I hoped you taped the conversation you had with him, Graham.
I am unsurprised at him being disingenous. I knew of him solely because he falsely represented himself as an expert on Dr Robert Hare's psychopathy test. (Dr Hare is the one who said Ronson falsely reperesented himself).
At roughly the time this was happening, I was learning about psychopathy myself, and watching lots of videos, which is how I stumbled across his. A psychologist I had been to see for PTSD related to a car accident had asked me to read the book Without Conscience, Psychopaths Among Us. He believed a "friend" of mine might well be a psychopath. Usually psychologists will not agree to the definition "psychopath" preferring narcissistic personality disorder, which has the same basic traits.
Psychologists generally prefer not to believe someone is absolutely unfixable and untreatable, as psychopaths basically are. They offer attempts to engage with and treat people diagnosed with NPD, which is why you won't often hear a psychologist discuss psychopathy. The truth is, trying to treat people without empathy, shame, guilt, or love just trains them how to better psychopaths.
Anyway, I was lucky, as it just happened to be James David Haynes' (the psychologist I visited) area of interest at this time. I wish I had read the book about two years (or twenty years) previously, would have saved me a lot of trouble with my psychopathic "friend" and made some sense of some things going on in the world.
I am not associated with Dr Hare or his work in any way, but highly recommend everyone reads the book.
Seriously, if you haven't read it, you don't understand psychopaths, even if you think you do. Please, do read it.
It could explain a lot about the current situation women find themselves in. That is not to say all transologists are psychopaths, but that it only takes a few with power to cause absolute havoc and destroy progress.
Ronson took the work of an educated scientist and rode his coat tails to make claims that were untrue in order to sell himself as a psychopath expert. Dr Hare says he is not. His "talk" on the subject was one of the last TED talks I subjected myself to, because I realised at that point that anybody could and did say anything they liked in TED talks and they may present themselves as authorities but they often are not. In this "talk", which was grandstanding nonsense in my opinion for the most part, he tries to downplay the reality of and concern of psychopaths amongst us. Having read the book and followed up with further reading, I could clearly see that Ronson's claims could not be true, regarding his expertise and ability to diagnose psychopaths. Only trained mental health practitioners with years of expertise are even allowed to attempt this. He did a workshop on it.
Of course I am not claiming this about Ronson, but it has been pointed out that people who would be diagnosed as psychopaths themselves often make a point of trying to dismiss, downplay or make a joke out of the dangers of psychopaths. They minimise their behaviours and appeal to neurotypical people's sense of empathy to thwart any attempts to reign in the harm psychopaths cause.
This is Dr Robert Hare, an actual expert who has spent his life studying psychopaths and who devised his psychopathy test, speaking up about Ronson's behaviour here: http://www.hare.org/comments/comment3.pdf
So, I remain unsurprised that he downplays the issue of harms caused by people with low empathy.
Indeed. According to the comment by Dr Hare that I linked to, Ronson explicitly used materials he was not given permission to use, transcripts and handouts from his weekend workshop made it into his book without Dr Hare's permission. A weekend workshop in no way makes a person an expert or entitles them in any way to diagnose people. I was really shocked when I saw the video, on the back of having just read the book and read up on Dr Hare. I have avoided Ronson ever since.
Very well said Alice Anne. I don't have anything of substance to add but you have not the proverbial nail on the head.
Regarding the Robert Hare book; I agree its excellent, but would caution people that it's extremely disturbing in places (as you would expect given the subject) - even for folk who have an interest in true crime.
Yes, you're right, it is very disturbing, and I should have given a warning to that. But I think we all need to be forewarned about these sharks that swim amongst us, disguised as dolphins.
Jon won't give up his schtick. He doesn't want to be thought of as judgemental in any way. He keeps his mind so open, he forgets about the importance of boundaries. Any stance on this, or any other issues, would damage his standing as a professional receptacle for the weird and outlandish.
" He doesn't want to be thought of as judgemental in any way. He keeps his mind so open, he forgets about the importance of boundaries. Any stance on this, or any other issues, would damage h)is standing..."
It is this very thing (the rush to not appear to exercise any judgement whatsoever) that truly perplexes me about the ad hoc application of PoMo "theory" in society. If one isn't allowed to "judge", particularly if one can be construed in any way as "kink shaming" (ugh!) - what is the point in having any public opinion on anything whatsoever? It never seems to be thought through to it's logical end, does it?
Indeed! It's the apparent blindness of many a so-called sceptic to this gender woo woo chicanery which has shocked me the most over the past few years. They're all vehemently against religious belief being inserted into public policy - until it comes to this glaringly obvious matter. It's unspeakably disappointing.
So what if you wrote an opinion piece in which you claimed to be against cancel culture some five months ago? You're still an incredible hypocrite, mate.
