EmpressInYellow
Banned
I dunno...someone that goes for "triggered" jokes and has a bit about "this Bruce Jenner thing" sounds an awful lot like a hack.
Context matters, but click bait journalism is all about removing any semblance of nuance and going for the extremes.I've been listening to this episode because of the thread. Nothing worthy of offense has been said and there have been some pretty interesting and funny conversations.
God damn some of you guys are so ready to be offended by anything and everything.
God damn some of you guys are so ready to be offended by anything and everything.
Rogan is a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person is like.
I don't agree with everything Joe Rogan says but I would like to hear why not agreeing with the pay gap makes you an MRA. What are the facts that prove the pay gap? I really would like to know.
I came to that conclusion after all the stupid people started sharing this:
Isn't it pretty much well established there is a difference between what men and women are paid in UFC? Like wasn't rousey one of the first to even remotely get paid what the dudes get paid?
You don't think this country has a terrible problem dealing with mental issues? I hate guns too.
You don't think this country has a terrible problem dealing with mental issues? I hate guns too.
You don't think this country has a terrible problem dealing with mental issues? I hate guns too.
Por que no los dos?You don't think this country has a terrible problem dealing with mental issues? I hate guns too.
It's not an either/or thing, that's the stupid part. To paraphrase and debase the gun lobby, mentally ill people don't kill people, mentally ill people with easy access to firearms do.
Yeah, I agree with you there. I'd like to see us improve both aspects. It's too easy to obtain guns and the mentally ill aren't treated correctly. Our society helps to create people with mental issues as well.
It wouldn't be a 'mental health issue' if the shooters weren't majority white.
Ok? This is a whole 'nother topic man.
I have been called it a few times myself for expressing (bregrudging) support of Hillary or aligning myself with leftist views like feminism.
Sometimes I see discussions about things in OT that I have some experience or interest in myself and click them, and I just get disappointed in how reductive many posters are. Sigh. Funny, the thread's links aren't even to Joe's own podcast. You may or may not like Joe, but what he's produced in almost 900 episodes is far from worthless. I'm not even defending him, I'm just sad to see confirmation bias drive-bys posts saying everything Joe Rogan has done is garbage and dismissing him as is common in our internet age. It's just not the case, and polarized language like this doesn't help anyone.
In the context of political matters (and this is a political thread), "they're so great we made memes for them," and "they're garbage and a waste of air" is the new version of "you're with us or against us" and it's shit. Stop it.
People brought up shootings, I replied.
Having on different guests doesn't automatically make him a liberal. Not a single person has yet backed up this idea that he's secretly a liberal, while others including me have backed up the idea that he's actually a right-wing or center-right fuckhead who has some liberal friends and ideas. But sure, thread backfire.
This was the first and last time I listened to his podcast. lolJoe Rogan is the kind of guy who has to have to have the moon landing conspiracy debunked by an astrophysicist in person in order for him to change his views. He's always been an idiot.
I've been listening to this episode because of the thread. Nothing worthy of offense has been said and there have been some pretty interesting and funny conversations.
God damn some of you guys are so ready to be offended by anything and everything.
Dude. I never said that. I never called him a liberal, nor did I say having different guests automatically make him a liberal. I said having different guests helps to create a well-formed opinion, in response to you calling him out for having Milo as a guest.
I've been listening to this episode because of the thread. Nothing worthy of offense has been said and there have been some pretty interesting and funny conversations.
God damn some of you guys are so ready to be offended by anything and everything.
A well-formed opinion for his audience? Maybe. He didn't really grill Milo on anything besides religion and let him spout his fucking bullshit about Leslie Jones and a bunch of other things, and as far as him personally, he's friends with Milo and had him on before. He defended him on his harassment and agrees with him about dem SJW's. It's perfectly valid to judge him based on that, Milo is absolute trash.
As for SJWs, they absolutely deserve criticism so I I'm not quite sure where you're going there...
Rogan has always rubbed me the wrong way with his conspiracy theory and transphobic bullshit.
Also OP is that a corgi puppy in your av...
lol
We're done here.
I'd say it depends on the severity.
There are several people I'd say are terrible depictions of liberals, like the Hugh Mungus incident, or the hula car decorations cab video.
I'm a liberal, and those people are crazy.
lol
We're done here.
I'd say it depends on the severity.
There are several people I'd say are terrible depictions of liberals, like the Hugh Mungus incident, or the hula car decorations cab video.
I'm a liberal, and those people are crazy.
