, just for a while. See your comment there…sitting on your ass and simply child rearing? That’s the attitude moms face. Neither of these two moms has time to sit…

  • Annerdr
  • Galen Ballentine

    Sounds like he didn’t like Clinton or Trump. As a Canadian he only entertained the question because he was so playing a game at a party.

    I’m not sure how you leap from distaste for both candidates displayed in the video to him supporting Trump much less the details of his immigration policy.

  • smrnda

    The problem, to me, with the notion of ‘child care is not valued’ is the question of valued or not by whom? There are people who seem to think that being a mother must be a full time job and that even sending kids to school is a bad idea. Even though plenty of kids do fine having working mothers, plenty of people still believe that a woman who works must be neglecting the kids. Women are shamed for wanting a break from child care even when they’re still primary caretakers.

    Now, the ideal of the full time mom isn’t attainable by most people. It wasn’t attainable by most people during the 1800s either. Ideals often reflect upper class norms. When the poor can’t attain them, they’re often seen as morally less ‘decent’ than the people who can afford them.

    But maybe, with the whole nuclear family thing is that we’ve got this expectation that moms are more or less exclusive, full time caretakers when that is actually unusual historically? I’m all for parents getting more time off and flexible scheduling, but I just see many women who get guilt ridden and anxious for admitting they want a break from the kids.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    You stated: “Peterson is talking about things that don’t actually fucking matter and
    he’s just doing it to rile up all the misogynist He-man woman haters and
    pseudo-intellectuals who make up his rabid fanbase.”
    While I agree that him speaking for large crowds in itself means very little, the fact that that crowd is far more diverse than you give credit for shows that his “fanbase” hardly consists of he-man woman haters and pseudo-intellectuals.

    As to that regard: how do you define a pseudo-intellectual?

    Dr. Peterson has never claimed that women should only do one thing; that’s your interpretation of some of his words. In other interviews he’s often stated how he’s helped women in his clinical practice to stand up for themselves, and get that better job and/or higher pay. He’s 100% behind his daughter pursuing her own career. He’s claimed to hold the highest respect for some very high powered women. What he says really isn’t that special or controversial, so it’s a mystery to me why people get so riled up about it. It’s like his name alone is like a red flag to a bull, and people interpret his words through a lens of the view they already hold on him. It doesn’t match at all with the general message he’s been teaching; it actually flies straight into the face of it.

  • smrnda

    live simply, live in a much cheaper house in a much cheaper neighborhood,

    You realize that poor people usually live in the cheapest places already, because they can’t afford to live anywhere else? I would prefer to avoid such terms, but you do realize that people with kids live in places that get called ‘slums’ or ‘ghettos’? Those parents get criticized for not moving to better, more expensive neighborhoods.

    It’s very privileged to have enough money to pick between an expensive option and a cheaper one. Plenty of people only get the cheapest options, and even those strain their wages when they work 3 jobs.

    I can also see how people who have to struggle that hard would be dismissive of middle class and above stay at home moms. Many women are back at work days after giving birth. They have no other choices.

  • smrnda

    I find it strange that he can say it’s ‘not obvious’ when not only have men and women worked together for quite some time, but where most workplaces likely employ both men and women. Someone might as well ask ‘can desegregation work’ in 2018. The worst thing is people still are asking that.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Well, why then not cite some credible studies then that discredit those studies that Dr. Peterson is citing? Remember that most of the studies he’s citing were done by people that would hardly agree with his political views, and the results generally were not what they expected to find. You can be damn sure that they triple checked their data before publishing it.

  • smrnda

    If this is some sort of western problem, how many women in non-western countries do you think don’t work?

  • smrnda

    So, I take it Peterson is opposed to work requirements for government aid being placed on women with children?

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Considering he’s Canadian, I don’t see that happening. 🙂 He’s often cited how important the left is within the political spectrum, and that both moderate left and right are needed for a healthy society. I would agree with you that Trump is an idiot (God, he’s an idiot!), it might be worth finding out why so many people voted for him, because if it’s just because they’re all fascists then you have a much more serious problem in the USA than I think you do. I think the Democrats need to really step up if they want to prevent the same catastrophe in 2020.

  • Saraquill

    It’s harder to punch a jackass if one’s arms are full. However, there are plenty of other ways to fight back.

  • smrnda

    So, were Rosa Parks, MLK Jr, John Carlos and Muhammad Ali playing ‘identity politics?’

  • therealcie

    I am hoping to land an overnight babysitting job, which I am interviewing for this coming Tuesday. I like babies. When I was a homecare nurse, I liked working with babies. Oddly enough, holding babies did not solve all of my problems. I like kittens and puppies too. While I can think of worse things to do than play with kittens and puppies or hold babies, none of these things are going to “complete” me as a woman or a human being.
    Babies, kittens, and puppies are all better than Jordan Peterson, who is a horrible excuse for a man and a human being.

  • therealcie

    I’ve been sexually harassed at work, when I was working the night shift at UPS. I’m not what you’d call good-looking. I wear loose-fitting, modest attire. I don’t wear makeup. And yet, I was still sexually harassed by one of my co-workers, who asked if he could touch my butt. I suppose at least he asked, for his sake, so he didn’t end up smacked onto a conveyer belt with a load of packages bound for Topeka. Still, I sure as hell wasn’t expecting it. It can happen to anyone, even a frumpy broad like me who wants nothing to do with sex.

  • therealcie

    While working in a restaurant as a waitress/bartender, I developed a crush on a fellow bartender. I knew it was a dumb idea. I never let him know anything about it. I didn’t treat him any differently. Eventually, the crush faded out, and I was relieved. Imagine how this would have played out if instead I’d groped him or tried to push him into dating me. I wouldn’t have had a job and I would have looked like a fool. The “IT Guy” does need to get over himself. Nobody owes him a date.

  • therealcie

    Thank you.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Certainly not, and it’s incredible how they fought against deeply routed racism, some of which still exists today. We have come quite a long way since then though. MLK Jr. said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”. I wonder how he would feel about the situation in some universities where Asian Americans need 140 more points than white people, and 450 more points than black people to get the same chance of making the cut. I’m not so sure he would approve of such group based politics.

    Out of curiosity, where do you stand on “students for fair admissions, inc. vs president and fellows of Harvard College (Harvard Corporation), and the honorable and reverend the board of overseers”?

  • Carstonio

    I wasn’t sure at first if Peterson was a practicing evangelical Christian because he downplays anything overtly sectarian in his rancid rhetoric. His schtick is evangelical dogma about gender roles with the serial numbers filed off, so he can present it as psychological and sociological.

  • Martin Penwald

    Remove the dust, clean the fan and reboot. Sometimes, it works for servers too.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Actually, he’s highly in favor of each individual’s free choice to choose his/her own path to a meaningful life. Which words of his exactly do you take to mean otherwise?

  • persephone

    The Twitterati is definitely letting him know. Everything from some of us don’t want children, to the lack of support for women who have children.

  • Martin Penwald

    I’ve seen women dress in a provacative, absolutely inappropriate way (lots of cleavage showing, short skirts, high high heels) and how are men supposed to ignore that?

