Canadian psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson and his lawyers have received five more complaints against him over his so-called lack of etiquette on social media. The allegations follow the Supreme Court of Canada’s August 8 dismissal of Peterson’s appeal against the College of Psychologists of Ontario (now re-branded as CPBAO, College of Psychologists and Behaviour Analysts of Ontario), after the college ruled he must undergo mandatory social media re-education for his “controversial” posts on Twitter (“X”). To date, the college has not appointed anyone to “re-educate” Peterson, despite his proclaimed readiness, having exhausted all legal avenues. The latest complaints to the College are centered around a single social media post regarding presidential candidate Kamala Harris. None of them are related to his professional conduct. As was the case with the complaints against him last year, the complainants have never met Peterson, nevermind been treated by him in a clinical setting. Peterson in the tweet in question, from January 31, 2023, satirically used the word “retarded” in describing Harris’ audience. Ian Miles Cheong posted a video of Harris speaking at a press conference with the caption, “Is Kamala speaking to an audience of children?”“I'll hazard a guess: retarded children,” wrote Peterson. “And they got that way from listening to people like her. A devouring mother, if there ever was one,” he added, referring to the psychological concept of an overbearing mother stunting her children from growing to reach their full potential. Each complainant said they objected to Peterson’s use of the word “retarded.” Curiously, as Peterson disclosed in an op-ed published in the National Post, one person wrote they are aware they are not the only one to file a complaint, which are allowed to be anonymous. .Peterson in his article mused over motivations behind the “language police types” who reported him. They want “first, to appear as though they are good and that they care, without any cost to themselves and, second, to control absolutely everything everyone else says all the time.”“And the first reason is just an excuse for the second, and the second is nothing but a manifestation of their unlimited desire for power,” he wrote. “The CPBAO has the right to dismiss all such complaints as vexatious, frivolous and manipulative which is exactly and precisely what they are but refuse out of spite or incompetence or some toxic combination of both to do so. Thus my overt prosecution, and the lesson it holds for other professionals, continues.”Peterson compared the total of 10 or 12 complaints against him to the at least one billion people who have listened to Peterson’s videos or interacted with his social media. “That’s one complaint for each hundred million listeners. Canada itself has a population of only forty million. That means I had to speak to twice as many people as inhabit our entire once-fair country before a single person complained,” he surmised. “Here is the blunt fact of the matter: 99.999999+% of people believe that what I am saying is both true and worth listening to. 0.000001% disagree.”“Nonetheless, the College sees fit to pursue the complaints of the minority. Why?” he questioned, pointing out the number of complaints the CPBAO received against themselves must be in the hundreds or thousands — but nothing is done about those. “Why should anyone care about any of this? Because our language is increasingly policed. Because the rules associated with that policing are increasingly unclear, and we break them, stated and unstated, at our increasing peril," he wrote."Now we are literally at the point where if a professional (that would be me) dares to point out bluntly that a stunningly manipulative politician is being both demeaning and pretentious the professional body that governs the conduct of psychologists in Ontario can begin exactly the kind of lawfare action that has frozen the tongue of virtually every professional in Canada.”“Civilization ends when the envious, bitter and power-hungry gain the upper hand — which they have forever done by claiming victimization. That is how they cover their drive to usurp, control and outright steal with the façade of care and concern.”“Free speech, free thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of association: these do not die suddenly, anywhere they have taken fragile root, with a cataclysmic and dramatic bang, obvious enough to call the requisite rescuing heroes into being. They die, instead, in a series of pathetic defeats, none of which appear to be worth risking reputation to prevent. We are watching them die in front of our eyes. Everyone who is not asleep knows it.”
