12 Reasons Why No One Should Ever Listen to Jordan Peterson Ever Again

12 Reasons Why No One Should Ever Listen to Jordan Peterson Ever Again


Dette er en kommentar. Kommentaren gir uttrykk for skribentens holdning.

Jordan B. Peterson (JBP), a professor at the University of Toronto, became world famous after his free speech protest against Bill C-16 that allegedly forced public servants to use people’s preferred pronouns or face a steep fine and possible jail time. Since then, he has become a respected “public intellectual” and a best-selling author twice over for his academic magnum opus Maps of Meaning and his self-help book 12 Rules for Life, telling young men the world over to “clean [their rooms]” before trying to save the world.

But JBP is dangerously incompetent at best or an unscrupulous hack at worst. Here are 12 reasons (with references) why no one should ever listen to Jordan B. Peterson ever again:

  1. Let’s start with the event that made him famous: his protest against Bill C-16 – a bill that proposed to add gender identity and orientation to what is colloquially referred to as “protected classes” in the Canadian Human Rights act.“If they fine me, I won’t pay it. If they put me in jail, I’ll go on a hunger strike. I’m not doing this. And that’s that. I’m not using the words that other people require me to use. Especially if they’re made up by radical left-wing ideologues.”

    JBP characterized the law as forced speech and formulated his protests as a fight for freedom of expression and against forceful suppression and control of speech.

    But the amendment to the law meant that it would become illegal to deny someone a job or a house or discriminate against them in the workplace on the basis of the gender they outwardly express or identify with, just as it is illegal to do so on the basis of religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation etc.. It did also amend the Criminal Code, but that only pertains to hate motivated crimes and hate-speech, not misidentifying someone as JBP was prone to claim (1). To be crystal clear, Canadians cannot be jailed or fined for using the wrong gender pronouns. Since it passed over two years ago, exactly zero people have been jailed or fined because of the law amendment.

    JBP’s horrible misrepresentation of Bill C-16 notably contributed to hate and antagonism against (and confusion about) trans- and non-binary people.

    I could write this entire article about this point alone, because he’s said a lot more crazy shit about Bill C-16, but suffice it to say that JBP has either not bothered to read the amendment, severely misunderstood its legal implications and/or was intentionally misrepresenting its contents. His reckless and dangerous incompetence (or unscrupulousness) should disqualify him from public discourse alone.

    But wait, there’s more!

