Rachel Stewart on Jordan Peterson and free speech

I really done care much about Jordan Peterson, but free speech issues that he ignites are important.

Peterson has a lot of supporters (almost cult like), seems to do good for some people, but also says some crappy things, either because he has crappy ideas (in my opinion) or is being deliberately provocative. Much of the publicity he gets is thanks to people trying to shut him up.

Media might see it as click bait fodder, but at kleast they are promoting understanding and discussion.

Peterson obliged with some provocative stuff:

Jordan Peterson, the Canadian celebrity psychologist and author currently on tour in New Zealand, has a thing for shock pronouncements. “The idea that men have been preferentially treated as a group across history is an absurd idea,” he told me in a half-hour interview this morning.

“Diversity, inclusivity, equity, all of those things together make up a very toxic brew.”
And: feminists have an “unconscious wish for brutal male domination”.

He’s said several times it’s wrong to believe the victim in rape cases. I asked him if he accepts the need to treat rape victims in a way that avoids revictimising them. As the video clip, taken from the full interview, reveals, he doesn’t think we need to do that.

In his book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos,, Peterson argues that the problem with the world is we have fallen prey to Chaos, so we need to restore Order. Order, by the way, is masculine and Chaos is feminine.

Surprisingly:

Simon Wilson’s full video interview with Jordan Peterson will appear on the NZ Herald website on Saturday, February 23. His feature article on the interview and Peterson’s town hall speaking tour will appear in the newspaper and online the same day.

Why hold it back until Saturday?

I don’t understand why so many people flock after Peterson, and especially pay to hear him talk when he is easy to find online. NZ tickets are $140-170 a pop. Youtube is free.

I understand why some people take offence at some of what he says – I think that some of what he says is offensive.

But jumping up and down and trying to shut him down is doing the opposite, giving him the publicity and revenue he seeks.

 

49 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  20th February 2019

    ”I understand why some people take offence at some of what he says – I think that some of what he says is offensive.”

    Most of what he says is repeated in a million self help books. I haven’t seen anything that is offensive. To be fair I’m not a big fan for that simple reason, so I may not be cognisant of what others may consider offensive.

    • Gezza

       /  20th February 2019

      Strange comment. Are you saying you’d be a big fan if he said things that were offensive?

      • Corky

         /  20th February 2019

        Yes, not well written. I’m not a fan because I’ve heard most of what he’s publicly stated in one form or another. However, I make no pretence of knowing his work in depth.

        • Gezza

           /  20th February 2019

          I’ve watched a fair bit of him. Some of his stuff I agree with and his book’s useful for lost and useless young men who need to learn to get a grip, & take responsibility for fixing their own inadequacies and helplessness.

          I think he’s probably past his use by date now. It’s mostly the same old same old stuff & it’s time he moved on from a few Nordic countries who he always cites to back up his conservative views on women. I think he’s probably right in most of what he says about them, in many respects – although that irritates the hell out of radfems who aren’t normal women anyway and get too much air time imo.

          But he’s like Al, I think. He finds research that supports his view and then says he’s right because the science says so, and one is left with the impression he’s so selective in what he accepts and what he rejects he could only superficially pretend to have considered it all.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  20th February 2019

            While I agree about men not having preferential treatment. I can’t see that many women want brutal male dominance.

            While I don’t think that the alleged victime in sex cases is always telling the truth. it’s stupid to suggest that none are. as he seems to do. I can think of few things worse for a man than a false rape claim, especially when he has his name printed and his case seen on the news.

  2. Duker

     /  20th February 2019

    I agree, some it is just nonsense. While most could be in the shelf help category and you make of it what you will.
    No doubt the Herald is teasing its ‘scoop’ for its big selling sat paper, no doubt more will be shocked or outraged….stunned even. Cue clicks online

  3. Griff.

     /  20th February 2019

    feminists have an “unconscious wish for brutal male domination”

    Freudein in more than one way.

    For a head shrinker he certainly talks some crap.
    His propensity for god whacking makes him as interesting as mother .

    • High Flying Duck

       /  20th February 2019

      And yet, while he discusses Religion he is not personally a religious person – or at least he makes sure his personal beliefs are well hidden. Most think he is agnostic.
      He’s definitely no god botherer.
      And the bit that gets missed out from the feminist quote is that specifically says he doesn’t actually believe it, is questioning it.
      I know, i know, who would have thought the guy would be misquoted…

      • Duker

         /  20th February 2019

        “And the bit that gets missed out from the feminist quote is that specifically says he doesn’t actually believe it, is questioning it.”

