I keep chickens, so I can attest to the pecking order very much being real. Like most chicken-keepers in this country (there are more than 5 million pet chickens in Britain), we only have hens, so we’re talking about hierarchy of females. It has less to do with size or strength and more to do with age: the hens we added later are lower down in pecking order than the ones from our original flock.
The feminist theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether once argued that the crucifixion of Jesus was the 'kenosis' or emptying-out of patriarchy, Jesus renouncing masculine domination. Try that one on Peterson in the unlikely event he ever lets you interview him again 😊
Very much enjoyed the Blair article. And share your skepticism about AI revolutionising public services. Probably upgrading from fax machines, windows 95 and non-editable pdfs would be great first steps into the techno-future of the 21st century.
On the Jesus paintings always having him with long hair thing, my weird obsession the last 18 months has been the early growth of Christianity so I finally got around to reading the Bible and Paul has a bizarre obsession with the need for men to have short hair. Given that he supposedly saw Jesus (or a vision at least) I doubt he’d continue banging on about the evils of long hair on men if Jesus did have long hair and I’m also sure the renaissance painters read the Bible a lot closer than I ever have so where did the long haired Jesus thing come from?
In Ancient Rome -- the society in which Christianity arose -- ruling class men usually wore a military style crewcut, which connoted no-nonsense martial discipline. BUT, there was also a long hair style sported by the esteemed emperor Marcus Aurelius (ruled 161 - 180 CE), which went in an out of fashion. Long hair was associated with Greek philosophers, such as Plato and Socrates, who were the models for Marcus Aurelius's claims to be a "philosopher emperor" -- an intellectual, not just a man of the sword.
Reasoning through association and speculation is often a dead end, especially when it comes to cultural symbols. They shift across time and place, so we have to trace concrete links to specific, documented cultural practices.
The Renaissance artists worked from Greek and Roman artworks, not from any cultural memory of how Jesus might have looked (if he ever lived, which is debated.) No one knows what Jesus looked like. There are no extant images depicting Jesus prior to around 100 CE. And photography was not invented until 1839.
That's why Jordan Petersen is such a joke as a "public intellectual." He looks to nature to interpret phenomena that are clearly historical, cultural, and social.
I get that long hair was in when the renaissance paintings that we get our idea of Jesus from were painted, what confuses me is these were all deeply religious men who constantly read the Bible, yet I picked up Pauls weird hair obsession on one cursory reading and put 2 & 2 together it’s just odd that these religious painters didn’t consider the same thing
I was once a fan of JP , as I believe that I could feel that his intentions were pure. He could see the storm rising in the form of the disenchanted, disenfranchised and despairing young men of the world.
I believe also that he could see the despair and disconnection being experienced in women. Who having been sold the idea of being and doing it all, work, love, family, home and self actualisation. Were now realising that this ideal was as toxic and self abusive as the male ideal.
Your interview with him was probably the best I saw. As far as a proper engagement of ideas and questions of perspective. It was the closest I saw to a woman properly speaking to him without attacking , and thus he did not bite back very much. You both have a mutual respect of the truth and an open enough mindset to find it.
As in the biblical example of the trinity, the truth lay in the tip of the triangle. Your truth, my truth and gods truth, or the shared discovery and understanding of the mutual shared truth.
Unfortunately he was not able to step out of the mansplaining (which is his fundamental flaw). He cannot step out of his own way to see that his audience does not understand or completely agree with the facts , facts , facts he is feverishly delivering. In good faith though , as he knows suffering and sees the suffering in the world, and wants to help. But the disconnect is real. And can be bridged at any time by either party.
My wish was for you Helen was to say, let’s stop for a moment Jordan. I think we both want the same thing here. But I cannot connect with you. This is not a conversation. Let’s begin from here.
Every interview I saw of him with people who pushed back ended in more polarisation. And this has continued and driven him literally crazy. He dresses now like two-face from the Batman comics. And ended up addicted to pain meds. His deep desire to help, was not accepted or embraced (his crucifix to bare, or for all men).
And this is the story for all men who want to deliver the answers. But forget to also ask for help and consultation from other men and women.
I will mansplain right now , with the hope of delivering some clarity or insight. His lobster observations (yes are flawed) but what he is pointing to is fundamental biological characteristics and behaviour.
Which we need to acknowledge and understand. As well as with cultural norms. So that we nourish ourselves and each other, and work with our shadows and our potential.
Political and family systems that respect the individuals and put them in the best position (regardless of gender).
So that we form communities and families where our fundamental needs are met. And our individual gifts allowed to shine.
