Free Speech

Penguin Random House Employees Broke Down in Tears at Thought of Publishing Jordan Peterson's Next Book

"He is an icon of hate speech and transphobia."


On Monday, Penguin Random House announced it would publish a sequel to 12 Rules for Life, the bestselling self-help book by Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson.

In response, several employees of the publishing giant broke down crying—and no, these weren't happy tears due to the prospect of selling so many books.

"He is an icon of hate speech and transphobia and the fact that he's an icon of white supremacy, regardless of the content of his book, I'm not proud to work for a company that publishes him," a young LGBTQ employee told Vice News. Another employee said people were crying in meetings because of the negative way "Peterson has affected their lives." Several submitted complaints—outraged that the company would give yet another platform to a person whose views they find toxic.

Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, is indeed controversial among progressives: He first came to the public's attention in 2016 when he criticized a Canadian human rights law that he said would violate academic freedom by requiring him to use trans people's preferred pronouns. (Peterson claimed he would not be forced to use words that, in his view, were invented by activists; he wasn't attempting to misgender any specific trans people.) In subsequent years, he became a passionate opponent of identity politics, speech policing, and cancel culture, and is revered by many young, right-of-center males.

Critics contend that he gave voice to the concerns of the far-right, and helped embolden racial bigotry and anti-trans animus. Defenders point out that Peterson does not actually push racist or bigoted ideas, he merely rejects the idea that people should be coerced into opposing them. Moreover, while it's undeniably true that Peterson was popular among the racist alt-right, others have plausibly argued that Peterson's work has helped to prevent some vulnerable young people from experiencing radicalization. In any case, his actual book falls squarely in the self-help category, and offers such banal wisdom as "clean your room." Reason's Matt Welch gave the book a conflicted review, observing that Peterson was "too important to—and reliant on—the great campus culture wars to have any realistic hopes of transcending them."

People who run publishing companies have to make all sorts of difficult decisions about which books to sign off on, and employees of those companies are welcome to give input: In many cases, that's their exact job. But it certainly says something about the ideological capture of so many elite institutions of knowledge sharing—the traditional media, social media, the university, and now book publishing. Many young, militantly woke staffers at these places are determined to suppress viewpoints they disagree with on grounds that conflicting opinions are literally dangerous to their safety. For them, Peterson's book isn't an intellectual endeavor worth challenging, it's an assault on their emotional wellbeing.

Peterson, for what it's worth, has apparently had a challenging year. It was reported that he had become addicted to prescription drugs and had traveled to Russia for treatment; doctors then placed him in a medically-induced coma for eight days as he recovered from pneumonia. He later went with his daughter to Serbia and contracted COVID-19. It might be interesting to read how—or even if—these struggles changed his thinking: His next book will be titled Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't mildly curious. Here's hoping Penguin Random House's Peterson-skeptics succeed in improving the book, rather than preventing it from ever seeing the light of day.

NEXT: Offensive License Plates Are Free Speech, Court Tells California

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Make 6,000 dollar to 8,000 dollar A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And Choose Your Own Work Hours.Thanks A lot Here……….USA PART TIME JOB.

    1. Mikhaila Peterson needs to let me clean her room, if you know what I mean.

      1. you mean tidy up and vacuum…you’re a helper!

        1. Start making money this time. Spend more time with your family & relative by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $65o to $7 a month. I’ve started this job and earn handsome income and now I am exchange it with you, so you can do it too. You can check it out here… EASY ONLINE EARNING

  2. President joe biden long shot efforts at getting courts to overturn the results of the presidential election in key states are ending in near-unanimous failure………VISIT HERE FOR FULL DETAIL.

    1. ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regularer office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…..work92/7 online

      1. Google pays for every Person every hour online working from home job. I have received $23K in this month easily and I earns every weeks $5K to 8$K on the internet. Amj Every Person join this working easily by just just open this website and follow instructions………….. Visit Here

  3. Maybe the employees should quit & find another job if this one brings them to tears. Jesus F Christ.

    1. No shit. If they think Peterson is a white supremacist, they are way too naive and fragile to be allowed out in public, loose on the streets. Bring back freedom of association and let the employer fire their asses for being undependable; I sure wouldn’t sign any contract with such wussies.

      1. If the employer fired them they’d turn around and sue the employer for hostile work environment and say they were fired for being gay. This kind of bullshit has the force of law. That’s why these people say they feel image even when no reasonable person would believe they are in any physical danger, because that is a legal code word that forces their employer to do what they want.

        1. That’s why freedom of association should have been explicitly mentioned in the First Amendment. I believe one of the framers objected to the Bill of Rights, especially the 9th and 10th amendments, because he feared the unenumerated rights would be denigrated for not being expressly listed. He was right. But without the Bill of Rights, none would still remain today. The real flaw is that the government gets to define its own limits.

