I was sent this curious collection of recent tweets by Joe Rogan, a comedian I’ve never much cared for, but they’re so bizarre I had to put them up for your amusement/contempt. Click for a larger image.
His central point is this one:
I view women that don’t like children the same way I view dogs that like to eat their own shit.
How odd. Personally, I like some children, especially my own, but I don’t automatically melt into affectionate reverence when I see one; I have no problem with someone electing to not have children of their own. I also know from personal experience that, while there are definitely great rewards to raising kids, they are also a giant electrified flaming cattle prod to the butt through most of their childhood. Don’t you remember being a teenager once? Imagine what it’s like living in a house full of scrambled hormones, pimples, tears and frustration.
It’s OK to not want kids, or even to detest the very idea of having kids, as long as you avoid having them and making them as miserable as they’d make you.
But the way it’s phrased by Rogan is so weird: if you don’t like children, it’s equivalent to indulging in process that is disgusting to others. You are socially and psychologically required to want children, or you a morally reprehensible person. That’s a mindset I can’t embrace. We get a lot of the equivalent attitude from right-wingers: if you’re a man who doesn’t like having sex with women, you’re a vile human being.
Which leads into the real repugnant attitude here: all of his comments are addressed to women. Women, you must love children, if you don’t, you’re odd, gross, weak, a “hateful twat”. I have to ask…what about the men?
That’s the more disturbing part of his rant. He’s trying to shame women into doing something he considers vitally important, apparently, but men…eh, they aren’t part of his concern. We men can go ahead and dislike children, and that doesn’t make us weak and gross. That gives the lie to a claim he made in another tweet, that he’s not a feminist, he’s a humanist.
Don’t worry, though. He’s a comedian. He’ll say he’s just joking around.
Oh, but he did make some digs at men who called out his sexism. Called us “gender traitors”. Funny, from the slymepit posters I’ve had the misfortune of running into, I thought only the #FTBullies called people that.
So in his mind there is a war, and women are the enemy.
/insert facepalm picture here
Never heard of Joe Rogan before now. And never want to hear any of his material whatsoever. I love kids, too, but this is just vile and NOT FUNNY.
6 bits, 6 misses. Hell of a comedian.
Great, now I can’t enjoy reruns of NewsRadio as much.
I’ve often been asked what the difference is between “good” bad taste humor and “bad” bad taste humor. My standard reply is that good bad taste subverts the status quo, while bad bad taste upholds it.
Joe Rogan is clearly in the second group.
Never heard of him, so I looked him up on the Wikipedia. Apparently, he has argued that the moon landings were a hoax, is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist and was a supporter of Ron Paul in 2012.
Gee, a nut-ball Libertoonian. Who’d have thougth?
What a succinct and apt way to put it. That’s just right.
So wait, women who like kids are like dogs who eat their own shit? And he’s complaining about women who don’t like kids, while comparing said children to dog shit….
You want to hit a nerve with him talk about “fighters” who don’t fight. He is a loudmouth asshole who thinks he’s a tough guy. He does commentary on UFC matches pretends to be a coach and has never fought professionally in his life. On top of being a terrible comedian, he is the typical product of sport culture although he’s only a sideline “participant”.
Glad you approve, #8; it actually took a lonnng time to arrive at an explanation that simple. It explains the difference between John Waters (fat girl becomes hero, loser becomes winner) and the Farrelly Brothers (let’s make fun of fat and mentally disabled people).
Doesn’t sound funny to be. Or at least funny ha ha. Funny peculiar.
What’s funny about being a hater and an idiot who just slings insults.
I view women that don’t like children the same way I view dogs that like to eat their own shit.
And Joe Rogan is a rabid dog. A diseased and dangerous animal randomly biting people that no one sane would want near them.
Also, Peter, you were eating a meatball sandwich, right out in class, and you were passing nooooootes.
Well, I’m just confused. Will I choke to death or be eaten by zombies? Maybe I’ll become a zombie and then choke on a vegan?
Rogan’s a brain-fried dolt who defends rape jokes and his fans are just as awful. They live on the corner of rape culture and conspiracy theory. If you want to hear some wild stuff, listen to Rogan talk about how his drug fueled hallucinations are really his communications with magical beings.
Weren’t his fans the trolls tweeting rape threats at Jamie Kilstein not too long ago?
Brilliant piece of insight there, peterhuestis!
I think Louis C.K. had the right of it: some children are just shitty. The next time you see someone who appears to not like kids, stop and consider whether it’s actually just that they don’t like _your_ kid.
Joe Rogan apparently was playing himself on NewsRadio.
Ahh, the man show asshole.
So he views people who don’t like children as normal, but disgusting? Because it’s totally normal and healthy for a dog to eat shit… Their immune system is designed for that and their digestive tract is inefficient.
Now you’ve done it, PZ! The guy will undoubtedly be leading the Comedy segment at the next Australian atheist convention.
/sadface
Apparently I’m not a feminist and can never be one. I like my pizza with as much meat on it as I can get and I would really rather listen to Pearl Jam than Lady Gaga.
Sorry.
Mike.
+1 to peterhuestis #6
Also, “the zombies will eat you first”? Zombies know where to find the best brains.
Never been a fan. I’d seen him on a few shows, and well, never thought much of him. Glad to see that my tastes have been vindicated.
What a stupid douchebag. Whenever someone throws out the accusation of white knighting, it tells a lot about how that person sees human relationships.
Joe Rogan is pretty tight with Penn Jillette. ‘Nuff said.
But, see! He mentioned zombies! He’s topical! Has his finger on the pulse of pop culture and whatnot! I don’t know how zombies are supposed to relate to supposed gender traitors, I guess zombies are all going to be rampant misogynists…but zombies!
Eh? Eh?
What about the menz? There goes your feminist cred.
Lovely. So I’m a disgusting failure of a woman because I don’t like kids, don’t want kids, and find the concept of me pregnant to be repulsive.
And my acquaintances wonder why my taste in comiedians is basically just Eddie Izzard and Tim Minchin.
Among so many other tells, the white knight “they’re still not going to fuck you weak bitches” bullshit is a giveaway that the MRAs, PUAs, and other skidmarks don’t fully believe their own evo-psych bullshit.
Remember boys, there are two motivations to men, as you like to trot out. Sex and violence.
The reason I’m a gender traitor is not because I’m interested in getting laid, it’s that other easily trotted out trope about real men—I desire violence, and dominating fuckheads, at least verbally, is how I legally assuage that desire.
Joe Rogan of all dipshits should be able to appreciate that.
Hey D.J., another speaker to line up for next year’s TAM.
I view women who don’t want to have children as prime life partner material.
And women who don’t like children at all (a subset of the above) as excellent companions, because we can all have a chuckle over the woes of the bechilded :)
You know, I’ve always loved the “White Knighting” complaint. It really just means that if he ever agrees with a woman, she should probably be very, VERY skeeved out.
@optimalcynic (30):
Yeah, but they’re still not going to [REDACTED] you weak [REDACTED].
Eugh, even with redactions, I still feel dirty.
No Crissa. Not “people”. Since when have we ladyfolk been “people”?
But right — he’s bad at dogs and humanity. My dog really likes eating poop (though not her own) when we don’t keep a good eye on her. And she’s the best doggy ever. Certainly not a hateful twat.
I thought dogs eating their own shit is, like, completely natural and expected. It’s about as remarkable as dogs barking at squirrels. So, I guess that makes women who don’t like children are the natural normal ones.
So he considers himself a super masculine macho man while simultaneously thinking he’s an intellectual and enlightened humanist.
I think that’s the first time Joe Rogan has made me laugh.
This is correct. Also, the dig at vegans thrown in is almost definitely a result of their interactions.
If anyone feels like breaking a monitor today, they can go listen to the last time Jamie Kilstein was on Rogan’s podcast and they talked rape culture. This, combined with criticism of Daniel Tosh, was why Kilstein received said rape threats.
P.S. Always nice to find another Maniac :)
That must be it.
…Do zombies breathe, though?
Thread won.
This is not fucking comedy. Where’s the funny? Where’s the wit, the insight, the irony, the subversion of expectations? Some troglodyte’s ignorant opinions aren’t funny.
I think what this bozo needs is to be pulled aside by a cane, vaudeville-style.
Please be aware, Justin Vacula has declared Joe Rogan to be a #BraveHero.
These fucking toxic scumbags.
He can talk about 9/11 being an inside job at TAM!
Skepticismforthewin!
citation needed (wrt eating their own shit)
It might happen a lot (that would make it “normal” I guess), but healthy?
Besides which, even if it was normal, healthy, and natural for a dog to eat its own shit, that would in no way preclude the opinion, from a human standpoint, that that’s ‘disgusting’.
case in point.
For some reason I’m reminded of a comic strip I saw years ago. Two men at a bus stop, one w/ suit & tie, the other overalls.
overalls guy: So, got any kids?
tie-guy: Just the one. You?
OG: Just the six, and number seven on the way.
TG: *pause* I’ve always thought it’s a matter of education.
OG: I think it’s natural selection.
Joe Rogan is a moron of the highest order. He’s a moronic “bro”, in fact — the king of moronic “bros”, nothing more. He’s a homophobic hatemonger of the highest order as well. There’s a YouTube clip of him at a club, going after a heckler by calling him a “fucking faggot” and so on.
Rogan’s a dumb piece of shit, nothing more. Real bottom feeder material.
Children in the family tend to like me. Probably because I am the weird uncle that has a room filled with LEGO and computers full of videogames that I might lend them.
But I don’t really like children myself. Probably because of how much of a drag it is to babysit them. Liking children is something that requires a lot of patience and time and really, I doubt that many people actually like them, some are just better at hiding their distate than others..
For women it must be far more annoying, because of society and scumbags just assuming right away that it is part of their duties to like children.
For the record, Joe has kind of gone off the deep end over the last few years. He’s one of these hardcore MMA guys, who’s likely taken a ton of hormones to jack himself up physically. He’s also a bit of a woomiester to boot. He’s really into DMT, he was in the “documentary” DMT: the Spirit Molecule .
He’s also an advocate of a ton of conspiracy theory’s and such. All-in-all he’s quite a quack. I kind chalk it up to all the drugs (psychoactive and steroids) that’s he’s been on over the past decade or so (or so I am lead to believe). He’s seemignly getting crazier and crazier. Maybe he always has been and is more recently speaking out/being seen, but he didn’t seem so crazy back in the News Radio or even the early Fear Factor days.
nyarlathotep,
Thanks you. Yes, I’m very much a fan of the show. My friend hooked me on it and I hooked my daughter. If you like that and Lovecraft, have you listened to Caustic Soda? One of the hosts is lead singer in Darkest of the Hillside Thickets.
Oh, FFS.
Rogan, as mentioned above, is a moon hoax believer. He once suckered Phil Plait into a debate which he “won” by simply shouting down Phil every time he tried to make a point.
@#35: I’ve never heard of that for dogs, or any other carnivores. For rabbits, on the other hand, it’s the equivalent of cows chewing their cud.
*Thank* hurp…
interesting. My SIL’s family are show dog breeders/kennel owners. They said it was a “don’t want to leave a trackable scent” thing. I just assumed they were correct. now, I’ll have to exercise my googlefu.
#BraveHero
I’ve seen this sort of thing before: a man who’s a “strong supporter of women’s rights”—but with the important qualifier that it is a different set of rights from those accorded to men. In other words, a woman has the absolute right to “stay in her place”.
Never self-described that way, of course.
–
Obnoxious tosser.
Since all it takes to become a #bravehero all one has to be is an unhinged misogynist, of course he did.
Why should I be required to like “children” as a whole, the way I might like chicken or chocolate ?
I like children the same way I like adults. Some are lovable, some you’d rather avoid – like this so-called “comedian”.
Some kids are assholes, just like some adults are assholes. Assholish kids often grow up to become assholish adults. Stupid, boring, inane and hateful people don’t magically become so at the age of 18.
People who don’t remember that from their own childhoods either are suffering from a peculiar form of amnesia or never had social interaction with other children to speak of.
I bet Rogan was not a particularly lovable child.
Good point. Nobody should be required to like children as a whole.
There are a lot of parts of a child that are simply inedible.
@Vexorian- I’m in the same boat. Kids have a tendency to just wear out my patience. Especially the kids who constantly interrupt any attempt to have a conversation or perpetually need to make themselves the center of attention. I don’t enjoy visiting my friends who have kids (most of them nowadays) because I can hardly even get a minute to catch up with them with all the distractions the kids present. Maybe it’s just my nature. Even as a kid I hated being forced to spend time with my cousins when I would rather hang out with the adults. I think that alot of people probably share our attitude (in varying levels) but society makes it very hard for most to admit.
