6 ms·

It’s worth pointing out that Peterson is actually not against using a variety of gender pronouns per se. So many people get this wrong. He is against being com

It’s worth pointing out that Peterson is actually not against using a variety of gender pronouns per se. So many people get this wrong. He is against being compelled to use a variety of gender pronouns by legislation which is internally inconsistent, scientifically inaccurate, and additionally lacks clarity by punting process and standards to the Ontario human rights commission which can change their process and definitions without involvement from an elected legislature.

savanaly 9y ago
In everyday life I've never found it to be too inconvenient to be as accommodating as possible to others and communicate with them on their own terms, whether that means remembering to use the pronouns they want or using alternative terminology if they think some word is offensive. I've never had to think about how my outlook might change if all of that got a lot more inconvenient though (if more people start requiring ever more varied pronouns, or if so many words get soft-banned as being offensive that it's difficult to communicate with clarity). Much less have I thought about what if I were compelled by force/law to do the thing I've been doing voluntarily all along. I can understand and be sympathetic to Peterson's position in that sense, although I'm not sure if I agree.
- majormajor 9y ago
  It's easy in one-on-one conversations with people you know or have a reasonable way of learning about. It's hard for public or mass communications with people who have rapidly-evolving preferences and sets of things that can cause offense. Peterson sounds like a dick in his methods, but there's a dangerous regressive trend picking up in mainstream circles of treating disagreement as heresy. We've picked up the worst habits of religion. (And the "right" is too intellectually dishonest to notice that this treend of whining/heresy/safe-spaces-desire trend is deeply entrenched in evangelical and right-wing America, with private schools, "wars on Christmas", etc.)
  - cholantesh 9y ago
    >It's hard for public or mass communications with people who have rapidly-evolving preferences and sets of things that can cause offense. I'm not convinced of this. "Hi all" works as a salutation, in public speaking, you can substitute ladies and gentlemen with lots of far more engaging variants (eg: "Dear friends", "my fellow students" (a favourite of one of my best instructors in college), "distinguished guests", etc), announcers have been using "attention all passengers" and other formal identifiers for a while.
    - majormajor 9y ago
      The outrage is less, but you can still catch flak for little slips like referring to an unknown party as "he" or "she" instead of "they." (A perfectly cromulent third-person-singular pronoun with plenty of history, IMO, but some people dislike it, too.) But I'm thinking more of things like "creating a gender drop down box for a tool where demographic info was desired." Or do we just drop the idea of even having a meaningful response to such a question? Sometimes it's relevant, though, especially in medical industries.
      - cholantesh 9y ago
        It's been my experience that trans/genderqueer people indicate what their preferred pronouns are when goy meet them. The annoyance comes if someone repeatedly misgenders them afterwards. It seems to be me to be on par with calling them the wrong name a few times. It's not an especially huge transgression, but it's a bit oblivious. Not saying anything about Shapiro-caliber deliberate provocation here.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  Much less have I thought about what if I were compelled by force/law to do the thing I've been doing voluntarily all along. Have you never made a mistake in common courtesy? What if any mistake in common courtesy meant that you could be hauled before a kangaroo court which can use a scientifically dubious "test of unconscious bias" against you as evidence? What if that kangaroo court could get you kicked out of your job? Go and read the law Jordan Peterson is complaining about.
  - jrs95 9y ago
