Joe Rogan and Eric Weinstein on the Victoria's Secret Transgender Model Controversy

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1203: • Joe Rogan Experience #...

[@andrewholmes1889]

The secret of Victoria's Secret is most if not all the models are male.

[@MrBRETTMLORD]

“You can’t understand me because my experience is too different, but you MUST understand me because it is so important.” ..... wow that is perfect...

[@darkhorse381]

In my experience, SJWs only believe the first part: "my experience is too different, so trust me, this is offensive." They don't necessarily care that you understand, as long as you trust them and listen to what they say. For me personally, I hold the second belief, that I have empathy which enables me to understand you even if I haven't had your exact experiences

[@wussmode]

Victoria's Secret is also discriminating against women in wheelchairs, women with missing limbs, women with crooked teeth, women with nail fungus, women with hairy bodies, women with crossed eyes, women without hair on their heads, women with spinal deformations, women with burn scars... and I can keep going for years. I am deeply offended that I've never seen these types of women in Victoria's Secret ;)

[@panacheautomotive4298]

Don't forget midget women

[@karljonson3287]

Don't forget lady boys.

[@Isejankhonojanem]

wussmode you can’t please everyone

[@vai82]

Fat women

[@wussmode]

@@Isejankhonojanem Yeah, that's kind of the joke with my comment, captain obvious.

[@kfizzle357]

I was once a man trapped in a womens body...then I was born

[@dandelion4210]

So clever haha

[@innerpowerup]

🤣😂

[@branndymessier5081]

Tinman 219 clever

[@themoonissquare323]

Nice, you know i am gong to be using that one.

[@vegancandy9570]

Hahaha, I’m using that this Thanksgiving 🙂

[@JennyPeckMakeMeABird]

I applied for a job at Victoria’s Secret in the mid 1990S (20-ish years ago). I specifically remember them asking me in the interview...”what would you do if a man came in and wanted to try on lingerie.” I didn’t know what to answer and this was before the trans movement. so I answered that we should let him in the fitting room. The interviewer said “oh no! Never should you let a man in the fitting room. It would make everyone else trying on clothes uncomfortable.” Fast forward 20 years and a man/trans person is walking in the vs fashion show?? It’s crazy to me.

[@stephanierussell7256]

I think your awesome for being so open minded and caring, yes it is a major contradiction however I don't think they knew just how many trans people exist,it's always been here but everyone is to scared to share it worried about what everyone else thinks instead of just being happy it's a scary situation to be trans and trust me no matter how many times or what I do to convince myself it's just a fantasy or a phase 35 years after the first experience age 5 I still deal with it, it sux really but I make a nice rug for the hateful folks to wipe there feet on and when I'm dead they'll be looking for the next victim to hate!!!

[@TommyGunz327]

@@stephanierussell7256 most of the “trans people” aren’t trans. They are transtrenders. It’s the new emo/ punk rock. It’s a trend and they have been propagandized and indoctrinated. A very small percentage of these lunatics actually have gender dysphoria or are gender dysphoric. It’s all disgraceful.

[@-KillaWatt-]

Eric "I'm not related to a rapist" Weinstein

[@jaxoncrow6918]

Looks like he could be though. It's kind of freaky the resemblance

[@fauxbro1983]

Are you sure?

[@Razzlion]

@@jaxoncrow6918 So racist, just because he's white he looks like Harvey Weinstein? How about you learn to differentiate between white people? Bigot.

[@joecoolden9671]

Mister Biggs when a joke flys over your head faster than a fucking rocket

[@singhatishkumar]

@@sandlotscout6358 whoosh

[@KAISER-OUTDOORS]

Victoria’s secret is that she’s Victor.

[@bluelambo5]

That's my cuzzie Victor you're talking about

[@hittinfoe383]

@@bluelambo5 ok?

[@bluelambo5]

@@hittinfoe383 stay away from Victor, he'll sleep with your 3rd cousin if you don't watch out

[@AkhirahOverDunya85]

HAHAHAHAHA

[@DrNickRiveria]

i call her Vic

[@miketython6554]

Well you won't see Alex Jones complaining

[@carterhanna4314]

That was sadly proven be photo shop

[@exposer3339]

@@carterhanna4314 photoshop is for still images, not video editing.

[@wcoleman99]

I thought Alex Jones was too worried about chem trails and frogs being turned gay

[@carterhanna4314]

@@exposer3339 you know what I mean I was altered

[@gigig6021]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@healthymealthy775]

Joe Rogan is having a really hard time following his logic lol

[@Okay-pr9fp]

I don’t think anyone can follow along with him

[@healthymealthy775]

@@Okay-pr9fp I do. He's brilliant

[@yamiyugi8123]

@@healthymealthy775 yea. He just described the burden of proof at a more abstract level.

[@thescoobymike]

I'm having a hard time following his investment

[@chris-cy5ed]

Lol this guy is smart I get what hes saying he just uses big words to explain it but we know

[@Samhertzog]

My favourite: "There's no such thing as a male or female brain, it's all social conditioning! Now let him change gender because he has a female brain".

[@IrateWizrd]

The first claim is incorrect, however transgender individuals have brain activity and development congruent with the opposite sex.

[@Anzerke]

@A 4 PLAYJUNKIE Uh, there are women with a Y chromosome dumbass. They tend to go their whole lives without ever knowing.

