HawkShack.com

Pete Carroll had as a guest locker room speaker a psychology professor at the University of Toronto and a right -wing radio talking head who has some controversial ideas some say are misogynistic Pete. Pete, Pete, say it isn't so.

I have an open mind, but what I have read of this guy I doubt Roger Goodell and the NFL are going to be down with this guy and still say they are reaching out to their female fans with a straight face. Wow, "women bring on sexual harassment on themselves"- Jordan Petersen

Pete must want to shed the image of being "PC" and/or a "friend" of the new out spoken players. Something tells me that those days of players just "being themselves" and that a new/old Field General has arrived and it will be his way or the highway and his way is that players keeps their mouths shut and don't step out of line or you will find yourself either traded, cut, or worse, blacklisted.

Seahawks4Ever wrote:
I have an open mind

Pete must want to shed the image of being "PC" and/or a "friend" of the new out spoken players. Something tells me that those days of players just "being themselves" and that a new/old Field General has arrived and it will be his way or the highway and his way is that players keeps their mouths shut and don't step out of line or you will find yourself either traded, cut, or worse, blacklisted.

What does having this guy in have to do with how PC feels about outspoken players? Is this guy a proponent of 'shut-up and do what the man says" sort of stuff? PC has always been big on different ways of thinking. He has had conversations with 9-11 truthers. He also seems to be more liberal than conservative politically. One thing that he has done well, and seems to be continuing is allowing differing voices and opinions to be heard. If anything this is just another example of that.

Also you have proven time and time again that you actually don't have an open mind, at least when it comes to Pete Carroll.

Jordan Peterson isn't a "right-wing talking head", and he doesn't have a radio show. He's stated he would have voted for Hillary had he been able to vote in the election, for Pete's sake.

It's just that he's unapologetic about promoting self-reliance and personal responsibility, and firmly against coerced speech (a problem in Canada and the UK now).

That that makes him appear to be "right wing" says more about you and the American "Left" than it does about him.

You're right, Jordan doesn't have a radio show, but he does have a You Tube channel with over a million subscribers, and he has 600k followers on Twitter, so it's fair to call him as a "talking head". And he has been characterized as "right wing" by a number of people. At the very least, he's an extremely controversial figure that holds some opinions (along with various other opinions) that are embraced by the far right.

I'm not sure what Pete was thinking about when he brought him in to talk to his staff, particularily when the NFL is facing a bit of a sexual harrassment crisis (anyone been following the Matt Patricia story?), but Pete has been known for going off the rails when it comes to his management style, so I wouldn't read too much into this story. But to be honest, if I were an NFL head coach, I woudn't have touched this guy with a 10' pole, at least not with the team in general as his audience.

Here's a summary you might find interesting:

https://sports.yahoo.com/pete-carroll-i ... 29396.html

And he has been characterized as "right wing" by a number of people.

Yes, and for the same reason I stated- "personal responsibility" (etc) is now called "right wing" by a faction of this country that's lost its marbles.

I've done quite a bit of reading on the guy- he's become a bit of a firebrand, but he's not some far right-winger except insofar as he pisses off the far left.

Here's a better summary you might find even more interesting from noted right-wing house organ Esquire magazine:

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a ... interview/

You should also watch the video embedded in your USA Today link and tell me what's 'alt-right' about anything he's saying. The interviewer isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer (to say the least), but it's a decent summary of who the guy is.

But to be honest, if I were an NFL head coach, I woudn't have touched this guy with a 10' pole, at least not with the team in general as his audience.

I probably wouldn't have had him in, either, but only because he's (as I said) a firebrand right now, not because anything he says is particularly offensive.

First, mykc, thanks for stating the obvious. The OP is not open-minded at all.

I haven't listened much to this guy. I know quite a few people do listen to him on Youtube. He's a Canadian right winger, which is like being center-right in America. Maybe you should listen to some of what he has to say Riverdog, decide for yourself rather than the let the press lead you around. As you know that's never a good idea because the majority of the press almost always has an agenda, often one that promotes a lot of lies regardless of political affiliation. It's always best to go to the source and find out for yourself. In this case, that source is Jordan Peterson's channel and books.

