I got my two new podcast hosts, Jesse and Katie, to share how the ‘real’ Katie and Jesse have spent the last few years throwing braver people under the bus.
I think this is unfair. After Herzog’s 2017 article in the Stranger, apparently TRAs put up defamatory posters about her all over Seattle and she was scared of being attacked. So it’s not like she hasn’t stuck her neck out. Just because they disagreed with your “male lesbian” prank (which I thought was great incidentally) isn’t a good reason to go on the warpath and stoke some kind of feud with them. It would be better if you reserved your criticism for the TRAs.
This reminds me of when KJK was mocking Stella O’Malley. I don’t like it.
Oh dear. As a Barpod primo and a subscriber over here, too, there's enough room in a cold little terfy heart for you all. I'm gonna take a pass on this one, though.
Same, as a Primo and an admirer of Graham's campaigning on this issue this antagonism always made me sad. I get it, but still. I listened to 30 secs just to hear the AI's attempt and hilariously the AI woman's voice is about two octaves higher than Katie's and the AI man is two octaves lower than Jesse!
Ah, is this one of those ChatGP things? My husband did one about himself and it was quite good and rather sweet. He did a rather spectacular thing in his youth and made history in a small sector and the podcast brought that whole episode in our lives to light.
This sort of thing is why I stopped being a paid supporter of GL.
This ‘podcast’ is breathtakingly hypocritical, making the case for spaces in which nuanced debate can happen on controversial issues, but then indulging in ad hominem attacks on people whose main crime seems to be not to want to follow GL down every single rabbit hole he has chosen to descend.
WTF was that...? i see comments here about AI- could you please explain at the start, what this item is going to be. Including who Katie and Jesse are, and what is your realtionship with them... (I think maybe you assume too much, about what we might know..?)
Sorry, I don’t understand this podcast. Who’s talking? Are they reading a script? Why are the voices so annoying? I’m sorry to say I’m none the wiser of anything having listened to this podcast. Ch
This is amazing, Glinner, and what AI should be for. I hope the two "real" twits (is it okay to call them that?) would listen to this. Can you email it to them? Although I think J. Singal has seen the light somewhat and may be getting some flack for it, has he ever even slightly apologized to those he harmed with his BS? And I don't know what Katie's up to now, but for news about the gender lunacy, you, and JL, et al., are my go-to journalists! Thanks 👍🏼❤️
This is SO much better than the actual Jesse and Katie it's a little discombobulating. I feel a little like Barney,"with the goo-goo-googly eyes .. " ( except it's my ears.)
I never knew that Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal were critical of Graham. I read Jesse and Katie occasionally and thought that they were on the same side about protecting women and girls. Never heard of these two Katie and Jesse but found it interesting.
i just saw this, about copyright and music, but the same concerns will apply to all areas of creativity…. It reminded me of this post. Its pretty depressing but worth a watch.
I was initially put off by everything about this.... I'm no fan of AI and I dislike the scene setting in the intro text (it's a bit ironically bus-throwy!).... but, I've just listened to all of it and it goes to some fantastic and interesting places. Hats off to you for doing something completely different. I hope that people listen to this with an open mind. It's only ~17 minutes of audio but its twists and turns leave a longer impression.
Though not quite sure -- at least without spending some time reading the transcript -- exactly what is the substance behind your "throwing braver people under the bus" -- speaking of 1984 and Room 101, 1066 numerology and all that -- but there's probably some justification for the accusation.
Singal at least has made some valid criticisms of "gender ideology", but still some reason to think he's more or a grifter than not. He had asked for emails about his planned book on the "youth gender medicine debate" -- which I had dutifully responded to but received only crickets -- and "tumbling tumbleweeds" -- in response. I may publish it as an open letter:
Sadly more than a few who are ostensibly on "our side" are about as narrow-minded and dogmatic as those on the other one, as much engaged in self-aggrandizement rather than in the somewhat more noble cause of bringing enlightenment to the masses.
