The Cancellation of J.K. Rowling: A Conversation with Megan Phelps-Roper (Episode

[@philchinamusical]

As a Chinese living in China mainland (PRC), I am qualified to tell everyone how terrible it is to live somewhere that you are not allowed to speak anything "incorrect" publicly.

[@jasonwilliams8328]

Few Americans today recognize this fact. It is indeed a privilege to live in a country that provides an umbrella of free speech. Although in J.K.’s situation her right to free speech was never directly stifled, even though she was still wronged in my opinion.

[@aguastheclown]

Perhaps you can, but don't equate the two circumstances. The situation Rowling finds herself in-a famous billionaire author, outspoken on issues, receives pushback from some minority of the public-all those components are products of a free discourse and the society it creates. Concomitantly, none of the components of the scenario are allowed in China-outspoken celebrities seem to disappear into thin air. The RW's favorite poison is false equivalence. I recommend you avoid it. Be suspicious of equivalences in general, regarding our Western politics.

[@noamfinnegan8663]

Ouch.😢

[@wenz5682]

​@@aguastheclown I don't think he is equating anything but human experience, doesn't matter where you live, as long as you are human, there are conditions where is crucial to thrive both materialistically and mentally, and that is increasingly absent in the entire world

[@aguastheclown]

@@wenz5682 I guess we disagree then.

[@Apollo.Rising]

I am someone with gender dysphoria who has successfully transitioned and has had a major improvement to my life because of it. I really, really appreciated this conversation. I have been massively frustrated by the general conversation around these issues- from both sides. It's been this feedback loop of hyperbole that has pushed people into more and more extreme opinions about something that is, frankly, not all that important compared to the plethora of issues we could be focusing our energy on. This was a breath of fresh air and the kind of conversation we need to be having about trans issues- one that bridges gaps and extends empathy while acknowledging the reality of how complex these issues are. Thank you.

[@samdg1234]

*” I have been massively frustrated by the general conversation around these issues- from both sides. It's been this feedback loop of hyperbole that has pushed people into more and more extreme opinions“* I’m pretty sure that most of the hyperbole is coming from one side in this issue.

[@MrMark595]

Well said. You make good points. I think though the whole issue has been weaponised by certain groups with agendas, from both sides. It really is tiresome at this stage. Good luck with the rest of your life too btw!

[@samdg1234]

@@MrMark595 You > *"I think though the whole issue has been weaponised by certain groups with agendas, from both sides."* As I indicated to the original poster way more of the fault lies with one side in this issue. For example, where is the transphobia? I just don't see it. To suggest for example that competition in women's sports should be restricted to biological women is in no way transphobic. Nor is it transphobic for me to make that point. Has J.K. Rowling made any comment that can in reality be construed as transphobic?

[@boeing757pilot]

Well said, Apollo!

[@Zoomo2697]

“The choice today is revolt. Igor Stravinsky wrote, “The old original sin was one of knowledge, the new original sin is one of non-acknowledgment.” It is the refusal to acknowledge anything outside the operation of the human will-most especially the good toward which the soul is ordered. The good is what must ultimately inform human justice. Therefore, moral relativism is inimical to justice, as it removes the epistemological ground for knowing the good. As Max Planck, the founder of quantum theory, wrote, “Everything that is relative presupposes the existence of something that is absolute, and is meaningful only when juxtaposed to something absolute.” What happens if the absolute is absent? If what is good is relative to something other than itself, then it is not the good but the expression of some other interest that only claims to be the good. Claims of “good” then become transparent masks for self-interest. This is the surest path back to barbarism and the brutal doctrine of “right is the rule of the stronger”. The regression is not accidental. Relativism inevitably concludes in nihilism, and the ultimate expression of nihilism is the supremacy of the will.” ― Robert R. Reilly, Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything You or I may have feelings towards somone of the same gender but... “Broadmindedness, when it means indifference to right and wrong, eventually ends in a hatred of what is right.” ― Fulton J. Sheen, Life of Christ

[@michaelseal6738]

Sam Harris is one of VERY few people having actually insightful conversations currently. I’m a proud Sam Harris fan.

[@terrymckenzie8786]

A shame it dosen,t get more views than Rogan. We live in dangerous times indeed.

[@michaelseal6738]

@@terrymckenzie8786 I understand why people like Joe Rogan, but I misunderstand why he’d be considered a reliable resource for political or scientific issues. If he stuck to MMA and comedian interviews he’d keep himself out of trouble. Sam is the resource people actually need even if they don’t know it

[@jeronimo196]

@@michaelseal6738 Joe Rogan is not considered a reliable source - he has interesting guests and asks them questions, that's all. Sam Harris has intentionally boring voice and delivery, and more importantly proclaimed publicly he'd condone an agencies conspiracy to keep Donald Trump from being re-elected. That alone would cost him half his potential audience - and casts a huge doubt on his "reliability as a source", as far as I'm concerned.

[@sk8ermGs]

@@jeronimo196You people cling on to that so desperately to try to discredit everything else sam has ever said, really quite ridiculous. Also love his voice.

[@jeronimo196]

@@sk8ermGs the notion of a person as "a reliable source of information" is ridiculous. Doubly so if "the source" itself has told you it's unreliable. Monty Python's "I am not the Messiah!" scene comes to mind. As does Robert Downey Junior's: "What do you mean, "You people"?!"

[@galindoof]

No wonder I recognized Megan's name. Her life story is one worth studying, and the fact that she is now working on this project shows that she's actualizing more than what her past religious experience was aiming for. Amazing to also know that she is the voice of your new series, Sam.

[@dificulttocure]

She didn't change as a person, she is still a sad and angry bigot. The only thing that changed is that now she is targeting trans people instead of homosexuals, because its easier and more socially acceptable. Gay rights are no longer in question, now we are questioning trans rights for some reason.

[@jplmedley]

Megan is a brilliant analyst and communicator - glad to hear more from her. and good dialogue with Sam.

[@星yve6wns]

I have so much respect and admiration for Megan.

[@testcase6997]

Why

[@insidiousmischka]

Did you enjoy how she was kissing ContraPoints' a22?

[@elsagrakin2570]

I'm trans, and I love Megan Phelps-Roper so much! I'm glad she's defending J.K.Rowling. I'm also a fan of Sam Harris.

[@babs_babs]

aww a little tru scum 😂 jsyk being a pick me won’t help with the dysphoria. and it won’t get cis people to like you more

[@UnironicallyToast]

Your comment history says otherwise

[@elsagrakin2570]

@@UnironicallyToast Don't know what you're reading. I'm a huge supporter of J.K.Rowling, and I know she's not transphobic.

[@mitchswish21]

I want a civilized and rational society...i wish the best for everyone ...therefore..who cares that 'you're trans'...dont be an arsehole !

[@edejong]

What's wrong with you?

[@mikesmith542]

There is a reason why you never hear someone critical of JK say what she actually said. They simply allude to something sinister and if you don't do the work, you walk away assuming she is evil and said something very damning toward trans people. When in reality she said something very honest and completely harmless.

[@joeberg3317]

True even in this comment section here.

[@razzle_dazzle]

I wouldn't say it's completely harmless. She often misgenders trans people, and from what I understand, that severely exacerbates their gender dysphoria and feels like an attack on the core of who they are. It's a separate debate as to whether they should learn to "grow a thicker skin" or whatever, but as things stand, her words have needlessly hurt a lot of people.

[@MustyUnderboob]

Oh it's very harmful to those invested in the ideology.

[@BadassRaiden]

Harmless? She denies the humanity of a group of people. That's literally what she's doing. It would be one thing if these people suffered from severe delusions, but this is an area of research that has legit been studied to death and there is zero indication that trans people suffer from some delusional mental illness. In fact it's not nothing, it's less than nothing, because ALL the amounted evidence points to these people not having any sort of delusional mental illness associated with how they feel themselves to be. So when these people express who they really are, and she says "no actually you're this or that", she is literally denying the very essence of these people's existence. That is what it means to deny someone's humanity. They have every right, and are just as capable as anyone else, to decide who they are, and to come into the realization of who they are. She comes along and says, "actually that's not who you really are cuz I don't believe that, so IM gonna tell YOU who YOU are." By denying these people's capacity to understand themselves she inexorably says I'm the one who understand who you really are and you're not what you say you are. That is quite literally denying the humanity of others. She is a revolting human being.

[@nickcrovo9512]

I'm not sure what you mean by this. There are a lot of well researched articles on why Rowling's statements on this issue are harmful. If you are looking for, like, a tweet from Rowling where she says "I hate trans people because they're icky lol" you aren't going to find it. Not because she doesn't hold bigoted views, but because she is a skilled writer who cares a great deal about her public reputation, despite her claims to the contrary. Rowling's most direct statement about her views on trans people is her blog post formerly titled "TERF Wars" and now titled, bafflingly, "J. K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues." In order to understand why this piece of writing is, in your words, "something very damning toward trans people" you need to do several things: 1) understand the factual assertions that Rowling bases her anti-trans conclusions on. 2) understand that many of these facts are false and 3) understand that, based on her own claims, Rowling knows that what she is saying is false and is deceptively making things up to push a not at all "completely harmless" agenda. So, again, Rowling does not want to appear to be a bigot, you have to actually spend a few minutes to understand the subject she is writing about in order to see why her views are so offensive. On the very slim chance that you posted this response out of actual curiosity and not in order to smugly score points against what you perceive to be dummies on the internet, I'll leave a link to the post on Rowling's blog and a couple of articles dissecting her factual claims and conclusions. The blog post: www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ A video responding to the blog post directly from ContraPoints, the youtuber mentioned by Sam: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZinfJWKlNFlq9U&ab_channel=ContraPoints A Vox article which contains a breakdown of the blog post, if you prefer text to a video: www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy

[@grahamHAYNES]

Keep up the good fight for sense

[@SarahSatellite]

As a 90's kid from an evangelical Christian family, ep 2 was so on point and relevant

[@kmzirk]

My thoughts too. I also grew up in an evangelical family and I wasn't allowed to read Harry Potter because it was "evil".

[@paigemccormick6519]

I did not appreciate that "editorial" from Sam.

