A quick (and biased) search turns up:
"His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested."
Now I'm sure there's more to the issue, but that's kind of my point - increasingly, not ceding to every demand by group X is labelled as being 'anti-X', and ending any discussion.
No, he's actually anti-trans too.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/4/11/peterson-talk-dr...
Wouldn't it be more fair, even necessary, to just say "he doesn't want pronoun choice to be enforced, and doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct"? Why distort his views by condensing them to 'anti-trans'?
That just makes him a dickhead that should be ignored.
> doesn't think biological sex and gender are distinct
Which makes him wrong, scientifically (his testimony to the Canadian Senate has him saying that because the vast majority of people express their biological* sex as their gender, it would violate causality to accept they weren't linked), and, because he keeps using this nonsense to push his "trans people are just SJW leftists trying to take control" rhetoric, that makes him anti-trans.
For more about the spectrum of biological sex (way more than 2) and the expressed biological genders that can result (more than 2, not necessarily matching the biological sex) -