I get the feeling Pete brought him in at this time to preach about personal responsibility as burton says. The little I've seen that is the big thing he preaches about. He tends to discuss how the left is taking control of language to take control of culture. That the left is forcing everyone to accept their viewpoint with legal force suing or jailing anyone that doesn't agree with them. One of his biggest problems is apparently in Canada they have ten or more forms of sexuality you must acknowledge and be careful about using or you might end up with a fine or jail time. He thinks that is absurd and he is pushing Canadians to reject this type of forced cultural change from the government. The little I've watched leads me to believe Canada has reached a point of bankrupt liberalism where it's not about having an open-mind, but more about forcing a paradigm on society that that the left desires using all the legal means within their power backed by the police using prisons. Or so it seems. Whether it's true or not, I do not know. I don't know much about Canada. Most of the Canadians I've met mostly seem like Americans.

I think NFL players, especially young ones could use a good talking to about personal responsibility and what it means. They're young. No one talks about it much nowadays, especially politicians as much as they lie. Democrats tend to want to blame different classes of people like cops, the wealthy, and white folk. Right wants to blame immigrants, make all non-whites seem like criminals, blame socialists, and the like. They're always looking to blame others rather than accept freedom requires seeing each person as an individual and ensuring each individual gains the benefits of his actions as well as accepts the consequences. I hope the idea of personal responsibility and accountability sinks in with our young players.

I'm not second guessing Pete for bringing this guy in to talk to his team, but neither am I applauding him. First off, we don't KNOW what he was asked to speak on. Was he being asked to express his views on personal responsibility? If so, then perhaps it was a good choice. Was he asked to express his views on sexual harassment? If that was the case, then it was a pretty poor choice.

To be honest, I never heard of Jordan Peterson before today. All I know is what I've read, and it appears to me that he's a pretty controversial figure and because of that and that alone, I wouldn't have brought him in, but that's just me. Pete does at times act unconventionally and has been successful with his style, so I'll defer to his judgement. I trust that he know what he's doing.

First off, we don't KNOW what he was asked to speak on.

Oh for heaven's sake. Look, I know you don't know much about him, but his 'thing' is personal responsibility'- manning up, taking on life head-on, etc. I'm sure there are more controversial topics he's discussed, but I guarantee Pete didn't bring him in to discuss his opinions on the 'gender pay gap' (intentionally in quotes) with a bunch of men getting paid more in a few years than most see in a lifetime.

This is one of the nothingburgerest nothingburgers we've seen with this team in a while.

It *is* the offseason, though, so I guess we can go back and forth on this for a few more weeks...

RiverDog wrote:I'm not second guessing Pete for bringing this guy in to talk to his team, but neither am I applauding him. First off, we don't KNOW what he was asked to speak on. Was he being asked to express his views on personal responsibility? If so, then perhaps it was a good choice. Was he asked to express his views on sexual harassment? If that was the case, then it was a pretty poor choice.

To be honest, I never heard of Jordan Peterson before today. All I know is what I've read, and it appears to me that he's a pretty controversial figure and because of that and that alone, I wouldn't have brought him in, but that's just me. Pete does at times act unconventionally and has been successful with his style, so I'll defer to his judgement. I trust that he know what he's doing.

RD, I don't know if you realize this, but to these modern day liberals you would be a controversial figure. You believe ideas that the left of today don't believe in and would think you were a fascist for expressing. Not sure why you are attempting to paint Pete in some kind of negative light for bringing this guy in, especially if you haven't listened to anything he's said. You're doing nothing but what an intolerant, hypocritical "liberal" would do.

Listen to the guy. I've listened to a few of his talks. About the worst of his controversial stances is thinking men and women are different and part of the reason you see gaps in pay and the like is due to some of these differences that need to be investigated further rather than just assume it's males being sexist. Only in this day would that be considered fascist and far right. He wants to teach young males that they aren't bad guys for being male. Something they are inundated with by the left wing in college and on TV these days.

I had never heard of Jordan Peterson either, but in his Wiki bio, right at the top it mentions that he is a psychologist who has expertise in the 'improvement of personality and performance'. Those 5 words right there would probably be enough for him to bring him in. As for the politics, the little I did read made me think that he's worth listening to more, because he criticizes both the left and right when it comes being 'PC'. And I think Pete is the kind of guy that isn't afraid to let his players hear from someone like that, and letting them learn from it on their own. Pete has never struck me as someone who is trying to do anything to change his players core beiiefs other than helping them get the best out of themselves.