          1. The Supreme Court has long recognized a right to freedom of association. But like the 2nd Amendment some rights are less equal than others. Even among enumerated, explicit rights, the Supreme Court recognizes that when the government has a compelling interest, it can contravene your rights as long as it restricts you in the least way possible.

            I don’t think you will ever get 5 (or 10 after the Dems are done) Supreme Court Justices to say that your right to be a racist asshole (their argument, not mine) overrides the government’s interest in making sure that minorities get their due. To do so would be to tacitly admit that these rights are near absolute, and they cannot have that.

            1. Anti discrimination laws have little to do with a right to be a racist asshole or protecting minorities; in fact, they tend to hurt minorities.

              They are simply regulatory capture and handouts to big corporations, law firms, and public sector unions. Companies like Google love anti discrimination laws.

        2. The way around that is for the employer to document every instance where the employee caused a disruption, failed to complete assigned tasks, etc.

          If the threat of suing for discrimination was enough to keep such terrible employees from being fired, you’d see a lot worse actions from them than crying over literally nothing. Why wouldn’t they just go all in and refuse to do any work, steal office equipment with impunity, or even sexually harass whichever colleagues they felt like harassing? If they could turn around and claim any disciplinary action was strictly because they are gay or trans or whatever to avoid any consequences—never mind how that would undermine those LGBT employees who are actually competent and dependable—that would be happening all the time. It doesn’t, so I think employers have figured out how to legally cover their asses when they have to get rid of problem workers.

          1. Yes. Most discrimination complaints are unsuccessful, for the reason you state—most employers are meticulous about documenting employee misbehavior. Where I work, EVERY time a Black employee is terminated, they file a complaint with the state civil rights commission. The complaints never go anywhere.

            1. Gotta have a job to get unemployment.

      2. It is too late for the employer. It was too late as of 2018:

        “We want everyone who works at Penguin Random House to feel like they belong. To help do so, in 2018 we formed a Diversity & Inclusion Council comprising employees from all areas of our business.”

        These Diversity & Inclusion Councils are internal grievance networks. When you set them up, you are basically setting up a network of all the activist employees in the company, and giving them official sanction. Within a year or two, all opposition to Anti-Racism has been linked to racism. These people train one another how to file HR complaints and marginalize others. They get up at executive meetings each month, normalizing radical CRT language that 5 years previous would have been considered bizarre.

        And if you are an executive who is fed up with that? Good luck. Let’s see how your job does when these activists are scorned. They are literally your “minority protection” group. Firing them or stripping them of their power will likely get you fired by HR in order to protect them from lawsuits, and you will likely never work again after they have dragged your name through the mud on LinkedIn and Twatter.

        Any company that hires a diversity officer or starts these inclusion councils has essentially swallowed the tapeworm eggs. They are infected and will forever be hosts.

        1. “…in 2018 we formed a Diversity & Inclusion Council comprising employees from all areas of our business.”

          “Our DIC will enhance multiculturalism and diversity. It’s a powerful DIC.”

        2. Was CRT language considered “bizarre” 5 years ago, or was it considered “hate speech” at that time? There’s precious little difference between CRT and the ideas that Richard Spencer is pushing other than who’s pushing them and how much they’re able to leverage State authority to force people to accept them; it’s possible that Spencer’s ideology doesn’t go as deep into trying to define people based only on their “identity” characteristics.

          1. CRT is cultural Marxism applied to a single cultural construct – that being the concept of race – as such it is itself a form of hate speech.

            And being Marxism it is the worst form of hate speech, because it hates you for being free.

            All Marxism is hate speech.

            1. Uh, no. I’m no fan of Marxism, but I have read Marx. It’s a little more complicated than your summary.

              1. No, it is not. And my comments were not restricted to Karl Marx, (or even Engels.) Marxism encompasses much these days, including Cultural Marxism.

                But even so, if you wish to stick strictly to Krazy ol’ Karl you are going to have to do better than a mere ‘it’s complicated.’

                Because we are all tired of the ‘no true Marxism’ horseshit. You are know by your fruits and Marx’s were all roadapples.

                1. “You are known by your fruits and Marx’s were all roadapples.”

                  And dingleberries, lots and lots of dingleberries. Sow Marxism and you’ll always reap a rich harvest of dingleberries.

        3. Pretty much. The only thing that’s going to cure this type of disease is a nuclear holocaust at this point.

          1. If progressives saw greater perceived virtue in laughing off crybullies, this shit would end tomorrow.

            1. Or at least handing these basketcases a razor and telling them, “you run it vertically down your arm, not horizontally.”

      3. Canada has no trouble trampling upon the unalienable right of humans to be able to speak freely. That very small minorities of with dysphoria of aberrant conduct need help and not promotion of their dysphoria to lord over the rational and reasonable people trying to lead our lives as human lives are designed to be lead.

