ジョーダン・ピーターソンさん、フェミニストによる恣意的なインタビューを華麗に乗り切る。
Fore one of our guests of the day the other one today is a man you may recognize or maybe you don’t Jordan Peterson has achieved that rare feat becoming a global Superstar academic so how did he become so well known he first came to National prominence in Canada in
2016 in a debate about new laws on gender identity bill c16 made it an offense to refuse to call someone by their chosen gender pronoun Jordan Peterson argued that this would infringe Free Speech while some supporters of the the bill said he was advocating Prejudice from there his YouTube Star
Took off and he has now over 1 million subscribers and his videos where he talks everything from Identity politics which we’ve touched on to the Bible to Disney movies have been viewed over 150 million times gosh that’s about the same number of viewers we have on this
Program H last year he supported ex gooogle employee James Dore who had been fired for suggesting men and women have different interests due to biological differences and his Book 12 rules for life has taken him on a global tour promoting his ideas and just this week
He sold out the 1,000 CA Emanuel center around the corner here in Westminster um so Jordan you’ve done endless interviews you’ve been publicizing you’ve been publicizing your book and they’ve generated plenty of heated debate and I actually sold out the Apollo it had 5,000 seats all right stop boasting um
Do you think though because of the heat that has been generated that your views have been misrepresented at times oh definitely but that’s you know that’s part and parcel of the process I did take a very um uh forceful stance let’s say against some of the excesses of the
Radical left Wingers and it’s in their best interest to paint me as somehow a figure of the extreme right because then I don’t have to be contended with but I mean it’s easy for people’s views to be oversimplified in a very large public debate I mean in terms of some of the
Issues I mean you say you’ve been uh painted as a as an extreme right winger some people have tried that not successfully but they’ve tried it and you came to prominence um in part over your opposition to this law that we just talked about in Canada proposing the use
Of preferred pronouns for transgender people just for cl mandating them yeah right you should do it no that you had to do it right you had to do it by law but just for clarity do you think a transwoman is a real woman I don’t really like the way those
Questions are formulated you know I don’t know what that means what do you mean a real woman well I’m asking you in your mind you know it depends what you think a real woman is but do you think a trans woman is a woman no why not because I think that women
Are capable generally speaking of having babies and they have female genitalia and they have an XX chromosome and and I think the biological markers are relevant doesn’t necessarily mean that I don’t think that people should be treated with respect and dignity if they happen not to fit easily into a gender
Category that’s a different issue right but but it’s a matter of definition and and I actually think it’s a foolish argument in some sense because what do you mean by real well I mean you’ve just clarified that though you you you don’t think um that a transwoman is a woman
And do you do you think that that is what is behind or explains your opposition to this idea of a law mandating you to use a preferred pronoun is because you don’t actually believe that that’s the truth that a transwoman is a woman and therefore you can’t use
That no that’s not my argument at all yeah really my argument is that the government should compel voluntary speech AR no but I know what your argument is it very clearly exactly there’s motivation behind motivation behind it but you don’t believe put everything on my online in my life to
Take the stance I did unless I had thought that through very deeply and I’ve thought it through very deeply there aren’t hidden motivations that have to do with some arbitrary prejudice against trans people it’s purely pure and simply this there’s never been a time in English common law history where
The government compelled speech and the Canadian government dared to do that and that was unacceptable and they masked it with this show of of compassion for the oppressed and I don’t buy it right but you would as I think you’ve said at an individual level if somebody asked you
If you know somebody asked you to use a particular pronoun you would do so well I have you have right fine let’s talk about feminism are you a feminist uh no not as it’s currently defined certainly not no well in any other definition well I think that
Anybody who doesn’t think that the the competitive landscape should be opened up for equality of opportunity is not thinking and so everyone’s interests are better served if people have as equal access to opportunity to display their talents and to manifest their talents in the world as possible so in that sense