@optimalcynic- Absolutely true. Took me many years to find a gal who didn’t want kids (doesn’t even like them) and that was a big factor in my decision to marry her. It’s so awesome that I don’t have to explain to her every time I wanna make an excuse for skipping some friend’s kid’s Birthday Party. Or why I’d rather avoid family-friendly restaurants etc.
My theory: If you dropped the routines of Dane Cook and Don Rickles into a food processor, chopped them into bits, consumed the contents and then crapped them out, you’d give birth to a Joe Rogan routine. (I use ‘routine’ I can’t bring myself to calling any of their stuff ‘comedy.’)
We have to thank Vacula for going through the trouble of sorting out the vile bullshitters for us.
One would think that among the last people that should have children are people who do not like children.
Oh, wait, I keep forgetting that one of the essence of being a woman is the absolute desire to have children.
I don’t want kids. In general, I don’t like kids.
I remember working at the campus bookstore with one of my female co-workers (I am also female), and she offered to watch a lady’s kid while the lady shopped. And then basically handed the kid over to me, which I did not sign up for. If she wanted to do something nice for someone – that’s fine. It’s not part of her job, and it might have interfered with her job, but whatever – it was a slow day.
But I didn’t want to watch this kid, and she just assumed I’d be cool with it. I’m a woman, right? And therefore if I don’t have kids of my own, I must necessarily want to “practice” with other people’s kids, right? Despite my protests, my co-worker went on break, and this kid and I just stared at each other until his mother came back.
The only sprog I’ve ever really liked to be with is my niece. She’s a sweet baby. And she’s a quiet baby, and if she’s not quiet she’s cooing or laughing. She’s not a crier.
Not even she has changed my mind about having kids. :P
Oh FFS. It’s hardly original for someone to come along with the whole “a woman who doesn’t want or like children is an unnatural bitch!” It’s not at all surprising coming from Rogan, who seems to eat and regurgitate bullshit for a living.
@33 Richard Smith:
You misunderstood me, but I’ll cop to poor phrasing. Let me try and explain, but I’m very open to suggestions on how to phrase it better.
I don’t want kids. I don’t want to end up with someone who does want kids because not having them would make her life miserable. I think that’s a very unfair thing to do to another human being. Therefore when I do as most of us do and look for someone to share my life with, I tend to stick with people who share my goals and values – specifically, not wanting children.
Does that make more sense and inspire less redactions?
Janine:
I used to take the time out to explain that to every other person who expressed shock at my not wanting sprogs. The standard response? “Oh, you’ll change your mind, it’s different when it’s your own!” Ugh.
Even those of us who have had kids know this simple truth: it’s a lot harder than it looks (well, if you’re doing it right, anyway). It will require huge compromises in your life. It’s a responsibility and a commitment for the rest of your life. You should only do it if you’ve thought about seriously and think it’s an important aspect of who you want to be.
It was a bigger leap for me than dedicating my career to science and education, that’s for sure. Would I tell everyone in the world that they must invest the first 30 years of their lives in preparing for a scientific career, or they’re dog-shit eating wastes of skin? No. So why do some people think they can decide that all women must follow this one very narrow path?
PZ:
Answers I have heard various times throughout my life, said to me in all seriousness:
“You’re a woman! Your body is built to have children!”
“It will happen. You just wait until that biological clock starts ticking.”
“Women don’t have a choice, you have a biological clock. You’ll be sorry for waiting so long.”
“All women want children. It’s in your body and your brain. A woman who doesn’t want them has a mental illness.”
“Women are biologically suited for having and caring for children. That’s the way it’s always been.”
Chas what are you getting at by quoting me? I was saying that I find the concept of me being pregnant to be disturbing, not pregnancy in general.
@Caine
Ugh my mother is getting on us about that. She loves kids and that’s great and was a great mother but we’re not ready and it is putting a strain on how she’s dropping hints. I may have to take her aside and have a talk to her about that
J. Brisby, late of these parts, is a Joe Rogan fan. He once linked delightedly on his LJ to a video of Rogan shouting down the amazing Lydia Lunch, whose toilet he isn’t fit to clean with his tongue. His single-brain-celled fans think that exchange constitutes a “slapdown” on Rogan’s part.
Ing:
Oh man. All my sympathies. It might be best to have the talk, because it will get much worse as time goes on. If you have a chance to stop it now, go for it.
Ah, yes. Those of us with uteruses are just little baby-makers. How dare we have opinions and personal feelings, like we think we’re people or something.
We probably will have children at some point, we’re just not ready now. And they’ll probably be adopted.
Thank you, Miss Daisy Cutter. I had pretty much forgotten about that one.
Why couldn’t he have stayed forgotten?
@ Caine:
Oh gawd, the “biological clock” gambit! *rolls eyes in utter disgust* It’s also my biological destiny, as a descendant of hunter-gatherers and subsistence farmers, to stockpile energy within my body against a potential famine. Society frowns upon people who let themselves get fat, though, especially for women…
Strange how this biological imperative thingy works. /snark
Doesn’t matter. No offense intended. My only point was that “disgust” is entirely subjective and that it’s not mutually exclusive with normal, natural, and healthy.
Vexvorian at #46-
I’m not fond of kids either, but they always flock to me. I have an idea why. People who dislike kids are less likely to be patronizing and treat kids “like kids.” Which all kids crave.
That, and the childfree types do cool things, like collect LEGOS and catch snakes. :)
Irenedelse:
Yeah. There was a long time when it seemed that everyone on the planet was “biological clock! biological clock! Oooh, wimmin has a biological clock!” Yikes. I’m 55, never heard so much as a tock outta mine. ;)
Yet it’s clear that many, or at least some, heterosexual women who swear in their 20s that they will never ever have kids turn out later to have been incorrect.
As always, anecdotes about meee are just that and ought not be extended to others. People change their minds, and just because some women deny feeling a biological-clock effect doesn’t mean that it’s not a real and powerful feeling for others.
@79
Stay classy
When I was younger and had small children of my own I was more likely to like children. I liked mine and many of their friends. I still didn’t like all of them. At one point in time I had 3 step children that I disliked in varying degrees. As I get older I find I like children less and less.
I find it interesting that children are lumped together as group that part of the population must like when in reality there are individuals in their own right with distinct personalities. So just as I don’t like every person I meet, I don’t like every child that I come into contact with.
I just saw this in my twitter feed and had to share.
Just so you know, the person claims to be an abortion provider in Chicago. Guess I will have to follow her.
Chas:
Yes, some people* change their mind. Naturally, that excuses all the intolerable, disgusting behaviour and attitudes aimed at childfree people and it also absolutely justifies physicians patting women on the head and refusing to sterilise them or provide certain types of birth control, because of course, a woman can’t know her own mind, but hey, a 15 year old getting pregnant is just dandy!
*Men are childfree too. That seems to get missed a lot. I guess because it’s okay for them.
he is a self proclaimed comedian like many such critters he ain’t very funny but there does seem to be an audience for that kind of thing.
children can be exhausting that is for sure. They are “working” as hard as they can from day one to try a learn what this place is and what is going on. I can understand why not all people can handle the level of concentration they require. I had at one time two dogs, sisters and litter mates who were very different mothers one very patient and tolerant of her pups the other sometimes almost hostel it was very interesting.
Me, I like children but as I get older I do not always have the energy I want to spend on interacting for long periods of time with them.
Most only have two states on (100% awake) or off (asleep).
I marvel at the scope of the subjects on this blog and the depth in the comments.
Thanks PZ and all the participants here.
uncle frogy
Well, Joe Rogan would know coprophagy. He laps up the toxic excrement of bro culture by the freighter-load and regurgitates it for his fans to chow down on.
The guy’s a jerk. That’d be something I could work with if he was actually funny.
But no.
Caine,
This. This. This.
I find it incredible that I feel lucky for having a doctor willing to believe me that I have no interest in having children. She is willing to prescribe a long term IUD without giving me any crap about, “Oh just you wait, you’ll want them eventually!!” Or, “Are you really sure you want long term? You don’t want to just stay on a Pill?”
I love his use the phrase gender traitor. I imagine no hair, and a lot of political ink
@ Chas #79:
You know what? It’s entirely possible to feel some biological tug toward babymaking… and then conciously reject it, for various reasons. For instance, my health (mental and physical) is dicey enough, thank you. I don’t dislike kids, though, but I do lack the emotional ressources needed to be even a reasonably adequate parent.
My mother never quite understood that, though in the end she accepted that it was my call, and none other.
Rawnaeris:
Yeah, the condescending attitudes you come across are jaw dropping. I started looking for a doc to deal with reproductive issues when I was 17. I went through quite a lot of them. Finally got a Planned Parenthood doc to agree to an IUD, *after* arguing with me about “you should take the pill!” for over two hours first. (I had chronic, classic migraines. I still got “the pill, the pill!”).
Yes, AND women who change their minds after saying they don’t wants kids are just submitting to the siren’s song of the biological clocks. It’s never due to being brownbeaten into breeding. No nevah!
Illuminata:
On that score, I’ve known several men who didn’t want sprogs, and got a vasectomy, who later caved under constant pressure of a partner in a later relationship, got the vasectomy reversed and had kids. One of them turned out to be happy about the change.
Yeah, honestly I did get genuinely lucky with this one, I just moved to the area, and she’s the first doc I’ve seen here. She took one look as my symptoms chart and informed me that I need to go get a general practitioner to get diagnosed for migraines, and when she gave me the data booklets on the IUDs, she said to review them with the assumption that any migraines I have will get worse if that’s one of the listed side effects.
It does probably help that I’m in my late 20’s and travel a lot, so the whole daily pill thing isn’t really practical, and I’ve put up with them for the last year.
Chas, isn’t it interesting how you ignore the people who wanted kids and then stop wanting them? Or worse, regret them because they never actually wanted them in the first place but had them for fear of being “unnatural”?
Even if some people do change their minds about not wanting kids, that doesn’t ever justify the bullshit condescension and outright contempt people like Rogan and yourself spew at people (not just women!) who don’t want kids.
I like some kids. Many personality things that go along with child development are, to me, at best annoying or tedious. So I don’t like most kids. I was sterilized when I was 24, and it was the best decision I’ve ever made.
I was only able to get my IUD because I’m a chronic, classic migraineur. I’d really rather be sterilized, but no one will do it.*
*I think I’ve talked my current gyno into it, but she’s making do a five year waiting period with the IUD first.
Rawnaeris, when I started looking for a doc, it was in 1974 – attitudes were seriously bad back then.
ChasCPeterson #79
What does heterosexual have to do with anything.
Why do you phrase it as “deny feeling” rather than “don’t feel”?
ButchKitties:
I had the same problem. Fortunately, my time with a copper7 IUD took care of the problem. My fallopian tubes are sealed up tight, due to a sub-clinical infection. And yes, I had a hysterosalpingogram.
Chigau:
Because biological clocks and mommybrainz are real, man! Who cares about non-heterosexuals, anyway?
Caine:
Well no wonder. You’ve duct-taped the snooze button.
Chris:
I must have done that in my sleep – I have no memory of that at all.
@Goodbye Enemy Janine, #82,
I’m inclined to think that’s a joke. It looks as though the author is taking the “you just killed Beethoven” argument to its logical extreme, and saying that any missed opportunity to have a child is equally terrible.
On a more serious note, men are “biologically designed to produce children” just as much as women are. But I rarely see the same criticisms directed against men who do not like children or have no interest in raising them. It’s almost as though society at large sees nothing wrong with men being distant from their children…
Hell, we could be more efficient at it. A woman can only get one pregnancy at a time. Men could get many women pregnant, all in the same day. Rarely has anyone asked me why I haven’t knocked up more women yet.
“Hmm. 198 billion babies in a few weeks. We’ll need an army of super-virile men scoring round the clock! I’ll do my part. Kif, clear my schedule.” -Zapp Branningan.
Country-Western song:
You’ve Duct-taped the Snooze-button on the Alarm Clock of my …. something
Ughhhhh *shakes Etch-a-Sketch*
Chigau:
Aliens abducted me and strapped me to this examining table. They had this stuff which looked just like duct tape! Ever since I was returned, I haven’t heard a sound from my biological clock! *sob*
@ Ing,
I just realized that I fail as man compared to Kif. He can get pregnant! And is also supported by a serious of bladders.
*over-sharing time*
I had my one and only child at 19. I never wanted kids–said all through childhood that I never wanted to be a mom. I got pregnant by accident (slipped up on my birth control pills) and, since I was a fundamentalist xian at the time, abortion was never an option. Instead, I got married (at 19) and had a kid. Big mistake. I adore my daughter–she’s the smartest, best person–but if I had it to do over again, I’d never had a child that young (or at all). I would definitely not have gotten married and divorced before I was 21. I don’t regret her existence because I love her, and I think I’m a great mom (on every other weekend, and alternating holidays). But it wasn’t the life I wanted for myself, or for her.