He did so much on psychopathy and particularly men who hurt women, I thought he was one of the good guys. Just goes to show how scary this whole thing is. Wolves in sheeps' clothing.
Of course he knows the answers to your questions. He’s weak and all too aware of what happens to high-profile dissenters (heretics) - they get cancelled.
In the current slowly shifting mood in this debate I imagine there will be many full-on TWAW adherents starting to feel less sure of their ground...
I wonder was that why Jon Ronson made contact or was he hoping for you to recant? Sorry the reunion was not more fruitful
I think he contacted Graham to write a hit piece on him. Sorry, but that is my genuine belief. I truly hope Graham taped the conversation. At least by posting this article Graham will have taken some of the "gotcha" wind out of Ronson's sails.
PS If you're not already following this young man on Twitter, you should consider it. He makes the fact that we are binary sexual species simple and clear and is endlessly patient at debunking the deliberate misunderstandings, obfuscations and flat out lies the transologists insist upon repeating ad nauseam in an effort to twist simple biological facts into a pretzel. He has a great YouTube channel with simple explanatory videos. The transologists really hate him. https://twitter.com/zaelefty
Not answering those questions is itself an answer. He can't give truthful responses because it goes against what the "acceptable answer" is. So he prefers to remain quiet.
I’ve followed JR’s writing loosely over the years and I’m surprised at the disappointment. He has never shown himself to be empathetic or even having any meaningful views of his own.
Graham, I'm sorry to say that I've only just had the opportunity to listen to the latest "Mess We're In" and I have to ask you: In what sense did Jon Ronson actually mean that Yaniv had been "taken care of"? Could you please, please elaborate on that?
I mean, yeah, vulnerable immigrant women's livelihoods being severely damaged, their emotional suffering and harassment don't matter. Wasting the human rights tribunal's time over and over again, no problem. Yaniv posting one ugly, threatening comment after another, making threats and attacking a reporter - and that's just off the top of my head - and never having been punished for anything.
Sure, he's been taken care of if you don't give a flying fuck about the safety and human rights of half the human race.
I hoped you taped the conversation you had with him, Graham.
I am unsurprised at him being disingenous. I knew of him solely because he falsely represented himself as an expert on Dr Robert Hare's psychopathy test. (Dr Hare is the one who said Ronson falsely reperesented himself).
At roughly the time this was happening, I was learning about psychopathy myself, and watching lots of videos, which is how I stumbled across his. A psychologist I had been to see for PTSD related to a car accident had asked me to read the book Without Conscience, Psychopaths Among Us. He believed a "friend" of mine might well be a psychopath. Usually psychologists will not agree to the definition "psychopath" preferring narcissistic personality disorder, which has the same basic traits.
Psychologists generally prefer not to believe someone is absolutely unfixable and untreatable, as psychopaths basically are. They offer attempts to engage with and treat people diagnosed with NPD, which is why you won't often hear a psychologist discuss psychopathy. The truth is, trying to treat people without empathy, shame, guilt, or love just trains them how to better psychopaths.
Anyway, I was lucky, as it just happened to be James David Haynes' (the psychologist I visited) area of interest at this time. I wish I had read the book about two years (or twenty years) previously, would have saved me a lot of trouble with my psychopathic "friend" and made some sense of some things going on in the world.
I am not associated with Dr Hare or his work in any way, but highly recommend everyone reads the book.
Seriously, if you haven't read it, you don't understand psychopaths, even if you think you do. Please, do read it.
It could explain a lot about the current situation women find themselves in. That is not to say all transologists are psychopaths, but that it only takes a few with power to cause absolute havoc and destroy progress.
https://www.booktopia.com.au/without-conscience-dr-robert-d-hare/book/9781572304512.html
Ronson took the work of an educated scientist and rode his coat tails to make claims that were untrue in order to sell himself as a psychopath expert. Dr Hare says he is not. His "talk" on the subject was one of the last TED talks I subjected myself to, because I realised at that point that anybody could and did say anything they liked in TED talks and they may present themselves as authorities but they often are not. In this "talk", which was grandstanding nonsense in my opinion for the most part, he tries to downplay the reality of and concern of psychopaths amongst us. Having read the book and followed up with further reading, I could clearly see that Ronson's claims could not be true, regarding his expertise and ability to diagnose psychopaths. Only trained mental health practitioners with years of expertise are even allowed to attempt this. He did a workshop on it.
Of course I am not claiming this about Ronson, but it has been pointed out that people who would be diagnosed as psychopaths themselves often make a point of trying to dismiss, downplay or make a joke out of the dangers of psychopaths. They minimise their behaviours and appeal to neurotypical people's sense of empathy to thwart any attempts to reign in the harm psychopaths cause.
This is Dr Robert Hare, an actual expert who has spent his life studying psychopaths and who devised his psychopathy test, speaking up about Ronson's behaviour here: http://www.hare.org/comments/comment3.pdf
So, I remain unsurprised that he downplays the issue of harms caused by people with low empathy.