    This is different! A mistake in common courtesy could cause one of these oppressed people to commit suicide. It has everything to do with pronouns and absolutely nothing to do with mental illness.
    - mcmacintosh 9y ago
      You’re not helping your case when you say that a mistake in common courtesy could lead to suicide.
      - notconservative 9y ago
        I agree. If being mistaken as the wrong gender causes someone significant enough distress to make them commit suicide, they need (and likely are getting) serious mental health attention. It is not the burden of anyone to cater to a stranger's mental illness. If you look vaguely male, I will say "excuse me sir, could I get past you?" (and "madam" for a vaguely female looking person). And there is no place where that should be illegal or morally wrong. Deliberate misgendering is definitely a separate discussion from a genuine mistake.
        stcredzero 9y ago
        I get misgendered all the time, and I'm just some guy who never recovered from the 80's and 90's and still sports a ponytail. Once in South Carolina, I got, "Uh, sir, uh, ma'am, uh,..." -- That checkout guy never made up his mind!
stcredzero 9y ago
Not to mention scientifically dubious tests of "unconscious bias" used against you as evidence in kangaroo courts -- enshrined into law. That's something that might be in Room 101 in the world of Orwell's1984. Also, enshrining into law of scientifically false statements. (Anyone remember the bit about Indiana doing that with pi == 3?)
- rosser 9y ago
  The pi thing never actually happened. The bill was proposed but did not pass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
  - kazinator 9y ago
    All those who jumped on that bandwagon found they couldn't get it rolling, because the wheels looked like hexagons in order to make d = 2πr work out.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- DiffEq 9y ago
  Well pi does equal 3 if you round it down.
  - Yetanfou 9y ago
    ...and a square looks like a circle if you round it down as well. Doing so does make it lose its essence though, just like rounding down pi does. It is not for nothing after all that the ancients tried all sorts of tricks to find the actual numerical value of the ratio between a circle's radius and its circumference.
    - DiffEq 9y ago
      While this is true, they were still able to build pretty significant things without such accuracy. Sure, if you keep rounding you can lose essence but rounding pi to 3 doesn't lose enough of the essence for practical usefulness. 3 works fine rough circles..it might not work fine for building a rocket or a some finer piece of machinery but for may things it works fine. Besides, although I said what I did to make a valid point, I mostly said it to be humorous. Sorry I did not put in the humor tags.
FussyZeus 9y ago
Exactly. I have no problem calling a genetic male "she" that's what she prefers. I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time, and respect it, with no effort on the part of the woman in question. I'm perfectly able to be understanding in these cases, but I'm not capable to be psychic.
- drak0n1c 9y ago
  Nicknames are similar, someone you meet may let you know how they prefer to be called, and then you use it if you can remember.
- masmullin 9y ago
  I've only met one transgender person. She was basically a dude wearing lipstick and high heeled boots. She was really nice, and I wanted to use her preferred pronouns, but it's really difficult to do so. > I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time, and respect it, with no effort on the part of the woman in question. I'd like to postulate that it's not just ahead of time. It's really hard to change your usage of he to she or him to her, when you are visually presented with a man. The brain doesn't easily change, so don't get mad when it doesn't change as fast as you want.
  - FussyZeus 9y ago
    There seems to be a very vocal minority of trans people out there who are demanding a totally friction free experience to their life. These are the people people like Peterson get riled up. I know two trans individuals, I address them by the correct pronouns probably 80% of the time if I'm being a little kind to myself. The other 20% they've been totally understanding. Anecdotal yes but I feel like this is the vast majority of trans people; they know it's out of the ordinary and respect that, and handle the inevitable slips with social grace.
