Thanks very much for this – I’m reading ‘Delusions of Gender’ by Cordelia Fine at the moment, and very much feel she proceeds exactly as you’ve described here. She makes some great & interesting points, but her clear bias shines through regularly. Some of the experimental results she cites even seem to imply the opposite of what she argues. I actually enjoy Jordan Peterson’s work too, but definitely agree he falls into similar traps – loved this summary: “It is as if conceding on a single point is akin to surrendering, or that thinking up a clever but shallow ‘gotcha!’ is sufficient because it humiliates opponents”
Can’t you just watch some birds, they are quite sexually dimorphic physically and behaviorally. You can raise a rooster on its own and it crows, hens will make the clucking sound they use to herd their chicks even if they have never heard it before.
Hi, sorry only just saw this comment!
It has been a long time since I sat and watched a Peterson lecture or read any of his work, so I’m not sure I can point to a specific example… probably the best place to look would be in his twitter feed from 2016 until he fell ill in 2018. I recall quite a few entries which had the flavour of ‘dunking’ or attempted ‘owning’ of Woke lefties. For example: ironically saying things like ‘hate facts’ when sharing some statistical study or other. I also seem to remember some moments in 12 Rules For Life in which he makes some rather cheap and flippant comments about feminists too, which struck me as odd and as clashing with the rich and lofty tone of the rest of the book.
I’m just reading this great article which seems extremely fair, and I think the author notices the same thing occasionally appearing in Peterson’s public persona: https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/april-2020/the-feminist-case-for-jordan-peterson/
I will say that since he has resurfaced this year he generally comes across much more humble and self aware than during the first Peterson wave, so I feel like he may be paying attention to this tendency within himself and working on it, which is lovely to see.
Esmon Dinucci
3 years ago
What an excellent debunking of the idiotic notion that gender has nothing to do with physical anatomy. It is possible given a cadaver to easily identify the sex of the deceased – it gives no real clue as to their preferred socialisation – nor would it need to.We are people and shouldn’t allow ourselves to bullied into thinking that our ways of being or thinking makes us different from each other in any meaningful way that defines us as either oppressor or oppressed.
Lindsay Gatward
3 years ago
Surely with the ‘brain’ we are still at the stage of the more we find out the more we get a glimpse of the vastness of what we don’t know – We are all the product of a chain of successful reproduction and the different characterisitc of male and female are totally the product of the behaviour that worked to pass on their genes – It is easy to imagine the long history of the divergent interests of each sex to maximise their opportunity to successfully reproduce – So different characteristics will be everywhere in the brain and body – We can see and observe but as with all science and particularly science about life we don’t really know why….yet…..hence lots of argument.
William Shaw
2 years ago
The default position with regard to the gendered brain must surely be that it exists and, if they are so inclined, it is up to the naysayers to prove it doesn’t. However, proving a negative is impossible so this seems to be something that will never be resolved.
Spot on in spades, well done.
Thanks very much for this – I’m reading ‘Delusions of Gender’ by Cordelia Fine at the moment, and very much feel she proceeds exactly as you’ve described here. She makes some great & interesting points, but her clear bias shines through regularly. Some of the experimental results she cites even seem to imply the opposite of what she argues.
I actually enjoy Jordan Peterson’s work too, but definitely agree he falls into similar traps – loved this summary:
“It is as if conceding on a single point is akin to surrendering, or that thinking up a clever but shallow ‘gotcha!’ is sufficient because it humiliates opponents”
Can you give an example where Peterson falls into this trap?
(I do agree about Fine, her book Testosterone Rex is bizarre, she often makes the point of her opponents better than her opponents do.)
Can’t you just watch some birds, they are quite sexually dimorphic physically and behaviorally. You can raise a rooster on its own and it crows, hens will make the clucking sound they use to herd their chicks even if they have never heard it before.
Hi, sorry only just saw this comment!
It has been a long time since I sat and watched a Peterson lecture or read any of his work, so I’m not sure I can point to a specific example… probably the best place to look would be in his twitter feed from 2016 until he fell ill in 2018. I recall quite a few entries which had the flavour of ‘dunking’ or attempted ‘owning’ of Woke lefties. For example: ironically saying things like ‘hate facts’ when sharing some statistical study or other. I also seem to remember some moments in 12 Rules For Life in which he makes some rather cheap and flippant comments about feminists too, which struck me as odd and as clashing with the rich and lofty tone of the rest of the book.
I’m just reading this great article which seems extremely fair, and I think the author notices the same thing occasionally appearing in Peterson’s public persona:
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/april-2020/the-feminist-case-for-jordan-peterson/
I will say that since he has resurfaced this year he generally comes across much more humble and self aware than during the first Peterson wave, so I feel like he may be paying attention to this tendency within himself and working on it, which is lovely to see.
What an excellent debunking of the idiotic notion that gender has nothing to do with physical anatomy. It is possible given a cadaver to easily identify the sex of the deceased – it gives no real clue as to their preferred socialisation – nor would it need to.We are people and shouldn’t allow ourselves to bullied into thinking that our ways of being or thinking makes us different from each other in any meaningful way that defines us as either oppressor or oppressed.
Surely with the ‘brain’ we are still at the stage of the more we find out the more we get a glimpse of the vastness of what we don’t know – We are all the product of a chain of successful reproduction and the different characterisitc of male and female are totally the product of the behaviour that worked to pass on their genes – It is easy to imagine the long history of the divergent interests of each sex to maximise their opportunity to successfully reproduce – So different characteristics will be everywhere in the brain and body – We can see and observe but as with all science and particularly science about life we don’t really know why….yet…..hence lots of argument.
The default position with regard to the gendered brain must surely be that it exists and, if they are so inclined, it is up to the naysayers to prove it doesn’t. However, proving a negative is impossible so this seems to be something that will never be resolved.