When I was 27, I had a tubal ligation (and yes, I had to fight 2 doctors about it before I found an GYN that would just do it). Couldn’t be happier with that decision. I don’t want to have more children, ever. And luckily my partner feels the same way. At 35, I don’t feel a “biological clock ticking.” I don’t feel like there is something missing in my life.
IDK–my feelings about my own role as a mother are complicated, because the situation is complicated. But the very last thing I want or need is for those complicated feelings to be dismissed with some horse-shitty gender essentialism. I HATE the way people assert stuff like “You must want kids, come on! Babies are so cute, right?” or the way my soon-to-be-MIL is soooooo sad that her son and I won’t have kids because that’s just what married people do, right? But I also hate when give me a check mark when they find out that I am a mom, like I did a great, gender-fulfilling thing by popping out a baby when I was a teenager. BEING A MOM ISN’T ALL I AM OR CAN EVER BE, THANKS.
*/over-sharing*
Why should being a decent human being have anything to do with whether or not you breed? What the hell. Fuck you Joe Rogan. I look at him like I look at dog shit.
Glodson:
I ♥ this, I do.
@ Caine
I saw that just as I posted. If I was a respected member of the community, I would be embarrassed by my typo. However, the cry of goddamnit was made as I hit submit comment just as I noticed my error.
Happiestsadist
That would be my mother and there really is no special pleasure in life like growing up knowing your mother never really wanted children and regrets having them. I’ve lost count of how many times she’s told me that children are the greatest source of misery in parents’ lives and any fully rational person would never have children. If she could do it over again, she wouldn’t have had any of us. She has stated this quite bluntly and openly.
Social support and acceptance of the childfree would have been far better than inflicting these situations on children who were never truly wanted and the parents who felt pressured to have them.
But ooooh, sometimes women change their minds. Guess we’d better not take them seriously. ::spits::
@Cyranothe2nd (#108):
Thank you for sharing this, especially the part about having to fight to get a tubal. My fiancee had to fight with her doctor for years to get one – the guy even wanted to bring her then-husband in to “talk about” the decision! One would think there’s got to be something in the canon of medical ethics that would prevent that sort of absurd behavior… I’ve never heard of a man having to fight so hard to get a vasectomy.
Describes the Formerly Funny Dennis Miller
Seriously, when CAN’T we apply this argument? Guess we’d better not let women adopt, or get abortions, or get tattoos or piercings, or become educated, or…
Even worse, this chain of argument works just as well in the opposite direction. We’d better not encourage women to have children in case they don’t like them. We better not encourage women to become educated stay at home mothers in case they want to start careers later in life.
MM:
Oh yes, it’s all extra special with poison on top.
okstop:
Depends. In some states, a man can’t have a vasectomy unless his wife is informed and signs off on it.
Unlike humans dogs can get nourishment from feces (it’s not all waste products) without getting sick. Which can save a dogs life on occasion, I remember there was a TV show about pet rescues and someone had abandoned a pug with her puppies in a locked apartment, and the pug ate it’s own feces to survive before being rescued. So Rogain is in both cases applying his limited knowledge to areas he knows nothing about.
Caveat Imperator:
You can apply it to absurd extremes. However, it keeps being seriously applied to women in regard to breeding because of a persistence of thought that women are, by nature, flighty creatures who will naturally change their mind because biology.
Liking children is just a matter of not overcooking and using the proper herbs to season them.
Sounds suspiciously like the spurious reasons people want to talk about late term abortions.
This has nothing to do with Rogan, who shows himself to be a jackass once again, but I wanted to add a little something for dog owners.
In some circumstances, dogs eating poop can be normal, especially if it is a mother who has given birth to new-born pups, or in some cases where there are multiple dogs and a more submissive dog might eat another dogs poop. Puppies themselves might sometimes eat poop, but usually grow out of it. Dogs that have owners who repeatedly ‘rub their noses in it’ and punish dogs for pooping in the house might also unintentionally promote poop eating for some dogs (the dog has an incentive to get rid of the poop before he gets punished).
However, in most circumstances, if your fully adult dog routinely eats poop, it might be a sign of health problems, like pancreatic problems, digestion problems, or an intestinal infections. A trip to the vet just to make sure nothing is wrong could be in order…
Glodson:
There’s considerable overlap. Anti-choice people want women to be punished for daring to have sex for non-procreative reasons, and what better to put the slut in her place than a baby? It’s hard for me to express my absolute fury over such thinking. I knew from a very young age that the only reason I was around was because my mother feared dying if she had a back alley abortion. To an anti-choicer, that’s a success story. In truth, my childhood was the stuff of nightmares and horror movies. Not exactly a success from my point of view.
If you don’t trust women to know what they want in the first place, why would you trust them in the second place?
To be fair, I said @109: “Why should being a decent human being have anything to do with whether or not you breed? What the hell. Fuck you Joe Rogan. I look at him like I look at dog shit.”
Fuckshit Rogen didn’t actually say that women had to breed but just like kids. I’ll just amend my post to:
“What the hell? Fuck you Joe Rogan. I look at him like I look at dog shit.”
It must be dizzying to live thinking that pregnancies are great and all women want them, and when they don’t want them, they must be sluts who should be punished by having the previous great thing forced onto them.
This is along the lines I was thinking of. It even ties back into the talk of “positive sexism” the other day. Often, I hear that women are so good at being in touch with their emotions, they understand feelings and all that. That and the “Women are naturally nurturing” ideas tie into the idea that all women love babies. But they feel more than think, so a woman might feel something strongly and make a snap decision the woman will regret.
I wasn’t thinking of anti-choicers when I noted the overlap of the “biological clock” and “arbitrary late term abortion” gambits. I was thinking that these ideas seem to stem from the same sexist idea. Women predisposed to motherhood, women are so nurturing, women are all baby-crazy… and when a woman wants to be childless, or when the women want an abortion, they are adherent examples, there’s something wrong and it is important to tell these women to stop thinking and just feel the “natural” feelings.
At least, that was my take.
It’s a sign of just how fucked up access to birth control is in this country that I’m a little jealous of this.
@Caine, #118,
Precisely. This line of reasoning is built on two monumentally stupid premises; that women (or whatever group one decides to apply it to) are fickle and cannot be trusted to make their own choices, and that another group of people know what the correct choices are and can be trusted to make those decisions in their stead.
Even if the first premise were somehow true, the argument is bidirectional and thus useless until someone establishes the second one.
Not surprising that Rogan is big of biological essentialism, as his most recent prior asshole move was ranting about how trans women are really men and thus that trans woman MMA fighter Fallon Fox is a cheater (along with lots of insults to her appearance), because apparently trans women have magical male power boosts even when they haven’t had testosterone in a decade.
I was being facetious about dogs eating their own shit, but dogs (and other carnivores) do sometimes eat the shit of herbivores, which, being full of partially digested plant matter, is actually healthy for them.
Caveat Imperator at #102:
I posted that because I thought it was funny. Not because I thought she was making a bad argument.
There is a poll at the link in Sassafras #128.
—
UFC’s Joe Rogan to Transgender MMA Fighter Fallon Fox: ‘You’re a F***ing Man’
Is Joe Rogan right about Fox?
Yes. 90.0%
No. 4.6%
Don’t know. 5.3%
Total votes: 10,709
I’ve understood that Joe Rogan is an atheist. Am I wrong? Several years ago I saw some kind of comedy skit in which he interviewed religious people and went pretty hard after their beliefs. From that I gathered that he must be an atheist or agnostic.
Chigau @ 131, wow. Words fail.
Andreas:
What difference would that make? Do you think that atheists are immune to being flaming douchebags of toxic sexism? Been hiding under a rock lately?
actually, he really was saying that.
you have to know people like him to be able to read correctly between the lines.
If Rogan’s an atheist, all the more reason to support movements like A+.
…you know, a couple weeks back, PZ was asking what would get atheism cons bigger audiences, like comic cons get.
I can’t see why adding social justice issues wouldn’t be just the ticket for that. Can’t recall if it came up?
So?
It is entirely possible for someone to be an atheist and a shitty person. And it is possible to be a very good person, very respectable, and a theist.
I was lucky. I knew I didn’t want kids at 14. I never changed my mind (40 years and counting). I received only a handful of comments to the effect of “you’ll change your mind.” I was never mocked or derided. I married a man who was indifferent about having kids. I’m thrilled I don’t have children, don’t like them much (have three nephews, can only take them for an hour at a time, if that). Okay, I do admit that I like to be around intelligent, inquisitive kids who love to learn and discover new things. I really feel I was born without that urge, that whatever-it is that makes many women want to have kids.
And I hate it when I go from NM to CA to visit my family and can’t have a single intelligent conversation with my sisters because they are totally wrapped up their kids the whole time I’m there. Their kids are hugely intelligent, creative, very special, but they are boys and I have no idea how to relate to them.
Susan:
I knew at a much earlier age. I was seeking sterilization at 17.
Um, how about as people? Individuals?
Just talk to them about their interests.When a kid warms up to you, they can talk to you, at length, about a subject they love. And if you take an interest in what they like, they will love it.
Especially if you aren’t feigning interest.
Glodson:
Holy Rodent, that’s the bloody truth. When this came up in another thread, I mentioned that sprogs are attracted to me, in spite of my not liking them at all. It’s one of the features I really don’t like – sprogs don’t come with an off switch. ;p
It turns out that I am both good with kids, and like kids. Good thing too, since I spend a ton of time with my daughter.
But you are right, Caine, about kids not having an off switch. I wasn’t feeling well a couple of weekends ago, and was trying to rest on the couch. While my daughter, who is three, attempted to take care of me. She wanted to play tag, so she would try to help me rest. Then, every five minutes, she would as “are you better yet, daddy?” Then she would look a little dejected when I said no, think for a minute, and go back to her attempts to help me.
Ah, I think my sarcasm detector needs to be taken in for a tune up. I thought you were incredulous that an abortion provider could believe such things and doubted that he or she was telling the truth about his or her occupation.
I have a theory that some children are like cats and seek out the person who is least interested in their attention.
MM:
Yes. I think it is a combination of this and many childfree people having fascinating things in their houses, fascinating animals or hobbies, etc. When we first moved to Almont, there was a herd of sproggen at our house every fucking day while we were moving in. Word that we had an 800 gallon indoor pond and koi spread like wildfire. And we had seriously cool monster dogs. And this. And that. One day, there was a knock at the back door. I answered and there was the herd of sproggen. The spokesprog held out her hands and pronounced “we brought you a frog! We caught it at Gaebe’s Pond.” I thanked them very much, took the poor frog indoors and searched about for something to make a quick habitat out of, until we could return it to Gaebe’s Pond later that night. Yeesh.
“Do you like children?”
“Oh, yes, absolutely love them. Especially broiled, tandoori style.”
I listen to Greg Proops’ podcast, and decided to try some others.
Rogan’s was listed as a top one, so I downloaded an ep. Listened partway through it.
The subject was about how the Apollo missions were clearly faked. Rogan was putting forth that seriously.
The man is not worth listening to.
/delurk
This attitude is one of the reasons I still have a job. :( When I worked in foster care I had dozens of young, single women who kept having kids because they believed that having kids was just what they were supposed to do. They could not conceive of a purpose other than being a mother–but they weren’t able to be *good* mothers. They had been abused and neglected themselves, they were dealing with rape, domestic violence, trauma, substance abuse, developmental disabilities and mental illness–they had never been parented. They didn’t know how to be parents. And I had to take their kids away.
I don’t know how many women I talked to who, in addition to believing that they *must* be mothers, also believed that they should naturally know *how* to be mothers. As if upon the birth of their child, a parenting manual was downloaded into their brain, telling them exactly what to do in every situation–how to nurse, how to burp, how to change diapers, how to toliet train, how to discipline, how to handle temper tantrums, how to handle puberty and illness and acne and school proms. And when they didn’t magically know how to do everything, they were angry and sad and self-destructive and depressed because they believed they were bad mothers. They believed they were bad *people.* And I had to take their kids away.
I can’t express how angry this type of attitude makes me. Kids are HARD. I’ve worked with children for over 14 years–they’re wonderful, terrifying, frustrating, bewildering, mercurial, indescribably complex beautiful little monsters. And not everyone is cut out for them*. Even the ones that are–there are no perfect parents. There are no perfect mothers. There are no perfect fathers. Children are a choice. Mocking women *or* men who make the choice not to parent is terrible. It’s like mocking someone for saying: “I’ve only had one glass of wine, but I’d better not drive, because I know that I get drunk very easily.” FSM forbid someone make a responsible decision!
*Including me. I fix other people’s children; I don’t need any of my own. ;)
/relurk
Jafafa Hots:
Interestingly, Greg Proops and his wife are childfree.
Onion girl! So nice to read you again, and that was a wonderful post, thank you. Too many people refuse to think of things from the kid’s side of things, and a lot of kids out there have lousy lives because of such attitudes and those who insist on perpetuating them.
