Support NeoGAF

[EmpressInYellow]

he's extremely ignorant on the topic and said a few super shitty things but doesn't seem to be an outright transphobe.

Well, sure - I don't think he's an active anti-trans campaigner like the HB2 folks or anything.

But he still perpetuates deeply ignorant, harmful ideas and gets all pissy when called on it (see, again, the Fallon Fox thing).

 

[Arkeband]

This topic is starting to stray a great distance from the premise in the OP.

 

[Audioboxer]

Nope.

Again, look at his comments on the bathroom laws (which came up in conversation because of Curt Schilling) or some of the stuff he said about Fallon Fox.

This?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvPXdvwdtQ0

There was some decent stuff said there, along with bullshit. I don't think it proves Rogan is transphobic though. He just sounds like he's opening his mouth and letting opinionated shit come out. So much "correct me if I'm wrong", "I think....".

What it mostly seems like is the hostile environment that comes up when people with a lack of knowledge try to debate a complex social issue they have ignorance around. There are times when it is okay to look at their intent and reasonably say they're ignorant idiots, but not necessarily people who view transgender/insert minority here as lesser than them. I can understand why you feel like you do though. Rogan can only blame himself with the amount of money and resources he has for being less educated than someone who posts on GAF.

Education and knowledge is of the uptmost important before you decide to be a mouthpiece that has tons of eyes watching/listening.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

There was some decent stuff said there, along with bullshit. I don't think it proves Rogan is transphobic though. He just sounds like he's opening his mouth and letting opinionated shit come out. So much "correct me if I'm wrong", "I think....".

Sure, but I don't care about whether Rogan is "transphobic". I care about whether he says transphobic shit to his audience, which he does.

What it mostly seems like is the hostile environment that comes up when people with a lack of knowledge try to debate a complex social issue many have ignorance around.

Well, maybe if you're ignorant about a complex social issue, you shouldn't be debating it on your widely-distributed podcast, and should instead shut up and listen to people who actually know what the hell they're talking about.

"Correct me if I'm wrong" doesn't do any good if there's not someone there to actually correct him.

This topic is starting to stray a great distance from the premise in the OP.

Eh, it all falls under the heading of "Is Joe Rogan kind of garbage?" and "Does Rogan spout regressive crap in his podcast?"

 

[Moofers]

Haven't listened to this episode yet, but y'all are stretching if you're saying Rogan has taken a side with the alt-right or for Trump. Rogan is intellectually out of his league on a variety of topics, but lets be clear, on his podcast everything that isn't MMA gets shit on all the time. Sometimes guests come on and insist on talking about important topics without much sense (Greg Fitzsimmons comes to mind) and Joe will empathize and go with it up to a certain point, probably past where he should. They're comedians and MMA fighters on a podcast, and not the people to have these sorts of conversations for a crowd of serious politically minded people (ie GAF, when reminded that Joe Rogan exists). And yet, it's Joe's podcast and he can do what he wants, even if I shake my head and start skipping ahead when he and his guest are in obvious "don't know what they're talking about" territory.

Know what you're getting into on Joe's podcast. He does have some interesting guests on occasionally but personally I don't listen nearly as much as I used to because Joe is intellectually out of his element too often. Even when he has really smart people on his show, he sometimes really downgrades the conversation by being a dummy and asking stupid questions. In the end he's a comedian, and he and his guests are often somewhat high/drunk while recording. Don't expect stuff you'd hold up as an example of important human conversations in history or anything.



I listened to that more recent episode and it's pretty clear Joe likes Milo because he has a kind of weird fun/jokey charisma, even if he's almost entirely full of shit. To Joe, Milo is that charismatic friend that says crazy shit half the time that leaves you going "wtf did you just say bro?" In other words, a great podcast guest.

Great post. I listen to the podcast all the time and I think Joe is a lot smarter than most of GAF will ever admit, but I do recognize he is often guessing or working with limited information/understanding and he doesn't let that stop him when maybe he should.

That said, it's a great show and if you listen regularly and not just for some 3-minute rant that's been posted on YouTube, you'll understand he is hard to pin down as either left or right because really his views are all over the spectrum. People love to just dismiss any suggestion that there's more to it than left or right because that way you never have to have any discussion and can remain safely in your bubble.

And the bit about Milo was perfect. I have a longtime friend who is a Trump supporter and we will never agree on that but he's always going to be my friend. We have discussions where we get into it but hey we're both adults and we can disagree without me calling him an "alt-right MRA pig!".

 

[JimiNutz]

Well, sure - I don't think he's an active anti-trans campaigner like the HB2 folks or anything.

But he still perpetuates deeply ignorant, harmful ideas and gets all pissy when called on it (see, again, the Fallon Fox thing).

If I recall correctly the Fallon Fox discussion was about the physical advantages that she possess over other women because, unlike her opponents, she was born a man.

As a result she still has her male skeletal structure which is scientifically agreed upon as being larger and denser than that of a females. In a sport where the aim is to inflict damage on an opponent by striking them with said bones, having a larger skeletal structure and bone density could be perceived as a significant and unfair advantage.