    Why is it inappropriate?

    and how are men supposed to ignore that?

    The same way they ignore what shirt or pants other men wear. See, it was easy.

  • Carstonio

    Any assertion that specific social roles for the sexes are natural is, by default, against individuals’ free choice. Evolutionary psychology, gender essentialism and complementarianism all boil down to the same thing – defining roles for women that exclude them from positions of authority.

  • Daniella Leona

    I’ve already addressed elsewhere in this thread the rest of the world is way worse and we’re millennia ahead in the West in terms of patriarchal problems.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Certainly not exclude, but it is a valid explanation as to why men and women on average make different life and career choices. If these were just socially constructed, you’d find them smallest in the most egalitarian countries, but the anthropological research into this matter shows the exact opposite.

    As for positions of authority: do you have any idea of the sacrifices you have to make to be in such a position? Work 80 hours a week or more, and hardly have any life beyond your work? Why anyone would want that is beyond me, but it’s certainly clear that the few maniacs that do are mostly male.

  • Martin Penwald

    They only comments here since this morning, except the 2 first posts they wrote somewhere else. I suspect they is a regular of this other blog under another pseudo, and tried their new one there before coming here.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Clearly you know nothing about Quiverfull or Fundamentalist Christianity where men do not allow their wives to vote, have checking accounts or any personal agency at all.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Not necessarily. I am familiar with the revision and fact checking that many do at the university levels, and it’s usually skewed towards the assertions of the author.

    I was warned by others about the pita defenders Peterson has that refuse to listen to any reason or reality, that they continually vomit up their defense of the indefensable no matter what you tell them but this has to be seen to be believed. I’m not sure it’s emotionally healthy to be this wedded to one person’s ideas.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    You know since I last checked your posting I a(went to the beach and walked for an hour, b) had 3 mojitos beachside along with appetizers, c) danced to the band and d) went grocery shopping. See where I’m going with this? You’ve wasted what is the better part of a day arguing online with strangers over your own interpretation over someone we all here find vile and toxic. What are you accomplishing besides trying to repress the first amendment rights here?

    Very over the Jordan Peterson Defense Team, or any number of the rude names Andrew Hall dubbed you guys. Give it a fucking rest.

  • Daniella Leona

    No I haven’t. Interesting. But this is related to a generalist tweet on Western society not specific subcultures.

  • lady_black

    When I was in my late teens, the thought of having a child was horrifying to me. I told my mother I didn’t want any kids. She said “Then do the world a favor, and don’t have any.”
    I changed my mind after a few years, but not everyone does. And that’s perfectly OK. It was just nice to know my family wouldn’t pressure me to do something I didn’t want to do. My mother was a very wise woman.

  • persephone

    There were plenty of tweets from women who stated they didn’t want children.

    There were plenty of tweets from women who said they couldn’t afford to have children.

    There were plenty of tweets from women who love their children but don’t want to be SAHMs.

    You are literally ignoring everything here and standing up to support whatever inanities Peterson pops off. He’s a psychologist that found a shtick that he can sell to men who think they deserve everything, and part of that shtick is that women are causing most of the problems.

    So, please, stop with the sea lioning and misrepresentation and concern trolling.

  • Carstonio

    No one claims that differences are entirely due to socialization. It’s fair to suggest that some differences are innate and some are socialized. But it’s also impossible to point to any one difference and empirically prove its cause. That’s because we have no control group of people raised with zero social influences. Similarities in different cultures don’t rule out explanations such as shared social influences going back millennia.

    What we can say, however, is that societies shouldn’t be in the business of pushing double standards on the sexes. It’s wrong to teach kids that they have to act a certain way because of their sex.

    You miss my point about authority. Evangelical ideology teaches that men have authority over women, and that’s deeply unjust.

  • persephone

    I’ve pushed the FED is best. A hungry baby is a bad thing. Yes, breast milk is awesome, but a starving child–some children have starved to death as the result of mothers focusing too hard on breastfeeding only–is a starving child. Babies need all the calories they can get, especially fat calories which feed the brain and nervous system.

    If the breastfeeding isn’t going at least somewhat decently within a week or so, it’s time to consider options. An exhausted mother and a starving baby should not be happening.

  • persephone

    Pretty sure the avi was pulled off someone’s Instagram.

  • persephone

    No, he doesn’t. That’s complete bulls**t. I’ve read the articles. I’ve read the quotes. Peterson is just another self-styled deep thinker who couldn’t find his way out of a paper bag with scissors and a headlamp.

    Quit stanning for someone who is so intellectually challenged. You’re just dittoheading stupidity.

  • AudreyA

    Thanks anon

  • AudreyA

    Hey notagain: people like me have an opinion that is presented, take it or leave it, with no wish to force or stop anyone form choosing another path. But there are so many voices demeaning the choice to stay home, demeaning the women who chose it, archly stating things like “Oh, it’s ok for you, little mother, but I couldn’t bear the stifling boredom” (yes I heard that from a career minded acquaintance) that I think it’s important to state that there IS another way. Stop evaluating women’s lives according to the values of the patriarchy (career, money, prestige) and give more value to raising children. Of all we do with our lives…family is the most important.

  • smrnda

    That reminds me of the joke about how many computer programmers does it take to change a light bulb? None, it is a hardware problem.

  • persephone

    Those rules are some pretty lame dumbassery. They’re chum for privileged little white boys.

  • smrnda

    My sympathy. Sexual harassment happens in workplaces that mandate uniforms that are definitely not sexy, so it’s clearly not the clothes or even the perceived attractiveness of the target.

  • Dom S

    He still defends Trump and makes it seem as if he were the lesser of two evils, if nothing else when that is clearly far from the truth in reality? So yeah, he’s still his supporter.

  • persephone

    I’ve worked with professors. I’ve worked with geniuses. NO ONE IS THAT SPECIAL. I see the same BS being trumpeted about Elon Musk, who has employees passing out in his factories, who turned off warning beepers on equipment because the sound bugged him, sold flamethrowers to anyone with the money, has cars that catch on fire just because, and so on.

    A Ph.D. means you know a whole helluva lot about a very narrow field. Very narrow. That does not make one knowledgeable about anything else. And even less so those who are firmly ensconced in a tenured position in a university.
    https://xylemup.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/phd.jpg

  • smrnda

    Millennia ahead seems a bit too much. Some western countries might be a few decades ahead, though it depends on the metrics. Many non-western countries have less gender disparity in STEM, for example, despite being more sexist in other regards.

  • smrnda

    About the only group of people I’ve run across who would list ‘existential angst, guilt or shame’ as a problem would either be guys in college who hang around cafes, people who were subjected to repressive upbringings, and then people who would be better characterized as clinically depressed and who would need actual therapy or medication.

  • NotAgain A Contumelious Puss

    Perhaps you should do the same for those who choose to work. You devalue my choice in all of your posts. There are just as much vitriol, what Peterson said was vitriol, against women who work. Every woman’s reasons for working is her own and every woman’s choice to stay home is their own. I am not a bad mother for working, and I do t feel guilty for not accepting my only purpose in life is to breed and raise children. I have my own mind, you have yours.

