Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?

[robvalue]

Well, I've done some superficial searching and I can't find any mention of "women saying no" being a cause of our large brain sizes. I've seen plenty of possible explanations, but not this one. I don't see how it's any more significant in (pre) humans than other animals, nor how this would be any kind of cause of big brains. If anyone has any knowledge about this, I'd be interested to know!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mate_choice

As I already said, just look around.  Do some women strongly prefer highly intelligent men, especially those with verbal intelligence?  Absolutely.  That's one of the axes on which a human male may hope to attract a human female.  Now, flip this over.  What are the women who prefer very intelligent men going to do when they are approached by some fucking derp with a pick-up line that HE thinks is clever, but only because he's too unintelligent to know better?  She's pretty likely to tell him in no uncertain terms that he hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of getting anywhere with her.

That's selection in action.

---

I just noticed the front cover has the subtitle: "An antidote to chaos".

If that isn't a dead giveaway to his blatant mysogny, I don't know what is. Even if what he was saying in the paragraph I quoted is accurate, which I highly doubt, I don't think I could write it in a more offensive way without simply calling women cunts.

So you've picked up on the word chaos, which in the title he's not applying to women, and assumed that it's evidence that he thinks women are cunts?  The title isn't "rules for men in avoiding the chaos that women inevitably bring."

I'm a little suspicious that in typing out that excerpt (thank you very much for that effort, by the way), you may still not have cast your net wide enough.  I doubt the chapter is mainly about women being a force for destruction.

I appreciate your efforts to make the case, and I know what you're saying, but it's rather a specific claim and I don't think the current status establishes cause and effect so cleanly.

He refers to women "as chaos" routinely once he's brought it up. There's loads of parts all about it, and how they're so unfair to the poor males. It's painful to me reading the book, I wanted to give you a clear example. If you don't find the style he's using there offensive, I doubt more examples would convince you. All I can say is get the book for yourself and come to your own conclusions.