  2. If you have paid any attention to JBP, you might have heard him talk about the dangers of “postmodern neo-Marxism”. Not only is he unable to clearly define what he means with this, but as many have pointed out, it’s an inherently self-contradictory term. A huge part of postmodernism was and is critical of the kind of grand-narratives that Marxist theory – with its claim that class struggle and economic inequality shape history –  is about (2).It is also dangerously close to the nazi dog-whistle “cultural marxism” that was popularised by Anders Behring Breivik, which itself is a rehash of the literal nazi dog-whistle “kulturbolshewismus” (Cultural Bolshevism) used by the literal fucking nazis in nazi-fucking-Germany (3). Again, he is either incompetent as fuck or uncaring about the implications of his words.
  3. Although JBP will happily rant away about the evils of postmodernism at any opportunity, he does not understand it at all and severely misrepresents what the most influential postmodernists (Foucault, Derrida, etc) actually thought, meant and wrote (4). This is somewhat ironic considering that his own philosophy can be argued to be postmodern in nature (5). 
  4. Although JBP will happily rant away about the evils of Marxism at any opportunity, he does not understand it at all and severely misrepresents Marxist theory. Which is to be expected from someone who is on record admitting to never having read any Marxist theory ever. 
  5. In a debate against Marxist philosopher, Slavoj Žižek, he only read the Communist Manifesto in preparation (6), which is little more than a call-to-action pamphlet and contains no actual theory. In his 30 minutes opening remark, he laid out problems he claimed to have found in this Communist “Pamphlet” and allegedly thus in Marxism, which is akin to debating a PHD-level subject after only having read the course descriptions of university classes on the issue without ever having attended any of them. 
  6. In his Magnum Opus, Maps of Meaning, a bunch of his own sources directly contradicts the very claims he uses them to make. He also deliberately or unwittingly ignores the historical context of several the examples he uses to argue for his universal archetypes, a context that directly undercuts the point he is trying to make (7). 
  7. In a VICE interview, while discussing women in the workplace, JBP equates wearing makeup (for women) with sexual provocativeness and sexual displays (8), claiming (amongst other things) that the reason women wear red lipstick is because the lips turn red during sexual arousal. While there is certainly a solid anthropological argument here for the cultural origins of makeup, this is insanely reductionistic and is completely removed from the contemporary context, where it is culturally expected of women to wear at least some amount of makeup in public. Women even put on makeup in all-female prisons, and there are reported cases of female inmates exchanging sexual favours for beauty products, the reverse of wearing makeup to get laid. 
  8. In the same interview, he expresses doubt about whether men and women can coexist in the workplace at all. 
  9. JBP is sometimes derogatorily nicknamed the Lobster King, because in his writing he sometimes uses the natural hierarchy emergent in lobsters to argue in favour of hierarchies in humans. In his infamous interview with Cathy Newman (9), he explains “there is this idea that hierarchical structures are a sociological construct of the Western Patriarchy – and that is so untrue that it’s almost unbelievable – and I use the lobster as an example. Because we devolved from lobsters in evolutionary history about 350 million years ago (common ancestor), and lobsters exist in hierarchies and have a nervous system attuned to hierarchies, [a nervous system that is very similar to ours]. And it’s part of my attempt to demonstrate that the idea of hierarchy has absolutely nothing to do with socio-cultural construction.”This is such a massive strawman that it is (almost) funny. No serious academic, politician or intellectual has ever claimed that all hierarchies are socio-cultural constructions. What feminists, SJWs, and even anarchists are railing against aren’t all hierarchies ever, but unjust hierarchies, specifically hierarchies based on race, gender, economics, etc.. As YouTuber ContraPoints points (heh) out in her video on JBP, you can use his argument, “the same way he uses it, to justify literally any hierarchy or authority, no matter how unjust.”
  10. JBP’s is almost impossible to pin down on any political subject. For all the criticism Cathy Newman got for misrepresenting JBP’s beliefs and for putting words in his mouth, I do feel sympathy with her. Because her interview is a nice case study for JBP’s particular style of intellectually dishonest rhetoric: he will often say something that is uncontroversial and true, while also implying something controversial. But when confronted on this he will retreat or attack you for misrepresenting him. For example, some people might feel I misrepresent his thoughts on women in the workplace from reason 8, because he never explicitly says that women and men cannot work together. But that is what he heavily seems to imply: “we don’t know the rules [for working together]”, “[the relationships between men and women] are deteriorating rapidly”, “we don’t know if men and women can work together successfully in the workplace”.He frequently, heavily seems to imply horrendous shit, and he is either dog-whistling as fuck or to much of a coward to say what he honestly believes.


  11. JBP uses his platform to actively laud and promote his daughter’s ludicrous all-meat (yes, all-meat and only meat) diet as having cured his depression and her depression and arthritis. This claim that has no scientific basis whatsoever¸ and there is plenty of research that shows that this can lead to severe vitamin deficiencies, such as scurvy. This is not just insanely irresponsible, but very dangerous to boot.I mean, I am glad they feel better-and-all, but keep that shit away from your humongous and very influential public platform, for fuck’s sake!


  12. There is a YouTube channel called PragerU, an American far-right propaganda channel that lies about and misrepresents everything from feminism, to economics to racial tensions. It has videos with literal white-fucking-nationalists, and I generally use the channel and their guest hosts to know who is not worth listening to.JBP has no less than two videos on this channel. In one of them, he calls universities propaganda tools that “indoctrinate your children” into dangerous “far-left” ideologies, and that you should let your children go there. Which is ironic, because he himself is a university professor.