I think Joe also had issue with the fact that Fallon did not disclose that she used to be a male until a few fights into her career so her opponents had no idea they were fighting someone who potentially possessed such an advantage. Remember the aim of said sport is to inflict damage on your opponent so we aren't talking about something like tennis or basketball here.

Is that the discussion you are referencing or was there more?

 

[mikespit1200]

That said, it's a great show and if you listen regularly and not just for some 3-minute rant that's been posted on YouTube, you'll understand he is hard to pin down as either left or right because really his views are all over the spectrum. People love to just dismiss any suggestion that there's more to it than left or right because that way you never have to have any discussion and can remain safely in your bubble.

And the bit about Milo was perfect. I have a longtime friend who is a Trump supporter and we will never agree on that but he's always going to be my friend. We have discussions where we get into it but hey we're both adults and we can disagree without me calling him an "alt-right MRA pig!".

Yeah, I listen to the Rogan podcast pretty regularly and the thing people often gloss over is that Joe prefaces everything he says with "Look, I'm a dummy..." Of course he has some silly opinions but he's self aware enough to realize he's human being that's wrong on shit fairly regularly. He's actually changed his views quite a bit on conspiracy theories in the last few years, for which I'm extremely grateful. Like others have said, I enjoy the podcast because he has a wide range of guests and let's them talk at length for 3+ hours. I don't have to agree with everyone he has on. And yeah, Alex Jones is a loon but he seems like a fun hang. Rogan is friends with the guy but also clowns on him fairly regularly on air.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

Is that the discussion you are referencing or was there more?

There's more, but some of what you posted is incorrect, anyway.

I don't really want to litigate the whole Fallon Fox thing, but if you're interested, there are numerous people who have explained at length why Rogan is full of shit on the subject (for instance, long term hormone exposure has a substantial effect on bone density and musculature), and that's leaving aside the question of whether or not those "advantages" would actually put her outside the range actually seen in AFAB women.

Here's a choice quote:

"First of all, she's not really a she. She's a transgender, post-op person."

Yeah, fuck you, Rogan.

"She calls herself a woman but... I tend to disagree. And, uh, she, um... she used to be a man but now she has had, she's a transgender which is (the) official term that means you've gone through it, right? And she wants to be able to fight women in MMA. I say no f***ing way.

I say if you had a dick at one point in time, you also have all the bone structure that comes with having a dick. You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints. You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more..."

Once again, fuck you, Rogan.

And this is why people who are ignorant of potentially sensitive subjects should actually listen to people who know what they're talking about instead of running their goddamned mouths like their uninformed opinions are worth something.

And incidentally, when he was called on it, he doubled down and continued to be an asshole, so...

 

[Jenenser]

^

in the context of a sport, i dont think he is wrong, altough he certainly could phrase it better.

the anatomy is different, even if you dont like this fact...

a post op woman should never fight in the womans bracket.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

in the context of a sport, i dont think he is wrong, altough he certainly could phrase it better.

the anatomy is different, even if you dont like this fact...

a post op woman should never fight in the womans bracket.

Tell that to the IOC. And "the anatomy is different" is kind of a bullshit argument - how, specifically? Are we talking in general or with regards to the individual in question? What if, say, her bone density is within the ranges commonly seen in AFAB women?

But like I said, I'm not particularly interested in re-litigating the Fallon Fox thing. Suffice it to say that it's a lot more complicated than Rogan (or you) are making it out to be.

 

[Audioboxer]

There's more, but some of what you posted is incorrect, anyway.

I don't really want to litigate the whole Fallon Fox thing, but if you're interested, there are numerous people who have explained at length why Rogan is full of shit on the subject (for instance, long term hormone exposure has a substantial effect on bone density and musculature), and that's leaving aside the question of whether or not those "advantages" would actually put her outside the range actually seen in AFAB women.

Here's a choice quote:

"First of all, she's not really a she. She's a transgender, post-op person."

Yeah, fuck you, Rogan.

"She calls herself a woman but... I tend to disagree. And, uh, she, um... she used to be a man but now she has had, she's a transgender which is (the) official term that means you've gone through it, right? And she wants to be able to fight women in MMA. I say no f***ing way.

I say if you had a dick at one point in time, you also have all the bone structure that comes with having a dick. You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints. You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more..."

Once again, fuck you, Rogan.

And this is why people who are ignorant of potentially sensitive subjects should actually listen to people who know what they're talking about instead of running their goddamned mouths like their uninformed opinions are worth something.

And incidentally, when he was called on it, he doubled down and continued to be an asshole, so...

Posting the video would be best - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6_7BOGUXHM

I have to say I'm glad in one sense this seems like a really early podcast given how bad some of it is.

