I know of someone who says they listen to Joe Rogan podcasts (political I assume) but I don’t know what this means or what the connotations are. Both this person and I live in east asia.

  • BuckFigotstheThird@lemmy.worldEnglish
    65·
    1 year ago

    Joe Rogan is a bigot. If your friend subscribes to bigot content, they probably harbor some bigoted beliefs. Any sane, non-bigoted person would recognize the fucked up shit that gets platformed on Joe Rogan content, and promptly unsubscribe.

    • Screwthehole@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      1 year ago

      Bigot is a strong word for him. I guess if you are pro-trans athletes in sports you would find him that way, but I can’t really think of other issues where he expresses close minded views? Fucking guy learns and changes his mind when presented with evidence, which is a huge reason I can listen to him. Even if some of the subjects and guests are kinda fucked up or dull or misinformed.

      Like, tulsi gabbard last week reading a thing from the UN and totally either misunderstanding it, or worse, twisting it into saying something it 100% wasn’t. And Rogan was just kinda like “I dunno maybe” as he’s not very confrontational, very often.

      • AdaAEnglish
        52·
        1 year ago

        I mean off the top of my head, he laughed at a friend who “joked” about coercing women in to giving blowjobs by threatening to withhold gigs from them, he’s hosted Jordan Peterson and Matt Walsh, the first “merely” transphobic, the second, a self confessed fascist and transphobe. He’s also suggested that supporting trans folk is a sign of society collapsing

        As the person you’re replying to said, if someone subscribes to Rogan, they likely hold some bigoted beliefs, because the guy is absolutely a bigot, and actively chooses to spotlight and empower other bigots

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            2·
            1 year ago

            Users kept calling people bigots without evidence, but you’ve only removed the comments requesting evidence of bigotry rather than the unsupported original insults.

            That reaction is not in accordance with the posted rules of NSQ.

            • Rooki@lemmy.worldM
              2·
              1 year ago

              Its against the rules that i didnt banned you both. The first one is personal opinion. The rest was just insulting. And not relevant to the post.

              • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                2·
                1 year ago

                Thanks for responding, by the way

                The first comments by the other party are unsubstantiated accusations, I agree, although my first reply is a direct contradiction providing evidence from within the podcast they mentioned.

                After that, the person called me a bigot and gaslighting, words they are using incorrectly and have no evidence for, which I pointed out.

                I understand if you are basing this decision on your personal opinion of rogan, but this person is just name-calling without evidence, baiting comments(against NSQ posted rules) and I’m providing contradicting evidence to their incorrect and unsupported name-calling.