By David Futrelle
I ran across this Tweet this morning from an intrepid Jordan Peterson debunker on Twitter and, well, it’s pretty much spot on:
https://twitter.com/zei_nabq/status/1083015376022224896
For evidence of this, we need look no further than some of the off-the-cuff comments about birth control and the allegedly scary consequences of women controlling their own sexuality that Peterson recently made to a small audience that included, among others, Charlie Kirk, “Bumble Jack” Posobiec, and weirdo MAGA couple Donald Trump Jr. and Kimberly Guilfoyle at Turning Point USA’s annual Student Action Summit.
As Sam Seder points out in this clip from his Majority Report show, Peterson seems to be pushing the idea that what he sees as feminists’ preoccupation with sexual consent is basically a left-wing “sexual taboo” roughly equivalent to the right-wing “taboo” against gay sex. (Peterson being Peterson, he doesn’t quite come out and say this outright.)
Sam has been taking on Peterson’s nonsense for some time. Here’s another video in which Sam discusses a Peterson appearance on the Joe Rogan show in which Rogan, an oddball in his own right but still pretty sharp, gobsmacks the Canadian beef-eater by pointing out a very basic issue with his promotion of “enforced monogamy.”
While Peterson’s utterances do seem to be getting weirder by the day, he’s been saying awful crap about the often fraught relationship between women and men for years. And for a time, during a sort of pickup artist phase, he did so dressed like a 1930s gangster.
Sam’s got a video on that, too.
And this guy is seen as a leading light in the “intellectual dark web.” It’s really a testament to how fucked up this political moment is that a cornball weirdo like Peterson is taken seriously by anyone at all, much less the adoring throngs that attend his talks and watch his videos and buy his books.
We Hunted the Mammoth is independent and ad-free, and relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!
@Hambeast, Gaebolga, Button:
One of my earlier exposures to the concept of ‘company town’ was actually from a comic book… there was an odd semi-horror comic book anthology back in the late 1980s called ‘Wasteland’. One of the regular features there involved a somewhat fictionalized set of tales from the childhood of one of the writers, and one of those involved him and the group of performers he was travelling with going into a company town to do a show.
They got paid in scrip that was only good at the company store in town, because that was the only money most of the people working there had.
When the mining company refused to take the scrip and give them actual money, the performers responded by taking the scrip they had, going to the company store, and basically buying out all the alcohol the company store had. Faced with a likely riot in town, the company relented and bought the booze back from them using actual money.
@Rhuu:
That, of course, is a perfect example of rape culture right there. Someone gets raped, and people are more concerned about the damage to the rapist’s career than about the person who was raped. And it’s not as if there’s a lack of publicly-known examples… on top of the really low chances that some of these got reported (because who’s going to report when the entire family of the last person who did got hounded out of town for tarnishing the reputation of the college quarterback?)
@ jenora
There’s like a saying about such cases; “Women are judged on their pasts; men are judged on their futures.”
Just in case you’re both a) still around and b) not a troll, I’ll answer this one.
I’ve never had any trouble getting “female attention” because I treat women like human beings and don’t just try and get them into bed.
…and just to be clear, by “female attention,” I mean social interaction, not sex.
If you’re asking about sex, well, that’s a whole different thing. The fact that you don’t seem to differentiate between the two is probably a big part of your problem. Casual sex is a very specific type of social interaction, and I’ve literally never been successful at it…although in fairness, there have only be a few very specific times in my life when the thought of it was at all appealing to me. That said, one thing I know for certain: there’s no magic formula for being successful at propositioning women, because they’re people, not a monolithic cohort of mysterious Other. Some women love sex regardless of who they’re fucking, some hate it, and most enjoy it just fine with the correct partner(s)…who will have a variety of different characteristics based on each individual woman’s aesthetic preferences, sexual orientation, life experiences, and current mood.
You know, just like men.