And someone can't be friends with someone they disagree with? Maybe Milo is a fun dude when he's not ranting incessantly about politics or social issues, I dunno.
Using the buzzword "SJW's" unironically to group those nutjobs in with people who are actually passionate about real social justice issues is where the conversation ends. Be specific about what you're talking about, use context.
Uh oh, was my opinion too different than yours? Does that mean it's time to turn off discussion? Too bad.
The regressive left is terrible and gives actual liberals and social activists a bad name. The term "SJW" does not group them together.
Outside of NeoGAF, SJW isn't necessarily the right wing slur its been made out to be. A lot of mainstream voices, liberals even, use that term as a catchall for social justice excess and strident ideological overreach.
It's simply not the case that the usage of that word divides people into good guy progressives and alt-right badguys.
Milo is a guy who eggs his followers on to send death and rape threats to women he doesn't like. He takes pleasure in hurting people.
Even if you ignore Milo's politics, he's a horrible excuse for a human being. If Rogan can be friends with a guy like that, that says absolutely nothing good about him.
Using the buzzword "SJW's" unironically to group those nutjobs in with people who are actually passionate about real social justice issues is where the conversation ends. Be specific about what you're talking about, use context. It would be like if I called alt-righters right wingers or republicans. They're not.
"The regressive left" is another broad brush term used by the right to describe anything ranging from every single liberal alive to the most extreme examples who aren't even liberals in the first place. Why would you be using loaded terms like that or "SJW" if you weren't trying to put people into groups? Makes no sense. Use context or else you have no argument, you're just yelling at the clouds.
Milo is a guy who eggs his followers on to send death and rape threats to women he doesn't like. He takes pleasure in hurting people.
Even if you ignore Milo's politics, he's a horrible excuse for a human being. If Rogan can be friends with a guy like that, that says absolutely nothing good about him.
But the thing with Milo is that (hate to admit it) he's charismatic, he's funny, and most of these hosts have little deep awareness of how hateful and destructive he has been.
I'm troubled by the casual acceptance of Milo on shows like Rogen's, Adam Carolla and Dave Rubin.
But the thing with Milo is that (hate to admit it) he's charismatic, he's funny, and most of these hosts have little deep awareness of how hateful and destructive he has been.
I listen to his podcast all the time and haven't seen a single extended interview I can point to to back up a claim that he's actually really opposed to conservative views and is totally liberal about social issues. It doesn't exist. There are dozens of clips of him ranting about SJW's ruining everything, how stupid vegans are, how women are out to fuck over guys in divorce proceedings, how hunting makes you a real man and people who love animals are pussies, how awesome guns are and that Clinton is stupid for trying to take them away from him, the list goes on and on. You still haven't shown any receipts as to this mythical version of Joe you keep talking about, and standing up to Milo over religion of all things instead of his awful harassment campaign (which he defended on Twitter, by the way) isn't really that strong of a stance.
I'm not knocking the part of his show that features smart people talking about smart things. But that accounts for maybe only half of the content he puts out, and it's just him asking them questions for the most part. When he actually reveals who he is (like on fight companions), it's almost always totally fucking stupid.
So am I allowed to call him a dick now without pages and pages of people quoting me to defend him now?
I feel like you're responding to the wrong person. I'm not part of whatever argument you're involved in, nor have I ever made claims about him being liberal. I suppose I did say that he's had many guests on his show, some of who are very liberal. Which was only to say that Milo being on the show doesn't make it a conservative show. Listen to ep 698 for example, to hear someone who is for legalizing all drugs without exception.
If you listen to the show regularly, I must admit some confusion. SJWs, vegans, and divorce stories come up because the first two are easy whipping boys for comedians (which, if you listen to other comedy shows that deal with current events, you should know), and the divorce stories come from multiple guests' horror stories he's heard on the podcast that obviously left an impression. Dave Foley's divorce horror story (among others) is pretty rough, and left an impression on me to, to be honest. Though my take-away was more about avoiding marriage than women being horrible or whatever. Rogan has had experiences hunting and being out in nature, a fascination with large, powerful animals, and a number of guests who are also into that. If you don't like him, don't like his humor, and you don't like the topics that Rogan defaults to in conversation, I question why you listen to the show.
The pay gap is real, verified by many studies, and exists for workers within the same jobs, for high earning careers and low earning careers. Here are some sites with graphs and citations:
http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/
http://www.nationalpartnership.org/.../fair-pay/americas-women-and-the-wage-gap.pdf
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/04/14/five-facts-about-gender-pay-gap
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.pdf