    I feel like you are trying way too hard to defend your choice. You made the right choice for you. If you don’t like it when folks demean it, you should not demean others choices. You most certainly should not support Peterson demanding women make their life his way.

  • ildi

    Written a couple of months ago by Bernard Schiff, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Toronto and the one who pushed for him to be hired (a couple of excerpts from long article, link at bottom):

    I thought long and hard before writing about Jordan, and I do not do this lightly. He has one of the most agile and creative minds I’ve ever known. He is a powerful orator. He is smart, passionate, engaging and compelling and can be thoughtful and kind.
    I was once his strongest supporter.
    That all changed with his rise to celebrity. I am alarmed by his now-questionable relationship to truth, intellectual integrity and common decency, which I had not seen before. His output is voluminous and filled with oversimplifications which obscure or misrepresent complex matters in the service of a message which is difficult to pin down. He can be very persuasive, and toys with facts and with people’s emotions. I believe he is a man with a mission. It is less clear what that mission is.

    This past March, Pankaj Mishra wrote in The New York Review of Books an informed and thoughtful critique of 12 Rules for Life, provocatively titled “Jordan Peterson and Fascist Mysticism.” Jordan’s immediate response was a flurry of angry, abusive, self-righteous tweets, some in response to Mishra’s questioning Jordan’s induction into an Indigenous tribe by referring to it as a “claim.”
    Jordan called Mishra a “sanctimonious prick,” “an arrogant, racist son of a bitch,” “a peddler of nasty, underhanded innuendo,” said “fuck you” and expressed a desire to slap him. (As it turns out Jordan had not been inducted into that tribe, and his publisher removed references to the claim in promotional materials as reported in The Walrus by Robert Jago in “The Story Behind Jordan Peterson’s Indigenous Identity.”)

    https://thestar.com/opinion/2018/05/25/i-was-jordan-petersons-strongest-supporter-now-i-think-hes-dangerous.html

  • Rod_E_Kelly

    Tammy, his wife, grew up across the street from Jordan. They’ve know each other since childhood.

  • smrnda

    We’re obviously reading the same ‘simple words’ yet coming away with totally different impressions. You seem to be hearing them as challenging. I just read them as complacent ‘pat yourself on the back for doing what you’re already doing’ advice.

    Let’s take ‘work hard to improve yourself’ combined with ‘pursue what gives meaning to your life.’ I’m sure every corrupt and self-centered vulture in the financial industry feels they’re accomplishing that with their pursuit of money at all costs and maybe a trip to the gym and a ‘meditation session’ to help them prepare for another day. Are they ‘making the people around them better?’ Of course they are, they’re helping them become more ruthless in the pursuit of wealth.

    My cynicism about all things motivational is that it’s easy to see how, instead of a tool for actually making people better, they’re a product for making people feel better about themselves.

  • smrnda

    That still isn’t very specific about who is exerting this pressure and judgment. If the people who are unhappy about women not working full time were their spouses, wouldn’t that be a very different case than if the women merely felt ‘judged by society?’

  • Daniella Leona

    It was deliberate hyperbole. And you’re correct it depends on the metrics. In this instance it’s having and raising children.

  • Martin Penwald

    Have you seen the latest xkcd strip?
    https://xkcd.com/2021/
    Ah, no, it’s not the latest anymore.

  • Martin Penwald

    He probably voted for Doug Ford.

  • smrnda

    “this is a new thing (all jobs used to be segregated) ”

    Really? How long ago was this universal segregation? All jobs? Even when there were ‘men’s jobs’ and ‘women’s jobs’ many men and women still worked in exactly the same places. Prior to that was before modernity – people worked mostly in farming or family businesses.

    me, I think uniforms could be part of the solution…

    Which is why there is zero sexual harassment or sexual abuse in the military. Come on, uniforms?

    I mean, low wage workers are already pretty much wearing uniforms, and it isn’t like that’s preventing sexual harassment or abuse on the job.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    If you keep endlessly yammering out an unpopular opinion that is falling on deaf ears it behooves you to simply be quiet.

  • Raging Bee

    …the problem is that common sense isn’t common.

    It seems to be common to just about everyone EXCEPT Peterson’s fan-base.

    It’s odd how some people claim that his rules are just common sense, and nothing special, while others claim they’re obviously wrong.

    Why is that odd? A lot of Peterson’s quotes ARE obviously wrong.

  • Raging Bee

    Wow, I expect Peterson and his fans to welcome that news of a society that does exactly what they want it to do! There’ll be dancing in the streets…any day now…

  • Raging Bee

    So you’d look at statistics in order to pretend you understand how people are feeling, while refusing to listen to actual people as they describe and explain their feelings? Why would you want to do that, when there’s PLENTY of people willing to talk about their feelings?

  • Raging Bee

    So he reworded a stupid prejudicial statement as a question, and that makes it less prejudicial or stupid…how?

  • Raging Bee

    Perhaps if you actually listened to what the man IS saying rather than what you THINK he’s saying, you might learn something.

    Perhaps if you actually quoted and discussed what he IS saying, rather than relentlessly insisting we don’t understand what he’s saying, and/or haven’t listened to enough of his videos, we might take you and him seriously.

  • Raging Bee

    Have you actually seen the crowd he speaks to these days, over 150,000 this year alone?

    So he gets big crowds, just like Trump and Jim Bakkker. So what?

  • Raging Bee

    Yeah, slaves and migrant workers are so much happier than the people who profit from their work. Where have we heard that before?

  • Raging Bee

    Citation required re: “group-based politics.” Sounds like the same old dishonest, simplistic attacks on affirmative action I’ve been hearing from racists who want to pretend racism doesn’t exist anymore.

  • smrnda

    There are many jobs that could be considered ‘positions of authority.’ If we wanted to talk about ‘what does it take to be in a position of authority’ we’d have to come up with some shared characteristic of ‘position of authority’ and then, looking at all the jobs that qualified, discuss what it takes to get there.

    I mean, a police officer, substitute teacher, retail manager, department chair at university, movie director, chef, youth sports coach, judge, captain of a ship, dance choreographer or HR manager can all be considered ‘positions of authority’ but they clearly don’t all come with the same requirements. Sometimes, the only requirement to being in charge is wanting it, or sticking around longer than everybody else. Other times the person with authority needs specific skills. Sometimes it’s more a question of whether people accept you as a ‘leader’ or ‘authority.’ And then there’s nepotism.

    If these were just socially constructed, you’d find them smallest in the most egalitarian countries, but the anthropological research into this matter shows the exact opposite.

    The problem is that we have no uniform way of quantifying which society is more egalitarian that isn’t tainted by bias. I’ve met people from non-western nations denounced for their sexism who point out there nations have more women in politics, more women in STEM, and smaller wage gaps, but that since western nations are the ones deciding who is egalitarian and who is not, they will of course weight these less.

    I actually think the opposite. Let’s take the STEM gap. More advanced nations have been developing STEM professions for quite some time. The technological advances began way back when the nations were quite sexist, and ideas about science and technology and who was fit for what job was informed by the attitudes of the time. Those attitudes have only recently changed.