[@naratores]

Mine too :)))))

[@justinchapman5876]

Also a woman's brain is one third the size of a man's. That's a fact! -Ron Burgundy

[@taraji_b]

None Player Character what’s even worse for us females is when we are pregnant our brains shrink temporarily. Our bodies decide that other organs become secondary to growing the baby, intestines, brain, etc.

[@jopo7996]

Now Victoria's secret is "I have a schlong"

[@bobpowers9637]

Tuck your sack back “sexy”

[@crazyjoeduvolla7446]

🤣🤣

[@MJB1993]

Victor's Secret

[@Dmdm_dm]

Pre-op or post-op?

[@azuradawn9348]

Victorio's secret

[@DrBeauHightower]

Men and women are equal. Believe all women. Gender is simply a social construct.

[@mitchryan257]

Eric makes complete sense, but I fear that most of the people pushing these inconsistent ideas are too incapable of understanding the logical flaws even when they are being visibly acted out.

[@sondraarrache1908]

I think that what you said is already obvious. Therefore, I agree.

[@dc3371]

Eric's argument works perfectly for mathematics because its basis is logic and rationality. It probably won't apply to social construct arguments because people are irrational in their behavior.

[@BD-yl5mh]

I thought this too, he’s being TOO logical. Contradictions actually can exist in the real world. (Also, his example is a bit simplistic anyway. It’s entirely possible for transwomen to say “we want to be included in the female experience, even where that means women are being exploited. And then we also want to end or reduce the exploitation of women. Those two ideas don’t ACTUALLY contradict. I think there are some woke ideas that are better examples of contradictions than the one he’s using as an example here)

[@blacksocrates1]

@@BD-yl5mh yes, but how can the same person advocate for the exploitation of women in order for them to achieve a "women's experience" and simultaneously condemn the exploitation of women?

[@CertifiedFresh7]

Victoria’s secret has a whole new meaning now 😂

[@ThatOneScienceGuy]

The title implies that a trans model walked the runway.

[@knight3481]

ProtagonistNonTheist She hot!!!

[@--_DJ_--]

Not really, you just made the assumption. The thumbnail might have led you to infer that, but the video is titled properly, they discuss a controversy.

[@TheSteve2305]

If you think one is not about to then you dont understand what this is about. That's why the executive was made to quit. It's now right around the corner.

[@--_DJ_--]

@@TheSteve2305 I hear what you are saying, I am not familiar with this story other than this little piece. I have no doubt the libtards will push until it happens, nothing is sacred anymore, just look at Miss America for an example. My comment only related to the title comment, not the event leading to the controversy.

[@--_DJ_--]

@@TheSteve2305 Well put, I can't think of a better comparison.

[@RighteousBrother]

At my gym there's a Booty Build class. You would not believe the quality of women there exercising away to mske their booties look great for men! Look women want to look good to attract men, men want to look good to attract women our entire species revolve around this, its that simple. I don't know why people feel the need to deny it or discuss it endlessly it's so boring we've known this for thousands of years.

[@KiLLaBushWooKiE]

I thought women just want to look good for themselves and no one else especially not the male patriarchy lol

[@groovydespairgod5190]

ChrisRants33 you have an American flag as you’re profile pic that’s the definition of beta you degenerate

[@GodCarnage]

@@groovydespairgod5190 Why is that the symbol of beta... your name sounds beta pussy ass bitch

[@panacheautomotive4298]

@@groovydespairgod5190 the American Flag is a sign of beta what fucking planet are you from?!

[@GodCarnage]

@@panacheautomotive4298 last I checked the flag represented a World Wide Empire with the most military bases ever and have been at war 94% of the countries history. Matter fact isnt it Betas who typically have a problem with that 😂😂😂

[@comical9587]

Not sure if I agree with his idea. If a child misbehaves, you stop it. You don't let it experiment around with dumb ideas right up until it puts a zippo to the cat or accidently sets the house on fire.

[@patricioansaldi8021]

no, but you can show your child the danger of that up front, which is what Eric W is saying. as it stands, we are letting the kids set stuff on fire instead of slowing down to explain why setting stuff on fire is bad (and sometimes it's good). if you "burn a cat" first in a safe way (in an ideological way in this case) then we stamp out future issues. if we don't take all possibilities into consideration, then we are the ones failing and not the "child". people can do unlimited things so it doesn't apply to these examples directly, but we can do this for any given set of ideas. since people are presenting certain ideas, we can tackle those as they come along

[@samfonder7044]

I totally agree on Patricio comment. The idea is we restrict child from experiment on their surrounding and environment, on the grounds of not letting them misbehaving. First of all, misbehaving is a broad interpretation of doing something bad, and doing something bad can differs from people to people, albeit we have a common understanding of it. For example, say we all agree on your child drawing on your house wall as misbehaving, and we also agree on your child burning cat as misbehaving. So the difference these two action is what level of nonacceptance action are those two compared to each other. Both are considered misbehaving, but we all agree and understand that burning cat is much worse than drawing on the wall. Now the problem is we assume that by telling a child that drawing on wall is bad and burning cat is bad, that they would immediately understand the whole concept on why it is bad. We assume that would solve the problem of them misbehaving, but what we fail to realize is that a lot of things that individuals (which includes a child) do doesn't necessarily provides the same outcome as what we intended it to be. As a parent, drawing on wall is bad because we have to clean it up later and wash it and its gonna be a busy day if that happens... yadda yadda... We thought that it is a terrible thing for a child to do because our outcome is that we are gonna be busy cleaning it up and all it does is satisfy the child drawing on the wall. But what we dont understand is that child drawing a wall may not necessarily because a child likes to draw and its their way of having fun, noooo it may also be that a child drawing on the wall would result in different outcome as how their motor skills work, how their cognitive ability to understand that if they move their hands while holding a crayon, create a scribble on the surface, how different colours create different tonation, how the texture of one brand of crayon is rougher than the texture of another brand of crayon, and so on so forth.. So what im saying is basically what Patricio and Eric was explaining, which is the fact that we stop a child or other individuals because we thought that is a bad thing to do, but we fail to understand that, that exact method create unlimited possibilities of outcome that may develop a better understanding on how their surrounding works. It doesnt work like that. We lay out what a child wants to do, and select a few of it that is considered misbehaving, and we let them do it, so that by the time they are done, they understand that "ohh drawing crayon is bad because my mom has to clean it up later". By that point, a child has a grip on the concept of whats wrong and whats right, and then they can further understand that burning a cat is also bad. This is much better than telling them no dont do it, fullstop Hope you understand Comical :)