Certainly but feminism now as far and this is why it’s so deeply unpopular very small minority of women in the UK identify as feminists and the reason for that is it’s primarily become an ideological weapon and it’s an ideology that I don’t I I detest actually the ideology that it’s associated with
Collectivist ideology right I mean okay and that’s your view about feminism Aisha are you a feminist oh absolutely I’m a very proud uh feminist and when I was um a special advisor in government I worked on women and equality issues and I was very proud actually of a piece of
Leg legislation I got on the statute book with my former boss Harriet Harman the equality act uh in 2010 which strengthened our anti-discrimination um laws and I fought very hard to get more women into public life into the labor party and yeah and yeah I’m very very proud of being the F
Hence my pink dress oh well you would like men to regain or reclaim their strength physically mentally and morally is that broadly correct I would say morally fundamentally but I think the other things along with that but it isn’t men precisely who I’m Who I’m speaking to it’s it’s people I’m a
Clinical psychologist I’m actually interested individuals and I’m interested in their fortification against tragedy you know every time I do an interview the interview is always political the fundamental news that’s important about what I’m doing isn’t the political element and the people who talk to me don’t talk politically they
Say they’ve watched my lectures but part of it is sorry is that I think for a lot of people the kind of personal does become the the the the the political or the political becomes the person yeah and I think in terms of the in this situation a lot of people are wrong
Because primarily what’s happening is people are watching my lectures and as a consequence their lives are improving dramatically oh I’m sure I’m sure they are what I would like to do is is kind of almost I think at the moment the discussion about feminism is very
Divisive and it sometimes it can sort of be like okay men have to lose and women have to gain actually everybody has a lot to gain by greater equality now whether you get the equality of outcome that you want I think only time will ATT but certainly equality of opportunity is
Is very important and actually a lot and a lot of men would would benefit from that so I think a lot of men men are having a lot of crisis at the moment in terms of mental health suicide issues um their own sense of identity because I
Think some of the stereotypes put on men are quite limiting for them as well I think they make men quite unhappy as well the devil’s in the details with regards to equality because I’m an advocate of equality of opportunity but IDE outcomes that’s an appalling Doctrine why
Why all right because you have to produce an unbelievably potent Bureau bureaucracy to make the ever greater and ever finer distinctions that are necessary to enforce equality of outcome how many group differences are you going to equalize across is it just gender and sex how many genders gender and
Ethnicity how many genders how many ethnicities how many racist we let I sh answer I think what what people are trying to do with this and certainly somebody who you know has looked to do to sort of do this myself I think you set yourself Ambitions for for what you
Would like to see and then you try and remove as many of the the structural barriers and obstacles so you try and create that you know Fair crack of the Whip and that equality of opportunity to see where you get to with the outcomes that’s now we are in very early stages
It’s only hundred years since you know women got the vote in this country you know we have had a long established patriarchal society and set up for for a long time in the world in this country so I think we have a long week to go to
See where it plays out there is no country in the world where you know we really do have gender equality um properly yet in terms of real decision- making and and real some of the Scandinavian countries maybe I they’re still not quite there and I think you’ve
Spoken a lot about there scandin there’s still a way to go in Scandinavia things are not perfect in Scandinavia I hav spoken about that specifically I’ve spoken about about the right stuff yesterday you talked about the I Spen about the fact that you see one of the things that’s happened in the analysis
Of the differences between men and women is that the social constructionist claim is that the differences are socially constructed right is that it’s a consequence of environment that men and women differ but what the scientific literature indicates is that as cultures become more egalitarian like they have in Scandinavia the differences between
Men and women actually increase rather than decreasing which is a direct repost to the social constructionist view so they just deny all that the biggest differences in the world in interest and temperament are between Scandinavian men and women it’s exactly the opposite of what everyone predicted for For for For for fore
ご視聴いただきありがとうございます!
