British GQ: Helen Lewis interview to Jordan Peterson Analysis

A forthright and downright interrogation bring forth transparent argumentation of discretely rational perspective and discrepancy. Helen Lewis, one of the Atlantic magazine’s journalist and author of the book—Difficult Women: A History of Feminism in 11 Fights has interviewed the controversial influencer Jordan Peterson, a research clinical psychologist and professor at the leading University of Toronto, Canada. He is the author of bestselling book titled 12 Rules for Life: Antidote to Chaos, his book is seasoned with numerous credible sources from Dostoevsky, Jung, and Nietzsche that shows his well-founded ideas and knowledge appealing to ethos and logos. However, his robust bestselling book seems to be miscomprehended by many readers resorting to dissensions and criticisms.

The argument between Lewis and Peterson was extrapoted from Peterson's book—The 12 Rules for Life, and their intensively in-depth argumentation was primarily circulated to the idea of Patriarchy followed by intriguing matters such as the alt-right movement, the allure of fascist ideologies, gay parenting, Me Too movement, his all beef diet and some personal questions. I infer that the existence of patriarchal structure is undeniably part of the social history and humankind; It is a result of competence which is definitely not tyrannical. 

 

Both of them provide salient points with their logical reasoning skills and the credibility of their individual statements that challenge each other's grounds making it conspicuous to me that the crux of their discussion about Patriarchy got convoluted. Peterson does not believe that there is Patriarchy if it is based on Helen's conventional definition which is a system of male leadership or superiority, because he believes that our society is not male-dominated and he mentioned that he is certain that male dominance is not the modern notion of patriarchy. He has emphasized that dominance is based on power which is tyrannical and absolutely different from competency that sets male as primal part of the hierarchical structure in the society. Male competency for triumph should not be misapprehended as a form of tyrannical patriarchy for it is a product of their moral value, intellect, and aptitude that does not constitute fascist Ideology or any deplorable authoritarian system, not even linked to Alt-right or white supremacy that is extremely racist, it is neither a threat to gender equality nor undermines feminity. 

Contextual Analysis

In the first part of the interview Helen asked Jordan Peterson about the idea of “masculine order and feminine chaos” in his book. Peterson respond immediately by saying that was merely a representation that symbolizes two things, Helen still asked then why men are orderly? Peterson expatiated that he thinks it is because masculine is mainly cardinal in the society's hierarchical structure. Helen interpreted it as men dominates the hierarchical structure and hence it is patriarchy. However, Peterson was trying to throw out Helen's stride by asking her in what sense the society is dominated by male? Helen exemplified that men owned larger properties and wealth while women usually assigned to non-paying labors this is where Peterson interrupt by outweighing it with a clever forceful argument stating the unexpressed travail of men that shows no dominance. In response, Helen stands firmly and pointed out that women are always victims of rape and Peterson said which i concur that there is unevenness in various situations but women's ordeal committed by perpetrators is not an indication of patriarchy in western culture. 

He has established a good point there but I want to accentuate that Peterson claims that there is no patriarchy in the society specifically in western culture but as I discern it there is patriarchy even before the civilization began, I would say that patriarchy do exist but tyranny must not directly be associated to patriarchy that is two different things. Peterson have probably discombobulated some readers and listeners: He mentioned that men are primarily on top of the social hierarchy because of their competency. In the essence of “competency, not power” it is perspicacious but, in the part, patriarchal structure it is vague. 

Helen was able to provoke Peterson when he said that the neuroscientific lobster theory that Peterson used as a representation to human demeanor that described how male lobster fight for success depicting male social position in the society were botch by saying it is “rubbish” showing how ridiculously illogical Peterson's point. Peterson's explanation to this was supported by science appealing to logos, as he said that there are biological traits possessed by the lobster exhibing similar behavior to human and he adds up terms such as “seropin” a molecule that is also present in human indicating that there is emotional connection between the two species which justifies as to why he chose lobster. 

My point here is that I agree to Peterson about the male ardent effort to achieve victory is a product of competence and not power or dominance but I have also understood Helen's point that patriarchy has something to do with the structure of social hierarchy. In this case, it is explicit to me that patriarchy really occur in some degree and I deemed it harmless unlike tyrannical patriarchy that is something detrimental. To elucidate my understanding, based on questia website, an online academic oriented books and articles repository, Patriarchy came from the Greek words patria means father and arches means ruler, it is defined as a social system legitimately depended on men as a leader, father and husband figure. Matriarchy is the opposite term pertaining to female leadership. On the other hand, according to Sian Lewis, a senior lecturer in ancient history school of classic, tyranny is an illicit and grave abuse of authority or power. As what I have mentioned patriarchy has been existing even before, the basic unit of the society which is family follows patriarchal system legitimized by law and custom. In addition, biblical context concords to the same practices. 