Aseahawkfan wrote:RD, I don't know if you realize this, but to these modern day liberals you would be a controversial figure. You believe ideas that the left of today don't believe in and would think you were a fascist for expressing. Not sure why you are attempting to paint Pete in some kind of negative light for bringing this guy in, especially if you haven't listened to anything he's said. You're doing nothing but what an intolerant, hypocritical "liberal" would do.

Listen to the guy. I've listened to a few of his talks. About the worst of his controversial stances is thinking men and women are different and part of the reason you see gaps in pay and the like is due to some of these differences that need to be investigated further rather than just assume it's males being sexist. Only in this day would that be considered fascist and far right. He wants to teach young males that they aren't bad guys for being male. Something they are inundated with by the left wing in college and on TV these days.

Oh, I fully realize that there are people out there that think I'm a flaming lunatic, perhaps some in this forum. But that's not the point.

The point is that this guy is a controversial figure. That doesn't mean that I think he's right, wrong, or indifferent. It just means that by being controversial, that he could generate a "controversy." You could say the same thing about Billy Graham or Tim Tebow. The other point is that we're not talking about bringing in a guy like this in a benign work environment where only those directly involved will know about it, such as my former place of employment. We're talking about the fish bowl that exists in the NFL, where every move is reported nationally and open to criticism.

As I said, I am not criticizing Pete, nor am I appauding him. He's earned my trust on these matters, so I assume he knows what he's doing. I'm just saying it's something I would not have done.

And I'm sorry, but I don't plan on listening to Jordan Peterson or any other radio/TV personality. It's not that big of a deal to me.

One of the linked articles said Peterson talked to the staff, not the players.
It may be a case of getting the coaches to think a little outside the box and maybe challenge some of their ideals. Critical thinking about themselves can help improve their chances of advancement down the road and we all know that Pete is big on advancing his coaches towards a HC position should they show that promise.
It could also be part of the process to get everyone on the same page prior to TC so the new coaches are thinking along the same lines as the old ones from a personal and player responsibility PoV.

Players really could use his insights on personal responsibility and accountability. Then again they can find them if they like.

Carroll responds:

I do know that there is varying opinions. It happened to be an opportunity; I had heard about Jordan's work, he was in town, speaking here in town, and we had the opportunity to get him to come on by. He is a very thought-provoking individual, with a psychology background, his mentality, his approach – it's an amazing perspective that he has created and he's created a following. I just want to know what I can share with our people in terms of personal growth and organizational growth, and see if something could come of that in the opportunity that's presented. He did a marvelous job visiting with us, and we tore it up downtown.

In a follow-up question, Carroll also clarified what it was, exactly, that they spoke about.
"He talked about personal growth, perspective and life, and working together and helping each other find our best," Carroll said. "Themes that really rang true to us."

-----

Pretty much what I thought.

burrrton wrote:Jordan Peterson isn't a "right-wing talking head", and he doesn't have a radio show. He's stated he would have voted for Hillary had he been able to vote in the election, for Pete's sake.

It's just that he's unapologetic about promoting self-reliance and personal responsibility, and firmly against coerced speech (a problem in Canada and the UK now).

That that makes him appear to be "right wing" says more about you and the American "Left" than it does about him.

I tend to think this is the case. I'm 67 years old and in my lifetime I have seen a huge paradigm shift in American culture such that years ago those who were considered to be left wing would now be considered as firmly in the right wing of conservatism. Now we are a society full of victims who are entitled to be provided for and who don't know how to take responsibility for their own lives and their own behavior. And yes, I think that when women dress and act seductively and then get date raped they bear some responsibility in the matter. I think I'm beginning to like Jordan Peterson more all the time.

trents wrote:I tend to think this is the case. I'm 67 years old and in my lifetime I have seen a huge paradigm shift in American culture such that years ago those who were considered to be left wing would now be considered as firmly in the right wing of conservatism. Now we are a society full of victims who are entitled to be provided for and who don't know how to take responsibility for their own lives and their own behavior. And yes, I think that when women dress and act seductively and then get date raped they bear some responsibility in the matter. I think I'm beginning to like Jordan Peterson more all the time.

I don't agree with that. I come from an age where women wore skirts that could have been accurately described as a wide belt, and although I had a huge libido (young, dumb, and full of ...), it never resulted in my forcing myself on an unwilling partner. No means no.