高評価やコメントをいただけたら、とても喜びます。
海外の反応ブログ:https://www.anipoli-tsushinki.com/
▼BGM
■魔王魂
▼音声
■VOICEVOX 四国めたん・春日部つむぎ
▼ヘッダー背景
■ヌー@ドット絵素材置き場
▼引用
何かございましたら下記のメールアドレス、もしくはツイッターにてご連絡よろしくお願いします。
vnxyg39090@yahoo.co.jp
I make these videos to entertain people. I do not own the clips and music I use in most cases. If any owners of the content clips would like me to remove the video, I have no problem with that and will do so as fast as possible. Please email me if you have any concerns at vnxyg39090@yahoo.co.jp
0:00 冒頭
0:29 経歴
2:31 ジェンダー代名詞の強制
4:55 現代のフェミニズム
9:11 スカンディナヴィア
10:04 個人的感想
11:08 現地の反応
#イギリス
#ゆっくり解説
#海外の反応
41 Comments
ジェンダーは無数にある、というのがLGBTQ+連中の定番の台詞なのにそれに結果の平等を割り当てろって時点で矛盾してるんだよね
福沢諭吉の言葉を「天は人の上に人を作らず」の部分だけ切り取って間違った引用されることも多いよね。
ちゃんと「勉学を励め」まで読めないと。
結果の平等
男女の人数を同数にしろ
白人と黒人を同比率にしろ
ということですよね
ジョーダン氏は機会の平等、能力で判断しなければ危険だと提唱している
あれ?トランスジェンダー女性の話はどこいった?w
選挙権を持ってからまだ100年?
選挙権を持たなかった時代を知ってる人間なんてほとんどいないじゃないか。
ほとんどの女性が生まれた時から女性も選挙権を持てる様になっててそういう教育を受けているのに何を言ってるんだ?
機会の平等は既に与えられていて、結果が出ない・出さないのは結局のところ女性・有権者の問題に過ぎない
こういう「平等」を口にして、強権的に他人や社会を支配しようとする連中には否定しかないね。
だからこそ一般から忌避されるし、どんどん先鋭化して狂った差別主義を推進しようとするばかり。
自分達だけの理想を追求しようとした社会・共産主義国家が、全て例外なく終わってるのを見れば
こうした公開討論が許される自由主義社会にとって、この手の癌を蔓延らせないのは重要だよ。
この2人の女性はフェミビジネスのクズだ。こんなのが国家の要職やメディアにいることが罪。
フェミを名乗る
クレイジーに由る
インタヴューに名を借りた
公開吊るし上げ
インポスターに由るPP盤面
其れを見事に乗り越えた
優秀なcrewmate
Mr.Geordan
立派なtaskmasterだ
機会の平等はそうあるべきだよね
だけど結果の平等って何もしてない人も平等でいいのって話になっちゃうよね
努力した結果に対して見合った報酬を得る
それが健全じゃなければ不平不満が生まれるね。
「本当の女性とは?」愚問。心で女性が決まるのでは無いよ。男女のDNAと性器は生まれる前から異なる。誰もが客観的に理解できるのが性別。お心次第でどっちにでもなれる!ものじゃ無い。過去の遺骨をDNA鑑定してもトランスジェンダーって鑑定結果は出ない。人間の身体は男と女しか無い。その他の生物学的な稀な例は疾患です。
心の問題は勝手にすればいいでしょ。自分の周りの人に「私を女性として扱って」と言えばいい。でも女性の身体じゃ無いから女性特有の生理や疾患があるわけじゃ無い。だから生物学的な女性では無いから、女性として区分はされないし特権は得られないよ⁈って事です。そもそも女性に特権が欲しいのでは無く、機会の公平平等さが欲しいだけだわ。だからこの番組のフェミニストの女性も間違ってる。
フェミニストのインタビューは忍殺世界のインタビューに近いからね
互いの主張がぶつかることは悪いことでは無いが、話が通じないのは本当に疲れるよな。この人尊敬するわ
Q.トランス女性は女性ですか? A.自身を女性だと自認している男性です。
自身を女性だと錦してる女性は女性だし、男性だと認識している女性はトランス男性なだけ…?
あなたの心に聞いています!
