The Jordan Peterson Thread

[Looper]

one of his daughters became the youngest grandmaster in history

Judit Polgar is exceptional and more strength to her. Nobody is trying to put down a woman who is exceptional.

Females mature earlier than males so maybe getting in early is something that females will be good at.

She did defeat Kasparov once. But world champions do not win every game. Defeating a world champion once does not make you a better player than him.

She was the best female player in history and she managed to break high into the top 100 for a brief spell. But there is currently only 1 female player in the top 100.

Hou Yifan is the current woman number 1 and she is ranked overall number 93.

There are no barriers to women playing chess. Women have been playing chess as long as men have. It was a socially acceptable pastime for women even centuries ago before female political emancipation.

Spatial reasoning is a task at which males on average eclipse females. That is not sexism. It is reality.

But we have not even finished talking about the physical differences.

Do you think setting a 50% target for female firefighters is reasonable, given that males are unarguably more physically suited to the task?

[raycarey]

Do you think setting a 50% target for female firefighters is reasonable

just out of curiosity, how many times do you expect me to answer this question? i think i've answered it at least twice already. but....

yes, for all the reasons outlined in previous posts, i think it's reasonable.

my answer is yes.

yes.

hold on let me make sure you can read it....

YES.

[Norton]

Are you sure Ray?

[Looper]

for all the reasons outlined in previous posts

Ray, the only rationale you have offered is:-

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.

Men are on average 10% taller, 20% heavier and 40% stronger than women.

Given these simple facts of the sexual dimorphism of humans how can a 50% target for female representation in the fire service make sense?

The distribution of strength for males and females are 2 bell curves that overlap.

We would expect that some women would qualify as the best candidates on merit due to the overlap but it would be nowhere near 50%.

Equally in other professions such as obstetrics women out-compete men easily and men represent only about 10% of the workforce.

It is not a problem for society that men are better at some things and women are better at others or even that men prefer doing some things and women prefer doing other things.

The only thing that matters in a fair society is that people are treated as individuals and evaluated on their personal qualities and not as an aggregation of their group memberships.

Quota driven hiring policies are colossally stupid and will be looked back upon as a bizarre experiment once society has escaped the suffocating strait-jacket of political correctness that currently binds our institutions.

[harrybarracuda]

I reckon Looper got slapped about by a bint sometime in the past and has had a chip on his shoulder about them ever since.

[raycarey]

professions such as obstetrics women out-compete men easily and men represent only about 10% of the workforce.

good thing you're not cherry picking.

The only thing that matters in a fair society is that people are treated as individuals and evaluated on their personal qualities and not as an aggregation of their group memberships.

heterosexual, christian, white males who are oblivious to (or deny the existence of) their privilege say this a lot.

[happynz]

^^^ hire Pacific Island women. No shortage of strong Pasifika gals. Maori, Samoan, and Tongan women are likely 10% taller, 20% heavier, and 40% stronger than your average Southeast Asian fire fighter.

[Looper]

heterosexual, christian, white males who are oblivious to (or deny the existence of) their privilege say this a lot.

I think it is an objectively true statement in moral terms.

The only thing that matters in a fair society is that people are treated as individuals and evaluated on their personal qualities and not as an aggregation of their group memberships.

What do you see as being wrong this statement about how individuals should be treated in terms of equality of opportunity in an egalitarian society?

We may need to refine our efforts in the fair application of the individual treatment that the statement refers to but it remains an objectively true statement about where we should be heading in terms of the moral evolution of our society. And it is not compatible with 'equality of outcome' quotas and representation targets which are inherently group identity driven.

If you were one of the many woman who have really have carved out their career on merit then how would you feel about a crowd of quota hires rolling in and casting doubt on the merit of your achievements by putting a cloud of suspicion on the worthiness of female hires since they are hired on gender and not on merit?

[Farangrakthai]

in Saudi, i could see the need for affirmative action programs. for women.

in the west, women and minorities have been made equal in terms of the law and in terms of how people think (the last 60 years and more).

women generally earn less as they have to take breaks in their career to raise a family.

just the way it is.

minorities?

asians in america are among the most highly educated and earn more on average than whites.

in the west the opportunity is there (for all).

already.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial..._United_States

As of 2010, 14,011,000 Asians were living in America.[19] Asian Americans are the only minority in the United States whose median income is higher than whites, assuming Pacific Islanders are not counted as a separate race. In 2009, the median income for Asian males was $37,330, compared to the median income for non-Hispanic white males of $36,785.

[Looper]

in the west the opportunity is there (for all).

already.

One of the key battle grounds in the gender quota wars is STEM (science technology engineering maths).

The strange thing is though, that the more freedom you give girls to choose what they want to do (rather than what quotas tell them they should do) the less girls choose STEM.

Sweden is one of the Scandinavian countries which are paragons of equality of opportunity but girls in Sweden seem to enjoy and choose reading and language over maths and technology.

The upshot of this research is neither especially feminist nor especially sad: It’s not that gender equality discourages girls from pursuing science. It’s that it allows them not to if they’re not interested.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...n-stem/553592/

So where is the foul if girls simply have different inclinations and aptitudes to boys?

Western society should stop telling girls what they should want to do and let them choose what the want to do instead.

This is the main thrust of Jordan Peterson's rhetoric. There is nothing malign in it.

[Looper]

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

No, it is not illegal in Australia.

In Australia, most Federal and State anti-discrimination laws provide exemptions for those who implement “special measures” to rectify previous disadvantage to a particular group and promote substantive equality.