[@terrymckenzie8786]

Me too. Evangelicals have a flash point in their brain to do with witch’s, Yoga, or sex😂

[@keep-ukraine-free]

Is it possible your personal experiences & history made you hear (mis-hear) Sam's admonition about episode 2? What you say and what he said can both be true (both ARE true). He did not discount or disagree with your point. His point was that for most people who (i.e. SINCE most people) didn't grow up in an evangelical environment, episode 2 might be a distraction that makes them lose interest. He is correct. about MOST people's reactions.

[@frizzman1991]

Interesting that most people have no idea what JK has actually said or done. Likely because all conversation is shut down so often, so this is a welcome change of pace at the very least. Good stuff, Sam.

[@L_Martin]

It's also because often young people don't want to be exposed to ideas they disagree with or find uncomfy, so they outsource the digestion of uncomfortable ideas to KZbinrs or other influencers in the "community". This was absolutely the case with JKR. Most young people never read her essay, they just watched YT-ers make videos arguing back, because that's more palatable than engaging with anything themselves. I say all that because it's exactly what I did. I never bothered to read JKR's essay myself until a couple years ago. Up til then I assumed she was bigoted because everyone I liked and admired on the left said so, and I'd watched YT videos of people I liked deconstructing her arguments, and that seemed sufficient to me. Only later came to realise that I was getting all JKR's argument filtered for me, and misrepresented. People I admired and really liked and esteemed were all wrong. Only wound up reading JKR for myself after my Dad said "I agree with her." and I went away to do reading in order to argue with him. Actually reading JKR in her own words came as quite a shock. Where was the bigotry and hate everyone was talking about??? Everything went downhill from there, once you start looking into this subject.

[@tonycatman]

Activists, generally, are willfully dumb. They march, chant and shout - and it is impossible to listen to anyone's argument when doing so. This might be by design, or it might be an emergent property. i.e. those who do take the time to listen to a counter-argument, drop out of the activism. Most activists justify activism on the basis of successful activists like Gandhi or MLK. I argue that those people would have been successful without the activists who support them. Thomas Sowell : "Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole." ....and yet, we listen to these people and form policy around their demands...

[@redryan20000]

It's fairly easy to find her tweets and/or a record of them.

[@redryan20000]

@Two Wolves Which activists are you even talking about?

[@Malentor]

​@@redryan20000 the biology deniers.

[@pmac206]

I’m not even a fan of JK but what happened to her woke me up to the dangers of the ideology. I found the podcast Megan did so well done . More people should listen to it because it really does tell you alot . Some of the things I’ve learned since then are just the tip of the iceberg.

[@Kildergcowboy]

Nice to hear a conversation without the overly emotional takes. We have to have adult conversations if we are going to move forward and take care of everyone. Thanks Sam and Megan

[@jmc5335]

Unfortunately Harris acts like a petulant child when criticised and very much wants to cancel people

[@Kildergcowboy]

@Ser Aeggo Butterworth on ep2 now 👍👍

[@evasilvertant]

I think you mean a conversation with arguments you agree with. I’m hearing plenty of rationalizations with emotional undercurrents. I think it would have been more fruitful for Sam Harris to talk with Natalie Wynn, for instance. I don’t think these one-sided conversations are helpful. But I can understand it’s just what you want to hear.

[@Kildergcowboy]

@@evasilvertant I have watched a tonne of these discussions devolve into shouting and name calling. I like that this was a calm discussion and I think an important topic. I listened to the entire podcast and found it incredibly interesting. Especially the episode with contrapoints, it certainly gave me food for thought on the entire discussion.

[@evasilvertant]

@@Kildergcowboy True, I’m not a fan of the shouting matches either. But I’m also not impressed when two people who have no skin in the game have discussions about trans issues. It doesn’t affect them in any way, so it’s not surprise they can remain calm and unemotional. And the danger I’m seeing is that because they lack personal experience, they fail to bring important parts of the discussion to the table. But I’m glad you also listened to the ContraPoints episode!

[@sausageskin]

It's very good that you publicly came out on this topic, Mr. Harris. It's unfortunate that our norms of behavior are being influenced by internet bullies, to the point when people are afraid to speak up. There are taboo topics, like gender, sex and race that we are simply afraid to discuss even privately. It is exactly what life in autocratic counties is like (I grew up in Soviet Union), where there are topics that are prohibited. I hope that conversations like this will recover some of the lost freedoms.

[@crochetomania]

Oh no, in post soviet countries topics of race and sex are totally ok to discuss, as long as you keep on with the mainstream narrative. Some nations are openly frowned upon and treated as lowlifes (people form Tadzhikistan and so on), some groups of society, especially in a religious narrative are treated as the ones that must obey and be silent (women and children). All of this has nothing to do with internet but a lot to do with societies this believes flourished in.

[@sausageskin]

@@crochetomania Very good point, I agree, comrade. I corrected my post, it was unclear. I meant sex/gender/race are taboo topics in modern social media, not in Soviet Union, which had different set of prohibited topics.

[@johnhorton5627]

Yes, and I look forward to Sam Harris having people on critical of J.K. Rowling to coolly discuss why they feel that way. I look forward to him having critics of Megan Phelps-Roper's podcast on for the same reason. Oh wait, I'm getting word now that's never going to happen. I'm getting further word that the people who claim to want to have these reasonable conversations want to have them around people who mostly just agree with them. That apparently the only way to have a discussion about hard issues with wide disagreements is to have people who basically just agree with what you already think on the topic. That way, you can give the appearance to your listeners of being will to have hard conversations on difficult topics while almost never actually having one with someone who you don't already agree with.

[@ConsciousExpression]

@@johnhorton5627 It's not Sam's job OR his mission to provide a counterpoint to every point that happens on his show. This faux-struggle for "balance" in journalism is something that doesn't interest or motivate Sam in any way whatsoever. Sam has a point of view, and expresses it. He may talk with people who disagree, but he's not going to do that just so that people like YOU will be satisfied that he had "both sides" of an issue represented on the podcast. Sometimes there aren't two reasonable sides, there's an unreasonable side and a reasonable side. This is one of those cases.

[@johnhorton5627]

​@@ConsciousExpression Yes, exactly the same response every time it's pointed out that Sam caters to the conservative end of the spectrum every single time he discusses social issues. It's not because he's a conservative on most issues though, it's that he's super duper reasonable. Or to put it this way, I checked Harris's topic/guest list. Transgender issues even as there is an assault on the rights of people he claims to care about are no where to be seen except for this episode, to let "radical leftists" know they're once again wrong on the issues.

[@daveayala8515]

Hey Mr. Sam Harris. Love all your words that you spread into my ears.

[@Drelam]

Everything J.K Rowling has said I haven't found offensive, granted I don't use Twitter so I'm not sure what she has said on there, but everything I've seen her quoted as saying about the transgender issue I do not disagree with. I have no issue being respectful and calling a biological male her or a female him, if that is their preferred pronoun and gender, but it does not change their actual biological sex and some person born as a male pretending they can become pregnant or experience menstrual cycles and I have to go along with that fantasy is insane.

[@nickmasters8474]

I felt the same as you until recently (with regard to respecting folks' preferred pronouns). I was full on board the PC train. I've changed my mind though. Don't take this as encouragement that you, too, should change your mind. Just my personal take. I think we should all agree that trans people should be defended from bullying, oppression, abuse, and that they should have the same rights as everyone else. I have had personal dealings with at least one trans person, and had a productive and friendly relationship with that person. I have zero ill-will towards trans folks. But I'm done with the preferred pronouns. In day to day interactions, this has been a non issue for me (the aforementioned trans person dealt with me one on one, so there was no need for such pronouns... we just called each other by name, and I was, and still am, fine to call this person by their preferred name). But I agree with Posie Parker and others; gender is nonsense. There is no gender, there is only sex. I don't believe in a "soul." Like Posie Parker, I am not a theist. You are your body (in my view). And bodies are male or female. Grown males are men, and grown females are women, and that's that as far as I'm concerned. I'm all for people dressing however they please and engaging in the activities they like; let women dress in jeans and fix trucks, and let men wear makeup and obsess over women's fashion. But none of this negates sex. The fact that some people are far out of alignment with reality doesn't mean we must all appease them by pretending that their fantasy is reality. And I tend to think that playing the game - affirming trans folks pronouns - just causes a further erosion of the social value of truth itself. I'm not on board with it. Unfortunately, this is equated with hatred, but it's really not. I have no hate for anyone, and I wish the best for trans folks. But I'm not going to play pretend with them. I also don't play pretend with Christians or Muslims or Wiccans or Scientologists or any number of other groups that believe stuff that has no basis in reality.

[@Drelam]

@@nickmasters8474 Yeah I would normally just call someone by their name, and to me its just about respect so if a transgender person is going to be rude to me and insist I call them by a certain pronoun rudely ill most likely do just the opposite, also Ill stick to him/her all these made up ones Ill never learn and never use no matter what I'm called.

[@buckstraw925]

Identity politics was always going to end up with various groups competing with each other in a very damaging manner. The only real way forward that leads to long term sustaining value is to remove the importance of identity and not to strengthen it.

[@user-ko3tv7jl2r]

Or not validate the delusions of the mentally unwell or fantasies of perverts.

[@BadassRaiden]

​@@user-ko3tv7jl2r There is literally no evidence, and this subject has been studied to death, that trans people suffer from delusion. NONE. There is also no evidence that they are perverts. You want some statistics? You know the ratio of trans to cis gender people that commit rape or child molestation? There isn't any ratio because no trans person has ever been convicted or indeed even arrested for rape or child molestation. Get the fk out of here with your revolting and despicable lies.

[@BadassRaiden]

So funny how people who go against identity politics all day the very same thing. Remove the importance of identity, while at the same time, trying sermonizing about the importance of the "individual". So what you really want is individuals without identities. Hmm. I wonder why that is... Well according to Jordan Peterson for instance, probably the most vocal individual against identity politics, it is so that you have mindless individuals with which you can manipulate into religion, specifically christianity, and turn them into fundamentalists. But regardless of what those people say, you see the stupidity of what you say? And also the historic significance? Saying we should just vacate identity from society is first of all, impossible as it is a crucial aspect of the human condition, which is the concept that literally sets us apart from other animals. And secondly, it denies the literal evil of the past, of people being oppressed because of the way they expressed themselves, by saying well we shouldn't do anything about people trying to oppress others, we should just make identity not a thing so that no one can be oppressed for it. You see how asinine that is?

