4 ms·

Today Google disabled a Jordan Peterson's account, including his YouTube channel with millions of views. This is a clinical psychologist professor who is openly

by alecco 9y ago

Today Google disabled a Jordan Peterson's account, including his YouTube channel with millions of views. This is a clinical psychologist professor who is openly anti-Marxist (but also openly anti-fascist, and anti-antisemitic). No explanation given. Just plainly said he wasn't following the ToS but not particularly what. Only after hours of pressure from many people they reinstated it silently. We need anti-trust laws to curve this authoritarian Internet rising.

zimpenfish 9y ago
> openly anti-Marxist (but also openly anti-fascist, and anti-antisemitic) Openly anti-trans too.
- DarkKomunalec 9y ago
  > Anti-trans A quick (and biased) search turns up: "His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested." Now I'm sure there's more to the issue, but that's kind of my point - increasingly, not ceding to every demand by group X is labelled as being 'anti-X', and ending any discussion.
  - gasof 9y ago
    I'm not sure what's wrong with the above statement? I see merit in his view that the state should not force anyone to use any particular words, and I think it is not clear at all whether one should be able to force other people to act as if they are a gender different from how they are perceived, or to force others to use specific words to speak to them, although I personally think we'll end up at "don't use force". Peterson's position on the pronouns thing (which is an oddly hot-debated issue, perhaps because it'd open the doors to more compelled speech) is that if you would ask him to use special pronouns whether he would use them would depend on his estimation of your intentions; this seems very reasonable to me, and I could also understand it if he refused altogether because he is a public figure, a free-speech advocate and a professor with tenure, and if he can't who else is going to feel like they can? It's also non-obvious to me whether the net effect of accepting transgenderism and promoting non-binary gender roles is positive. GP stated their opinion, I did too, no need for off-topic discussions. Edit: I just spotted 'JBP is antisemitic', that's just slanderous. JBP is in no way anti-semitic, citation very much needed.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > At the event, Peterson outlined his criticism of transgender people, arguing that the idea that biological sex and gender were independent quantities was “wrong.” No, he's actually anti-trans too. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/4/11/peterson-talk-draws-criticism/ http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/4/11/peterson-talk-dr...
    - beaconstudios 9y ago
      the article doesn't back up your claim with evidence at all.
    - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
      You're proving my point - both disagreeing with the idea that sex and gender are independent, and hating and assaulting trans people, get thrown in the same 'anti-trans' bucket. Wouldn't it be more fair, even necessary, to just say "he doesn't want pronoun choice to be enforced, and doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct"? Why distort his views by condensing them to 'anti-trans'?
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
        > he doesn't want pronoun choice to be enforced That just makes him a dickhead that should be ignored. > doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct Which makes him wrong, scientifically (his testimony to the Canadian Senate has him saying that because the vast majority of people express their biological* sex as their gender, it would violate causality to accept they weren't linked), and, because he keeps using this nonsense to push his "trans people are just SJW leftists trying to take control" rhetoric, that makes him anti-trans. For more about the spectrum of biological sex (way more than 2) and the expressed biological genders that can result (more than 2, not necessarily matching the biological sex) - http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943 http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
- beaconstudios 9y ago
  you should listen to his arguments before making such a swift assumption. He isn't anti-trans at all, and in fact has quite a few trans supporters - his argument is that compelled speech (legally mandating the use of non-binary pronouns) is a line that should not be crossed. In one of his videos he said that if someone asked him to use a pronoun decently he would do so, just that he strongly disagreed with the legislation.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    Literally his own words - > At the event, Peterson outlined his criticism of transgender people, arguing that the idea that biological sex and gender were independent quantities was “wrong.”
    - beaconstudios 9y ago
      those aren't his own words though are they? they're someone paraphrasing his words. If you can link me to a quote from him directly then I'll believe it but that statement is ambiguous outside of context. For example, it seems that born-male-sex individuals are more likely to be transgender than born-female-sex individuals, which suggests non-independence of the factors. Is this observation transphobic? I don't believe it is. And that's not me citing Dr Peterson's argument - just one I've noticed personally.
      - zimpenfish 9y ago
        http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ To me, his words directly quoted in that article are sufficient to show he's transphobic (but certainly doing a good job of cloaking it in "free speech" rhetoric.)
        beaconstudios 9y ago
        if in your mind he's doing a good job cloaking hate in free speech rhetoric, how can you be so sure that he isn't actually arguing the free speech case? Hate isn't a subtle emotion, and Dr Peterson's arguments are reasonable to those who aren't fully committed to the postmodern understanding of sex and gender. Both sides of the debate are perfectly reasonable to hold and the issue isn't in any way settled (at least in part due to how politicised the study of gender and sex has become) so to suggest that Dr Peterson hates trans people because he disagrees with the far-left narrative on gender is misguided at best. If you think his views are outdated then that's a fair criticism but it's not like the current postmodern perspective on the issue is old and well-established.
- alecco 9y ago
  > Openly anti-trans too. He is not against trans people at all. He is against being legally _forced_ to use dozens of new gender pronouns. You keep using far left sources who don't back their claims. Jordan Peterson has hundreds of _hours_ of videos and lectures where he explais his positions. Link one of those to have an argument. Not some paraphrased nonsense to justify your position.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ Do his words there count as "not some paraphrased nonsense"?
- angry-hacker 9y ago
  Like any other sane person he believes trans people are mentally ill. Word anti is wrong.
hsod 9y ago
Maybe we should nationalize YouTube to provide a safe space for anti-Marxists

by alecco 9y ago

zimpenfish 9y ago

> openly anti-Marxist (but also openly anti-fascist, and anti-antisemitic) Openly anti-trans too.