Thanks for that background and the linked response of Dr Hare to Ronsons' book and media appearances. Sounds like Ronson is quite the fraud.
Indeed. According to the comment by Dr Hare that I linked to, Ronson explicitly used materials he was not given permission to use, transcripts and handouts from his weekend workshop made it into his book without Dr Hare's permission. A weekend workshop in no way makes a person an expert or entitles them in any way to diagnose people. I was really shocked when I saw the video, on the back of having just read the book and read up on Dr Hare. I have avoided Ronson ever since.
Very well said Alice Anne. I don't have anything of substance to add but you have not the proverbial nail on the head.
Regarding the Robert Hare book; I agree its excellent, but would caution people that it's extremely disturbing in places (as you would expect given the subject) - even for folk who have an interest in true crime.
Yes, you're right, it is very disturbing, and I should have given a warning to that. But I think we all need to be forewarned about these sharks that swim amongst us, disguised as dolphins.
*hit, not "not". Thanks autocorrect!
Jon won't give up his schtick. He doesn't want to be thought of as judgemental in any way. He keeps his mind so open, he forgets about the importance of boundaries. Any stance on this, or any other issues, would damage his standing as a professional receptacle for the weird and outlandish.
" He doesn't want to be thought of as judgemental in any way. He keeps his mind so open, he forgets about the importance of boundaries. Any stance on this, or any other issues, would damage h)is standing..."
It is this very thing (the rush to not appear to exercise any judgement whatsoever) that truly perplexes me about the ad hoc application of PoMo "theory" in society. If one isn't allowed to "judge", particularly if one can be construed in any way as "kink shaming" (ugh!) - what is the point in having any public opinion on anything whatsoever? It never seems to be thought through to it's logical end, does it?
Didn't know anything about his stance on this issue until I read that. I'm actually really saddened by it. I used to like him.
I was absolutely stunned when he weighed in. He's supposed to be a sceptic!
Indeed! It's the apparent blindness of many a so-called sceptic to this gender woo woo chicanery which has shocked me the most over the past few years. They're all vehemently against religious belief being inserted into public policy - until it comes to this glaringly obvious matter. It's unspeakably disappointing.
So what if you wrote an opinion piece in which you claimed to be against cancel culture some five months ago? You're still an incredible hypocrite, mate.
He did so much on psychopathy and particularly men who hurt women, I thought he was one of the good guys. Just goes to show how scary this whole thing is. Wolves in sheeps' clothing.
Thank you for sharing this Graham. It’s hard to lose a friend.
Of course he knows the answers to your questions. He’s weak and all too aware of what happens to high-profile dissenters (heretics) - they get cancelled.
In the current slowly shifting mood in this debate I imagine there will be many full-on TWAW adherents starting to feel less sure of their ground...
I wonder was that why Jon Ronson made contact or was he hoping for you to recant? Sorry the reunion was not more fruitful
I think he contacted Graham to write a hit piece on him. Sorry, but that is my genuine belief. I truly hope Graham taped the conversation. At least by posting this article Graham will have taken some of the "gotcha" wind out of Ronson's sails.
Urgh, this is SO disappointing and completely completely sickening. Used to be a big fan of JR, but not any more. Spinelessness of the highest order.
PS If you're not already following this young man on Twitter, you should consider it. He makes the fact that we are binary sexual species simple and clear and is endlessly patient at debunking the deliberate misunderstandings, obfuscations and flat out lies the transologists insist upon repeating ad nauseam in an effort to twist simple biological facts into a pretzel. He has a great YouTube channel with simple explanatory videos. The transologists really hate him. https://twitter.com/zaelefty
Not answering those questions is itself an answer. He can't give truthful responses because it goes against what the "acceptable answer" is. So he prefers to remain quiet.
I’ve followed JR’s writing loosely over the years and I’m surprised at the disappointment. He has never shown himself to be empathetic or even having any meaningful views of his own.
Graham, I'm sorry to say that I've only just had the opportunity to listen to the latest "Mess We're In" and I have to ask you: In what sense did Jon Ronson actually mean that Yaniv had been "taken care of"? Could you please, please elaborate on that?
In the sense that he lost his (first) case. jon thought that sorted he whole thing out
Never mind that he's at it again with frivolous demands that women wax his balls. https://www.rebelnews.com/jonathan_yaniv_rejected_from_ladies_beauty_pageant_alleges_injury_to_his_dignity
I mean, yeah, vulnerable immigrant women's livelihoods being severely damaged, their emotional suffering and harassment don't matter. Wasting the human rights tribunal's time over and over again, no problem. Yaniv posting one ugly, threatening comment after another, making threats and attacking a reporter - and that's just off the top of my head - and never having been punished for anything.
Sure, he's been taken care of if you don't give a flying fuck about the safety and human rights of half the human race.