[@buckstraw925]

@@BadassRaiden "Remove the importance" doesn't equal "getting rid of it" nor does it remove the historical significance of identity and its role in persecution and oppression (quite the opposite).

[@BadassRaiden]

@@buckstraw925 if you say that identity is not important then it incentivises oppression against it. The fact of the matter is "remove the importance" will only ever be a linguistic reflex because it will always be important. If it will always be important no matter what, because it's central to the human condition, then going out and saying "ah well is it's not important," not only encourages continued oppression against it, but enables the ignorance towards acknowledging it's happening or that it's not important that oppression is happening because "identity isn't important". I never said it removes the historical significance of past oppression of identity, I said it ignores it, and it ignores it by the very notion that it enables it to continue further by trying to linguistically categorize identity as unimportant when that is psychologically never going to happen. Since this is about identity, it's not different than specifically saying being trans is unimportant, in the same way that being straight is unimportant. That may be true contextually, but from a literal standpoint, it ignores the fact that straight people have never been systematically oppressed, whereas trans people have. Saying it's not important doesn't make it go away, and wont ever make it unimportant, and because of that, there will always be attempts to oppress it and trying to say that it's unimportant will provide a linguistic justification for people ignoring that oppression. I mean, just look at all the shit we already ignore simply because people say it's not important. And yes "removal of" and "getting rid" are literally the same thing. You want to "remove" the rats in your wall. You want to "get rid" of the rats in your wall. You want to "remove" the trash from your car. You want to "get rid" of the trash from your car. I could go on and on. It means the same thing.

[@authenticallysuperficial9874]

Glad to hear from you on this topic. Our whole country is brainwashing itself

[@byronwilliams7977]

So true. It's like they take being empathetic to a fault. Open minded until your brain falls out. Accepting to the point where you'll swallow anything.

[@User-bl5cw]

About what proposition are people brainwashed?

[@cameron339]

​@Mike Kane Who's claiming that biology is a social construct? People are claiming that gender is a social construct, not biology. But I'm sure you're one of the many Mike who believes that gender and sex are synonymous with each other. 🤦‍♂️

[@claudiaxander]

@Mike Kane Only the right claim this is what the left are saying. It's just a strawman.

[@tiny_toilet]

@@cameron339 I believe you're grossly misinterpreting what Mike said. What he's saying is diametrically opposed to the idea that gender and sex are synonymous. Sex as a social construct is a meme from trans rights activists; whereas, gender (only) having a cultural basis is a concept from the feminist movement.

[@salvus7021]

I wish we could hear Christopher Hitchens talk on this subject

[@connor5669]

Why?

[@josephharley9448]

@@connor5669 Maybe because he had a magnificent intellect. His insights were remarkable.

[@michaeltape8282]

I like the way you think and how you explain things sir.

[@swaggitypigfig8413]

What kind of a last name is Tape?

[@JasonAndrew1973]

I think once you turn to death threats you don't get the benefits of the doubt in terms of good faith.

[@jmc5335]

Of course it would be a bad faith argument to conflate the criticisms of JK Rowling with those who have used death threats against her.

[@JasonAndrew1973]

​@@jmc5335 Certainly. I've seen lot of folks have civil disagreemens. Threre are valid disagreements. I can see that, but it's hard not to empathize with her even if you disgree with, You can't persuade people when you are threatening them on anything. And, I think she has some valid points. There lots of stuff to naviagate to respect everypne's rights and figure out the best path forward. I certainly don't know the best way to go. Anyone that claims to own the truth isn't someone I am interested in speaking with. Here's to hoping we figure it out via communication and love..

[@jmc5335]

@Jason Andrew I disagree with a good part of that but I know JK Rowling disagrees with your sentiments over love and respecting rights

[@rozzgrey801]

@@jmc5335 No you don't, you just assume you know what Rowling thinks, in between threatening to rape and kill her for not accepting your psychotic delusions about gender. Yes, we know that all those who criticise Rowling do also make death threats against her, as you do. You bullshitters are only fooling yourselves.

[@maynardgent6708]

Turn off social media and all this goes away real quick. Sam himself has highlighted that people are going bonkers because of social media, but the irony is that there are so many people involved now who make their living from commenting on this sort of thing, including Sam himself, that it's become self perpetuating.

[@ThiccBoi23]

Exactly. Most everyday people not on Twitter have no idea she was "cancelled"

[@AlanDantes76]

Sam doesn't make his living responding to BS on Twitter.

[@stevena.7022]

@@AlanDantes76 Good on Sam for quitting but this entire episode is still BS from Twiter and Twitch.

[@GaaikeEuwema]

You're making a logical error. Reacting to people going bonkers doesn't perpetuate it and ignoring it doesn't make it go away, as is evident by activists showing up at her house/terrorists blowing up buildings.. i agree with the turn off social media part..

[@hhiippiittyy]

I find that "cancel culture" is mostly only a concern for privileged people who's biggest struggle in life is other people who disagree with them online. I have a hard time taking seriously anyone who bitches about being "cancelled" and likens it to the downfall of society and the current most important social issue when there are so many fucked up things going on in our world. Billionaires bitching about not being heard on social media while dining on fruit picked by people getting paid a dollar an hour. Fucking babies.

[@Albertk96]

Wow., this podcast turned around my thinking on JK. Granted, I had only heard vague reference to the "bad anti-trans" comments and went along with it without digging too deep. Like so many things in life, it's more nuanced than it first appeared. Our (society's) desire to punish, shame and destroy each other over conflicting beliefs is horrifying. There is a deep seed of primal hate that social media seems to unchain. I will continue to read and watch Harry Potter media AND support transgender rights... as crazy as that may sound. Thank you Sam, I appreciate you bringing these topics to the table.

[@BadassRaiden]

Our society doesn't have a desire to punish or shame people over "disagreements". There are things that are true, and things that are not true, and then there is opinion. Shame and punish and exile are human concepts for a reason. No one is punishing Rowling or shaming her, for a fucking opinion. Her belief that men can't be women and women can't be men, her belief that sex and gender are synonymous, is FACTUALLY incorrect. Gender is a social construct, and the idea OF IT as a social construct and the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of it as a social construct has been around literally for centuries. The fact that we have used gender and sex synonymously for some time now, is a failure on society's part for being lazy in how we use language. They are not synonymous. The most egregious action of hers is denying other people's humanity. When she says to someone, for example, "I don't believe men can be women, therefore I don't believe you are a woman," that's not opinion. She is literally saying I don't believe men can be women, and before you are a "man" saying you are a "woman" I also don't believe in your own capacity to understand who you are, so IM gonna tell YOU who YOU are. She legitimately denies people's humanity, by denying they have the capacity to understand themselves, and ultimately gesturing that actually she knows better. It's revolting, and indeed worthy of shame and she deserves to feel like a pariah. We used to say well they're an asshole but they aren't hurting anyone, so let them be. We now realize no, we shouldn't just let assholes be assholes, we should encourage them to be better human beings. She wasn't cancelled. It's called becoming irrelevant because you have such a horrible personality and no one wants to associate with you, for among other reasons, your refusal to acknowledge that your beliefs are factually incorrect and you thus make no effort to be a better person. You want to be "uncancelled" or return to being relevant, because again, cancel culture does not exist - then be a better person and change your shirty beliefs. You can have shitty beliefs all you want, that's you're right. But if you want to interact with society, you're gonna have to change those beliefs because socirty has recognized that we don't simply have to let assholes continue being assholes anymore, nor should we. Cancel culture is just the name given to the act of holding an asshole accountable to make it sound some some kind of hysteria because people want to go back to letting assholes just be assholes, and it's a real shame that Sam fell into this cancel culture delusion.

[@lakingpaul]

@@BadassRaiden You said a lot there that I don't agree with, but treating gender identity as just a social construct is probably the worst offender. Speaking as if the facts are completely in support of this notion, and shouting down (to put it lightly, in some cases) those who even attempt to discuss it cogently, is quite literally the entire issue here. Also, honorable mention to "nobody is trying to shame her" as you immediately go on to shame her.

[@BadassRaiden]

@@lakingpaul I didn't say no one is trying to shame her, I said no one is shaming her simply because of a disagreement. Learn to read. And I don't care if you don't agree with what I said, what I said wasnt opinion. It was fact. You can disagree all you want, it doesn't change that. Gender identity is a social construct. That is actually a fact. It's been a fact, ALL THROUGHOUT HISTORY, and the ideas of gender norms as social constructs associated with gender has been discussed for centuries by philosophers. Gender and sex are not the same. It is a scientific fact. Go ask a biologist. No scientist will tell you that gender is the same as sex. Literally none. Disagree all you want, it's still a fucking fact. It deserves to be shut down because there is no, or rather, should no longer be a discussion. It's not up for discussion. The matter has been settled in the same way the matter of whether or not slavery is morally wrong has been settled. There's no debating it anymore, slavery is wrong and anyone who attempts to suggest otherwise, needs to be shut down IMMEDIATELY. Why? Because allowing them to suggest otherwise is to allow for the propagation through the rest of society that maybe slavery wasn't bad, whereby a sect develops that is convinced slavery was justified and is dedicated to reviving it. Likewise, the matter of whether or not gender and sex are the same is settled. They are not, and gender IS a completely and entirely social construction as are the gender norms associated with them. To deny this is to invite the development of a sect of individuals, convinced that trans people are actually sick individuals - of which there is less than nothing in terms of evidence that supports any mental illness whatsoever associated with trans gender people - who are determined to eradicate any means of "transgenderism" ie, eradicate trans people. Low and behold look what we have - and entire sect of the alt right, which if we are being honest is practically the entirety of the alt right - that is vocalizing that transgenderism should be eradicated. There is no nuance. There is no metaphor or subtext. Transgenderism is trans people, and calling for the eradication of transgenderism is linguistically the same as calling for the eradication of trans people. They only say transgenderism because they can't legally say transgender people should be eradicated. It is no different than if they said homosexuality should be eradicated. It literally means homosexuals should be eradicated. Since you said treating gender identity as just a social construct, is probably the worst offense - explain to me how gender identity is anything more or less of a social construct WITHOUT invoking the comparison between gender and sex, since we have already determined gender and sex are scientifically and factually not the same thing and therefore not synonymous.

