“In my opinion” is problematic. It’s used as a disclaimer by provocateurs. No, you know what you said; you meant to provoke. We’ve lost the meaning of “in my opinion,” which got weighed down by “alternative facts.” It’s exhausting to think about: the verbal gymnastics afforded to those who espouse recreationally cruel statements.
This week in particular: Megyn Kelly and Stephen A. Smith.
She did it again. Can this woman shut up? Megyn Kelly, down to the front and out the door. I mean, it’s one thing to offer varying viewpoints, to be the provocateur, if you will, but this needs to stop.
“This is probably a first for her,” Kelly said. “She’s probably thrilled to be so admired because she clearly didn’t grow up the incredibly beautiful one. I’m not trying to be insulting.”
She went on, “Why can’t we account for that possibility— that the girl who was never the most sought after suddenly had four guys who wanted to have *** with her, and she counted this, yeah, in her inebriated state, as a win, and liked the feeling of being sexy and desired and wanted? It happens. Sorry, it does. And that’s why she kept saying yes. Why do we have to go right to, ‘She’s a victim.'”
Does she speak for all women? No, of course not. She emits something more dangerous into the ether. With a public platform, she sets a stage.
Then there is Stephen A. Smith, who this week mocked Lane Johnson, who retired from the NFL for mental health reasons. Smith was brutal!
“You know what, ‘I’m going to call it quits.’ Now, he calls it quits. Not before the season. Not in the offseason. No, no, no. After being subjected to this, he said, ‘Life is a little bit too short. I need to focus on’ — what did he say? His mental health? Am I making it up? Did he say that? Four games into the 2026 season, a dude that has been in the league forever, sits back and says, ‘I need to focus on my mental health.’ As an offensive tackle, lord, you know it is bad.”
The disclaimer, “it’s my opinion,” “it was not my intent”… oh, and lest we forget, Stephen A. Smith did a public service announcement for mental health, and Megyn Kelly sued Fox News for sexual harassment.
Look, people are free to express thoughts. At the same time, public figures have a responsibility. People like Charlie Kirk, Megyn Kelly, and Stephen A. Smith are sowers of chaos and hate, and they cater to audiences who eschew nuance and embrace the concept of alternative facts.
The issue is that we then start to debate freedom of speech rather than the enormity of their expression.
These contrarians are not part of some Socratic pedagogy of structured debate and challenge. They masquerade as intellectuals for dummies; freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
Alas, could it be said I have done the same? I think not, as I feel bereft of provocation or contrarianism. The concern this week is vitriol in talk form against two serious issues, mental health and sexual abuse, from two people who have spoken on those very subjects: Megyn Kelly, who has advocated for the right to be free from sexual harassment and objectification, and Stephen A. Smith, who expressed in a public service announcement, his bout with depression and therapy after his mother’s death.
