About Peterson.

/u/farkinga on /r/canada, discussing Professor Peterson’s pronoun predicament: (src)

Peterson makes two arguments: the first regards speech and the second regards gender/sexuality. On the issue of speech, he raises so many great points. Unfortunately, he doesn’t just argue about speech.

On the issue of gender/sexuality, Peterson has fringe beliefs that are not shared by most of his colleagues. Peterson is demonstrably behind on the relevant literature, repeatedly stating that he is unaware of any research to dispute his claims, when in fact there are many relevant publications. He regularly speaks way beyond the responsible interpretation of scientific results. I am distantly aware of the literature, enough so to state with authority that several eminent gender/sexuality researchers have given talks at Peterson’s department in the past 5 years and he really has no excuse to not be aware of their work – especially if he’s going to become an activist on the topic.

As an academic and a philosopher, we’re lucky he’s doing his thing. However, it’s important to understand that Peterson is practicing terrible, embarrassing psychological science as it is applied to gender. Nobody in the scientific community has his back because he’s simply not being scientific.

I wish so badly these speech and gender arguments could be considered separately, but all parties repeatedly conflate them.

How not to raise awareness: a case study in caricaturing

Now, don’t get me wrong. They’re right.

But they’re drawing a hilarious caricature of Big Ads and passing it off as, to quote the video description, “what we did to expose the hidden business of the Internet”.

  1. Trackers do not shout the data at everyone passing by.
  2. Trackers do not literally expose your physical body.
  3. Trackers do not sound like auctioneers.
  4. Trackers do not have giant flashing signs.

Honestly. I’m sure this isn’t meant to be taken seriously, but it’s frankly ridiculous, and serves no purpose. Shame on you, Mozilla.