[@BadassRaiden]

@@Albertk96 yes but historical context is well, contextually relevant. Since we aren't currently shaming and punishing people for simple opinions, nor are we headed towards a "slippery slope" where we engage with that tradition once again, the fact that societies throughout history did shame and punish people for disagreements is irrelevant.

[@joeberg3317]

@@BadassRaiden Women are not men actually. Gender in this context means personality and doesn’t define that.

[@Carhill]

Irrelevant to the subject matter at hand: Sam, I am disappointed you didn't upload Episode 314 on Pi day... it was so close as well.

[@weikko79]

Major disappointment.

[@godisbollocks]

Some of us don't have Asperger's, you know.

[@flyingfig12]

@37:00 Sam says he's stayed out of it as it's not worth what JK is going through.. would he think differently if he were a woman?

[@michaelbennett500]

Proper laughing at Sam spending 2 full minutes slamming an episode of Megan's podcast right in front of her. She took it very well, though.

[@iankclark]

A really crass move and tbh episode 2 sounds really interesting.

[@Hemlocker]

Did you actually listen? He didn't slam it, he was just telling potential listeners not to get discouraged from continuing the series if they found it difficult to get through. He said that he loved the episode himself.

[@Y2JLionHeart]

@@Hemlocker It was more an acknowledgement of the lack of patience/discipline of the average person nowadays.

[@jimmyessien8619]

I thought episode 2 of the Rowling podcast was more enjoyable than the first. It did a great job of describing the 90s and how it set the stage for her persecution.

[@DarkIncentive]

"Persecution" lol

[@georgeclune3282]

Haha..persecution!!

[@robertmarshall2502]

​@@DarkIncentive How would you describe it?

[@robertmarshall2502]

​@@georgeclune3282 How else would you describe it?

[@eVieww]

@@DarkIncentive ”’persecution lol’” lol

[@DeezScotts2023]

It being transphobic means telling the truth, not deconstructing observable reality, protecting women’s spaces, protecting children, and not supporting enforced language and coerced ways of thinking, then I am officially transphobic.

[@Jackjohnjay]

FYI, there’s literally 26 min of introduction. Show really starts at 26.

[@itsjustameme]

I find it strange that there has been such a backlash against Rowling. I think that if the HP series has a set of morals it is that of acceptance, inclucivity and finding yourself. And also some of the traps you can fall into when navigating that minefield. From Hagrid being in denial of his giant parentage to being taken aback by whatshername giant lady who becomes not only a love interest for him but also a kind of role model in him accepting who he is. To Hermione who lauchesva big campaign to free the house elves and give them rights without bothering to actually hear them out first and just deciding what is good for them from her own biases. And overarcing it all we have these evil death eaters bure blood fanatics who are trying to polarize society and the heroic struggle against them. Seriously - if someone had asked me a few years ago to name a mainstream author that I would reccomend to an LGBTQ person it would have been her or Terry Prattchett. I think it is sad to see how they are tearing everything apart. I realize that it is probably too late to ask for a bit of mutual goodwill but I think it has gotten way out of hand and need to be dialed back. And the same goes for the asshats who are trying to portray Terry Prattchett as some kind of homophobe now that he is dead. Seriously people - this needs to stop.

[@robertmarshall2502]

Both Rowling and Pratchett are excellent picks for acceptance and tolerance imho. In order to judge them to be simply evil bigots you have to bend over backwards in such an unfair way as to make everyone on the planet a bigot (if you were to apply that same treatment equally). It requires you to be purposefully disingenuous. It basically requires you to go out of your way to not read what they wrote and invent something else entirely. It's a shame because these attacks are driving down acceptance. They're increasingly making the bar so high to the point where you have to lie to yourself and claim multiple contradictory, often unscientific, ideas are true at the same time. And not just that but these are the only truths not that multiple definitions or perspectives exist. We already had perfectly acceptable definitions of woman in terms of sex as well as in gender which included trans women! I fundamentally don't see how it helps any trans person to blind ourselves to real world issues such as male rapists taking advantage of self-id laws, fairness in women's sports, a generation of young girls opting out of womanhood and being affirmed in never before seen numbers through nonsense such as sex is not real (it's a social construct?!). I increasingly find it difficult to separate the far right and the woke left. They seem incredibly intolerant.

[@matityaloran9157]

I didn’t know they were already gunning for Pratchett

[@DarrellVermilion]

This is the nature of deconstructivism; when people believe everything is a social construct, it makes sense (in their broken brains) to destroy the "constructs" in the pursuit of utopia. The irony is, the West is the only place on earth that will tolerate their nonsense, so if they succeed they're in for a _lot_ more than a rude awakening.

[@beetledune9264]

Emma watson fuel the movement against JKRowling.she tell her fans to cancell JKRowling and called her antitrans.

[@saiyamoru]

Terry Pratchett made me a better person. I read as many of his books as I could get my hands on as a teenager. I cannot believe that anyone would read them and decide he was a bigot secretly. His daughter has tried to defend him but some people will clearly never believe her...similar to this case.

[@pewmanfoibles7557]

Agree with JK Rowling. Adults should feel free to dress however, call yourself whatever, sleep with whomever, etc… as long as it’s consenting adults, who cares? But biological sex is a part of material reality. A person’s behavior (mannerisms, fashion choices, personality) is not the determiner of sex. “Feminine” males are still male, “masculine” females are still female. And to place more importance on “gender identity” over biological sex creates some obvious issues.

[@louiseparker1915]

Some people think they should only have one leg. Should society condone the removal of healthy limbs?

[@slyjokerg]

How odd to bring on a guest and say "You might want to skip the #2 episode of her podcast series. That one is a really boring piece of shit. Just go on to #3."

[@inkoftheworld]

lmao. x'D

[@jmoney9494]

If you think about how we have mostly as a society allowed the black community to control their narrative on what is correct in how we apply stereotypes and understanding their community and our level in involvement, it's kind of the complete opposite to take a class like women and completely downgrade their own opinions of how they themselves as a community should be respected and heard on subjects that affect them.

[@orphanedhanyou]

It's hypocrisy. It doesn't mean a group can't be wrong. Ex if you post a video singing a certain word from the song lyrics you are not a racist and should not be canceled. Otherwise all the black artists that made money off the media containing the word needs to give all non black people refunds. However there is also objective truth. Biological women exist. Some people actually denying this.

[@ejd5261]

That’s how I feel when a trans woman gets plastic surgery, grows his hair long/puts on a wig, puts on a dress and makeup, goes to a speech pathologist to imitate a woman’s voice, or even (as has been said countless times by trans women) has degrading sex and says that this means he “lives as a woman”: like a black person would feel if a white person who tattooed their skin brown, got plastic surgery to get big lips, put on a textured wig, wore gold chains and a basketball jersey and pants slung low, did an imitation of a black accent said “I’m living as black.” This wildly disrespectful behavior is accepted at all bc misogyny is the oldest and most intractable form of bigotry, and bc in a patriarchal society, even the lowest ranking men rank higher than the highest ranking women.

[@Ray-dl5mp]

I just want to say the 2nd episode is a great episode. And the last few minutes or conversation at the end of the 2nd episode is one of my favorite podcast moments ever. I don't think I'll ever forget it.

[@evanmills8559]

"We should mistrust ourselves most when we are certain, and we should question ourselves most when we receive a rush of adrenaline by doing or saying something." -J.K. Rowling

[@EchoBravo370]

I agree with Sam. Ep 2 was unnecessary. It was completely off topic.

[@Ray-dl5mp]

@@EchoBravo370 I feel like it was super interesting and super on topic. It’s all about what we do as a society over time and talking about one person in particular (and perhaps a little of the interviewer which connects the audience to both their stories and why they are talking) It’s about as on topic as it gets. Unless you only wanted to hear about that one thing in the news that happened recently. But why not expand your horizons. To go one step further, I think it was harsh of Sam to even say that to her that basically one episode was a skip. He could have said that a lot nicer. What he could have done was say, it's a great episode but I just want to make sure people don't stop at that episode because it gets better. I don't agree with Sam (I loved every episode), but the way he went about it was completely dismissive. Sometimes we don't realize while trying to help people (Sam wanted people to listen to the full podcast) we can come off as over the top critical. I think creating a podcast is a form of art, so I think you need to respect the artist more.

[@ScottJB]

Imagine being targeted constantly by lunatics on the far right and left for decades after creating one of the best children's stories ever.

[@toby9999]

I share your sentiment and you can call them lunatics, but many are likely to be highly intelligent and good people such as Megan, but are trapped by a 'mind virus' so to speak, as Megan was. I was once like that.

[@ejd5261]

She’s a woman who refuses to be meek and silent so you know there will be large scale mobs of haters no matter what. The best test of moral character for a woman is if you’re getting screamed at by both the right AND left 😅

[@Sun-Ra9]

It’s pretty sad, if you see JK Rowlings life history, that lady is a fighter, unbelievably strong and grew into what she is today from absolute poverty. I support trans rights but you need to let other people speak. We can only solve problems through discussion but not by muzzling other people. Alternative to discussion is violence which never ends well for either sides.

[@farcenter]

This is great, the podcast needs every boost it can get

[@kappla]

Keep up the good fight, Sam! 💪🏻

[@user-ko3tv7jl2r]

The issue is that the whole trans thing is just obvious, observable, nonsense. Pandering to it is ridiculous, even before accounting for the bad actors slipping in under its cover.

[@SebastianLundh1988]

I go on Twitter sometimes and politely ask people what it is that she's said that's so awful; I often get blocked.

[@williamhutton2126]

Right. There are literal websites that cover this. It's not quite like asking "what did Hitler do that was so wrong" except Hitler didn't pretend to be a feminist.

[@tracygrant7931]

Okay I will tell you. She completely erodes the existence of transgender women by derisively distinguishing transgender ideology, who they are, their value as a woman. She advocates for their rights as women to be eradicated purely because they are not biological females, and not lucky enough to be content with their assigned sex at birth, antithetical to the contented fulfillment cisgender women experience. If you want me to extract quotes, I will, but I know that you conservatives and transphobes will defend yourselves with your inexorable dogma. But if you need me to send the quotes, I will.