        Why say it in the format he has used …hes a skilled communicator . Doing the ” I was only questioning it” angle is just bullshit.

      • Griff.

         /  20th February 2019

        Just asking questions

        Just asking questions (also known as JAQing off) is a way of attempting to make wild accusations acceptable (and hopefully not legally actionable) by framing them as questions rather than statements. It shifts the burden of proof to one’s opponent; rather than laboriously having to prove that all politicians are reptoid scum, one can pull out one single odd piece of evidence and force the opponent to explain why the evidence is wrong.
        Strategy
        …………..snip……
        The purpose of this argument method is to keep asking leading questions to attempt to influence spectators’ views, regardless of whatever answers are given. The term is derived from the frequent claim by the questioner that they are “just asking questions,” albeit in a manner much the same as political push polls. Additionally, this tactic is a way for a crank to escape the burden of proof behind extraordinary claims.[1]
        https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

        • High Flying Duck

           /  20th February 2019

          And yet the same proposition has been raised by many psychologists over the years. Google the concept of feminists wanting to be dominated and there is plenty of materia out there – much of which is written by women, and much by psychiatrists.

          Context for the statement was he was specifically talking in relation to the success of the 50 Shades series at the same time as feminists were backing Islam to the hilt.

          Here’s him talking about it (from 56 seconds to about 2:30). There is context. It isn’t simply “leading an audience”.

          You can take it as you will. I maintain there is an element of cherry picking to make him look worse than he is, which is a very common theme of criticisms made against him.

          • Griff.

             /  20th February 2019

            Context for the statement was he was specifically talking in relation to the success of the 50 Shades series at the same time as feminists were backing Islam to the hilt.

            Really.
            You think feminist back Islam?
            Nonsense.
            That’s just is dumb as saying right wingers wanna close down all abortion clinics for baby killing.
            Feminists back Islam is a Non Sequitur.
            Some feminist back Islam it does not follow that feminist as a group back Islam
            Some right wingers wanna control what a woman does with her own body it does not follow that all right wingers do.. If I said all right wingers are all prolife on here I would rightly be crucified by you and Alan for talking shite

            It is fuckin illogical rubbish deliberately leading his target audience so they react to his pop crap making connections that are not really there ..
            FFS.
            Deem filthy dykes see they all wanna good bash…. days just gaggin for the man to give it .,….

            An informal fallacy (also relevance fallacy, conceptual fallacy, soundness fallacy) is an argument that is formally valid but is unsound because of the falsity or irrelevance of one or more of its premises. Informal fallacies are often characterised by the fact that there is a disconnect of some kind between their premises and conclusions. Inappropriate generalisations and argument from ignorance are forms of informal fallacies.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  21st February 2019

              You’ve got preconceived ideas of what he is talking about, so I will end it here.
              Agree to disagree with what you are saying about his motives.

  4. Blazer

     /  20th February 2019

    whats the cost of…listening to this mans…free…speech?

  5. PartisanZ

     /  20th February 2019

    @Stewart – “Jordan Peterson…… is bringing the degradation of public discourse into sharp relief.”

    Stewart is 100% correct about this IMHO.

    Her, and all of us, Simon Wilson, the Herald, MSM, Social Media AND JORDAN PETERSON are all part of “the degradation of public discourse” into polarized, emotive, confrontational ‘opinion wars’ …

    I take it to be a powerful symbol of the partially well-educated, relatively affluent, ‘comfortable’ yet entirely helpless populace floundering in a world where everything is more-or-less totally dictated to us by Corporate-Political Elites …

    What do we do under these circumstances?

    We argue about peripheral, pseudo-intellectual BULLSHIT!

  6. Alan Wilkinson

     /  20th February 2019

    Simon Wilson needs to stir the pot and get his shots in before actually reporting the interview. That’s a sign of weakness rather than strength.

    • High Flying Duck

       /  20th February 2019

      He even manages to twist the context significantly in the very short excerpt he did put out. It doesn’t bode well for the rest of the interview.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  20th February 2019

        You would surely not expect anything else from Wilson?

  7. Pink David

     /  20th February 2019

    “I don’t understand why so many people flock after Peterson, and especially pay to hear him talk when he is easy to find online. NZ tickets are $140-170 a pop. Youtube is free.”