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” Eric Hoffer, The Temper of Our Time
More than few of "our tribe" in that boat. I periodically wonder what will happen if and when "gender ideology" is finally shown to be no more than quack medicine and a medical scandal. You presumably have something else to go back to but for many people it's their bread and butter, what they've bet the farm on -- and much of their integrity. Upton Sinclair:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
For example, Andrew Doyle once argued, quite reasonably, that "one of the most chilling aspects of the woke ideology" was "the sheer certainty of its adherents" -- outright zealotry:
Yet he blocked and banned me for challenging his rather clueless misunderstandings about what it takes to qualify as male and female, one of the central points in your Katie and Jessie transcript. The smoking guns -- in living colour:
And your good buddy "Arty Morty" is about in the same boat -- he too has blocked and banned me for some "inconvenient truths". Though he too -- like Singal and Doyle -- often makes some reasonable arguments. Even if he's something of a plagiarist, being charitable -- I kind of expect he got his ideas about Lysenkoism and natural kinds from spelunking about in my Substack as I've been beavering away on those topics long before he posted anything on them. Not that he hasn't added some useful or flagrantly erroneous, if long-winded, elaborations.
But, for example, this post of his, which you had restacked, and this bit in particular:
"... instead of the hard, unchangeable fact of our sex, which is fixed from the moment the very first cell that multiplies every one of us into existence — the egg — fuses with a sperm. Our sex is not a drop-down menu selection; it is infused into each and every cell of each and every one of our bodies."
What unmitigated horse shit -- being charitable. Though he's more or less in good company as Helen Joyce, Yale, and the NCBI likewise cluelessly insist that "every cell has a sex" -- barking mad, unscientific and quite anti-scientific claptrap:
What an ignoramus, a scientific illiterate -- being charitable. Rather surprising for someone supposedly trained as a mathematician.
Standard biological definitions stipulate that to have a sex is to have functional gonads of either of two types, those with neither being, ipso facto, sexless. A rather "unpalatable" bit of science for many people. And who get quite "offended" when their noses are rubbed in those brute facts. Stephen Fry:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what.' ..."
They have their moments -- as the Desiderata put it, many strive for high ideals.
But many hardly qualify as "human" -- "forgive them lord, they know not what they do". Apropos of which, you may wish to take a gander at this classic from Philip Wylie, "Generation of Vipers":
Wylie: "I have said that we civilized men are still medieval—cruel bumpkins and dancing savages. I would like to elucidate that point, first, because no other can be made until it is somewhat accepted."
For a variation on that theme, see Mark Twain's "Corn-pone opinions":
Twain: "Men think they think upon great political questions, and they do; but they think with their party, not independently; they read its literature, but not that of the other side; they arrive at convictions, but they are drawn from a partial view of the matter in hand and are of no particular value. They swarm with their party, they feel with their party, they are happy in their party's approval; and where the party leads they will follow, whether for right and honor, or through blood and dirt and a mush of mutilated morals. ....
We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking. And out of it we get an aggregation which we consider a boon. Its name is Public Opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles everything. Some think it the Voice of God."
And, speaking of thinking versus feeling, see Carl Sagan to round out a trio of prophets -- words of written on subway walls and tenement halls:
Sagan: "I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; ... when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness."
I think this is unfair. After Herzog’s 2017 article in the Stranger, apparently TRAs put up defamatory posters about her all over Seattle and she was scared of being attacked. So it’s not like she hasn’t stuck her neck out. Just because they disagreed with your “male lesbian” prank (which I thought was great incidentally) isn’t a good reason to go on the warpath and stoke some kind of feud with them. It would be better if you reserved your criticism for the TRAs.
This reminds me of when KJK was mocking Stella O’Malley. I don’t like it.
Oh dear. As a Barpod primo and a subscriber over here, too, there's enough room in a cold little terfy heart for you all. I'm gonna take a pass on this one, though.
Same, as a Primo and an admirer of Graham's campaigning on this issue this antagonism always made me sad. I get it, but still. I listened to 30 secs just to hear the AI's attempt and hilariously the AI woman's voice is about two octaves higher than Katie's and the AI man is two octaves lower than Jesse!
