Size Matters, But Training Helps!

Most of my jiu-jitsu training partners outweigh me by at least a hundred pounds. Sometimes more. I’m a 5’0” 41-year-old bookish introvert. This sport is hard. I get mat burns and sore fingers and bruises. Am I doing well? Do I look like a purple belt? Everyone’s bigger and stronger. Why keep coming back?


A lot of folks seem to rely on quite a bit of strength at first if they happen to be built that way. I wasn’t born that lucky or with a particular interest in spending hours on the machines in a gym next to guys flexing for themselves in mirrors. Why stick around if you’re not winning?

In working with bigger folks, I have had to be mostly technical and that can be demoralizing, especially as a beginner without many tools in the toolbox. Even later I think – I’m a purple belt after all, I should be somewhat good at this. This sweep should work! It’s hard and I spend a lot of time figuring out how to escape – which is to say on the bottom sucking stale, sweaty air, ineffectually shrimping, being the proverbial nail instead of the hammer, as the Gracie quote goes. I don’t have it all figured out now, but I’m better than I was when I started! That’s a win for me.

There are some advantages to being small like speed and fitting into spaces people don’t realize they’re leaving, but if all my weight isn’t in the two or three points I’m using for the technique, it’s probably not going to happen. Even when I’m doing it perfectly, their strength gets the better of me many times. Size matters. That’s just a fact. That doesn’t have to ruin the fun though! Is crushing everyone you meet what you consider winning? Is that the goal of your training?

Not all competition and vigorous training is bad. I do kind of dread the type of competition when you first get your purple belt or a new guy thinks “oh, this tiny lady should be an easy submission.” But when you find good people who respect each other and watch out for one another, a little competition can be good. There is a way to push each other, up the pace, but still in a playful controlled way. You both understand that your life doesn’t depend on “winning” this particular session. If your guard gets passed or you get swept, it’s not the end of your career. It means a little more work maybe. Now you have to pass guard again. But it certainly doesn’t reflect poorly on who you are as a person. It’s not a character flaw. If you’re on the mat, you’re learning and getting better. If you’re doing the work, you’re winning.

Though I enjoy friendly competition, I’m also putting my life in your hands as a smaller person. We smaller folks have to stay vigilant about a partner muscling through techniques or whether or not to invert or turtle if a heavier person might do something dangerous. Even if not explicitly stated each time, we all – no matter our size – still trust each other with our joints and necks. Training partners are there to make each other better and take care of each other. You’re not there to practice “street techniques” or mark off “wins” in your jiu-jitsu notebook. At least I hope not – not in an open mat and especially not during a regular class. There’s a high degree of trust involved that we don’t necessarily think about on a day to day basis. But if we’re all – regardless of size – in it for cooperative, respectful competition rather than skull crunching, spine crushing, knee wrenching wins we’ll all last longer, learn more and have more fun doing it.

I wrote this for:
https://geoffbalmebjj.com/2019/03/31/size-matters-but-training-helps/

Toxic Masculinity and Libertarianism

I've been increasingly interested in the links between white supremacy and domestic violence since the mass shootings have been linked to these and toxic masculinity is in the news. There are links and associations amongst those things throughout society as we've seen in Gamergate, guests on sports radio shows and their massive popularity, and even some presidential candidates' problematic associations. In trying to find a driving force, left and right didn't seem all that helpful/conclusive, but libertarianism seemed a possible likely connection with the emphasis on individual liberty at the expense of altruism/equality/liberty for ALL. -- and it says MRA are two sides of a coin, not that if you're one, you have to be the other (but you could be). And, yes, there are different strains of libertarianism, so don't sweat it if you don't have MRA tendencies!

This article is from 2015 and so maybe unacceptable to many, but I wondered if anything like this had been written...and it turns out it had. There are three good quotes below, presented for your introspection.

Why Libertarians and MRAs Sound the Same When They Talk About Feminism

On MRA:

"For those of you who are blissfully unaware, men's rights activists are basically weaponized douchebags. They tell us that feminism has gone too far and men are now second-class citizens."

