Said Riley Gaines, describing the difficulty of training during the Covid lockdown. That's part of a 2-and-a-half-hour discussion with Joe Rogan, which is mostly about her staunch opposition to allowing transgender women to compete against biologically female athletes. I've listened to the whole thing, and I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material. He's very supportive of Gaines, and the two of them frequently declare that the world has gone crazy:
"The same assertive, dominant men – who have always and will always be men – are the same men claiming to be women, demanding the language that we use," [Gaines] said. "And the same apologetic, emotionally-driven, empathetic women – who have been and will always be women – when they enter into a man's space, they're not demanding anything because they're the same women they always have been. It shows the differences that we possess within our characteristics almost innately."
Posts
73 comments:
Risking his reputation?? For agreeing that Men shouldn't be competing against Women?/ Why do Progressives hate women?? They don't even know what women are anymore. They are a joke, and Rogan is right bringing Riley on and discussing how crazy the left is now.
If she'd been training with Lia Thomas she would have been beaten every day.
Too lazy/uninterested to watch the interview, but curious to know what kind of snakes they were. Despite their reputation, cottonmouths are not aggressive at all. Non-venomous watersnakes (Nerodia) are, well, I wouldn't go so far as to say aggressive, but they're definitely not shy about biting when provoked. A misplaced swimstroke could lead to a bite, and while not dangerous, they do have a bit of an anticoagulant, so you'd bleed more than you'd expect. Even heard of someone who got a watersnake tooth lodged under his skin (unbeknownst to him) and ended up with a nasty infection.
My swim team did the same thing during covid we started swimming in ponds and everyone got addicted to Pond swimming and then when the ponds froze over we started hiking together and then when the trails became covered in snow we started snowshoeing together.
Problem solved.
I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material.
The left has long since demonized him because he determines what's right and sticks to it.
Here are two comedians, Theo Vaughn and Louis CK, discussing Rogan's integrity within the comedy profession.
"He believes what he believes and he goes for it, no matter whether it's going to hurt him or not."
"I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material"
I know what you mean, and you're right, but as a reflection of where we are it's quite a statement, isn't it? Recognizing it's bold to talk to a woman who says women should have the right to compete with women, that women's spaces and opportunities should not be taken over by men. Assuming that one's reputation is determined by progs who will vilify anyone platforming such a view. Implying there is indeed a substantial risk in deviating from prog orthodoxy. "This material" adds a nice twist, turning what was common sense the day before yesterday into something slightly ominous.
For us normies, there is nothing bold about talking to RG or in her actual views, Joe is enhancing his reputation rather than risking it, and "this material" is still common sense. But that doesn't count. Althouse's statement correctly captures the current state of prog hegemony.
Imagine the training with crocodiles.
What is Rogan's reputation, anyway?
I have two words for Riley Gaines:
1) Congress
2) Run
Professor, I don't know why you think Rogan is risking his reputation.
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/americans-oppose-inclusion-trans-athletes-sports-poll-finds-rcna88940
By 70% and that's being reported by NBC News.
And 55% think that changing your gender is morally wrong.
And those percentages have increased since 2021.
"Risking his reputation?? For agreeing that Men shouldn't be competing against Women?"
No. Not for that. For all the other things.
"Risking his reputation?? For agreeing that Men shouldn't be competing against Women?"/'No. Not for that. For all the other things.'"
I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Also for characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that... for 2+ hours.
Joe Rogan has a reputation. For taking horse dewormer?
A transgender woman is a FAKE woman.
We need to change the language and not concede to the Left.
Same with "gender affirming care" for minors. It's really child mutilation.
And the entire Covid lockdowns and masks wearing was the single biggest unforced public policy error in US history and people need to pay a price for being wrong. Fauci, et al.
The mismanagement of Covid and the subsequent election of Joe Biden is the root cause for our miserable economy and wild inflation.
Just look how Sweden handled it. The Swedes got it completely right.
What is “all the other things”?
"I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Also for characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that... for 2+ hours."
It would have been quicker to simply say "the truth."
>"Risking his reputation?? For agreeing that Men shouldn't be competing against Women?"/'No. Not for that. For all the other things.'"
I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Also for characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that... for 2+ hours.<
C'mon. His reputation is for speaking his mind and the truth very forthrightly. It therefore is at no risk whatsoever for having said those things.
I thought Riley was related to Rowdy Gaines, the olympic champion, even being her dad.
Ends up they have no relation.
But she does come from a family of top athletes.
Transgender spectrum disorder. Send in the pride of lions, lionesses, and their unPlanned cubs.
@James said: "Despite their reputation, cottonmouths are not aggressive at all..."
Dude, I was on a roof banging shingles in, and a cottonmouth swam all the way across a small pond to come after me. They are mean and irascible, and can be quite territorial.