Having a relationship is a different type of social interaction, one that – in my case, at least – has almost always grown out of a fair amount of getting to know the other person as a friend first and blossoming after we discover that we have mutual interests, attraction, and a good interpersonal dynamic. The few relationships I’ve had that didn’t start that way were universally short and most ended with varying degrees of acrimony.
…given that you claim to be married, however, I’m guessing you’re just looking for advice on casual sex.
@Alan:
I hadn’t heard it phrased that way before, but, yeah, no kidding.
That certainly sums up the whole Jian Ghomeshi thing here in Canada, both as to why things were swept under the rug for so long and how the court case went.
On an unrelated note, I don’t know if you’ve heard, but I’m pretty sure I’d mentioned ‘Wolff and Byrd, Counsellors of the Macabre’ (a.k.a. ‘Supernatural Law’) to you before: a comedy/’horror’ comic based on a pair of lawyers who take various supernatural creatures on as clients. Unfortunately, the creator, Batton Lash, died a few days ago of brain cancer.
(I think my favourite one of their stories was still the one about the perfectionist judge who was rewriting his will when he died, and whose ghost was running his clerks ragged trying to finish the will. They laid him to rest by bringing him pieces of case law indicating that posthumous changes to a will are not valid, even if there exists evidence that the changes are based on the wishes of the deceased. He was such a stickler for the letter of the law that his ghost left on seeing that.)
@ jenora
Ooh, thank you for reminding me. I had been meaning to check them out but I’ve got a memory like a sieve at times.
I like that snippet. Although (or maybe, because) it reminds me of a disasterous hearing last week. Trying to claim on a loan agreement. Unfortunately the judge spotted something in the contract:
“But this loan is only repayable on the sale of (property), or the death of one of the beneficiaries. Well, they’re both here, and stares intently…yep, seem to be alive.”
I was tempted to say “Are you a doctor?; but this definitely wasn’t the judge for that.
@Alan:
It’s just sad to know that the creator is no longer with us.
That said, given his somewhat dark sense of humour, celebrating the stories written would probably work out anyway.
Like the Amazing Heroes Swimsuit Special (to talk again of objectification and the like) where he had a three panel page involving a monster climbing up onto the beach, Wolff and Byrd approaching, the narrator going “Who are these lawyers? How do they approach this dark creature so unafraid? Was it…” followed by a scream.
Last panel: Alanna Wolff giving a death-glare to someone off-panel, while Jeff Byrd is commiserating with the monster and saying, “Sorry, but my partner always did say she’d scream if they ever told the one about ‘professional courtesy’ again.”
(The female of the duo was rather the more hard-nosed and dedicated of the two. Somewhat truth in advertising, I expect, from the old line about a woman having to be twice as good to be thought of half as well. I have little doubt that there’s still a fair bit of that in the legal field, like so many other professions.)
@ jenora
Every woman in my old chambers was a better lawyer than me. Mind you, so was every man.
On a more serious note though, had one of those enlightening learning experiences a while back; that is sort of related. It’s that oblivious to privilege thing.
I get away with a lot of stuff in court; levity, not complying with procedural rules, a certain casualness etc. But no-one minds because I have a reputation for being a bit ‘quirky’. And that’s not entirely uncommon at the Bar.
But in chatting with female friends in another space, and hearing about their work experiences and professional expectations, it’s clear that that sort of thing seems to be only acceptable, and forgivable, for men. Identical behaviour in a woman would be seen as ‘unprofessional’.
@Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Question, when I say it is super good that cars have wheels, am I saying anything about the exhaust fumes?
From what I see, you guys assume ill intentions and then go look for them a then create these weird constructs. Isn’t that a strawman?
He was just talking about the idea of having sex after marriage. Nothing more.
Also is he really smart or really dumb? Cause I hear both and it depends on whether you (perhaps not you personally) want to portray him as sinister or stupid.
Possibly. The word is there for sure. So when talking about rape culture one is necessarily talking about rape? Well, technically yes, you got me there. But you see there is this context of the 1st video, where Sam misinterprets JBP – JBP says ‘affirmative consent regulations and laws’, Sam says ‘rape’.
Would you care to explain? Especially the attack thing? Is this blog full of assertions, insincere and more interested in attack than truth?
@Rhuu – apparently an illiterati
Nobody equated money and women. If anything was put in comparison then it was redistribution/equality of outcome in sex and in wealth and it was done in the 2nd video by Sam Seder and his team.
Yes, I do see women as gatekeepers to sex. I said nothing about what men should be getting. You don’t think women are gatekeepers to sex? If not how do you then explain the fact that you have (roughly) twice as many female ancestors as male?
I also see women as people.
@Makroth
Did not happen.
@Gaebolga
Government bad – works only for the rich. Government good – works for the poor. I am confused … are you confused?
Key questions that did not get answered: What exactly do you call promotion? What do you understand when JBP says ‘enforced monogamy’?
Wow, you’re really stupid.
…and no, I’m not confused. If you can’t understand how the US government can round up Japanese Americans and put them in concentration camps while simultaneously providing Social Security to keep the elderly from dying in poverty in the streets, that’s a problem with you and your ability to think, not with my arguments.
Given your obvious intellectual shortcomings, I need to ask for some clarification about this quote:
Why do you think (and I use that term very loosely here) that qualifies as “enforced redistribution of income?
As for the other questions you asked of me, why do you think they’re at all relevant to my point?
Seeing women as gatekeepers to sex carries the implication that sex is something men should be getting. It also implies that it’s something women shouldn’t be giving. My break is almost but I can elaborate later if need be.
You mean when you compared “enforced monogamy” to “enforced redistribution of wealth” you weren’t comparing human beings to money? Can you explain what exactly you were comparing, then?
Uh, what? I’m pretty sure that my ancestors have been a pretty even 50-50 split of male and female, since, y’know, that’s how reproduction works. (I mean, I certainly could have some trans and nonbinary ancestors too, but I doubt I have so many trans women ancestors that they outnumber the dudes 2:1.)
Or have women figured out parthenogenesis and no one told me?! I thought I was part of the female hivemind too! Why would you folks leave me out of the loop?
@Catalpa
Omg, I stopped reading before that because I got bored but ohhhhh wooooooow.
@Catalpa
He’s misreading – or, rather, is parroting someone else’s misreading of – this paper:
https://nau.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/genetic-evidence-for-unequal-effective-population-sizes-of-human-
I had the same reaction to that bizarre claim, but I thought about it for a minute and I think he’s saying that the same men contributed genetic information to several branches of each of our family lines. E.g. Grandma A had a baby with Grandpa, and Grandma B had a baby also with Grandpa, and then those two half siblings had a baby of their own who would have 2 grandmas and 1 grandpa. Incredibly gross, but not impossible.
Definitely going to need some evidence to back up the assertion that that kind of thing happened frequently enough for there to be a 2:1 female to male ancestor ratio, though.
Unless he’s referring to some other study that I haven’t heard about, he’s not going to be able to back up the “(roughly) twice as many female ancestors as male,” because that’s not what the study says.
I’m guessing some manosphereian asshat saw this line from the abstract:
and thought that meant “twice as many female ancestors as male ones.”
UMMM
Is what you said. YOU equated the ‘redistribution of taxes’ with ‘enforced monogamy’, because that shit gets a lot of play and heads nodding in the right wing sphere, where women are not considered fully human.
(emphasis mine.)
Re –
What are you even talking about, here? This term was offered as a solution after someone who declared themselves an incel *killed people*.
People. Are. Dead.
And the Great Smarty Pants Jordie P shat out that idea as a way to avoid this sort of situation in the future.
Here’s a question: Why do you think that violent people will stop being violent, if they are getting laid on the regular?
