Gina Lyle August 7th, 2018 - 2:13 PM
Last February, Laetitia Sadier defended Canadian psychologist and author Jordan Peterson who rose to fame for his contentious views concerning gender dynamics and social justice issues. Now, Pitchfork reports, the artist has released a statement via her official website walking back previous support of the culture warrior while clarifying her stance.
The former Stereolab member threw her name behind Peterson after the Guardian published an article critical of the author’s rhetoric, tweeting, “I am so gutted by the treatment The Guardian -and some of the well to do media- has given you this week. You have all my support and many thanks for your clarity and -oh too rare- courage to speak the truth!”
@jordanbpeterson I am so gutted by the treatment The Guardian -and some of the well to do media- has given you this week. You have all my support and many thanks for your clarity and -oh too rare- courage to speak the truth!
— Lætitia Sadier (@SadierLae) February 12, 2018
Last week, the tweet resurfaced after a photo of Peterson and folk-pop group Mumford and Sons circulated online. Sadier now claims her tweet was written in defense of free speech rather than in support of Peterson’s views, saying, “However questionable I think his arguments are now, I objected to the way he, rather than his ideas, was demonised. My tweet was about his right to hold his ideas rather than support for them per se.”
Sadier goes on to say, “Following my tweet, I started seeing more clearly the cracks in his reasoning: his systematic assault on what he calls neo Marxism, his hang up on social justice warriors, his narrow biological determinism around gender issues were perturbing to say the least. And the fact that he would never acknowledge the malignant impact of colonialism or neo liberalism was evidence that his is a one-sided argument.”
Check out Sadier’s full statement from August 6, 2018:
Friends,
When I came across Jordan Peterson, I was initially interested by his arguments about Nietzsche, Jung and Dostoevsky.
The Guardian published a review of his book earlier this year but shortly after printed another article, one that attacked him personally. However questionable I think his arguments are now, I objected to the way he, rather than his ideas, was demonised. My tweet was about his right to hold his ideas rather than support for them per se.
Following my tweet, I started seeing more clearly the cracks in his reasoning: his systematic assault on what he calls neo Marxism, his hang up on social justice warriors, his narrow biological determinism around gender issues were perturbing to say the least. And the fact that he would never acknowledge the malignant impact of colonialism or neo liberalism was evidence that his is a one-sided argument. It just took me a little longer than some of you to fully realise this. I didn’t make that public. I should have done and I am sorry for that.
La Resistance!