Great comment, Onion Girl.
We miss you.
Caveat Imperator@115:
(emphasis added)
Sadly, the “she might change her mind and have regrets” argument was what Justice Kennedy (you know, the “moderate” justice!) used to justify upholding the “partial birth” abortion ban in Gonzalez v. Carhart.
Seriously, right now Roe v. Wade depends on someone who thought that was a good argument.
My own two cents, personally I can’t understand truly hating children.
Being irritated by? obviously.
Not wanting? sure, perfectly reasonable.
I don’t really see much of a demarcation between children and adults. They’re just young people, and hating children, categorically, is the same sort of misanthropy as “hating people.” Which people will say, and I’ll take as joking, because if one actually means shit like “Think about how stupid the average person is, then remember half of them are stupider than that” they’re a world class asshole.
karpad:
You know what I find interesting? Fuckwits who can’t seem to resist equating not liking children/disliking children into “truly hating” children. Personally, I can’t be bothered with any child enough to reach a point of hatred. That might have happened if I had been forced to actually have one. Happened to me (being hated and unwanted.)
There’s definitely an asshole about. Goes by the nym karpad.
Sassafras beat me to the Fallon Fox issue. As far as I’m concerned the weight classes in mixed martial arts, like boxing, are questionable, and undercut any legit concerns anyone might have. It’s all about being able to make a specific weight for the weigh in, which doesn’t mean the two fighters are equal in strength, stamina etc. A guy who loses 15 pounds to make weight, then gets a bunch of it back by the time the fight starts, is going to perform differently than his opponent who only gains back a couple of pounds, and didn’t have to radically cut weight. A 140 pound, 6 feet 2 inches tall fighter is going to perform differently than a 140 pound, 5 feet 8 inches tall fighter, yet they would be put in the same weight class.
I am a parent.
I find myself wistfully looking at the childFREE.
Note: Not “childless”, these are not people without children, these are people free from the tyranny of parenting. I only want my friends to have kids out of a kind of twisted revenge. Schadenfreude is, after all, a very good reason to encourage reproduction. ;-)
Don’t get me wrong, I love my son and will raise him to the best of my abilities, never faltering for a second. But ask me if I’m having another child and I shall quote the words of one of the wisest, most talented and brilliant women I have ever met to you. That woman is my wife, her words are “Fuck no! Are you out of your tiny mind? Have you seen how much work this one little beast is? You want MORE of these running around? You look after the next one, you push it out of your body, then we’ll talk.”
Smart lady. I’m inclined to agree with her.
Louis
onion girl
Oh my yes. Excellent comment all around.
karpad
I have had a lot of childfree friends over the years. You know what they most often complain about and direct anger towards? Inattentive or pushy parents and smug people who try to tell them how they feel, tell them what they should do, and accuse them of hatred. There’s the occasional “this kid wouldn’t leave me alone”, sure, but primarily it’s adults forcing kids upon them, or telling them they need to have kids, or calling them misanthropic assholes for not wanting kids.
Are there people who categorically hate children? Of course there are. People are diverse. But more often than not, I’ve found this claim of hatred to be a bludgeon to bash childfree people with. Apathy towards, disliking or a disinterest in having children isn’t the same as hating.
@ karpad
That has nothing to do with anything in this thread. It isn’t about women hating children. It is the notion that some women don’t like children, and don’t want them. It is about the fact that women who reject the idea of having children are bad, or adherent examples of humanity, it is about how this sexist notion of “women as nurturers” allows for an asshat like Rogan to say something like this and be publicly supported.
Oh and speaking as someone with almost universal love for all things comedy, I’ve never warmed to Rogan. His timing and technique are not good, he’s not a great comic, whether or not his material is directed pleasingly or not. Take another comic whose work I don’t like, the late, great Bernard Manning. The man was an appalling bigot, but an excellent comic. His timing, his comedy technique, was superb. He was just a gigantic arsehole. I admire his technical grasp of comedy, I deplore the subjects he used it on.
It’s relatively easy to be part of the “‘New’ Offensive Observational” trend in stand up (compared to generating genuinely novel comic works), and it’s really easy to use that platform to pander to current, common, mass prejudices. It’s certainly going to make you rich as a comedian. It’s just not very lasting or good.
It’s okay to be bad at something, hell, I know I’m bad at lots of things. He’s just combined being relatively bad (compared to many of his peers) at something with being unpleasant in a populist way. It’s not high brow stuff, it’s not comedy that ruptures a neuron of thought. Hence I don’t follow his comedy. I’ve always maintained that comedy is actually important and serious, it says something about a culture. Something not easily accessible any other way. The culture Rogan represents with his comedy is not a pleasant culture, it’s a culture (as beautifully alluded to above by peterhuestis in #6) being pandered to by Rogan, not challenged. That’s the job of a demagogue, not a comic.
Louis
I don’t know what Rogan’s family status is but he sounds like the kind of guy who uses his kid to flirt with women, expecting them to gush over it. Guys like that tend to get butthurt when they get a frosty reception to that endeavor.
I’m confused by the bottom middle – why would you not want children if you did like them?
The Mellow Monkey @ #112: I’m so, so sorry you went through that. I was fortunate enough to have been a wanted surprise, but my mother was adamant that I should be allowed to make my own choices that would hopefully leave me as happy as hers did. Part of how I got my tubes ties as young as I did was that she was willing to have my back during the doctor-pestering process.
I can’t imagine the feeling of both having kids you don’t want because you are forced to, or being the kid in question.
chigau @ #123: That does about sum it up.
onion girl @ #149: “Mocking women *or* men who make the choice not to parent is terrible. It’s like mocking someone for saying: “I’ve only had one glass of wine, but I’d better not drive, because I know that I get drunk very easily.” FSM forbid someone make a responsible decision!”
QFT. How on earth is it mockable to say “Hmm, well I don’t want to, and I’d also be terrible at it, and this is a small dependent human being we’re dealing with here, so I’ll pass.”
Caine @ #155: YEP. I don’t like most kids, same as I don’t much like most people. As I result, I avoid interaction if possible, and otherwise keep it brief.
Louis @ #157: It’s excellent you’re both on the same page, and also both hilarious. And awesome.
Caitlin O:
You seriously cannot come up with a single scenario where a person could like children well enough and yet not want any of their own? Seriously?
Caitlin O @#162: I like some kids, but I don’t want any, not even those ones. I see them sort of the same way I do like malamutes, or shetland ponies. Goodness, how cute! And lovely to interact with in the short term, maybe play with, give treats, etc. Do I want a malamute or a shetland pony of my own, in my house, wrecking stuff, and taking up huge amounts of my time, limited energy and money? Not so much.
So we can now expect a 5 year old to have the same social manners and awareness as the average 30 year old? Awesome ! I’m sure that with this new knowledge, my sister-in-law will tolerate the ‘vagina gremlins’ to a much higher degree, as she has no qualms with the average adult (or teenager)! It’s great to know that no longer will young children think that running around a restaurant screaming is appropriate! I’m so happy that I’ll be able to go the grocery store and not be assailed by the raging tantrum of a child who has been denied a candy bar!
Who cares about that whole not-fully-developed brain thing, and the fact that the impulse control centers mature fairly late. Children are just miniature adults! You know what, that means we should just cram all the schooling they need into just 5 years or so and then start them in the work force!
Also, Caitlin O, see Onion girl’s post @ 149 to see what leads up to this sentence:
1- Finances
2- Health concerns
3- Personality
I have a friend who intensely dislikes most children. Even if she DID like them, she would NEVER have kids of her own because she is not patient enough; she has severe, heritable health conditions that make it unsafe for her to ever get pregnant (Hashimotos at 24 plus a myriad of others) and that would be irresponsible to pass on to offspring; she also supports herself as a costume maker which is definitely not enough to raise a child on.
Happiestsadist:
Cue the chorus: “OMG!!1!WTF!11! Children aren’t animals!!!11!”
Rowanvt, oh dear. I hope we don’t have to do that whole ‘omgwtfbbq11! you said “vagina gremlins! hater!’ nonsense again.
No, animals are *better* than children because they grow up faster, are typically less expensive, and are easier to understand and make happy. :P
I’ve had people ask me “It doesn’t bother you, having to make the kittens go potty until they’re 5 weeks old?”
My response?
“It’s sooner than a child gets out of diapers!”
BAHAHA…. Caine, I had pretty much forgotten about that. XD I give it…. no more than 15 posts before outrage.
@Caitlin O
They take more work than you’re willing or able to provide, or you have too many of your own issues to deal with and don’t want to inflict yourself on a helpless dependent, perhaps.
Because you’re happy without them and recognize that you enjoy having kids in your life as a temporary joy and not as a permanent responsibility.
FFS, I like the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Doesn’t mean I want to be responsible for running the place.
A. Noyd:
Or:
You have a career you are seriously invested in.
You travel a great deal.
You prefer to invest your money elsewhere.
You spend your life educating, caring for or fixing other people’s children.
You get all the happiness of children from nieces and nephews.
And so on.
MM:
I like asparagus. I’m not about to move so I can start asparagus farming.
I like helicopters…
Hitler was once a kid and look how THAT turned out.
87
Rawnaeris, FREEZE PEACHES
Ditto. I’ve had doctors refuse to give me the IUD after I had my daughter.
Like what?!? I was 17 when I had her and had just gotten free of the abusive sperm donor. But apparently me getting knocked up again was just fine and dandy. I wasn’t in a relationship and wasn’t getting involved in another one again but I wanted the IUD. Fucking getting pregnant again. I refused to be shrugged off and just get on the pill again or do shots every so often. I would’ve asked for my tubes tied but I knew that would just cause more problems.
It wasn’t until after she was two that I found a doctor willing to do it. I was so fucking sick and tired of the search. I went in and said “I want the 10 year IUD. Yes, I’ve done my research and all that. Just tell me if you’ll do it or not.” That doctor responded with “Of course.”
I sat for a moment and just blinked at him. I was so relieved I felt like crying. He was a doctor before Roe V. Wade so he understood me perfectly. Best fucking doctor ever. Didn’t give me any bullshit or lectures or question my decision. Didn’t get any shit when he asked about the father and I told him the situation. No pitying looks or “Well, at least you got your little blessing out of it!”. He treated me like a real person. I got so lucky. In this state I’m surprised I found a doctor at all like him. He was still practicing because of AZ’s fucked up laws. Fighting the good fight and all that. I’m straight terrified of what’s going to happen when I have to get it replaced in 6 years.
—–
—–
126 ButchKitties
Ditto.
All the doctors kept stressing “But you could go sterile with the IUD!”.
Well, good! Shit. I don’t want more kids, I’m full up on the one I have now and trying to give her a better life. Any extra time or monies down the line (way, way far away) are going to the “It’s about time for ME” fund. The only kid I’ve loved and liked is my own. Most likely because she’s mine and my little mini-me. I can’t stand any of her friends because oh my god. It’s like being swarmed with a hundred Navi.
I didn’t read all the 180 comments, so someone might have brought this up, but let me get this straight.
Feminists are “uppity” and “overly emotional” and this guy is a big bundle of rational critical thinking. Oh yeah, and women must be made to love children otherwise they are disgusting, but then let’s whine about how women just want to trick men into marriage and children.
Oh, and finally, someone actually uses “gender traitor”! Maybe the pitters are correct, after all, feminists use “gender traitor” all the time. Oh wait…
JAL:
Yeah, I got that too, with the doctor who eventually gave in and inserted the copper-7. I had to listen to that two hours of “the pill!” and finally raised my voice and said “you keep pushing that – I’ve told you I have chronic migraines. I could stroke out on the pill, I could die. So, no.” She looked at me and said “but an IUD may render you sterile”, as if that were more important than me *dying*. Christ.
Joe Rogan was once a kid and look how THAT turned out.
Jafafa Hots:
Oh, SNAP!
Sadly having only one kid is often not enough. Where I live less than three is regarded almost the same as none and the question “are you going to have any more?” is appropriate to ask anyone within five or then minutes of meeting them. Some people ask as soon as you tell them your name. If you have an “only” you must be prepared to answer for that anywhere from the park to preschool to the checkout line at the market. My wife felt an enormous amount of guilt and pressure whenever she was asked. Sure she could just say “no,” but there are always the follow up questions and the critique of our reasons by anyone who insisted on asking. I suggested she say that we would be picking up another couple of them the next time we went to Costco, but that was a no go. It is infuriating to be expected to answer to strangers about such a personal decision, but she doesn’t enjoy being snarky to rude people.
Ours is fun enough for a 6yo. He won’t wear his shoes on your sofa, but neither will he let you have a conversation that isn’t about what he wants to talk about. I can definitely see why people might not want to deal with him.
Sidenote: I did pick up a cool parenting tip here about introducing kids to the idea of consent. It went like this:
Neighbor’s cat on a bed
He: Look Daddy, a cat. Can I pet him?
