Implying that women wear heels to work and put make up on to make themsleves sexually attractive is absolutely misogynistic...even though he is presenting it in a way that excuses male behavior.
He put that out there as a thought experiment. We mustn't dilute the meaning of "misogyny", which is
the hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women or girls. Do you really see hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women in this?
For the sake of argument, let's ignore that statement wasn't a thought experiment but in fact represented JP's actual views. He could be fairly accused of
sexist stereotyping, perhaps...but
misogyny is a level worse than that, he could not be accused of such a crass level of women-hating based on that one statement.
Language is important.
He believes that there is no such thing as white privilege. Maybe no where you are from or where he is from, but it's absolutely true in America. It certainly isn't as big as it was say 50 years ago, but it absolutely exists. Maybe it's not racist, maybe it is...certainly makes things plausibly deniable though. I would think most black people in America would listen to him deny white privilege and take it as racist.
There is no such thing as white privilege in a legal sense...anywhere where there are laws to protect against such. So in the US since the 60's there's been no white privilege. But there is class privilege, and as %-ratio there are more white people in a better economic class than black people. There are also racist institutions (the police) which when looking at the evidence appear to treat white suspects better on balance. On the flip side there's positive discrimination which seeks to redress the balance somewhat.
I understand why some would say there is indeed such a thing as white privilege, and also why some would say that's the wrong thing to focus on. There are plenty of white working class who don't feel that privileged. I believe they voted for a certain perma-sunburnt man because he seemed to acknowledge their existence.
So I disagree that anyone arguing there isn't such a thing as white privilege is a racist. Misguided, maybe. But plain racist? Again, it's diluting language. A racist is a person who
shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Denying there is such a thing as white privilege isn't that, it's not even plausibly denial that. It's only racist if there are other things that person is saying or doing which is more clearly outing him as a racist (like a Don Black or Richard Spencer would...clearly racist people who aren't worth anyone's time).
There is such a thing as the
racist card, and when it's played wrongly, it damages the very cause it claims to fight for. And it's real damage, as there are enough very real problems with racism in USA that everyone should be fighting against. Creating made-up problems that aren't there is distracting and breeding resentment among the white working class (again, why Trump got in).
He talks of wanting equality of opportunity but then saying things design to create such equality is wrong.
I think you've got that mixed up. He believes creating equality of
outcome is wrong (as do I), he fully supports equality of
opportunity (for all). Unless I missed something and you can link me up?
He is helping depressed white men? How depressing is that. He depresses the hell out of this white male American.
Well, you may not need his help. But there are many reports of those who have needed help and are getting it from his words. Personally I feel happy for them.
So let's go back to the worst of that Durham Council statement:
"Mr. Peterson’s racist, misogynist, and transphobic views...Those who seek to exclude or deny the humanity of others will find no comfort here. We believe that violence against women is horrific and unacceptable under any circumstances. "
From your examples, which I'm assuming are the worst you could find, is he excluding or denying the humanity of others? Is he promoting violence against women?
For if you agree he's not really doing that (not even in a plausible denial sense) then maybe you understand how such a crass accusation can make one fume.
