Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Destiny: Right to Reply (Patreon)

Published:
2024-05-22 07:17:58
Edited:
2024-05-22 19:45:32
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Downloads

  • Destiny Interview PF.mp3

Some files exceed the archive size limit and weren't saved: 1 file. Please note these limits are in place to keep this site running long term, without costing a fortune. You can favorite the creator though, certain milestones increase the limit.

Content

Join Matt and Chris as they dive into the world of debates and online personas with the ever-controversial streamer, Destiny (Steven Bonnell). We discuss our coverage a little bit but mostly broader topics including the value of 'debate porn', the role of edginess & Twitter bomb-throwing, reality TV orbiter drama, and the perils of hero worship and parasocial relationships. As you might anticipate we also discuss various 'hot-button' issues including Destiny's involvement in Israel-Palestine discourse, the ethics of engaging with extremists, and whether Destiny genuinely was arguing for the right to murder the DDoS kid. Additionally, we explore media literacy, the challenges of navigating online discourse, and strategies for laypeople to better engage with research.

Links

Our Decoding episode on Destiny

Destiny's Gurometer Episode

Destiny's Positions as summarised on his Wiki

Files

Comments

Oliver G.

Excited for this one!!

RipleyV

Yes! Finally, my terminally-online, pathetically parasocial dreams have come true

RareTripleBait

Please, someone call Tim Apple. 42 minutes and it‘s still not available in my podcatcher 😭😭 I need to download it for my bus ride later

Dr Badmouth

Chris, do you really believe your criticism of Sam on Jordan Peterson's show avoiding certain takes as if to avoid audience Pushback when their most famous conversations are their disagreements? It was also JP's show and he gets to drive the conversation. JP had destiny on specifically to disagree like JP & Sam's earlier conversations.

alice

Lol sweet. Already know this episode is going be hilarious

Andy First

Was really hoping you’d bring up his potential endorsements of Peter Boghossian, Lex Friedman, Dr. K. But overall, a good convo

Rufus Evans

Up there for destiny interviews I would say. Well done.

Moe's

fucking love this right to reply shit, really welcoming and interesting :D

Oliver G.

Absolute cowards! Reserving the bad food takes for the last minute. Your decoding skills are being squandered damn it, hold him to account! 😤

Kyle Dun

Interesting opening. The boys haven't really said much about Sam following his second right time reply but it sounds like they have been put off by him all the more after their second interaction lol.

Erin

The tree growing analogy was great

Erin

Thank you for bringing up the legitimising people they debate like Andrew Tate, I mean sometimes these guys seem to forget that they're talking to literal Nazis and sex traffickers

Erin

The practice of not stopping people shoplifting in America is for the safety of the staff, not the robber

collapsing

Destiny tbf is fairly impressive in this- listens, answers, but the mode switch , while being consistent as you’ve established, is quite the feature. He may be a new form…

Tom

He’s a walking contradiction. I can’t believe I’m saying this but JP is right about him. He just wants to be right. Goes on long tangents to explain his actions but then qualifies it with “yeah I’m probably wrong”. Like a horrible boss he says he wants to cultivate a accountable society but blocks so many people in his community for arguing with him. I’m only one subscriber but I had to unsubscribe after the Anna drama. That girl was legitimately mentally ill and any reasonable person would have ignored her bc she has no credibility. Instead he stalked her streaks then slept with her months later. I agree with a lot of his politics but he’s clearly a sociopath who knows how to use fake humility to sound reasonable

Tomasz Kulesza

great stuff guys ❤️ it was and is my dream crossover

Tomek Krzesiński

This was an interesting Destiny fan interview and, I'm sorry to say, an embarrassing Decoding The Gurus one. Literally every single criticism that you raised was reframed positively and left uncontested. I would have said you pulled a Lex Fridman, but his episode with Destiny makes him seem like a BBC interviewer in comparison. His usage of the n-word in public was reframed as conditioning his audience to become desensitized to virtue signaling. Left uncontested. Vindictive behavior where he sexually smears his opponent's girlfriend publicly was reframed as him actually being a victim for being criticized for fighting back. Uncontested. Sleeping with fans is not actually problematic because the fans will understand his lifestyle better than outside people will, which is better for the relationship. Uncontested. The absolute icing on the cake, and something that should be an episode of someone else's decoding of the gurus itself, is the segment about the DDOS kid. You ask him whether his stance is genuine or just edge-lording for the sake of edge-lording. He gives you a long non-answer, but he finally admits, 'my opinions are genuine.' This is an influential public figure justifying the murder of a teenager and his father. Matt says he 'gets the argument' and he's 'not going to litigate it,' and that it's 'a fun, philosophical question.' Chris, maybe you're enamored by his charisma, maybe you didn't catch it the first time, but you ignore his admission and try to give him a way out - you say that he should have said he just got carried away trying to justify it. Chris: That was just blowing off steam, right? Destiny: I don't know what the rule of the principle should be, yeah, I don't have that feeling that it was just an emotional reaction, fuck those guys. Chris starts laughing like a schoolgirl. Sorry to be repetitive, but again - influential public figure justifying the murder of a child and his father for cutting off his internet connection. Turned it into one big joke. Absolutely embarrassing. I understand the counterargument is that just because there's no back and forth doesn't imply endorsement, but there is absolutely no shot you would leave such contentious claims without comment if it was Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate. Zero chance. I've seen you damning takes/situations that are 10x less extreme. There is a moment in the conversation where you express surprise that so many fans copy his arguments for his most extreme takes verbatim. I think what is interesting is that his decoding episode was met with literally universal praise from the very same community. Maybe that's a sign you've become a bit too much of a fan yourself?