- microtherion 9y ago
  > I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time I agree that this would be an unreasonable standard. But I've yet to see that standard being applied to anyone (And I run in circles where I'm exposed to quite a bit of very outspoken trans/nonbinary rhetoric). What I see, time and time again, is people who explicitly refuse to call someone by their preferred pronoun, whether it's on the grounds of pure petulance ("You can't make me!"), or of some biological essentialism ("HE, because Y chromosome"). So unless you have any examples of people being attacked for a single, innocent mistake, I'm inclined to see this as a strawman (straw-person?) argument.
wavefunction 9y ago
I try to treat people with respect and in the manner they would like to be treated (within reason) but I also reserve my right to be offensive to other people, to be rude and crude and aggressive because some times that's appropriate.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
acjohnson55 9y ago
> It’s worth pointing out that Peterson is actually not against using a variety of gender pronouns per se. At some point, what someone literally says they are or aren't against starts to pale in comparison to the perception of their stance. And if that perception persists, at some point, one has to call into question their sincerity.
- Erik816 9y ago
  You are calling someone's sincerity into question because other people have an incorrect perception of what they are saying?
  - rosser 9y ago
    Does he endeavor in any way to correct this mis-perception or disassociate himself from those who hold it? A lack of condemnation can, not unreasonably, be construed as a tacit endorsement.
    - cholantesh 9y ago
      That and saying "I'm not ______", and then turning around and saying ______ things is a sign that you're at best lacking in self-awareness and at worst lying.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  You are espousing a position that calls for the validation of anyone's unjustified projections onto someone else. Should this cause me to question your sincerity?
upofadown 9y ago
He actually wrote a letter to the administration of his university to state that if he had a trans student he would not be compelled to use their gender pronoun of choice. The admin told him, in so many words, to not be an asshole for no reason. He then published to response on the internet and played the victim. So he more or less had to create a controversy out of nothing. The great majority of people consider the question a matter of courtesy and hold no strong feelings.
- tomsthumb 9y ago
  > The admin told him, in so many words, to not be an asshole for no reason. He then published to response on the internet and played the victim. This is a pretty low resolution summary of their correspondence. It’s also pretty easy to argue that his behavior is better described as refusing to play the victim. For him, the loss of his rights is more impactful than the consequences of not complying, so he refused to play a part in the quiet loss of his rights.
  - notconservative 9y ago
    I've heard him insist that he hasn't and wouldn't deliberately misgender one of his students. From my understanding, it is purely the attempt to compel behavior from him that is his issue.
- jnbiche 9y ago
  > So he more or less had to create a controversy out of nothing. The great majority of people consider the question a matter of courtesy and hold no strong feelings. Well, this is now enshrined in Canadian law, so it doesn't matter much what the great majority of people feel. It only matters how courts will interpret the law.
  - upofadown 9y ago
    Not at all, although Dr Peterson has spent a lot of time arguing that it is. In particular, he thinks that a recent addition of gender to anti-discrimination law means something about the sort of gender pronouns you can use. He has not been dissuaded in his opinion by a great number of people with much better qualifications in that sort of law.