[@MidnightRambler]

The far left loves being stopped.. they pretend their victimised. They are being oppressed.

[@hccarder]

You're apparently not from West Virginia.We will burn Charlie Murphy's couch!!!

[@mlhenault]

“...you didn’t hear about this?” “Oh god”

[@sixstringemotion]

lol

[@joskojansa1235]

"Oh, god"... then lets him elaborate without interupting, and listens to what he has to say. That summons up that "special" part of why Rogan is so popular. Remember him and Niel?...:)

[@sixstringemotion]

Eric: "Oh, you didn't hear about this?" Joe: "Oh, god...." lol

[@Twobarpsi]

Victor's Secret

[@drivn4895]

LOLL

[@KenGold666]

Lmao!

[@joab757]

Twobarpsi seriously, does anyone feel like we are living in an episode of the Twilight Zone?

[@Twobarpsi]

@@joab757 what's it going to be like in 20 years?!

[@putnamehereholdmadoodle]

@@Twobarpsi we will all be dead

[@annettearrow8824]

MOST, if not all, of VS Runway Models are biological males, period.

[@mishmashmedley]

that was barely about Victoria's Secret

[@Web3Future333]

they talk about the issue behind it. Because the VS controversy is a contradiction of left values.

[@alex-qd6of]

F. As if the left is a monolith. He's taking different ideas believed by different groups, and smashing them together into one thing. Strawman.

[@suedeB05]

Glad that was your big takeaway from all this, moron. Two and a Half Men reruns are that way

[@kairos106]

Fortunately.

[@joskojansa1235]

This man Eric is a genius, to us 85%. Its rare to find mathematician, that can handle philosophical, personal, psychoanalitics topics and connect them in such a way, that not only he understands, but is able to teach others. And beeing able to teach, is a show of mastery of the topic. Genius, nothing less.

[@scottysatpanalysis]

Honestly an awesome guest everytime as well as his brother! Much appreciated

[@MonsterDeplorable]

I been watching anything with him featured, lately. Guy is brilliant

[@VillaDeLaLuz]

Joe @ 1:45 He's like, "Here we go again..." 🤣😂 "Oh God..." someone needs to make a meme on this.

[@robertjay9415]

“Theres no pretense of consistency” on joe rogens podcats 😂

[@dtothee8730]

I think Joe doesn't understand him lol

[@GrubKiller436]

I don't understand what the fuck is going on.

[@AustrianEconomist]

I think they kind of stopped understanding each other halfway through, and then Joe got back on track right at the end lmao.

[@zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcba0]

Joe switched his brain off. " This isn't the cool Wienstein" just got baked and zoned out until he had to do the outro lol

[@andmicbro1]

I didn't understand him. I mean I get the mathematical and logical lines of reasoning, but trying to apply that to something like gender politics got messy really fast. And then he ended up saying that you basically have to tell him where each idea is correct or incorrect? Isn't that what we're already doing? And isn't that in itself contradictory to his original statement about contradiction? Because we start from a premise that everything is complicated and contradictory, so now we go down the rabbit hole and establish every single case on where it's okay and not okay, basically defining political correctness on every little point? I feel like that's not his initial argument, but then that's what it boils down to. I don't know, mathematics are great when you just have to worry about the numbers, but on social issues it doesn't always apply nicely. People are not always rational, or logical, when it comes to politics.

[@nicolascamino7956]

Too theorical not very logical everything based on cause effect is not reliable and even less in human behavior.

[@bennyhath1789]

Most of this conversation went right over Joe's head haha

[@kimcooper87]

I have a friend who was a high fashion photographer in the 1970s or 80s, and they said that about 20% of the models were actually boys. Not necessarily trans, but some must have been. It's that it pays really well, and they want slim boyish bodies, which most women don't have.

[@therealbs2000]

1:00 Eric weinstein, love you man, but you are so wrong on this point. Accepting all of the bad ideas and then pointing out the inevitable bad outcome works when you are in a domain where logic and mental clarity are considered virtues. What would happen in your hypothetical is that the blame for the bad outcome would simply shift to some other, as yet unaccounted for form of bias/method of marginalization. The theories would remain "right," the experimental results would be wrong. On top of that, there would be a host of psychological biases murking up the hypothetical, in addition to political ones. Which do you suppose is more likely--that the progenitors of these theories of systemic discrimination would roll back on their claims in the face of refuting evidence, or that they would find some way to use the lack of evidence in their favor AS the proof that the problem is even more systemic and requires even more fixing? The real issue is that echo chambers are deadly reliable in forming the cult mind. And a mind wrapped in cult dogma does not bend to reason as eric weinstein believes, not least because of the psychological cliff that people who have been mainlining the kool aid would have to walk off to see the logic that he speaks of. The mind has a nasty tendency to shut out such evidence and logic for its own security. So...bottom line...eric weinstein super smart guy...very bad bad idea.

