Stereolab’s Laetitia Sadier Distances Herself From Jordan Peterson in New Statement

After giving “all my support” to the controversial psychologist, Sadier now says she has “started seeing more clearly the cracks in his reasoning”
Lætitia Sadier
Stereolab’s Lætitia Sadier, February 2009 (Graham Denholm/Getty Images)

In February 2018, Stereolab’s Lætitia Sadier tweeted her support for Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, the Canadian psychologist, professor, and author who has gained fame for his controversial views on gender, race, and social justice issues. The tweet resurfaced last week after a photo of Peterson in the studio with Mumford & Sons circulated online. Sadier has now released a statement on her website clarifying her remarks and distancing herself from Peterson’s views.

Sadier explained that her tweet had been in response to an article in The Guardian that she felt “had attacked him personally.” “My tweet was about his right to hold his ideas rather than support for them per se,” she wrote.

Peterson has become a figurehead of the recent reactionary backlash against feminism, political correctness, gender self-identification, and other issues. In a New York Times interview published in May, he made the case for “enforced monogamy” as a corrective against male violence, has stated his belief that white privilege is a “Marxist lie,” and has refused to acknowledge gender-neutral pronouns.

Sadier, in her statement, wrote, “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.”

Find the statement, as well as Sadier’s initial tweet, below.

X content

This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.

Lætitia Sadier, 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!