And with that, I thank you for your attention. I could have gone on even longer, but this has been 12 reasons for why no one should ever listen to JBP ever again.

Written by Emil Olai


  1. https://torontoist.com/2016/12/are-jordan-petersons-claims-about-bill-c-16-correct/
  2. https://medium.com/@charlietaylor105/on-petersons-postmodern-neo-marxism-b33f6f425066
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory
  4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSuEccEYvaE&t=2s (“Defending Postmodernism: An Open Letter to Jordan B. Peterson”)

  5. Same as above, timestamp 47:13.

  6. Slavoj Žižek

  7. https://medium.com/s/story/jordan-peterson-is-a-very-poor-researcher-whose-own-sources-contradict-his-claims-464633558b75
  8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9dZSlUjVls
  9. https://youtu.be/aMcjxSThD54?t=1580


    1. JP is exactly the shifter described in this article & his réthorique though appealing to the delusional rugged individualists (those who believe in the great “I” & casually dismiss the impact of the group & the necessity of the group in generating individual success or achievement) won’t amount to much except for misguided energy…

    2. Say what you want, but it seems nobody here actually refuted these points, and can’t. Because they’re true. And all the angry comments won’t make the facts go away no matter how hard you try.

    3. Interesting. Peterson is from Alberta, Canada, as am I and we are of the same generation. Alberta has a state education system and almost no private schools or universities because the teachers are unionised and paid well and the facilities are excellent. The universities were well funded and the fees were negligible. I got a small scholarship which he would also have received which paid them in their entirety, about $200. The phone system is government owned with free unlimited local calls. Electricity is entirely hydro-electric from dams on public land. Health care is provided by the state. The province has one of the largest supplies of oil and gas in the world. There was virtually no unemployment and no homelessness. There is a social security system run by the province. It has vast prairies for grain and cattle production. There are immense public National Parks and local public parks with playing fields, ice skating rinks and tennis courts free for all. The government has typically been far right. The population is almost all white European and largely fundamentalist Christian.
      There was a lot of antisemitism, anti-French and general racist sentiment. The indigenous people live on reservations in relative poverty with their children historically removed from their families to be integrated into white society, unsuccessfully, resukring in a high youth suicide rate.
      Peterson is just like many of the kids I grew up with who lived a good life and frankly had little or no interest in or concern for social justice or much if anything beyond playing sports and getting a job and family. This is his background and be is a hypocrite to talk about post-modern Marxism because be benefited from social policies which made him what he is, wealthy, privileged and unfeeling.

  1. You have no idea what you are talking about. Basically you gave twelve reasons why no one should take you seriously.

  2. Complete garbage misrepresentation of JBP. Very disappointed in the slanted and shoddy writing in this article.

      1. Why is it that when anyone defends Jordan, people have to insult them and pretend they are just part of the cult.

  3. 7 comments answering your 12 reasoning say it all.
    What else is there left to say other than the glaring truth that you’re truly a miserable human being.

    1. Nobody answered anything, and neither did you.

      If you disagree so much with this author, perhaps show where you do it, and perhaps show where the author is wrong about Peterson.

  4. Well summed up. It is clear from all the comments decrying your article, which clearly did not have to be read, only further price for point. The cult doesn’t object to its exploitation and gas lighting by it’s leader, instead they rationalise ways to «love» it and through that, the leader. When this is pointed out, the followers lash out for their figurehead being attacked. Some cults gave been known to call for beheadings over alleged insults to their dead Messiah. This is no different.

    1. This is not neccessarily meant to be an informative article, but rather an opinion piece that presents the writer’s opinions. We are all entitled to have our own opinions.

      1. But when his opinion is that Jordan doesn’t know anything about C-16, Marxism, Postmodernism, and he grossly misrepresents a lot of what Jordan has said, then that opinion sucks.