[@wasdwasdedsf]

@@williamhutton2126 what

[@tracygrant7931]

She also endorses people who actively are hostile and discriminatory towards transgender women (in essence, supporting people who refuse to respect the pronouns of transgender women). All of this is pretty transphobic if you ask me. Again, I will provide my extrapolations if you are willing to actually be debated on this topic, or I won't bother if you just want to be obstinate.

[@Yic17Studio]

She mocked the trans community with some derogatory jokes a few times. But mostly she just continues to state that she doesn't believe trans women are women. IMO the jokes are not nice but the trans community definitely gets too triggered and take it way too far. I am all for supporting trans - if you're an adult you can do whatever you want as long as you're not hurting others. But I don't support anyone harshly attacking others and sending death threats regardless of your gender.

[@hollywooda111]

How DARE a trans woman tell a Female!, how they should react to actual female issues. Its disgusting.

[@TriteNight1218]

You can not understand the over-the-top vitriol directed towards JK Rowling unless you understand the role that autogynephilia plays in trans activism.

[@oak8891]

So men who like dressing as women think their trans?

[@L_Martin]

Yup. Narcissistic rage reaction. Cluster B personality, and the AGP getting their fantasy ruined by mommy... cue the meltdown.

[@Claudia-es8jv]

Yes we’re all supposed to not only acquiesce to their demands but also support it somehow? It’s insane.

[@BH-te5fs]

The vitriol comes from people like you still peddling decades-old pseudo-science and ignoring that every major medical organization in the US disagrees with you.

[@brianmeen2158]

Good discussion . I often shake my head wondering how we have gotten to this place? The current race/gender/trans narratives are so warped that sometimes I feel like we are all being punked . But we arent. I can’t see this issue getting resolved either as long as those in power are afraid to be honest about it

[@redaderoua8816]

Honest about what exactly? The race gender fights and debacle are the natural byproduct for progress in fighting for people's freedom and rights but its getting turbo charged with the rise of the internet/social media that shows people the worst of each other

[@unowen-nh9ov]

We need to put historic labels behind us, neither sex nor race are binary & we only perpetuate those hateful divides using their rhetoric.

[@randoH3000]

I think it’s become a lightning rod issue for the far right since it galvanizes peoples fears. They are afraid of their children being influenced to change their gender by their peers, and many of the far right are already religious lunatics and bigots when it comes to the LGBTQ, and it seems to be getting worse. That said, those on the left seem to be split: some see it as an issue where people seem unbalanced in their attack on the right, and some see it as an issue where people are being attacked simply based on their identity and lifestyle choices. To those who think JK Rowling is being unfairly attacked, I urge you to look into suicidality among transgender youth. There are many cases of families who lost children to suicide because they were unable to understand and accept their identity until it was too late. There are very real risks when it comes to not attempting to understand your fellow man. I admit I thought the gender pronoun issue did come from a place of hysteria for a long time until I actually listened to a family’s personal account of the issue with their own transgender teen. As I’ve researched it more, it seems like the far right may have actually positioned the issue this way to influence people BEFORE they look into the issue. I appreciate Sam’s dedication to compassion for Transgender people being his foundation, but I wonder if he’s considered how the narrative around Wokeness may have been weaponized by the right to shutdown discussion of how we could better and more compassionately integrate the LGBTQ community into our society.

[@alex-qd6of]

@@unowen-nh9ov sex is absolutely binary, and there's nothing hateful about admitting it.

[@gking407]

Normal people were doing normal stuff - figuring out their gender and social identity - then the conservatives made it political. Their politicians did what all fascists do, used them as a test subject to see how far they could go bullying and destroying normal people. Same playbook as Hitler and Pol Pot.

[@Receipt]

The suggestion she has for sports is already how it is. There are women's leagues and open leagues, there are no Men's leagues. Women can and have tried out for the NBA, NHL and NFL. They don't make it.

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

I had people jump down my throat for saying Governing Bodies of sports should be allowed to determine rules of fair competition. I felt unjustly attacked.

[@joeberg3317]

Sports is probably the biggest area for ‘biological sex distinct from gender identity is relevant sometimes.’

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

@@joeberg3317 That's why it was so disheartening to be so immediately and viciously attacked ("Die Nazi scumbag"). Almost pushed me back into voting Republican!

[@fnordiumendures138]

@@joeberg3317 I'd say prisons are a more important area. And military service. And the... possible... right to only be intimately searched or examined by someone of their own gender. Oh, and the right to seek refuge in same sex domestic abuse centers.

[@brianmeen2158]

But I assume this happened online? So much of the woke discussion is happening online - I rarely encounter it in everyday life

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

@@brianmeen2158 "Woke discussion"? Please give your definition of "woke".

[@Claudia-es8jv]

Team JK here, she’s only stating what 95% of us are thinking.

[@opinion3742]

Plucking stats out of the air to defend ignorant and damaging behaviour. Well done.

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@opinion3742 why do you think it's unreasonable? Most people don't even know what transgender people are.

[@BH-te5fs]

Trans rights support is fairly wide among the public. You guys are not the majority.

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@BH-te5fs evidence?

[@BH-te5fs]

@@Daniel-ih4zh Look up Pew's polling on it. The primary issue that swings the other way is transgender sports participation, but on pretty much everything else the public supports trans rights by solid margins.

[@keep-ukraine-free]

Key ideas: 1) Megan @46:39 found that many trans people share J.K. Rowling's concerns to protect women/girls. 2) Sam says @36:24 there are extremist/trans activists who show signs of mental instability (viciousness & hysteria). 3) We can't go on this way. We can't undermine society and make language useless, simply for ideology or fringe activists. Summary: we must balance how many people are affected. A tiny minority should not upend 4 billion women/girls.

[@lillyinthepond]

Loved this. Looking forward to watching the series.

[@ToxicallyMasculinelol]

honestly, when I say "men" or "women," I'm talking about sex, not gender identity. because I'm never talking about gender identity. because gender identity is a ridiculous, strained way of talking about personality. it's real, to be sure, but it's not relevant to virtually any aspect of public life. the difference between "man" and "male" is that "male" is a generic adjective or noun that can refer to any animal or plant part. "man" is specific to human beings. that doesn't mean the word doesn't relate to sex, it just means it relates to sex as it exists in homo sapiens, specifically.

[@User-bl5cw]

So, when you say you’re looking for a woman to marry, all you are conveying by that is that you’re looking for someone with XX chromosomes and a vagina? There’s no other vague cluster of traits to which you’re referring, such as disposition, presentation, vocal tone, etc? In other words, if you were offered 2 possible mates, and you had to choose only one, you would pick someone who looks like Hulk Hogan who happens to have a vagina, and reject someone who looks like Megan Fox, who happens to have a penis?

[@joeberg3317]

@@User-bl5cw As a straight guy I would probably not be super into either of those people, however yeah a more stereotypically male looking woman(/vagina haver) would be my option. There’s nothing wrong with having a genital preference lol

[@totalyunsober]

What are you talking about? You wouldn't even be able to clock a lot of trans people as trans. You'd be assuming their gender based on their gender expression, and using the pronouns that best match. How would you deal with intersex people who have chosen a gender expression? Just use no pronouns when referring to them? How would you even know? lol

[@wegder]

I agree with Rowling, if that labels me as transphobic I don't care.

[@mrlurp]

I’ve lost over fifteen friends on Facebook over my support for J.K. Rowling, and the rights of women. To be fair, I have over four thousand friends on there. And to be even more fair, most of those friends, friended me because I am gay, and was posting shirtless workouts videos in my home gym on my feed, and Instagram. Anyway, I think it’s important to stand up and be counted as an ally to J.K. Rowling, for her own courage to stand up for LGB folks like myself. But also because she’s right. I’d lose every friend, if that’s what it takes.

[@AlanDantes76]

Hopefully you have learned not to post shirtless selfies of yourself in the interim. Nothing screams douchebag more.

[@opinion3742]

The rights of women to act like dicks to a marginalized group who are not an actual threat to them? Yeah well done go ahead and sacrifice all your friends to feed a hateful belief. Why not, whole countries have done it in the past.

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@opinion3742 how is transgender people in women's spaces not threat to them? To deny that necessarily means you deny the premise of women's spaces.

[@BH-te5fs]

@@Daniel-ih4zh Because you have to actually demonstrate a threat, not just declare one exists. The most likely way to see actual harm in situations like this is to force trans women into men's spaces.

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@BH-te5fs sure, you can just use all the arguments for womens only spaces that have been used for the last 70 years. Self identification undermines none of these arguments, i.e. they still hold.

[@mogznwaz]

JK Rowling is like Ricky Gervais - rich enough and confident enough to be uncancellable. Plus they’re only ‘cancelled’ if WE allow them to be.

[@godisbollocks]

What if the sheer volume and nastiness of the death threats she regularly receives reaches a point where she simply decides it's no longer safe for her family to live this way, and retreats from all public life? Essentially cancels herself to escape the vitriol? Where would "WE" - presumably you meant the public at large - factor into this series of events?

[@guyferrari8124]

@@godisbollocks She probably has people to protect her in all honesty though

[@godisbollocks]

@@guyferrari8124 Sure, but that's not the point. The point is that countless numbers of people today, young folk in particular, seem to be wielding such blinding moral certainty that they've convinced themselves that anybody who doesn't abide by their ethical dogma is a prejudiced piece of dogshit who ought to be intimidated into removing themselves from the public sphere.

[@tombombadyl4535]

@@godisbollocks I think it has reached that point for most women. Most men actually. You can’t bring it up at work without fearing s reprimand. Do most people just shut up. It does seem like the tide may be turning however. Check out the latest issue of the Economist.

[@yomamma.ismydaddy216]

They could get cancelled if they truly did something that’s actually horrendous but they ain’t getting canceled from some bs

[@dj_laundry_list]

Why not just have Rowling herself on the podcast?

[@robk5427]

Because the new Sam is afraid.

[@AlanDantes76]

@@robk5427 Jesus Christ dude, give it a rest. JK Rowling would not do his podcast, I'm quite certain of it. She doesn't exactly DO podcasts, and she may not even know who the fuck Sam Harris is.