savanaly 9y ago

In everyday life I've never found it to be too inconvenient to be as accommodating as possible to others and communicate with them on their own terms, whether that means remembering to use the pronouns they want or using alternative terminology if they think some word is offensive. I've never had to think about how my outlook might change if all of that got a lot more inconvenient though (if more people start requiring ever more varied pronouns, or if so many words get soft-banned as being offensive that it's difficult to communicate with clarity). Much less have I thought about what if I were compelled by force/law to do the thing I've been doing voluntarily all along. I can understand and be sympathetic to Peterson's position in that sense, although I'm not sure if I agree.

majormajor 9y ago
It's easy in one-on-one conversations with people you know or have a reasonable way of learning about. It's hard for public or mass communications with people who have rapidly-evolving preferences and sets of things that can cause offense. Peterson sounds like a dick in his methods, but there's a dangerous regressive trend picking up in mainstream circles of treating disagreement as heresy. We've picked up the worst habits of religion. (And the "right" is too intellectually dishonest to notice that this treend of whining/heresy/safe-spaces-desire trend is deeply entrenched in evangelical and right-wing America, with private schools, "wars on Christmas", etc.)
- cholantesh 9y ago
  >It's hard for public or mass communications with people who have rapidly-evolving preferences and sets of things that can cause offense. I'm not convinced of this. "Hi all" works as a salutation, in public speaking, you can substitute ladies and gentlemen with lots of far more engaging variants (eg: "Dear friends", "my fellow students" (a favourite of one of my best instructors in college), "distinguished guests", etc), announcers have been using "attention all passengers" and other formal identifiers for a while.
  - majormajor 9y ago
    The outrage is less, but you can still catch flak for little slips like referring to an unknown party as "he" or "she" instead of "they." (A perfectly cromulent third-person-singular pronoun with plenty of history, IMO, but some people dislike it, too.) But I'm thinking more of things like "creating a gender drop down box for a tool where demographic info was desired." Or do we just drop the idea of even having a meaningful response to such a question? Sometimes it's relevant, though, especially in medical industries.
    - cholantesh 9y ago
      It's been my experience that trans/genderqueer people indicate what their preferred pronouns are when goy meet them. The annoyance comes if someone repeatedly misgenders them afterwards. It seems to be me to be on par with calling them the wrong name a few times. It's not an especially huge transgression, but it's a bit oblivious. Not saying anything about Shapiro-caliber deliberate provocation here.
stcredzero 9y ago
Much less have I thought about what if I were compelled by force/law to do the thing I've been doing voluntarily all along. Have you never made a mistake in common courtesy? What if any mistake in common courtesy meant that you could be hauled before a kangaroo court which can use a scientifically dubious "test of unconscious bias" against you as evidence? What if that kangaroo court could get you kicked out of your job? Go and read the law Jordan Peterson is complaining about.
- jrs95 9y ago
  This is different! A mistake in common courtesy could cause one of these oppressed people to commit suicide. It has everything to do with pronouns and absolutely nothing to do with mental illness.
  - mcmacintosh 9y ago
    You’re not helping your case when you say that a mistake in common courtesy could lead to suicide.
    - notconservative 9y ago
      I agree. If being mistaken as the wrong gender causes someone significant enough distress to make them commit suicide, they need (and likely are getting) serious mental health attention. It is not the burden of anyone to cater to a stranger's mental illness. If you look vaguely male, I will say "excuse me sir, could I get past you?" (and "madam" for a vaguely female looking person). And there is no place where that should be illegal or morally wrong. Deliberate misgendering is definitely a separate discussion from a genuine mistake.
      - stcredzero 9y ago
        I get misgendered all the time, and I'm just some guy who never recovered from the 80's and 90's and still sports a ponytail. Once in South Carolina, I got, "Uh, sir, uh, ma'am, uh,..." -- That checkout guy never made up his mind!

stcredzero 9y ago

Not to mention scientifically dubious tests of "unconscious bias" used against you as evidence in kangaroo courts -- enshrined into law. That's something that might be in Room 101 in the world of Orwell's1984. Also, enshrining into law of scientifically false statements. (Anyone remember the bit about Indiana doing that with pi == 3?)

rosser 9y ago
The pi thing never actually happened. The bill was proposed but did not pass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
- kazinator 9y ago
  All those who jumped on that bandwagon found they couldn't get it rolling, because the wheels looked like hexagons in order to make d = 2πr work out.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
DiffEq 9y ago
Well pi does equal 3 if you round it down.
- Yetanfou 9y ago
  ...and a square looks like a circle if you round it down as well. Doing so does make it lose its essence though, just like rounding down pi does. It is not for nothing after all that the ancients tried all sorts of tricks to find the actual numerical value of the ratio between a circle's radius and its circumference.
  - DiffEq 9y ago
    While this is true, they were still able to build pretty significant things without such accuracy. Sure, if you keep rounding you can lose essence but rounding pi to 3 doesn't lose enough of the essence for practical usefulness. 3 works fine rough circles..it might not work fine for building a rocket or a some finer piece of machinery but for may things it works fine. Besides, although I said what I did to make a valid point, I mostly said it to be humorous. Sorry I did not put in the humor tags.