    I mean, I’ll offer a comparison. Is there something innate about USians that made them worse soccer players than Europeans or Africans or South Americans? Or is it just that they don’t play the game. Note that the same gap doesn’t exist to the same extent among the women’s team. Perhaps because professional sports for women are equally new across nations. US male athletes have been gravitating away from soccer since what, 1776?

    When a less advanced nation experiences an abrupt shift to modernity, you would expect that if there was some innate gap it would simply not be overcome – right off the bat, there would be a huge difference. Instead, we see the opposite.

  • smrnda

    But I can’t see the benefit for a wealthy and ‘democratic’ society to want to keep poor women ‘brainless baby machines’ and rich women with few to one child, or less.

    A few possible reasons :

    Poor children can be criminalized and sent to prison where they can be forced to work pretty much for free.

    The poverty draft – people enlist in the military for lack of other employment options.

    You also might be assuming a level of rationality that doesn’t exist among people promoting these social policies. They also aren’t typically that happy about wealthier women having fewer kids, but in the USA that’s usually because of racism.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Well, Peterson is one of the biggest reasons guys are flocking to that tiki torch carrying bros of the Alt Right. So a false claim about slaves and immigrants is not surprising. He is in Ayla Stewart territory now.

  • smrnda

    In this day and age of streaming, is there a ‘dominant media culture?’ You can kind of pick your own media these days, or pick no media at all.

    There seem to be more than one flavor of the problem you are describing. There are poor women who have no choice but to go back to work because they desperately need the money, and are the least likely to have unpaid leave. These women are not always having smaller numbers of children, for a number of reasons, though some of it is that the more reliable methods of contraception are more expensive. They also tend to face more precarity in terms of job situations and less marital and relationship stability. A child might be conceived during a time when the future looks good and when the woman has a steady partner, and that can change by the time the child is born.

    I’m also not really noting any pressure on women to work. educated professionals tend to have the most cooperative employers in terms of balancing having children and work. Most women I know in academia got far more time with their young children than poor or working class women, even while still working.

    You might want to check stats . Vague feelings of ‘social judgment’ or ‘dominant messages’ are far fuzzier things.

  • smrnda

    Instead of articles and personal reminisces, how about we check some data?

    How many women could this type of article even concern? Only a tiny fraction of women could be said to be on ‘competitive career tracks.’

  • Galen Ballentine

    And from this same video you’ve concluded that he supports trump’s immigration policy? I loath trump but I don’t like lazy arguments either.

  • smrnda

    But wait, aren’t Asians protesting discrimination against Asians engaging in ‘group based politics?’ Right now many white people seem pissed that Asians are no longer content to just sit back and be a ‘model minority’ but are now getting into what they often derisively term ‘identity politics.’

  • Dom S

    https://ivn.us/2018/03/10/jordan-peterson-wrong-borders/

    It’s discussed here. If he doesn’t support the policy outright, at the very least, he’s woefully ignorant when it comes to making analogies in order to spin a half-hearted defense in favor of it. There’s your receipt, complete with video and quotes. You can read that shit and leave me the fuck alone.

  • Daniella Leona

    I don’t disagree with you as they’re potentially valid reasons. However I still don’t subscribe to the whole patriarchy conspiracy trying to keep women down. I believe cultural and religious systems and power plays are more pervasive and potentially damaging for the US. And wider Western world.

    I think gender politics are by no means resolved, But nor do I see an overarching patriarchal endgame to keep women from… what exactly?

    And if the current status quo is so awful for women, what exactly is being proposed as an ideal? And how do proponents of such ideals think they can/will be reached?

    I hear a whole heap of criticism all the time about the patriarchy, but rarely any alternative solutions.

  • smrnda

    Society is not a monolith. Many people hold conflicting opinions (sometimes the same person) and they are often not well thought out. Both individuals and groups don’t think rationally.

    Let’s take something like ‘patriarchy’ or ‘sexism.’ There’s clearly not just one flavor of patriarchy or sexism, and the motivations aren’t always the same. Many conservative evangelicals who advocate patriarchy imagine a world of hardworking male breadwinners and women keeping house with many children. I think they’re arguing based entirely on religious dogma. There are jobs for men like working at a factory and jobs for women like being a nurse. So what happens when women are more successful working as nurses and the factory jobs go away? It’s not like the men stop thinking they are, by default, the ‘head of the household’ nor do they eagerly assume ‘women’s work’ like taking care of the kids or cleaning house. Since the ideal is unattainable, it prevents people from adapting. It only really benefits a small number of affluent households who can show off how ‘godly’ they are when it’s really just a matter of having more money. And you can see how this is more a concern for working class and the working poor. They’re the ones this idea fails the worst.

    Then there’s a sexism where men just resent having to deal with women as equals or, even worse, superiors. They don’t necessarily have any religious justifications and it’s usually just men with toxic entitlement. They oppose women having educational or occupational equality since it means those women won’t marry them out of economic desperation. They might frame their ideas as benevolence – saving women from the awful world of work or helping women embrace their ‘natural roles’ and they might use religious justifications. At the extreme you’ve got men dreaming of totalitarian societies where women have no rights and they can simply ‘pick’ their victim of choice. You could view this as a problem more common with educated, affluent men who feel that their economic success (if you can call it that) entitles them to submissive women.

    but sometimes it isn’t so well thought out or conscious. A person might just strongly feel that women shouldn’t be working and that the man should be supporting his family. The economic realities just don’t occur to him for whatever reason. There’s no conspiracy there, just sexism clouding judgment. Men who feel threatened by women at work might still complain about their wives or partners being stuck in low paying jobs. People aren’t rational.

    And if the current status quo is so awful for women, what exactly is being proposed as an ideal? And how do proponents of such ideals think they can/will be reached?

    Really, people have been throwing around solutions since before I was born, but here are the big ones :

    1. Better wages for workers.
    2. A comprehensive safety net that accepts the ‘gig economy’ as a reality.
    3. Parental leaves.
    4. Shorter working hours.
    5. Less inequality in terms of school and other educational opportunities for children.
    6. Lower costs of higher education
    7. getting people to get over the gender bias in terms of what jobs they will consider. Keep in mind that there are vacancies in health care but men aren’t likely to attempt to enter that field.

  • smrnda

    How do you define ‘economic pressure?’ Is it ‘if I don’t get a job we can’t pay the rent’ or is it ‘I will not advance in my career as quickly or as high if I take this much time off after having a child?’ It just seems like when people like Peterson talk about women being ‘forced to work’ he’s talking about affluent, educated women who are only really facing social pressure and only moderate to light financial strain from not working. That’s a completely separate issue from the one poor women face.

  • smrnda

    When it comes to telling the truth, I find that I don’t read people who are ‘simply asking questions’ or ‘just trying to start a discussion’ to be very truthful. It’s not just that their intentions are unclear, it’s like they’re trying to be able to make a statement but offer themselves plausible deniability.

  • smrnda

    This is what I think – how many PhDs are there? And then I think, of all the PhDs, how many even got positions in academia?