Ymirsdreams

Something I really appreciate about the right2reply episodes so far is that they're not about what, in the correct country, we call 'doing a Paxman', it's about giving the guest enough rope to either tightwire or ariel. Edit: Mad Max and Mad Max 2 have some really interesting underlying sexual politics in them that don't get mentioned enough. I think the whole franchise does. All very freudian.

Trees

Maybe it's a quibble when Destiny was also literally justifying murder, but I took exception to his comment about how lay people should evaluate research literature. Reading just abstracts and conclusions will get you hoodwinked, even if you're only looking at "landmark" papers. The average Destiny fan would be much better off taking 15-20 hours to learn basic statistical methodology. They clearly have the time. If you do this, then you can read the abstract and look at results tables and generally decide if a study is worth its salt. It is not that uncommon for abstracts(and conclusions) to completely misrepresent results. I think this was the case with one of the Ivermectin papers Brett would throw around, and Jesse Singal has basically made a living off calling it out on various controversial topics. It even happens with regularity in humdrum clinical research Twitter doesn't care about. So that directly contradicts Destiny's other point about how citing a table in a paper to critique the paper is a red flag. I agree with the more general point that Chris made against cherry picking statements from long papers, but critiquing methodology or the connection between results and conclusion is crucial to evaluating research. It doesn't take that much knowledge of statistics to be able to do this for a large swath of social science and clinical research. Plenty of influencers do it poorly, sure, but I think the answer is for more people to learn some basic stats.

not important

Destiny Fan here, overall I was happy with your portrayal of both Destiny's talents and faults. You guys seem to genuinely try to get into the mind of the people you research. Keep it up

online online

Will the video version be released at some point?

Erik Fast

I’ve never heard any actual Destiny content, just the two DTG episodes. Other than his occasional extreme opinions and outbursts, I probably align 90% with him politically but he does display some guruish tendencies. My biggest problem with him is his use of “both sides” rhetoric and the preempting of criticism. He can sound reasonable and nuanced when he puts an argument from both sides, but he's not actually saying why his view is the right one. He will acknowledge a potential criticism without actually addressing it, but it's easy to think that he addressed it due to the way he frames it. I think you guys pointed this out way back in the Contrapoints episode and noted that it's a common tactic in left-leaning circles. He did it several times in this episode but you guys either didn't notice it or just let it slide. Still an entertaining episode overall.

Oliver G.

To everyone perceiving DtG as being biased in favor of Destiny... Do you find them to be more objective in their other decodings? Do other 3rd party observers often also appear biased in favor of Destiny? Does this discrepancy keep presenting itself? If you answer yes to all these, consider that your own perspective might be off.

Monica B.

I love the right to reply episodes! I’m not done with the episode yet, but still don’t think destiny (who I had never heard of before your episode) is for me…the ego on that guy is W I L D. He’s smart and might be fun to chat with one on one, but all I could imagine was being a member of his family and having to deal with him at like, dinner, or a holiday. Maybe it’s just my big sarcastic family, but the eye rolling would cause injuries. Probably better than having to be in his entourage, though, and privy to his whims and his believing he’s super unique and the most interesting guy on the planet. And the casual sexism woven through everything—oof. Sadly not as unusual as it should be, of course, in a ‘does the fish know its in water’ kind of way

Mike Nelson

Like the rest of the season of streamers people covered, this is the only two times I've heard any of Destiny's content, and I hope it is the last two times. Dude Bro culture regardless of their politics just isn't for me.

Linda Sears

I definitely prefer Destiny on podcast compared to Destiny on stream. I admire that he has thought about what he is doing and how to be better. He’s not my thing, but I can see why others like him.

Stefan Rabenstein

Haven't watched yet, but Right to Reply is an awesome concept almost nobody does, so you deserve my 2 bucks for the two episodes I watched at very least. Not sure if I will stick around.

Jesse Rimler

Great talk, but: authentic Mexican food is the greatest cuisine and real deal guacamole w fresh tortillas is better than steak, sorry.

James Carr

I like Destiny most of the time and politically I'm mostly aligned with him. I do hope he loses his need for edginess. Whether it's his attacks on Twitter or his need to argue that calling someone a generic slur is worse than casual non-pejorative usage of the n-word, I don't find those to be useful in "truth-seeking". For instance, I've also seen him argue that it's not a problem that he tells people to kill themselves. These are such self-defeating topics to defend, they're optically bad, and they poison the discourse. But he also spends much of his life on camera, and I can't pretend if you recorded me all day, everything I said would be perfectly sane and justified.

Tree

I was expecting to hate this is guy. But after the decoding, and more so after this, I really quite like him. Dont agree on everything, but really like his attitude.