I think it's a both a weakness and a strength. In an era of cancel culture, I think there has been a counter movement to avoid cancelling people, which may lead

I think it's a both a weakness and a strength. In an era of cancel culture, I think there has been a counter movement to avoid cancelling people, which may lead to an over abundance of tolerance and politeness toward genuinely noxious people. I wouldn't argue Joe Rogan hasn't stepped over the line. But since nobody will ever toe the line perfectly, I've become more tolerant toward people who err on the side of hearing someone out, rather than shutting someone down, and I suspect a lot of other people have too. I call this "rotten cherry" picking, where you scour someone's background and find the top 10 worst things about them, and use that to introduce the person. The conversation goes like this. T: "Frederick Douglass wrote insightfully about slavery during the..." C: "Frederic Douglass? You mean that sexist, anti-immigrant, anti-native American guy?" T: "Wait, what? What did he say?" C: "Well let me tell you", (gleeful in C's eyes pulls out his laminated card of the worst 10 things Douglass said about women, Irish immigrants, and condescending jokes about American Indians). See, a lot of us have been through enough of this that we'd like hear for a few hours from the person who just got cancelled through rotten cherry picking. And yeah, this means that now and then, we will end up hearing out someone who shouldn't have been (an this, in turn, will be rotten cherry picked against the person who gave them that platform).