The Jordan Peterson Thread

[harrybarracuda]

Merit is precisely what you are not arguing for when you support quotas.

Do you support quotas?

Do you think jobs should be reserved for individuals based on gender or other demographics?

That is precisely the social policy that Peterson is arguing against and precisely what is happening today in many hiring environments such as government departments and 'progressive' businesses like Google.

People should be evaluated based on their abilities and merits. Not measured on their political credentials as members of the 'correct' minority groups to be hiring from to satisfy the political pressure for equality of representation which is as fundamentally wrong headed as old-fashioned racism was in its day.

I think the point is that if fucking dinosaurs such as yourself are scared to hire women for fear of being outshone, they should be put out to pasture or forced to hire the best candidates and not the mates that bummed them in the showers at public school.

[Looper]

I think the point is that if fucking dinosaurs such as yourself are scared to hire women for fear of being outshone, they should be put out to pasture or forced to hire the best candidates

But hiring the best candidate is what I am arguing in favour of and you are arguing against.

I am all in favour of hiring a woman if they are the best candidate.

Surely that should be the policy of any sensible business or organisation that wants to get the best value for money from its employees.

But when positions are reserved for women only or blacks only (and this is happening a lot) then that is not employing on merit but employing on group identity.

Do you think this is a good approach to the hiring process?

[david44]

for women only or blacks only

where is that Looper, not disputing, certainly not Thailand.

I think fair minded people look for equality of opportunity and outside of the Islamic world woman are proving that they can not only do their traditional roles of work , family and childcare but equal or better men in many areas.

There will always be jobs where because of sexual norms or physical strength i.e firefighters certain individuals will be more suited .It used to be 6ft tall to join the GArda or the Met. Like all of us oldtimers change is a challenge but I see majority of people are happy to see discrimination diminish and it's only basically the low skilled and bigoted who feel threatened by the other

tHose they label ,here we joke and banter but in the real world talented honest people are passed over so the sons of hi-sos kings and dictators don't have to pitch in or heaven forfend compete

All the wave of "poofs and darkies, ragheads and crossdresers " as ranted about by the alt right and their soft cock fans in their usual comics Fairfax/Fox Daily Fail the Daily Excess in UK Murdock media worldwide and of course Stromer/breitbart knuckle draggers who are doing "The Lord's work" from Gaza to Waco

[harrybarracuda]

But hiring the best candidate is what I am arguing in favour of and you are arguing against.

I am all in favour of hiring a woman if they are the best candidate.

Surely that should be the policy of any sensible business or organisation that wants to get the best value for money from its employees.

But when positions are reserved for women only or blacks only (and this is happening a lot) then that is not employing on merit but employing on group identity.

Do you think this is a good approach to the hiring process?

The problem is feeble minded individuals that don't think women deserve equal pay or equal chances.

Unless you can purge them from the system you need an alternative.

[Looper]

where is that Looper, not disputing, certainly not Thailand.

I can tell you from my very own horse's mouth since Russian woman was offered a job interview with the Australian Federal Police last year and was informed in the letter of offer (as if this was something to be proud of) that the position was only open to female applicants.

There are many organisations in the West today unashamedly advertising job vacancies that are only open to women and stating openly that the rationale for this is gender equality.

There will always be jobs where because of sexual norms or physical strength i.e firefighters certain individuals will be more suited

Don't imagine that the fire service gets to wriggle out of this outcome equity festival. Many fire services are aiming for 50% female representation.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...10-gvi2v2.html

There used to be a test for joining the fire service in QLD which involved dragging an 80kg dead weight for 20m (like what a fireman might have to do in action). The test has been scrapped because it is discriminatory against physically weaker females.

The problem is...

Harry you are just dancing around the central question here:-

Do you agree or disagree that it is OK to offer jobs vacancies available for women only, in order to achieve politically driven equality of representation quota targets?

Or do you alternatively agree that job applicants should be measured on ability and merit only and their group membership should be disregarded?

don't think women deserve equal pay

The question of pay almost always boils down to men simply being willing to work longer hours and more difficult positions and tasks. It is a political beat-up. It is simply illegal in the West to offer different rates of pay based on gender and has been for many years.

Men and women are different creatures. They have different priorities in life due to differences in evolved psychology and personality.

Men are far more likely to put work before family than women are. Hence they often earn more money.

This is all that Jordan Peterson is arguing but he seems to have become this boogeyman whom (<--- note to jeff. this is the correct usage) the left are trying to besmirch as an alt-right figurehead but what he is arguing is eminently reasonable and he is a respected academic with no association with the childish alt-right nonsense.

[Looper]

Have at it........

For anyone who harbours suspicions about Peterson's angle just listen to Stephen Fry talking. If you have got this genius willing to stand behind you then you are on the side of the angels.

I especially like the way Fry came dressed as a plantation owner to debate the snake-oil salesman black reverend!