On privilege bolstering MRA or libertarianism:

"Obviously, the idea that we all go through life as isolated individuals and that group identities (race, class, gender, sexuality, etc) don't define us in any meaningful way could only seem plausible to a white man of at least moderate financial means—or anyone bound up in the aspirational fantasies of whiteness, masculinity, and economic elitism. Whiteness, and especially straight male whiteness, is treated as the de facto standard from which others deviate, to such an extent that a straight white (cis, able-bodied) man can completely forget his experience is not universal. From within that perspective, it's easy to see freedom as consisting in, and only in, being left alone to do whatever you want with your money."

And ding ding ding - we have a winner!-->👇

"Both libertarians and MRAs are dedicated to missing this point. They speak in the language of individual rights and equality because by reducing all the complexity of the social world down to a set of isolated units, they can pretend that everyone's privileges and disadvantages are rightfully earned."

Banning Abortion in the Case of Down Syndrome

Banning Abortion in the Case of Down Syndrome

Arkansas Senate approves bill banning Down's syndrome abortions

Arkansas ‘Down Syndrome Discrimination by Abortion Prohibition Act’ (SB 2)


As it impinges on the right to an abortion I don't think anything should - if you are pregnant and don't want to be, you should have the right to decide - but I don't think Down Syndrome is a good reason for it if you want kids in the first place. 

I don't think one *should* abort for sex selection or Down Syndrome or anything along those lines. But that's a different question than a legal ban. Bans get into the state requiring you to give a reason and or proof and that's extremely problematic for privacy in medical care and maintaining a right to abortion in general. Obviously there's a movement to ban abortions of which this ban is likely a part, not just a disingenuous slippery slope argument. It's got to remain an opinion and up for discussion rather than law if we want to keep the right to choose at all.

What about Iceland? They've got such a low number of Down Syndrome births.

As long as there is choice in the matter - which is a necessary right of bodily autonomy - it won't be eradicated, as headlines frequently announce. I don't even like using that word, eradicated, but it drives home a certain point about our problem with ableism in this country and the extent to which Down Sydrome isn't really a disease that you can, in good conscience, speak about in such a way. You aren't going to "eradicate" it with any sort of preventative measure at this point - those things aren't known as far as I know. It's not polio. Eliminating a single disease is good and there are vaccines that accomplish that by preventing the spread of them and keep people from catching it. You don't "catch" Down Syndrome though.

The facts are, that Down Syndrome isn't a disease and the eugenics aspect is hard for me to deal with. Eliminating a segment of the population with traits some simply find undesirable is troubling, to say the least. With Downs, sure the are health issues, but there are a host of other traits that make them much needed members of society. We would be less without them. I wonder what the line would be if we could predict blindness or other things from the womb. Who would be next? Maybe in Iceland and the Netherlands they are in general a more cooperative or collective society and services wouldn't diminish despite a lower incidence and there wouldn't be more stigma/discrimination, but I suspect that situation here would be a disaster.

It might seem like a positive, this near eradication in Iceland, but talk of eradication is hard to reconcile (or frankly hear anyone discuss) with knowing Down's people and what they've added to my life. It's not like polio, where there's a vaccine and you're eradicating a disease instead of a set of traits and a particular personality. We would be less without them. 

I hope the thinking doesn't change among our population such that it goes the way of Iceland - I wonder if it comes with a greater intolerance of all disability - but equally I hope abortion is never banned again.

---

If you want to read something by someone who said it better, you can read this by a woman who has experience:

The "Down Syndrome Abortion Ban" Uncovers A Difficult Truth About Pro-Choice Politics & Disability

A couple of quotes from the article, things to think about:

I do not believe my daughter's mutations are an accident. I do not believe they are a gift. I believe they are part of who she is. And I know that I will always feel grateful and honored to be Esmé’s mother, just as she is.

Genetic mutations, genetic difference, is what has allowed us to become more resilient as a species. It is at the root of how we grow and adapt.

Instead, what we need, and what individuals like Esmé require of us, is a turn toward compassion, selflessness, joy, and determination in the face of struggle.

---

From the struggle in Ireland where people with Down Syndrome were used as political pawns by anti-choicers.

STOP USING DOWN SYNDROME AS ANTI-CHOICE PROPAGANDA


Quote from article:

Writing in the Irish online publication The Journal, Darach Ó Séaghdha, the father of a toddler with Down syndrome, takes issue with the "Love Both" flyer. He's tired of seeing faces of children with Down syndrome in anti-abortion propaganda and almost nowhere else. "She's more likely to see a girl like her in such propaganda than she is to see a girl like her in a TV show or even working in a shop," he writes. Meanwhile, he’d like to see these groups put similar efforts into expanding postnatal services.