The only thing I can say neutrally on it is biologically you can be born with a female brain in a male body. That is not a lie and simply saying "gender hormones" doesn't necessarily necessitate body structure and strength (many if not most people transition at the later stages of puberty if not after, so the body is largely developed). In terms of competitive sport where we are talking about fighting I can see why it's a contested debate, male and female athletes in such sports do tend to get separated because like it or not biology can play a part in giving an upper hand competitively. Unless you are someone who wants to deny biology and science and say there are no trends or statistical evidence to support studied differences within the sexes. I mean, you don't even need to look at humans, look to the rest of the animal kingdom. Although I know some refuse evolution and refuse that we are animals.

Most people just don't like the idea of a man fighting a women either, and while yes I accept she is a women, sadly medically her body has the traits of a male body. As you know that is what body dysmorphia is. I'm not just talking sexual organs either. Heck within the same gender we even have lightweight/heavyweight etc. However yeah overall that segment is not a piece for Rogan to be proud of, his guests as well (diving right in with tranny, GTFO with that Roth whoever you are).

 

[The Beard]

It's Joe Rogan, what do you expect? I find his podcast entertaining, and he's great as a UFC announcer, but the guy says some dumb shit from time to time. This should be surprising to no one. If you don't like him then don't seek out his material. It's not like he can't be avoided.

 

[Dude Abides]

"Wanting to believe" is the opposite of textbook skepticism, which is to doubt. But to make that point you've stripped it to all the nuance of our conversation. In our conversation, "wanting to believe" means to want to believe that everything is incorrect. That's skepticism.

I think you've built yourself up a pristine image of what being a skeptic is. Maybe you're non-religious, and skepticism among the non-religious was practically synonymous with intelligence for awhile there. You now don't want people to use that title unless you view them as intelligent. That's an easy mistake to make, but it doesn't mean that at all. Being a skeptic doesn't make someone intelligent, so you can take that exit and bow out of this ridiculous and misguided rant you're going on about. You can go ahead and believe in whatever you want about how he's a meathead or whatever - I don't care. I don't know that he's not. He could be or he could not be (that's skepticism right there, and it isn't a sign that I'm intelligent).

Ok. I guess I'm using a definition of skepticism that could be called the "reptile," or perhaps more appropriately the "standard" usage, which means not being credulous about stupid nonsense because of your feels. You seem to be using a different one.

 

[Levito]

I'm one of the few MMA/UFC fans that really dislikes Rogan, especially when it comes to most things social political.


His stand up is fucking vanilla-ass boring shit too. I saw him live a few years ago and he spent 30 mins making circumcision jokes which was literally him saying "SUCKING THE BLOODY BABY DICK" over and over.

 

[Scientist Supreme!]

Wow, this transgender stuff. I'm constantly baffled by the people who like him.

 

[The Beard]

I'm one of the few MMA/UFC fans that really dislikes Rogan, especially when it comes to most things social political.


His stand up is fucking vanilla-ass boring shit too. I saw him live a few years ago and he spent 30 mins making circumcision jokes which was literally him saying "SUCKING THE BLOODY BABY DICK" over and over.

I watched one of his stand up specials once, and it was terrible. I didn't even crack a smile. I'll never watch another one. His material is stuff you'd expect to see at an open mic night at a shithole comedy club.

 

[l2ounD]

Great post. I listen to the podcast all the time and I think Joe is a lot smarter than most of GAF will ever admit, but I do recognize he is often guessing or working with limited information/understanding and he doesn't let that stop him when maybe he should.

That said, it's a great show and if you listen regularly and not just for some 3-minute rant that's been posted on YouTube, you'll understand he is hard to pin down as either left or right because really his views are all over the spectrum. People love to just dismiss any suggestion that there's more to it than left or right because that way you never have to have any discussion and can remain safely in your bubble.

And the bit about Milo was perfect. I have a longtime friend who is a Trump supporter and we will never agree on that but he's always going to be my friend. We have discussions where we get into it but hey we're both adults and we can disagree without me calling him an "alt-right MRA pig!".

I dont get the hate, he seems like a decent guy and his podcast where he wants to talk to people he finds interesting is awesome.

 

[mikespit1200]

Anyone that spreads the Gospel of Uncle Joey Diaz gets a pass for life from me.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

I dont get the hate, he seems like a decent guy and his podcast where he wants to talk to people he finds interesting is awesome.

I mean...did you even bother to look at the last page or so of the thread? Whether you agree or not, I think it should be pretty obvious why some people don't like the guy.

 

[Henkka]

Ok. I guess I'm using a definition of skepticism that could be called the "reptile," or perhaps more appropriately the "standard" usage, which means not being credulous about stupid nonsense because of your feels. You seem to be using a different one.

This is a really good show about his skepticism and such. A skeptic accused him of spreading pseudo-science, so Joe invited him on his show to talk it out. It's pretty interesting. The skeptic is making a lot of the same arguments as you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcvVbAhQEz4

 

[jakonovski]

This is a really good show about his skepticism and such. A skeptic accused him of spreading pseudo-science, so Joe invited him on his show to talk it out. It's pretty interesting. The skeptic is making a lot of the same arguments as you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcvVbAhQEz4

I only just started and Rogan is clearly trolling like crazy. Now I really should watch the entire show because who knows how the short video is cut, but I think what the skeptic is doing is suffering from target fixation. Or whatever. Maybe audioboxer can give us a proper term.