I tend to agree with you, RD, but from what I've seen of JP, he's not talking about cute skirts or low-cut blouses- he's talking about overtly sexual dress, dancing, etc.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in the cases I've seen him speaking, he's:

1. Talking about women who are clearly taking it to another level
2. Not excusing men who rape/assault/etc.

I'm not saying *anyone* ever is 'asking for rape' (or whatever the accusations inevitably will turn to), but when you're essentially, say, faking the act on the dance floor, you're clearly not concerned with 'keeping boundaries in place', and it's tough to not assign at least some level of openness to that taking place on a more clinical level.

That's what I've seen him pointing out to his audience, and I'm sorry, but he's right.

I have no idea. I just know that we have a culture where drunk/drugged up men and women get together quite often leading to many bad outcomes the authorities have to sort out that neither gender seems to want to take much responsibility for in some circumstances. I'd hate to be the guy dealing with that garbage. Wise men don't let themselves get too drunk and wise, sober men stay away from drunk women that aren't thinking straight. It's asking for trouble by both parties.

burrrton wrote:Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in the cases I've seen him speaking, he's:

1. Talking about women who are clearly taking it to another level
2. Not excusing men who rape/assault/etc.

I'm not saying *anyone* ever is 'asking for rape' (or whatever the accusations inevitably will turn to), but when you're essentially, say, faking the act on the dance floor, you're clearly not concerned with 'keeping boundaries in place', and it's tough to not assign at least some level of openness to that taking place on a more clinical level.

That's what I've seen him pointing out to his audience, and I'm sorry, but he's right.

I'd wager a ton of money that the vast majority of rapes do not involve women 'taking it to another level' either through their dress or their behavior. Granted, there are 'teases' that enjoy playing the role of the mouse in a cat-and-mouse game so long as the cat never actually catches them, but in my experience, those types of women are extremely rare, especially if they know that they are going into a situation, such as a date, where the expectation from their partner could be that the night end with sex.

IMO a more appropriate audience for a talk like that would be young, teenage girls, such as those entering their freshman year in college, not a bunch of very successful male athletes that could interpet his message as a justification for their frustrations.

From what I've read about it, I don't get the impression it was about that in the talks with Seahawks staff.

A quote from Carroll:

Carroll said Peterson had an important message for the staff.

“He talked about personal growth. He talked about perspective and life and working together and helping each other find our best, things that really rang true to us around here,” Carroll said.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... -to-staff/

Peterson just has another perspective on how to achieve personal growth which may fit some or all of the staff and help them work together better.
Pete does something like this every year and this is just a different point of view than the conventional wisdom.

Have to say. This seems like much ado about nothing. Honestly wouldn't care if he brought in the reality star currently residing occasionally in the white house to discuss condo opportunities on Mars. Ultimately, these are adults, and they can take what's offered or completely reject it.

HumanCockroach wrote:Have to say. This seems like much ado about nothing. Honestly wouldn't care if he brought in the reality star currently residing occasionally in the white house to discuss condo opportunities on Mars. Ultimately, these are adults, and they can take what's offered or completely reject it.

Yup. And it was delivered to the coaching staff, not the players so it was a limited audience and it was intended for the coaches to perhaps get something out of it for personal growth and (coaching) team building.
Maybe some will get something out of the talk and maybe one or two will get more.

I'd wager a ton of money that the vast majority of rapes do not involve women 'taking it to another level' either through their dress or their behavior.

Then he's clearly not speaking to the vast majority of rape victims.

Again, it's a 'personal responsibility' thing, and telling people to take ownership of those things they do that may contribute to bad outcomes is not the same as saying "it's your fault you got raped."

An example: we have a good friend of ours who, after a big party at a mutual friend's, took off with a couple of strangers to go get high. She told us the next day it got weird fast- ultimately nothing happened outside of an awkwardly sexual conversation and them kinda blocking the apartment door when she tried to leave, etc, but... "what the actual fck were you thinking going back to their place with them drunk at 1am" is a perfectly valid question to ask (and I did).

From what I've read about it, I don't get the impression it was about that in the talks with Seahawks staff.

There's that, too.

My point is that if he's going to give a talk to a group of people about how women can do things, or rather avoid doing things, that put themselves at risk of being raped, the more appropriate audience would be young women. I don't know why one would want to direct a talk on that subject to young men.

It's a moot point as far as his speaking to the Seahawk or Seahawk staff, as I don't get the impression that he spoke about that subject with them.

This is a bit of a silly thread for a football forum anyway, and as such, will be my last comment on the subject.

Here, watch this (all of it) and tell me you think he's a poor choice for inspiring your staff:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djZNpTR5iL8