これ見るとフェミニストって頭が悪いか悪辣かもしくはその両方だということがよくわかる。その相手をするピーターソンさんに尊敬しかない。
まぁ先進国はほぼ全て少子化だからな。移民を受け入れてない日本が人口減少で滅びそうになって初めて気づくだろうさ。
結果の平等というのは共産主義と同じ考え方で、人が働いてる間は無理かな。人の代わりに全ての労働を機械がするようになれば結果の平等に近づいていくかも。
本人の意志を聞かずに男、女と振り分ける産婦人科はレイシストだな
せめて10年は待たないと
ジョーダンさんからミスを引き出したいだけの言いがかり的質問。機会の平等と結果の平等は同列ではない。同じ結果は与えられる条件・能力・精度が同一の機械でなければ起き得ない。然し、それでも一定の誤差は生じる。だから「公差」が与えられることで「同一視」する。人には感情が伴うから同一にはなり得ない。ジョーダンさんのように感情をコントロールできる人にはインタビュアーの策は通じないことが、結果の平等(≒同一性)が有り得ないことの証明。
利益を与えるから増える
見なければ感想を言ってはいけないなんて言う卑劣な集金方法の通用する時代は終わった
ジョーダンさんが語るのは「男」「女」の身体構造の違いでの区別。
相手は心の区別。
絶対に交わらないですね。
身体的性別は2つしか無いですからね。
女性2人が理解力なくて、男性が気の毒。
有名人を訴えた者勝ちの弱者&被害者ビジネスも日本に浸透してきた、まともじゃない
理解できてたらフェミニスト辞めないとおかしいんよね
よくある話だど思うけど、生物学的に男性と女性の話であって、なにが言いたいのかな?
気持ちと生物学的を同一視してるしてないの話なら相容れない。
その方達は生物学的に認めてもらいたいのか、人権?的なことを求めてもらいたいのかよくわからないね。
相手の意見を決めつけ反論させ否定するの繰り返し
男女平等とは何かを決めないとフェミニストの女性観もただの差別ですね
彼がが「結果の平等は・・・」と否定的な反応をした途端に女性2人が「なぜ???」とハモったシーンは笑えた。。。私はその反応に「なぜ???」だわ
結果の平等性は性を一つにすれば可能なんじゃないかな。
いつも思うが共産主義者って本当の男女平等については実はどうでも良くて、自分たちの考える「理想的社会」運動の方便になってる。異論を唱える人は男女どちらも「〇〇主義者(この場合は差別主義者)」とレッテルを貼ってその人の人権まで奪おうとする。過去に開放すると訴えた労働者や農民が「開放された」世界が生き地獄だったように、多様性とは正反対の画一化が始まり、それに反対するものは男に限らず女性だろうが「弱者」だろうが排除されるのはいつか来たパターン。
わからんけど、結果の平等をおそらく2人の女性はとても狭い範囲で論じている感じがする。報酬。
トランスジェンダーの女性を選んで考えると確かに『体は男で、心は女性』と言う、言い方は悪いかもしれないがそういう病気の人は居ると思う。だけど、『体も心も男のまま、女性枠に入れれば有利だ』と考える男性もいるし、それの選別も真面に出来ないままトランスジェンダーを認めろっていう事は『今現在、そういう人も居るよね』と肯定的になってきている世情を覆す事に成りかねないから、昔からのトランスジェンダーの人達が反対の立場に立ってるんじゃないのかな?それはトランスジェンダーの男性を選んでも同じだが被害は体力的に女性の方が大きいから選びました。
話を聞く気がないな。
「結果の平等」ではなく「機会の平等」であるべきって主張を聞いた時からジョーダンさんが好きなんよな。
フェミニストってバカしかいない。バカを炙り出すのには一番良いよw
自分の望むデータ結果にならない限り、差別があるってことにするんだろうね、こういう人達
婆「トランス女性を女性として認めてますか?はいかいいえで答えなさい」
ジョーダン「はいかいいえかの問題じゃない」
婆「はいかいいえで答えろ」
ジョーダン「生物学的にはいいえですけどね」
婆「うわっこいつトランス女性を女性として認めてないんだってよ」
みたいなやり取りが嫌いだわあ。
結果の平等の行き着く先は共産主義思想だよね。人間社会でそんな制度が上手くいくわけがないのは、歴史を見れば明らかでしょ。
完全に社会でも固定観念なしで成長したらどうなるのだろう。まさに今はその初期段階なのかもな。
平等と公平は違うBy出光佐三
チャンスの平等にはわかるけど、結果の平等とかアホでしょ。
ジェンダーだという事を許した世間に向かって
今度はジェンダーがそれは違う世間を許さない
女性は損しているって思い込んでるんだろうな。