 

[Henkka]

Yeah you can look up the full episode. From what I remember of it, I thought the skeptic came off pretty bad. Not necessarily because Rogan is some beacon of skepticism, but because he overreached in his blog post.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Wow, this transgender stuff. I'm constantly baffled by the people who like him.

I get the impression that he has nothing against transgender people, but as a parent and generally uneducated about trans issues, he like the rest of the mainstream (I'd say a vast majority of westerneres) has a irrational fear that if we have gender neutral bathrooms rape will go amok.
I exercise in a gym with neutral bathrooms and while I must admit that it is a bit awkward to have 10 year old girls running around inside the bathroom next to strange middle aged men (who don't know them) I've never gotten the impression that the threat of child molestation or rape is increased.
I think this fear is a bit like "immigrants are taking jobs which will make the job market worse for everyone" or population control will solve our biggest problems. These preconceived notions are often born out of irrational fears rather than bigoted hate.
And it's sad that the vast majority of people in the world believe this fear. Historically men are the cause of mayham, violence and bad things, and collectively we just do not men. That's why we see men not being able to sit next to kids on an airplane! I think Rogan is like many Americans in that with evidence and good arguments that prove the fear is unfounded, will come around.
We know how this will go down- Because most people have always resisted change because it's perceived to be scary.

Tell that to the IOC. And "the anatomy is different" is kind of a bullshit argument - how, specifically? Are we talking in general or with regards to the individual in question? What if, say, her bone density is within the ranges commonly seen in AFAB women?

But like I said, I'm not particularly interested in re-litigating the Fallon Fox thing. Suffice it to say that it's a lot more complicated than Rogan (or you) are making it out to be.

Sorta related, someone wrote in to Bill Burr with the same question; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7jXb8mDXbY

I just have no idea. Because on one end; Women are strong. They are capable and deadly and their technique is sharp and they actually have more open and flexible hips than men. And, I think about Cyborg and Gabi Garcia who obviously have done steroids and who both look vastly more muscular than Fallon Fox. People have touted for a long time they'd like to see Cyborg shut Ronda down- That fight scares me a lot more than Fallon Fox. And let's face it, the scandals evolving roids in professional fighting has been such a big problem.

Personally, I think test runs should be tried. Ronda Rousey changed how women are perceived in mainstream as capable fighters. It's highly possible that letting Fallon fight would not be a problem. It's not sure she would dominate. You don't know until you've tried. If it turns out that Fallon would ragdoll everyone like inhumanely with cardio and endurance- Okay. But we don't know until we try. And philosophical fairness in sports always is such an impossible discussion because it seems so difficult to have hard facts. We don't know which factors make people win more than others. we have an idea but not anything measureable, and that is part of the interesting thing about sport. it's the upsets. And you know- Rogan is a guy who always talks about the good old days in Pride which was a chaotic, but exciting freakshow of mish mash fights, but he has also said that he hates seeing fights being sent to their deaths by being walked into a fight they cannot win. This usually happens when someone comes from the outside who doesn't have the expertise yet, gets matched up with a veteran. The UFC throws these atheletes in the grinder for for more PPV views, and the athelete gets a fight that destroys them. We've seen time and time again that fighters needs to be build up.


This discussion about fairness in sports... I'm reminded of this guy:

Zach became a wrestler champion despite having one leg, but there was a national outcry of him being a cheater. The argument within is that due to the fact he missed his entire leg, he was able to fight in a lower weight class, which meant that the weight he had was proportioned in his upperbody. And since in wrestling you can sprawl, shoot and so on with one leg, it was argued that this handicapped competitor was a cheater.
To me this argument is insane. This is not a situation like the blade runner who had artifical limbs to help him run faster with springs. This is someone who lacks an entire leg. an explosive part of your body that contains your largest muscle. you're not seriously going to argue that cutting of your leg would give you a tournament weight class advantage. so much of the upper body strength starts from the thighs, ass and hips. I don't buy it at all.
And in general my head spins from these what is fair and what isn't.
Rogan most likely doesn't meant any offense but it's not a good argument. I think if Fallon fought and he saw a fight he would feel differently. He has been good at evolving on the issues and he clearly wants to learn.


This thread made me watch the a bit of the one with Paleontologist debunking the dinosaurs. The paleontologist is funny and angry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knWCsonQVG4

 

[jakonovski]

Yeah you can look up the full episode. From what I remember of it, I thought the skeptic came off pretty bad. Not necessarily because Rogan is some beacon of skepticism, but because he overreached in his blog post.

Having listened to the original for 45min on Vimeo now, it's a perfectly good natured discussion as a whole so far. Just goes to show how much you should never trust on paraphrased or cut content.

 

[subwilde]

I mean...did you even bother to look at the last page or so of the thread? Whether you agree or not, I think it should be pretty obvious why some people don't like the guy.