  • smrnda

    What about women who did stay home with kids who point out that they were frequently bored or isolated? They aren’t questioning the choice they made, just pointing out that staying home with kids is often idealized as having no downsides, and that expressing frustration with the experience is kind of taboo. You could say that women are supposed to either work and love it or a stay at home with the kids and love it.

    Women I have met who stayed home with small kids dealt with not getting much sleep. They often felt isolated and missed out on adult company. Some complained that the few opportunities that did exist ended up just being other moms where the main topic was children – it’s sort of like people who want to get out of the office and find that even out of the office too many people just want to talk shop.

    And some women will find certain things more or less rewarding, or more or less boring than others. Even parents who love their kids can find they need a break, and then there’s the cost benefit analysis of whether in the long run the income from a job might help the kid out?

  • otrame

    Peterson is full of shit on this issue for a number of reasons but the biggest one is the assumption that men hassling women in the workplace is about sex. It’s not. Sex is the tool used to degrade and oppress women in the workplace. Harassment is not rape, but like rape, it’s not really about sex. It’s about power. Makeup or not.

  • otrame

    I say again. Clothing, makeup, whatever won’t solve the problem because the problem has nothing to do with sex. It’s about power. Sexmis just the tool used to try to take power from a woman. Or a man, for that mutter, because both gay men and straight women sometimes also harass. Not as often as straight men, but it does happen.

  • Daniella Leona

    I agree with everything you’ve said. And I’m aware of those ‘forever’ solutions you listed.

    What I don’t see are very many reasonable attempts to gain those solutions. I hear way more hate mongerimg then measured lobbying. Screaming (e-screaming) about how crap men and the system are just serves to reinforce some men’s opinions about women being ‘crazy harpies’. That’s a Peterson phrase I think

  • otrame

    Oh, FFS. Do you know that every Peterson fanboy says exactly the same thing? Is there like a boiler plate site were you guys cut and paste from?

  • otrame

    ^^^There it is^^^

  • Daniella Leona

    And that’s waaay enough political talk from me.

  • smrnda

    Okay, so you’ve mentioned that you haven’t been that involved with politics, and that you’ve only really become interested since the latest presidential election. So the idea that politics or political activism is ‘everybody screaming’ is a recent impression. I’ve lived through some times of immense improvements for GLTBQ rights. It involved tactics both quiet and disruptive and it depended both on individuals ‘coming out’ and media personalities coming out or making queer themes acceptable.

    But, on the ‘crazy harpies’ deal – you have to realize that men (and I think Peterson does this) will attempt to frame women as ‘crazy harpies’ no matter how reasonable they frame their objections or criticisms. Many men get extremely defensive when any talk about sexism happens. If a woman says ‘we need to do a better job educated men about consent’ a man will retort ‘so I’m a serial rapist unless you educate me!’ If you say ‘unwelcome sexual advances should not happen at work’ you will usually get someone making at least these 2 responses : ‘how do I know it’s unwelcome unless I make it’ or ‘so, I won’t ever talk to women because I’ll get fired.’ Both of these objections are made despite the fact that millions of men succeed in working with women and being professional.

    It is not all men – many men pretty much get sexism and also get the rules for behaving in an egalitarian society. They’re fine with the end of patriarchy. But some men feel a loss of status (sometimes called ‘privilege distress’ because they’re really only losing a privilege, not actually falling in status) and lash out.

    Whilst I understand the US has been roughly 50/50 Democratic/ Republican, or Left/Right if you prefer, I think it’s currently reaching, or reaching for some sort of a crescendo finale.

    The real division in the USA has been racial, or around racial issues. The parties did not have this clear division until particular Democrats decided to back Civil Rights legislation, and then Nixon started using racist dogwhistles to appeal to racist whites. That was always kind of there (think Reagan and the ‘welfare queen’) and Trump has just said loudly what was said quietly. I mean, you could argue that the main division in the USA is racial (POC overwhelmingly don’t support Trump) or you could argue it’s age (young people don’t support him) or region (people in urban areas are less likely to support him.) But the bulk of 45 supporters are older, and white, and they see the younger generation being less white and less Christian and ‘less American’ than them.

  • Daniella Leona

    The issue of race as being the largest divider is very interesting, because that’s not what is portrayed, or perhaps being perceived (these can be same or different things) outside the US. In Australia anyway almost everything else but race is given air time as the cause of cultural cut.

  • lady_black

    Of course it’s possible that she’s as fucked in the head as he is.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    I believe the argument is reversed actually. If you take egalitarian to mean that all people have the same political, economic, social and civil rights, huge studies over a large set of countries have shown that the STEM gap grows as a country becomes more equal, because when women are free to choose their path as they see fit, more women choose not to enroll in STEM. Since STEM tends to pay well, that also impacts the wage gap. Now the big question is: why do fewer women choose to enroll in STEM? Studies so far seem to indicate that women on average are simply less interested in STEM, and prefer other studies rather than the cause being societal pressure on women to not go into STEM (though there certainly are some bigot professors still out there).

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    As a religious person myself, I would agree with you that some churches do indeed push that agenda, and I agree that this is deeply unjust. I also agree that it is wrong to force children to act a certain way because of their biological sex. I do not agree that there’s no research into the cause of differences between men and women in society, and biological causes rank highly on those (but are certainly not the only ones). Behavioral distributions are often normative, and even a slight move to the left or right of such distributions has huge impact on the edge behavior. Since most of the interesting things happen on the edges (relation between aggressiveness and jail time for example), there are very direct links to be found in these distributions. It says very little about a random man or random woman though.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    He would be the first to agree with that actually, and there’s certainly a group of his followers that fit that pattern (like there are in any following group). I’m far from wedded to his ideas, and certainly disagree with some of them, but his views really aren’t that extreme unless you choose to interpret them that way.

    I would agree that revision and checking are usually skewed towards the assertions of the author, but in these cases the authors did not want to reach this conclusions in the first place. They had expected to reach the opposite conclusions.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    Because anthropological research shows you how the distribution of feelings over a population are rather than give anecdotal evidence of an individual’s views. If you wish to know how men feel, what interesting facts would you learn from my personal feelings?

  • Ocean Creature

    Comments are fine, but do your research, Jordan Peterson is not a Christian.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    What could possibly be learned from discussing things in an echo chamber? I spent a few hours last night discussing things here while watching a series with my family at the same time. I do that once or twice a month to get some insight in how people react to certain arguments, and to see if I can learn something from theirs. A few times people actually change my opinion on things as well. Just because we end up agreeing to disagree doesn’t mean the discussion is fruitless.

    How does showing an opposing view repress anyone’s first amendment rights? I was under the impression that allowing people to freely express their opinion is the main point of having the first amendment in the first place? Is this site only available to people who want to vent their anger over how they interpret someone else’s words then?

    What I don’t understand is how some can argue that Dr. Peterson’s a quack for stating the obvious and bringing nothing new to the table, while others state he’s a quack for being obviously wrong. They can’t both be right, and I think they have a lot more to talk about with each other than with someone like me who’s merely pointing out a few fallacies in the interpretation of his words, because those interpretations do not match the main message he’s put out for decades now.

