- Joined
- Jan 20, 2016
- Messages
- 11,793
- Reaction score
- 13,322
I think what he's trying to explain is that putting on make-up, high heels and lipstick are all actions that are inherently meant to make yourself more sexually attractive to men. It looks to me like most of the grooming women do is actually done unconsciously, they don't really know why they're doing it. If you ask them directly they'll just tell you something generic like to make themselves feel more confident. I think women are engaging in their own status battles, in which they know unconsciously that being more beautiful raises their standing. So I think he's wrong in thinking it's necessarily a sexual action on the part of the woman, it's a status action, but he's right that those things are sexual markers.
With the #metoo thing, the sexual actions of men are put under a microscope, yet there's a double standard where women are not put under the same scrutiny. So I think what Peterson is saying is either you put everyone into "work uniforms" that erase sexuality, or you accept sexuality in the workplace. I think the latter just makes more sense and it's more natural, and that comes along with stopping to demonize men for their sexuality. But again I don't agree that female grooming is a sexual action.
With the #metoo thing, the sexual actions of men are put under a microscope, yet there's a double standard where women are not put under the same scrutiny. So I think what Peterson is saying is either you put everyone into "work uniforms" that erase sexuality, or you accept sexuality in the workplace. I think the latter just makes more sense and it's more natural, and that comes along with stopping to demonize men for their sexuality. But again I don't agree that female grooming is a sexual action.