I'm for it.
Even if AI creeps me out.
Okay.
i like the last line… thats what we’ve tried to do here…. think. bloody computers taking all our shit. I’m a right luddit i’d put them all in the bin.
Ah, is this one of those ChatGP things? My husband did one about himself and it was quite good and rather sweet. He did a rather spectacular thing in his youth and made history in a small sector and the podcast brought that whole episode in our lives to light.
My husband has corrected me. It's not ChatGPT, it's Google notebook LM. Ok, whatevs, dear 🙄
This sort of thing is why I stopped being a paid supporter of GL.
This ‘podcast’ is breathtakingly hypocritical, making the case for spaces in which nuanced debate can happen on controversial issues, but then indulging in ad hominem attacks on people whose main crime seems to be not to want to follow GL down every single rabbit hole he has chosen to descend.
WTF was that...? i see comments here about AI- could you please explain at the start, what this item is going to be. Including who Katie and Jesse are, and what is your realtionship with them... (I think maybe you assume too much, about what we might know..?)
Creepy!!
Sorry, I don’t understand this podcast. Who’s talking? Are they reading a script? Why are the voices so annoying? I’m sorry to say I’m none the wiser of anything having listened to this podcast. Ch
Me too- what's going on here??
This is amazing, Glinner, and what AI should be for. I hope the two "real" twits (is it okay to call them that?) would listen to this. Can you email it to them? Although I think J. Singal has seen the light somewhat and may be getting some flack for it, has he ever even slightly apologized to those he harmed with his BS? And I don't know what Katie's up to now, but for news about the gender lunacy, you, and JL, et al., are my go-to journalists! Thanks 👍🏼❤️
Moss? Moss? Is that you, Moss?
This is SO much better than the actual Jesse and Katie it's a little discombobulating. I feel a little like Barney,"with the goo-goo-googly eyes .. " ( except it's my ears.)
Hilarious, you are the best, for sure, right?
I never knew that Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal were critical of Graham. I read Jesse and Katie occasionally and thought that they were on the same side about protecting women and girls. Never heard of these two Katie and Jesse but found it interesting.
They were into covering all the bases, and their asses, first and last.
i just saw this, about copyright and music, but the same concerns will apply to all areas of creativity…. It reminded me of this post. Its pretty depressing but worth a watch.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LrkAORPiaEA
I was initially put off by everything about this.... I'm no fan of AI and I dislike the scene setting in the intro text (it's a bit ironically bus-throwy!).... but, I've just listened to all of it and it goes to some fantastic and interesting places. Hats off to you for doing something completely different. I hope that people listen to this with an open mind. It's only ~17 minutes of audio but its twists and turns leave a longer impression.
LoL. Big One. 😉🙂
Though not quite sure -- at least without spending some time reading the transcript -- exactly what is the substance behind your "throwing braver people under the bus" -- speaking of 1984 and Room 101, 1066 numerology and all that -- but there's probably some justification for the accusation.
Singal at least has made some valid criticisms of "gender ideology", but still some reason to think he's more or a grifter than not. He had asked for emails about his planned book on the "youth gender medicine debate" -- which I had dutifully responded to but received only crickets -- and "tumbling tumbleweeds" -- in response. I may publish it as an open letter:
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/im-writing-another-book
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/its-almost-2024-and-doctors-are-still
Not terribly impressed, particularly after I'd subscribed there for a month or two.
Not only did they come after me, they came after Mia Hughes who wrote the WPATH Files. They really do suck as people.
Sadly more than a few who are ostensibly on "our side" are about as narrow-minded and dogmatic as those on the other one, as much engaged in self-aggrandizement rather than in the somewhat more noble cause of bringing enlightenment to the masses.
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” Eric Hoffer, The Temper of Our Time
More than few of "our tribe" in that boat. I periodically wonder what will happen if and when "gender ideology" is finally shown to be no more than quack medicine and a medical scandal. You presumably have something else to go back to but for many people it's their bread and butter, what they've bet the farm on -- and much of their integrity. Upton Sinclair:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
For example, Andrew Doyle once argued, quite reasonably, that "one of the most chilling aspects of the woke ideology" was "the sheer certainty of its adherents" -- outright zealotry:
https://x.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1208423606977515520
Yet he blocked and banned me for challenging his rather clueless misunderstandings about what it takes to qualify as male and female, one of the central points in your Katie and Jessie transcript. The smoking guns -- in living colour:
https://www.andrewdoyle.org/p/what-has-gender-identity-got-to-do
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r91LM72izpD8sYqSzvFK0C2L3nIB_Nq2/view?usp=drive_link
And your good buddy "Arty Morty" is about in the same boat -- he too has blocked and banned me for some "inconvenient truths". Though he too -- like Singal and Doyle -- often makes some reasonable arguments. Even if he's something of a plagiarist, being charitable -- I kind of expect he got his ideas about Lysenkoism and natural kinds from spelunking about in my Substack as I've been beavering away on those topics long before he posted anything on them. Not that he hasn't added some useful or flagrantly erroneous, if long-winded, elaborations.
But, for example, this post of his, which you had restacked, and this bit in particular:
"... instead of the hard, unchangeable fact of our sex, which is fixed from the moment the very first cell that multiplies every one of us into existence — the egg — fuses with a sperm. Our sex is not a drop-down menu selection; it is infused into each and every cell of each and every one of our bodies."
https://artymorty.substack.com/p/there-are-no-trans-kids-only-kids
What unmitigated horse shit -- being charitable. Though he's more or less in good company as Helen Joyce, Yale, and the NCBI likewise cluelessly insist that "every cell has a sex" -- barking mad, unscientific and quite anti-scientific claptrap:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222291/
https://medicine.yale.edu/ycci/news-article/every-cell-has-a-sex-x-and-y-and-the-future-of-health-care/
Joyce:: "And if you're a mammal every part of your body is female ... but you know my hands are female, my jaw is female ..."
https://substack.com/@humanuseofhumanbeings/note/c-21582743
What an ignoramus, a scientific illiterate -- being charitable. Rather surprising for someone supposedly trained as a mathematician.
Standard biological definitions stipulate that to have a sex is to have functional gonads of either of two types, those with neither being, ipso facto, sexless. A rather "unpalatable" bit of science for many people. And who get quite "offended" when their noses are rubbed in those brute facts. Stephen Fry:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what.' ..."
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/706825-it-s-now-very-common-to-hear-people-say-i-m-rather
You seem a bit disillusioned with people Steersman. You don’t like ‘em very much?
They have their moments -- as the Desiderata put it, many strive for high ideals.
But many hardly qualify as "human" -- "forgive them lord, they know not what they do". Apropos of which, you may wish to take a gander at this classic from Philip Wylie, "Generation of Vipers":
Wylie: "I have said that we civilized men are still medieval—cruel bumpkins and dancing savages. I would like to elucidate that point, first, because no other can be made until it is somewhat accepted."
https://vultureofcritique.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/philip-wylie-generation-of-vipers.pdf
For a variation on that theme, see Mark Twain's "Corn-pone opinions":
Twain: "Men think they think upon great political questions, and they do; but they think with their party, not independently; they read its literature, but not that of the other side; they arrive at convictions, but they are drawn from a partial view of the matter in hand and are of no particular value. They swarm with their party, they feel with their party, they are happy in their party's approval; and where the party leads they will follow, whether for right and honor, or through blood and dirt and a mush of mutilated morals. ....
We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking. And out of it we get an aggregation which we consider a boon. Its name is Public Opinion. It is held in reverence. It settles everything. Some think it the Voice of God."
https://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html
And, speaking of thinking versus feeling, see Carl Sagan to round out a trio of prophets -- words of written on subway walls and tenement halls:
Sagan: "I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; ... when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness."
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan#The_Demon-Haunted_World_:_Science_as_a_Candle_in_the_Dark_(1995)