Gaza war crimes report

Gaza war crimes report and what's been in the news the past two months...


So a run down on news in Palestine. There's always too much to digest, but when the world notices and makes a report of Israel's war crimes I feel it's always a positive.


👉First, a new film. 1949: Creation and Catastrophe
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/last-eyewitnesses-nakba/


👉February 2019 - any time war crimes are officially pointed out, I am here for it. There will be no adverse effects for the criminals, but at least it is being recorded - this time.
UN Investigators Call For Arrests Over Gaza War Crimes

UN says Israel's killings at Gaza protests may amount to war crimes


👉Two ads in the Israel elections that seem to say the quiet part loud and incite violence:

First ad -- 
 https://t.co/s8Y4Oziw75

And the shooting one -- with video 😥😤
Jewish Lawmaker Shoots Dead Arab Colleague in Campaign Video; Complaint Filed
👉March 2019 - continued terrorizing of peaceful protesters
Palestinian shot, injured as Israeli army attacks peaceful Kufr Qaddoum protests


👉Israel's need for self-defense just doesn't hold up.
'Endless Trip to Hell': Israel Jails Hundreds of Palestinian Boys a Year. These Are Their Testimonies
"A report a year earlier from British legal experts concluded that the conditions the Palestinian children are subjected to amount to torture, and just five months ago the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe deplored Israel’s policy of arresting underage children, declaring, “An end must be put to all forms of physical or psychological abuse of children during arrest, transit and waiting periods, and during interrogations.”"


👉Susan Abulhawa's social media feed brought this one to my attention. Maybe it's as a result of the Ilhan Omar issue where she called out the US bias and AIPAC lobby group's stranglehold on American politics and was wrongly derided as being anti-Semitic.

Israel’s Stranglehold on American Politics
"The Israel lobby’s buying off of nearly every senior politician in the United States, facilitated by our system of legalized bribery, is not an anti-Semitic trope."


👉Saying the quiet parts loud. Israel isn't a state for all its citizens - only for Jews. We all knew that. Now we can fight apartheid and get rights for all equally?  Right?

Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is ‘not a state of all its citizens’


👉Somewhat related to the previous link, the US Trump administration recognized Israeli soverignty over the land they stole in Syria although they have no authority to do so.
Trump says US will recognize Israel's sovereignty over Golan Heights

And of course some in the apartheid state would like to make the apartheid official and have the US declare the West Bank the property of Israel, also contravening international law.
Israel MK calls for Trump to recognise Israel’s annexation of West Bank


👉Daily acts of violence and injustice against Palestinians
Two Palestinian Families Forced by Israeli Authority to Demolish Their Homes

Me and Joe Rogan, Part Deux: Is He Liberal and Open-minded?

There has been push back as to my assertion that Joe Rogan isn't as liberal as fans think he is. I still think he's maybe more liberal than his listeners, but definitely right of center on many things, though occasionally leaning left and mostly libertarian.

His anti-PC rants make it clear he's a privileged white guy and trivializes and diminishes anyone else's experience who sees the world as anything but how he sees it. PC is just about not being as asshole, yet he wants to retain his right to be an asshole and be considered nice and reasonable. But this isn't a right. You can say what you want! But don't be surprised when people call your sexism sexism.

In his 2016 show, which if you had any doubts about his leanings, is called Triggered. Out of the gate with the title he's belittling marginalized groups' daily discrimination and issues by kind of laughing them off. “Oh, why do you need safe spaces and trigger warnings, you oversensitive snowflakes!” He feels this way because he doesn't experience these hardships brought on by gender or race and has no desire to understand those who do. He even goes farther and says they are trying to censor and control him, which is absurd. Instead of trying to understand where people are coming from in his so-called inquisitive manner, he hand waves his obstinance saying “it's all good.” He puts up a wall of objection to much need introspection on his part and then “forgives” the marginalized groups for offending him in a way entirely manufactured by him not putting himself in their shoes. Is that gaslighting? It's something.

Quote form the Maxim review ofTriggered:

“If that title and Rogan’s history of criticizing political correctness has you expecting a 60 minute screed against safe spaces and microaggressions, you’re going to be disappointed. Rogan certainly takes his swipes—feminists, transgender people and Instagram models will find cause to take offense—but...”