DarkKomunalec 9y ago
> Anti-trans A quick (and biased) search turns up: "His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested." Now I'm sure there's more to the issue, but that's kind of my point - increasingly, not ceding to every demand by group X is labelled as being 'anti-X', and ending any discussion.
- gasof 9y ago
  I'm not sure what's wrong with the above statement? I see merit in his view that the state should not force anyone to use any particular words, and I think it is not clear at all whether one should be able to force other people to act as if they are a gender different from how they are perceived, or to force others to use specific words to speak to them, although I personally think we'll end up at "don't use force". Peterson's position on the pronouns thing (which is an oddly hot-debated issue, perhaps because it'd open the doors to more compelled speech) is that if you would ask him to use special pronouns whether he would use them would depend on his estimation of your intentions; this seems very reasonable to me, and I could also understand it if he refused altogether because he is a public figure, a free-speech advocate and a professor with tenure, and if he can't who else is going to feel like they can? It's also non-obvious to me whether the net effect of accepting transgenderism and promoting non-binary gender roles is positive. GP stated their opinion, I did too, no need for off-topic discussions. Edit: I just spotted 'JBP is antisemitic', that's just slanderous. JBP is in no way anti-semitic, citation very much needed.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > At the event, Peterson outlined his criticism of transgender people, arguing that the idea that biological sex and gender were independent quantities was “wrong.” No, he's actually anti-trans too. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/4/11/peterson-talk-draws-criticism/ http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/4/11/peterson-talk-dr...
  - beaconstudios 9y ago
    the article doesn't back up your claim with evidence at all.
  - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
    You're proving my point - both disagreeing with the idea that sex and gender are independent, and hating and assaulting trans people, get thrown in the same 'anti-trans' bucket. Wouldn't it be more fair, even necessary, to just say "he doesn't want pronoun choice to be enforced, and doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct"? Why distort his views by condensing them to 'anti-trans'?
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      > he doesn't want pronoun choice to be enforced That just makes him a dickhead that should be ignored. > doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct Which makes him wrong, scientifically (his testimony to the Canadian Senate has him saying that because the vast majority of people express their biological* sex as their gender, it would violate causality to accept they weren't linked), and, because he keeps using this nonsense to push his "trans people are just SJW leftists trying to take control" rhetoric, that makes him anti-trans. For more about the spectrum of biological sex (way more than 2) and the expressed biological genders that can result (more than 2, not necessarily matching the biological sex) - http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943 http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
beaconstudios 9y ago
you should listen to his arguments before making such a swift assumption. He isn't anti-trans at all, and in fact has quite a few trans supporters - his argument is that compelled speech (legally mandating the use of non-binary pronouns) is a line that should not be crossed. In one of his videos he said that if someone asked him to use a pronoun decently he would do so, just that he strongly disagreed with the legislation.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  Literally his own words - > At the event, Peterson outlined his criticism of transgender people, arguing that the idea that biological sex and gender were independent quantities was “wrong.”
  - beaconstudios 9y ago
    those aren't his own words though are they? they're someone paraphrasing his words. If you can link me to a quote from him directly then I'll believe it but that statement is ambiguous outside of context. For example, it seems that born-male-sex individuals are more likely to be transgender than born-female-sex individuals, which suggests non-independence of the factors. Is this observation transphobic? I don't believe it is. And that's not me citing Dr Peterson's argument - just one I've noticed personally.
    - zimpenfish 9y ago
      http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ To me, his words directly quoted in that article are sufficient to show he's transphobic (but certainly doing a good job of cloaking it in "free speech" rhetoric.)
      - beaconstudios 9y ago
        if in your mind he's doing a good job cloaking hate in free speech rhetoric, how can you be so sure that he isn't actually arguing the free speech case? Hate isn't a subtle emotion, and Dr Peterson's arguments are reasonable to those who aren't fully committed to the postmodern understanding of sex and gender. Both sides of the debate are perfectly reasonable to hold and the issue isn't in any way settled (at least in part due to how politicised the study of gender and sex has become) so to suggest that Dr Peterson hates trans people because he disagrees with the far-left narrative on gender is misguided at best. If you think his views are outdated then that's a fair criticism but it's not like the current postmodern perspective on the issue is old and well-established.
alecco 9y ago
> Openly anti-trans too. He is not against trans people at all. He is against being legally _forced_ to use dozens of new gender pronouns. You keep using far left sources who don't back their claims. Jordan Peterson has hundreds of _hours_ of videos and lectures where he explais his positions. Link one of those to have an argument. Not some paraphrased nonsense to justify your position.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ http://skepchick.org/2016/10/a-response-to-jordan-peterson/ Do his words there count as "not some paraphrased nonsense"?
angry-hacker 9y ago
Like any other sane person he believes trans people are mentally ill. Word anti is wrong.

hsod 9y ago

Maybe we should nationalize YouTube to provide a safe space for anti-Marxists