As continuation to Helen and Peterson's discourse, they have covered the ideology of fascism and Alt-right movement. Both of these are related to vicious superiority principle. One of the most popular form of fascism was applied in Germany during the time of Adoft Hitler. The Nazi party which is authoritarian and dictatorial in nature adheres to their ideology that they were the “Aryan race” or the supreme race of pure German people that was meant to rule the earth. On the other hand, alt-right movement is not far behind this Ideology as they equally believe to “white supremacy” as the race that is higher than any other race, I can say both are impertinently racists and good examples of tyrannical dominance ideology that is not necessary patriarchy because this can be exercised by both men and women.

Peterson has his feminine characteristics that was discussed in the interview, he dresses well, he shows his emotional side like he cries in public, and he do baking, after sorting these out Helen asked him if he feels the allure of fascist ideology or the temptation of being authoritarian, he admitted that he noticed the allure but he is a man who can manage to grapple with this kind of urges and that is what he has been doing for decades, to discreetly handle himself as he views it more ideal. Moreover, he has also been associated to Alt-right movement but he ascertain that he does not want and he is not related or member of any organizations and political movements because he does not agree to their objectives, their method and to what they fight for, he said that those radical leftist involving those anti-capitalism, anti-semitism groups that hated him because of his belief in individualism and he does not what to side to any of these political associations that could ruin his reputation and just exacerbate things. 

Another social movement that was discussed in the interview was about the Me too movement, an organization that fights against sexual maltreatments, abuse, and injustice to women's right. According to Peterson he deduce  that this movement has done favorable and unfavorable acts, in this part he is being neutral but he addressed his point of view about the propensity of risks in discarding the legal right of the accused which is the presumption of innocence unless proven guilty, he shared this in relation to the example he gave about the preponderance of evidence model they utilize in the university in which he found to be ineffective, as he explained that this kind of model will capture a particular culprit based only on the quantity of evidences gathered which to me, it is insufficient and flimsy for I agree to what Peterson have implied about “believe the victim” concept that could really attract manipulation. Albeit, I prefer to follow due process of law that holds the impartial rights for victims and accused. This discussion about the Me too movement has nothing to do with patriarchy but it bears upon tyranny.

Gender equality is already attached to the topic of feminism and fascism because gender role is present. In biological and cultural aspects, the individual role and capacity are not dictated by prescribed gender stereotypes and when it comes to same-sex parenting, it is true that we do not have concrete basis to what is the best way in raising child as long as both same-sex parents can appropriately do the necessary part in nurturing and sustaining children's daily needs there is nothing wrong with that. This can be construed in Peterson's perception. 

Conclusion

To recapitulate the analysis the provocative argument discourse mode has elicited profuse information about the undying issue of inequality because of superiority. The idea of patriarchy is not only in western culture but it is apparent in most places across the word. The interview between Jordan Peterson and Helen Lewis has given two conflicting views and compelling reasons not only to persuade as well as to enlighten the audience about the misinterpreted ideas and vacuous information circulating around. Patriarchy was indeed achieved through men's competence but it is not what is perceived to be an excessive power that is clearly unjust. Tyranny is a term that can  be associated to patriarchy or matriarchy which is a form of perverse, indignant shenanigans and reprehensible use of power that could be deleterious to all humankind. Feminism views patriarchy as tyrannical, bias, and threat to gender equality and women's liberty but the truth is patriarchal hierarchy is not an impediment to feminines success that hinge upon their competence. We abide by the rules of laws that governs us, and nobody can stand above it. Women's oppressions would remain with or without the patriarchal hierarchy. 

Fascist ideology, alt-right, and gay parenting has been integrated to widen and augment one's understanding about the different forms of dominance and ideologies that formulate explicit disparity between tyrannical patriarchy of aggrandizement and patriarchy of great potentials and competence. Women can compete victoriously for any prime position and can also established either tyrannical matriarchy or lawful Matriarchy. 

Reference

British GQ. (2018, October 30). Jordan Peterson: “There was plenty of motivation to take me out. It just didn't work”| British GQ [video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/user/GQRecommends

Kunzru, H. (2018). 12 Rules for life by Jordan B. Peterson review-a self-help book from a culture warrior [Article]. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/18/12-rules-for-life-jordan-b-peterson-review

Mirrlees, T. (2019). The alt-rights platformization of fascism and a new left's digital united front, 28(2) [journal].  Retrieved from https://journals.flvc.org/demcom/article/view/118968

<script data-ad-client="ca-pub-5326383612539043" async src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>