[@Fankas2000]

This guy is used to dealing with high IQ individuals and probably forgets that the was majority of people out there are illogical and act on what feels good instead of what is logical.

[@therealbs2000]

Fankas2000 no doubt this dude deals with the smartest people on planet earth...lol

[@aintnozombiecatchinmyass..4873]

He's too much of a mathemetician to see how this would fail. You nailed it when you said they would just shift the blame to some other illogical, contradictory factor.

[@cvrator]

The guy's a babbling idiot.

[@brocaraton]

You’re right... the leftists will simply shift their position and say “I never personally agreed with the idea of models” or they will add some “nuance” that nullifies the whole dichotomy-like only men are exploiters and your opinion is itself oppressive.

[@Mountaindewdewable]

Joe has had too many smart people on recently. He’s starting to look stupid again. He needs to bring Bent Chrysler or brenden schaub on real fast

[@Thallod]

Schaub makes Bravo look like Von Neumann

[@Weston29406]

Burnt Cryshart is my favorite.

[@Mountaindewdewable]

r0x x0rs yeah and he makes himself look like a mechanic at Nordstrom rack

[@malorie8557]

Agreed. He sticks to something in a way to make it important. It's like Joe, move on!

[@alexharvey7102]

I’m not mad at it, I’m not mad at it at all

[@JoHnSapla7LordSapla9]

I wish I could have these kinds of conversations with people. Where there is respect and willingness to learn and explore new ideas and opinions. Joe has a great platform.

[@tech1238]

Eric Weinstein is the type of guy that’s right even when he’s wrong

[@theroach1012]

Wake up Joe, almost all of the Victoria's Secret models are trans.

[@charlixcxworld8194]

proof

[@theroach1012]

@@charlixcxworld8194Look up Phonie Persephone's videos on KZbin. She's the best educator on secret transgenders.

[@charlixcxworld8194]

@@theroach1012 oh yeah ive seen her. i do believe there are transgenders but its not all of them. maybe just a few of them but believe what u want

[@davidalexander9635]

The majority are Transgender folks... wake up

[@turtle4329]

Wow!!! Eric is brilliant. Let people with a million principles of nonsense burn themselves out, because they will if you let them. It will be chaos for or a while, but people that keep to principles of facts and truths should not give up. They will be needed to pick up the pieces.

[@DanSwanson2070]

36-24-36-9

[@communist-hippie]

Ha ha good one

[@unacceptableviews1505]

took me 2 seconds but man is that funny...

[@acerimmeh]

I see what you did there😁

[@youtubescroller350]

Only if shims 5'3"

[@skoshow8418]

Mountain Dew out the nose. Well played, sir.

[@quepaso568398]

"It's case by case" is what my bosses refer it as.

[@PhilT81]

I’m a progressive/SJW and I completely agree with this. It’s very embarrassing when people on your side undermine the argument by holding two simultaneous positions which are simply incompatible. Too often they don’t get that not everything is an absolute and that they can be a little bit more nuanced. You can’t just see everything in such simplistic terms.

[@TheNateWalking]

Eric is making such a good point here. If only Joe was keeping up.

[@kingofswing3000]

I want an apple. Not a banana wrapped in an apple skin.

[@Jimipappa]

What if it looks like an apple and tastes like an apple but someone told you it's a banana. Do you believe what you see or what you think you know?

[@kingofswing3000]

@@Jimipappa That banana, no matter how hard it tries to be an apple, is missing about 90% of the things that make an apple an apple. Plus, GMO food just isn't healthy.

[@RoyalGuard4619]

kingofswing3000 well played punnery, sir

[@Jimipappa]

@@kingofswing3000 putting your point about the healthiness of gmo food aside, as I hope that isn't part of this apple/banana metaphor. What is this 90% of things that can never change? If you were to see this thing there would be no way for you to know that it isn't an apple, then what is the deciding factor that makes it a banana?

[@joaniep675]

You’re not gonna get it whether it’s an apple or a banana that makes you think it’s an apple. That’s why this works and doesn’t matter - from the Apple side, they’re trying to see other apples hot lingerie and the illusion that they can look like that apple. No apple is looking closely to make sure it really is an apple walking down that runway - just looking at the illusion of what they could buy. And then from the banana side it’s all an illusion for them too because they’re not gonna be eating any of that fruit up on the runway whether it’s an apple or banana. So, who gives a shit if it’s an apple or Banana so long as you think it very much looks like an apple because you’re going to be eating a Big Mac tonight no matter what anyways.

[@sumuqh]

Eric Weinstein is a fascinating man.

[@klugyboy1500]

Geez, simultaneous incompatible ideas being spewed out. Sounds like my ex wife.

[@panacheautomotive4298]

All women

[@skoshow8418]

*ex husband

[@Just1Spark]

You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

[@detrockcity3]

"We should just accept them all to disprove them" is why so many intellectuals need their hands held through leadership positions...

[@Smashpatate]

Eric "i Will confuse the shit out of you even With the simplest facts' Weinstein.

[@bud389]

If you were confused, you may be stupid.

[@Smashpatate]

@@bud389 indeed i am😁

[@turtle4329]

I read the comments before watching the video. Why do most of the commenters think the point of discussion was Victoria Secret models?