[@ArcadianGenesis]

​@@robk5427Or maybe - imagine this - she simply didn't agree to be on the podcast (if she even knew it existed).

[@robk5427]

Sure, less and less people are interested in being interviewed by Sam these days, I get that. The thing is, even before TDS and blind faith in corrupt institutions got the better of Sam, he was already showing the weakness of lefty cancel culture types and talking about not interviewing any of society's undesirables because he felt it was, (or more likely was simply afraid it would be seen as) endorsement. This is the conversation guy; remember he would constantly tell us conversation is all we have? Now he won't even have a conversation with people who used to be his close friends if they disagree with him.

[@wasdwasdedsf]

why not just have obama on the podcast?

[@techdeth]

I just scrolled down the first 20 replies .... literally no one listened to this whole segment.

[@opinion3742]

Interesting observation. I for one can't listen to the Harris drone for too long without getting sleepy. And then his words would slip quietly into my subconscious and eventually become my conscious belief. Give the script to another speaker and it might become clear to more people that it is Harris' voice itself that they should be wary of.

[@mdslush23]

Would like to hear Sam have a conversation with Natalie Wynn on these same topics.

[@mousquetaire86]

YES!

[@Inertiafivezero]

Anyone who's seen her video on JKR will have a more balanced view of this whole situation than what Sam is arguing for. Sam has some serious blind spots when it comes to woke-mobs and he quite often takes the wrong stance by default. There are real problems with wokeism and cancel culture but, oh man, does this episode feel like "look what they did to Ye West!" -video.

[@mousquetaire86]

@@Inertiafivezero I agree, but it was a pleasant surprise to hear Sam used to support Nat on Patreon, so he is well-disposed towards her.

[@thedude0000]

@@Inertiafivezero _There are real problems with wokeism and cancel culture_ I agree, but we cannot have that actual conversation. Pick ANY topic on either the right or the left.....the mindset is "you're either with me or against me". There's no middle ground to have an actual conversation.

[@MsHojat]

Destiny would probably be my #1 pick, then ContraPoints 2nd.

[@TIm_Bugge]

It occurs to me that I don't hear much discussion about the biologically novel burden social media puts on one's reputation management skills.

[@andreasplosky8516]

That would actually be an interesting subject.

[@pmccarthy001]

I'm a 61 year old non-transitioned MtF transgender. Honestly, I'm kind sick of this topic. I've always considered myself relatively liberal, or progressive, but when I was younger there was this idea called tolerance. But that concept seems lost in the 21st century. Whether it be largely the left 20-30 years ago that just couldn't tolerate the smoke or the right today that just can't tolerate some people decidng that they're going to have an abortion or trans people transitioning or living their life... in either case, whether the left or the right, bans are the simple solution. Now, the left is getting perhaps a bit less coercive with this idea of cancellation... clever, but still pretty intolerant. I know many think I'm relating issues which are clearly, and profoundly different, and perhaps I'm just too lost in time or just plain dumb, but to my mind... they don't seem that different. So, I don't even really know... so, J.K. Rowling has opinions on transgenderism some people don't like. Who cares? Many of my nieces and nephews really like many of her books... Harry Potter. She's obviously a very creative person and a great author. I've got views that people hate me for if I express them. Fortunately, I don't have her promience and only occasionally seem to attract those who would hurt me because I don't have all the right views... Maybe some of my views are stupid and ignorant. Perhaps I am a homophobic, transphobic, prejudiced, racist idiot. When I was young we did have Archie Bunkers... I remember always being told when I was young that the hardest thing to tolerate is intolerance. Conflict may be a good thing in some ways, but when it tears families, friends, and societies apart I'd hope it'd be over more important things then smoking, trans people, or abortion. All these issues have matters which need to be worked out, but just banning everything I disagree with/don't like or 'cancelling' people because they don't expouse the 'right' views... Perhaps I'm just an old fart, but me thinks this idea of pushing conflict so much and demanding everyone echo my thoughts and actions have gone a bit off the rails.

[@L_Martin]

What does "non-transitioned" mean?

[@pmccarthy001]

@@L_Martin Well, I don't know how specific the definition of that word is. I think of transition as implying some spectrum of actions ranging from living your life in some gender role not in alignment with your society's gender norms for the sex you were born, and/or assigned at birth, to taking hormones and having surgery to alter your body more to bring it more in alignment with what I'd say are internalized ideas of what our culture says our body should be to embody the feelings that one has. So, in my case, I've never taken hormones nor had any surgeries related to being trans. At a few times in my life I have tried to dress, or more generally 'present' as we say in the trans community, but for me it's always ended badly... getting fired, routed to the outbox, etc. Whether it's my inept social skills or others intolerance it became something that just didn't seem to matter to me anymore... what's the point of dressing (or, presenting) as you might prefer if you're likely to be living under a bridge... So, for someone like myself, whether it's my inadequate social skills or societal intolerance I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't. As much as I've always admired the pretty girls in the cigarette ads it's pretty much the same thing with smoking. If you're someone like myself who wants to be liked, there's no chance in hell that smoking's going to help with that nowadays. I suppose it depends on how much of various things you want your behaviors to do for you. When I was younger and smoking was more socially acceptable, smoking a girls brand of cigarette was problematic just as wearing girls clothing. Nowadays, pretty much everyone hates it and it's difficult to see how smoking can do anything but hurt someone who is socially challenged as things are now. In my assessment I've always been a very open and honest person, but that doesn't do much for you if others just don't like you, and/or what you do. And, in my assessment, that's just what it is. I still believe I'm a good person, but I no longer expect approval nor acceptance from other people. You can react to it any way you like, but if you go out in the rain you're going to get wet, and then you've got to deal with being wet. So, I try not to ask much of other people... and that way I'm less likely to get hurt. 'Cause apparently I ask too much... it is what it is.

[@davegold]

I keep trying to tell people that intolerance is not a virtue and it just falls on deaf ears. I hope you have a good community can survive the culture wars.

[@PickledShark]

I loved episode 2!. I grew up in Christian schools and remember well that Harry Potter books weren’t allowed at my school. That was in the early years when I first started doubting my faith. I decided then that I wasn’t going to accept book bannings, and suffice it to say that I’m not going to accept it now either.

[@hellbenderdesign]

I liked it to, even after hearing Sam take a huge public dump on it.

[@CausalityLoop]

I remember reading Chamber of Secrets in a pew at a talk by some notable preacher at a big church that my parents dragged me to. I was little so I wasn't paying attention to the adults, but I remember someone sitting next to us seeing my book, pulling my mom aside and warning her that she shouldn't be letting me read that book about witchcraft.

[@orphanedhanyou]

Not having children read any and everything, on the public tax payers dime, especially without their parents knowledge, isn't a book ban. You can obtain all the books & share them with your kid if you want.

[@alex-qd6of]

@@orphanedhanyou where would you obtain them, since public libraries are publicly funded? I'm so fortunate that my parents didn't care what I read...

[@juanReflex37]

Excelent Sam Harris

[@virtualalias]

There's an insignificant, but non-zero group of individuals that believe themselves to be Jesus Christ and would, undoubtedly, benefit from widespread acceptance of their identity. The peace it would bring would allow them to divert their attention from both internal and external conflict as well as constant, tiring scrutiny of their closely held beliefs as they attempt to square their inner and outer worlds. Unfortunately, they cannot be 'celebrated' because we emulate what we celebrate and emulating mental illness is, on its face, an objectively bad idea.

[@opinion3742]

Wtf did you think you said???

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@opinion3742 it's pretty obvious. The pro trans position literally comes down to 'they will be happier if you agree with X, therefore we should agree with X'. This line of thinking is literally rejected for every group *except* trans people.

[@kaulz]

​@Opinion37 it's pretty clear. They think trans people are mentally ill and shouldn't have their delusions confirmed by society at large. They want us to socially force them to conform to gender roles that align with their sex.

[@Ihatemyusernamemore]

So all the neuroscience backing up transgenderism being legit goes out the window cause you thought of a shit analogy?

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

@@Ihatemyusernamemore there is no evidence

[@roxee57]

So human females get relegated to only being able to use a term, female, undifferentiated from “female” shared across multitudes of other species so that males can use our noun, but females of specific species with their own nouns like cows, mares, does, vixen, sows, etc, get to keep theirs Megan? Human females have been demoted below those other mammals mentioned to the suite of species we haven’t come up with names yet for their seperate males & females? No! I’m not a subset of woman that has to accept being called cis. I’m a woman because that’s the noun for adult female humans. I don’t care what people wear, or who they love, But people who are insisting they be referred to as women need to find a new noun for their group, like the fa’afafine did, because woman is already taken. Also, males who claim a trans identity are more than one group. There’s early onset dysphoric boys, most of whom turn out to be gay, but those whose dysphoria persists are helped by transitioning - a verb. This group are referred to as homosexual transexuals. They need their own noun. Then there’s a group some of whom claim a late onset dysphoria which is accompanied by erotic crossdressing, ie transvestitism, which can sometimes progress to a full blown paraphilia, ie autogynephilia. This group needs their own noun too. Natalie Wynn is a self declared autogynephile, though Natalia hasn’t mentioned it for years now. I don’t wish this group any I’ll will, but I’m not here to validate a males paraphilia, certainly not without my consent, & I refuse to validate it by sharing a noun female humans are called with them. Have Helen Joyce on your podcast Sam. If you think activists, mostly autogynephiles, think a diagnosis of dysphoria, or full transition, is a requirement for a male to call themselves a woman you’re I’ll informed. Trans people who say those things are necessary, mostly HSTS, are called “trans medicalists” & “tru scum”. One final add, how did a man who educated me that we don’t have a self come to think it rational someone could be born in the wrong body.

[@presterjohn9088]

Whatever your thoughts on Sam Harris you should definitely listen to Megan Phelps-Roper and the podcast she's done called "The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling".

[@TheHSIHP]

It's nothing less than fascinating

[@Ikbeneengeit]

Why do you conflate "free speech" i.e. freedom from the government, with "employee/employer rights"? They're not the same thing.