  5. He’s warped so many promising brains with his convoluted rhetoric he’s essentially the 21st century mental fascist cult. I can’t express how much I loathe him, but there’s always plenty of drooling slackjawed dogs yapping at his feet because he told them to clean their room and exactly what they want to hear- that they are important.

  6. How anyone can have so much hate for a man that helps so many is utterly incomprehensible to me. At the core his message, that is very well received by men and boys, is basically to get your shit together. How can this be bad?

    1. His work is an obstacle of one of the key necessities in Marxist theory outlined by Karl Marx in the communist manifesto, which is to destroy the family.
      You can’t successfully create a system of state slavery with your peasants having their priorities aligned with anybody else’s interests but the state.

  7. gotta say the comments cant take shit , yeah you dont make much of 12 reasons like literally 3 points similar (marxisms one) youre right about his refusals to use pronouns is dumb people are literally ignoring the all meat bullshit theory . 10th point isnt much of a point more like fact

    1. he refused using the pronouns if it was mandated by law that he had to use them, he said he would use them if someone came up to him and asked him personally.

  8. Just looking at your list of references is enough to figure out your academic preparedness to comment on the matter. None whatsoever. There are things you can claim JP is incompetent to argue, but I don’t seem to find them on your list. Say, e.g. climate change. And I’d cut the angry profanities if I were you. They don’t help your case, quite the opposite, in fact.

  9. I just came to read and to confirm that freedom of speech still exists, cause l just read a ton of non-facts-based-shit that hasnt been taken down, congratulations, you are the proof even idiots are able to express their opinions. (hope you didnt spend too much time trying to think while writing this article, it sucks).

  10. I recently heard JBP discuss how non-monogamy increases violent crime rates and heralds the downfall of civilizations. It’s an interesting argument, but he didn’t show any of his work. The most docile and empathetic apes are Bonobo chimps. They’re also polyamorous. Perhaps he’s getting his data from lobster cohabitation. Like most unenlightened pseudo-intellectuals, he stops after correlation, because causation requires exhaustive effort.

  11. Emily Olai,

    You sound just like my teenage son used to sound when I would tell him «clean your room». (think incompletely developed frontal lobe, second toddlerhood etc.) Not a bad kid necessarily, just immature and uninformed. ;-)

  12. i like how your article is based on not listen to him… that’s telling, i assume that’s because you know if anyone actually does they will find he is a reasonable and articulate human being… doesn’t mean he’s right about everything but he’s well worth listening to.

  13. Great! I started questioning JBP when I saw some really messed up videos he posted about child upbringing. Like, could he really be so stupid to believe a child would fall asleep faster by being bribed with presents? And now reading this, I think he really is an imposter. And I think he harms a lot of people, pretending to be someone who really cares about others.

  14. Alright, what? You’re saying that every nasty person nit-picking from his personal views, is his responsibility. That’s not how the world works. The problem with people who take Jordan Peterson’s statements or opinions word for word, is largely in the poor uneducated American population. It’s true he’s revered by poor right wing Americans and why? Because they largely are raised on religion rather than education. What was religion created to do? Control people through fear. If you’re na adult able to think for yourself and think critically (which every educational institution should teach you) you might be able to see this man’s points and perhaps allow him his own opinions whether you agree or not.

    Oh man!!! Talk about incompetent writing!!! You seem to not understand his points. That’s OK. Maybe when you grow up!!

  16. JP has a lot in common with Kenneth Copeland. Yelling nonsense at a hypnotized crowd that take his every word as gospel.

  17. Jordan Peterson is an incredibly intelligent, insightful and logical person. He attracts vitriol from those who are unable to accept that someone may have a different opinion, i.e. socialists and Marxists who are ironically the epitome of fascism and first to shut down free speech.

Legg igjen en kommentar

Din e-postadresse vil ikke bli publisert. Obligatoriske felt er merket med *

Dette nettstedet bruker Akismet for å redusere spam. Lær om hvordan dine kommentar-data prosesseres.