[@freeltamon7208]

@@turtle4329 They're commenting on the click bait title. Plus, idiots generally don't understand other idiots, so there's that...

[@BigRamifications]

@@turtle4329 The party that I went t to last Week when I stop writing whent off. I was my usuall soild performer But I do remember the night amasing. I spun the Uni friends I whent whith you know How I get Fully charged and it controll OFF.

[@burtmaclin7204]

On the point about women feeling empowered by wearing skimpy clothing. I still go back and forth with myself as to whether or not the skimpy clothing itself and the fact that one looks attractive is the baseline reason for the empowered feeling. Doesn't it go deeper than that? Why feel empowered by looking attractive? Doesn't it come back to the attention it will inevitably attract and the self power garnered from such attention (hence the definition of "attractive" and its root "attract")? If it is simply just to feel good about yourself and has no external component then why don't more women get dolled up to go sit on the couch and watch TV? Maybe I am severely underestimating the number of women who do this? In my mind there absolutely has to be an external prerequisite to the empowered feeling anyone gets from looking attractive. We are, after all, very social creatures.

[@nsalaza]

Eric's discussion was brilliant!

[@alg3221]

Men preferred women butt naked rather than wearing lingerie. Women feel better with lingerie, so stop blaming men for Victoria secrets tactics lol

[@stirlingmasters46]

Probably the last person I would talk to about a social issue is a guy that tried to explain something with math

[@jonlanier_]

When an 80 pound adult woman stands in front of a mirror claiming that she is obese, do we take her into the bathroom and make her throw up in order to help her lose the extra weight she thinks that she is carrying around? No. We intervene and get her to a mental health professional before she dies from the delusion in her mind. And yet we are told that people who think that their physical body and DNA does not match the gender vision they have of themselves in their mind must be accommodated with restrooms, locker rooms, correct pronouns, then hormones and surgical mutilation. Anyone who suggests that they are suffering from a mental delusion and should receive therapy instead is called a bigot or punished for using the wrong pronoun. But now we have a whole segment of society that is not only helping to perpetuate this dangerous delusion that people and children are having, but are actively promoting it, both in our schools and the media. We are going to end up with a whole lot of damaged people out there who should have received the needed support of mental health therapy. Reality is not bigotry. Perpetuating a delusion is not really helping someone.

[@pizzylee1978]

Finally we figure out what her secret was

[@goldfinger1445]

Well no more hiding a Victoria Secret catalog under my mattress😉😏😄

[@topher198133]

Wait catalogs exist now a days.

[@The3rdGunman]

@@topher198133 Wait why are you hiding it?

[@marylsanz]

"Let one contradiction in and it all explodes" ... Is beautiful to know we live to be compatible, and we do not live to be right or wrong.

[@nikkig4847]

This mans description of victorias secret is 100 percent accurate. He is smart.

[@ifyoureinmarketing-killyou3111]

Modelling lingerie is weird, its for men, really, but its womens' lingerie- for women

[@whoahorseywhoa4685]

lol ... dont over think it ..

[@Merrillizer]

Actually, women enjoy being, ya know, women. Imagine that! It's NOT all about YOU. For real...

[@gattsuberserk4534]

I like your name, first of all. Courting attention of the opposite sex is as primitive as desire as any, so when you realize that's what it comes back to, it isn't weird at all.

[@Neishy4AGTE]

I guess you haven’t been with too many women yet, women get off on themselves as much as their partner a lot of the time.

[@Worstvloggerever]

Youre bad at this

[@hops2099x]

When joe said oh god I felt that in my soul

[@anottakenusername3189]

The problem I see with Eric's Weinstein's proposed solution is that it relies on the emotional opposition being reasonable enough to define what it is that they want. If you have ever had a fight with an overly emotional person they DON"T need rules and regulations to get mad at you because they will make up reasons on the fly and if you call out contradictions they will just continue to shift focus and not ever define what exactly the problem is. Deep down they know they are wrong, but will never admit it because being "right" becomes an extension of their identity so asking for them to accept any sort of responsibility would be like asking them to commit mental suicide. Example: Feminist believes 2+2 = 5 If you try to explain that laws of mathematics say 2+2=4 her response will be "men created math so it is inherently sexist and doesn't count." If you try to show on paper why 2+2 does in fact equal 4 she will accuse you of "mansplaining" and say it invalidates your argument. If a woman shows her evidence she'll claim this woman has "internalized misogyny" and is too corrupted by patriarchy to understand. If a multicultural team with exact equal representation across all groups proves her wrong she'll try to redefine the meaning of the word "evidence." If all else fails she will still shift the blame to you for "hurting" her with your explanation of which there is no possible way to quantify how much "damage" you have done.

[@Bobby20222]

Overly emotional here and you are a fuckwit.... You are the definition of mansplaining, I must be on my rag and hysterical.

[@anottakenusername3189]

@@Bobby20222 Your comment makes you look really good. Please continue. Woosh.

[@RichardGilligan33]

So pretty much allot of bullshit

[@itsethansalsbury]

@@Bobby20222 found the butthurt girl confronted with truth over here

[@oooweeeoooo]

Bonnita Despy way to prove his point.

[@capitaldistrictcourtblock2016]

The victoria secret models are all transgender all ready

[@whitleypedia]

this guy had me until he used the word "exploited" -- this is not a human trafficking ring.