[@chadmichael_]

I had gender dysphoria. It is a survival mechanism from trauma. It happens subliminally in the minds of children who unwittingly get the message that their authentic biological sex and the cultural expectations that come with it somehow threaten the attachment relationship with one or more of their caregivers. It happens when that role is at odds within a toxic family structure. As humans we are extremely dependent on our caregivers. We are wired for attachment. Anything about ourselves that threatens that attachment will be suppressed. It’s a survival mechanism. Other mammals that can walk as soon as they’re born aren’t as dependent but we as humans can’t even crawl and as a result we are biologically programmed this way. This isn’t talked about in the mainstream and therefor many kids grow up confused and bullied for it which only emboldens their false beliefs about who they are and makes them more resistant to anything contrary to the pro transition narrative. It took me years to connect the dots in my life. The way it showed up for me (in a nutshell) was by having a mother who was abused and sexually harassed so much by men that she would demonstrate that hatred in many ways such as making a big deal out of a movie scene with female nudity. Not covering my eyes like most parents might do as in I’m not allowed to see this yet kind of thing but instead by talking out loud about how disgusting and shameful men are for wanting to see this and having a total meltdown over it. Which is understandable given her life experience but yet very toxic to me her son. I’m not blaming her. How could she have known? I then (key word) subliminally started associating being a man with something that would threaten my relationship with the most important person in my life and had no idea why it was happening to me. I started dressing and acting more and more androgynously as it became more and more apparent that I was becoming a man. I rejected it with everything I had and suffered the consequences of ruthless bullying in which only made me even more militant about my lgbt identity. Now that I know the truth, I am so glad I never took hormones or did anything drastic or life ruining to myself. Now I am a confident adult man who continues to do the trauma work that has helped me virtually eradicate this problem. I find it very sad to see how many people are lead down the wrong path, especially these days, and even more sad that I have been labeled as transphobic for speaking out about what I have learned from my experience. I would even venture to say that these experiences were huge reasons why my romantic and sexual attractions developed in the way that they did. I don’t think there is any gene responsible for this. It’s totally a trauma based toxic social environment kind of thing that manifests these issues. Much of that toxicity having been so normalized to the person that they don’t even realize what has actually happened to them.

[@winwinmilieudefensie7757]

But thats just you ..

[@chadmichael_]

@@winwinmilieudefensie7757 No it isn't.

[@wasp89898989]

I think what you're saying is true, but it still shouldn't impede on the rights of people who choose to change their gender identity, take hormones or have gender affirming surgery. Two things can be true simultaneously

[@danger.snakes]

okay, now what about people like me, who have no history of trauma, had great family lives, have great relationships with all of their family members, etc.? do you realize that your experience isn't universal? I'll happily accept your explanation of what made you feel things in your life, that's fine, but when you apply that to the rest of us without knowing the conditions of our lives, that's a problem

[@chadmichael_]

@@wasp89898989 I agree. My goal isn’t to take away people’s rights. I’m just sharing what I’ve learned from my experience and from what I’ve observed on my path to hopefully provoke people to think harder about what’s really going on with these issues and to show that there is a way to overcome gender dysphoria without surgical intervention.

[@SecretAgentPaul]

This was the amazing San Harris I've heard so much about?? What a wishy-washy, gutless, nothing interview that went nowhere it was.

[@robk5427]

Woah, we're halfway there...

[@Mr.Pink1996]

Sam isn't living on a prayer.

[@opinion3742]

@@Mr.Pink1996 No, he is powered by his own bull***t.

[@Igbon5]

And, "there are some sports where sex doesn't matter 'as much' " she says. What bullshit. So what if are some that might not matter 'as much', possibly? It is absolutely true that it does matter, a lot, in virtually every sport. Picking out the possibility of an exception is irrelevant. Long distance swimming, over a certain distance really? That's worse than claiming that sex is a spectrum based on a tiny percentage of developmental disorders most of whom can't procreate at all let alone a different sex.

[@craigb4913]

Incredibly naive at best to say the trans activists have benevolent intentions. Trying to control the language of others is a power game designed to shut down dissent.

[@leahcimolrac1477]

I don’t understand why this woman is placating this mental disorder by using the terms “trans women” and “natal women.”

[@jordanm2984]

Every time I hear cogent, respectful conversation about a charged and delicate topic (when most interactions are the exact opposite), I breathe a sigh of relief. Thanks Sam & Megan.

[@danielhall6354]

It would be really good to have Contra points on the podcast

[@joeberg3317]

Not exactly surprised by Sam’s views on these issues as expressed here, but refreshing to hear him be straightforward here after (understandably) avoiding it.

[@AlanDantes76]

Are you saying that he avoids controversy? Apparently you don't know the Sam I do lmao.

[@brianmeen2158]

@@AlanDantes76yeah Sam is one of the bravest liberals out there in terms of combatting what he thinks is wrong - doesn’t matter how taboo the topic is

[@wasdwasdedsf]

@@brianmeen2158 you mean as he lined up with the establishment on every single issue the last 6 years?

[@wasdwasdedsf]

@@AlanDantes76 you mean as he lined up with the establishment on every single issue the last 6 years??

[@AlanDantes76]

@@wasdwasdedsf Like he did commiting a whole podcast to explaining why the riots in 2020 were bullshit and and outrage against police was a false narrative? That establishment view? Lol be silent.

[@itsacomment5991]

My first awareness of vicious trans activism dates to the Michael Bailey book (2003) cost him his seat as department chair of Psychology at Northwestern. A researcher largely supportive of the trans community, Bailey's book for non-academic readers crossed some tripwires with the then-nascent transactivist movement. One tripwire was needlessly incendiary, but in other instances, he was just citing research. The attacks on his academic career, on his family, and on him personally were vicious and had the effect of ending honest dialogue among researchers. I stopped donating to Northwestern because the university shamelessly gave in to social terrorists who think anything written about trans people must reflect, word-for-word, the doctrine of a then-tiny subset of unstable people on Tumblr. A few years later, in 20122, it was the political right who attacked Bailey after defending his "freedom of speech" back in 2003.

[@guyferrari8124]

I didn’t know tumblr even existed in 2003

[@Starfish2145]

Social terrorists is a good name for them!

[@pjc8682]

Who is driving these extreme positions in social media is the question... somebody could systematically look into it.

[@Bryanbkk]

Not who, what. It’s the algorithms.

[@nga88nguyen]

Rumour say it was the big pharma who sell all this medical treatment. But cant be for sure.

[@opinion3742]

@@Bryanbkk Lol. If only.

[@porgguy4962]

I too left the cult I was raised in and Megan Phelps-Roper is indeed a true hero of mine.

[@ProkofNY]

Taking a second to appreciate how I would have reacted 10-15 years ago to the notion of a conversation between Sam Harris and a former member of the WBC surrounding the topic of JK Rowling (of all people!) becoming the nemesis of the fat left.

[@tedoymisojos]

"They is a woman male" Yeah no. Let them indulge in the language gymnastics if they want, but its not ok to mandate that nonsense in any way.

[@L_Martin]

MPR asked JKR: "Is there information that would cause you to change your position?" And JKR said yes. Very telling MPR never put this same question to Contra Points or anyone on the TRA side.

[@connor5669]

I literally just listened to the last episode and she never says it. Where is it?

[@L_Martin]

@@connor5669 Maybe you should have listened more closely then? Final episode (Chapter 7), timestamp is 46:19 MPR's 2 questions she puts to JKR. "Is your position unfalsifiable?"

[@connor5669]

@@L_Martin thank you for linking me the timestamp. I listened back and never heard her say WHAT she would need to change her position. She said she "could articulate what she would need to see" but doesnt say exactly what evidence that refers to. Did I miss something?

[@L_Martin]

​@@connor5669 JKR's answer is "Yes, and I've gone into what they would be." And she did... For 6 episodes. I don't even think that's an exhaustive list of the evidence JKR would like to see in order to change her stance. I'm pretty sure JKR outlines all of that in the 7 episodes of the show. I'm not going to re-listen to it and quote her for you, you just listened to it yourself. (dashes and * added to not get the comment screened)

[@L_Martin]

​@@connor5669 --Blockers followed by HRT is not ster/ ilising a/ utistic and same-s* attracted kids --Data gathered by gender clinics that prove long-term benefits to this medicalisation --Evidence that no harm is being caused to women when you take away their single-s* spaces --Evidence to show women are not self-excluding from places like r* or DV shelters because males will be there --Evidence that males have zero advantage over females when they compete in women's sports --Evidence males wanting to be housed in women's pr/ isons are committing female-typical crim/ es such that they pose no more risk to the female population in prison than any female --Evidence that "gender identity" is real and not just a collection of regressive s* stereotypes about men and women...

[@unowen-nh9ov]

Rowling is right. How many women die annually because they were born that way? No one can tell us because they don't know or care. Yet when feminist pushes back against "people who menstruate" she is not just vilified but her life threatened, now they object to her being involved in television adaptation of work SHE CREATED! J.K. is right, I grew up female identified & was brutalized for it, puberty happened & nature course corrected me NATURALLY, no need of possibly life-threatening meds., chemicals, surgeries or wardrobe changes. If trans are women, why is it trans activists threatening the lives of feminists? Where is Trans Pride, what is wrong with being Trans & why disparage the identity of others to assert your own? The non-binary don't get to redefine the binary, human sexuality is represented by a 🌈 for a reason, millions of 'em, in fact. UDHR, millions died, just like the witch trials. Thank you, Megan & good luck with the rest of your journey, the past is our past & if we can't continue to learn what's the point of living? Certainly not to hate.

[@PlayNiceFolks]

Always listen to the KZbin release before switching over to the full subscriber episode.

[@Protolamna]

I do that for podcast like this that I expect to be spicy in the comments section. If Sam's talking about meditation or global hunger or something I'll probably just go straight to the paid podcast lol.

[@PlayNiceFolks]

@@Protolamna the comments..whhaaat?! I would never...I just do it to boost Sam's view count...

[@MsHojat]

I don't know if you were describing what you personally do, or suggesting what others do. But either way, it's indeed good to do this, since hypothetically if all viewers could easily afford subscription then all fans of Harris wouldn't watch this intro videos, and they wouldn't get many views, and hence would not get popular not recommended to others. Of course due to the fact that most people chose not to pay subscription this effect is significantly diminished in reality, but it would still play a factor if paying subscribers didn't watch these intro videos.

