I wouldn't disagree. He's done some awful stuff.
That I don't agree with.
There's no strict qualification requirement, clearly.
But obviously one route in would be as a respected ex-player and his point is that players who have played the male game at the elite level are better qualified to give expert insight on the male game than their female equivalents.
tbf he also calls out that there are plenty of poor quality male commentators/pundits too.
He favours female commentators/pundits proving their chops covering female games before allowing the cream to rise to the top and for some of those to get a shot at plying their trade in the male game.
Some more qualified / able male candidates may lose out on a job opportunity - either at the inteview or pre-interview stage. It's a zero sum game.
And if less able people are in those roles then the listening public get a lower quality product.
Neither are apocalyptical outcomes, but neither are positive either.
I think he's made it clear that he opposes it because it's not a meritocracy.
(...whether that's his real view, or only reason, is up for debate of course)
He does offer some rationale to support his views.
Did you listen to the interview?
(...as I said, his persona in the interview was at odds with much of his Twitter bile)
Not sure I agree. There's a rich history of comedians commenting on social topics in a way that's both insightful and entertaining - Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, Richard Pryor & Bill Hicks among others.
Triggernometry put out some good content and are a good antidote to overly woke content elsewhere. I don't agree with all their views and I'm not a fan of every guest they have on but they at least seem to approach topics with an open mind and are willing to skewer some sacred cows from time to time.
Kisin is Russian and Foster is half-Venezualan, so their backgrounds can influence the way they tackle topics. Kisin was particularly insightful in the early stages of the Ukraine war, for example.