[@Mr_Pewpy_But-Whole]

2:35 Rogan is making the same argument that that dude from Vice news when he was Interview with Jordan Peterson this is the similar argument to make up in the workplace

[@topnotch7432]

this Eric Weinstein guy is super smart

[@e99fuy0ng]

He might be the smartest person hee's had on. Eric blew my mind this episode

[@realestaterelief]

Weinstein brothers are smart. However they accept George Soros money so take their musings with a grain of salt.

[@iraniandude2899]

@@justinmusic1296 not "everything you said" but the thinking system which allows for contradiction to occur. We actually have the problem of thinking systems like the hegelian one where contridtcion is considered to be a productive and reliable method of getting to the truth.

[@nickd.2273]

This guy isn't smart... he just uses big words and goes on a 5 minute lecture to avoid answering a direct question with a yes or no answer...

[@iraniandude2899]

@@justinmusic1296 everything you say is nice but has almost nothing to do with the topic at hand, in order to have a moral system you must be consistent in your claims, because otherwise you would not be able to function.

[@aimbotbob5056]

He didnt really talk about it lol. Mostly just talked about the explosion thing or w/e

[@krenwregget7667]

what an incredibly awesome place the world would be if everyone were as smart and thoughtful as the Weinstein Bros.

[@gattuccina]

Eric is too intelligent to really understand how stupid People think

[@thefacebiters]

Well said. The kinda polarized people you're talking about on the left and right, have to short a fuse to hear you out though.

[@agentsmithofthematrix5111]

Chicks with Sticks? 🤔 *I'll pass*

[@stevea1708]

Bro you got it all wrong. There's no such thing as chicks with dicks it's just men with fake boobs

[@19biglou]

@@stevea1708 ... I don't know man I'm a strait guy who's in good enough shape to run 50k-50 mile races 5-6 times a year and I got a pretty juicy pair of tits...

[@gregoryhitchcock5258]

Zen Master Yep you right it's just a good looking man trying to be what his not a real woman.

[@King_Verb_]

@@gregoryhitchcock5258 🤔

[@vickey111]

@@stevea1708 @Zen Master Exactly, chicks with dicks and men with fake boobs, I could never masturbate to this www.hotcelebsworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/giuliana-farfalla-nude-playboy-germany-008-672x1024.jpg www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42633601 (sarcasm) (also she doesn't have a dick)

[@matts3729]

Eric "lingerie is exploitation" Weinstein

[@dionmoore879]

M S you missed the point also.

[@mrbald2851]

R/woooosh

[@MrSidney9]

Idiot

[@CASHXRAT]

You’re making the same error as Joe. He wasn’t saying the exploitation thing was his opinion, he was saying the social justice people hold that view, AS WELL AS the view that it’s empowering to women. His whole point is about how they hold contradictory views.

[@kimarese140]

It’s also more on how Ed responded to the exclusion of trans women. He was quite rude saying no trans woman is worthy of being in a males fantasy.. yet there are incredibly attractive trans people out there who if you didn’t know they were trans, would be casted.

[@matthawkins123]

Victoria Secret models are basically professional athletes.

[@k00tabare]

Spam “F” in the chat boys I just failed 🚫🥜 November

[@k00tabare]

kuriu stop beating around the bush you tryna smash 🅱️

[@alg3221]

This Weinstein guy has double standards

[@TONYWR]

That dude has a bad rug

[@TONYWR]

S.M.C. Kennels lmfao, that thing punches a clock, it probably walks off his head at 5 pm

[@TONYWR]

S.M.C. Kennels it’s a black version of Habib’s furry hat

[@JapanJohnny2012]

@S.M.C. Kennels i would pay serious bucks to watch him remove it and put it on joe's noggin. i'd laugh for about a week.

[@shotgun111180]

the fact that this is even being discussed in a serious manner tells you how screwed we are as a society... This is fucking insane!!

[@AlexM-ht9ff]

Really? How about go F yourself and trans people exist. Dont like it? Go to Saudi Arabia.

[@bredtimestories]

I think the problem with what Eric Weinstein's saying here about conflicting values is that just because these ideas are coming from BROADLY the same side, group, whatever, it doesn't mean that they're coming from the same person. People can have largely similar views but still see things far differently on particular issues, and to that point he really seems to be trying to sidestep Joe's statement about how for a lot of women lingerie is a way to feel empowered, not objectified

[@robertyuhsef7211]

joseph my rogan

[@peapod6747]

This man is assuming that we are dealing with rational ppl. No we are dealing with double-think

[@komfykoala6083]

1984- great book

[@bwebb90]

We're all just playing to our own emotions, never forget that.

[@joshstead6078]

Maybe it's his background in maths, but this guy is making really bad arguments. Both things can be true at once. This isn't an equation.

[@halwarner3326]

I forgot what they began talking about, but Weinstein sure sounded like a Philadelphia lawyer.

[@TheRampart]

The most obvious of these contradictions is women saying men only clubs(Boy Scouts, Golf clubs etc) can't exist because they're exlusionary but that women only clubs should exist because women need spaces free from the "oppression" of men.

[@shikaman]

It feels like everybody forgot what It is in the first place. Why taking a transgender model to wear lingerie ? Because she looks good in it ! Why care about the gender ? She’s a model, her job is to make the lingerie look good. Stop the boring politics

[@tupac89442]

He

[@jubreakitjubawdit5188]

Because "SHE" isn't a she....he is a man with some sort of mental illness and delusions that he can magically turn into a man...YOU don't get decide what u are....your genetic line does....your chromosomes do...and leading these people who are clearly sick (Jenners included) to believe that this non-reality they have in their head is reality...its saddens me to see mental health issues not only go left unattended but also for people to enable this type of behavior....its sick. They need serious help...

[@ashleygrayson3326]

Because Victoria Secret is for women that want to look sexy for men.

[@atomiswave2]

It's just a way to gain power.

[@phillyphilly1076]

There are way to many big words used here I have no idea wtf they are talking about!!!

[@MG-yv8dr]

TamTam521 haha 😂 me too

[@calistob.6252]

Basically: Waman, big or small, want respekt. Trans want respekt.

[@warzy01]

Nice another one who is proud to be dumb, english is not even my first language and even I could pretty much grasp what he was saying...If you don't the meaning of these words there is google that can help you understand.

[@icrawdad572]

Neither does eric.

[@icrawdad572]

@@warzy01 you can't explain it either. Einstein

[@eclipse5393]

This is the same craziness as transgender "women" in female sports.

[@nicolejete]

Just empower people to wear what they want, that makes them feel great about themselves. I don't necessarily conform to mainstream beauty standards, I'm a total tomboy and have no desire to wear lacy lingerie, but IF another woman likes it or feels influenced by models to buy those products, let them. I don't feel bad about myself because I'm not into that type of consumerism.

[@rumplefourskin6775]

This guy makes everything a false dichotomy.

[@BioStuff415]

as do they

[@rumplefourskin6775]

@@BioStuff415 whos they

[@theseusothership]

People who used absolutes tend to disagree with logic

[@rumplefourskin6775]

@@theseusothership they're only absolutes because he's being obtuse

[@theseusothership]

Well that's where logic starts... The dichotomies he brings up fail at the step he is pointing out. example: 'Republicans are racists because they want a border wall'... (We'll even use the flawed new definition of racism) there are plenty of Republicans that are not in power (i.e. white). Are those Republicans racists? No, they can't be... The only logical conclusion is Republicans are not racist. But if you still want to use absolutes the only proper one is humans are racist. See... Obtuse, but only correct answer when dealing with the topics at hand. The want for the desired outcome overweighs logic too often in this political climate right now...

[@pm5726]

What he is saying means nothing

[@pm5726]

Seriously, sit and think about it. I implore you

[@TheHereigoagain]

It’s still a man!!

[@SC-pf6bi]

It's not about being angry that trans women cant be included this exploited class, it's about acknowledging them as sexual beings.

[@raindrop3558]

The video should be titled: Transgenderism vs. Math

[@tyroneloki5131]

Hey weinstein, the human psyche is not just numbers and logic, and...there is the factor of emotion. so trying to explain human behavior and sociology through plain mathematics does not work. facepalm

[@malorie8557]

Or you lack the capacity to see his perspective? I hate math but he was able to perfectly illustrate some of today's problems from the perspective of math. Numbers make up everything. Just like on the internet 1 and 0's so he has a point. I think you just lack imagination.

[@tyroneloki5131]

@@malorie8557 lack imagination? tf you talking about LOL... you cant put 1's and 0's on the human psyche. if you think people are just numbers then you seriously "lack imagination". Besides an not saying he was wrong, i was stating that his analysis lacked a shit ton of variables. its like saying picaso is good at drawing LOL

[@SI29222]

@@tyroneloki5131 I don't think there's really anything "LOL" about any comment here. Are you really that amused by this analytical and mundane conversation? Back to the point though - he was using math an aid, as a supplement here, to help illustrate his point. He never said it could be completely explained through mathematics. Besides, I haven't even defined what "it" is, and similarly, you are being vague by implying that he's trying to explain "human behavior and sociology". Its like no... he is analyzing a very specific phenomenon, and saying that a certain abstraction (model) of that phenomenon is similar to something that has already been seen in mathematics.

[@centurionl]

Then look at the problem in the form of Ideals, standards, attractiveness.

[@lukijuxxl]

Just because something is very complex, it doesnt mean it isn't logical or defies basic priciples. To believe that our brains are much more than just neurons is kind of religious, because as far as science goes, our brains are just that. a very complex collection of neurons, but one nonetheless. maybe we do have transcended information capacity, but we dont know, since we dont fully understand our brains yet, i wouldnt bet my money on that though.

[@BartBe]

Don't be naive about it : woman LIKE the male gaze. They just don't like it that they can't command it. They are used to getting their needs met, and think they can control that as well. The right gaze at the right moment from the right guy doesn't bother them at all. It's not about the rules, it's about the control.

[@ashleygrayson3326]

Women like male gaze because it's biology....why does "women having the male gaze upon them" have to be demeaning or exploitative??? That insults me being a woman. This guy went on forever just to say he's a male feminist.

[@dabig_guy2204]

quod erat demonstrandum

[@SunnyofOz]

What an incredibly eloquent man.

[@1MinuteFlipDoc]

in management, this is called "bring me a rock. i'll tell you when you've found the right one."