Are you going to respond to AudioBoxer? You can't just say "fuck you, Rogan" to a few quotes and come to a conclusion without listening to a rebuttal. AudioBoxer is right and so is Rogan in this case, but you are still free to hate him and say "fuck you". Based off these few posts I've seen from you, I would probably hate you and say "fuck you, EmpressInYellow" after a couple thousand hours of talking on a podcast haha

 

[EmpressInYellow]

Are you going to respond to AudioBoxer? You can't just say "fuck you, Rogan" to a few quotes and come to a conclusion without listening to a rebuttal. AudioBoxer is right and so is Rogan in this case, but you are still free to hate him and say "fuck you". Based off these few posts I've seen from you, I would probably hate you and say "fuck you, EmpressInYellow" after a couple thousand hours of talking on a podcast haha

What, specifically, do you expect me to respond to?

As for "Audioboxer is right and so is Rogan in this case" - are you seriously arguing Rogan knows more about this subject than trained endocrinologists and experts at the fucking IOC? Seriously?

God, I said I didn't want to rehash the whole "Should Fallon Fox be allowed to fight?" thing, but the amount of blatant misinformation is just stunning.

EDIT: Also, "You can't just say..." seems to assume that that's the extent of my exposure to him. I already explained my issue with other comments he made (like the bathroom stuff) earlier. As a trans person myself, what "rebuttal" do you think should I be forced to weigh before I decide whether or not certain comments are transphobic?

 

[Mental Atrophy]

There's more, but some of what you posted is incorrect, anyway.

I don't really want to litigate the whole Fallon Fox thing, but if you're interested, there are numerous people who have explained at length why Rogan is full of shit on the subject (for instance, long term hormone exposure has a substantial effect on bone density and musculature), and that's leaving aside the question of whether or not those "advantages" would actually put her outside the range actually seen in AFAB women.

Here's a choice quote:

"First of all, she's not really a she. She's a transgender, post-op person."

Yeah, fuck you, Rogan.

"She calls herself a woman but... I tend to disagree. And, uh, she, um... she used to be a man but now she has had, she's a transgender which is (the) official term that means you've gone through it, right? And she wants to be able to fight women in MMA. I say no f***ing way.

I say if you had a dick at one point in time, you also have all the bone structure that comes with having a dick. You have bigger hands, you have bigger shoulder joints. You're a f***ing man. That's a man, OK? You can't have... that's... I don't care if you don't have a dick any more..."

Once again, fuck you, Rogan.

And this is why people who are ignorant of potentially sensitive subjects should actually listen to people who know what they're talking about instead of running their goddamned mouths like their uninformed opinions are worth something.

And incidentally, when he was called on it, he doubled down and continued to be an asshole, so...

To be fair, this was several years ago and Mr. Rogan has softened considerably on whether or not a transgender woman is actually a she. I don't think you're helping yourself or anybody else by villainizing people whose perspective progresses after an issue has been more thoroughly discussed and considered.

 

[Audioboxer]

I get the impression that he has nothing against transgender people, but as a parent and generally uneducated about trans issues, he like the rest of the mainstream (I'd say a vast majority of westerneres) has a irrational fear that if we have gender neutral bathrooms rape will go amok.
I exercise in a gym with neutral bathrooms and while I must admit that it is a bit awkward to have 10 year old girls running around inside the bathroom next to strange middle aged men (who don't know them) I've never gotten the impression that the threat of child molestation or rape is increased.
I think this fear is a bit like "immigrants are taking jobs which will make the job market worse for everyone" or population control will solve our biggest problems. These preconceived notions are often born out of irrational fears rather than bigoted hate.
And it's sad that the vast majority of people in the world believe this fear. Historically men are the cause of mayham, violence and bad things, and collectively we just do not men. That's why we see men not being able to sit next to kids on an airplane! I think Rogan is like many Americans in that with evidence and good arguments that prove the fear is unfounded, will come around.
We know how this will go down- Because most people have always resisted change because it's perceived to be scary.




Sorta related, someone wrote in to Bill Burr with the same question; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7jXb8mDXbY

I just have no idea. Because on one end; Women are strong. They are capable and deadly and their technique is sharp and they actually have more open and flexible hips than men. And, I think about Cyborg and Gabi Garcia who obviously have done steroids and who both look vastly more muscular than Fallon Fox. People have touted for a long time they'd like to see Cyborg shut Ronda down- That fight scares me a lot more than Fallon Fox. And let's face it, the scandals evolving roids in professional fighting has been such a big problem.

Personally, I think test runs should be tried. Ronda Rousey changed how women are perceived in mainstream as capable fighters. It's highly possible that letting Fallon fight would not be a problem. It's not sure she would dominate. You don't know until you've tried. If it turns out that Fallon would ragdoll everyone like inhumanely with cardio and endurance- Okay. But we don't know until we try. And philosophical fairness in sports always is such an impossible discussion because it seems so difficult to have hard facts. We don't know which factors make people win more than others. we have an idea but not anything measureable, and that is part of the interesting thing about sport. it's the upsets. And you know- Rogan is a guy who always talks about the good old days in Pride which was a chaotic, but exciting freakshow of mish mash fights, but he has also said that he hates seeing fights being sent to their deaths by being walked into a fight they cannot win. This usually happens when someone comes from the outside who doesn't have the expertise yet, gets matched up with a veteran. The UFC throws these atheletes in the grinder for for more PPV views, and the athelete gets a fight that destroys them. We've seen time and time again that fighters needs to be build up.