ONYA Stephen!

I love ya!!

[raycarey]

5 white guys on a hiring committee and the following candidates (with identical quals and experience) arrive to be interviewed:

1. white guy
2. white woman
3. black guy


if you hold this interview in 100 different companies in the UK, US or australia, what percentage does the white guy get the job?

33%?

don't waste our time by pretending to think so.

I especially like the way Fry came dressed as a plantation owner

how interesting that you would make that assumption.

[AntRobertson]

This Peterson chap just strikes me as the latest in a long line of talking heads that panders to the cottage industry of reminding white males that they're the real victims out there. Of everything.

[Cujo]

The trouble is women get pmt and black people are lazy and just listen to hip hop on headphones all day. And they can't spell.

[AntRobertson]

Incorrect. Proportionately headphones aren't used that much.

[Looper]

if you hold this interview in 100 different companies in the UK, US or australia, what percentage does the white guy get the job?

Do you live in the West Ray?

With the current political climate I would be willing to bet good money on the woman taking the prize home more than the other 2 candidates. Positive discrimination is rife among virtue-signalling larger organisations and women's CVs are sent straight to the CEO in places like academically qualified engineering where female applicants are scarce.

Here is what happens when a government agency tries to engage in gender blind hiring.

"We anticipated this would have a positive impact on diversity — making it more likely that female candidates and those from ethnic minorities are selected for the shortlist," he said.

"We found the opposite, that de-identifying candidates reduced the likelihood of women being selected for the shortlist."

Blind recruitment trial to boost gender equality making things worse, study reveals - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Yes, the number of women getting offered and interview goes down! And this is the rabidly left wing ABC reporting this.

D44 (unbidden by me) brought up firefighters as if this were an example of a profession that obviously should be male.

Here is a quote from the article I linked to earlier. The majority of the firefighting services in Australia are aiming for 50/50 representation of female firefighters.

The spokesman pointed to Fire and Rescue NSW, the Melbourne Metropolitan Fire Brigade and the Northern Territory Fire and Rescue Service, which had all set 50/50 gender recruitment targets.

Canberra's 50/50 target would remain in place for the future, he said.

To me this is truly bordering on lunacy.

What is your take on this? Do you want to be carried out of the building alive or does the thought of all those female firefighters give you a warm glow?

[crackerjack101]

Perhaps by hiring the likes of Teary57 they're bridging the divide?
Just a thought.

[Cujo]

Perhaps by hiring the likes of Teary57 they're bridging the divide?
Just a thought.

You might be onto something there. Where is that big girls blouse anyway?

[raycarey]

the Melbourne Metropolitan Fire Brigade and the Northern Territory Fire and Rescue Service, which had all set 50/50 gender recruitment targets.

To me this is truly bordering on lunacy.

What is your take on this? Do you want to be carried out of the building alive or does the thought of all those female firefighters give you a warm glow?

well you've cherry picked one of the few professions that includes physical strength as a job requirement but i'm sure there are still rigorous standards that all candidates must meet in order to join the fire brigade.....and i'd wager that includes being able to bring a body from a burning building.

[Looper]

well you've cherry picked one of the few professions that includes physical strength as a job requirement

I did not cherry pick fire-fighting.

D44 was countering some of the points I had raised and then offered up fire-fighting (unbidden by me) as an example of a profession where clearly gender ratio targets would not apply.

I then pointed out that most of the major fire services in Australia do currently have 50/50 gender ratio targets and are modifying their hiring strategies to meet these targets.

So would you rather be dragged from the burning building by a bloke who is actually physically capable of such a task or would you prefer to bask in the warm glow of knowing that 50% of Australian fire-fighters are to be women?


Here is another article showing that women are more likely than men to be hired by government agencies now, all other things being equal.

DPM&C study finds public servants more likely to hire women

Years of public service gender diversity efforts may have succeeded in making bureaucrats more likely to hire women then men, a new study by the Prime Minister's "nudge unit" suggests.

The "behavioural economics" team have warned that the "blind recruitment" techniques currently in vogue across the public service might be doing more harm than good to the job prospects of senior women.

https://www.smh.com.au/public-servic...30-gx1pqg.html

The stench of political correctness is rank in the public service.

The whole gender target ratio concept is absurd, not just for physical jobs like fire-fighting but for jobs involving certain types of mental tasks.

Men and women differ physically in obvious ways due to the forces of evolution. Men are significantly larger and stronger than women.

But men and women also differ in characteristics of personality and mental strength at specific types of tasks.

These differences should lead us to not expect a gender ratio of 50/50 once all barriers to entry have been removed and people are free to choose. Men and women will still on average choose different tasks by nature due to differences in evolved mental preferences and strengths.

[crackerjack101]

My brother was a fireman in London for many years and then, when he moved to Australia, he served with the Sydney Fire service until he retired.
I remember, some 20 years ago when he was still in London (Heston Services), discussing the implementation of a gender equality policy.
The general consensus of he and his colleagues was simple, if they can do the job, they're in.