Me: Does the cat look like it wants to be petted?
Cat *stinkeye*
He: No
Me: So what should we do?
He: Leave him alone
Cat *yawn*
Thanks horde.
Ichthyic @135
Oh, I know that is what assbutt Rogan is saying between the lines. He’s awful.
I remember one of the women who was in hospital at the same time as I had #2. She was having a hell of a time trying to convince the staff that she wanted her tubes tied as part of the procedures. The baby she delivered gave her 4 children under 4 years old. I was going to have to care for an infant and one nearly 3 years old. She was facing one almost 4, twins not quite 2 plus a newborn. But she was only in her mid 20s! Her mother had 8 children! What if one of your children died, you might want another! Contraceptives are reliable! (Oh really? 4 children under 4.)
She won out in the end, but I don’t know how she’d have got on if she’d “only” had three children under 4. Probably have had to doctor-shop for a few months tracking around dragging 3 pre-schoolers with her.
mildlymagnificent:
! That’s more stress than any person should have to deal with.
A few months? In the U.S., unless you luck out, it takes considerably longer than a few months.
Oh. Omitted one point. Poor woman had had a near nervous breakdown in the early months of the pregnancy. Only eased off once she got a scan showing, definitively, that she wasn’t carrying twins – this time.
At least she was in Australia with lots of doctors and a few women’s health clinics available in a capital city. I dread to think how she might have got on in a less civilised arrangement.
Reminds me of my aunt who had three sets of twins in rapid succession.
::shudder::
Fixxored.
Caine, I do apologize for any misunderstanding, I thought I was quite clear that I leave plenty of room for not liking or simply not wanting children. I am childfree, I understand those impulses perfectly well. But I have had living acquaintances tell me they hate children, and I was expressing I find that is a misanthropic sentiment that I find bewildering. If it seemed to you I was conflating the two, I assure you I was not.
Re: 44 ChasCPeterson 5 April 2013 at 11:10 am (UTC -5)
Citation, from a veterinarian, that it’s normal for dogs to eat even their own feces:
http://www.veterinarypartner.com/Content.plx?A=1613
It was the top hit when I searched.
since having had a child I have come to the conclusion that if was not so fun “makin babies” there would not be so many. Nothing I have read hear contradicts that thought.
uncle frogy
I really like children, and they like me, but I am never going to have one biologically. I find teens more interesting than pre-teens, pre-teens more interesting than toddlers, and toddlers more interesting than babies. Babies just do not trigger any special feelings in me.
I also knew this from a child. My friends wanted to play house with baby dolls and I wanted to play school or build with Legos.
As an adult, as my health problems and my husband’s health problems developed, I became grateful for my lack of maternal urges. We had neither the energy to look after a child, nor did I have the health to bear one, nor would our hypothetical offspring be healthy given our overlapping health issues.
We still may adopt or foster, if our health and financial stability ever reach that point.
karpad, some of my friends who say they hate children were very badly bullied as kids. I think the abstract word “child” brings to mind their tormentors, rather than their younger selves, or the child that became their partner or their friend. Others, I think actually mean they hate being in the presence of children, rather than actually hating the child. I’m pretty sure my friends who say they hate children would be just as likely as anyone to pull a child out of the way of a car. They just would not want to hug and comfort them after. So, I guess I’m saying people sometimes use ‘hate’ pretty loosely.
PZ, you seem to confuse “not liking” with “not having” children, he specifically said he didnt mind people(women) not HAVING kids, apparantly, he’s only peeved at women who dont LIKE kids. Dont get me wrong, the guy is still a dumbass and his tweets are still dumbass. And I cant really see if one of those opinions are dumber than the other, to be honest.
Here’s a little anecdote
There’s a family member of ours who never ever wanted children. Their spouse was indifferent to them and decided that being with that person was more important than kids. And they lived happily ever after until the day said family member paid a visit to a colleague who just had a baby. And morphed into a baby-lover.
Well, since his wife wasn’t fundamentally opposed to having them they became parents.
But women, meh, can’t trust them!
+++
I expect people who don’t like children not to have them and not to choose jobs that involve them. I expect them to accept and tolerate that children share the public space with them and accept their inherent characteristics. And I expect parents to make sure their kids don’t tyrannize the rest of the world because they share the public space, not own it.
+++
oniongirl
OMG, that bullshit.
I don’t know how many times people including my own husband expect me to know how to deal with new things solely on the basis of me being their mum. Sorry, that download must have failed. I don’t know how to apply eyedrops to a non-cooperationg preschooler. And the really bad thing is that after I find out with one kid it doesn’t miraculously work with the second one as well.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRGHHHHH
Caitlin O
Probably for the same reason I don’t want a dog: because I like them so much that I know I couldn’t give a doggie a good home where its needs are met. Some people are smart people.
Caine
Of course they aren’t. You can take your pets to the shelter if you find out you don’t get along….
+++
Yeah, just like I replaced that coffee cup I broke and then went to buy another one.
It’s people who say such shit who really shouldn’t be let within 20 m of children.
uh huh. It was the top hit when I searched too. The only difference is that I read it for comprehension. Note first that the author is not, in fact, a vetrinarian. Note second that the assertion I questioned was that that dogs eating therir own shit is “normal”–i.e., it happens reasonabkly often–but rather that “it’s totally normal and healthy”.
You might as well follow the clown above who cited a TV show about pet rescues.
Citation: you’re doing it wrong.
You are socially and psychologically required to want children, or you a morally reprehensible person
Löööydieees and Schentleminnnn…
Tonight ! Every Night ! PZ’s strawmen fireworks and free vegan pizza for everyone !
It’s all very emotional reaction in here.. I’m not going to defend Rogan’s statement about women. He is obviously wrong.
But, I do find him interesting to listen to. His podcast interviews a variety of people with different viewpoints and he really lets them get in and show who they are. I think this is lacking in most of the podcasts I usually listen to. When he has people like Greer on his show I spend the whole time saying WTF but then the next show he will have someone else that is anti conspiracy theory and Rogan will show his skeptic side.
Rogan is wrong on a lot of things, right on some things, and sometimes holds what seem to conflicting opinions. It’s okay to listen to people you disagree with. It’s okay that some people are wrong in this world.
As for the transgender MMA fighters issue Rogan has actually made himself pretty clear that he has no problem with transgender people, has transgender friends, but just feels really bad for the people that are going up against a transgender fighter that may have an advantage. It’s sad when people on a skeptic site use strawmen instead of actively engaging the arguments of the people they are criticizing.
Yeah, it’s not like people can recognize a stereotype even when it’s not spelled out to the last syllabe.
The spelling is also frightening.
Regulars will understand why.
Yeah, what are you bitches so emotional about somebody who apparently judges your gender wholesale, thinks that you are disgusting and who happily and handwavingly denies your humanity?
Can’t we all agree to disagree about whether bitches ain’t shit or not and be friends?
Do those of you who have been for years on the receiving end of prejudice, abuse and judgement always have to get so upset every time somebody reinforces that shit?
I didn’t say emotional was wrong. The point of my post was that ONLY having an emotional response without looking deeper isn’t enough. I didn’t say don’t be upset. Plenty of what is said on that show makes me upset in some way or another. The guy obviously needs to change. He is capable of change. It’s good to see criticism of what he said. I just think it’s more productive to actually address the whole person instead of simply writing him off as lost and lumping on the insults.
Josh Neal
If you think that there has been only an emotional response here then you obviously haven’t read people’s comments.
In that case: Why don’t you go there, hold his hand and walk him through “not being a sorry excuse for a human being and an utter waste of skin 101” instead of telling us what we should do.
Because sorry dude, I ain’t a christian out there saving souls. It’s not my job to be nice to somebody who’s a shitty misogynist.
Josh Neal,
I’ve heard Rogan trying to be funny. He failed miserably. Now just because he’s a failure in his career doesn’t mean he’s a failure at other things. He succeeds at being a conspiracy theorist. He’s a winner at being a misogynist. His transphobia is outstanding.
Personally I wouldn’t piss in Rogan’s mouth if his tongue was on fire. But that’s just me. You’re perfectly free to put out his flaming tongue.
Josh Neal @ 201
You say you aren’t, but that doesn’t seem to stop you…
I bet Rogan even let’s his transgender friends use his bathroom! He’s only concerned, after all…
My humble opinion? If he really didn’t have a problem with transgender people, he wouldn’t have made such statement in the first place. The fact that he did so — and in a very transphobic context (i.e. MMA fandom) — is very telling. I’d say you aren’t being skeptical enough.
Being that we are all imperfect, what percentage of perfection should I require from someone before I listen to what they have to say?
I’m not a christian either, but I think I will take your advice and be nicer to people that are shitty. It’s not a bad way to live.
I didn’t defend his comment about women not like babies. Can I get a quote where I did?
As I was saying, why not actually address his arguments. He is saying that there are physical differences between someone who was born a woman and someone who is transgendered. There were statements about spatial awareness, skeleton structure and muscle growth patterns. He might be right or he might be wrong. I truly don’t know enough about the issue to make a statement either way. At first Rogan defined it as XY vs XX and then changed his position slightly after he found out that chromosomes aren’t an accurate way to define the sexes.
How do we skeptics come off when someone makes specific claims and we come back with things like “I bet Rogan even let’s his transgender friends use his bathroom! He’s only concerned, after all…”
If he said that, he is a liar. He was quite happy to declare that Fallon Fox (and all other trans women by extension) is not a woman and insult her appearance and call her “a man without a dick”. He clearly does have a problem with trans women, and if he actually does have transgender friends I feel sorry for them that they are lonely enough to keep a “friend” who thinks nasty things about them.
Of course, by “transgender friends” he could also mean drag queens who tell him it’s totes OK to say a trans woman is really a man and has a man face and should be disqualified from women’s activities because being a gay dude who dresses in costumes as a performance sometimes means you are transgender authority.
A skeptic would actually try to find some evidence of whether or not a trans woman fighter would have an unfair advantage over cis woman, rather than relying on “common sense”. Doctors who actually know about this stuff say she has no significant advantage, but people are still scrounging for any reason at all they can latch onto to set her apart from cis women. That’s bigotry, not skepticism.
Thanks for the link.. This is the discussion I was looking for.
How do we come off? Better than if we were defending a misogynist creep.
If he was really worried about “fighting fairness”, then he should apply his “skepticism” to the very concept of weight classes, as timgueguen points out @156.
(I assume that people who comment here would bother to read the thread before commenting.)
Mr. Rogan is no skeptic — he’s a thinly-veiled concern troll. He’s as skeptic as those dignified Victorian gentlemen who would frantically measure skulls in order to “prove” that women and POC were inferior. The only difference is that, nowadays, the phrenology chart has been replaced by fMRI blots, sexual chromosome essentialism and assorted evo-psych crap.
“Skepticism” directed at already disadvantaged/discriminated groups, most of the time, isn’t really skepticism — it’s just badly disguised bigotry. It’s just like Mr. Rogan’s “comedy” — it’s directed downwards in the power gradient, pure mauvaise foi intended to reinforce the status quo.
Why doesn’t Mr. Rogan apply his amazing skeptical powers to the economic “science” behind those “austerity measures” that hurt mainly the non-rich in Europe, for instance?
Maybe he’s just a bully, targeting exclusively those that are weaker than himself.
Karpad, language is a lovely, imprecise thing.
For example, I hate olives. By this statement, I mean I dislike them rather intensely and avoid them as much as I can and will not eat something with olives in it. But when people ask me if I want olives, I say “No. I hate olives.”
I am NOT going on a rampage, or declaring that olives are the cause of all terrible things in the world, or legislating to make olives illegal, or setting fire to olive orchards.
You think he’s right about some specific thing? Then explain what he’s right about and provide the evidence that supports your opinion. Otherwise quit your annoying whining about people here not performing “conversation” up to your high standards of entertainment.
Josh Neal @ 209:
This is one of those things that always puzzles me. Nobody is “born a woman.” Women are adults.
Thread skipping to offer Oniongirl a huge hug.
I’m a foster mom. I’ve seen that too.
I had my biokid at 20. I told anyone who would listen that I wanted a hysterectomy. I was too young, too poor etc. Besides that, I hated being pregnant. Romanticize it if you want, but the experience was awful for me. I knew that we could make it work with one child, but any more and we’d be sooo in over our heads. No one listened. I was told that if I divorced I’d want to have another child when I remarried. (WTF? Why?) I was told I would never find a doctor to do it. I ended up having a C section. It would have been so easy to fulfill my wishes, but they didn’t. We knew that if we wanted more than one child, we’d foster to adopt one day. So, Hubby got a vasectomy. No fuss, no muss.