I mean it was a large cottonmouth, the size of a small pond. Just kidding, it was a little over 3 ft, missing its head, but I've been chased more than once by those fat stinky bast*rds. Aggressive.
How was there never a Title VII challenge to allowing genetic and anatomical males to compete in college women's sports?
I don't know if Joe Rogan is boldly risking his reputation. There has been a regular and lengthy drumbeat about Joe Rogan risking his reputation, boldly or otherwise. Is "reputation" a synonym for "prominence" or "influence"? If he is risking it, whatever it is, the risk hasn't become reality.
Far more interesting questions are, were his heterodox - perhaps reputation-risking! - views once orthodox? If so, when did they change? Who set the current standard of orthodoxy that he violates? Are those people trustworthy? And, the always fundamental question: cui bono?
“Transgender women” are men. You’re either XX or XY, no disputing that.
It’s not so much “characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered“ as “observing that transgender people are mentally disordered.”
- Rafe
He just signed a new $250mm, non-cancellable, contract with Spotify. That also allows him to broadcast privately. He owns his own studio and employs his own staff.
If spotify cancels him it won't cost him a penny and his show will continue without missing a day.
I suspect that he does not give 2 shits about his reputation and being cancelled. And since he does not, he is uncancellable even with all the anklebiting and yapping. As long as he doesn't pay attention to it, pretty much nobody else will either.
John Henry
That's part of a 2-and-a-half-hour discussion with Joe Rogan, which is mostly about her staunch opposition to allowing transgender women to compete against biologically female athletes.
Are those their words or are they you arrogantly, inappropriately and deceitfully speaking for them when what they actually spoke about was her staunch opposition to allowing men to compete against female athletes?
You don't get to impose your words in their mouths. You don't get to control the debate by your manipulation of their language.
You speak for yourself, and have the decency and honesty to let others speak for themselves.
I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material. He's very supportive of Gaines, and the two of them frequently declare that the world has gone crazy.
You're right. So are they. By being there, willing to say this stuff out loud both of then are doing much to slow and maybe reverse a little bit o the crazy. I certainly hope so.
Males are people that were born with testicles. End of story.
Is there anyone in the world who doesn't believe that men shouldn't be competing against women? Even men pretending to be women believe that. Part of the reason for a Lia Thomas to compete in women's sports is so he does not have men competing with him.
And then nice ladies come along and point out that calling Lia Thomas a man is wrong. (Not factually incorrect. Only politically incorrect) Those who believe that Lia Thomas is somehow a "woman" see women competing against women. Thus they fail to see the problem.
If I say I have 6 fingers, even if I really and truly believe it, I still don't have 6 fingers. If I do really and truly believe I have 6 fingers, I think even you, Ann, would believe that I am mentally ill to some extent.
John Henry
Unless your name is Howard, Rich, Lonejustice, or Chuck.
I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Ooohhhh, got it.
NOT including our host. The lefts pretzel twists to change the language that ONLY supports their conclusion.
If the ideas were sound and supportable, there is no need to hijack the language
You can call yourself a dog. But I'm not validating you delusions
As with all confusing policies, the longer it goes on the shorter it will last.
mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that.
I cant find any room between 'fetish' and the social contagion that is trans.
It is pretty sad the state we have reached where telling the truth is risking a reputation.
I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material.
???
risking His reputation with WHO?? Faghags, that WANT to chop their sons dicks off?
believe it not, Ms Althouse.. But Not EVERY mother DREAMS of emasculating their sons
Reputation with who?
I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material.
With whom?
If you're talking about his fans: he's probably burnishing it.
If you mean his detractors: I was very emphatically told by a CNN-indoctrinated family member that Rogan was the leader of the world's Incels. I don't think he's got much of a reputation there to risk.
"I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women."
He's risking his reputation by saying... facts? What a world. I don't care if men pretend to be women. Am I risking my reputation by declaring that I can't be forced into saying they are women?
Science (DNA) says they are men. I thought WE were the science deniers??
Hmm. I know a few college athletes. Male ones. At state supported schools, which are all schools, because with two or three exceptions, all schools are supported by tax dollars.
These guys were football and track students. And while all the other students were in lockdown, the schools kept their athletic dorms open, continued training them, administered daily covid tests, and worked around the lockdowns. For them.
I wonder what the policies were at Thomas' school for male and female athletes, and also at Gaines' school. Was he permitted to keep training, while she was not, before he pretended to change his sexual identification? Either way, he's a disgrace, as are all the officials destroying women's sports to pander to male athletes with sexual pathologies.