  • Pieter Hulshoff

    “What is your friend: the things you know, or the things you don’t know. First of all, there’s a lot more things you don’t know. And second, the things you don’t know is the birthplace of all your new knowledge! So if you make the things you don’t know your friend, rather than the things you know, well then you’re always on a quest in a sense.
    You’re always looking for new information in the off chance that somebody who doesn’t agree with you will tell you something you couldn’t have figured out on your own! It’s a completely different way of looking at the world. It’s the antithesis of opinionated.”

    “Intolerance of others’ views (no matter how ignorant or incoherent they may be) is not simply wrong; in a world where there is no right or wrong, it is worse: it is a sign you are embarrassingly unsophisticated or, possibly, dangerous.”

    As to the OP: Dr. Peterson was asking a provocative question to get some discussion going. His reply to Annelise Mitchell’s reply shows you his views: he believes that if a woman (or man for that matter) wants to be able choose to stay home, she or he should speak up, because our society is working hard on making that harder. Part of those problems are economic, which sounds like a perfect focus point for the left.

  • LaMaria

    Ya know, I happen to be of the female persuasion, I quite enjoy holding babies and I never wear make-up. Yet Peterson would hate me because I do what I do because I want to, not because he tells me to. And so while I enjoy holding babies I have never been pregnant and I have no plans to ever be.

  • Shan

    I thought about going through this thread and taking a shot for every comment involving the idea that Peterson is “out of context” or “starting a discussion,” but I need to be functional at some point this week.

  • Shan

    Did…did you read his book? That one book that explicitly talks about how the Bible is a roadmap to salvation after the Fall (a very, very biblical concept)? The one that constantly trots out examples and references to the Bible and God? That book? Did you read it and, somehow, walk away thinking he wasn’t Christian? If so, look into practicing your reading comprehension skills, or at least give it another read through.

  • Shan

    My vote on why he doesn’t is that he’s certain girls have cooties and he’s not up to date on his playground shots.

  • Carstonio

    I wasn’t claiming that research into differences didn’t exist, but that the cause of differences can’t be empirically known. My objection isn’t just to forcing children to act a certain way because of their sex, but also to labeling their behavior as normal or abnormal because of their sex.

    Outside of science, the concept of normality isn’t descriptive but prescriptive. What happens is that a social structure where men hold the power gets rationalized as nature’s way – it’s often claimed that women don’t have the intellectual capabilities for any role outside the kitchen or nursery. Nonsense like that was once used to deny women the right to vote, or the opportunity to pursue careers in law or medicine.

  • Rostopchin

    I think he’s basing this one evolutionary assumptions, that humans haven’t accomplished their evolutionary mission if they don’t have kids. It’s kind of like evolution religion as opposed to religious dogma…and Jordan does back off some of his dumber ideas when challenged, lol!

  • Rostopchin

    He’s actually doing Freudian subconscious stuff, but it’s highly speculative and often wrong. He at least admits he is speculating, even in this tweet. This is how he plays the outrage against his critics…his critics really are outraged by his speculation, and he can rightly accuse them of being anti-speculation. If speculation and refutation are key parts of truth seeking, then he can paint his critics as anti-Truth seeking.
    He really is playing this game pretty intelligently…that’s why he has a huge following. His critics underestimate him and don’t understand he’s playing them to increase his publicity. I’m pretty confident that is what he’s doing…playing/riding the controversy waves and doing it well. He’s seen no loss in Youtube subscriptions and his book is STILL number 1 most read across the world. He’s played other controversies in other countries…it’s interesting to watch and learn his strategies. He really is an expert on human motivation, though he kind of sucks at philosophy.

    https://www.amazon.com/charts/2018-07-15/mostread/nonfiction/index.html?ref=CHRT_BK_RD_NF_1_DP

  • Rostopchin

    Precisely…this is largely what I argue in the other post. However SINCE Jordan is popular, everyone has an incentive to play his game and get a piece of the attention/publicity. It’s part of how the strategy works.

  • Rostopchin

    If course, if you really study his core ideas, most of them aren’t that noxious, and are often misrepresented (yeah really). For example, enforced monogamy is something we’ve had in the West for quite some time, and most people take if for granted. Monogamy is socially enforced through taboos on cheating and sleeping around, and it’s legally enforced by laws against polygamy. Of course it makes no sense as to how something we already have (enforced monogamy) will help with something we have concurrently (incels) but the outrage in the article at the Times and the way it presented enforced monogamy reminded me of a dimwitted Fox News op-ed where the angry evangelical doesn’t understand evolutionary theory. Dumb criticisms help Peterson more than anything. The correct criticism is that it’s dumb to think enforced monogamy will help with an incel problem, though a decrease in enforced monogamy could theoretically make it worse. Here is an example of the term’s use in PubMed:

    “To conclude, monogamy may have limited the potential for selection to operate in agricultural human populations (20). Nonetheless, such a change did not introduce insurmountable constraint on the variation in fitness, implying that there is still room for relatively strong selection to operate in preindustrial Finland. Whether this finding is general among all populations with enforced monogamy remains an open question because other factors can also influence sex roles (11). This question calls for replications of measurements of the different components of the opportunity for selection using either samples from other populations that are not biased toward individuals with offspring or methods allowing correction for potential bias (see ref. 20). Our results stress that it is misleading to assume that all human populations have remained unaffected by selection for the last few millennia. In addition to genetic studies and phenotypic studies focusing on particular traits, global measurements of selection advance our understanding of human evolution, and studies focusing on evolutionary changes in both historical and current populations should be encouraged.”
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3361384/

  • Rostopchin

    It’s psychological religion..which is the point of religion. If you live your life as if Christianity is true, some positive things can result. Why do you think 95% of the world is religious…and the rest of the world (like me) follows another religion, humanism. Humanism is fiction too…you can’t find it in science or anywhere in reality. We have to live our lives by fiction, a story we tell ourselves about ourselves, and religion is the type of fiction that has helped people create these stories since humans have been around (it started as animism). Read this book by Yuval Harari, then re-read 12 rules for life with the pragmatic understanding of religion in mind. It revolves around the pragmatic theory of truth as opposed to correspondence theory. Truly bright atheists understand religion in it’s evolutionary context. I think this book should be #1 most read…but it’s currently #4 (12 rules is number one). Of course it is a bit older…

    https://www.amazon.com/Sapiens-Humankind-Yuval-Noah-Harari/dp/0062316095

    Of course religion is more than just individual fiction…it’s a shared fictional framework that allows people to integrate their stories into a cooperative and shared whole. Religions telling different incompatible stories often clash…

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    All of you guys from the Jordan Peterson Defense Team are exhibiting willful ignorance in your posts, which is forbidden in our comment policy i.e. *Repeats the same point without responding to arguments or information you provide* sooooo it’s ban bus time. I allowed you guys to chew the scenery like a pack of demented alt-righters for 24 hours and that’s plenty long enough. Please return to licking Peterson’s butt somewhere else. These conversations are benefiting no one.

  • Trellia

    Kicking is good. Especially with steel-toed boots.

  • pinkie

    The good part about borrowing babies is that you can give them back.

  • smrnda

    On speculation, I think the value of speculation is overrated. People like it because they can sit around in a circle throwing out ‘maybe’ and ‘what if’ statements and feel really smart but is this how any question is settled? You use data to settle questions. There’s a place for philosophical debates, but they’re not the right tool for any number of subjects.

    I mean, Freudian subconscious stuff? I remember reading somewhere that Freud might get a mention in an introductory psychology textbook, but there are no courses on Freud in the psychology department. You would find some in literature perhaps, but that says how current and up to date that is.

  • smrnda

    How many countries have been studied?

    I mean, back when say, the UK was more sexist, was the STEM gap smaller? So after women got the vote in 1918, we would see fewer women in STEM than before in the UK. Or does this rule not apply to the UK?

    With interest, you find that girls lose interest in STEM while the gap barely exists among younger children. It’s also noted that girls underrate and boys overrate their abilities in STEM, largely because of differences in how boys and girls are socialized. And then even more than that, parents, teachers and other adults send signals about what’s ‘acceptable’ for kids. I can’t find it, but there was some quote from a Silicon Valley figure who was relating a story about how his daughter referred to a truck as a ‘baby truck’ and how that totally explained the STEM gap. And we’ve also got very well documented sexism in the field.

    I mean, we could ask ‘why are there fewer African Americans in STEM?’ The interest in science isn’t that different at young ages, so obviously something happens in between there.

  • “But yesterday one of Peterson’s more loathsome tweets caught my eye. It’s an implicit promotion of some of the crazier ideas in Quiverfull theology, that every women NEEDS to have a baby, or mulitple babies.”

    If women don’t have babies or enough babies, then the current civilization dies. That means every women should have at least two babies as replacements for her and the baby’s father. That this outrages so many women pretty much makes it clear that the West as we know it is dying. And it will keep on dying until a new group of women comes along that will focus on having lots of babies instead of a career.

    Modern feminism will breed itself out of existence. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a 100 years for things to play out.

  • Kirsten Corby

    Yeah, I think we need a citation on that.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Promiscuously using the Ban Hammer because this has gotten ridiculous. Posting a ranty nonsensical support of Alt-Right beloved Jordan Peterson is an automatic ban. I allowed you guys to rant all day yesterday. but you’ve said all you can possibly say and now are in repeat mode.

  • Shan

    Ahhh, I see. That’s why it’s so comfortable for you. It uses the same format, the same mythos, the same language as Christianity, but it wraps it up in the guise of being intellectual and grants you the ability to look at anything wrong in your life as something caused by the Other. For Christianity, it’s Satan, and for Peterson fans, it’s Chaos…or women, really. And hey, here’s a nice numerical list of rules to follow and lead your life by, meaning that that mean old Sata-I mean Chaos won’t get you. 😉

  • smrnda

    So, there are women who resent being pressured to have careers. They don’t want to be out there fighting for status or money and want to stay home with their kids. They want to choose family over prestige.

    But prestige is, largely, how you become a ‘role model’ since ‘being famous’ is usually the pre-requisite. This is like complaining that there nobody who isn’t famous and also totally unknown. Until recently the only ‘role models’ for stay at home moms were fictional characters on TV. Now there are bloggers. Of course, someone could choose people in their community for role models.

    Plus, who is ‘allowing’ or ‘not allowing’ women to be ‘just mothers?’ There’s no law prohibiting women from staying home. But there’s no requirement that a particular life choice will be embraced by potential partners or affirmed by your friends.

    I mean, when I met that college student who was complaining that none of the guys she met wanted a stay at home wife, what should I have told her? What’s the ‘right way’ to feel about someone like that?

  • smrnda

    I’m more familiar with sociological or psychological research. What I’ve seen hasn’t indicated that there is a huge quantity of women who are upset that their ‘choice’ to be stay at home moms is making them feel judged.

    There are women who wish they could drop out of the labor force, but it’s usually not affluent, professional women whose jobs are the most accommodating of motherhood. It’s lower income women stuck in shit jobs.

  • smrnda

    It’s probably tough to get a feel for the central role of race in US politics if you’re on the outside. There’s a lot of history and current events to know about, and there’s also the fact that racist white USians have typically spoken in what are termed ‘dogwhistles.’ They don’t explicitly say racist words, but we all know what they mean. If someone says ‘we need to crack down on inner city crime’ we know they mean ‘we need to crack down on black people’ – up to and including framing them and torturing them into confessing crimes they not only didn’t do, but sometimes didn’t even happen. US city planning has been guided by racism. White people moved out of cities and deliberately racist policies were put into place to degrade neighborhoods populated by POC. White people in some regions of the USA are freaking out over the fact that white people no longer will have a huge super majority – they view this as the downfall of all things good and decent. They’ve only been obvious about it recently.

    And it’s not really entirely white people vs everybody else. Civil rights issues have been a wedge between white people – white people who support and white people who oppose.

  • smrnda

    You realize that, as standard of living increases and women get more opportunities birth rates decline pretty much everywhere? Fertility rates among immigrant populations declines after a generation. In many cases, the former ‘immigrants’ and ‘foreigners’ become much more like everybody else. Civilizations and cultures change and adapt. People have smaller families, get married later, that kind of stuff.

    When people say ‘the west as we know it is dying’ – there was a time when WASPs in the USA said that ‘civilization’ would die there once all those other Europeans – Irish, Italian, Jews, Slavs – showed up and outbred them. Somehow civilization is still here. The west as the WASPs know it is kind of dead, but we still have civilization, possibly a better one.

    I’m also not sure how I’m supposed to view your formula for ‘protecting civilization.’ If part of western civilization that we must value is equality, then deciding that women shouldn’t use that equality but stay home and have ‘lots of babies’ then aren’t women just fighting to end up just like those horrible ‘other people’ threatening our western way of life?

    Maybe civilization is an idea, and anybody can sign on, particularly women? I mean, you seem to suggest that those outside of ‘the west’ are intrinsically not ‘civilized’ – go tell that to women who are my colleagues from all over the world. Women like that change their own cultures and countries.

    EDIT – there are also limits to how many people the world can support, and how many children a family can feasibly support. The attempt to influence culture by ‘have lots of babies’ embraced by various Christian patriarchy movements hasn’t been very successful.

  • ildi

    President Johnson called it back in the day in 1960 and nothing has changed. It went underground for a while until Obama got elected:

    WHILE Lyndon Baines Johnson was a man of time and place, he felt the bitter paradox of both. I was a young man on his staff in 1960 when he gave me a vivid account of that southern schizophrenia he understood and feared. We were in Tennessee. During the motorcade, he spotted some ugly racial epithets scrawled on signs. Late that night in the hotel, when the local dignitaries had finished the last bottles of bourbon and branch water and departed, he started talking about those signs. “I’ll tell you what’s at the bottom of it,” he said. “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”

    Interesting that Moyers was talking about what a “real president” was like in 1988 days after Vice President George HW Bush got elected president (Reagan was ineligible to run for third term).
    https://washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1988/11/13/what-a-real-president-was-like/d483c1be-d0da-43b7-bde6-04e10106ff6c/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.da66b9ce1dc8

  • Clancy

    OK, I checked with my daughter, who has an advanced degree in linguistics. Using the phrase, “is it possible that…” is called “hedging”, and is used in discourse when you wish to make an assertion, but want to be able to deny it later. As native speakers of English, this is something we all understand informally. So your contention that he didn’t say it is disingenuous at a level amounting to falsehood.