For instance, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) states that “special measures” taken to redress a historical disadvantage experienced by minority racial groups (which would ordinarily amount to discrimination) will not be considered unlawful under that Act.

https://www.workplacelaw.com.au/posi...the-workplace/

[harrybarracuda]

No, it is not illegal in Australia.




https://www.workplacelaw.com.au/posi...the-workplace/

Sounds fair enough if its redressing an imbalance caused by insecure white men like yourself.

[stroller]

The strange thing is though, that the more freedom you give girls to choose what they want to do (rather than what quotas tell them they should do) the less girls choose STEM.

The outcome might be different if you talked about women rather than girls.

[Looper]

Sounds fair enough if its redressing an imbalance caused by insecure white men like yourself.

Redressing a historic imbalance sounds like a good idea but when it translates into a 50% female gender representation target for the fire service then I think things have gone awry.

The problem is that men and women are different in their physical and psychological nature so setting representation targets and enforcing them through quotas is ignoring this reality. People should be free to choose what they want to do and then treated as individuals without bias when they go about pursuing those goals.

What do you think about a 50% female gender ratio target for fire-fighters?

The outcome might be different if you talked about women rather than girls.

We are talking about 'women' who are leaving school and choosing what they will do at university. I don't think calling them girls is sexist.

[harrybarracuda]

We are talking about 'women' who are leaving school and choosing what they will do at university. I don't think calling them girls is sexist.

Which says more about you than it does about them.

[Looper]

Which says more about you than it does about them.

I don't think it is sexist to call 16/17 year old females girls. Maybe you do.

So do you think that setting a 50% female representation target for fire-fighters is reasonable?

This is the reality of what equality of representation outcomes has come to in Australia in 2018.

To me this is a sign of political correctness being taken to absurd and even dangerous levels.

[raycarey]

i think everyone has more or less staked out their positions on the non-cherry picked examples of chess players and the fire brigade.

let's get back to the topic of the OP....jordan peterson.

during a recent (and bizarre) interview, peterson revealed himself as an advocate of enforced monogamy for women so that unsuccessful men won't go on murderous rampages....oh, and he also believes in witches and dragons.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/s...-for-life.html

[Looper]

non-cherry picked examples

Ray, it has already been pointed out twice that I did not pick the example of the fire-brigade. It fortuitously fell into my lap at the behest of our esteemed David44.

oh, and he also believes in witches and dragons

He is an odd and mercurial character.

I disagree with many of his religiously coloured oration.

I also don't really jibe with some of his langauge on seemingly nostalgic romantic heroism. These ideas are counter-enlightentment for me.

But when he focuses on political correctness and the nonsense that is 'equality of outcome' he is bang on the money all the way.

Even the unparalleled genius and wit that is our very own Stephen Fry backs him on this stuff.

Did you watch the video that crackers banged up?

None of the other 3 in that debating hall could touch Fry, including Peterson, who was gushing in his praise in the back stage after-match analysis.

[raycarey]

Did you watch the video that crackers banged up?

as is almost always the case, the most intelligent and erudite person on the stage was michael eric dyson.

but since you've brought up fry...do you care to post more about why you assumed fry intentionally dressed up as a "plantation owner"?

probably not, so let's get back peterson....and him advocating for enforced monogamy for women to placate the so-called "incels".

[harrybarracuda]

Sounds like he's a fucking whackjob.

They tend to attract other whackjobs, c.f. David Icke.

[Looper]

as is almost always the case, the most intelligent and erudite person on the stage was michael eric dyson.

Are you being serious?

You thought that dreadful gospel preachy snake-oil salesman, as Fry very amusingly put it, came across as more eloquent and intelligent than Stephen Fry himself did?

We really do live on different planets.

but since you've brought up fry...do you care to post more about why you assumed fry intentionally dressed up as a "plantation owner"?

That was a joke Ray. This is Teakdoor.

Me suggesting that the enormously intelligent and obviously sensitive Fry would intentionally dress up as a plantation owner (in his cream cotton suit) to debate a black man was a joke!

When did Teakdoor lose its sense of humour FFS?!

[Cujo]

i think everyone has more or less staked out their positions on the non-cherry picked examples of chess players and the fire brigade.

let's get back to the topic of the OP....jordan peterson.

during a recent (and bizarre) interview, peterson revealed himself as an advocate of enforced monogamy for women so that unsuccessful men won't go on murderous rampages....oh, and he also believes in witches and dragons.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/s...-for-life.html

You're kidding right? That article reads like it was written by a one dimensional halfwit with a chip on her shoulder. Not at objective or open to ideas beyond what her sjw gender studies tutor taught.
Christ. You need to open your mind a little.
Basically he's saying there's a reason things are the way they are. It's natural development.
It's the way I've always considered it. In fact it's pretty bloody obvious.

[Looper]

he most intelligent and erudite person on the stage was michael eric dyson

Did you actually watch the entire debate ray?

For anyone who has not, it is quite long at 2 hours, but it is worth the price of admission just to see the Reverend Dyson's face when Fry starts his closing statement address by hilariously calling him a huckstering snake-oil salesman pulpit-talker!

I don't know who looks more uncomfortable, Dyson or his feminist side-kick Goldberg

It is at 1.40.45 if you are not up for the full 2 hour tug of war.

Fry's disarmingly self-effacing and non-combative manner only adds to the injury of his scalpel wit

[raycarey]

it is worth the price of admission just to see the Reverend Dyson's face when Fry starts his closing statement address by hilariously calling him a huckstering snake-oil salesman pulpit-talker!

considering your plantation owner 'joke' it's not surprising that you would find this sort of racist dog whistling to be 'hilarious'.

professor dyson's response to fry's coded racism begins at 1:43:53

[raycarey]

peterson clearly has problems with women...and he's also very, very angry.

the video below is only a minute and a half....