This discussion about fairness in sports... I'm reminded of this guy:



Zach became a wrestler champion despite having one leg, but there was a national outcry of him being a cheater. The argument within is that due to the fact he missed his entire leg, he was able to fight in a lower weight class, which meant that the weight he had was proportioned in his upperbody. And since in wrestling you can sprawl, shoot and so on with one leg, it was argued that this handicapped competitor was a cheater.
To me this argument is insane. This is not a situation like the blade runner who had artifical limbs to help him run faster with springs. This is someone who lacks an entire leg. an explosive part of your body that contains your largest muscle. you're not seriously going to argue that cutting of your leg would give you a tournament weight class advantage. so much of the upper body strength starts from the thighs, ass and hips. I don't buy it at all.
And in general my head spins from these what is fair and what isn't.
Rogan most likely doesn't meant any offense but it's not a good argument. I think if Fallon fought and he saw a fight he would feel differently. He has been good at evolving on the issues and he clearly wants to learn.


This thread made me watch the a bit of the one with Paleontologist debunking the dinosaurs. The paleontologist is funny and angry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knWCsonQVG4

Sports are where you can potentially understand a little bit of unease. As much as we can grasp calling someone by the gender identity their brain obviously was born as, they're still unfortunately left with the physical appearance of the gender the body was born as. While some people do seek medical ways to transition and have their appearance more closely represent that of the gender they are, others do not. Within those that do it can be varying degrees of attempt to change the physical body. Sometimes it can just be surgery, and not necessarily hormones. It's an individuals choice.

It's intellectually dishonest to say someone is a terrible person for finding it uncomfortable to see what appears as a female body get hit/wrestled with by a male body. Even if ones knows it is a woman and a woman. This is why body dysmorphia is a registered medical condition and at that a very serious, traumatic and challenging condition. I mean you'd be laughed off NeoGAF if you tried to argue it's "socially acceptable for a man to hit a woman". This is partly due to biology, but sure, also largely due to social factors positioning most of us to feel it is an "unfair fight". Not to mention a man is seen so fucking low in respect if physically hitting a woman, even in cases of self defense. There has been years of social conditioning to influence what the mind thinks when it appears to see a male body attack/get physical with a female body. Largely we all agree on this and get upset/outraged in cases where a man has hit a woman, regardless of the reasoning.

This isn't to say personally I think a woman with a mans body or vice versa should be stopped in sports. I think the best case scenario is regardless of whatever level of physical transition they opt for, they should be weighed and classed as close as possible to their opponents. As let us face it, we all know biology and genes aren't 1s and 0s, and its entirely possible to see female bodies that are stronger than male bodies. I'm pretty sure the Williams sisters (Tennis) could kick the living fuck out of the majority of guys! When talking about gender we broadly talk about what statistical evidence favors. Outliers are always a thing. Transgender individuals are such a small minority of the overall population so while physically I empathize that it's hard for a human mind that is in the right body to not see a mans body, albeit it with a female mind, hitting/wrestling with a female body with a female mind, this is simply a challenge for our society to work towards overcoming. The greater good is for an inclusive humanity. Not exclusive.

Yes sports are stupidly competitive, but lets be honest there, competition while it can be healthy can also be toxic and abused in it's own right. Look at Russia and all the doping scandals in the name of "competition/winning".

it's cool that the video he linked immediately starts with a slur.

so yeah, fuck joe rogan and his shitty, uninformed awful opinion that he is perfectly entitled to. but that doesn't shelter him from criticism or random people on the internet saying "fuck joe rogan". he's a big boy I'm sure he can handle it.

If you're talking about the "tranny" remark, I do need to say for sake of clarification that was not Rogan, but his guest.

 

[partyphone]

it's cool that the video he linked immediately starts with a slur.

so yeah, fuck joe rogan and his shitty, uninformed awful opinion that he is perfectly entitled to. but that doesn't shelter him from criticism or random people on the internet saying "fuck joe rogan". he's a big boy I'm sure he can handle it.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

To be fair, this was several years ago and Mr. Rogan has softened considerably on whether or not a transgender woman is actually a she. I don't think you're helping yourself or anybody else by villainizing people whose perspective progresses after an issue has been more thoroughly discussed and considered.

And yet he's still spouting ignorant garbage about trans people and bathrooms as recently as a few months ago. I mean, if he's made progress, good on him, but he still maybe needs to learn to stay in his lane.

 

[subwilde]

What, specifically, do you expect me to respond to?

