1 Like
You can be a billionaire and a good person, too. Doesnât mean we shouldnât keep guillotine blueprints handy.
Rogan being into MMA and having tattoos doesnât require him to have such a bizarre fixation on feminists and promote transphobia (even though I donât think Rogan has any meaningful personal bigotry towards trans individuals).
I honestly donât see how anyone can find his trans women in sports stance transphobic. The Fallon Fox story where she was fighting women without telling them she was trans was fucking nuts.
1 Like
Yeah, there will always be bro culture, but it doesnât have to be toxic.
1 Like
I wouldnât say someone is inherently transphobic for holding that view, but it definitely highly correlates and in most cases is ultimately transphobic. Whole other discussion and its not what Iâm referencing, though.
Iâm talking about him hitting on damn near every talking point that transphobes use regarding gender identityâŚAND WHAT ABOUT THE GUY IDENTIFYING AS A 5 YEAR OLD GIRL DO WE NEED TO BE TOLERANT OF THAT WHERE DOES IT END!?
And again, I donât even think Rogan has any hatred in his heart for transgender people, he is just a gullible guy who I suspect gets information from suspect sources.
The only trans stances Iâve seen Rogan take are the sports take and then expressing some concern for irreversible changes that trans teens are increasingly undertaking these days. Which seems like a reasonable concern? Iâm probably a transphobic piece of shit too according to this forum, so whatever.
Iâm not making it up that one of his podcasts discussed some grown manâI think in the UKâwho insisted he was/identified as a 5 year old girl.
This was supposedly relevant to all this talk about gender and, like, is it different than a man identifying as a woman?
Throughout the interview, Rogan and Shrier repeatedly claimed that being transgender is a âsocial contagion,â equating it to anorexia, cutting, demonic possession, and other disorders or afflictions that are affected by peer pressure or social influences. Rogan specifically compared young people identifying as trans to joining âsuicide pactsâ and a âcrazy radical cult.â
I listened to that episode and thatâs an absurd summary of it. Exactly the sort of clickbait nonsense that I was talking about.
Everything is laid out in that link and its fucking gross.
Here are some direct quotes:
JOE ROGAN (HOST): It seems like thatâs really the only way these people that are going through this with their children are ever going to get any light at the end of the tunnel is to see that some people have already done this and to learn from the mistakes of the past and to learn from the problems that these kids have encountered upon transitioning and that this groupthink model, this âcontagion,â as you describe it, does happen to kids. It happens with cutting. It happens with even suicide pacts. It happens with a lot of weird stuff that kids â particularly kids that feel like theyâre outcasts and theyâre depressed. Itâs a real problem.
ABIGAIL SHRIER: Thereâs a reason that social contagion spreads among teenage girls specifically, OK. Because you donât see tons of boys going around becoming anorexic because their friends are. If a teenage boy is depressed, his friend says to him, âLetâs go play basketball or a video game.â He doesnât say, âLetâs sit and talk about it.â And because girls try to take on their friendsâ pain very naturally and meet their friends where they are â and they care, they take on the pain of other people, especially their girlfriends â they are more likely to share and spread a peer contagion like anorexia, like cutting, and like trans identification.
Is it absurd to say that Shrier was promoting a book that describes trans kid as being part of a social contagion? Is It absurd to say that comparisons were made to anorexia, cutting, suicide, and cults? Is it absurd to say that the summary is absurd if the answer to both those questions is no?
Unlikely but not impossible.
Can you delineate this hypothetical good billionaire?
Certainly the thesis of Shrierâs book is that the huge increase in teens who are identifying as trans boys is that it is due to a social contagion phenomena. The summary you quoted summarizes a multi hour conversation in an extraordinarily inflammatory way and does not accurately summarize what they discussed, even if all those topics were mentioned.
Notably missing from that MMFA link is any actual refutation of or engagement with Shrierâs argument, instead preferring to just call her and Rogan transphobic pieces of shit.
So you are saying that Rogan is part of the mainstream media?
That article describes gender affirmative health care as the best practice and cites studies in favor of that. It also claims that Shrierâs work is based on a flawed study that surveyed parents who were found via anti-trans websites and not actual people who identified as trans. How is that not engaging with Shrierâs argument?
Dismissing Shrierâs argument because one piece of research supporting it is a scholarly article that added an editorial note and correction after it ignited a controversy isnât meaningfully engaging with or disputing her argument.
It is not worthy of being given the platform of being treated as a serious object for meaningful engagement that you think it requires.
why?