--So basically, don't expect a horrible screed, it's just going to be good-natured trans and gay and feminist bashing! It's all good!

Look at his guests if you need further proof of his leanings – and I'll give alternative guest ideas as we go. (I also understand that it won't work if my guest suggestions don't want any part of Joe Rogan or if Rogan himself is completely uninterested in the topics or guests. That would be a further proof that he's not as open as he would have you believe.) He'd rather talk with incels, neo-Nazis, fake moon landing guy or quack pseudoscience when he gets high and “curious” rather than a wide range of people. He's applauded for this “learning” though never really pushes his actual intellectual or ideological boundaries. In order for me to see a leftist or someone liberal and curious about left leaning things, I'd see him asking: what is restorative justice? What does abolishing ICE or abolishing prisons mean? What would that world look like? But he instead wants to find a leftist hypocrisy between feminists wanting to see rapists in jail and leftist talk of closing prisons. And he doesn't really even want to explore that so much as make a declaration. His curiosity just does not extend in that leftward direction like everyone wants to say. He saves all the open-mindedness and curiosity for the right, alt-right and right wingnut part of the spectrum – if it is a spectrum at all, which I would debate.

Same with anything to do with women. He's not open to introspectively challenging his beliefs that feminists hate men or feminism is bad. He has zero curiosity except when he has "proof'" that actually women are the problem  - and then it isn't a feminist guest, but a link with a title he likes (though the article didn't say what he was asserting... ). 

A search for Joe Rogan and feminists will get you JRE #724 with Christina Sommers (and a long list of his problems with feminists and feminism, showing that he really doesn't get it). A quick search on Sommers will give you her connection to conservative think tank AmericanEnterprise Institute where she thinks about gender with Dick Cheneyand those like-minded freethinkers. 

Rogan likes guns. But not particularly women or trans people. But they could bond over guns, if not a belief in equality or the protection of their further existence on the planet.

https://unladylike.co/episodes/014/shoot-gun

Cristen and Caroline, hosts – very long list of references on gun owning groups, if interested!

Queer and Trans Gun Club - https://twitter.com/trigwarnatl

I don't like guns, so I can't really speak to all these groups, but maybe they'd be interesting or sparka liberal's curiosity.

https://www.triggerhappypanda.com/

Trigger Happy Firearm Instruction, LLC is dedicated to empowering women through safe firearms education! We aim to effectively educate 1 million women on firearms safety and fundamentals.

Or this? Socialist Rifle Association.

The Socialist Rifle Association's mission is to uphold the right of the working class to keep and bear arms and maintain the skills necessary for self and community defense.

They oppose assault weapons bans AND the US backed coup in Venezuela. How about that.

I don't know anything about that. Rogan is likely not curious. https://socialistra.org/

For UBI, universal basic income, he had Andrew Yang, Richard Spencer's favorite and not someone who could really explain the pros and cons.

Here's an argument against: http://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/12/universal-basic-income-inequality-work

Robert Reich may not come on there, but Dan Savage did in t#512 (2014, so maybe UBI, marginal tax rates and Medicare For All wasn't as popular then?). All people got from this appearance on Reddit was - did Joe Rogan “win” or “lose”. Facepalm. Savage isn't really all that liberal either - he's another with one of these privileged white boy libertarian streaks.

He could have antifa people on and talk about how the media portrays them. He could have democratic Socialists on and talk about how they are demonized as Stalinists. There's very little "inquisitiveness" with respect to leftist topics whereas he gives more of a frenemy vibe and wide latitude to a wide variety of right wing nuts.

Rogan has had Ben Shapiro on, but no one from anything like Current Affairs? https://www.currentaffairs.org/

I wonder how this show compares to Rogan? https://burnitalldownpod.com/

“What do you get when you put a Think Progress sports reporter, a Canadian sports activist and a Hofstra professor together on the same podcast? One capitalist-hating, Trump-hating, NFL protest-loving group of far Left women.” – NewsBusters

• Brenda Elsey, Associate Professor of History at Hofstra in New York
• Jessica Luther, freelance sportswriter and author in Austin, Texas
• Shireen Ahmed, freelance writer and sports activist in Toronto
• Lindsay Gibbs, sports reporter at ThinkProgress in Washington, DC
• Amira Rose Davis, Assistant Professor of History and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Penn State University

Any libertarians there?