Have you not noticed that many of these so-called ‘lone wolf’ killers have had the police called out for domestic abuse?
Why would you think that giving someone who has the potential to DRIVE A VAN THROUGH A BUSY SIDEWALK someone who is tied to them (enforced) a good idea? Because then they’ll only hurt one person, instead of a bunch?
No? I see women as the gatekeepers of their bodies, much like men are. Sex isn’t something that some one has to protect, otherwise someone will come and take it all. Sex is an activity that you do by yourself or with others.
You’re putting consent only on the women, “She didn’t say ‘no’!” instead of going “she was very into what we were doing, and kept saying yes.” (Also checking in with *you* on if you are into what is happening, because you also have the ability to not be feeling it.)
TIL that I have a bunch of amazing lesbian trans ladies in my family tree, and I couldn’t be more here for that.
(Oh I see there is a paper, I will look at that later.)
How is the weather in Kentucky these days, anyway?
I realized after I wrote my comment that I was insensitive to a couple of things.
1) Different cultures have different standards of what constitutes incest, and I should not universalize my own experience. I think half-siblings are considered out of bounds pretty much everywhere, but by using a value judgment like “gross” I’m turning it into a moral thing, and that could be generalized to other forms of what my culture considers incest, and blah blah blah. I’m not sure if that’s clear at all. I shouldn’t have said it was gross, is my point. Not helpful.
2) I definitely do not intend to say that children who are born of incest are themselves gross. No one can control their own parentage. I’m sorry for my wording.
Value judgments aside, it does not seem likely that men and only men contributed genetic material to various family lines to such an extent that for every male ancestor each of us has we have two female ones.
@Gaebolga
So this deeply corrupt government is doing the good job of providing social security?
What makes you think state provided social security is a good thing? Could the society save the poor old dying people in the streets in any other way? Could you maybe find a better solution that the deeply corrupt state?
Taxation is literally enforced redistribution of income. you know that if you don’t pay your taxes you end up in jail – that is where the enforced comes from. You pay a part of you income in taxes, right? And it gets redistributed by the deeply corrupt government that serves only the rich and is somehow still good.
@weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee
Please do elaborate. I really do not see the implication.
@kupo
Huh … you really have to point your question to the rape joking genius Sam Seder himself.
But, let’s play a devils advocate, why is my time and my hands earning my money, different from your time and your vagina making sex. You seem to be eager to redistribute my money, why should I not be eager to redistribute your sex. Why are you so prudish about sex? It just a casual thing, no? BTW when Peterson talks about enforced monogamy he’s not talking about this, certainly not to this degree.
@Catalpa
So there is your ancestral tree. It half of the branches are male, other half is female. Each branch end with a leaf. Some branches lead to the same leaf. Branches ending at the same leaf are much more common on the male side, so much so the male side only has half the number of leaves.
@criannon
Is Peterson also advocating that men go out and offer themselves to women who aren’t getting much sex?
Regardless if he is or not, what you’re saying is still quite… i’ll be very mild and call it “iffy”.
So far, my perception of you has not improved.
What do you think sex is? Is it a craft that vaginas make? Like some sort of vagina pottery? Do you think you can box it up and mail it to strangers?
I quoted you, you fucking wannabe rapist.
You… you know that ‘sex’ isn’t made inside someone’s vagina… Right?
Like, if we need to explain what ‘sex’ is to you…
God I hate the shitty sex-ed, abstinence only programs. There is so much crap we need to deal with.
Rhuu explained it well. Sex is not a thing that women withhold or give to men. It’s a mutual activity and we all have the right to consent or not consent for any reason.
The gatekeeper theory also places the burden on women to control male desire. Cultures and subcultures that view women as the gatekeepers to sex tend to be highly patriarchal and tend to blame women for male on female rape because men supposedly can’t control their lust, therefore women must look and behave modestly. It is thin pretext to justify strict control of female bodies. For example the “stumbling block” rhetoric employed by the Christian right.