      4. Exactly. Those woke, brainwashed, totalitarian brats need a real world wake up call.

    2. That’s not how progressivism works. You force your ideology down everyone else’s throat, not pursue other endeavors or leave people who don’t agree with you alone. And you certainly don’t accept that there are others out there that don’t think exactly like you do, and go about your life regardless.

      Progressivism is a quasi-religious cult.

      1. These fuckers fancy themselves as though they were Romans spreading “culture and light” to all those who’ll have it, and destroying those who won’t.

    3. Victim industrial complex.
      Victimhood has been elevated to a high art. Never in history has being a minority been safer, yet never has the pained cries of oppression been more shrill.
      Words have been redefined as violence, because there is a dearth of actual violence. Safety is now equated with hearing nothing to contradict one’s own world view, as opposed to what most normal folks would equate with an absence of physical harm.
      Emotional security comes from within. It is not the responsibility of society to give anyone a warm cuddly emotional place.

      1. There were something like 7K cases of racist attacks in this country of 330 million yet all the media could say is that ‘racist attacks are up by 30%’ or some such shit.

        1. …racist “attacks” are defined by anyone claiming such. There is no actual standards for what constitutes one. This makes it impossible to actually fight the real attacks, when they are mingled with exaggerated ones.

        2. Racism, like sexism, is essentially dead. Cops discriminate, but mainly against the poor. BLM was complete bullshit – they made some headway dividing the country and pushing ever closer to that color revolution Soros has always wanted. If it weren’t for a bunch of virtue signaling millenials, they’d have been stamped out early. But being distinguished as an SJW was cool. Now it’s not. They got their way, now they can stfu.

      2. Unless you are a Christian in the Middle East or Europe and then your rights will hear crickets from the professors and the media. No mention at all of Armenians.

  4. Critics contend that he gave voice to the concerns of the far-right, and helped embolden racial bigotry and anti-trans animus. Defenders point out that Peterson does not actually push racist or bigoted ideas, he merely rejects the idea that people should be coerced into opposing them.

    Diversity means forcing people to conform to a certain set of ideas, and tolerance means not tolerating disagreement.

    So the critics are just being tolerant and promoting diversity.

    1. I’ve asked the sjw types in other online venues to explain their hate of Peterson to me. I’ve listened to a “Behind the Bastards” podcast on the same topic, but the same sort of people. They utterly fail to make a case. The best I can tell is that they don’t like someone telling them to clean their room and do better, especially if he has a few other personality traits that are easy to lampoon.

      1. That’s because they are believers in their prog group identity. It’s no different than TDS or any other religion. They will defend the group irrationally and without logic or objectivity. Belief will end up catalyzing the end of this nation.

    2. *by the same sort of people.

      1. Either way worked.

  5. Don’t you know ideas are dangerous and words are violence? We must be protected from thoughts some people don’t like.

    1. Words are violence.
      Silence is violence.
      Physical violence is mostly peaceful. (Depending on who does it and why)

      1. War is peace.
        Freedom is slavery.
        Ignorance is strength.

        1. Which one of those is going to replace “Democracy dies in darkness” on the WaPo masthead once Biden is inaugurated? Or maybe they’ll wait a few months until he steps aside (or gets taken out via 25A for dementia) and Kamala Harris takes over?

          1. “Democracy dies in darkness” is a want not a warning.

    2. The key phrase being “some people”. Because I note that *I* am not protected from ideas *I* don’t like, nor do I see a mechanism in place to protect me from such.

      Not that I really care. But what I DO see is a real effort to protect people’s feeling from arguments made with factual evidence and logic, and from jokes. And I don’t view either of those as being things from which society OR individuals need protecting.

      1. They need to lock themselves down and throw away the key. Leave the physical world to the non believers.

  6. “It might be interesting to read how—or even if—these struggles changed his thinking”

    Maybe, but it would be completely irrelevant to this story because nobody beats drug addiction and illness in Serbia only to conclude “maybe those 20 year old SJWs were right all along”.

  7. Jesus Christ, the lack of self-awareness in these people. At some point, surely you have to become aware that your reactions are not normal and you need the help of a mental health professional. Who the fuck hires these people who are so emotionally and psychologically fragile, and where the fuck do they find them?

    1. Why would they become aware that their reactions are not normal? They’ve been trained to react this way for nearly twenty years and these reactions have been validated every step of the way. In fact, it would be more surprising if their reactions won’t be validated by the corporate establishment this one time.

      1. Even more surprising would be to find young folks at a publishing company throwing tantrums about some Marxist drivel that was scheduled for publishing.

        1. They’d have tears of joy for that type of book.

    2. 20 Years ago, Google figured out that they could get obscene levels of work out of these children by basically being their parents. They bring you in and manage all aspects of your life- free food, free clothing, company trips to hawaii, etc. While not all companies have Google’s deep pockets, they have taken a lot of this to heart- trying to turn the companies into one big family where you work, play and volunteer together. This has led these children to believe their relationship with the company is essentially the same as their relationship with parents- they are to be shielded from Opportunity Costs by someone else’s work, and their way to get what they want is through temper tantrums and sibling infighting.

      Mind you, there is a difference between trying to make your company one big family and being employee led. Whole Foods, for all their enviro-conscious clap trap expects its employees to take responsibility for the company. For example, they tell the employees just how much money they have available for benefits in a year, and let them vote on the benefits.

      1. This is to my mind a perfect encapsulation of what’s at play.

      2. Pretty much, and it’s even more insidious than that–Big Tech companies like Google don’t just want to be another family for their employees, they want to act as the replacement for their actual family, because they realize that by destroying those bonds, your employees become far more malleable towards accepting whatever political and social agenda you want to push. It is, at its core, an ideology of Corporate Marxism, but it functions more or less the same as college professors who relentlessly push their political agenda in their classes, and brainwash students into being left-wing pod people with no loyalty or ties to their communities or family.

        1. “Big Tech companies like Google don’t just want to be another family for their employees, they want to act as the replacement for their actual family, because they realize that by destroying those bonds, your employees become far more malleable towards accepting whatever political and social agenda you want to push.”

          Isn’t that Scientology’s gig?

          1. Makes you think, doesn’t it?

    3. Mental health professionals are the reason these people think their actions are perfectly normal and justified. If the psych field hadn’t spent the last 10-20 years indulging these lunatics and enabling their delusions as healthy self-actualization, we wouldn’t be seeing this mainstreamed.

      It’s not going to be until some civilization with balls actually figures out that societies like this are ripe for conquest, that this shit will eventually stop.

      1. “societies like this are ripe for conquest”

        This. Maybe this is what it is all about. The end of the free people experiment.

    4. “Who the fuck hires these [emotionally fragile] people?”
      ~Those in the vanguard tasked with invading the HR departments of international corporations.
      “Where do they find them?”
      ~Same place they have all been made: college. University have by now made so many diversity hires, all into positions where they MUST “publish or perish”. That guarantees many of them have taken the easy way out and published propaganda masquerading as “research” in their own made-up field. This intellectual dog’s-breakfast is then served up to students who at this point are basically grading their own efforts, and after a few years they graduate, considering themselves “educated”.

      And all for a mere 5 or 6-figure debt! Such a deal! But if they end up running (and/or ruining) the country, maybe not as bad a deal as it first appears.

  8. Tying Peterson to the alt-right is especially ridiculous. Maybe some of them like some of what he has to say. But he has nothing good to say about any flavor of identity politics. And a lot of the focus of his study throughout his career has been on how political/ideological radicalization happens and how people can avoid it.
    He does challenge a lot of what comes from gay and trans rights activists, but it seems to me that when a significant shift in how we view certain kinds of human relationships happens like that, it is quite reasonable and relevant to consider how that affects human psychology.

    1. Tying Peterson to the alt-right is especially ridiculous. Maybe some of them like some of what he has to say.

      Pfffft. The next thing you’ll claim is that Hitler enjoying Wagner’s work doesn’t mean that Wagner was a Jew-murdering Nazi.

      1. or that the orange man was not Hitler reincarnated.

      2. You should really read or listen to Peterson before condemning or even making a decision. It is apparent you have been influenced by someone or something other then personal knowledge.

        1. You should really get a qualified technician to take a look at your sarcasm detector. It is obviously in bad need of calibration.

        2. Oh, and while you’re at it…maybe read up on when Wagner lived (and died) and maybe that will make the point a little easier to grasp.

          1. Are you fucking man-splaining?
            Are you pushing some colonial narrative and insisting there’s only ONE WAY, THE WHITE MAN’S WAY, of looking at history?

            If you deny the tribal wisdom that some diversity hire professor (teaching the “Unwhitening Reality” class he just made up) recently got published in “Struggle: A Quarterly Journal of Post-Colonial Approaches to History”, then you are, by the principle of adjacency, a racist.

            Hitler influenced Wagner, you Nazi. Only someone who wants their daughters’ school to be flooded with “concerned inquiries” about you would deny that.

    I’m not really interested in the book, but I’d like to pre-order the DVD of the crying staffers

    1. Get it on Blu-ray with Dolby Atmos surround sound.

  10. Someone should point out to these snowflakes that silence is violence, so by suppressing Peterson’s book, they are forcing Peterson to commit violence.

    1. But Peterson’s speech is also violence. What now?

    2. Ha, love this take on it.

  11. I haven’t read a lot of Peterson but seen a few interviews. What is swj’s beef with him? Does it come down to his pronoun usage (or lack thereof)? Or does it go beyond pronouns/gender?

    1. He talks a lot about personal agency and responsibility which is an anathema to the intersectional left.

      1. Yeah, that too. He tells people that if they want to improve their lives they have to accept reality and do something about it themselves. Can’t have that.

    2. Well, he very explicitly rejects the premise of SJW-ism, so he’s not making any friends there. And his failure to immediately and unquestioningly embrace every aspect of gay and trans rights movements seems to piss them off even more. He takes a somewhat conservative view of human relations and tradition and points out that we don’t know what the long term effects will be of things like women having expanded roles in society, gay marriage and parenting.

      1. The Trans community is like the left of the left. The old iowahawk line talks about how the left’s modus operandi is to infiltrate organizations, strangle them from within, and wear the skin to legitimize the leftist agenda.

        Well, the Trans community is the follow on to that- they join and co-opt every leftist organization and do the same thing. Notice how BLM had a bunch of clap trap about “we stand with our black trans allies”- as if any sizeable number of people supporting BLM were there to support Trans rights.

        1. The old iowahawk line talks about how the left’s modus operandi is to infiltrate organizations, strangle them from within, and wear the skin to legitimize the leftist agenda.

          1. Identify a respected institution.
          2. kill it.
          3. gut it.
          4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.

    3. Peterson uses people’s preferred pronouns; his issue is with Canadian law forcing use of pronouns. This has been twisted by social ‘justice’ zealots and other ignorant progressives into attacks on him, and seen by some fringe rightist groups as a plus. The progressives are, as is frequently the case, wrong, lying, and spreading falsehoods.

    4. IIRC, he refused to comply with a rule (law?) that ‘required’ him to use “preferred pronouns”.

      His argument was that this is compelled speech and a violation of his rights.

      I don’t know if he ever ‘mis-gendered’ anyone. He just fought against the rule itself. He didn’t go out and call people names or mis-gender them.

      1. I love how this comment and a couple others just assumes the left’s moral framework on “mis-gendering.”

  12. Critics contend that he gave voice to the concerns of the far-right

    The craziest thing about that statement is that Jordan Peterson was a former leader of the New Democratic Party youth wing, which is a left-left socialist, not center-left party.

    Not indulging intersectionality-cum-mental-illness counts as being far-right in 2020 I guess.

  13. But it certainly says something about the ideological capture of so many elite institutions of knowledge sharing…

    You’re going to make them cry if they ever get/have to publish your next book, Mr. Soave.

  14. Kudos to Penguin for hiring the mentally challenged

  15. Here’s hoping Penguin Random House’s Peterson-skeptics succeed in improving the book, rather than preventing it from ever seeing the light of day.

    I don’t know that it’s an editor’s job to be skeptical of his author, or that an editor who is skeptical of his author is going to be very interested in “improving” the book. A neutral editor may be able to point out weaknesses in the author’s narrative and his arguments and suggest ways to improve them, a biased editor has to make a superhuman effort to overcome his biases and suggest ways to improve arguments and sentiments with which he disagrees. I don’t know that there are that many such superhuman editors.

    1. A editor biased against you will tear apart the weak areas of your book (assuming they don’t behave in a malicious manner, which no can guarantee for crying girl), which gives you areas to shore up and strengthen. So it has its benefits.

    2. If I wanted to read a book by Editor X, I would do so. Having edited a number of published novels [I’m blessed with talented friends who allowed me to read manuscripts before submission], my view of the job is to help the writer make their story more effective in conveying their point. It is not to *change* the point (well, except in the case of one book, where, after I asked a question on the course of the story and suggested an alternative approach, the writer when back and re-wrote the last quarter of the book . . . 😉

  16. I was wondering if the election results would bring an end to the crying and bitching we’ve heard from these people over the past four years. Guess not.

    1. Are you kidding? They forced Feinstein off her commitee for hugging Lindsey Graham.

    2. Many people I know in Blue states are going on and on about how they’re swimming in tears of joy because Saint Joe is going to bring heaven to us all. I reckon when some of us dare to resist Saint Joe the tears will be tears of rage.

      1. Liberty or death.

      2. Never forget that only Trump supporters have unrealistic expectations of a candidate. Everybody else ever was and still is totally grounded in reality.

        1. Trump supporters expect a candidate to work for the people and country and in reality Joe “Big Guy” Biden will work to gain more wealth for his family?

    3. it will only embolden them

    4. All this trans bullshit started under obama, so I seriously doubt it. BLM started under obama, too. So did the antifa rioting (berkley)

  17. “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” – George Orwell

    1. Freedom is great, but only if we all do it together, in the exact way that I’ve been told to want it.


  18. Personally I think he is just another overhyped self help guru but I can’t see what the issue is with him publishing another book.

    1. same.

    2. To normal thinking people, his advice is ‘ho-hum’.

      But to the professionally agrieved class, he is second only to Trump as Satan incarnate.

    3. Actually, he’s a real professor, and practitioner of, psychology. He’s got thousands of hours of lectures online, and “self-help guru” is a step down from what he’s been doing for 30 years.

      He’s actually a pretty sharp guy, which is very much what the preemptive “issue with him” is about.

  19. Robie you are a dumb SJW apologist. These marxists have no interest in improving anything but you always gotta be there to pretend otherwise. You are an enemy of freedom and liberty in your defense (or just your mindless acceptance of their claims as valid) of these evil NPCs.

    1. SJW/”woke” NPCs aren’t deep enough to be evil. As someone else put it, they’re just “a bunch of normies who picked up progressive ideology without questioning it.”

  20. This reminds me of the time The Tonight Show staff supposedly broke down in tears because Norm Macdonald might be on the show and he said he was happy that the #MeToo movements was losing momentum.

    Former Saturday Night Live performer Norm Macdonald was told he could not appear on Jimmy Fallon’s show Tuesday night because his comments on the #MeToo movement made senior producers cry.

    . . . .

    In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter printed on Tuesday morning, Macdonald said he was ‘happy the #MeToo movement had slowed down a little bit.’

    Macdonald said people used to receive a second chance, but now ‘there is no forgiveness.’

    They’ve twisted the definition of “tolerance” around and turned it on its head. If you can’t tolerate Norm Macdonald–not because of anything he did but because of his views–then you, my friend, are intolerant.

    Same thing with Jordan Peterson. The refusal to tolerate differing viewpoints makes you intolerant–end of story. And the idea that you’re so intolerant that it makes you tolerant just makes you a stupid laughingstock of a prude.

    1. Or JK Rowling, who is actually on their side but refuses to ignore reality.

      1. Then you have Rico Suave who is ostensibly not on their side, yet accepts all of their premises with scarcely a moment of critical thought.

    2. I would like to know the Tonight Show Staff’s background? There does seem to be a very small “type” of people who seem to have broad representation in the media, entertainment, social media and “journalism”…I had to deal with these folks 40 years ago when I was at a supposed “elite” eastern university…all from NYC and all red diaper babies who majored in “nothing” and all got gigs in NYC or LA media or entertainment industry. They can’t help it…socialism and cultural marxism are in the blood…very said.

    3. I seem to recall Dennis Miller mentioning some snowflake on SNL refusing to do one show because Andrew “Dice” Clay was hosting it.


      1. Nora Dunn

        from wikipedia:

        Dunn made headlines in 1990 when she, along with original musical guest Sinéad O’Connor, boycotted an episode which was hosted by comedian Andrew Dice Clay because they found his misogynistic humor offensive. SNL alumnus Jon Lovitz discussed Dunn’s boycott of the show in detail during an episode of “The ABC’s of SNL” with director Kevin Smith. “It’s the last show of the season. Nora…she caused a lot of trouble. [She] was very hard to get along with, and they weren’t going to ask her back, anyway…And this is how the press works. And I’m telling you I’m on the inside of this. They don’t know the story. It’s like she’s just doing it to get press. It’s her last hurrah. They’re not asking her back onto the show.”

        1. Didn’t even remember her name. She brought nothing worthwhile to SNL at all.


  21. Tell them to man the hell up or find another job in the publishing business.

    1. Or they are free to start their/Xer own company, where they can refuse to publish anything written by icky white cis men.

      1. Those companies already exist I’m sure. Xey can just go get a job there.

        1. Sure they can, I am sure there are many unpaid internships at such companies.

      2. These people don’t build. They infest.

  22. I read the Vice article recently, and at least one of the complaining employees was like, they talked about how valuable Peterson’s contribution was, but really all they’re interested in is – gasp – making money off his book!

    1. This was phrased as an accusation – a publishing company wanted to make money off a popular author’s book.

  23. The kids are *not* alright.

  24. In subsequent years, he became a passionate opponent of identity politics, speech policing, and cancel culture

    Yeah sounds like a real monster. Scary enough to make me cry to think of him publishing a book about personal responsibility. Lock him up!

  25. My heart weeps for these poor oppressed souls. I can only hope someday their children will to see these wrongs made right. This sort of oppression must always be opposed.

    1. Fortunately, most of Xem will not reproduce.

      1. Having children will destroy the planet.

  26. I heard about this last night. Let’s pretend for a moment that Peterson was 25% of what they claim he is (he’s not). Let’s just pretend that, for a moment. What is with this current generation constantly breaking down into tears and falling into the fetal position the moment they’re confronted with something they disagree with, even profoundly?

    We really have run a program of reverse CBT on our children.

    1. FYI I know the answer to my question… I just thought it was worth posing.

  27. Here’s hoping Penguin Random House’s Peterson-skeptics succeed in improving the book

    What does this even mean? Are you saying you hope they pressure him into modifying the contents of his book? And if so, how do you know that would be “improvement”? This is a very strange statement.

    1. One wonders just how much “improvement” Rico would tolerate.

    2. I was troubled by this clueless statement as well.

      If these whiny “professionals” want to “improve” Dr. Peterson’s book by changing what he is saying/arguing, let them write their own freaking book correcting the alleged “errors” and citing the research in support. Then let’s see if they can convince readers to buy their book. There’s a fool born every minute–they might even find buyers. But to hope for what is just bullying to force an author to change their viewpoint is pretty sickening.

  28. A lot of young people have learned to use “magic words” to get what they want.

    “‘He is an icon of hate speech and transphobiaand the fact that he’s an icon of white supremacy, regardless of the content of his book, I’m not proud to work for a company that publishes him,” a young LGBTQ employee told Vice News.”

    And now they’re adding crying when magic words aren’t enough, apparently. What’s next: descending into a thoughtless fit-like rage and flailing about?

    1. html whooped me

    2. so show some self respect and quit

  29. Moreover, while it’s undeniably true that Peterson was popular among the racist alt-right

    No he’s not, he’s an anti-identitarian.

    1. Those are not automatically exclusive. People can pick and choose which aspects of a speaker/author to recognize and/or agree with. But, even if both are true it still should not mean jack shit. Or do we start going after everyone who happens to be popular among actual Marxists?

      Or maybe Rico is just too stupid to fully consider the ramifications of his own rhetorical gobbledygook.

      1. Or do we start going after everyone who happens to be popular among actual Marxists?

        I considered throwing that out but I thought it was too obvious to even ask, but I’m glad you did.

        1. Sadly nothing is too obvious when dealing with the brain trust that is Reason.

      2. “The moral equivalence must flow!”

  30. Serbia and contracted COVID-19. It might be interesting to read how—or even if—these struggles changed his thinking:

    Changed what thinking?

    1. It’s changed his thinking about widespread use of benzodiazepines. Probably not too much else.

      1. Huh, I have to be honest I didn’t know what is thoughts on benzodiazepine use were.

        1. He learned they can be a real problem.

          The hard way.

        2. I don’t think he had a particularly strong view before. Just took what his psychiatrist gave him.

  31. ..people were crying.. because of the negative way “Peterson, a professor of psychology, has affected their lives repeatedly called them out on their ‘insufferable mental gymnastics, and protected status’ bullshit.”

    All I really needed from this article..

    1. brevity AND an ability to read critically…a powerfulcombination

  32. Do they cry at the exploitation of penguins for their employer’s profit.

    1. HAH! love it

  33. But it certainly says something about the ideological capture of so many elite institutions of knowledge sharing—the traditional media, social media, the university, and now book publishing

    I’m glad to see someone at Reason acknowledge this.

    Also, I didn’t notice any “both sides…” in this article. Well done.

  34. I’m past the point of caring whether or not something is deemed transphobic, homophobic, xenophobic or racist.

    In fact I’ve come to relish such things as healthy manifestations of a healthy society that intends to survive rather than committing mass suicide. I wish these woke bastards would just suicide themselves rather than insisting that the rest of western civilization join them in the endeavor. I wish their claims about the murderous intolerance of western societies were true, because then we wouldn’t be forced to endure their endless nonsense.

  35. jeezus fucking christ…what a bunch of fucking pussies. someone please tell these kooks to grow the fuck up. honestly, if i heard one of my kids played that card i would cut ties and drink heavily because i clearly failed

  36. I am still waiting for progressives to provide proof that Peterson is transphobic and/or a white supremacist. Their logic is a prime example of “I read it on the internet therefor it’s true”.

    Progressives are in a continual cycle of one-upsmanship when it comes to crying about stupid shit.

    1. there will be no support for their simpering candyass bullshit. they lob out their accusations and turn to each other for validation. receiving it they start anew. 30 years ago we would have guffawed at this supreme nonsense and remarked about what a bunch of fags they were, told ’em to shut the fuck up and left it at that. once we stopped doing that they were off to the races and no matter how retarded their simperings got there was no one to tell them they sounded stupid…so they got even more ridiculous.

      we’re fucked

      1. No. We are not…they are. Society has patience…..american society has loads of patience, The whiny fools mistake this patience for acquiesence and when that runs out the repercussions will be harsh and swift. and they will belatedly realize how far in the minority they really are.

    2. I can’t believe their sole “evidence” is that he opposed hate speech laws. Doing that doesn’t mean one must be FOR hate speech. That’s like saying that if you oppose drug laws, it must mean you want to do heroin, coke, PCP, and meth. Or if you oppose the death penalty, it must mean you admire murderers and think they should be praised and given medals.

      I don’t know if some people are that stupid to think that’s how it works. Do they really not understand drawing a distinction between what things need to be enforced by policing rather than enforced by social convention and acceptance into civilized society?

  37. Why do companies need to get “political” these days or more over why do the political views of the employees matter one dime in the firm’s decisions? Honestly I was told 30 years ago when I started my corporate gig that my politics stopped at the door…if these little ivy league liberal art majors are too upset then fire their asses…all of them..lots of State College Grads would love to have their jobs and keep their politics to themselves. The issue is the type of “woke” hires in publishing and social media firms..they are very much alike..mostly ivy league type liberal art majors from NYC or some large eastern city. Few are Catholic or Irish or Italian..which is the source of the problem. More Rizzo’s or Murphy’s and less well you know where I’m going..

  38. “he criticized a Canadian human rights law that he said would violate academic freedom by requiring him to use trans people’s preferred pronouns. (Peterson claimed he would not be forced to use words that, in his view, were invented by activists; he wasn’t attempting to misgender any specific trans people.)”
    What he did was publicly condemn Canada’s Bill C-16 which makes it a crime not to use a transgender person’s pronouns. Dr Peterson has transgenders in his clinical practice, and he ALWAYS uses the pronouns they prefer. And he understands that some speech is or can be prohibited. But he is standing up to the idea of government ** insisting on the use of certain words**, ie the idea that government can COMPEL speech of a certain nature, putting words in people’s mouths. Soave has no real idea how courageous and right in Peterson’s position on this. There is a video of Peterson defending himself on a program called The Agenda, with Steve Paikin. He lays it out well.Worth seeing.

    1. Nice info. Thank you.

    2. It’s what propelled him to fame. I invite people to look up the C-16 hearings where he spoke and ripped a new a-hole in the author of the bill. It was brilliant. But the law passed sadly. Its first victim was was Lindsey Shepherd.

      And that’s precisely what he said, no one should be COMPELLED. He didn’t argue to not be polite and agree to what someone asks of you. What he argued was the government can’t force these things.

      Reason had a chance to see the libertarian arguments in Peterson but instead led by Nick and ENB, published shallow pieces about him. Nick went after his post-modernist views (which I was was unmoved by. Which is why I thought an interview with Peterson with Nick who is a good interviewer would have been good) and ENB….well you know,’peaceful protestors.’

  39. Crying at work deserves further beatings.

    1. I remember when it was being widely put about that employees of Amazon were (all) noted for crying at their desks.
      It’s been a few years, but do you remember that?

  40. Random House’s management owes it to their shareholders to show these sniveling little shits the door.


  41. “Here’s hoping Penguin Random House’s Peterson-skeptics succeed in improving the book, rather than preventing it from ever seeing the light of day.” Perhaps the author should read the book before presuming that it needs “improvement” by the snowflakes whose goals are to whine and censor anything that “offends” them.

  42. I remember whilst it turned into being widely put about that personnel of Amazon were (all) mentioned for crying at their desks.

  43. I keep in mind while it turned into being extensively put about that personnel of Amazon were (all) cited for crying at their desks.

  44. This is what happens when you artificially suppress natural selection.

  45. Start getting paid more cash online from home. Start making every month $20,000 or more simply doing online job from home. Last month i have earned and received $21769 and this amount is for that time which i gave to this job and i am doing this for only 2 hrs a day maximum. Very easy to to work with and regular earning from this are amazing. Everybody can join this and start earning more cash online like me just by follow details on this blog….. Read More

  46. If you’re so damned fragile that the publication of a book by someone you don’t agree with moves you to tears, then move back into Mommy’s basement and restrict your online activity to websites featuring fluffy clouds, unicorns (which aren’t sweet little ponies with a horn, mind you), and rainbows. You are obviously unfit for the real world which is populated by actual human beings, some of whom may have divergent views from yours and some of whom might actually be dangerous, as opposed to threatening your unrealistic, juvenile worldview.

  47. I am looking for a البحث عن محامي who is a lawyer and legal advice website that seeks to provide the numbers of the best lawyers and legal advisors in Riyadh, Jeddah, Dammam, Makkah and all regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

  48. The employees who cried because a book they did not agree with was to be published have a big time serious emotional problem and need appropriate help. These people are apparently living their lives based upon the the far leftist narrative they use for a world view. Their world view is a lie. They are living a lie. The aberrant sense of reality they are living in is telling them not to believe they are living a lie. This persistent denial of the reality they are among a very small minority is a mental illness that is still in the listing of diagnostics. The major media actively supports these individuals in their aberrant beliefs and thus are an enabling factor that is not helping. This is all a derivative of leftism, which is their religion with the state being their godhead. The whole situation is highly detrimental to all whose lives and livelihoods are swept up in the clear nonsense of the entirety of it all.

  49. “[Peterson] is revered by many young, right-of-center males.”

    Yea see there’s the problem right there. The statement is undoubtedly true. But ya don’t have to be right of center. At all. Being “just center” is perfectly enough. And thats what the penguins are trying to censor. Centrists (!)

  50. It’s a shame that Reason has become a tabloid.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.