Now, years later, here we are doing exactly as planned. I like kids. That doesn’t mean I think I need to make more of them. I had to stop typing this a few times to soothe some hurt feelings, discuss the day’s itinerary and look at a stuffed dog ride a motorcycle. I love that stuff. I find kids fascinating and frustrating. I’m their captive audience, but they are also mine. Kids in foster care present some difficult challenges. Some are beyond my abilities. Some I can learn as I go. I understand why not everyone would want to do this, because I wouldn’t want to do what other people do. I don’t do this out of some biological imperative. It isn’t a calling or any of that fuzzy crap either. It is simply what I decided to do. I wasn’t born good at it. I made mistakes when I was new at this. I make them still. I got fairly good at working with special needs kids because I worked hard to get that way. I am constantly educating myself. It takes a team of professionals to act as my support network. This has never been easy. Mentally, physically and emotionally it is taxing. Telling women they are born caregivers negates all the work that actually goes into being a decent care giver. (meanwhile it suggests that something is not manly about men who are caregivers.) It is also, imo, what encourages so many of the biomoms stuck in bad situations that I’ve met to continue having children even after they have had kids removed from their care. The biodads seem to be caught in the same cycle. They may be bad at being dads but they’re men, so they think that’s natural. The next woman will do all the parenting for them. People internalize all sorts of stupid cultural cliches: They want to be loved. They want a new beginning. They think that a baby can do that for them. “Real” families have kids.”Real” men don’t use condoms. Pregnancy is a gift from God. Having children signifies to the world that at least once, someone was sexually attracted to you. The reasons why unsuitable parents keep having kids is a mile long. Rogan has bought into the same tropes and is now using his limited fame to spread them.
mildlymagnificent,
I was told that too! “What if this one dies!!???”
As if having another baby would be the antidote to grief? Does one kid replace another? Eww, ick…just ..no.
This discussion reminded me of something. When my eldest son first came to me he was 6. After a few months he asked my when I was going to get pregnant. I told him I was never getting pregnant again. He was so confused. In his world women were always pregnant.
That poll about Joe and his attitude to trans women linked in #128 is still active.
It could use some attention.
I love how someone actually showed up on this thread to chastise everyone (read “ladiez”) for being so emotional. By love I mean hate. From reading the comments I can see excellent responses, thoughtful critique, and moving personal experiences. I can’t imagine how one would seriously come away from this thread with “Gee whiz, if they would only stop being so emotional and look at this rationally!”
Chinau, voted.
OMGodlessnes! Do not read the comments!
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mexgl6yRsc1qjt6x6.gif
Congratulations! It’s a man!
Yeah, no. That’s not how it works. And the things Rogan is worrying about being advantages are simply factually wrong. Despite what what the TV show Bones has led people to believe, no one can give a quick glance at a skeleton and declare it 100% female or 100% male. These are only statistical probabilities that the skeletons of the physiologically male tend to have certain characteristics and the skeletons of the physiologically female tend to have other characteristics. A trans woman who went through male puberty is statistically likely to have certain skeletal traits, but there is no guarantee she’ll have all of them and there’s no guarantee a cis woman won’t have some of those traits.
He brings up bone density, which is actually one of the fastest things to change during hormone replacement therapy. If it wasn’t, then postmenopausal cis women or those who have had hysterectomies would be in trouble. There are decades of data on this, in both cis and trans individuals. Muscle mass is similarly affected.
Unless internal gonads are some magical weakness in cis women and Fallon Fox has been spared their detrimental effects, there are at best only statistically possible advantages that a trans woman would have related to skeletal size, lung capacity and bone length. Muscles, bone density and testosterone levels have all been physically feminized by this point.
And even those? Are still only statistically likely to favor a cis man over a cis woman. It’s still perfectly normal to find specific cis women capable of beating specific cis men in a physical challenge. If a specific trans woman has some physical advantage over a specific cis woman in a fight, that isn’t unfair: that’s how athletic competition works.
For a guy who claims to hate “white knighting” Rogan seems awfully invested in Fox not being able to fight women. I think the fear here is that Fox, who has won the past two fights, will eventually lose to a cisgendered woman in her weight class (featherweight). That will threaten the toxic masculinity of so many MMA fans, Rogan included. I noticed that commenters are already looking for a way to explain away any losses on Fox’s part. MMA fans are calling for female fighters to refuse to fight Fox. I don’t think that’s going to happen, although her next opponent has complained, she has also stated that she is certain of her ability to win that fight. I don’t think she’ll succumb to pressure and back out.
To clarify why I think this is about male fans feeling threatened, many of the complaints assert that no matter how the mtf process changes the body, it somehow retains a “maleness” that gives that person an unfair advantage over cisgendered female fighters. They refuse to see Fox as a woman. If/when she is beaten, they will see that as a man beaten by a woman. I think that scares them. In the comments there have been some attempts to educate the the transphobic fans, but little things like facts are not about to separate them from their biases.
I doubt that many female fighters would back down from a fight with a male fighter, anyway.
You don’t get that far along in MMA by backing down.
The fans who are calling on the cis-females to refuse to fight Fox seem to be trying to protect the ladies.
Which is pretty funny.
Goddammit, I used to LIKE this Rogan guy! Some of his jokes are really smart! Why is it so hard to see when someone is secretly a dickhead?
which were what?
crocswsocks:
I’d hardly say it was a secret. Also, we don’t use gendered slurs here. Asshole is good, everybody has one. ;)
crocswsocks #225
He must bring those out on rare occasions for the amazement of his favorite fans. “See, I knew Rogan knew a joke or two that could possibly be almost funny, especially for those of us without functioning senses of humor.”
Gendered slurs are not used here. You have been cautioned.
A very late reply no one will probably read …
Caine, I don’t know how to relate to boys or men because my father was virtually nonexistent emotionally to me and my sisters, I had no close cousins, my grandfather lived far away, and I had no male friends. I had exactly one “date” before I was married. I hate sports (as does my husband) and most of the things the boys are addicted to are sports. When I visit, I have shown interest in other things they do, but they both change interests frequently and I see them only once a year. The boys have always been very wild, and as an introvert and bipolar person I am very sensitive to a lot of noise and activity that was very normal with these boys.
So, yes, it’s often hard for me to relate to boys or men, unless they are quite like my husband–feminist, reader, has no interest in sports, etc. etc. I’m often threatened by men because I find it so difficult to relate to them or their interests … has nothing to do with them as “people” in the sense you mean, it’s an emotional and physical sense of rejection that comes from my childhood. And this carries over to boys.
Susan,
Don’t bet on it! As a (physical) sport hating man I see where you’re coming from.. I don’t relate well with the average male human, let alone sports mad people of any gender.
Susan, thanks for the clarification. I can see why it would be highly problematic to you. Given that you see them so infrequently, I’m not all that sure it’s vital or necessary that you relate to them or their interests. Seems that listening when they chat with you is enough.
My husband has no interest in sports (thankfully) and neither do I, so we’d be at a loss in that regard as well. Even so, I find just letting a sports fan natter on while listening to be good enough, and they seem pleased to hold court. I’m also introverted, have PTSD and am basically antisocial. One of the reasons I avoid sprogs is the noise level. It’s overwhelming, the sheer level of noise sprogs make.
Rogan’s “dogs that eat their own shit” tweet doesn’t even make any sense if he’s decrying the “unnaturalness” of a woman hating kids.
Dogs eating their own shit is an entirely natural behavior. So what he’s in fact saying with his analogy is that women who hate kids are behaving naturally.
Why does Joe Rogan hate the natural order?
Looking forward to his non-apology for those who he offended.
Wonder why he equates not wanting to have children with hating children. There are so many reasons that women (and men) decide not to have children that have nothing to do with hating them. Not a bright man.
I’m a child free by choice, 52 yr. old woman who works with kids from time to time and enjoys it. When I tell people I don’t have kids, I get a quizzical look and sometimes a “but you’re so good with them!” comment.
It never occurred to me that at least some of them are thinking things like this Rogan twerp. Now it’s going to be on my mind :/
It would be so nice if people would stop equating don’t like with hate. FFS. Hate requires quite the investment. I can’t be arsed to hate sprogs. I don’t like them, which is why I don’t have any and tend to avoid them.
Just think Caine, if you had had kids back in the day, you’d probably be a Grandmother.
[mwahahahaha]
Chigau:
Assuming that everyone decided to breed in turn, I’d probably be a great-grandmother by now. (I got knocked up when I was 17.)
even more OT
[one of my high-school cohort was a grandmother at 33 and a great-grandmother at 50]
Of course they’re “just that.” Expressing their own feelings is all any of the people you’re finger-wagging at are trying to do. You’re the one who’s trying to extend it, making this a case of the pot calling the snow black.
Chigau, that would be about right in my case, assuming my sproglet also had the family habit of getting pregnant at an absurdly young age. By the time my sprog would have been 17, I would have been 33.
Caine
My acquaintances were (I’ve lost touch) a nice working-class family.
Each generation had one offspring at an absurdly young age and stopped.
They were a close and loving family so it seems a sensible system.
My mother is a great-grandmother in her mid-fifties. It was particularly odd for my brother, who became a great uncle at the age of nineteen.
At my elderly age of 32 with no spawn in sight, I’m considered quite the anomaly.
This.
As a sidenote, fuck people who like to pretend that this combination of sentiments is self-contradictory. >.>
This was kinda scary to read. I think my ex had a lot of this going on. :/
Well, he’s done the unthinkable. He’s made me believe what Andy Dick said about anything (him).
Go do the poll!
[please]
link at #128.
Well, I expect them to accept that I’m an individual human being, a person with human worth and dignity, and not something “disgusting” because I don’t follow a certain set of likes and values he deems proper for my sex (but apparently not for his).
Tell me, should black people be required to listen to the “arguments” on Stormfront?
Should LGBT people be required to listen to the Phelbses’ hatred and engage them?
So, why should I listen to his crap.
Oh, I understand, he didn’t dismiss your humanity, so you can treat it with all the distance and “rationality” you like.
Jackie
Oh so much everything you wrote.
BTW foster kids* is something I want to do at some point in my life. Because I think they deserve somebody who gives them structire and support.
*Short term fostering. I don’t think I’ll ever be looking for more sons and daughters. I want to give kids some stabilty until they can go back to their parents or thy can be adopted by somebody else.
+++
To people who say they can’t relate to boys/girls (unless there’s some traumatic reason for it):
Please, relate to children. Seriously, saying you cannot relate to a boy means you’re expecting a boy or a girl to have a certain set of characteristics and interests the other one can’t have. Yes, I understand that you might have more common knowledge with members of your own gender, but seriously, if you show an honest interest, most kids will happily engage with you and show you (and, btw, the things that are “in” among todays kids are pretty much not the same things that were in during your childhood. So, even though the girls might still play with dolls, they’re Monster High. You can as well learn who’s who on Yuh gi Oh).
I had my tubes tied through Planned Parenthood when I was 24. I’m nulliparous, and Planned Parenthood gave me absolutely no trouble over it. They didn’t try to talk me out of it, or try to convince me that I should wait or try an IUD or the pill instead. The nurse just said, “You know it’s permanent, right?” and I said, “Yes, that’s the point!” and that was that.
I did have to wait about six months from my initial request, but that was because they only had one surgeon who could perform the surgery and he was on sabbatical and had a long waiting list by the time he returned.
I’m 36 now and I love being sterile. I heard about it when I was 13, immediately decided that it was what I wanted, and I haven’t had a single moment of doubt. I’m forever grateful to Planned Parenthood for treating me with respect.
Fuck, I get that you’re all annoyed about things he says, but two things:
1. No one here is the sole arbiter of what is and isn’t funny. It’s subjective. “I don’t find him funny” is a perfectly valid opinion. “He’s not funny” is just a stupid thing to say. It’s as ridiculous as those pretentious arseholes that insist that any kind of art they don’t like isn’t *real* art.
2. Don’t pretend like he’s not successful. The guy sells out shows regularly, his podcast has a massive audience. You may not like him, but plenty of other people do.
sw,
1. Who gives a shit if he’s funny or not? The problem is the things he says bounce around between stupid, wrong, vile, and outright bigoted.
2. I must have missed the part where being successful was at all relevant. Rush Limbaugh is more successful “entertainer” than Rogan, does that mean we can’t criticize the things he says? Hell, the fact that he has a “massive audience” just makes the bullshit he advocates to them even worse.
SW, yeah like you can substitute monetary gain for morality anytime and you still end up with a creep. The fact that you defend him tells me all I need to know about you.
sw:
“He’s not funny” is a perfectly fine and acceptable thing to say. His subject matter is certainly not funny, and he brings no originality or spin on his subject matter, either. If you’re a person who finds ‘dissin’ the bitchez’ hilarious, well, that is a problem.