Anyone from Can We All Be Feminists would be a good informative gues, but I think anyone in trans or fat activism he'd just laugh at with no curiosity to be found whatsoever. Not that they would be open to such a forum given his reputation...

Can We All Be Feminists?: New Writingfrom Brit Bennett, Nicole Dennis-Benn, and 15 Others onIntersectionality, Identity, and the Way Forward for Feminism 

Another author is Kendi. I can't see him coming on, but who knows.

Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America

by Ibram X. Kendi

I really can't see NPR types like these going on Joe Rogan, but that would be interesting.

John Biewen and Celeste Headlee, Scene On Radio

http://www.sceneonradio.org/men/

http://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/

Josie and Clint do the Justice In America podcast. Would they come on? They could explain criminal justice if he wanted, though.

“Justice in America,” hosted byJosie Duffy Rice and Clint Smith III, is a podcast for everyone interested in criminal justice reform—from those new to the system to experts who want to know more.

Another author - not sure she'd come on, but I loved her book. She explained feminism well.

Soraya Chemaly, author Rage Becomes Her

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2555837324?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1

-Vienna women's city mentioned in RBH --

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/oct/13/why-arent-we-designing-cities-that-work-for-women-not-just-men

-Brazil - the self defense class mentioned in RBH --

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/opinion/brazilian-women-yell-manners-feminism.html

PrisonCulture to talk about Cyntoia Brown or others she's advocated for.

https://freebresha.wordpress.com/

https://twitter.com/prisonculture

http://mariamekaba.com/

http://www.lumpenmagazine.org/a-world-without-prisons-a-conversation-with-mariame-kaba/

Jeremy Scahill on imperialism/warmongering – I feel like he could talk with Joe and not be too academic for him. I couldn't find if he's been on. I feel like he could appeal to the Abby Martin folks.

https://theintercept.com/podcasts/

Maybe he could have someone on to talk about the ERA - he likely thinks it's not needed, but why not push himself to find out why people think it is?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/19/opinion/a-rebuke-to-trump-a-century-in-the-making.html

https://unladylike.co/passera

Susan Abulhawa - author and outspoken critic of Israel

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6692041-mornings-in-jenin

https://twitter.com/sjabulhawa

The New Zealand Mosque Attack and Clinton's Concern Trolling

Chelsea Clinton went to a memorial for NZ victims of the mosque shootings and was confronted by two NYU students, a Palestinian Muslim and her Jewish friend (Rose Asaf and Leen Dweik ) to tell her she wasn't welcome at the event- they aren't comfortable with it- for endorsing the same sort of Islamophobia that inspired the NZ attacks. It seems even the left is accusing the students of both saying Chelsea caused the attacks and for attacking a rich white pregnant lady. How dare they. I know the left is new and divided on support of Palestinians and standing up against Islamophobia, but this seems very backwards.

**********

I posted this on FB mostly to shout my dismay at the void so excuse the tone:

One of the US Democratic Socialist groups on FB posted this, uncharacteristically:

https://hillreporter.com/watch-as-chelsea-clinton-calmly-reacts-to-an-nyu-student-claiming-she-caused-the-new-zealand-massacre-27747

It says Clinton is the epitome of grace under fire, would that we all could be like this rich white lady whose white teary words we quoted extensively! 

Um no. 

Also, Leen Dweik and Rose Asaf were misquoted as accusing Clinton of causing the NZ attacks. False. Read the students' actual account:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/leendweik/why-we-confronted-chelsea-clinton

Don't defend Cheslea Clinton. Are we applauding her not punching someone? She deserved to be spoken to (she was neither yelled at nor attacked) and the young woman did NOT say she caused it but that her attacks against Ilhan Omar (and others) were the same sort of Islamophobia you see leading up to the violent attacks and it needs to stop. 

The Palestinian student felt Clinton's presence was detrimental to the healing process and she shouldn't be there. Valid concern. Clinton did not respect or understand that.

Do not applaud concern trolling.

What white people saw and identified with in Clinton was the confusion and hurt we white people feel for exerting white privilege or trying but failing to be an ally. But that isn't victimhood, it's coming to terms with our privilege, it's growth. Growth is painful, as we see in the video. She should just listen, correct herself if she wants to help, and leave if they want her to. She shouldn't be exalted or pitied. She's no more a victim than Megan McCain.

