Jordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism

Juden Peterson you said men need to quote "grow up, damn" tell me why, well because there's nothing uglier than an old baby, there's nothing good about it, people who don't grow up don't find the kind of meaning in their lives that sustains them through difficult times and they will surely encounter difficult times and become bitter and resentful and purposeless and adrift and hostile and resentful and vindictive and arrogant and deceitful and and of no use to themselves and of no use to anyone else. and no partner for a woman and there's nothing about it that's good, so you said, I mean, that sounds pretty bad, yeah, Isis of masculinity, I mean, what do you do about it, you say, you help the people understand why it is necessary and important to them. grow and take responsibility why that's not a kind of shaking the finger and getting your act together why it's more like but why it's more like a delineation of the kind of destiny that makes life worth living as I've been to them saying to young people but it's not like I wasn't targeting this message specifically at young men to begin with, it just turned out that way and you mostly admit that it's mainly men listening, I mean your audience is fine it's about 80 percent percent on YouTube, which YouTube is a primarily male domain, so it's hard to know how much is because YouTube is male and how much is because of what I'm saying, but what I've been telling young people is that there's a real reason why they need to grow is that they have something to offer, you know that these people have within them this ability to set the world right and that is necessary to manifest in the world and that also in doing so is where you find the meaning that sustains you in the world. life then what went wrong?

Then, oh God, all kinds of things went wrong. I guess I don't think there are any young men here. Words of encouragement. Some of them never in their entire lives. I can say that that is what I am told and the fact that the words I have spoken in the YouTube lectures I have made and put online, for example, have had such a dramatic impact is an indication that young men are They are dying of hunger. for this type of message because why would they derive it from a lecture on YouTube? Now they are not being taught that it is important to develop themselves because they don't mind that their audience is predominantly male.

Isn't that a little divisive? No I dont think so. I mean, it's no more divisive than the fact that YouTube is primarily male and Tumblr is primarily my resident female. Tumblr is primarily female. saying that's how it is, oh, I'm not saying anything, it's just an observation that that's how it is, there are a lot of women who watch my lectures, come to my talks and buy my books, it's just that most of them happen. being men, huh, that's what it is for women, well, what kind of partner do you want? Do you want an overgrown child or do you want someone to deal with?

That will help you keep an eye on women. You have some kind of duty to fulfill. helping to solve the crisis of masculinity depends on what they want, no, I mean, it's exactly like I put it, like women deeply want men who are competent and powerful and I don't mean the power in the one in which they can exert tyrannical control over others that's not power that's just corruption power is competition and why in the world wouldn't you want a competent partner Well I know why you can't actually dominate a competent partner so if you want more you should dominating is that what you are saying no, I would say that women who have seen their relationships deteriorate or their relationships with men deteriorate and who are afraid of those relationships will settle for a weak partner because they can dominate them, but it is a suboptimal solution, You know? when they did, I think there's a substantial minority of women who do that and I think it's very bad for them, they're very unhappy, it's very bad for their partners, although couples have the advantage of not having to take any responsibility. the right to say that I mean maybe that's how women want their relationships those women I mean you're making these big generalizations I'm a clinical psychologist right so you're saying you've done your research and women aren't happy Dominating men I didn't say they weren't happy with dominating, then I said it was a bad long term solution, okay, you said it was turning them into Israel, yes, yes, and it depends on the time period.

I mean, there can be intense pleasure in momentary domination. That's why people do it all the time, but it's the perfect formula for a successful long-term relationship that is reciprocal. Any long-term relationship is reciprocal first and foremost by definition, so let me tell you from the bench, well, you say that. There are entire disciplines in universities openly hostile towards men. These are the areas of study dominated by postmodern neo-Marxist assertion. Western culture in particular is an oppressive structure created by white men to dominate and exclude women, but then I want to put minorities. Okay, but I want to tell you that here in the UK, for example, let's say the

gender

pay gap is just over 9%.

There are women at the BBC who recently said that the broadcaster is illegally paying them less than men to do the same job, you only have seven women running the top 100 companies, so it seems to many women that they are still being dominated and excluded, to quote your words, it seems that way, but the multivariate analysis of the wage gap indicates that there is no limit of nine percent, which is a gap between the average hourly earnings between men and women, yes, but there are several reasons For this, one of them is

gender

, but it is not the only reason, as if you are a self-respecting social scientist, you never do a univariate analysis as you say, well, women as a whole are paid less than men , okay, so we break it down by age, we break it down by occupation, we break it down by interest, we break it down by personality, but you're basically saying that it doesn't matter if women don't make it to the top because that's what's skewing the pay gap. gender, isn't it?

You're saying well, that's just a fact, not so you know it's not going to be like that. get to the top no, I'm not saying it doesn't matter, you're also not saying reasons that remind you of that, although why should women endure those reasons, why shouldn't women? because he should put up with it, I am saying that the claim that the pay gap between men and women is due only to sex is incorrect and is incorrect, there is no doubt that the multivariate analysis has been done very well. I'm saying there is a nine percent pay gap, that is, a gap between men. and women I'm not saying why it exists but it exists now you are a woman.

It seems quite unfair you have to say why it exists but you agree that it is unfair if you are a woman it is not necessary and on average They pay you nine percent less than a man, that is not fair, it depends on why it happens. I can give you an example. Okay, there's a personality trait known as agreeableness. Nice people are compassionate and polite, and nice people get paid less than what they just received. t less nice people for the same job, women are nicer than men again, great generalization, nice ears, that's true, but it's true and some women get paid more than men, so you were saying that, Women are generally too nice to get pay raises.

I see, I'm saying that that's one component of a multivariate equation that predicts celery, it accounts for maybe five percent of the variance, something like that. You should be careful with the other twenty, you need about eighteen other factors, one of which is gender and there is bias, no doubt about it, but it accounts for a much smaller proportion of the variation in the pay gap than feminists Radicals say it's okay, so instead of denying that the pay gap exists, which is what you did at the beginning of this conversation, you should do it. Do you tell women that instead of being nice and not asking for a raise, go ask for a raise, make yourself unpleasant with your book?

Oh, there's definitely that, but I also didn't deny that it existed. I denied it existed because of gender. Alright? because I am very, very, very careful with my words, so the pay gap exists, you accept it, but you are saying that the pay gap between men and women exists, you are saying that it is not because of gender, it is because women are too nice to asking for salary increases certainly one of the reasons, okay, one of the reasons, so why not have them ask for a salary increase? I've done it many times in my career and they just don't fix it, oh they do it all the time.

As you can see, one of the things you do as a clinical psychologist is assertiveness training, so you could say you often treat people for anxiety, you treat them for depression, and you, and maybe the next most common category after that would be assertiveness training and So I have had many extraordinarily competent women in my clinical and consulting practice and we strategized their professional development that involved a continuous effort to compete for higher salaries and often tripled their salaries over a five-year period, of course, you too? Do you agree that you would be happy if that wage gap were completely eliminated because that's all radical feminists say?

It would depend on how it was eradicated and how its disappearance was measured and what you say about men being a problem, oh there are all kinds of things that could be at the expense of it could even be at the expense of women's own interests, so that they might not be happy if they could receive the same salary, no, because it could interfere with other things that are causing the wage gap that women are choosing tonight to have children well or to choose careers that actually pay less, something that women They do a lot, but why shouldn't women have the right to choose not to have children or the right to choose those that are more demanding because they can, yes, that's fine, but you're saying that makes them unhappy.

Me and big, I'm saying no, I'm not saying it's me and in fact, I haven't said that until now, you're saying that does. No, I said what made them miserable was having weak partners that made them miserable, right? I would say that many women around the ages of 28 and 32 have a professional family crisis that they have to deal with. and I think that's partly because of the time frame that women have to deal with, like they have to put together the most important pieces of their life faster than men, which is also partly why men are not under as much pressure to grow up.

So because for the typical woman you have to have your career and your family in order by about the time you're 35 because otherwise your options start to run out and that puts a huge amount of stress on women, especially at the end of their lives. 20 years. I think I disagree with the idea of ​​the typical woman because you know all women are different and I just want to give you another quote from last day's book in some ways and the same in others. Okay, you say that women become more vulnerable when they have children, no, and you talked in one of your youtube interviews about crazy harpy sisters, so a simple question is gender equality, a myth in your opinion is that something that it will never happen depends on what you mean by equality, no, if you mean a levy and we are having the same opportunities, fair people, we could get to a point where people were treated fairly or more fairly.

I mean, people are already treated pretty fairly in Western culture, but we can really look at them, even though they're not. I mean, otherwise why would there be There are only seven women running 100 companies in the UK. Why would there still be a wage gap that we all have? See satellite. Why do women at the BBC say they are illegally paid less than men for doing the same job? that's not fair the first question your brothers are complicated questions seven seven women repeat that there are seven women running the top 100 companies in the UK well the first one could be um why would you want to do that? why a tiny man?

I want to do it. I don't know many men, although not many, who are perfectly willing to sacrifice practically their entire lives in pursuit of a high-level career in order to work. These are men who are very intelligent. They are generally very, very conscientious, very motivated, very energetic, very healthy and willing to work 70 or 80 hours a week non-stop, specialized in one thing to get to the top, so I think that women are just more sensible, they don't want that because it's not a good standard. What I'm saying is that it's definitely part of it, so you're worried that you don't think there are barriers in their way that are stopping them from getting to the top.There are some barriers, yes, like others, like men, for example.

I mean, getting to the top of any organization is an incredibly competitive endeavor and the men you're competing with just aren't going to turn around and say, please, absolutely everyone, take the job. War is gender equality, a myth. I don't know what you mean by the question: men and women are not equal and will not be. That doesn't mean they can't be treated fairly. Is gender equality desirable? means equality of outcomes, then it is almost certainly not desirable, that has already been demonstrated in Scandinavia because in Scandinavia equality of outcomes is undesirable that men and women will not be classified into the same categories if you leave them alone to do it on their own. own account.

I have already seen that in Scandinavia there are 20 nurses to 1 for every man, something like that, it may not be entirely that extreme and approximately the same engineers and women engineers and that is a consequence of the free choice of men and women in societies that have gone further than any other society to make gender equality the purpose of the law those are eradicable differences that can be eradicated with tremendous social pressure and tyranny, but if you let men and women make their own decisions you won't get the same result, so you're saying that anyone who believes in equality, whether you call them feminists, call them whatever you want.

Basically, they should give up because it's not going to happen just if they aim for equality of outcomes, so you're saying that giving people equal opportunities, that's okay, not only is that okay, it's eminently desirable for everyone, for individuals. and for society, but also for women. you won't make it, that's who you really are, it depends on your measurement techniques, they are doing well in medicine, in fact, there are many more female doctors than men or there are many disciplines that are absolutely dominated by women in many disciplines and they are going very well, so let me tell you something else about the book.

They say that the introduction of the equal pay for equal work argument immediately complicates even the comparison of salaries beyond practicality for one simple reason: who decides what work? is equal, it is not possible, so the simple question is: do you believe in equal pay? Well, I made the argument there, it's like it depends and I say no, because a lot of people listening to it will just say, I mean, are we going back to the Dutch because we're not really listening. I'm just projecting. I hear you basically saying that women need to accept that they will never make it on equal terms.

Equality of results is how you defined it. No. I would go. Maybe. Also, go play with my dolls Cindy, take us to school because I'm not going to get the best job I want because there's someone sitting there saying it's not possible, that's what they said, it's a bad social role. I didn't say that women shouldn't strive to get to the top or anything because I don't believe for a second that she would strive to get to the top, but you're going to put all those obstacles in her way like you've been in her path. for centuries, so it's okay, you're saying it's okay, no, no, I think I read the newspaper as nonsense, I think it's nonsense, really, I mean, look, look at your situation, you haven't been successful, Yes, Maya, how do you pray hard to get it? exactly good, okay, fighting is good, this is inevitable, but you talk about man, let me tell you something else for now, you are saying that you have to be idle for a high-quality position, well, I noticed that in your book you talk about real . conversations between men that contain an underlying threat to the physical oh there's no doubt about that, what about real conversations between women?

Is it something or are we too docile and reasonable? No, it's just that the domain of physical conflict is off limits to You we just want to get to where I have, yes, but what does that do to me? I don't know, man, I can't imagine you've done it, yeah, to a certain extent. I suspect you're not very nice, so that's what happens with successful women. Actually, I'm not very nice in this conversation, at least I'm sure I served well in your career, successful women, although hmm, they basically have to wear pants, in your opinion, they have to become men to be successful, that's what what are you saying.

Well, if men were to strive to be more successful, Canadian men certainly masculine traits will come in handy. I mean, one of the things that I do in my counseling practice, for example, when I consult with women who are trying to advance in their careers, is I teach them to negotiate and to be able to say no and to not be easily pressured and to be formidable and it is necessary that if you want to be successful you have to be smart, conscientious and tough, well here's a radical idea why. Don't some male bosses adopt bosses?

Let's say they adopt some feminine traits so that women don't have to fight and stick out their sharp elbows for pay raises. It is simply accepted that if they are doing the same job, they get the same thing. pay well, I would say partly because it is not so easy to determine how much the same job costs and almost because you could say that yes, there are still men dominating our industries and our society and therefore they have dictated the terms for so long, but the women have to fight. to know like them it's not true, it's not true, so, for example, I can give you an example very quickly.

I worked with women who worked in high-powered law firms in Canada for about 15 years and they were as competent and prepared as anyone you would meet and we were trying to figure out how to advance their careers and there was a big

debate

in Canadian society at the time which basically developed along the same lines as your argument is that if law firms didn't use these male criteria then maybe women would do better but the market sets the damn game and the market is dominated by men no it's not the market is dominated by women they make 80 percent of consumer decisions that is not the case at all. the people who stay at home taking care of the children are generally still women, so they go out shopping, but that is chained, they make all the decisions, okay, so the market is driven by women, not by men, right?, and if you're a lawyer, you still pay more for the same type of goods, it's been shown that men buy a blue bicycle helmet, it'll cost less than a pink one anyway, we'll get to that in part because men are less nice, right?

They won't tolerate it. I want to ask you if it's not desirable to have some of those feminine traits you're talking about. I would say it's a generalization, but you used the words feminine traits. Is it not desirable? I have some of them at the top of business, I mean, maybe they wouldn't, they don't predict, they don't predict success in the workplace, the things that predict success in the workplace are intelligence and conscientiousness. , agreeableness negatively predicts success in the workplace, negative. emotion saying that women are not smart enough to lead this talk no, I didn't say that, I said that feminine traits don't predict success, but I didn't say that intelligence wasn't, I didn't say that intelligence and conscientious when you said that is it just by implication or not feminine traits oh no I mean sorry it didn't dress her it doesn't say at all that a woman is smarter than men no no they aren't they did that's pretty good , the average IQ. for a woman and the average IQ for a man is identical, there is some

debate

about the uniformity of the distribution, something that James d'amour pointed out, for example, in his memo, but there is no difference in overall cognitive ability, There's no difference.

To talk about conscientiousness, women are a little more organized than men and men are a little more hard-working than women, the difference is not big. I don't know about the averages among scammers which isn't necessarily why they don't have feminine features. Why are feminine traits not desirable on top? Why are they not desirable? It's hard to say. I'm just laying out the empirical evidence as if we know we know the traits that predict success, but we also know it because companies in general haven't done it. state dominated by women throughout the centuries we have nothing to compare it with it is a true experiment and it could be the case that if companies modified their behavior and became more feminine they would be successful there is no evidence of this I have no doubts nor There's certainly no evidence why not try, since the radical evidence suggests that it's okay, if someone wants to start a company and make it more feminine and compassionate, say, and caring in its overall orientation toward its workers and toward the market.

That's a perfectly reasonable experiment to prove my point is that there is no evidence that those traits predict success in the workplace and there is evidence that that is not the case, in reality, women have been in the workplace at least since I've been around the representation of women in the workplace has been around 50 percent, so we've run the experiment for a pretty reasonable period of time, but not, you know, certainly not for centuries. Let me move on to another debate that has been very controversial for you and this one. Did you get in trouble for refusing to call trans men and women by their preferred personal pronouns?

No, actually it's not true. I got in trouble because I said I wouldn't follow the mandatory speech dictates of the federal and provincial governments. I never really got into trouble. for not calling anyone out in any way, I wouldn't follow the law change, which didn't once I was law screaming hell, no that's all they said it was designed to do, well you cited freedom of speech in That, why should your right to freedom of expression? Trump has the right for trans people not to feel offended because in order to think you have to risk being offensive.

I mean, look at the conversation we're having right now, you know you're certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit. really, why should you have the right to do that? It's quite uncomfortable. Well, I'm very glad to have put you well. You get my point, since you're doing what you're supposed to do, which is. Doing a little digging to see what the hell is going on and that's what you should do, but you're exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me and that's okay. I think you have more power as far as I'm concerned, so you've done it.

I didn't sit there and I'm right. I'm just trying to figure that out. I mean, I got you, you got me, you got me. I'm trying to wake up, turn my head, yeah, it took me a while, it did, yeah, well, you. you have made a voluntary cut you have voluntarily entered the studio and you have agreed to be questioned hmm a trans person in your class has come to your class and said that she wants to be called, that has never happened and I would call her so that you can you would do. like it changed your Chi no no I didn't say it from the beginning what I said at the beginning was that I was not going to cede linguistic territory to radical leftists regardless of whether it was legalized or not that's what I said even then the people who came after about me he said oh, you must be transphobic and you would mistreat a student in your class.

