Home > Issues > General Theoretical Issues > Welcome to New Zealand, Jordan Peterson! (Annotated Partial Transcript of an interview with the Canadian Psychologist)

The Black Ribbon Campaign

Empowering Men:

fighting feminist lies

Welcome to New Zealand, Jordan Peterson! (Annotated Partial Transcript of an interview with the Canadian Psychologist)

Peter Zohrab 2019

Home Page Articles about Issues 1000 links
alt.mens-rights FAQ Sex, Lies & Feminism Quotations
Male-Friendly Lawyers, Psychologists & Paralegals Email us ! Site-map

 

(Annotated Partial Transcript of an interview of Canadian Psychologist, Jordan Peterson, On TV One's Breakfast programme, 19 February 2019)

(MY COMMENTS IN CAPITAL LETTERS)

 

  1. HAYLEY HOLT: Good morning!

  2. JORDAN PETERSON: Good morning!

  3. HAYLEY HOLT: So, do you think that you are often misunderstood?

  4. JORDAN PETERSON: I'm misunderstood by some people and not by others. I don't think I'm particularly misunderstood, in some ways, by members of the Radical Left, because I'm not a friend of Collectivists and I'm not a friend of the Radical Left, so I think their concern that I might be an impediment to their wishes is justified. I think the tactics that are used to describe what I'm doing are generally reprehensible, but that's not surprising. It's part and parcel of the way political discourse is conducted today: a lot of epithets and name-calling -- none of which is justified, in my estimation.

  5. HAYLEY HOLT: And a lot of pendulum-swinging. You're not a friend of the Radical Left and so people may assume you're a friend of the Radical Right, but that's not true, is it?

  6. JORDAN PETERSON: No, the Radical Right isn't very fond of me. There was a book written recently by a man called Vox Day, called "Jordanetics," which is a criticism of what I'm doing from the Radical Right perspective and it's a particularly low-blow book, I would say, written by a guy who's dreadfully in love with his own intelligence, but it's fine, as far as I am concerned. It was a good thing, because I'm not a fan of collectivists on the Right Wing either, because I think it's a mistake to make your primary identity your group. It doesn't matter whether it's from a nationalist or an ethnic or a racial perspective or a sexual perspective. It's a fundamental error and it's an extraordinarily dangerous one.

 

COMMENT: JORDAN PETERSON DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHAT HE MEANS BY SAYING THAT IT'S AN "ERROR" OR WHAT HE MEANS BY SAYING THAT IT'S "DANGEROUS" TO MAKE YOUR PRIMARY IDENTITY YOUR GROUP. I THINK IT'S A FUNDAMENTAL ERROR ON HIS PART NOT TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE MEANS BY THESE STRANGE STATEMENTS AND IT'S VERY DANGEROUS TO HIS CREDIBILITY. I MYSELF AM NOT INCLINED TO IDENTIFY WITH GROUPS, BUT PETERSON HIMSELF POINTS OUT (BELOW) THAT:-

SINCE THE FEMINISTS ARE ATTACKING MEN AND MASCULINITY, IN HIS VIEW, WHAT ARE MEN SUPPOSED TO THINK AND DO ABOUT IT? THE FEMINISTS HAVE ALREADY PUT THEM INTO A GROUP, SO MEN HAVE A DE FACTO GROUP IDENTITY THAT IS UNDER THREAT AS A GROUP. THEREFORE THEY/WE MUST FIGHT BACK AS A GROUP.

 

  1. HAYLEY HOLT: Who are you friends with?

  2. JORDAN PETERSON: I'm friends with virtually everyone. You know, I'm often described as polarising, but I've met thousands of people on the street and all of the interactions, with the exception of two, so far, out of all those thousands, have been unbelievably positive and the Youtube comments on my videos have been 95% positive, which is an unbelievably high rate on Youtube and, even among journalists in Canada, let's say, the vast majority of the newspapers support what I'm doing and so the people who are objecting to what I'm doing -- first of all -- are objecting to what they think I'm doing and they're are a very small minority and all they seem to do is read each other's press releases, because they virtually never talk about anything that I'm talking about. You know, they... and they tend to be very pejorative about my audience, which I think is quite apalling. so I ... most of the people who see my live shows and, probably, watch my videos are young men who are from, say, 25 to 35 -- not that young -- and they're an audience that isn't generally reached by this sort of thing and they're not there for political reasons or radical reasons. They're there to get their lives together, and many of them get their lives together. They drop their addictions, they drop their alcoholism, they increase their ambitions with regards to their jobs, they taken on more responsibility, they marry their girlfriends, they fix their families. They're in much, much better shape and many of them are no longer suicidal and desperate and there is absolutely nothing about that that isn't good!

  3. HAYLEY HOLT: Why do you think so many young men, then, are suicidal and desperate, as you say? Is this a fault of post-religious society lacking meaning?

  4. JORDAN PETERSON: Well, I think it's an assault on ... on.... It's a consequence of the active discouragement of young men and you see that manifesting itself through society all the way from elementary school up through university. I mean, boys are underperforming girls at every academic level, they drop out far more frequently out of school, they do -- and out of university -- they're bailing out of the Humanities like, and have been for twenty years. There won't be a man left in the ....

  5. HAYLEY HOLT: Have you any evidence?

  6. JORDAN PETERSON: Well, it's very unfriendly to be a man in the Humanities at universities. I don't know why in the World you would be! The constant discourse is that Western civilisation, although primarily a product of men, apparently -- which isn't something I particularly agree with -- is fundamentally oppressive and patriarchal and destructive and that any sign of ambition on your part as a male is nothing but indication that you're participating in the same oppressive structure and so anything that's ambitious or noble or forward-looking or characterised by fortitude is actively discouraged and punished and it's very, very disheartening.

  7. HAYLEY HOLT: Do you think that a man's search for ambition or to act nobly is different, is there a function different than what a woman's should be, do you think?

  8. JORDAN PETERSON: I don't know that it's a function of what a woman's should be, necessarily. I think that women's ambitions are supported very firmly now in our culture from a very young age. I still think women very difficult decisions to make, because in their thirties they have a lot of things to sort out that have to be sorted out quickly, like the balance between career and family, and so each sex has its own particular cross to bear, let's say, but I think there's active, active attempt to to criticise -- what would you say -- active masculinity from a very early age and it's unbelievably damaging and it will, of course, spread over into women too, because, insofar as women take over masculine roles and masculinity itself is criticised, then that will backfire and that will happen soon enough.:

COMMENT: THIS SOUNDS UNLIKELY TO ME. WHEN WOMEN TAKE OVER SOME PREVIOUSLY MALE ROLE, THEY DO NOT BECOME ANY MORE MASCULINE THAN THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY AND THE FEMINISTS IMMEDIATELY CEASE CRITICISING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PLAYING THAT ROLE, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT MEN. IT IS LUDICROUS TO PRETEND THAT FEMINISTS ARE LOGICAL OR CONSISTENT IN SUCH MATTERS!

...........................................................................................................................................

 

-- Hamill, Jasper (2019): "Men are more disadvantaged than women in the UK, US and most of Europe, scientists claim." Metro, 4 Jan 2019.
 

See also:

 

FAQ

Webmaster

Peter Douglas Zohrab

Latest Update

20 February 2019

Top