This person is remembering the victims on twitter:

https://twitter.com/KhaledBeydoun/status/1106746726864637952?s=19

Another truth...

https://twitter.com/LumpyLouish/status/1107009953510932481?s=19

Me and Joe Rogan

Why am I thinking about this? Everything is connected. There was a massacre at a mosque in New Zealand this weekend. At the time, I was gathering info about the Democratic primary nominees – all 50 of them or whatever – so that I can be an informed voter. A name came up that I did not expect: Joe Rogan. What? I have to hear about this guy all the time – in the gym (see photo) every day there's a mention, when my husband comes home from work after having listened to the Alex Jones segment for the 5^th time, I hear about him. He's everywhere. And it doesn't make sense.

Some will frame this as me hating on Joe Rogan or men, and that's fine. I don't hate anyone. I know what fears and dangers I grew up with and still experience – and, further, know that women who are queer or black or disabled face far more dangers than I ever will. I'm concerned about continually giving a platform to the linked ideologies that disrespect and endanger women and minorities that manifest as things like mass shootings of schools to Orlando nightclubs to Charleston churches to Christchurch mosques to the synagogue in Pittsburgh.

In some ways I thought Joe Rogan might be the problem initially, but that's not exactly the case - though he's not blameless! He's a platform and - while he doesn't have an agenda - he definitely chooses guests not to challenge his worldview, but to reinforce it. He's no different than anyone else. He's not enlightened as many weed smoking psychedelic enthusiasts would like to believe. He's not free thinking or open minded or particularly curious. He's a libertarian guy who likes to talk and slip in some feminist bashing and trans denying when he can.

You'll see echoes of him in this episode of Scene On Radio on sexism and sports talk radio where it talks about the toxic masculinity and the way "winning" is used: http://www.sceneonradio.org/episode-57-domination-men-part-11/

Related:

12 part series on sexism - https://www.sceneonradio.org/men/

Additional work by the SceneOn hosts:

14 part series on race - https://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/

The Joe Rogan Experience isn't exactly the root of the bigger sexism and racism problems. However, his show provides quite a few brilliant examples of how these things fester in society. Whether by dog whistle or outright disdain for equality, he shows how letting these guests speak unchallenged provides a platform for poison to spread under the guise of curiosity or no holds barred first amendment rights. (Putting no limits there is kind of like the extreme free market capitalism described in Shock Doctrine that destroys entire countries... Speaking of Naomi Klein, would Joe Rogan ever have her on?)

Apparently he's had a few presidential hopefuls on his show and obviously he did or used to do jiu-jitsu, so our interests converge some. I think of the typical guests on the JRE being mainly conspiracy theorists, quack doctors, and fascists, so I'm not a regular listener or devotee. Joe is a talkative folksy guy and maybe even funny sometimes, but his assessment of who is interesting to talk to is less wide ranging and curious (as advertised) than niche.

Some of the people he considers interesting are Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang, serious (-ish) contenders for a presidential candidate nomination. I paid attention to Tulsi for a hot minute, but ended up seeing too much bigotry to take her seriously. But let's look Mr. Yang, though, because all of the problematic aspects kind of converge here in a special way. He's a prime example of a typical Rogan guest - a guy not terribly objectionable at first blush, but is very definitely nursing some strong latent racism and/or sexism. The fan response is odd (read red flag) - people asking which women candidate they like and a group of dudes says well, actually, they're really excited about Andrew Yang. The fact that bitcoin (unintentional white nationalist dogwhistle?) and being against robots are mentioned more than any real plank in a platform. UBI is mentioned, but not seriously - a living wage or raising the minimum wage isn't in his plan. 

And then I saw it. Richard Spencer LOVES this guy. #YangGang. It all makes sense now. Toxic masculinity and white supremacy working through the patriarchy. All the recent school shootings, the PA synagogue, the black church in SC, the mosque attacker in New Zealand recently who cited Trump's white nationalism as inspiration. It's an old story, but one we all experience in some way. We're just now putting the pieces together. 