    Why do people pay for concerts when they can listen for free.

    • Amadeus

       /  20th February 2019

      People are paying the money to support him so he can continue his free speech.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  20th February 2019

        There is no comparison between a real concert and a recording.

        But I’d pay not to hear this idiot.

        • Pink David

           /  20th February 2019

          “There is no comparison between a real concert and a recording.”

          Of course there is a comparison. That is the whole bloody point of a recording.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  20th February 2019

            The real thing has a magic that no recording can match.

            • Gezza

               /  20th February 2019

              You ought to go to a Rolling Stone concert. One of the few bands who rake in the dosh for their concerts while sounding like absolute bloody crap (laziest musicians ever, imo) every time. They never match the magic of their studio recordings in their concerts.

        • I can help with that, I’ll send you my bank details separately 🙂

      • PartisanZ

         /  20th February 2019

        @Amadeus – “People are paying the money to support him so he can continue his free speech.”

        Yeah, Right … He appeals to the charitable kind.

        @Miss Kitty – “But I’d pay not to hear this idiot.”

        My laugh line of the day.

  8. david in aus

     /  20th February 2019

    When people mention that don’t agree with Jordan Peterson’s views they don’t actually say why and debate.

    A common tactic is to give labels so others can easily dismiss his views. Being able to access the actual comments and views is one of the great things about the internet. The ability to circumvent media gatekeepers.

    • Blazer

       /  20th February 2019

      ‘When people mention that don’t agree with Jordan Peterson’s views they don’t actually say why and debate.’

      they sure do…as revealed the other day…he has been shot down more times than HIGH FLYING…DUCKS.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  20th February 2019

        That’s probably why he’s still flying high Blazer.

      • david in aus

         /  20th February 2019

        My point exactly, devoid of argument.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  20th February 2019

          Blazer has squirrels, not arguments. He nurtures them carefully and keeps them forever no matter how many times they have their heads shot off.

          • Blazer

             /  20th February 2019

            any room for them at Wilkinson Farm….I hear you have a virtual flock…of headless…chickens..running around.

          • Griff.

             /  20th February 2019

            Is that like the squirrels named Obama and Clinton we so often see running around the wilds of this blog ?
            Just asking…

            • High Flying Duck

               /  20th February 2019

              In the context of you just bringing them up apropos of nothing – yes!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  20th February 2019

              Dunno, never seen them on my property.

  9. artcroft

     /  20th February 2019

    I’d like to hear him in person, it gives the opportunity to hear him take questions from the floor and should Peace Action Aotearoa arrive, the chance for some drama. However $140 is too rich for my blood.

  10. oldlaker

     /  20th February 2019

    “He’s said several times it’s wrong to believe the victim in rape cases…” What he actually says is that it’s wrong to believe rape victims AUTOMATICALLY… There’s a big difference.

    • Trevors_Elbow

       /  20th February 2019

      Now now oldlaker….. cant actually quote what he actually said! The 2 Minute hate sound bites beloved of the Left need something outrageous to stir their blood and distract them from the shit system they believe in….

  11. Pink David

     /  20th February 2019

    shock pronouncements. “The idea that men have been preferentially treated as a group across history is an absurd idea,”

    Not really a shock this? It’s perfectly true.

    • Duker

       /  20th February 2019

      Just ask the many cultures where children born who weren’t male could find their life in peril

      PK you should get out of your pink cocoon a bit more, as it’s not even a debateable that male children have got the advantages…and onto education and property and marriage….
      Even religion is generally/entirely male dominated until recently. Catholic church, well any organised religion , we are talking about you.
      There there’s that topic dealt with

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  20th February 2019

        Males lives are in peril and actually lost more often and earlier than female in most cultures. That’s that misrepresentation dealt with.

        Religion usually seems to attract female devotees more strongly than males. And they obviously like their male preachers and poncers. Otherwise why are they there?

      • Rod Robertson

         /  1st March 2019

        Ha ha ha! Get with the twenty first century!
        Girls do better in elementary school, partially because of systematic bias In favour of girls, Same in highschool. Same in University. There is nothing barring them from any opportunity they care to pursue. Lots of patriarchies out there, just not in the west.

  12. oldlaker

     /  20th February 2019

    Men have been treated preferentially in many areas but they have also always been treated as the “disposable sex”, who are sent off to war as cannon fodder and down dirty mines… and yes to clean up the mess at Fukushima more recently.