Even if Peterson is right that makeup brings more sexual harassment
He never said that.
(and he justifies the harassment by claiming that men are too stupid to know the rules)
He didn’t do this. He never at any point says harassment is justified, only that we shouldn’t be surprised that it happens given the lack of a clear rulebook.
that doesn’t make women hypocrites in the actual definition of the word. It would be hypocritical to say that makeup is wrong and then choose to wear makeup. It isn’t hypocritical to wear makeup and not want sexual harassment. So Peterson doesn’t even have the premise of hypocrisy right. So much for academia.
In his argument, the hypocrisy comes from — again, his argument, not mine — wearing makeup to enhance your attractiveness and then being upset at drawing unwanted attention over your attractiveness. What CatBus addresses is crucial: the rules on the street are different than the rules in the office, which adds to the confusion. What a coworker deems “unwanted” will vary from person to person. I told a female coworker years ago that her hair looked great (she’d just had it cut and colored), and she was flattered. Not a chance in hell I’d even mention it in a professional setting today. No way. Maybe that sort of thing isn’t necessary in the workplace, so no big deal, but I think it’s a loss all around when an innocent compliment can be twisted into something that wasn’t intended and saying nice things becomes risky. As CatBus also mentions, a third party who’s offended by someone’s behavior can also file a complaint, so even if you have a good working relationship with a coworker that allows for friendly — or even flirty — behavior, someone within earshot can still fuck up your life by filing a harassment claim.
Also, just a bit more about the enforced monogamy thing (trigger warning for the squeamish: JP video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=gNwIYOBpvLg