If it is the woman who wants a family but does not want the pressure to also balance a career and under appreciated and imbalanced work in the home.
Or if it is the man who would like to raise the children , and nourish the family. While the woman contributes to society and the family in the best way possible.
I would love for you to reinterview him Helen , and just open the conversation by apologising for maybe not connecting fully last time. And call it out, “JP, I can see that you are losing your shit , and that you have been co-opted by the right wing and billionaire think-tanks” I can see you want to help. Could we please start over.
I see this conversation as fundamentally iconic as the crucifixion, male and female relations, and the political divide. We both want the same thing , but we cannot arrive there without each other. And the shared truth of god.
I wonder as well Helen.
The takedown of JPs well intentioned, but fundamentally flawed methods (lobsters (he is mainly explaining the role of serotonin and dopamine in these examples I think) not suggesting male and female gender roles.
And his latest Christian journey (he is trying to titrate the fundamental truths or wisdom present in both the Bible, the Quran and other holy scriptures). Which are valid (but as in the mansplaining, corrupted by the do-gooder, or unbalanced male or female tyrant).
Are these not just your (and other writers) as these arguments against a mansplainer are universal)) own version of mansplaining or over talking? Perpetuating the disconnect?
They are universally adored by the consumer of a view point, and get hits and likes, but also are as fundamentally flawed , as the other half-truths delivered.
As in the JK take downs , one persons opinion or words , or thoughts are co-opted by others to project into infinity or onto anyone who deserves it or in order to reflect back what the observer wants to see.
Love your work , and in no way complaining or badgering. Just ever since that GQ interview I have been wishing for a part two. I am friends with Sarah Wilson and I have asked her many times to ask you to have another crack at it. But maybe that ship has sailed , and JP has cracked to much himself?
Peterson can’t handle pushback because he is not actually interested in ‘helping’ others, he is motivated by getting his ego stroked. And he gets lots of that from people like you, who seem to need a messiah figure.
”He argued that evolutionary biology, in the form of mating lobsters, demonstrated that men formed dominance hierarchies, and life was hard for the defeated lobsters men at the bottom of the pile. (I could say “pecking order,” because chickens are held to have similar hierarchies.)
"Transmit that to humans and you have a system where men compete with other men, based on their achievements in their careers and public life, and are matched with female mates on that basis. Female lobsters don’t compete against male ones, which . . . makes you think, huh. Without having to say it, Peterson was implying that women don’t belong in male-dominated career competition."
Your editor called me to inform you that, you forgot to add a "So what you're saying is..." At the start of your paragraph.
This week's newsletter is quite the ride! You know, I live in Australia where we are governed to death, so I've been indoctrinated with "we need to stop these idiots from being idiots." Yet I agree with Dr. O’Shanick - "just let natural selection run its course." As long as nobody else is hurt. Steller work, Helen.
Gift link! Whoohooo! Thanks Ms (childless) Lewis. I’m going to use it during the 30 minutes of advertising Canada’s national broadcaster has lined up preceding opening ceremonies in Paris. Oh, and btw, everyone’s national soccer teams spy. Ours got “caught.”
Sadly, it seems the Petersen/Musk video is no longer available because of a copyright issue regarding some video that was included. Can't understand why they don't just edit that bit out.
Oh and thanks for the PHAGES link, super interesting. Tony Blair is a sales man, AI is maybe a good tool , but more likely just the biggest Ponzi scheme / start up / bullshit machine ever invented. It will create a LOT of capital for a small amount of people. Which will be spent on assets, Ozempic and AI infrastructure to continue to mine capital from desperate and despairing people.
The Americans should be supplying Ukraine with every new device possible to use in armed conflict. There should not be a single bridge in Russia over which the Russian invaders can pass or supplies can pass. Similarly oil sales by Russia to India and China are funding the invasion and, even after two years, have not been stopped. I hope Kamala has a sharper brain than the people who are currently charged with helping Ukraine win the war.
Your personality vs ideology comment made me look up the 1957 Lloyd Price song (you got personality). The punch line on the chorus is “and of course you’ve got a great big heart”. The first bit to go once elected, bought or sold.
I keep chickens, so I can attest to the pecking order very much being real. Like most chicken-keepers in this country (there are more than 5 million pet chickens in Britain), we only have hens, so we’re talking about hierarchy of females. It has less to do with size or strength and more to do with age: the hens we added later are lower down in pecking order than the ones from our original flock.
The chapter on lobsters adds as an afterthought that female lobsters also compete in dominance hierarchies. 🤷♀️
The feminist theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether once argued that the crucifixion of Jesus was the 'kenosis' or emptying-out of patriarchy, Jesus renouncing masculine domination. Try that one on Peterson in the unlikely event he ever lets you interview him again 😊
I’m Just Kenosis.