  • ildi

    As the youngs say, he’s JAQing off.

  • otrame

    So an improvement in the lives of other men doesn’t matter to you?

    Why am I not the least surprised?

  • Clancy

    Sure is. I thought I’d make it clear how dishonest his quibble was for those who come after.

  • smrnda

    How old are you? Someone under the age of 30 would have lived through a pretty big seismic shift – the increasing acceptance of GLTBQ equality both socially and legally.

    Some older members of my family lived through seismic social shifts that kind of killed off lots of people.

  • Dom S
  • karmacat

    Patriarchy is not a “conspiracy.” What is true is that people in positions in power and privilege want to stay there. And one way of staying in power is to keep everyone else down. The alternative is equality but it is hard to describe exactly what the means is a few sentences. An ideal system would allow everyone to be in roles they choose and want but there is no such think as an ideal system. The status quo for women in this country is not awful but it is far from ideal. There are centuries of assumptions of what women can and cannot do. These assumptions are being gradually challenged and overcome but it takes time and new generation. In a way, each generation realizes society can be different and realizes certain assumptions are wrong. However, progress can be seen as a threat to some people to their power and position and so they fight against progress, especially if their power depends on what they are born with rather than what they have to work for.
    In the long run, progress and equality does help most people. they don’t have to be confined to certain roles based on biology. Just because women are the ones who get pregnant and breastfeed doesn’t mean they have to stay at home for years, especially when fathers are also involved in childcare.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25131274
    this study shows that when women are more involved in the political process, the more satisfied they are with their country. One caveat is that it is hard to measure satisfaction overall.

  • Lisa Macpherson

    Yeah, I don’t like holding babies… if someone was stupid enough to hand me one, I’d probably drop it, or put it down somewhere and forget it… (puppies are a whole other story

  • Annerdr

    Upon research, it is a general guideline provided to people who struggle with naturally picking up on social cues rather than any company’s policy.

  • Raging Bee

    Ayla who?

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Ayla Stewart from Wife With a Purpose. Big time promoter of white culture only. We quote her from time to time and she also has links to the Ch’ville rally last year just like Jordan Peterson does.

  • Anonyme

    It’s not my responsibility to propagate the human species. The birth rate fluctuates in all animals, and dynamics change. I’m not going to sacrifice my own mental health and happiness by ignoring the fact that I am asexual and would have to literally force myself to have sex with my hypothetical husband…to say nothing of the fact that I would be a lousy mouth.
    So I’m supposed to ignore my body and biological intuition just to make sure there’s no sudden (and unlikely) mass extinction of humans?

  • lawrence090469

    Well, American laws and policies concerning labor, healthcare, and housing make motherhood prohibitively expensive for most young people. But I’m sure that’s not where he was going. Peterson is just stupid.

  • lawrence090469

    Was he wearing a gimp mask during the whole courtship?

  • Hannah

    I’ve held other people’s babies, it’s nice and I get warm fuzzy feelings, but I still don’t want my own small human. Someone I work with was shocked when I said I don’t want kids the other day. *shrugs*

  • pl1224

    I know this is completely beside the point, but Mr. Peterson need to learn to spell “antidote”.

  • BridgetD

    Agreed.

  • BridgetD

    I love kids. I chose to be a teacher because I love kids.

    I’m not a fan of infants though.

  • Raging Bee

    Yeah, your predictions of the imminent end of Western Civilization will come true, any century now…

  • BridgetD

    Yeah…I have sensory issues. I haven’t worked anywhere where makeup is required, thankfully, or there would’ve been a problem.

  • Raging Bee

    Peterson wasn’t talking about the “need” to have more babies. He was ridiculing and belittling women by saying they’re silly stupid creatures who only get angry at…whatever…because they don’t have babies to hold. That’s not the same thing at all, and if you can’t tell the difference, then you’re really not smart enough to tell anyone else what to do.

  • Cynthia

    I’m not sure how the federal court system could actually enforce a mandatory makeup rule, but you are right that in some offices, makeup is simply seen as being part of one’s professional look – not much different than a man wearing a tie.

    For that reason, some of the conversations I’ve seen where Peterson fans try to argue about the roots of makeup are just ridiculous. If you want to know why someone is wearing makeup to the office, just ask them. When they tell you that it is an expected part of professional dressing, believe them. Don’t assume that you have some super-special knowledge of anthropology that allows you to completely dismiss what they say and tell them that really, deep down, they are trying to lure men in sexually. Don’t then compound that by trying to argue that they shouldn’t be surprised if a male colleague sexually harasses them (because a man capable of holding a responsible job is somehow unable to understand the word no or the clear direction of a company policy, apparently).

  • Dom S
  • Cynthia

    Well, I would argue that better social supports can reduce the need for a stark choice. Babies don’t stay babies forever, so quitting the workforce altogether in order to be able to have a decent period to recover from birth and establish breastfeeding and bond with a baby can be extreme but those without decent maternity leaves don’t have many options. Once a woman resigns from a job and spends a few years out of the workforce (if she has 2 or 3 children), it becomes harder to regain her place in the work world. If she does go back to work, it may be on a “mommy track” which offers more flexible hours, as opposed to a higher earning track.

    If longer mat leaves, better child care options and shared parental leaves are available, the expectation is no longer a stark choice between quitting a job to stay home or going back to work after a few weeks. Rather, the norm will be that moms will get a decent period of time at home with their babies, many dads may then take over for a few months, and the child will transition to child care right around the time they become toddlers and start to benefit from more stimulation and socialization. I would have been torn and found it really difficult to go back to work when my babies were 6 weeks old. I went back when Girl 1 was 7 months because I had a good opportunity and we really needed the money, but it was hard at the beginning. It was easier when I knew I could take an 11 month leave with Girl 2, and coming back at that point was fairly easy. I went back when The Boy was 14 months, and was absolutely ready to do so (although I did need a child care and work arrangement that were more flexible, because with 3 kids in less than 5 years, I was always needing to be available for carpool, doctor appointments, special days at school, etc.)

    Of course, this wasn’t a tweet about parental leaves at all.

  • Raging Bee

    I bet you say that to every women whose immediate first priority isn’t making more babies. Seriously, I hear that shit whenever a woman either wants a career, goes to college, wants to use birth control, comes out as a lesbian, puts off marrying whoever pretends he’s God’s gift to her…

  • IM

    A question: why would a government that capitalizes on racial discrimination want it portrayed that way? They wouldn’t. People don’t talk about things that make them uncomfortable, or that they don’t care about.

    Race is one.

    I don’t expect a middle class white woman to understand my troubles as a black person.

    Trust me, race is a huge divider. Black people get discriminated against in European countries, even fucking Japan. Believing that race “isn’t a huge problem” makes you apart of the problem ma’am.

  • John-Hugh Boyd

    Western Civilization isn’t all the wonderfulness that it’s said to be ,either….. a bit of thoughtful pruning is required to make the plant grow.