[@jamesr169]

LMAO!! I've never heard this before but it is so perfect to the situation. 10/10

[@a.foolsworth796]

where's eric dubay

[@NirbhaySen]

Aaah! Another mathematician/physicist/"neuroscientist" spewing a word salad on subjects they clearly don't grasp. Let's have a new movement where historians and painters are invited everyday to 10,000 different shows to talk about maths and physics. Many people are perfectly aware of the inherent contradictions in various aspects of the social sciences. To try and find absolute consistency is a fools errand precisely because this is NOT physics or maths. It's not some genius observation, it's a banal one. Social scientists are used to operating in a dialectic and compartmentalised world, these guys aren't. If we were to follow their methods you would end up not observing anything, never questioning anything in the status quo because they interpret the status quo as "reality", they cannot see outside it. That works brilliantly for the natural sciences, not so for other fields of study. Is Victoria's secret exploitative? Yes. Can it play a role in providing some feeling of empowerment within a exploitative system? Probably. Within this exploitative system does it become important to represent transgender persons? Also maybe. Can all of these things be resolved? Yes, but it will take decades, maybe more to reach some sort of eventual consistency? Yes, because the over arching structure is very resilient and to dismantle it requires ground work as well as academic understanding, something that might never happen. Are there many people who ignore the inherent inconsistencies and act like everything is already resolved within these movements? Of course, it is a highly emotionally charged area. That doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bath water. You acknowledge the inconsistencies, do your best to mitigate them/find reasons and explanations for them I etc. And try and have a nuanced and delicate approach. But it is easier to be delicate and nuanced in the academic sphere, much less so on the ground and in activism. You have to give more leeway to them to be inconsistent and make mistakes, as you should to any on-the-ground movement. Maths doesn't need political activism, so you never have to deal with these issues.

[@nedviper9526]

Talk about a word salad! LMAO

[@NirbhaySen]

@@nedviper9526 You're right, looking over it I should have been a bit better, especially avoided "dialiectic" I was writing on my phone and was loathe to change edit stuff once I had typed it out. I apologise, but try not to let it take away from my point. A lot of what I have written is just long, but not trying to hide behind jargon.

[@NirbhaySen]

@@CRL_One "They work" is a very simplistic way of looking at it. If all we needed was logic from greek philosophy then we wouldn't have needed the plethora of philosophers who came after the greeks, including those who built the foundations of what would later become science. I never implied he was "applying math" and why did you use quotations marks like that is something I said? I have written as best as I could, given the limitations of the youtube comment platform, about how people who actually do research in this field are exposed to the "muckiness" of social sciences, which the natural sciences, and mathematics, don't have to deal with (much). I also mentioned that as an academic in the natural sciences/maths you're much less likely to be familiar with the nature of activism (right or left), even social scientists may not be exposed to it, but they usually have a bit more exposure. I also mentioned that the contradictions between various stances are well known and acknowledged, this talk between "rationalists" implies that it is not, which is a common theme in all these sorts of discussions. I then went on to mention that, yes, there are people who act like these contradictions don't exist, but we should not use them to delegitimise a worthwhile endeavour. I think what I said was elucidated well enough to not warrant a comment saying I implied he was applying math to the problem. If Joe Rogan is so interested in these issues he should put in more effort to bring in a bunch of social scientists and get their views on these subjects, if nothing else, at least as a counter weight to these discussions. And he should treat them with the same kid gloves he uses with all these guys. It would be educational for the audience as well. Everyone going on and on about social issues and almost never actually speaking to people who professionally study these issues. A few regular feminists (non-academic) just to be able to bash on them. It stinks of an attitude to not wanting to learn. He can even stay away from the post modernists if he wants, there are plenty of other view points that are less convoluted, easier to understand and more accessible. I am very interested in biology for instance, and I like to read about taxonomical classes of different species (which is probably way more than the so-called KZbin "rationalist") and I get my information from content written by or taken from evolutionary biologists and palaeontologists, I don't sit around asking physicists, historians and geographers about what they have to say on the subject, that would be idiotic. A lot of celebrity scientists (and many who are not scientists at all, but like to ride a wave of public perception that they are) think it is fine to wade into other spheres of study (here it is less obnoxious because he is discussing something less academic) but have huge problems when other people wade into theirs (and rightly so!). Most scientists would not dream of doing this, they're serious academics and researchers who stay very much in their field and I am in no way implying that scientists in general do this, just a few celebrity ones who've been fed a diet of infallibility by their numerous "rationalist" fans. I have also observed that many of these fans (from my personal and online experience; again, I can only speak from that) are only interested in science and "logic" when it comes to "debunking" stuff (mostly stuff they don't like), and have no actual fascination in the field, in and of itself, other than some super "sexy" stuff about the cosmos and some random things here and there.

[@nedviper9526]

@@NirbhaySen Joe pretty much kid gloves everyone he has on. This is a primary factor is his ability to have such a wide range of quality quests. But also a major complaint of mine as he often doesn't seem prepared to challenge them on their BS. Having listened to many social scientists lectures I run into the same problem Mr. Weinstein was pointing out to Joe in this discussion. Contradictory statements and rules that seem to have some invisible set of rules as to when and where they apply and to who.

[@NirbhaySen]

​@@nedviper9526 Okay. I guess that's your experience. In my discussions I haven't had the same experience. Some people are hell bent on making categorical statements on stuff that is clearly not something that is resolved or can be spoken about categorically, but most seem to be quite aware of the difficulties, and they usually state things within a context and have riders to what they say. But I guess it's perfectly imaginable that that may not be the experience of others. I personally, am okay with the kid gloves, if there are a few platforms where people aren't aggressively interrogated that's okay with me.

[@coffeecomics3583]

Joe's simple common sense & basic logic makes literally everyone he has on his show sound like idiots.

[@robertmech3069]

henlo nu fren

[@nicholasozbolt642]

When I expect to see beautiful women. I expect them to be beautiful woman. NOT MEN.

[@mseadog]

America is where we are supposed to value diversity but never notice how we are different.