Very much enjoyed the Blair article. And share your skepticism about AI revolutionising public services. Probably upgrading from fax machines, windows 95 and non-editable pdfs would be great first steps into the techno-future of the 21st century.
On the Jesus paintings always having him with long hair thing, my weird obsession the last 18 months has been the early growth of Christianity so I finally got around to reading the Bible and Paul has a bizarre obsession with the need for men to have short hair. Given that he supposedly saw Jesus (or a vision at least) I doubt he’d continue banging on about the evils of long hair on men if Jesus did have long hair and I’m also sure the renaissance painters read the Bible a lot closer than I ever have so where did the long haired Jesus thing come from?
In Ancient Rome -- the society in which Christianity arose -- ruling class men usually wore a military style crewcut, which connoted no-nonsense martial discipline. BUT, there was also a long hair style sported by the esteemed emperor Marcus Aurelius (ruled 161 - 180 CE), which went in an out of fashion. Long hair was associated with Greek philosophers, such as Plato and Socrates, who were the models for Marcus Aurelius's claims to be a "philosopher emperor" -- an intellectual, not just a man of the sword.
Reasoning through association and speculation is often a dead end, especially when it comes to cultural symbols. They shift across time and place, so we have to trace concrete links to specific, documented cultural practices.
The Renaissance artists worked from Greek and Roman artworks, not from any cultural memory of how Jesus might have looked (if he ever lived, which is debated.) No one knows what Jesus looked like. There are no extant images depicting Jesus prior to around 100 CE. And photography was not invented until 1839.
That's why Jordan Petersen is such a joke as a "public intellectual." He looks to nature to interpret phenomena that are clearly historical, cultural, and social.
I get that long hair was in when the renaissance paintings that we get our idea of Jesus from were painted, what confuses me is these were all deeply religious men who constantly read the Bible, yet I picked up Pauls weird hair obsession on one cursory reading and put 2 & 2 together it’s just odd that these religious painters didn’t consider the same thing
Good morning Helen,
I was once a fan of JP , as I believe that I could feel that his intentions were pure. He could see the storm rising in the form of the disenchanted, disenfranchised and despairing young men of the world.
I believe also that he could see the despair and disconnection being experienced in women. Who having been sold the idea of being and doing it all, work, love, family, home and self actualisation. Were now realising that this ideal was as toxic and self abusive as the male ideal.
Your interview with him was probably the best I saw. As far as a proper engagement of ideas and questions of perspective. It was the closest I saw to a woman properly speaking to him without attacking , and thus he did not bite back very much. You both have a mutual respect of the truth and an open enough mindset to find it.
As in the biblical example of the trinity, the truth lay in the tip of the triangle. Your truth, my truth and gods truth, or the shared discovery and understanding of the mutual shared truth.
Unfortunately he was not able to step out of the mansplaining (which is his fundamental flaw). He cannot step out of his own way to see that his audience does not understand or completely agree with the facts , facts , facts he is feverishly delivering. In good faith though , as he knows suffering and sees the suffering in the world, and wants to help. But the disconnect is real. And can be bridged at any time by either party.
My wish was for you Helen was to say, let’s stop for a moment Jordan. I think we both want the same thing here. But I cannot connect with you. This is not a conversation. Let’s begin from here.
Every interview I saw of him with people who pushed back ended in more polarisation. And this has continued and driven him literally crazy. He dresses now like two-face from the Batman comics. And ended up addicted to pain meds. His deep desire to help, was not accepted or embraced (his crucifix to bare, or for all men).
And this is the story for all men who want to deliver the answers. But forget to also ask for help and consultation from other men and women.
I will mansplain right now , with the hope of delivering some clarity or insight. His lobster observations (yes are flawed) but what he is pointing to is fundamental biological characteristics and behaviour.
Which we need to acknowledge and understand. As well as with cultural norms. So that we nourish ourselves and each other, and work with our shadows and our potential.
Political and family systems that respect the individuals and put them in the best position (regardless of gender).
So that we form communities and families where our fundamental needs are met. And our individual gifts allowed to shine.
If it is the woman who wants a family but does not want the pressure to also balance a career and under appreciated and imbalanced work in the home.
Or if it is the man who would like to raise the children , and nourish the family. While the woman contributes to society and the family in the best way possible.
I would love for you to reinterview him Helen , and just open the conversation by apologising for maybe not connecting fully last time. And call it out, “JP, I can see that you are losing your shit , and that you have been co-opted by the right wing and billionaire think-tanks” I can see you want to help. Could we please start over.