FussyZeus 9y ago

Exactly. I have no problem calling a genetic male "she" that's what she prefers. I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time, and respect it, with no effort on the part of the woman in question. I'm perfectly able to be understanding in these cases, but I'm not capable to be psychic.

drak0n1c 9y ago
Nicknames are similar, someone you meet may let you know how they prefer to be called, and then you use it if you can remember.
masmullin 9y ago
I've only met one transgender person. She was basically a dude wearing lipstick and high heeled boots. She was really nice, and I wanted to use her preferred pronouns, but it's really difficult to do so. > I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time, and respect it, with no effort on the part of the woman in question. I'd like to postulate that it's not just ahead of time. It's really hard to change your usage of he to she or him to her, when you are visually presented with a man. The brain doesn't easily change, so don't get mad when it doesn't change as fast as you want.
- FussyZeus 9y ago
  There seems to be a very vocal minority of trans people out there who are demanding a totally friction free experience to their life. These are the people people like Peterson get riled up. I know two trans individuals, I address them by the correct pronouns probably 80% of the time if I'm being a little kind to myself. The other 20% they've been totally understanding. Anecdotal yes but I feel like this is the vast majority of trans people; they know it's out of the ordinary and respect that, and handle the inevitable slips with social grace.
microtherion 9y ago
> I take issue with being held to a standard of somehow needing to "know" that ahead of time I agree that this would be an unreasonable standard. But I've yet to see that standard being applied to anyone (And I run in circles where I'm exposed to quite a bit of very outspoken trans/nonbinary rhetoric). What I see, time and time again, is people who explicitly refuse to call someone by their preferred pronoun, whether it's on the grounds of pure petulance ("You can't make me!"), or of some biological essentialism ("HE, because Y chromosome"). So unless you have any examples of people being attacked for a single, innocent mistake, I'm inclined to see this as a strawman (straw-person?) argument.

wavefunction 9y ago

I try to treat people with respect and in the manner they would like to be treated (within reason) but I also reserve my right to be offensive to other people, to be rude and crude and aggressive because some times that's appropriate.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

acjohnson55 9y ago

> It’s worth pointing out that Peterson is actually not against using a variety of gender pronouns per se. At some point, what someone literally says they are or aren't against starts to pale in comparison to the perception of their stance. And if that perception persists, at some point, one has to call into question their sincerity.

Erik816 9y ago
You are calling someone's sincerity into question because other people have an incorrect perception of what they are saying?
- rosser 9y ago
  Does he endeavor in any way to correct this mis-perception or disassociate himself from those who hold it? A lack of condemnation can, not unreasonably, be construed as a tacit endorsement.
  - cholantesh 9y ago
    That and saying "I'm not ______", and then turning around and saying ______ things is a sign that you're at best lacking in self-awareness and at worst lying.
stcredzero 9y ago
You are espousing a position that calls for the validation of anyone's unjustified projections onto someone else. Should this cause me to question your sincerity?

upofadown 9y ago

He actually wrote a letter to the administration of his university to state that if he had a trans student he would not be compelled to use their gender pronoun of choice. The admin told him, in so many words, to not be an asshole for no reason. He then published to response on the internet and played the victim. So he more or less had to create a controversy out of nothing. The great majority of people consider the question a matter of courtesy and hold no strong feelings.

tomsthumb 9y ago
> The admin told him, in so many words, to not be an asshole for no reason. He then published to response on the internet and played the victim. This is a pretty low resolution summary of their correspondence. It’s also pretty easy to argue that his behavior is better described as refusing to play the victim. For him, the loss of his rights is more impactful than the consequences of not complying, so he refused to play a part in the quiet loss of his rights.
- notconservative 9y ago
  I've heard him insist that he hasn't and wouldn't deliberately misgender one of his students. From my understanding, it is purely the attempt to compel behavior from him that is his issue.
jnbiche 9y ago
> So he more or less had to create a controversy out of nothing. The great majority of people consider the question a matter of courtesy and hold no strong feelings. Well, this is now enshrined in Canadian law, so it doesn't matter much what the great majority of people feel. It only matters how courts will interpret the law.
- upofadown 9y ago
  Not at all, although Dr Peterson has spent a lot of time arguing that it is. In particular, he thinks that a recent addition of gender to anti-discrimination law means something about the sort of gender pronouns you can use. He has not been dissuaded in his opinion by a great number of people with much better qualifications in that sort of law.