So I never really got this one. It seems like she is a polarizing figure here, but why is that? Also, what's the joke behind the "amber" bot?
So I never really got this one. It seems like she is a polarizing figure here, but why is that? Also, what's the joke behind the "amber" bot?
Pretty sure it's because her takes are often the hottest, most controversial takes, and because of that, mentioning Amber (Amber) in any post became a meme in and of itself. I think.
Ah, ok. Can you give me an example of something she said that rustled feathers? Just trying to put things into context
About a month ago she went off on the idiots who thought COVID-19 was airborne. They were overreacting like they do to everything regarding it. It being airborne was one of the big discoveries of the month prior and her bad take may as well been anti-masker shit.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is the pattern I've seen the most of. She'll talk about touchy idpol topics without hesitation -- and usually in a way that's far from unreasonable -- and then people will play telephone with it until it turns into a vague accusation of her being bigoted somehow.
So are Amber stans just gonna pretend ep 435 never happened? lol that's fuckin hilarious
Amber.
This doesn't exist, at least not in a place where everyone routinely jokes about not even listening to the podcast. No idea what episode you're referring to, either, or what supposedly irredeemable thing she said on it.
If there's anything of value to be mined from a who-fucking-cares-about-this internet drama, it's that accusations aimed at anyone even broadly on the left should at the very least be specific.
Amber stans absolutely do exist, I should know, I was one of them, and I literally wrote Episode 435 so what do you mean "what episode I'm referring too?" and if you're so concerned with the non-"specificity" of accusations against left figures then maybe you should take a listen to the episode and judge for yourself instead of just reflexively defending some rich cocaine-addled hipster with dogshit politics
Amber.
Vague, ill-defined accusations of misconduct are cop shit. Period, full stop.
If someone's job was to wreck leftist groups, whisper campaigns like that would be high on their list. Anyone making such accusations should be aggressively pressed to state specifically what the problem conduct is, and should be shouted down if they keep reverting back to "no trust me bro it's really bad you wouldn't even believe it."
That conveys near zero information about what the supposed misconduct is. It doesn't even tell you where to find it; it just tells you where to start looking -- it's "sift through this 90-minute audio recording with no transcript for... something; trust me bro, it's there and you'll know it when you hear it."
A specific accusation would be "she said X, which you can find here at Y, and that's bad because Z." "Episode 435" is about half of that middle part, and the number alone doesn't even clue you in to the general topic of the episode.
Here's an example: "Felix said he'd have sex with his clone, which you can find in the first maybe 20 minutes of episode [whatever number, or give the topic], which is bad because being gay with your clone is a discount Cumtown bit." That's fine; vague accusations like "Felix has said some sus stuff about gay sex" is not.
Amber.
it isn't a joke, the podcast is genuinely shit and i do not understand why anyone would listen to it
The point is that there's really no one here worth calling an Amber "stan," and the fewer people who listen to the podcast the more true that becomes.
Amber.
Smoking is cool and good and you should blow secondhand smoke into baby faces or something.
How could anyone think this is a serious take?
https://twitter.com/cenkuygur/status/1333172294626074627?s=19
Same kind of people who think this tweet is 100% heartfelt and sincere.
She's being hyperbolic but she's also being serious.
If that's the interpretation, what's there to be upset about?
The obliviously hyperbolic bit (blow smoke in a kid's face) is a joke, and whatever your impression of the serious part is (probably something like "no one likes a Puritanical anti-intoxicant scold") isn't so far out in left field that anyone should have a real issue with it.
I thought it was pretty clear she was gainsaying secondhand smoke concerns, and while she's being hyperbolic about intentionally exposing babies, she also thinks she should be able to smoke where-ever she likes regardless of what anyone of the scolds think.
That's might not be unambiguously the case, but it does fit with her aloof misanthrope aesthetic.
This seems like reading the worst possible intentions into a statement that we both agree was not meant to be 100% serious.
I'm not doing exegesis here, I don't even remember exactly what was said and I'm not going to do the legwork to dig up the quote verbatim. I'm just reporting what I took away from the exchange as a possible explanation to the OP's question.
My friends also tell me they don't know when I'm being serious about things or not as well because I also have a lot of fun with post-irony and meta-irony, but I also keep it relatively anodyne, as opposed to her aloof misanthropy.
yikes
deleted by creator
she said the police aren't racist because there are black cops
Amber.
Amber
Amber.
Amber
Amber.
Amber
Amber.
Amber