Jordon Peterson

[Jurgen the German]

View attachment 14241

No it isn't if you read the full context of what he said, rather than the little snippets the guardian used.

He was saying that it was a 30 year old man that transitioned. That had the skeletal structure and bone density of a man. For all intents and purpose when fighting a woman it is a man. With a mans face (harder to damage). The woman "she" was fighting got abosolutely battered, including a fractured skull. She said that she had never fought anyone with strength like it.

But yes lets ignore the fact that women are getting their skulls fractured and focus on joe rogan cause he used the word tranny. If you can't understand how fudged that is, i don't know what to say.

Trans participation in sport essentially boils down to inclusion vs fairness. The trans lobbies will always argue that inclusion should be the starting point. We’ve seen recently that sports governing bodies like FINA and individuals like Seb Coe have thankfully taken the common sense approach and have argued the opposite and that fairness is the starting point. Trouble is, organisations like Stonewall will just play the transphobe card to shut down any debate and as Dave Chappelle says “invent words like Terf to win arguments”. Simply disagreeing with trans people makes you transphobic. Not sure they even realise “phobic” means having a fear or aversion to something. You’re not scared of someone if you simply disagree with them.

 

[Lilbaz]

Trans participation in sport essentially boils down to inclusion vs fairness. The trans lobbies will always argue that inclusion should be the starting point. We’ve seen recently that sports governing bodies like FINA and individuals like Seb Coe have thankfully taken the common sense approach and have argued the opposite and that fairness is the starting point. Trouble is, organisations like Stonewall will just play the transphobe card to shut down any debate and as Dave Chappelle says “invent words like Terf to win arguments”. Simply disagreeing with trans people makes you transphobic. Not sure they even realise “phobic” means having a fear or aversion to something. You’re not scared of someone if you simply disagree with them.

I get where they are coming from and have some sypathy. From their point they are being told, whatever they do they will never be fully accepted as a woman. Unfortunately people are born differently. They suffer from gender dysphoria. We as a society should help them as much as possible. But especially when it endangers others we have to draw a line.

 

[braineclipse]

View attachment 14241

No it isn't if you read the full context of what he said, rather than the little snippets the guardian used.

He was saying that it was a 30 year old man that transitioned. That had the skeletal structure and bone density of a man. For all intents and purpose when fighting a woman it is a man. With a mans face (harder to damage). The woman "she" was fighting got abosolutely battered, including a fractured skull. She said that she had never fought anyone with strength like it.

But yes lets ignore the fact that women are getting their skulls fractured and focus on joe rogan cause he used the word tranny. If you can't understand how fudged that is, i don't know what to say.

I have read the full context.

He does say that she shouldn't fight women because being a trans woman gives her an unfair advantage. As the guardian article states there's an argument being made that Rogan is wrong about this. I'm not going to say either way, I wouldn't say making that claim makes Rogan a transphobe.

"You're a fudging man". "I'm seeing a man with a dress". "You’re a man without a dingdong". These are transphobic statements. They're not at all necessary for him to make the claim you're saying he's making. It's just adding transphobia into it.

The quote in the guardian article. First part, sure, makes his point about her (alleged, I'm not taking Rogan's word on anything science related) physical benefits as a trans woman. Then, just for good measure, throw in "you're a fudging man". It's not being presented out of context by the guardian, it's presented in context for what it is.

What is the full context here that I'm missing that makes shouting "you're a fudging man" about a trans woman not transphobic?

I find your final paragraph baffling. What are you saying here exactly?

 

[Lilbaz]

I have read the full context.

He does say that she shouldn't fight women because being a trans woman gives her an unfair advantage. As the guardian article states there's an argument being made that Rogan is wrong about this. I'm not going to say either way, I wouldn't say making that claim makes Rogan a transphobe.

"You're a fudging man". "I'm seeing a man with a dress". "You’re a man without a dingdong". These are transphobic statements. They're not at all necessary for him to make the claim you're saying he's making. It's just adding transphobia into it.

The quote in the guardian article. First part, sure, makes his point about her (alleged, I'm not taking Rogan's word on anything science related) physical benefits as a trans woman. Then, just for good measure, throw in "you're a fudging man". It's not being presented out of context by the guardian, it's presented in context for what it is.

What is the full context here that I'm missing that makes shouting "you're a fudging man" about a trans woman not transphobic?

I find your final paragraph baffling. What are you saying here exactly?

Because it is a man? A man who has had their penis removed and taken estrogen, but still a man when it comes down to it. He still has a mans body, bone structure, bone density, he doesn't have child bearing hips or a cervix, he doesn't have a period or xx chromosomes. Which in most cases doesn't matter. If you want to identify as a woman that's fine. We'll call you whatever you want, you can wear what you want. But you should not be allowed to fight women.

Ask yourself this, would you date a man that has transitioned?

 

[braineclipse]

Because it is a man? A man who has had their penis removed and taken estrogen, but still a man when it comes down to it. He still has a mans body, bone structure, bone density, he doesn't have child bearing hips or a cervix, he doesn't have a period or xx chromosomes. Which in most cases doesn't matter. If you want to identify as a woman that's fine. We'll call you whatever you want, you can wear what you want. But you should not be allowed to fight women.

Ask yourself this, would you date a man that has transitioned?

Ok, now I get your point of view at least.

Shouting "you're a fudging man" about a trans woman isn't transphobic because you'll call someone whatever they want, but a trans woman is still a man when it comes down to it in your mind.

We obviously see gender rather differently. I think gender and your sex assigned at birth can be different. I think trans women are women. I think your description is transphobic.

If you're interested in understanding my point of view on this, or you'd like me to explain my reasoning I'd be happy to do so.

 

[Lilbaz]

Ok, now I get your point of view at least.

Shouting "you're a fudging man" about a trans woman isn't transphobic because you'll call someone whatever they want, but a trans woman is still a man when it comes down to it in your mind.

We obviously see gender rather differently. I think gender and your sex assigned at birth can be different. I think trans women are women. I think your description is transphobic.

If you're interested in understanding my point of view on this, or you'd like me to explain my reasoning I'd be happy to do so.

We're not going to agree. I'm stating biological facts and you think that's transphobic. Fair enough.

Careful though, many women may feel your views are misogynistic.

 

[Jurgen the German]

I get where they are coming from and have some sypathy. From their point they are being told, whatever they do they will never be fully accepted as a woman. Unfortunately people are born differently. They suffer from gender dysphoria. We as a society should help them as much as possible. But especially when it endangers others we have to draw a line.

I’m not unsympathetic to trans people being told they can’t be compete in sport, they should be allowed to compete. The fairest solution in my mind is to create a trans or an open category. It won’t be perfect, but they would still be able to compete. We do have to consider biological women too. Inclusion cannot come at the expense of fairness and most importantly, safety.

 

[braineclipse]

We're not going to agree. I'm stating biological facts and you think that's transphobic. Fair enough.

Careful though, many women may feel your views are misogynistic.

Saying that a trans woman is actually a man when it comes down to it is not a biological fact. You can claim it to be, but that's not how words work.

The difference between sex and gender is well established and perfectly rational. Information on it is available from a host of reputable sources. Sources with real reputations, real science behind their claims, real credibility. It's interesting stuff, no one could possibly force you to believe any of it, but it really can make for interesting thinking and reflection.

A word of caution though, that kind of information and reflection can cause one to think that shouting "you're a fudging man" into a microphone about a trans woman to tons of people may be a bad thing to do with serious real life negative consequences for a really marginalised group of people.

 

[Gazza]

There is a competitive advantage. Should not be allowed in the spirit of fair competition. Trans people have a right to compete, how about their own category? Like someone said it will not be ideal initially but it will be a start.

 

[Lilbaz]

Saying that a trans woman is actually a man when it comes down to it is not a biological fact. You can claim it to be, but that's not how words work.

The difference between sex and gender is well established and perfectly rational. Information on it is available from a host of reputable sources. Sources with real reputations, real science behind their claims, real credibility. It's interesting stuff, no one could possibly force you to believe any of it, but it really can make for interesting thinking and reflection.

A word of caution though, that kind of information and reflection can cause one to think that shouting "you're a fudging man" into a microphone about a trans woman to tons of people may be a bad thing to do with serious real life negative consequences for a really marginalised group of people.

Nobody has a problem with their gender. It is the problem with their sex. They can identify as whatever they wan't nobody cares. The fact is though biologically they are male. Which is an issue in sport where they are competing against people who are biologically female.

The World Health Organisation regional office for Europe describes sex as characteristics that are biologically defined, whereas gender is based on socially constructed features. They recognise that there are variations in how people experience gender based upon self-perception and expression, and how they behave.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/envi...tion regional,expression, and how they behave.

 

[Lilbaz]

To keep it on track.

 

[Lilbaz]

There is a competitive advantage. Should not be allowed in the spirit of fair competition. Trans people have a right to compete, how about their own category? Like someone said it will not be ideal initially but it will be a start.

Swinming has made an open category, which makes sense apart from the fact there are so few trans athletes. As they are a very small minority of the population. They aren't happy, because they see it as society not recognising that they are women.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Swinming has made an open category, which makes sense apart from the fact there are so few trans athletes. As they are a very small minority of the population. They aren't happy, because they see it as society not recognising that they are women.

They still have the frame and physical structure of a man, which gives them an advantage. The problem is, the science around trans people/athletes and whether they conclusively have an inherent advantage in sport is still in its infancy and we most likely won’t know for sure for years. A lot of credible sports scientists claim they have an advantage. The problem is, you’ll always find those who claim they don’t, and you can bet that is who the trans lobbies will listen to.

Genuine question, are there any examples of men who used to be women who now compete as men? I would assume you hear more about it when it’s the other way round because they compete and end up winning which causes more debate.

 

[Lilbaz]

They still have the frame and physical structure of a man, which gives them an advantage. The problem is, the science around trans people/athletes and whether they conclusively have an inherent advantage in sport is still in its infancy and we most likely won’t know for sure for years. A lot of credible sports scientists claim they have an advantage. The problem is, you’ll always find those who claim they don’t, and you can bet that is who the trans lobbies will listen to.

Genuine question, are there any examples of men who used to be women who now compete as men? I would assume you hear more about it when it’s the other way round because they compete and end up winning which causes more debate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Mosier

 

[braineclipse]

Nobody has a problem with their gender. It is the problem with their sex. They can identify as whatever they wan't nobody cares. The fact is though biologically they are male. Which is an issue in sport where they are competing against people who are biologically female.

The World Health Organisation regional office for Europe describes sex as characteristics that are biologically defined, whereas gender is based on socially constructed features. They recognise that there are variations in how people experience gender based upon self-perception and expression, and how they behave.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21#:~:text=The World Health Organisation regional,expression, and how they behave.

First off. Man and woman is used to describe gender too. Saying "it's a fudging man" without context about talking only about biological sex sits very wrong with me, and understably with many trans people.

Second. Biological sex. Sure, you can go to chromosomes, but that's not usually what we talk about when we talk about men and women in a biological sense. Those biological sex characteristics are influenced by transitioning. To various degrees of course, but just as an example hormones are part of biology. With hormone replacement therapy a person's hormone profile changes, and with it a great deal of secondary sex characteristics change, biological change. To describe a trans woman as "a man biologically" isn't really true. That person is a trans woman, with many biological female sex characteristics.

Finally. If one has a need to identify that someone that identifies as a woman, that has gone through a transition at some point after being biologically male at an earlier point there are words to do that with that doesn't include calling that person a man, a man when it comes down to it or anything like that.

Many trans people are happy enough, or even outright happy to identify as a trans man or a trans woman. It's way less hurtful, it does include the information needed to convey that someone has transitioned (if one cares or feels the need to convey that), way less associated with outright and directly harmful abuse of trans people. It's also more nuanced and more factually correct imo.

 

[Grays_1890]

I do agree that his underlying message can easily get lost. I also think there are real issues with his underlying messages, and that there are other reasons why those underlying messages are lost.

But if it's the case, that part of what's going on is that he has right wing followers because what he says is being taken out of context as right wing material shouldn't he do something about that?

He's supposed to be rather intelligent. He's supposed to be a deep thinker. Yet he lets this happen. Is he incapable of more clearly stating his underlying messages? Unwilling? Or just doesn't understand that it's going on? Some other reason?

Questioning both sides sounds good. I would say he's made it pretty clear what he thinks about all things "woke", social justicy, criticical race theory etc. Far beyond questioning, it's been pretty much a full frontal attack.

By comparison how has he questioned Trump for example? I would assume a centrist would have had some real issues with Trump. I haven't really seen him go after Trump, Trumpism or Trump allies in politics much at all. Perhaps that's my ignorance of the man.

What was his opinion on Trump before the 2020 election?

I have enjoyed this conversation pal, respectful and interesting so nice one.

This is a good video from Peterson and the views people have on him, goes a small way to explain the left bias

(13) Jordan Peterson’s Savage Response To Those Who Compare Him To Hitler | LBC - YouTube

I won't get into the arguments about transgender but he is right in my opinion that to ask people to be able to work out which of the 70 pronouns someone is identifying with is hard, its not hate. Its also more splintered in my opinion to keep drilling down to so many sub groups.

He is not wrong when he says that in the modern world if you talk or present to 10-100 people there is always going to be a risk of offence to someone in the crowd, does that make it hate? Its murky water

 

[Lilbaz]

First off. Man and woman is used to describe gender too. Saying "it's a fudging man" without context about talking only about biological sex sits very wrong with me, and understably with many trans people.

Second. Biological sex. Sure, you can go to chromosomes, but that's not usually what we talk about when we talk about men and women in a biological sense. Those biological sex characteristics are influenced by transitioning. To various degrees of course, but just as an example hormones are part of biology. With hormone replacement therapy a person's hormone profile changes, and with it a great deal of secondary sex characteristics change, biological change. To describe a trans woman as "a man biologically" isn't really true. That person is a trans woman, with many biological female sex characteristics.

Finally. If one has a need to identify that someone that identifies as a woman, that has gone through a transition at some point after being biologically male at an earlier point there are words to do that with that doesn't include calling that person a man, a man when it comes down to it or anything like that.

Many trans people are happy enough, or even outright happy to identify as a trans man or a trans woman. It's way less hurtful, it does include the information needed to convey that someone has transitioned (if one cares or feels the need to convey that), way less associated with outright and directly harmful abuse of trans people. It's also more nuanced and more factually correct imo.

First off context.


That is the context. Why he was a little bit tinkled off. Remember he knows this woman (on the right).

 

[braineclipse]

I have enjoyed this conversation pal, respectful and interesting so nice one.

This is a good video from Peterson and the views people have on him, goes a small way to explain the left bias

(13) Jordan Peterson’s Savage Response To Those Who Compare Him To Hitler | LBC - YouTube

I won't get into the arguments about transgender but he is right in my opinion that to ask people to be able to work out which of the 70 pronouns someone is identifying with is hard, its not hate. Its also more splintered in my opinion to keep drilling down to so many sub groups.

He is not wrong when he says that in the modern world if you talk or present to 10-100 people there is always going to be a risk of offence to someone in the crowd, does that make it hate? Its murky water

Cheers mate, always difficult to know how what one says is perceived so I appreciate the comment.

I don't have time now to watch that video unfortunately, but I do think comparing him to Hitler is a strange one on the surface at least.

When I've been exposed to his "70 pronouns" arguments in the past I've rarely been impressed with his arguments. Partly because I think it's mostly a slippery slope argument. People are asking for others to respect their choice of pronouns, use the pronoun they prefer when asked.

There will always be some people taking things to the extreme, there will be people who are unstable or downright difficult to interact with. But the vast majority of what's being asked here is very reasonable and easy to do.

There can't be many people who expect him or others to work or which pronoun out of 70 to use who then respond with anger when he or others don't get that right first time.

Painting the trans and non binary community with the "70 pronouns", and rather extreme consequences he claimed me policies would bring is unfair imo.

 

[braineclipse]

First off context.
View attachment 14242

That is the context. Why he was a little bit tinkled off. Remember he knows this woman (on the right).

I can get him being tinkled off.

I can get him, or others, being of the opinion that trans women shouldn't compete with other women in MMA or other sports. I don't have particularly strong opinions either way on that myself.

That doesn't excuse transphobic language. Any more than using racist language is exused be being angry.

Not apologising afterwards only makes it worse.

 

[Grays_1890]

Cheers mate, always difficult to know how what one says is perceived so I appreciate the comment.

I don't have time now to watch that video unfortunately, but I do think comparing him to Hitler is a strange one on the surface at least.

When I've been exposed to his "70 pronouns" arguments in the past I've rarely been impressed with his arguments. Partly because I think it's mostly a slippery slope argument. People are asking for others to respect their choice of pronouns, use the pronoun they prefer when asked.

There will always be some people taking things to the extreme, there will be people who are unstable or downright difficult to interact with. But the vast majority of what's being asked here is very reasonable and easy to do.

There can't be many people who expect him or others to work or which pronoun out of 70 to use who then respond with anger when he or others don't get that right first time.

Painting the trans and non binary community with the "70 pronouns", and rather extreme consequences he claimed me policies would bring is unfair imo.

Na all good mate, found your replies really interesting.

The extreme part is true and I think he is guilty of riding that out to make his point, I think many are guilty of that.

His best argument on it, which I do tend to agree with is the easiest way to avoid doubt is to refer to someone based on the persona they are choosing. For example if a man is dressed as a woman you are correct to refer to them as "she" and any doubt for want of a better term lies with them.