It's like I've never mistreated a student in my class. I'm not transphobic and that's not what I said, well, you said it. I have also called trans activists authoritarians. How many am I referring to? Isn't it just in the broader context of my claims that the radical left-wing ideologue czar is authoritarian? I'm a drug user, you're comparing them to Chairman Mao, who knows, you know the deaths of millions of people, even if the activists, you know, are also trans people, they have the right to say these things, yes, but they don't have the right either. brain within your entire community, heaven Chairman Mao, you know that it could end everything costs a penny, of course, I mean, you know that this is tremendously insensitive and I did not compare them to end it well.

I came here knowing he doesn't know any authority, he is right-wing, even though he was comparing them to the left-wing totalitarians and now I am left with the Aryans under Mao, millions of people die, that means there is no comparison. Mao and a trans activist are there, why not? because a trans activist. they are not killing millions of people the philosophy that guides their expressions is the same philosophy the consequences are still you are saying that trans activists know that this leads to the death of millions of people well, no, I am saying that the philosophy that drives your expressions is the same philosophy that has already led to the death of millions of people, okay, tell us how that philosophy is comparable in any way, I'm sure there is no problem, the first thing is that your philosophy assumes that group identity is primordial, that is the fundamental philosophy that promoted the Soviet Union and Mao is China and it is the fundamental philosophy of leftist activists is identity politicsit doesn't matter who you are as an individual it matters who you are in terms of your group identity you only say murder to provoke you I mean you are a provocateur never say lightly don't write that you hate being compared to you want to stir things up I'm just a provocateur in the to the extent that when I say what I believe to be true it is provocative no I won't provoke maybe four heroes from time to time.

I'm not interested in provoking. What about leading? You know, fighting and lobster. Tell us about the lobster. Well, that's a big transition. The first chapter I have in my book is called Stand. stand tall with your shoulders back and it's a mandate to be combative, not just to advance your career, let's say, but also to adopt a posture of engagement with the world and reflect that in your posture and the reason I write about lobsters It is because there is this idea that hierarchical structures are a sociological construct of Western patriarchy and that is so false that it is almost unbelievable and I use the lobster as an example because we spread the lobster from the lobsters in evolutionary history about 350 million years ago. , common ancestor and lobsters exist in hierarchies and have a nervous system in tune with the hierarchy and that nervous system works with serotonin just as our nervous system does and the nervous system of the lobster and the human being is so similar that antidepressants work in lobsters and it is part of my attempt to demonstrate that the idea of ​​hierarchy has absolutely nothing to do with sociocultural constructions, which does not allow me to understand it. you're saying we should organize our societies along locust lines.

I am saying that it is inevitable that there is continuity in the way animals and humans organize their structures. It is absolutely inevitable and there is a third of a billion years of evolutionary history behind that right. It is so long that it is a third of a billion years ago. there weren't even trees, for a long time you have had a mechanism in your brain that works with serotonin, which is similar to the locust mechanism that tracks your state and the higher your state, the better your emotions are regulated, so As your serotonin levels increase, you feel. more positive emotion and less negative emotion then you are saying like lobsters, we are programmed as men and women to do certain things to run along the tram lines and there is nothing we can do about it, no I am not saying that There is nothing we can do about it because it is like a game of chess.

It's okay, there are many things you can do, although you can't break the rules of the chess game and continue playing chess. And your biological nature is kind of like that's how it sets the rules of the game, but within those rules you have a lot of wiggle room, but the idea that one thing we can't do is say that hierarchical organization is a consequence of capitalist patriarchy. It is patently absurd. wrong, it's not a matter of opinion, it's very wrong that you just provoke people to a state of anger and not all the divisions between men and women that you are bothering people, you know that you have criticism towards you online, that you They completely criticize.

Your young followers generally regret that your critics are criticized by you. I mean, if there aren't, if an academic comes to me and tells me I'm not qualified and I'm not qualified, I don't know what I am. I'm talking now about leaving abuse, leaving anger, well we need some substantial examples of abuse and anger before we can detail that mission there, "he's very much alpha4, well let's take a more general perspective on that, so I've received 25,000 letters. since June something like that from people who told me that I had rescued them from the brink of destruction and so I am perfectly willing to contrast that with the rather vague accusations that my followers are making the lives of people like me.

I've targeted the miserable Jordan Peterson, thank you, it's a pleasure, it's a pleasure to talk to me.