As for "Audioboxer is right and so is Rogan in this case" - are you seriously arguing Rogan knows more about this subject than trained endocrinologists and experts at the fucking IOC? Seriously?

God, I said I didn't want to rehash the whole "Should Fallon Fox be allowed to fight?" thing, but the amount of blatant misinformation is just stunning.

EDIT: Also, "You can't just say..." seems to assume that that's the extent of my exposure to him. I already explained my issue with other comments he made (like the bathroom stuff) earlier. As a trans person myself, what "rebuttal" do you think should I be forced to weigh before I decide whether or not certain comments are transphobic?

The fact that men and women's bodies are naturally different in multiple ways. When it comes to fighting I agree with his stance.

 

[jakonovski]

I gotta say, the Brian Dunning episode is pretty great so far, an hour in (gotta go to bed now). He's being kinda rambling as always, but Rogan is effectively putting forth a pretty good argument for needing to trust your audience and also not treating the opposing stance as something that is trivially shown wrong. And the guest is clearly taking him seriously.

edit: granted it's a really tame subject as these things go.

 

[entremet]

it's cool that the video he linked immediately starts with a slur.

so yeah, fuck joe rogan and his shitty, uninformed awful opinion that he is perfectly entitled to. but that doesn't shelter him from criticism or random people on the internet saying "fuck joe rogan". he's a big boy I'm sure he can handle it.

That's fair.

Most of us pushing back aren't pushing back on the premise that Rogan says dumb shit and beyond reproach.

It's based on the OP's "full blown MRA" premise.

Saying Fuck Rogan is absolutely fine.

 

[noshten]

Joe Rogan is OK for what he does, he is far better than most of the pundits on CNN thats for sure.

 

[Heshinsi]

His new special on Netflix was going along pretty mehish, until he got to the part about the White House breakin. The stuff coming out of his mouth were some of the most contrived, sexist nonsense I have ever heard. I couldn't stand to watch the special after that point.

 

[EmpressInYellow]

The fact that men and women's bodies are naturally different in multiple ways. When it comes to fighting I agree with his stance.

Cool, so all the professional endocrinologists who point out how HRT can alter bone density and muscle mass, the experts at the IOC who have given the green light for trans people to compete, the fact that most trans people would fall within the normal range of variation...nah, let's ignore all of that and stick with what the stoner dude with a podcast says.

And even IF we assume he's correct on that (he's not), it does nothing to fix the deeply shitty things he said while expressing that point of view or the similarly shitty things he's said since, which you seem to have conveniently ignored.

Hey, why not, here's another example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh5R6XRqELs

EDIT: I mean, the fact that he'd even say "this Bruce Jenner thing" in the promo for his special kind of shows what a clueless asshole he is. I get that it seems like he's trying to be better, but you can't just say "I'm not transphobic, but..." and then say a bunch of transphobic crap and have it just magically be okay.

 

[entremet]

You guys need another thread to argue this. It's not part of the OP topic any longer.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I gotta say, the Brian Dunning episode is pretty great so far, an hour in (gotta go to bed now). He's being kinda rambling as always, but Rogan is effectively putting forth a pretty good argument for needing to trust your audience and also not treating the opposing stance as something that is trivially shown wrong. And the guest is clearly taking him seriously.

edit: granted it's a really tame subject as these things go.

Brian Dunning? Why does he get a convicted fraudster on his show? Weird.

 

[jakonovski]

I feel this thread is alright as a place for people to love or love to hate Joe Rogan.

 

[Audioboxer]

Brian Dunning? Why does he get a convicted fraudster on his show? Weird.

Wasn't Dunning convicted at the end of 2014?

He was on the Rogan podcast in January 2014. This is important to get right when you're going to make such a remark. Not personally getting at you, but we have been arguing in here about why getting things right via a little research is important.

edit: It seems Dunnings troubles with the law started earlier. I guess until someone is sentenced the American way is suppose to be innocent until proven guilty.

 

[subwilde]

Cool, so all the professional endocrinologists who point out how HRT can alter bone density and muscle mass, the experts at the IOC who have given the green light for trans people to compete, the fact that most trans people would fall within the normal range of variation...nah, let's ignore all of that and stick with what the stoner dude with a podcast says.

And even IF we assume he's correct on that (he's not), it does nothing to fix the deeply shitty things he said while expressing that point of view or the similarly shitty things he's said since, which you seem to have conveniently ignored.

Hey, why not, here's another example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh5R6XRqELs

EDIT: I mean, the fact that he'd even say "this Bruce Jenner thing" in the promo for his special kind of shows what a clueless asshole he is. I get that it seems like he's trying to be better, but you can't just say "I'm not transphobic, but..." and then say a bunch of transphobic crap and have it just magically be okay.

Do you honestly believe he is talking specifically about Caitlyn(not sure of spelling excuse me) and her choice or the media exposure and good/bad that came with it along with her choice? That's where I could see him referring to it as the Caitlyn Jenner "thing" or "fiasco" given everything that happened along the way.

 

[SunnyVi]

His new special on Netflix was going along pretty mehish, until he got to the part about the White House breakin. The stuff coming out of his mouth were some of the most contrived, sexist nonsense I have ever heard. I couldn't stand to watch the special after that point.

He chose the name of his special carefully obviously.

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

He can certainly toe the line and be abrasive but he's had some great guests on over the years, have learned a lot from them, plus the outright nutter guests are good for a laugh. The McAfee episode is legendary, dude claimed he was actively hiding from the govt/cartels in Belize while calling into the show. Starts at 18:45 for those on mobile:

https://youtu.be/5GmwSgCfn38?t=18m45s

 

[EmpressInYellow]

Do you honestly believe he is talking specifically about Caitlyn(not sure of spelling excuse me) and her choice or the media exposure and good/bad that came with it along with her choice? That's where I could see him referring to it as the Caitlyn Jenner "thing" or "fiasco" given everything that happened along the way.

To be clear, I am not accusing him of calling her a thing. I am saying calling her "Bruce Jenner" in 2016 is either incredibly clueless or a huge dick move.


As for thread drift - well, it happens. I do think it's relevant, insofar as it speaks to Rogan being kind of an uninformed asshole, and honestly, I can count the number of non-transphobic MRA types I've seen on...one hand, without using any fingers. Not that the inverse (transphobes being MRAs) is necessarily true, of course.

It does show that he has a tendency to either spout ill-informed crap (when he could just as easily, y'know, not) and/or uncritically buy into reactionary garbage when it fits his particular paradigms of how the world works.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Wasn't Dunning convicted at the end of 2014?

He was on the Rogan podcast in January 2014. This is important to get right when you're going to make such a remark.

*shrugs* That poster just brought it up, so I assumed they were talking about a recent episode. In any case, Brian Dunning plead guilty of wire fraud in 2013, which a simple Wikipedia lookup would reveal, so please spare me your faux-concern about "getting facts right".

 

[Audioboxer]

*shrugs* That poster just brought it up, so I assumed they were talking about a recent episode. In any case, Brian Dunning plead guilty of wire fraud in 2013, which a simple Wikipedia lookup would reveal, so please spare me your faux-concern about "getting facts right".

Obviously you didn't catch my edit and replied how I thought you might if I didn't put the edit in to say"not personally getting at you"...

 

[Henkka]

Brian Dunning? Why does he get a convicted fraudster on his show? Weird.

Because Dunning accused Rogan of peddling pseudo-science and conspiracy theories, and that's what the episode is about. I don't think Dunning's legal troubles were mentioned whatsoever.

 

[subwilde]

To be clear, I am not accusing him of calling her a thing. I am saying calling her "Bruce Jenner" in 2016 is either incredibly clueless or a huge dick move.


As for thread drift - well, it happens. I do think it's relevant, insofar as it speaks to Rogan being kind of an uninformed asshole, and honestly, I can count the number of non-transphobic MRA types I've seen on...one hand, without using any fingers. Not that the inverse (transphobes being MRAs) is necessarily true, of course.

It does show that he has a tendency to either spout ill-informed crap (when he could just as easily, y'know, not) and/or uncritically buy into reactionary garbage when it fits his particular paradigms of how the world works.

Ah ok. I went and watched the trailer and see what you mean. Fair enough.

He does spew some bullshit sometimes and while not always an excuse he does talk a lot of hours per week and since he's a comedian, I can understand why that happens.

Don't know him personally but after listening all these years he doesn't seem like he has hate in his heart. Some posters in here will attest that he usually says something along the lines of "I don't really know what I'm talking about" or "I don't mind what you do/what you are".

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Caitlyn has been such a topic of conversation that seems to have gone beyond transistion, but also revolves around the conversation that arose around her supporters and haters as well as the other things in her life. And so many people have taken a stab at her.
A good interview with Senifeld on Seth Meyers talk about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXDHjwaUtPI

But you also have someone like Bill Burr who takes it in a different direction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsOJnMvxZVg

 

[jeemer]

Cool, so all the professional endocrinologists who point out how HRT can alter bone density and muscle mass, the experts at the IOC who have given the green light for trans people to compete, the fact that most trans people would fall within the normal range of variation...

Regarding this topic, most of is not all, I'd be interested in your response regarding the outliers relating to this issue. If you are informed regarding the IOC and bone density and muscle mass, surely there is a point before and during treatment at which it is not ok to compete?

Afterwards I'm guessing that you'd have to make a declaration too? (Which I understand Fox did not do for her first two professional fights)

I don't think that particular issue is as black and white as you're making it out to be, and I've yet to see someone who is trans comment on these sorts of questions.

Hey, why not, here's another example.

I've heard this before and Audioboxer already made a post to you regarding this video in this thread. I agree with what he had to say. I get that you're upset at the guy's phrasing and I'm not trying to imply he is an oracle for the youth, but I don't think he's "spouting transphobic garbage" at all.

Just cause I've seen my name mentioned twice now.

Sorry, I'd written up some points but checked again before posting and you'd already gotten them across much more succinctly.