Admittedly, I made a big mistake and went on Twitter to interact with a few of Rogan's more misogynistic fans a while ago. Someone in my feed was saying sexist things in connection with a link Rogan tweeted out with no context – “Women, Not Men, Punish Sexualized Women! (With the usual MRA implication - See? Women, not men, are responsible for sexism! Gotcha!). I broke my rule of not looking through the equivalent of comment sections and was made fun of for suggesting they read and wrongly told that I hate men. But even if I had avoided this annoyance, I would still hear about this guy in nearly every BJJ class or gym I've trained in and my own husband bombards me and begs me to listen to this guest he heard on the JRE. There is no avoiding it really and I'm not really asking that you try.

I get that he's just a famous guy who has the ability to get anyone he wants to talk to him live on his show, and so he just has people on who he thinks are interesting or who are comic friends. He has thing for individual freedom, which would be good were it not for how it manifests. It's more of the type of nominal agreement with equality, but if it's racism or sexism that he doesn't experience, then these people are lobbying for special privileges that white men are being deprived of. He has a large platform and he could use it better to learn more about this wider concept of equality that he disagrees with, but instead he chooses the echo chamber. He'll have Jordan Peterson and Dr. Debra Soh on instead of, for example, this author or anyone involved in the new APA guidelines for men and boys that state that the patriarchy and rigid gender binary hurts men.

I suppose I don't expect him to be any sort of leader or moral compass. For some reason he has this reputation for being reasonable and curious with a wide range of interests and guests from all over the political spectrum. This part is extremely odd to me because I don't see the objectivity and reasonableness in Milo Yiannopoulos and Jordan Peterson talking about long debunked Clinton conspiracy theories and all beef diets. He has a lot of comics on and that could be part of the problem – that's almost a subculturethat's as sexist as the fighting scene.

From the guests I've heard of and the lack of certain voices, it gives him a sort of younger, cooler Rush Limbaugh vibe. Not saying he's that bad. I haven't tabulated all the Joe Rogan guests, but I get a certain vibe from Twitter barrages of his fans and even sometimes people I know who listen. My husband loves the guy and I know he's not a crazy sexist jerk – I'm not saying all Joe Rogan fans are this or that. He doesn't listen to the Jordan Peterson or trans bashing ones, for instance. It seems other fans I've spoken to aren't so selective. 

It feels like sexism and racism are too often given a well loved unchallenged platform (I realize he's not a journalist, but it feels irresponsible) on his show. Having racist and sexist guests - even to make fun of them - kind of treats these subjects as a huge joke that everyone knows they don't have to deal with and so the targets of racism and sexism feel a little like our problems are being diminished and made fun of too. Humor can be a helpful tool to deal with bigots and even tragedy, I'll give you that, but handing them a huge platform to let them humiliate themselves sometimes just serves to amplify their message as with Andrew Yang and the boost it gave him. 

What is my objective exactly? I don't want to yell or hate or demand you cancel Joe Rogan or boycott anything. I guess all I want is for you to listen. And maybe if you are so moved, I'd further ask the guys who listen to his show to think critically and speak out against racism and sexism even though it's tough in the gym where toxic masculinity (locker room talk) often prevails. Please take a minute for introspection and think about my (and others') humanity for a minute.

All I ask is that you stop and think. Hopefully you'll be an ally against the hate of white supremacy and misogyny, but I won't demand it. I don't care if you like or listen to Joe Rogan or sexist comedians or crazy Alex Jones; I'll still be your friend. I'm just asking you to think a little about where that leads and what they're connected to and how that affects half of the population or commonly targeted groups. 

Note for those concerned or defensive about "all men": There is in the larger culture and martial arts community, especially if we are to include MMA, a certain tough guy locker room culture, if you want to call it that. Some women join in it and some women ignore it and do what they love despite it, but if you ask women if it exists, they'll absolutely know what you're talking about. None of that takes away from love of the sport or our male training partners, but it's something women grow up with and have to navigate continually, on the mat and off, so I think you might want to hear this even if it makes you uncomfortable.

Some days I want to insist on my humanity and demand equal rights. Some days I just hope you have a mother, daughter, or wife you care about because I don't know how to generate empathy enough to to extend to the whole world.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Update today, March 21, 2019 - Slate had a great article that dives deep on this where I just looked at a little part of it.

https://slate.com/culture/2019/03/joe-rogans-podcast-is-an-essential-platform-for-freethinkers-who-hate-the-left.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Update:  I found this  from exactly a year ago today that explains it quite well:

http://www.mediafiledc.com/time-end-joe-rogan-experience/

Sample interaction:

Some responses unrelated to mine, but that give you an idea of the listeners: