Challenging Peterson
Re: The gender scandal — in Scandinavia and Canada, Jordan Peterson, Dec. 15
Jordan Peterson somehow continues to get credit for arguments about gender that entirely misrepresent what the other side is saying.
First, no one is saying that the goal is to minimize the differences between men and women. In fact, arguments for greater representation of women or minorities in certain professions or the government are based on precisely the opposite proposition: namely, that these groups bring different perspectives, approaches and experiences that have been historically undervalued/underrepresented, and that can have a positive impact on society and deserve to be heard.
Second, it is not that men’s and women’s preferences are entirely socially constructed. It’s that regardless of whether those differences are biological, socially constructed, or a bit of both (as I think most reasonable people believe), they should be equally valued. The problem is that those attributes that are deemed feminine are often devalued, discounted and even reviled. This translates into careers and then income, such that careers that require care work or other ‘female-coded’ skills are afforded much less esteem — and ultimately pay — than male-dominated professions.
Finally, Peterson’s assertion that the left wants to “eliminate gender identity in young children” is also misguided. Rather than erasing it, and making everyone the same, the left wants children to express their gender identity in the way that makes them feel whole — which may or may not match the characteristics that society prescribes to their genitalia. Julia Lockhart, Ottawa
Jordan Peterson wants cabinet members to be selected based on their competence level. Their genders would then reflect those of MPs overall, he claims, citing what he believes to be statistical likelihood.
Peterson didn’t define “competence;” presumably it needs to come in a special political flavour, distinct from what is valued in, say, construction workers. Nor did he claim that a politician’s competence is unchangeable and scientifically measurable. Nor did he provide any reason to accept this mysterious trait as the cabinet’s sole qualification.
He also undercut his own argument by pointing out how a distribution curve works. Violent criminals are far more likely to be men, he says. Why, then, isn’t it mathematically possible that the best politicians might typically be women? To make his point, he needed to show that the 10 per cent of MPs ranked as the most “competent” are indeed a mix of women and men who reflect the gender balance of their peer MPs, and that these aren’t the people Justin Trudeau picked. Tucker Lieberman, Bogotá, Colombia