11 ms·

He certainly spouts some "bollox" but I don't think I agree about "authoritative". He tends to show a lot of humility and asks a lot of questions rather than ma

He certainly spouts some "bollox" but I don't think I agree about "authoritative". He tends to show a lot of humility and asks a lot of questions rather than making statements

claudeganon 7y ago
It really depends. Go listen and to his interview with Adam Connover where he uses him as a foil to spout off a lot of nonsense about trans people and their agency.
- platz 7y ago
  Connover was doing a lot of hemming and hawing as well I recall
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    Yes because he’s not an expert on trans issues, he’s a comedian, which Rogan knows, but chose to use him as a foil for his equally misinformed stances. Connover, to his credit, went so far as to provide additional context for his defense of trans people’s agency post-interview: https://www.adamconover.net/adding-evidence-to-the-discussion-of-trans-issues-on-joe-rogans-podcast/ https://www.adamconover.net/adding-evidence-to-the-discussio...
    - anongraddebt 7y ago
      Multiple commenters have stated his stances are misinformed. Are his stances misinformed or is he simply poor at arguing for one of the many stances people can take on trans issues (issues which, if everyone is honest, are pretty complex)? The stance that it is wrong that there should only be male and female sports leagues AND that trans people should automatically be included in whichever their identification maps to, is a completely defensible and not misinformed stance. It may be wrong, but so might the opposite stance held by trans activists (which is also likely completely defensible and not misinformed).
      - resters 7y ago
        I listened to that episode by accident (autoplay). He was just venting ignorantly about his prejudices toward trans people. It was honestly quite an ugly spectacle. It was the kind of commentary one might overhear from a table of not-so-bright senior citizens at a Denny’s.
        stOneskull 7y ago
        There has to be conversation. There are some who just want to shut it down with 'bigot-transphobe' type spit-words. Gotta let it grow. Transcend the offended feeling.
        resters 7y ago
        Not sure why you characterize my comments that way. I was just mentioning how I reacted to it, not calling for it to be shut down.
        tudelo 7y ago
        I guarantee you have had a take of similar nature (not necessarily against the same identity) at some point in your life.
        resters 7y ago
        We all have some dumb opinions. I appreciate it when people help me develop awareness of my own.
- shapiro1 7y ago
  What is his “nonsense”? It’s reasonable to not allow people to cross their biological gender league. He’s seen how biological males have absolutely destroyed in biological female leagues.
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    He kept repeating that trans women were “confused gay men” on the basis of one very shoddy Swedish research paper, as if that was somehow authoritative.
    - ralusek 7y ago
      That was in regards to using puberty blockers on children, I believe. The study stated that many children that believe themselves to be trans ended up simply being gay, and that this lack of certainty (as well as the fact that we don't think of children as rational consenting entities for most things) makes the issue of using puberty blockers controversial. I could be wrong, but I am almost positive that this is what was being argued.
      - rpmisms 7y ago
        That matches with what I remember, and I don't understand why that's a controversial thought here. Changing gender is a big deal, it can wait a few years so you're sure.
        resters 7y ago
        That’s not what it was. The guy was venting about how irritating he finds trans people.
        rpmisms 7y ago
        That's also a valid view, even if it's insensitive. You can be annoyed by whomever you like.
- axaxs 7y ago
  I feel like you're picking one thing you feel strongly about and disagree with to discredit the entire show. I don't agree with a lot of what Rogan believes, but I feel this is an unfair characterization of him and his show.
- resters 7y ago
  Correct, that episode was so bigoted and off putting that I decided not to listen to any more. Hearing someone vent/whine about the orientation and life choices of others is just not my cup of tea. It was the kind of commentary one might overhear from a table of not-so-bright senior citizens at a Denny’s.

He certainly spouts some "bollox" but I don't think I agree about "authoritative". He tends to show a lot of humility and asks a lot of questions rather than making statements

claudeganon 7y ago

It really depends. Go listen and to his interview with Adam Connover where he uses him as a foil to spout off a lot of nonsense about trans people and their agency.

platz 7y ago
Connover was doing a lot of hemming and hawing as well I recall
- claudeganon 7y ago
  Yes because he’s not an expert on trans issues, he’s a comedian, which Rogan knows, but chose to use him as a foil for his equally misinformed stances. Connover, to his credit, went so far as to provide additional context for his defense of trans people’s agency post-interview: https://www.adamconover.net/adding-evidence-to-the-discussion-of-trans-issues-on-joe-rogans-podcast/ https://www.adamconover.net/adding-evidence-to-the-discussio...
  - anongraddebt 7y ago
    Multiple commenters have stated his stances are misinformed. Are his stances misinformed or is he simply poor at arguing for one of the many stances people can take on trans issues (issues which, if everyone is honest, are pretty complex)? The stance that it is wrong that there should only be male and female sports leagues AND that trans people should automatically be included in whichever their identification maps to, is a completely defensible and not misinformed stance. It may be wrong, but so might the opposite stance held by trans activists (which is also likely completely defensible and not misinformed).
    - resters 7y ago
      I listened to that episode by accident (autoplay). He was just venting ignorantly about his prejudices toward trans people. It was honestly quite an ugly spectacle. It was the kind of commentary one might overhear from a table of not-so-bright senior citizens at a Denny’s.
      - stOneskull 7y ago
        There has to be conversation. There are some who just want to shut it down with 'bigot-transphobe' type spit-words. Gotta let it grow. Transcend the offended feeling.
        resters 7y ago
        Not sure why you characterize my comments that way. I was just mentioning how I reacted to it, not calling for it to be shut down.
      - tudelo 7y ago
        I guarantee you have had a take of similar nature (not necessarily against the same identity) at some point in your life.
        resters 7y ago
        We all have some dumb opinions. I appreciate it when people help me develop awareness of my own.
shapiro1 7y ago
What is his “nonsense”? It’s reasonable to not allow people to cross their biological gender league. He’s seen how biological males have absolutely destroyed in biological female leagues.
- claudeganon 7y ago
  He kept repeating that trans women were “confused gay men” on the basis of one very shoddy Swedish research paper, as if that was somehow authoritative.
  - ralusek 7y ago
    That was in regards to using puberty blockers on children, I believe. The study stated that many children that believe themselves to be trans ended up simply being gay, and that this lack of certainty (as well as the fact that we don't think of children as rational consenting entities for most things) makes the issue of using puberty blockers controversial. I could be wrong, but I am almost positive that this is what was being argued.
    - rpmisms 7y ago
      That matches with what I remember, and I don't understand why that's a controversial thought here. Changing gender is a big deal, it can wait a few years so you're sure.
      - resters 7y ago
        That’s not what it was. The guy was venting about how irritating he finds trans people.
        rpmisms 7y ago
        That's also a valid view, even if it's insensitive. You can be annoyed by whomever you like.
axaxs 7y ago
I feel like you're picking one thing you feel strongly about and disagree with to discredit the entire show. I don't agree with a lot of what Rogan believes, but I feel this is an unfair characterization of him and his show.
resters 7y ago
Correct, that episode was so bigoted and off putting that I decided not to listen to any more. Hearing someone vent/whine about the orientation and life choices of others is just not my cup of tea. It was the kind of commentary one might overhear from a table of not-so-bright senior citizens at a Denny’s.