I've listened to the whole thing, and I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material. He's very supportive of Gaines, and the two of them frequently declare that the world has gone crazy
@Althouse, unless, of course, it’s you who is risking your reputation as a feminist by siding with biological males against young biological females. It seems to me that a woman should be able to change clothes in the women’s locker room without having a biological male saunter in, strip down, and literally wave his dick in the woman’s face while proclaiming “I’m trans” as a get-out-of-jail-free card. It seems to me that a conservative male shouldn’t have to be lecturing you on this matter.
Note that this is different from the case where a person born male has had his penis and testicles surgically removed and is taking estrogen therapy.
I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material EQUALS He's not willing to be dragged along under the progressive bus like the rest of 'em
Risking his reputation? Gaines is right. You're either xx or xy, prone to uterine or prostate cancer and produce eggs or sperm. That's it.
The 1st Amendment answers just about every manufactured trans issue. Express yourself how you please, but do not play the victim for making those choices. And do not claim "rights" exist above those with which you were born, because they don't exist other than in the minds of those who wish to make money off your victimhood.
The world has gone crazy, further evidenced by the fact that a distinguished former law professor won't (or won't) even write on her blog the simple truth that Riley Gaines (like the rest of the non-crazy people) opposes males being permitted to compete against female athletes in girls' and women's high school and college sports and instead uses the vernacular of the crazy people to obfuscate the truth.
The phrase "biologically female" is redundant. There is no other kind of female.
"I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material"
Nah. He's been firmly against this insanity of men competing against women from the very start.
I guess no crocodiles in the lake that she swam.
Joe Rogan is "boldly risking his reputation" in asserting that 2 + 2 = 4, in direct opposition to The Will Of The Party.
There are two biological sexes.
If you have XX chromosomes, you are female.
If you have XY chromosomes, you are male.
Everything else is genetic abnormality or sophistry.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
I haven't watched the episode so I don't really have an opinion on the episode itself. But regarding risking his reputation I would say that it has been my estimation that Joe Rogan isn't given to extreme cultural positions. I won't say he is always right in the middle, but he is a decent gauge of around where the center of the Overton window is. Obviously people get upset at him, but that is usually from taking very small clips of what he said. CNN and other media tried to trash him by inaccurately and briefly portraying him as advocating Horse-Dewormer. I'd bet most people who were strongly upset at him for that only saw the media pieces critical of him and didn't actually watch his show on it. When CNN's Sanjay Gupta appeared on Joe Rogan's show shortly after the negative pieces on Rogan aired, Gupta largely wound up conceding most of Joe Rogan's points on the issue and walked back a lot of what CNN had been running with.
Plus Rogan's job is sitting down with people and talking to them in long-form interview format for a couple hours or more each day. Him talking to so many different people in that same long-form format might give him a more accurate read on where people's feelings tend to actually lie once they let down the normal safeguards people have up during short social interactions.
Finally, and I didn't watch the episode so I don't know how it plays out here, but it isn't always what you say, but how you say it. If the statement is "Transwomen are actually men with mental disorders," and it is said with a mix of disgust and anger one way, but in the other it is said with compassion and understanding, but a firmness for the truth, those two statements will have different affects on people.
I hope Joe Rogan doesn't get his reputation destroyed over this. Because if the untruth that Transwomen really are women becomes unchallengeably cemented into our culture it will just be the camel's nose under the tent and we are in for far worse things to come.
Blogger Leland said...
I guess no crocodiles in the lake that she swam.
Well if she's from Kentucky, there are no Crocodiles or Alligators there, but there could be water moccasins. And from what I've heard they are very aggressive, water-dwelling, venomous snakes.
I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Also for characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that...
It is common throughout history that truth tellers and truth speakers risked their reputations and were vilified, exiled...and even killed.
But I will admit, the term "women with penises" is growing on me.
Why are we even talking about this.
I've listened to the whole thing, and I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material.
I don't think any such thing. I think he's making his reputation.
I guess no crocodiles in the lake that she swam.
@Leland, how do you think she learned to swim so fast?
"He's very supportive of Gaines, and the two of them frequently declare that the world has gone crazy"
The world has not gone crazy- the left has. And as with everything else related to progressivism, they insist on attempting to force everybody else to go along for the ride.
I've listened to the whole thing, and I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material.
I'd like to hear Ann expand upon this observation. What does she see that I don't?
I do not believe a male (sure add the unnecessary "biological" if it gives you warm fuzzies) is a woman just by declaration. (Or even surgery, buy let's focus here.)
And that holiest of the holy, SCIENCE - hallowed be thy name, agrees with me.
So calling that person a man comports with "my truth" and scientific truth. Forcing me to call that man a woman requires me to betray my beliefs and to be a science denier. How dare anyone dispute "my truth". How dare anyone be a science denier.
Good thing this isn't England.
I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.
Also for characterizing transgender people as mentally disordered and fretting about the sexual perversion and things like that... for 2+ hours
Ann, I am really interested to know why you are open at all to including males in the category of "woman" or "girl" aka female. Or why, at the very least, you think it is strange or daring to call a male person a man.