It seemed fair, and he went on to clarify that there are different areas of expertise in the service and that no one, be they male, female or frog , is expected to be a master of all.

So, jobs are assigned according to capability and yes, even 20 years ago there where female members on his crew, cutting bodies out of wrecks on the M4.

Just adding to the stew.

[Little Chuchok]

So basically you like him because he panders to your irrational fear of strong, independent women.

Harold, that's a statement right out of Cathy Newmans handbook.

[raycarey]

So would you rather be dragged from the burning building by a bloke who is actually physically capable of such a task or would you prefer to bask in the warm glow of knowing that 50% of Australian fire-fighters are to be women?

asked and answered.

The stench of political correctness is rank in the public service.

how about this....tomorrow morning, get up and write a heart-felt letter to your MP about how unfair it is to be a white, heterosexual, christian male in australia.

But men and women also differ in characteristics of personality and mental strength at specific types of tasks.

please expand on the types of tasks that women don't have the mental strength to complete equally to men.

[harrybarracuda]

I may be pissing on Looper's strawberries here, but isn't positive discrimination illegal?

[Looper]

So, jobs are assigned according to capability and yes, even 20 years ago there where female members on his crew, cutting bodies out of wrecks on the M4.

Just adding to the stew.

That is fair enough. Individuals should be evaluated on merit, not group membership. If a woman is strong enough then she should be part of the fire-fighting team.

But men are on average substantially stronger than women so we should not expect 50% of fire-fighters to be female. it is true that there are other tasks in the fire service but it is primarily a physical job so a 50% gender ratio target seems to me like classic political correct lunacy.

please expand on the types of tasks that women don't have the mental strength to complete equally to men.

Spatial reasoning is one area of mental capacity where men are far stronger than women.

Chess is a game involving substantial spatial reasoning. Holding patterns in the minds eye and re-arranging them mentally. Men are far better at chess than women. There are only a handful of women in the current 2000 grandmasters. There are no women in the top 100 chess players in the world.

Chess is only a game but there are jobs that involve similar abstract mental skills.

Emotional sympathising and care-giving is a mental task where women are far stronger than men.

We see this in the relative numbers of men vs women who are teachers of young children and nurses.

We are just scratching the surface here. There are thousands of examples of jobs which involve mental and emotional skills and strengths where men and women differ in innate ability and preference.

[Happy As Larry]

As he is making some $80,000 per month from donations to his youtube channel, I am guessing he is going to be around for a while whether you agree or disagree with him

[Little Chuchok]

This Peterson chap just strikes me as the latest in a long line of talking heads that panders to the cottage industry of reminding white males that they're the real victims out there. Of everything.

Not sure about that, but they are attracted to him. Just as many other people are.

He does hate the 'radical left' and the way that if you don't agree with them, they throw around words like racist, misogynist etc when all the person has done is disagree with them. A bit like what a couple of inbred fuckwits on here do.

Peterson has also stated on record that he detests the far right. Who doesn't?

He has had some great interviews and some not so great. Like anybody, I suppose.

I enjoyed this one with Russell Brand.



And this one with Joe Rogan




He has also got hundreds of hours of his lectures at University. There is not too much radical in these.

[raycarey]

There are only a handful of women in the current 2000 grandmasters.

i think you would agree that most (if not all) grandmasters begin playing chess at a very young age. boys are encouraged to partake in organized competitions as soon as possible. and i think you would also agree that most girls aren't socialized in that way...and specifically not to play chess. in fact, it could be argued that young girls are told that they can't be good at chess because "There are only a handful of women in the current 2000 grandmasters".

kind of like some guy saying they can't be in the fire brigade, eh?

but....a hungarian psychologist did raise his daughters to be chess players. one of his daughters became the youngest grandmaster in history...not youngest female...the youngest person. and she defeated many world champions, including kasparov.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl...ter-experiment

and btw, my understanding is that the number of male/female grandmasters is proportional to the number of male/females that play chess competitively.

[HuangLao]

As he is making some $80,000 per month from donations to his youtube channel, I am guessing he is going to be around for a while whether you agree or disagree with him

More than likely, his trendy presence throughout the surface commercial mainstream will be a flash in a pan. The proverbial 15 minutes.

Granted, he'll remain around - but not in the great exposed fashion that he's receiving today.
He'll settle in the usual "alternative" circle of obscure and limited popularity.

[crackerjack101]

More than likely, his trendy presence throughout the surface commercial mainstream will be a flash in a pan. The proverbial 15 minutes.

Granted, he'll remain around - but not in the great exposed fashion that he's receiving today.
He'll settle in the usual "alternative" circle of obscure and limited popularity.

Jeff, you might like to proof read this as it's complete nonsense.
Get a grip laddie.