Well, you seem to be easily impressed. Yes, there are many stupid, spiteful assholes in the world, all of whom I am sure are placed into absolute fits of laughter over weak, damaging bullshit, served with a punch down. Some of use prefer comedy with intelligence, flair, and an eye for pointing out issues without depending on tired stereotypes and the same old toxic sexism that many of us get to deal with every fucking day of our lives already. So, not funny.
I’m sure Mr. Rogan would be duly impressed by your white knight appearance, rushing in to defend him from all the nasty people with intelligence and taste. You should run off and twit him right now! Go on, shoo!
Is Joe Rogan right about Fox?
Yes. 60.8%
No. 35.6%
Don’t know. 3.6%
Total votes: 16,173
sw @248
H.L. Mencken described Rogan’s “success” quite succinctly:
@Sassafras
“Who gives a shit if he’s funny or not?”
> …all the people on here saying “it’s not funny”, I assume.
” I must have missed the part where being successful was at all relevant.”
> Me too. That’s why I don’t get why people were bringing it up.
“Rush Limbaugh is more successful “entertainer” than Rogan, does that mean we can’t criticize the things he says?”
> Of course you can. But if you start criticizing him for being unpopular, you’d be doing it wrong.
… that being said, a quick look back through the comments here and I can’t find anyone actually critiscizing him in this way. I think I saw it on Twitter and misattributed it to the comments here. My bad.
@Lofty
“The fact that you defend him tells me all I need to know about you”
> Wow, you sure don’t need to know much huh?
@Caine
““He’s not funny” is a perfectly fine and acceptable thing to say. His subject matter is certainly not funny”
> Oh, so you’re the person who gets to decide what is and isn’t funny? It’s a pleasure to finally meet you. How exactly did you get this job? Were you voted in? Because I don’t remember there being an election.
“he brings no originality or spin on his subject matter, either”
> I’ve watched a lot of comedy, I certainly think Rogan’s got an original spin on things. But I suppose that’s just a matter of opinion.
sw
If you type
<blockquote>paste quoted text here</blockquote>
this will result.
It will make your comments easier to read.
It will not help you make sense.
Thanks Chigau. What exactly did I say that didn’t make sense?
sw, we get it. You’re a fan. You could not possibly be more boring, either. The internet awaits your outrage, Cupcake. (That’s a hint: go elsewhere.)
Oh, and yes, sw, I am the arbiter of humour. The Humour Inquisition Squad will soon be knocking at your door. Have cookies and booze ready. Glad we got that all settled.
Well, Humor is subjective. Some people think Dane Cook is funny too.
Rev BigDumbChimp, that’s a fantastic example of a comedian I don’t find funny, but have to admit the guy’s found his target audience and knows how to work it.
And don’t worry Caine, I always have cookies and booze ready. Although I’m curious about the nickname “Cupcake”, is it supposed to be insulting? Cupcakes are delicious, after all.
And just so you know, I’m not a Rogan fanboy who just stumbled across this board while completing my daily ritual of Googling his name, I’ve been reading Pharyngula since PZ got kicked out of Expelled. I just don’t chime in too often, because I agree with most of what gets said, and “I concur” isn’t usually worth taking the time to type.
You may have missed my point. That’s ok, it should be coming around in orbit soon.
I didn’t miss your point Rev. Is Dane Cook my kind of humour? No. Does that mean it’s not funny? No. Because I don’t get to decide what is and isn’t funny for anyone other than me.
…that’s Caine’s job, as we’ve already established.
@sw
What if I told you a racist joke? Would that make it funny, if someone somewhere laughs at it?
Would I find it funny? No. But there is no objective funny or not funny.
I see. So, since there is “no objective funny or not funny”, comedians can never be criticized for the jokes they tell?
Well sure, you can criticize them by saying “I didn’t find that funny”. Although that’s not really much of a criticism, since it’s just your opinion. A better criticism would be “the audience didn’t find that funny”. And that’s why I don’t get the “Joe Rogan isn’t funny” criticisms. The audience clearly finds him funny.
You could also criticize them for being racist or bigoted or whatever. But every definition of “funny” I can find is pretty much results driven. It’s “makes people laugh or amused”.
Like I said, I don’t find Dane Cook funny. But clearly his audience do. And clearly the man has skill, not many people could do what he does.
@sw
I don’t understand why humor, as a profession, is magically something that we can’t hold to the same standards as other kinds of human interaction.
It is. We hold it to the same standard we hold every other art. I don’t like some music, but I don’t pretend it’s not music, or that it’s somehow objectively bad music. I don’t enjoy Taylor Swift’s music, but I don’t think people that like Taylor Swift’s music are wrong.
No, apparently it’s not.
When people say racist shit to me, I don’t think to myself, “Well, who am I to tell them that this is wrong?” I don’t think, “Well, There are people who agree with this, and I can’t tell them different.”
Why can’t something be categorized as “Not funny” if it’s something that causes harm?
So sw, is this argument really worth anything? A few people in the thread said “Joe Rogan isn’t funny” when they probably should have said, “I think Joe Rogan isn’t funny”. Happy now? So what difference does it make? He’s still a bigoted shitstain and you’ve added nothing other than scolding over the very least important aspect of the discussion.
sw:
Um, ok, let’s grant you the premise that sexist, awful, belittling comments can be funny.
Whoot? Good for ol’ Joe?
Is your point essentially “Well, yes, he might be a misogynist idiotic narrow-minded bigot, but some people find him funny, yanno!” because if so, so what?
Seriously, I’m asking, so what?
If you’re not saying that some people finding something funny makes that something acceptable, or excusable, or in some way better, what are you saying?
What exactly are you arguing for?
You can argue all day about whether something someone says is racist, or whether they should have said it. Maybe someone has said something that is hurtful. But something is funny to someone if it makes them laugh, it’s as simple as that. You can’t watch someone tell a joke that an entire room laughs at and say “that wasn’t funny”. Clearly the room found it to be funny. You can say “that was racist” or “that was wrong” or “you shouldn’t joke about that”, and you could have an argument about that, but that is irrespective of whether it’s funny or not.
If I hear a racist song I don’t say “that wasn’t musical”. I say “I disagree with that song”.
“So sw, is this argument really worth anything? A few people in the thread said “Joe Rogan isn’t funny” when they probably should have said, “I think Joe Rogan isn’t funny”. Happy now?”
> Yes. I’m just a pedantic fuck. But we seem to agree now.
I wouldn’t have felt the need to be “scolding over the very least important aspect of the discussion” if there weren’t so many comments on here to the effect of “that stand up comedian who can make audiences laugh for hours with nothing except for a microphone isn’t actually funny”. But now we agree, we can move on. Hooray.
Okay, sw.
A comedian has an act in which he gleefully butchers a live animal onstage. The entire audience laughs at it.
Is it funny?
mythbri
I wouldn’t find it funny. But in this case clearly the audience found it funny.
And on a worrying note, your example isn’t as hypothetical as we’d like to think: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat-burning
The world is a fucked up place, and people find stupid things funny. Attack the stupid things because they’re cruel, or because they’re wrong, but not because you personally didn’t laugh at it. It’s focussing on the least objectionable thing happening. If I saw animals being tortured I wouldn’t think it was funny, but that would be pretty far down my list of objections.
Okay, cruel and wrong does not necessarily equal “Not funny?”
There is absolutely NO objective measure of “Not funny” unless NO ONE NOWHERE EVER laughs at it?
What the fuck is wrong with you, that when a bunch of women find a misogynistic act unamusing, you INSIST LOUDLY that they must not say it’s not funny, instead of tellling the misogynist twerp to stop being a sexist jackass?
If someone laughs, they find it funny. I don’t know how much clearer I can be on this. If you disagree, I’m not sure what you’re disagreeing with.
Cruel and wrong things are bad because they are cruel and wrong. It doesn’t matter whether or not people find them funny.
Rutee, there were already plenty of people on here decrying what Rogan said. I didn’t really have anything to add on that front. And it’s not even that people were saying “these Tweets aren’t funny”, they were saying “this comedian isn’t funny”.
Someone laughing doesn’t make it funny. Someone laughing only means that they find it funny.
I think that what you’re trying to get at is that you object to people “mixing” objective and subjective criteria.
But you know what? There are plenty of people who claim that sexism and racism are subjective, too.
So if comedians can’t be criticized for things that are subjective, that leaves us with no avenue to criticize comedians at all.
No. The definition of funny is “causing laughter or amusement”. Someone laughing *does* make it funny. That’s what the word means. If it causes laughter or amusement, then to that audience it’s funny. You can’t tell them they’re wrong without telling them they’re not actually laughing.
Sexism and racism have different, more objective definitions. They don’t compare.
A definition of funny is “causing laughter or amusement.” Another is “Intended or designed to amuse.”
So because someone does something that’s both wrong in cruel, but intends it to be funny, that also makes it funny?
Why do you keep asking “is it funny” as though it has a objective yes or no answer? Have I not made it clear yet that I think it’s entirely subjective? I don’t find cruel things funny. Other people do. It’s just opinions.
Exactly what definition of “funny” are you using? What are your criteria and why?
@sw
I’m wondering if you think there’s any objective criteria for “Not funny” other than the utter lack of anyone in the entire world so much as giggling at it.
And I’m also wondering why you’ve chosen to focus on scolding people for not being sufficiently pedantic. What’s the point of your argument?
What you say bothers me because too often I hear “humor is completely and totally subjective”, which is used to excuse the “humor” in question. As if comedians are in a special class that are exempt from criticism (unless they’re chicks, because we all know women aren’t funny, amirite?). As if everything that a comedian says is by definition intended to be funny – whereas for all we know Joe Rogen is spouting his own personal nasty opinions and not intending them to be funny at all, at which point your pedantry becomes useless.
I am not saying that a comedians ideas cannot be attacked. If they’re genuinely expressed ideas, attack all you like. But don’t attack them because you think they’re not funny. It’s focussing on the wrong thing.
Honestly, I feel like we’re going around in circles here. I’m sure you’re all great people, just wanted to chime in with a couple of thoughts.
@sw
If I “attacked” everything or everyone I didn’t think was funny, then Jud Apatow would have no peace from me.
But in general, I’m perfectly content to allow him to make unfunny movies (in my personal, subjective) on his own.
There are plenty of criticisms in this thread about what was wrong about what Joe Rogen said, and about his apparent tendencies, too. Your comments indicated that you either hadn’t read all of the previous comments, or that you mistook the criticism of the subject matter exclusively for subjective judgement on level of funny.
Hey, so, if something makes the 7 billion people minus ONE on this planets cry but that ONE person laughs, it is funny.
Remember that incident in primary school when a kid wet their pants? Clearly that was the most funny thing ever, because 20 other kids stood around them and laughed.
Also, chasing immigrants through town and crushing their skulls is a fun activity. After all the skinheads who did it found it fun.
Well, under that definitio I shall never ever object to being called “humour-less”. If that’s humour I want nothing to do with it anyway.
sw:
Yet, I suspect no moving on shall be done. Let us test this…
(emphasis added just ’cause)
So, yeah, still here, still not moving on.
So, sw, can I ask: how many people have agree with your opinion on the appropriate use of the word ‘funny’ before it becomes correct?
Just one?
More to the point, we’re trying, really we are, to remove societal excuses for giving this kind of content a pass, for declaring that it’s just fine, for assuming no harm is being done. We’re trying to let people know that, when you actually step back and take a look at what’s happening, then no, it’s not actually funny.
I suppose we could make you happy adding the caveat “It’s not funny – unless you utterly lack either awareness or empathy, in which case you’re ignorant or horrible.”
Would that make you happy?
Would you feel more comfortable with that?
I assure you, it certainly comforts those people who listen to and enjoy that kind of misogynistic swill.
So, congratulations. A great victory by any measure.
After all, you’re not like them. No, no, not at all, never said so.
The fact that what you’re doing eases things a bit, makes excuses, gives them a convenient out – well, that’s just the price we have to pay to expect your sought-after approval. Surely that’s more important in the long run, right?
sorry, but: LOL.
“They find it funny” is not “It is funny” objectively, you colossal fucking ignoramus. I’m not fucking laughing, but I don’t hear you pissing and moaning about his fans who are talking about what a scream this guy is, and how fucking funny he is. Somehow, only their subjective opinions count, not the ones of the people being directly insulting.
<Chorus>Go fuck yourself, you miserable piece of shit.</Chorus>
WHAT A FUCKING CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! A racist, misogynist, transphobic asshole was called unfunny. GOD FORBID we let this slight against language stand because the jackass has fans! Save this pedantry for people not being fucking directly insulted by a bog standard jackass with a mic
*Refrain*
I know you don’t, you piece of shit. Your first words were to show up and bloviate about how popularity means… something, doesn’t it?
*Refrain*
Gilell,
I don’t know much about fostercare outside the US, but here it is easy to provide only short term care. To learn the ropes I recommend being a respite provider only once you complete training. That way you are only keeping kids for a weekend here and there. I also recommend talking to foster parents privately first. There is so much that the social workers don’t know or won’t tell you. Ignorance in this case is definitely not bliss.