[@MaDPuPPeTgames]

A lot of divisions we make in sport or prisons are based on biological imperatives, not gender issues. So they should remain divided based on biological terms. Women's sport is divided from men's sport based on biological grounds, so regardless of your self identification, you should still compete based on biological examination. Unless you can prove you've transitioned biologically completely to the other sex, you shouldn't be able to change the division you are put in.

[@hsmd4533]

It’s impossible to biologically (or otherwise) transition from one sex to another.

[@Godocker]

Sam praising contrapoints for what she said on the podcast in regards to Rowling... has definitely not seen her videos on Rowling. Definitely tempered down her comments for the podcast lol

[@synthesizerneil]

That's Sam in a nutshell - Painfully out of touch. He knows about things at a very surface level, like someone who only watches mainstream media. I imagine he never ever would actually watch Contrapoints or anyone on KZbin, seeing as how he constantly disparages "doing your own research" by watching KZbinrs. Instead I bet he was doing his own research to seem more informed before this podcast. Sam disdains ordinary people and would never give someone like Contrapoints a chance were he not trying to appear a certain way to others. And lastly, Contrapoints himself is an absolute joke. He's known as "controversial" because every once in a while he says something that *isn't* batshit crazy and people go "wow so nuanced wow".

[@Ihatemyusernamemore]

He's almost certainly watched it, he used to support her on patreon, I've watched Contra's video on Rowling as well, and I usually have very little time for "PC" and "wokescold" type stuff, but Contra makes decent points, she has evidence, if you don't consider transphobia to be a bad thing then Contra would probably annoy you but if you admit that transphobia is a bad thing you gotta admit Contra's arguments against Rowling have merit

[@ambientjohnny]

@@Ihatemyusernamemore Why do you believe females do not deserve any spaces free of males? What is hateful about upholding female sex-based rights that were fought long and hard for?

[@Ihatemyusernamemore]

@@ambientjohnny Why do you hate trans people and men?

[@josephmayfield945]

@@synthesizerneil that’s not being out of touch. It’s not reducing precious time to sludge media consumption.

[@josephbelisle5792]

Without a doubt people personally attacking others for their opinion is detrimental to their feelings and sense of well being. But you also have to understand that someone world famous comes out with an opinion that attempts to invalidate the lives of people is going to make people angry. For her its an opinion. Her belief. But this expressed belief is going to aid in disenfranchising millions of people around the world. For her its an opinion. For trans people it is their life. Their reality. Their freedom. All of it being invalidated once again. I dont like people attacking other people for their beliefs but when your belief causes harm to others i find it hard to empathise with their suffering. I do empathise with the trans community as they suffer daily for them just trying to be who they are. I have little sympathy for Rowling.

[@rebekahwiseman3377]

Those overly generous comments about ContraPoints didn't age well. He has since come out blasting Megan & the entire podcast. Experience indicates that expecting reasonable, logical perspectives from the talking heads of a political, ideological cult is a fool's errand. That does not mean, of course, that those who seek to resist said ideological cult should not take the higher ground. Indeed, our cooler heads absolutely must prevail. There's just too much at stake.

[@nicksyoutubeaccount]

Contrapoints is awful

[@Daniel-ih4zh]

Contrapoints is the definition "i have a philosophy degree, look at me talk!!". When you actually push or question what she's actually talking about you almost always find it vague and meaningless at best.

[@ehcarbles1623]

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but you don't have a cooler head, you are just heated with the contrary ideology cult without noticing

[@azurenojito2251]

Interesting to hear from people who are neither happy to be trans, nor willing to detransition. You are right to take J.K. Rowling's side, though.

[@reincarnationentertainment9885]

Don't cancel Jk Rowling! It's disgraceful that someone like her is not consistently given a platform. Who is she harming? No one = harm reduction.

[@brianmeen2158]

I find the jk Rowling situation to be just bizarre. If you would have told us 5 years ago that this would happen we’d be like “No way”.

[@abstractnonsense3253]

@@brianmeen2158 A warning: It's a _totalitarian_ ideology that explicitly rejects science and reason as instruments of white supremacy. There is no bottom to their insanity and they don't accept a middle ground.

[@reincarnationentertainment9885]

@@brianmeen2158 Correct, well put.

[@Socrataclysm]

Wonderful convo, you put into words so many of the issues I’ve had with my fellow democrats lately. Being a moderate has never been more frustrating.

[@testcase6997]

What are you talking about? It was constant drivel

[@0ptimal]

There's enormous variability between different individuals perceptions and perceptual processes. I think a large portion of people have a very immature or even broken way of interpreting things. Somehow they act as if their personal perception of something is THE real reality that everyone should adopt. And if someone doesn't adopt it then many assumptions are made largely based on things like ignorance and emotion. It's tricky, because how do you help people to process the world fairly, rationally. How do you get them to understand that their(yours, mine, each of ours) interpretation only means so much, and there are other people and perceptions that they should respect, even if they oppose them. And that society already has long established ways of perceiving things and you cannot expect everyone to immediately change the way they feel about something just because you think they should, it doesn't work like that. I think it's easier than ever by far for a person to become so detached from sensibility that only a life filled with resistance and errors can hope to change their perspective. But it seems much of society is detached, so the absurdity has plenty of soil to thrive.

[@evasilvertant]

I agree with most of what you said, yet I suspect you are alluding to the opposite of what I believe. I agree traditional views will take time to be changed, and we cannot expect people to change how they feel immediately. But one thing that bothers me is that most people now seem to equate language conventions with biological facts. I think we should give more thought to what we mean by social designations such as ‘man’ and ‘woman’, and acknowledge that it means many things, and that these terms aren’t specifically linked with sex chromosomes. And I think we need to break free from binary models, and start acknowledging the complexity of (human) reality more fully.

[@evasilvertant]

@Euthyphro Dungeonsdragons I think the terms have various dimensions, including biological, phenomenological, experiential, and social. But what bothers me is when people define the terms exclusively in terms of biology in a very reductive way, like XX = woman and XY = man. There are a lot of caveats to that statement. First off, there are other possible combinations of sex chromosomes. Secondly, chromosomal sex and biological sex don’t always match. It’s not actually the Y chromosome that defines male, but the SRY gene attached to Y, which can sometimes pop off and attach to XX. Yes, there are people that are chromosomally women, who outwardly look like men. So I don’t like it when people pigeon hole everyone into a strict binary, when nature is a lot more complex than that. But also, in biology text books we may define man and woman in this way, but in everyday use, we base these terms primarily on how people appear to us and how they present, and secondarily-if we’re respectful enough-on how they self-identify. No one is checking sex chromosomes to make sure the correct gender pronouns are used, for instance. Anyway, there is just so much complexity associated with these terms, from genetics, to hormones, to neurology, skeletal dimorphism, social constructs, etc. I find people hopelessly reductive, so they can maintain the simply narrative of XX = woman and XY = man. But biological facts don’t even necessarily inform language conventions like the use of ‘man’ and ‘woman’. So I don’t quite understand this tunnel vision on certain aspects of biology anyway.

[@paigemccormick6519]

Sam's backhanded endorsement of the 7-part Witch project devoted to encouraging listeners not to despair when they may get "bogged down" in episode 2 sounded completely unnecessary. I have already heard the full podcast, and I'm glad I didn't have this shadow criticism in mind.

[@dogsandyoga1743]

I desperately crave clear-headed, rational conversation about this topic. I found myself sliding farther and farther right, at least in online spaces.

[@godisbollocks]

Or the wokerati were sliding so far left that it made your position in the middle seem right wing by contrast.

[@dogsandyoga1743]

@@godisbollocks Yeah, I've thought about that as well. Perhaps the landscape shifted beneath my feet 🤷🏾‍♂️

[@opinion3742]

Says it all.

[@josephmayfield945]

The right are insane in other ways. They just use outrage culture to gain a foothold in your brain.

[@PickledShark]

For real. I’m an atheist vegan liberal environmentalist and this shit makes me want to vote red for the first time since way back when I was a Christian. It’s insanity

[@Awibrahor]

Just as gender is part of your identity, so is a person’s thinking. Neither must be attacked in defence of the other. The most suppressed minority is the individual.

[@TYoung90125]

If i learned anything from the Macbeth sparknotes, it is this: We ignore the prophecies of Scottish witches at our peril

[@samdoyle3945]

Nice connection Travis. Good reference

[@derekconn9950]

That comment about the person swimming and the distance gets so great the difference between men and women disappear is completely idiotic. That’s whenever the true difference will be most noticeable. Men have larger lung capacity speed etc the margin of going the distance will be extreme

[@aarondavis8943]

We probably going to be annihilated in a nuclear war while we were busily focused on JK Rowling's problems 🤣

[@RC-qf3mp]

JKR hasn’t been ‘cancelled’. She’s churning out video games, novels and HBO series these past years. She’s doing just fine. She’s a voice of reason in a world of woke madness.

[@tiffsaver]

JR Rowling is currently writing a book about a wizard who can instantly turn a vagina into a penis with the wave of a magic wand. The book should do well.

[@wynandbecker8489]

could you guys split a chapter RIGHT after the disclaimer please?

[@MrWrngway]

Also I would like your thoughts on free speech, are you free to say what you want and there should be no consequences, or You can say what you want but it comes with consequence. This in regards to cancelation culture, they have free speech to advocate for cancelation of things they don't like. It is a fascinating conundrum. Lol. Be well .

[@Anderzander]

Don’t get him started on free speech 😂

[@CanonicalVariable]

In my mind, free speech should also include free listening. If you don't like what you hear, you should be free to ignore or cancel it. A few hardcore free speech advocates seem to think you should be allowed to speak, but not really allowed to listen (i.e. react to that speech). Of course, any reaction should be within decency, and I understand that is some of what is discussed in this podcast.

[@blove142]

i love Megan, but saying that laws to prevent MINORS from puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and surgeries, are "targeting trans people" is a little ridiculous.

[@joeberg3317]

Some GOP laws go deeper than that. I don't like messing with what adults can do, some states have gone there.

[@L_Martin]

Ditto laws keeping males out of women's prisons and r* shelters, and sports. It's not targeting trans people, it's protecting women. Ugh how has it come to this... Some real narcissistic reversal.