I see this conversation as fundamentally iconic as the crucifixion, male and female relations, and the political divide. We both want the same thing , but we cannot arrive there without each other. And the shared truth of god.
I wonder as well Helen.
The takedown of JPs well intentioned, but fundamentally flawed methods (lobsters (he is mainly explaining the role of serotonin and dopamine in these examples I think) not suggesting male and female gender roles.
And his latest Christian journey (he is trying to titrate the fundamental truths or wisdom present in both the Bible, the Quran and other holy scriptures). Which are valid (but as in the mansplaining, corrupted by the do-gooder, or unbalanced male or female tyrant).
Are these not just your (and other writers) as these arguments against a mansplainer are universal)) own version of mansplaining or over talking? Perpetuating the disconnect?
They are universally adored by the consumer of a view point, and get hits and likes, but also are as fundamentally flawed , as the other half-truths delivered.
As in the JK take downs , one persons opinion or words , or thoughts are co-opted by others to project into infinity or onto anyone who deserves it or in order to reflect back what the observer wants to see.
Love your work , and in no way complaining or badgering. Just ever since that GQ interview I have been wishing for a part two. I am friends with Sarah Wilson and I have asked her many times to ask you to have another crack at it. But maybe that ship has sailed , and JP has cracked to much himself?
Egoists are gonna egoist.
Peterson can’t handle pushback because he is not actually interested in ‘helping’ others, he is motivated by getting his ego stroked. And he gets lots of that from people like you, who seem to need a messiah figure.
See you at the coffee shop for tea and scones for a real conversation when your ready ☺️
Egoists are going to egoist
And arseholes are going to arsehole
Until they don’t ✌🏼
You do not know anything about me and yet you project your own insecurity or story onto me
Time out my friend 🙅🏻
I do not need a messiah , I have a messiah complex 😝
I even look like Jesus 😝😝
And the first rule of Messiah Club is
If he says he is a messiah, than he or she ain’t shit
✌🏼
My point exactly ✌🏼
”He argued that evolutionary biology, in the form of mating lobsters, demonstrated that men formed dominance hierarchies, and life was hard for the defeated lobsters men at the bottom of the pile. (I could say “pecking order,” because chickens are held to have similar hierarchies.)
"Transmit that to humans and you have a system where men compete with other men, based on their achievements in their careers and public life, and are matched with female mates on that basis. Female lobsters don’t compete against male ones, which . . . makes you think, huh. Without having to say it, Peterson was implying that women don’t belong in male-dominated career competition."
Your editor called me to inform you that, you forgot to add a "So what you're saying is..." At the start of your paragraph.
Weirdly, his absurd jacket is the least ridiculous thing about Jordan Petersen. I can only assume the lady lobsters find it alluring.
“mortgage non-payment enthusiast”
😂😂
This week's newsletter is quite the ride! You know, I live in Australia where we are governed to death, so I've been indoctrinated with "we need to stop these idiots from being idiots." Yet I agree with Dr. O’Shanick - "just let natural selection run its course." As long as nobody else is hurt. Steller work, Helen.
Gift link! Whoohooo! Thanks Ms (childless) Lewis. I’m going to use it during the 30 minutes of advertising Canada’s national broadcaster has lined up preceding opening ceremonies in Paris. Oh, and btw, everyone’s national soccer teams spy. Ours got “caught.”
Great article, but I'm not sure I can ever eat crab again.
Sadly, it seems the Petersen/Musk video is no longer available because of a copyright issue regarding some video that was included. Can't understand why they don't just edit that bit out.
Oh and thanks for the PHAGES link, super interesting. Tony Blair is a sales man, AI is maybe a good tool , but more likely just the biggest Ponzi scheme / start up / bullshit machine ever invented. It will create a LOT of capital for a small amount of people. Which will be spent on assets, Ozempic and AI infrastructure to continue to mine capital from desperate and despairing people.
The Americans should be supplying Ukraine with every new device possible to use in armed conflict. There should not be a single bridge in Russia over which the Russian invaders can pass or supplies can pass. Similarly oil sales by Russia to India and China are funding the invasion and, even after two years, have not been stopped. I hope Kamala has a sharper brain than the people who are currently charged with helping Ukraine win the war.
Your personality vs ideology comment made me look up the 1957 Lloyd Price song (you got personality). The punch line on the chorus is “and of course you’ve got a great big heart”. The first bit to go once elected, bought or sold.
Did I miss the formerly obligatory reference to Dan Brown and the Holy Grail? 😉