Read more

It is rare for me to agree with public figures and while I do not agree with everything Jordan Peterson says I find myself nodding my head to the majority of his views. They are well thought out, evidenced and he is easily capable of educating in a few seconds.

The above interview was conducted by an impressive lady who obviously knows her stuff, but Peterson was still able to win the majority of the mini debates.

He has also been criticised by many for his views on special pronouns for transgender people. The thing is, almost none of this criticism is merited at all. See above for why.



Categories: Politics

10 replies

  1. Should I be embarrassed that he’s Canadian? Mind you, he is from out West and Westerners tend to be more conservative, both big and small C, than Easterners.

    Alternatively, should I be embarrassed that I’d never heard of him? Maybe because I tend to tune out before he gets to something I want to think about.

    • He is well worth listening to despite his abrupt manner. My wife and I were talking about this yesterday and we commented on how the Scottish, Canadians and Australians all come over as considered people who actually care about others. Sadly in England and America we have a lot of people who just think about themselves, but those people appear to be in a smaller minority in the above countries.

      • I listened to the one on pronouns for non-gender people. But I stopped because rather than stick to his concerns about the pronouns themselves, he attacked the Ontario Human Rights Commission and then said that he didn’t really understand the idea of a gender spectrum. I thought, maybe if he understood where the idea of the spectrum came from, he’d understand the preference for different pronouns.

        He also jumps on the idea that not using the proper pronoun would be considered a hate crime. Well, no. Our hate laws are reasonably interpreted as far as I’ve seen.

        So my problem is that I find it hard to get to the good points he might be making because of the extreme views he puts out on other things.

        • He certainly has issues with the radical left, as he calls them, and with the idea the someone could possibly call it a hate crime if you did not use the correct pronoun deliberately. It’s interesting because my son is somewhat left wing, but hates the cancel culture and the fact that he sees everyone having to bend for a few people. Hugely complex subject this one, but the more I have listened to Peterson the more persuaded I have been on some subjects.

        • The first bit here is interesting for so many reasons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHuYR1GaPY8 The speech argument is fully justified. As to the ‘is a trans woman a woman?’ that is much more tricky.

  2. I have no problem with discussing and debating these topics. I find the variety of views very interesting. But he is not debating. He’s putting out his view as if it were the end of the discussion. He also tends to take an extreme view. There are many words that are considered hateful. Gender pronouns are certainly not the first to be included in legislation. Does that mean we can’t use them or that we must use them? No, at least not in the Canada that I live in. If I use them in a public hateful manner, then I am liable to the consequences.

    • Yes he does that which is not helpful, but it seems to be effective for book sales and publicity. I agree that he is likely against the idea of a gender pronoun coming from someone’s decision to identify that way. When I say decision I don’t mean to make a point, but I too struggle with +100 genders and wonder if it could lead to a bad place in the future. I have been trying to view both the left and right the same way and it’s not easy, but I believe I am seeing that when the right say something it is often ignored or considered hate and when the left scream everyone moves to accommodate, That is a very simplistic sentence for this, but trying to sit in the middle is close to impossible these days.

      • You’re absolutely correct when you say that trying to sit in the middle is almost impossible. If you try it, you get blasted from both sides. I don’t sense the same extreme polarity in Canada but that may be because I’m in the Eastern part. The West may be more extreme than I sense.

        It’s one thing to be politically correct but that tends to suppress freedom of discussion. It bothers me that universities, supposedly the bastion of open discussion, are censoring people they would have address them.

        • Yes and the right jump on that in a very aggressive manner which then causing universities, students etc to fight back. Some rationality would be useful.

  3. Here’s a summary of the bill in question from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_amend_the_Canadian_Human_Rights_Act_and_the_Criminal_Code

    In the section titled Reception, it says: Jordan Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, criticized the bill, saying that it would compel speech. Peterson argued that the law would classify the failure to use preferred pronouns of transgender people as hate speech. According to legal experts, including law professors Brenda Cossman of the University of Toronto and Kyle Kirkup of the University of Ottawa, not using preferred pronouns would not meet legal standards for hate speech.

    There has been a lot of discussion that misuse of gender pronouns is not criminal in and of itself. I searched “Canadian gender pronoun law”. If you really want the specifics, here’s the bill: https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-16/royal-assent

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s