This phrase has no meaning.
ChasCPeterson gets it.
Anri says
So you’re testing whether or not I’ll move on by refusing to move on yourself?
Look, I don’t support everything Joe Rogan says. I don’t find everything Joe Rogan says to be funny. I don’t think the tweets in question were funny or insightful or good at all, and I never said I did. I just think it’s a bit absurd to insult a successful professional stand up comedian by saying “he’s not funny”. Funny is a subjective term, and clearly a whole lot of people DO find him funny.
If a professional football player says something racist, and we have a thread about it, people coming on saying “he’s not even good at football” are:
1. Probably wrong, since he plays football professionally. He’s at least better than everyone on the thread.
2. Completely missing the point. It doesn’t matter how good he is at football, that doesn’t excuse being racist.
Even if Joe Rogan was the funniest man alive, and he could paralyse everyone with laughter from a single knock-knock joke, that wouldn’t make these particular tweets any better.
…and dammit, I haven’t moved on. I promise I really tried, but you all know what arguing on the internet is like.
Can we keep in mind that laughter is not a reliable indication that the one laughing is enjoying a bit of (supposed) humor? Laughter is way, way more complex than that and is triggered by negative emotional states as well as positive ones.
Also, not all humor is meant to provoke mirth as its primary reward. Plenty of humor is designed, deliberately or otherwise, to maintain group identity and cohesion, and some of this does so at the expense of outsiders. In this case, the mirth reaction of a group member takes second place to xir sense of belonging and status, and xe uses the laughter as a signal informing outsiders they’re lesser beings who don’t belong—either personally or as a class. This sort of humor is not funny for its own sake. It becomes funny to the group member because the group dynamics demand mirthful reactions as a way of avoiding losing status and becoming an outsider. Once the individual stops valuing membership in the group, they stop reacting with mirth to this sort of humor. (Not necessarily all at once, of course.)
This identity-maintaining humor is what both Joe Rogan and members of the slimepit produce. Their group identities are built around misogyny and the primacy of a certain kind of masculinity, and so their humor relies on making those who don’t conform to their ideals the butts of their jokes by degrading them.
It’s not sufficient to consider only whether Rogan’s fans or the other ‘pit members experience mirth to allow that their humor is funny. Why? Because the purpose of the humor matters. It matters because it constrains and shapes their reactions in ways that don’t happen when there aren’t higher level concerns at stake. The mirth provoked by Rogan/slimepit humor is merely reinforcement of those higher level concerns, not an end to itself.
While we could call this humor one kind of “funny” based on mirth reactions, it’s too reductive to lump it in with other types of humor. In other words, on a more than subjective level, not all “funny” is the same. It’s important to recognize that because when we pretend that degrading humor is equivalent to non-degrading humor, we enable the former to succeed in its primary purpose, which is to maintain the group’s identity and its special status above others. And that’s wrong.
Thanks for the reply A Noyd, lots to think about there. I guess one point I’m wondering about is whether, when you say, “not all humor is meant to provoke mirth as its primary reward. Plenty of humor is designed, deliberately or otherwise, to maintain group identity and cohesion” we might be getting into a chicken-egg situation. Because I would say that maintaining group cohesion is sometimes the thing that’s provoking the mirth in the first place. If on somewhere like Pharyngula I say something that insults creationists, I would think some would find it funny *because* of the sense of belonging to this group.
I don’t know though.
How would you define “funny” if it’s not based on the audience laughing?
Also, more food for thought: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysSgG5V-R3U
Finally, if the group is sick of talking about what is and isn’t “funny”, I’m happy to stop, I just don’t like leaving comments made to me unanswered.
sw:
Buh?
I don’t recall saying that I would be moving on, could you just quickly quote me to remind me of where I did? Getting forgetful in my dotage, yanno.
Thanks in advance.
And some of think it’s a bit absurd to be defending the humor – or humor potential or whatever – of someone who’s willing to spew such utter hateful crap.
Even if Joe Rogan was the funniest man alive, why would anyone make a point of bothering once he’s shown what kind of a person he is?
Why give any cover to the “but I’m just joking!” school of hate apologetics?
Perhaps it’s just me, but I’ve never once actually tried to not post and failed in doing so.
sw (#295)
I don’t even know what you’re saying here. I’m not sure you do, either. It sounds like you’re caught up in playing devil’s advocate, and I’m not interested in, uh… humoring that.
I don’t give a flying fuck about defining “funny.” (See the last paragraph in 294.) You’re the one stuck on this “funny” business for who knows what reason. I’m trying to show you that in all important senses, your reductionism is detrimental to the actual concerns of this discussion.
What I’m saying is that if certain things that maintain group cohesion make people laugh, then those things would fall under “being funny”.
The only reason I’m “stuck on this funny business” is that it’s clearly absurd that a massive amount of people here think that a successful professional stand up comedian is somehow objectively not funny, despite the fact that he makes massive audiences laugh around the world. And we wouldn’t be stuck on it if people would just say “yeah, OK, I don’t find him funny, but that’s just me”. But instead people on here seem to have some sort of secret objective definition of the word “funny” that they refuse to reveal to me.
sw:
Well, some folk automatically exclude things that are hateful or hurtful from the list of funny things. Their point is that even if you personally are tickled by such a thing, you shouldn’t be, because it’s not a good thing.
Other folks object to the whole “Yes, but it’s still funny!” business because it tends to give cover to people who are hateful and then try to deflect criticism by insisting comedy can be offensive, and that those objecting should grow thicker skins or the like. Even if that argument is not directly being made, the “comedy isn’t for wimps – toughen up!” meme is supported by this kind of thing.
I believe I’ve touched on that at least once previously, so it’s hardly secret.
Lastly, some folks seem to think you’re backing the wrong horse in this situation – you’re defending Rogan, and Rogan’s humor (even if you’re not supporting it, you are defending it – in specific, from accusations that it’s not funny), and some folks are wondering if you realize what a massive waste of effort defending such a scumbag appears to be.
To put it another way, defending this guy strikes a lot of people as a bad idea, and they’d like you to quit. You don’t have to listen, of course, but refusing to heed while demanding attention is an iffy tactic at best.
sw (#298)
See, you’re just back to repeating your pet inanity. You can’t shift gears for a single fucking second to understand that someone is making a different point. That point being: Labels aside, the mirth response involved in some humor is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The elaboration on that point being: This is an important distinction to make because it has consequences in the real world. The relevance to your point being: What actually matters to people here is this distinction and its consequences, not your obsession with the utterly trivial question of subjectivity in relation to the semantics of the word “funny.”
Since you’re about as perceptive as a cheese sandwich, I’ll spell it out for you. “Not funny” is a shorthand way of acknowleding that the consequences of this (Rogan’s) sort of humor are objectively detrimental* to such a degree that any positive value in the mirth the humor provokes has no chance of offsetting that detriment. It’s “not funny” because the price of one person’s laughter is a thousand people’s degradation.
Meanwhile, here you are going, “Consequences? Degradation? Pssh, who gives a shit? That guy was laughing! How can you say he didn’t see something as funny? Making sure subjectivity is properly accounted for in the definition of “funny”: That’s what really matters!”
That ain’t cool so knock it the fuck off.
……..
*To an egalitarian society, at least.
Er, that footnote should read: “To attaining an egalitarian society, at least.” We’re hardly there yet, but it’s a goal I would hope all halfway rational readers of this blog would support.
Fuck it, I think we’re actually mostly in agreement, but are just using different language. Thanks A Noyd, if it weren’t for your occasional childish insult you’d be a shining beacon of what Pharyngula commenters could be.
(Seriously, why throw “you’re about as perceptive as a cheese sandwich” in there? I agree with almost everything you said, I’m getting to the point where I’m going “yeah, I see where he’s coming from”, and then that just leaves me wanting to tell you to go fuck yourself.)
@sw
So, you suddenly bestir yourself to object to humor when it’s at your expense, you fancy you can give civility lessons while simultaneously offering me a compliment that works by putting down the community I identify with, and you (incorrectly) assume my gender in a thread about sexism.
At least you can trust when I’m being an insulting asshole, it’s on purpose.
I think I am gonna go fuck myself. Sounds a lot more pleasant than this or my Japanese linguistics homework.
sw,
Just because someone is a successful professional stand-up comedian doesn’t say much about their talent. ‘Friends’ was a successful television show but I didn’t find it funny at all, it was boring and the jokes were weak. Did people a lot of people find it funny? Obviously yes.
I don’t find Rogan funny because he has no comic timing and just seems to use the stage more to rant about things that offend him rather than to tell any actual jokes. I don’t find him talented at all as a comedian, regardless of the subject matter he uses for his comedy. The fact that he also uses bigotry for some of his humor doesn’t help, but even if he didn’t he’s still not a great comedian.
Sorry about getting your gender wrong A Noyd, that was totally my bad. I need to get in the habit of using those gender neutral pronouns, especially on sites where people won’t say “what the fuck does xe mean?”.
TheoreticalGrrl, do you really think Rogan has little talent, or that Friends was poorly made? It’s one thing to not like something, but your opinion isn’t the only one that matters. I don’t much like the music of Taylor Swift, that doesn’t mean I think people who do are wrong. I don’t like Dane Cook’s comedy, but the guy definitely has talent. There aren’t many people who could do what he does.
If you don’t like a particular piece of art, maybe you’re just not the target audience.
“Friends” was embarrassingly bad as a comedy. That’s my opinion, shared by quite a few people. People I know who did liked Friends would tell me they didn’t understand why anyone thought The Simpsons or Seinfeld were funny. Need I say more?
Just because something is popular doesn’t make it good art. If someone gets something entertaining from Joe Rogan or Dane Cook, that doesn’t mean I have to agree that they have talent.
There are many artists I can agree have talent even though they’re not my cup of tea, but Rogan isn’t one of them.
Then I’ll tell you what, put together a comedy set and see how many laughs you get. Go for the “easy laughs” you probably think they’re getting.
How would any of you withered & depressed spinsters know what funny is?
I kid… I kid! :)
Your Honor, may I submit evidence to the courts in Joe’s defense?
Exhibit A: Joe Rogan – ‘You’re a Human Being’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaxrQAv1S38
Exhibit B: Joe Rogan – ‘Women and Relationships’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTAxZPOtGKk
Exhibit C: Joe Rogan – ‘Homophobia and Gay Marriage’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkfAV-51Jts
Exhibit D: Joe Rogan – Interview about Fallon Fox (Transgender MMA Fighter)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLIAii6v9E8
Exhibit E: Joe Rogan talking with a guy who believes Noah’s Ark is real
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGmh_w05gFY
At some point are you guys going to run out of pitchforks and torches?!
OK, a video where he just reasserts all the transphobic shit he already said before and adds a big whine about how progressives are mean (coming from the guy that compares women to dogs eating shit, and calls feminist men white knighting bitches). Great defense there, counselor, but I’m not wasting my time with the rest of your “evidence”.
guyincognito:
<clickety-click>
— listens and transcribes —
Well, you know, it’s a weird thing, man, when the whole idea of “happiness” and “pleasure” is a, a lot of it revolves around people wanting to be around you — and a lot of it revolves around the opposite sex wanting to be around you.
And for most of us, you know, the reality is that most of us are not that attractive.
You know (snicker) you know, not that many people are attracted to you, and for a lot of people their lives are a constant series of rejections, and (especially for women, guys) they’re dumpy, they’ve no self-esteem, they’re [sic] get get a couple of drinks in them and you think “maybe I could fuckin’ get some of that ass duuuuuh” — they like say something awful, knowing (you know) like, really, it’s just like a lack of confidence, like you would say that you’re a dickhead, but really a lot of it is like a pre-emptive attack, because you think eventually this person is eventually going to destroy your soul, because that’s your experience with relationships… that’s your experience with interacing with women: everytime you’ve attempted to interact with women, they’ve let you know that you’re repulsive — eeew! — which is yoooouuu — eeeww! bwgaaah! “no thankyou! Get away!” and that programming just enters into this guy’s definition of what a woman is.
— stops listening —
That’s funny, alright — indeed, it’s a laughable attempt at comedy.
(bah)
You are a deep cover Rogan hater. From your opening “joke” to the laughable evidence, including the transphobic statements which are just bigoted, your defense is more condemnation of the guy.
In the end, who gives a shit if someone finds him funny or not? How does that even remotely matter? The like or dislike of his humor is not related to the really horrible things he said. Those don’t strike me as a caricature with which Rogan is attempting to mock those ideas he expressed. That is an attempt to mock those who reject his dude-bro take on the sexes, and who see the sexist bullshit for what it is.
Um…I was reading some pretty heavy sarcasm in Guyincognito’s post, along with poking a very pointed stick at the actual Rogan defender, ‘sw’.