When Thomas competed against Gaines, he was a fully intact male (I am not sure if he has amputated his penis yet). The only thing he had to do to compete with women was to lower his testosterone to a certain level - which was still higher than would be permissible for a woman to compete, by the way.
So this was a fully intact biological male. Just beginning with that - why is it rude or a bit daring to call this person a man?
(My position being that even he had been de-penised and grown out some man breasts, he would still be a man and does not have the right to appropriate a female identity. But why not just start from the circumstances that propelled Gaines' whole journey on this?)
"Fretting about sexual perversion" - well, a great many men who are demanding to be treated socially and legally as women do experience this as a sexual fetish, and the more honest ones admit it. Freely. So it's worth talking about.
"I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material."
How can that be since his reputation consists of whatever dangerous misinformation, conspiracy theories, jerky bigotry, or offensive views he wants to serve up whenever that are all unstoppable while he essentially answers to no one?
When Spotify's President apologized to employees for Rogan's racial slurs, Joe faked an apology, and low and behold, 113 episodes were deleted from Joe Rogan Experience podcasts and 19% of Spotify users canceled service. Guess what happened to Joe Rogan - nothing!
"I think Joe is boldly risking his reputation with this material."
How can that be since his reputation consists of whatever dangerous misinformation, conspiracy theories, jerky bigotry, or offensive views he wants to serve up whenever that are all unstoppable while he essentially answers to no one?
When Spotify's President apologized to employees for Rogan's racial slurs, Joe faked an apology, and low and behold, 113 episodes were deleted from Joe Rogan Experience podcasts and 19% of Spotify users canceled service. Guess what happened to Joe Rogan - nothing!
"and I'd jump in the boat dock and I'd swim down, by Johnny Cash's house, and I came back, and I did the same route every single day."
Smart thinking- makes it harder for illegal aliens to hunt you down and beat you to death. You know- like what happened to Laken Riley.
I don't think Joe is risking anything. He has been saying the same thing for a few years, now. Everyone who wants to know, knows his position on biologic males in women's sports.
Gadfly, you really don't like it that other people have opinions they can express freely, do you?
95% of the country agrees with her.
It's just the freaks in the liberal media that spew anti-science bullshit every day that don't.
If you believe men can be women then you are a weirdo pervert misogynist.
You hate real women.
Remember the surfer harassed during Jabfly's Reign O' Rona?
Good times.
The epistemology of gender dysphoria/transgenderism seems obviously false. How is it possible for someone to validly "know" that they were born in the wrong sex?
It's absurd. It's a social contagion mania. And it's captured the power elite.
'I mean, it's the language, like what you've got there -- saying "men" for transgender women.'
Trangender women are men!
95% of country 60 and over, like me, may agree with her. Young people not so much.
I think that even Neil Young might be with Joe on this one.
It remains a mystery to me why some down and out basketball coach doesn't put together a bunch of practice squad guys who are willing to take a shot at some creative notoriety, crush the entire 'women's' NCAA basketball field, and put an end to the entire charade.
readering said...
95% of country 60 and over, like me, may agree with her. Young people not so much.
Yes, but young people are ignorant and easily led. Give them time, most will grow up.
Ann Althouse said...
"Risking his reputation?? For agreeing that Men shouldn't be competing against Women?"
"No. Not for that. For all the other things."
He has had hours long interviews with UFO "experts". People who believe in Bigfoot. Alternative creation kooks. All kinds of nutty people. My favorite is the guy who believes that archeologists have been lying to us all these years and civilization is much older than we can now prove if only wed excavate deeper. Sometimes while high on mushrooms.
The upside? And this is why he is respected. He is a terrific interviewer. He's intelligent and he's likeable.
I think his career is safe.
I watched the whole interview. They picked the wrong woman to mess with. She's tough.
@Dave Begley: A transgender woman is a FAKE woman.
We need to change the language and not concede to the Left.
Absolutely. In place of "fake", may I suggest "ersatz"?
er·satz | ˈerËŒzäts, ˈerËŒsäts |
adjective
(of a person) made or used as a substitute, typically an inferior one, for something else: ersatz woman.
"That's part of a 2-and-a-half-hour discussion with Joe Rogan, which is mostly about her staunch opposition to allowing transgender women to compete against biologically female athletes."
I am genuinely curious about the language used here: "transgender women" vs. "biologically female." Was it a conscious decision to not use "biological male" here, or un/subconscious? For quite a while when this trend started hitting the news, I was never sure that "transgender woman," for example meant trans-ing *to* a woman or *from* - seemed a obfuscation as a way to avoid saying "biological male," probably to avoid either hurting someone's feelings or getting ran out of town by woke lefties.
Thus, my curiosity.
Post a Comment