University TA ‘Censured’ After Playing A Clip From A Debate About Transgender Pronouns

[excelsiorlef]

If that wasn't good enough

This is his facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/drjordanpeterson/posts/1189374994459967

He shared this article with in it:

From this it is clear that we need to talk about pronouns. We shouldn't need to, but we do. That's just the way the world is right now. A couple of clarifications from the outset, though. Firstly, our concern lies not with an illness (transsexualism) but with an ideology (gender identity, leading to transgenderism).

Secondly, our question is not how to respond if John (who is male) asks us to call him Jessica. Forenames are not inherently linked to sex in the way pronouns are. No, our question is this: if John asks us to refer to him through pronouns other than he/him/his, should we?

...

So, in answer to our question, we could not refer to John through some set of pronouns other than he/him/his even if we wanted to. Think of it this way: is it possible to permit males to enter the female restroom? No. Why not? Because as soon as we permit males to enter, the restroom ceases to be the female restroom. Sure, it still has the word "Female" on the door, but its function has changed. Likewise, pronouns cease to be pronouns as soon as we de-sex them. Sure, John can help himself to the linguistic husk of female pronouns—she/her/hers—but their previous content will forever be beyond his reach because their previous content was a female-sexed body.

...

Let's just ask ourselves: if we are prepared to say John is not a he, then on what basis can there be anything we are not prepared to say? Seriously, gender pronouns are a hall of mirrors we won't be able to find our way out of. So let's not go there. Ideally, the gap between reality and language should be as narrow as possible so our speech is in harmony with how things really are. Gender ideology, however, requires levering apart language and reality so that reality ends up being beyond the reach of our speech.

...

Sex and gender might appear to be two aspects of identity that can run parallel to each other in law, but gender is making claims that contradict sex. The mind is claiming superiority over the body of which it is the mind. So it is not a case of us having both a sex and a gender. No, we are being told to choose: sex or gender. We are being asked to peel words off our body and attach them to our mind. Good luck with that. We are in fact being asked to sever the link between language and our own body.

G.K. Chesterton wrote, "The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." This is surely the right perspective to have in the war between sex and gender. It is not about being abrasive or meddlesome, but we do need to get off the back foot so the ground is not constantly shifting beneath us. We need to put down some strong verbal roots in the fertile soil of reality, and that means sticking with real pronouns.

We are not in control of whether somebody will pour hatred in our direction, but we can tend to those things that are within our control. We can look inside ourselves, examine our conscience, and know that our motivation is healthy. Check your heart, not your "privilege." Be confident, hold the line, and respect the pronouns. Respect language. Respect sexual difference. After all, who would John be without the difference between his father and his mother? He would be…nobody.

Is it disrespectful to refuse to call John a she? Not at all. Are we doing something wrong when we gently inform him that regarding pronouns his body beat his mind to the punch? No. Also, is it hurtful or hateful to conserve the relationship between words and people? Nope.

As an anchor to communication, the body works. Sex works. The mind does not. If we refer to people via their sex, as we should, there is no possibility of ever "mis-gendering" or "mis-pronouning" somebody. Dr. Peterson won't use gender-neutral pronouns, and you shouldn't either. All together now: I won't do it.

Click to shrink...

This shit is transphobic and he shared it.. he endorsed it

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/18/shouldnt-use-transgender-pronouns/#.WBI5GjDyZCI.twitter

He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt here.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

I don't think I believe you are arguing in good faith after this post specifically.

Click to shrink...

how am I not? People like Peterson and to a lesser extent Milo have strong use of rhetoric. Unless you can match and challenge them then you lose. I want the posters in this thread to exercise critical thinking and rip apart petersons words and dog whistling.

 

[Cream]

how am I not? People like Peterson and to a lesser extent Milo have strong use of rhetoric. Unless you can match and challenge them then you lose. I want the posters in this thread to exercise critical thinking and rip apart petersons words and dog whistling.

Click to shrink...

But you're literally ignoring the transphobic things we are showing you that he is saying.

 

[excelsiorlef]

http://thestrand.ca/petersons-trans...s-free-speech-is-not-the-same-as-hate-speech/

More shit

 

[Cryptosporidium]

If that wasn't good enough

This is his facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/drjordanpeterson/posts/1189374994459967

He shared this article with in it:



This shit is transphobic and he shared it.. he endorsed it

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/18/shouldnt-use-transgender-pronouns/#.WBI5GjDyZCI.twitter

He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt here.

Click to shrink...

Dont just say its transphobic, pick it apart, youre fully capable. Take these for instance.

He claims there is a difference between gender dysphoria and transgederism. Ok, what is transgenderism, what is its motive, philosophy, etc. He makes the claim their is the same difference as we see like in Islam vs Islamism. One is a religion the other is a reliogous political movement with the motivations to create a new caliphate. Peterson doesnt substantiate his first claim and so we can throw it away.

Later, he talks about de-sexing pronouns. He claims pronouns are dependent on sex yet in the earlier excerpts you posted that I criticized I recall him making the distinction between sex and gender identity. Pronouns can be claimed to be dependant upon gender identity and not sex, which from him acknowledging the differece between gender and sex would make his point on de-sexing pronouns moot.

This is what Im asking of you. This is how you defeat these people.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Dont just say its transphobic, pick it apart, youre fully capable. Take these for instance.

He claims there is a difference between gender dysphoria and transgederism. Ok, what is transgenderism, what is its motive, philosophy, etc. He makes the claim their is the same difference as we see like in Islam vs Islamism. One is a religion the other is a reliogous political movement with the motivations to create a new caliphate. Peterson doesnt substantiate his first claim and so we can throw it away.

Later, he talks about de-sexing pronouns. He claims pronouns are dependent on sex yet in the earlier excerpts you posted that I criticized I recall him making the distinction between sex and gender identity. Pronouns can be claimed to be dependant upon gender identity and not sex, which from him acknowledging the differece between gender and sex would make his point on de-sexing pronouns moot.

This is what Im asking of you. This is how you defeat these people.

Click to shrink...

For the record you don't get to demand my intellectual labour.... I provided clear obvious transphobia....I can in fact when asked to provide proof of transhpbia link to transphobia and simply call it what it is....

This article isn't written by Peterson (as I made clear), it was shared by him without comment (hmm seem familiar?)

Refusing to call a trans woman she is transphobic...

Is it disrespectful to refuse to call John a she? Not at all. Are we doing something wrong when we gently inform him that regarding pronouns his body beat his mind to the punch? No. Also, is it hurtful or hateful to conserve the relationship between words and people? Nope.

Click to shrink...

This is saying trans women are men... which is transphobia... the most self evident of it.

Peterson chose to share this article... it goes far beyond gender neutral issues and is just outright calling trans women men.... that's transphobic... he shared an incredibly transphobic article without comment or context.... That's an endorsement...

 

[mac]

Dont just say its transphobic, pick it apart, youre fully capable.

Click to shrink...

Hear hear. I welcome this principle on this new forum.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

For the record you don't get to de
mand my intellectual labour.... I provided clear obvious transphobia....I can in fact when asked to provide proof of transhpbia link to transphobia and simply call it what it is....

This article isn't written by Peterson (as I made clear), it was shared by him without comment (hmm seem familiar?)

Refusing to call a trans woman she is transphobic...




This is saying trans women are men...

Peterson chose to share this article... it goes far beyond gender neutral issues and is just outright calling trans women men.... that's transphobic... he shared an incredibly transphobic article without comment or context.... That's an endorsement...

Click to shrink...

See you can say that that one statement, rather than transphobic (just so i can use a more appropriate term), is transgender-exclusionary. He acknowledges in that one statement that gender identity exists through " pronoun of his body beat his mind to the punch" but disregards gender identity. He made it clear his intent was to not acknowledge Johns gender identity and only acknowledge his biological sex. So while coming out and implying that gender identity exists, he refuses to participate and is excluding that aspect of john which makes him transgender-exclusionary.

Edit: So we can then say that he is not respecting the norms of language use, that is sincerity and comprehensibility, because he refuses to acknowledge a core part of the discussion. You can argue against social constructs and can say they are misguided (like I do with the political spectrum) but when that social concept is a fundemental starting point for both speakers (that is John and Peterson) to stipulate and acknowledge in order for discussion to continue you will find that the discussion crumbles.

Though refusing to participate with good faith may be Petersons intentions but you can challenge that as well.

 

[ListeningGarden]

Lmfao

 

[Cream]

See you can say that that one statement, rather than transphobic (just so i can use a more appropriate term), is transgender-exclusionary. He acknowledges in that one statement that gender identity exists through " pronoun of his body beat his mind to the punch" but disregards gender identity. He made it clear his intent was to not acknowledge Johns gender identity and only acknowledge his biological sex. So while coming out and implying that gender identity exists, he refuses to participate and is excluding that aspect of john which makes him transgender-exclusionary.

Click to shrink...

.....Are you serious right now? Yup, I was right. Bad faith.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

.....Are you serious right now? Yup, I was right. Bad faith.

Click to shrink...

What how? Im arguing in your favour..

 

[excelsiorlef]

See you can say that that one statement, rather than transphobic (just so i can use a more appropriate term), is transgender-exclusionary. He acknowledges in that one statement that gender identity exists through " pronoun of his body beat his mind to the punch" but disregards gender identity. He made it clear his intent was to not acknowledge Johns gender identity and only acknowledge his biological sex. So while coming out and implying that gender identity exists, he refuses to participate and is excluding that aspect of john which makes him transgender-exclusionary.

Click to shrink...

Why would I when I can it's transphobic...

He's literally saying trans women are mentally ill men.... that's tranasphobic.... you are bending over backwards to avoid acknowledging it for reasons I don't actually understand...

Transphobic is just the trans version of racist or sexist.... Just in case you're now going to argue that to be tranphobic means you have to be afraid of trans people on some level.

 

[Cream]

What how? Im arguing in your favour..

Click to shrink...

Why is "transgender-exclusionary" a "more appropriate term" than "transphobic" which is what he is?

 

[Cryptosporidium]

Why would I when I can it's transphobic...

He's literally saying trans women are mentally ill men.... that's tranasphobic.... you are bending over backwards to avoid acknowledging it for reasons I don't actually understand...

Click to shrink...

You dont seem to understand my sentiments, I used transgender-exclusion because he was excluding the possibilty of John being transgender and using that as a basis to not use Johns preferred pronouns. I was not saying he was not transphobic though from the use of the word 'rather' I can see where you thought I implied that. apologies.


Edited:

 

[excelsiorlef]

You dont seem to understand my sentiments, I used transgender-exclusion because he was excluding the possibilty of John being transgender and using that as a basis to not use Johns preferred pronouns. I was not saying he was not transphobic though from the use of the word 'rather' I can see where you thought I implied that. apologies.


Edited:

Click to shrink...

Ok... who cares then?

The end result is you asked for evidence of Peterson's transphobia... well we mix in general denial of gender neutrality, his intentional msigendering of A.W Peet (using male pronouns to talk about an assigned female at birth general neutral person is pretty weird... they've never identified as male ever) him literally campaigning against trans human rights and his contextualess criticism free sharing of that article and I feel pretty comfortable having proved your request....

 

[Cryptosporidium]

Ok... who cares then?

The end result is you asked for evidence of Peterson's transphobia... well we mix in general denial of gender neutrality, his intentional msigendering of A.W Peet (using male pronouns to talk about an assigned female at birth general neutral person is pretty weird... they've never identified as male ever) him literally campaigning against trans human rights and his contextualess criticism free sharing of that article and I feel pretty comfortable having proved your request....

Click to shrink...

Yes you have provided enough evidence to which i made my own judgements and arguments against

 

[Theologian]

 

[excelsiorlef]

Yes you have provided enough evidence to which i made my own judgements and arguments against

Click to shrink...

So you disagree that this is evidence of transphobia?

Click to shrink...

Will Andrew Scheer speak up against Jordan Peterson's desire to get entire avenues of study removed by using an AI to "identify" neo-marxist professors and courses and post them to a public list...

Don't answer that... we know the answer.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

So you disagree that this is evidence of transphobia?




Will Andrew Scheer speak up against Jordan Peterson's desire to get entire avenues of study removed by using an AI to "identify" neo-marxist professors and courses and post them...

Don't answer that... we know the answer.

Click to shrink...

Ah no, the use of the word against was to mean I made an argument about peterson not against your proposition that he is transphobic. Ive already stated my thoughts on peterson so i thought youd understand that.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Ah no, the use of the word against was to mean I made an argument about peterson not against your proposition that he is transphobic. Ive already stated my thoughts on peterson so i thought youd understand that.

Click to shrink...

Frankly you are not very clear with how you word things...

 

[Windrunner]

Ah no, the use of the word against was to mean I made an argument about peterson not against your proposition that he is transphobic. Ive already stated my thoughts on peterson so i thought youd understand that.

Click to shrink...

I don't understand what your end game is with this. Your posts are almost completely intelligible.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

Frankly you are not very clear with how you word things...

Click to shrink...

That does seem to be a problem for me

 

[Cryptosporidium]

I don't understand what your end game is with this. Your posts are almost completely intelligible.

Click to shrink...

I just want people to breakdown petersons arguments and ideas with thoughtful posts. I want them to get nit picky. Thats all i want, rather than just saying one large paragraph of petersons words is one thing. They ought to explain why it is that thing in detail.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I just want people to breakdown petersons arguments and ideas with thoughtful posts. I want them to get nit picky. Thats all i want, rather than just saying one large paragraph of petersons words is one thing. They ought to explain why it is that thing in detail.

Click to shrink...

Nah.... People have lives... sometimes it's ok just to call a fish a fish and cut bait to take care of more important things.

 

[Cream]

I just want people to breakdown petersons arguments and ideas with thoughtful posts. I want them to get nit picky. Thats all i want, rather than just saying one large paragraph of petersons words is one thing. They ought to explain why it is that thing in detail.

Click to shrink...

We were able to come to the conclusion it was transphobic way faster than you were

 

[Windrunner]

I just want people to breakdown petersons arguments and ideas with thoughtful posts. I want them to get nit picky. Thats all i want, rather than just saying one large paragraph of petersons words is one thing. They ought to explain why it is that thing in detail.

Click to shrink...

Plenty of that has gone on and frankly it's not your place to be the arbiter of such discussion especially given your lack of coherence. If you're so keen on seeing his arguments broken down to your exacting standards then do it yourself, because you just come across as being a wind up merchant frankly.

 

[FeistyBoots]

Dont just say its transphobic, pick it apart, youre fully capable. Take these for instance.

He claims there is a difference between gender dysphoria and transgederism. Ok, what is transgenderism, what is its motive, philosophy, etc. He makes the claim their is the same difference as we see like in Islam vs Islamism. One is a religion the other is a reliogous political movement with the motivations to create a new caliphate. Peterson doesnt substantiate his first claim and so we can throw it away.

Later, he talks about de-sexing pronouns. He claims pronouns are dependent on sex yet in the earlier excerpts you posted that I criticized I recall him making the distinction between sex and gender identity. Pronouns can be claimed to be dependant upon gender identity and not sex, which from him acknowledging the differece between gender and sex would make his point on de-sexing pronouns moot.

This is what Im asking of you. This is how you defeat these people.

Click to shrink...

One isn't required to deconstruct a madman's thinking to understand transphobia is wrong and harmful.

In fact, to do so can give it an intellectual weight it simply does not have, as such bigoted thinking is predicated on unqualitiative emotional factors and straight-up lies and bullshit, recognizable on its face as such, and no more worth the rigors of a semantic assault than you'd give a child's argument that shitting on the floor is okay.

Don't elevate it to a debate. There's no debate worth having here. Transphobia is toxic, period. Fight it or be an obstacle to progress.

It really is that simple sometimes.

 

[Heshinsi]

Ok, so if my professor or TA in my Middle Eastern studies class brought in a video, where a radical sheik is saying a bunch of ridiculous things, and the teacher states, "well I'm not taking a side, but I think you guys should hear him out," these clowns would be perfectly fine with that too right? Because it only ever seems like this is a problem with things the right doesn't like.

 

[Windrunner]

Ok, so if my professor or TA in my Middle Eastern studies class brought in a video, where a radical sheik is saying a bunch of ridiculous things, and the teacher states, "well I'm not taking a side, but I think you guys should hear him out." These clowns would be perfectly fine with that too right? Because it only ever seems like this is a problem with things the right doesn't like.

Click to shrink...

They would have kittens if somebody tried that.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

Plenty of that has gone on and frankly it's not your place to be the arbiter of such discussion especially given your lack of coherence. If you're so keen on seeing his arguments broken down to your exacting standards then do it yourself, because you just come across as being a wind up merchant frankly.

Click to shrink...

well this was needlessly aggressive. I have tried to breakdown his arguments. I may not have done a good job, but I tried. We are on a discussion board meant for discussion not drive by posts. So, sorry for trying to create an actual discussion around Petersons transphobia than just saying Petersons views are transphobic and leaving it at that.

 

[mac]

Ok, so if my professor or TA in my Middle Eastern studies class brought in a video, where a radical sheik is saying a bunch of ridiculous things, and the teacher states, "well I'm not taking a side, but I think you guys should hear him out," these clowns would be perfectly fine with that too right? Because it only ever seems like this is a problem with things the right doesn't like.

Click to shrink...

Is that what the TA did in this case?

 

[Caz]

Free Speech Champion™ Andrew Scheer didn't say anything when a Dalhousie student was put under investigation for their criticism of Canada 150. Wonder whyte.

You dont seem to understand my sentiments, I used transgender-exclusion because it lets me define what is/isn't transphobic.

Click to shrink...

FTFY

 

[Cryptosporidium]

Free Speech Champion™ Andrew Scheer didn't say anything when a Dalhousie student was put under investigation for their criticism of Canada 150. Wonder whyte.



FTFY

Click to shrink...

The fuck?

 

[CannonFodder52]

On a related note, Peterson is harmful to the trans community regardless of whether he explicitly is shown to be outrageously transphobic or not.
People who are clearly transphobic can point to Peterson as a person in a position of authority that backs up their suspicions and bigotry. Peterson from what I have seen does nothing to dissociate with these people, instead he often promotes them.
I would say it's not a leap to deduct that this is related to the size and vitriol of Peterson's following and Patreon.

Again, this is pretty much a fallacy of association if it was being used to prove if Paterson is transphobic. I just bring it up because it's one of the reasons why many people will rightfully not tolerate the individual.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

On a related note, Peterson is harmful to the trans community regardless of weather he explicitly is shown to be outrageously transphobic or not.
People who are clearly transphobic can point to Peterson as a person in a position of authority that backs up their suspicions and bigotry. Peterson from what I have seen does nothing to dissociate with these people, instead he often promotes them.
I would say it's not a leap to deduct that this is related to the size and vitriol of Peterson's following and Patreon.

Again, this is pretty much a fallacy of association if it was being used to prove if Paterson is transphobic. I just bring it up because it's one of the reasons why many people will rightfully not tolerate the individual.

Click to shrink...

Its like his website for rating profs. by itself its harmless, but since Peterson has such a large fanatic anti-liberal/left, alt right, etc crowd it will be used as a harrassment tool. He's giving those kind of people better agency to achieve their ends. He knows this, hes benefitting from it, and therefore incentivizes that behavior

 

[FlyingMa]

Well I mean he literally denies that gender neutrality exists

Click to shrink...

I'm looking for this quote in what you posted, but I don't see it.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I'm looking for this quote in what you posted, but I don't see it.

Click to shrink...

"I don't know what neither means, because I don't know what the options are if you're not a man or a woman," he says in the lecture.

"It's not obvious to me how you can be both because those are by definition binary categories. There's an idea that there's a gender spectrum but I don't think that that's a valid idea, I don't think there's any evidence for it."

Click to shrink...

 

[FlyingMa]

Read through people's posts and the articles they've linked to in this thread, they've gone over it in explicit detail, specifically as to how the highlighted is transphobic.[

Click to shrink...

I don't think so. It seems people have either intentionally or ignorantly taken his words out of context or made them up entirely. Excel has now dropped the idea that Peterson ever said biological sex and gender identity can separate after Peterson's actual words were made apparent.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I don't think so. It seems people have either intentionally or ignorantly taken his words out of context or made them up entirely. Excel has now dropped the idea that Peterson ever said biological sex and gender identity can separate after Peterson's actual words were made apparent.

Click to shrink...

I didn't, he clearly says it can't be seperate.. but tries to have his cake too by saying trans people still exist as the exception... he demonstrates zero knowledge or understanding of the trans community a or trans theory...

I also showed that he linked without context or crticism an article that rbasically says trans women aren't women and should be referred to by male pronouns.... He shared... that's his decision, and that speaks to him.

Its like his website for rating profs. by itself its harmless, but since Peterson has such a large fanatic anti-liberal/left, alt right, etc crowd it will be used as a harrassment tool. He's giving those kind of people better agency to achieve their ends. He knows this, hes benefitting from it, and therefore incentivizes that behavior

Click to shrink...

He literally wanted it to be run on an AI that would detect neo-marxists and identify them on a list with the purpose of getting entire avenues of study out of universities because he believes they shouldn't be tought.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

He literally wanted it to be run on an AI that would detect neo-marxists and identify them on a list with the purpose of getting entire avenues of study out of universities because he believes they shouldn't be tought.

Click to shrink...

Ive heard this mentioned but wasnt sure about it. So its not like RateMyProfessor but is rather an AI? how does it take viewer opinion on who is or who isnt marxist?

 

[wandering]

Its like his website for rating profs. by itself its harmless, but since Peterson has such a large fanatic anti-liberal/left, alt right, etc crowd it will be used as a harrassment tool. He's giving those kind of people better agency to achieve their ends. He knows this, hes benefitting from it, and therefore incentivizes that behavior

Click to shrink...

He stated from the outset the intention of the website was to identify and excise "Neo-Marxist" or "postmodernist" professors.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Ive heard this mentioned but wasnt sure about it. So its not like RateMyProfessor but is rather an AI? how does it take viewer opinion on who is or who isnt marxist?

Click to shrink...

It doesn't.... He believes professors of areas of study he believes shouldn't exist because they are marxist brainwashing miust be named and identified (which btw is all women's, ethnic and racial studes) and wants a computer program to find the postmodern and neo-marxism that is apparently hidden as secret code in the course content and expose it because Peterson is not a well adjusted man.

It would basically go through course outlines and I'd imagine look for words programmed to be evidence of eno-marxism and postmodernism and flag them and then if there's enough flag it as neo-marxist and put it on the list

This would absolutely include anyone who teaches about gender neutral prnouns as I remind you he believes such pronouns are the same type of marxism that killed 100 million people... because Jordan Peterson is not a well man.

 

[Cryptosporidium]

It doesn't.... He believes professors of areas of study he believes shouldn't exist because they are marxist brainwashing (which btw is all women's, ethnic and racial studes) and wants a computer program to find marxism that is apparently hidden in the course content and expose it because Peterson is not a well adjusted man.

It would basically go through course outlines and I'd imagine look for words programmed to be evidence of eno-marxism and flag them and then if there's enough flag it as marxist and put it on the list

Click to shrink...

Appears I was misinformed about it then, thanks.

Semi related: Only radical thing I think Ive ever had to study was I think Coultard? an indigenous marxist feminist who wanted an armed revolt or something of that nature against the Canadian govt? its hard to remember as I read a lot in that class. We had a good discussion about it i recall. Itd be a shame if students werent shown this material as I found it educational.

 

[FlyingMa]

excelsiorlef You do realize you're basically denying the text that is printed very clearly in front of you.

He explicitly says that sex and identity can be separate. You somehow interpret this as him saying they can't.

He explicitly says he doesn't think there is evidence of a gender spectrum. You interpret this as him saying gender neutrality cannot exist.

 

[Caz]

excelsiorlef You do realize you're basically denying the text that is printed very clearly in front of you.

Click to shrink...

This is beyond amusing.

 

[Heshinsi]

Is that what the TA did in this case?

Click to shrink...

Bringing into class a video where Patterson is making arguments the way he is, and then declaring that you didn't take a side and was only presenting the arguments in a neutral fashion, is academic dishonesty.

It could be a video of Jenny Mccarthy stating vaccines cause autism brought into a health sciences class, or a B.o.B video claiming the earth is flat shown to geology students, the point would still stand. The idea that not making a stand one way or another, is quite simply a cop out.

 

[wandering]

excelsiorlef You do realize you're basically denying the text that is printed very clearly in front of you.

He explicitly says that sex and identity can be separate. You somehow interpret this as him saying they can't.

He explicitly says he doesn't think there is evidence of a gender spectrum. You interpret this as him saying gender neutrality cannot exist.

Click to shrink...

What?

"those are by definition binary categories"

Do you have a different definition of the word "binary?"

 

[FlyingMa]

What?

"those are by definition binary categories"

Do you have a different definition of the word "binary?"

Click to shrink...

There actually is a term for what Peterson is explaining, but I'm not near a computer right now.

Imagine a graph with population on the vertical axis and gender on the horizontal axis. There will be two large humps on the graph that holds almost the entire population of earth. However, there will still be outliers. What explains that distribution better? Spectrum or binary?

 

[excelsiorlef]

He explicitly says he doesn't think there is evidence of a gender spectrum. You interpret this as him saying gender neutrality cannot exist.

Click to shrink...

He seems to really be unable to grasp transgender concepts frankly....

In fact, all the evidence suggests that they're not independently varying constructs. I can tell you that transgender people make the same argument. They make the argument that a man can be born in a woman's body and that's actually an argument that specifies a biological linkage between gender identity and biological sex.

Click to shrink...

He seems to believe trans people arguing that sex and gender are independent means that we're denying biological influences... which we're not, what we're saying is simply that biological sex does not determine gender identity.... there is absolutely likely a biological process that determines gender identity... but it is not dependent on biological sex.

He also says this:

Peterson says he thinks the idea that gender identity and biological sex are different is "a proposition not a fact."

Click to shrink...

Let's examine these claims. First, more than 99 per cent of the population has a gender identity that's identical to their biological sex. So much for independent variation

Click to shrink...

Here he demonstrates he doesn't really understand what gender identity even means

in their gender identity, defined most accurately as their personality and interests

Click to shrink...

That is gender expression not identity... Gender identity is simply what I am I nothing more

But he uses this to then argue

Biological sex and gender identity are therefore strongly and causally linked, and no legislation is going to change that.

Click to shrink...

Frankly he's all over the place, mostly because I think he believes himself to be knowledgeable on an issue he's not.

If he's not trying to say they can't be separate, he at very least doesn't really know what the fuck he is talking about.

As for your second point

"If I said I don't see how Obama can be president if he was born in Kenya" would you be wrong in calling me an Obama Truther?

He literally says

"I don't know what neither means, because I don't know what the options are if you're not a man or a woman," he says in the lecture.

"It's not obvious to me how you can be both because those are by definition binary categories. There's an idea that there's a gender spectrum but I don't think that that's a valid idea, I don't think there's any evidence for it."

Click to shrink...

He avoids saying it outright because he knows that would be used against him so he skirts around, frankly like a coward... I don't see how you can be both, I don't know what other options are other than man or woman.... This is not the rhetoric of someone who believes gender nuetrality exists

I noticed you avoid all the other stuff I've posted such as him sharing overtly transphobic article without context, criticism or comment or:

First, I will never use words I hate, like the trendy and artificially constructed words "zhe" and "zher." These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century.

Click to shrink...

Which is just fucking ridiculous

 

[JeTmAn]

You should definitely never imply that some words are "made up" and some aren't. It's all made up.