Alison is joined by Greg Heller, Jeff Fox, Dustin Goot, Daniel Quantz, Jenna Kim Jones and Allan Moss for a discussion of one man bands, cats vs. dogs, who was popular in high school, ducks vs. geese, subtle racism, white guy privilege, college, Korea and so much more. We also did a round of Just Me Or Everyone (click here to see the JMOEs from this episode).
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Download the episode from iTunes.
And guess what? The HGFY ringtone is now available!! Hooray! Search HEY GO FUCK YOURSELF in the itunes store!
Also, our live podfest ep with Doug Benson and Matt Costa is now available!
Wondering how to contact the show and submit your Just Me Or Everyone?
This show is brought to you by Amazon (clear your cookies first and what the hell, make a bookmark!) and Blinds.com and MeUndies and Squarespace (use code BESTFRIEND). And shop in my Amazon store!
Credits? We have some!
Executive producer: Alison Rosen
Producer: Jeff Fox
Music: Trapp Dog Tom Rapp
Logo: Kezilla
follow @alisonrosen and @ariynbf for updates. Don’t use iTunes? Subscribe to the show’s RSS feed.
ALSO ALSO: like us on Facebook!
And read this review of ARIYNBFand read this article about ARIYNBF and buy the live episode from podfest.
Sounds good. BTW, we covered “The Facts of Life” in this podcast. Missed your old theme song: https://drivetimepodcast.wordp…
Sounds good. BTW, we covered “The Facts of Life” in this podcast. Missed your old theme song: https://drivetimepodcast.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/episode-12-the-facts-of-life-and-things-that-were-really-better-back-in-the-day/
As a fan who is Asian American, I quite enjoyed the group's discussion on racism; it was a nice departure from the sillies you all usually bring. I especially liked Jenna and Daniel's stories about racism in Korea (I can definitely speak to this) and Daniel's siblings. I think as long as you are all aware of privilege and are sensitive to issues that you all will probably never understand, these discussions are interesting and should be brought up more often!
Also, PS: Not all latino people are Mexican. 🙂
Is it too late to pick up my white privilege for this year?
Whoa. No more talking about racism please until the Thursday gang can get their nervous “likes” under control.
I would like to like this comment times 1,000 please!
As a fan who is Asian American, I quite enjoyed the group’s discussion on racism; it was a nice departure from the sillies you all usually bring. I especially liked Jenna and Daniel’s stories about racism in Korea (I can definitely speak to this) and Daniel’s siblings. I think as long as you are all aware of privilege and are sensitive to issues that you all will probably never understand, these discussions are interesting and should be brought up more often!
Also, PS: Not all latino people are Mexican. 🙂
Is it too late to pick up my white privilege for this year?
As somebody with two black siblings, I appreciated the thoughtful discussion on race and racism. I especially appreciated Alison's, Jenna's and Daniel's thoughts. It's a difficult subject, but I was proud of you for going there with thoughtful and compassionate perspectives. I do feel like more difficult topics seem to make Dustin uncomfortable and it shows. While the episode was full of seriousness, there were also some very funny moments. Daniel's “I have a friend who drinks Postum” was perfect.:)
Also, ditto to Jeff and Greg on cats. I'll give Daniel a pass on account of his allergies.
Whoa. No more talking about racism please until the Thursday gang can get their nervous “likes” under control.
Ha! I've noticed that Dustin especially has had the Case of the Likes for the last few eps that he's been on.
I would like to like this comment times 1,000 please!
As somebody with two black siblings, I appreciated the thoughtful discussion on race and racism. I especially appreciated Alison’s, Jenna’s and Daniel’s thoughts. It’s a difficult subject, but I was proud of you for going there with thoughtful and compassionate perspectives. I do feel like more difficult topics seem to make Dustin uncomfortable and it shows. While the episode was full of seriousness, there were also some very funny moments. Daniel’s “I have a friend who drinks Postum” was perfect.:)
Also, ditto to Jeff and Greg on cats. I’ll give Daniel a pass on account of his allergies.
I have a crush on Greg but I know he is probably all wrong for me (well, and the fact that he's married). Also, I think Allan is excellent marriage material (good job, Jenna!). That's all I've got today. Oh, and I'm team cat!
Good episode.
Ha! I’ve noticed that Dustin especially has had the Case of the Likes for the last few eps that he’s been on.
I have a crush on Greg but I know he is probably all wrong for me (well, and the fact that he’s married). Also, I think Allan is excellent marriage material (good job, Jenna!). That’s all I’ve got today. Oh, and I’m team cat!
Zing!
Good episode.
Zing!
Well that, and maybe thinking you have (or don't have) some mysterious privilege you can't even identify may just be counterproductive. Nevermind that the whole meme is about political elections anyway.
When Alison said she'd have to cover the windows before the blinddotcom spot I imagined her peaking out the blinds holding an M14 Malcolm X style, JMOE.
This show didn't just tackle racism, it went helmet to helmet and drove it back through the whistle, then stood over it and simulated rough sex for a few beats before chest bumping a teammate then running backwards and pointing and laughing at racism stumbling around with its bell all rung and shit while shouting “all day, racism, all day!”
Well that, and maybe thinking you have (or don’t have) some mysterious privilege you can’t even identify may just be counterproductive. Nevermind that the whole meme is about political elections anyway.
When Alison said she’d have to cover the windows before the blinddotcom spot I imagined her peaking out the blinds holding an M14 Malcolm X style, JMOE.
This show didn’t just tackle racism, it went helmet to helmet and drove it back through the whistle, then stood over it and simulated rough sex for a few beats before chest bumping a teammate then running backwards and pointing and laughing at racism stumbling around with its bell all rung and shit while shouting “all day, racism, all day!”
1. It is not a meme about political elections at all, you just associate it with being one. Also, the idea that you can't have an advantage over another person unless you understand it is quite flawed as a notion.
2. More to the point: I generally dislike the term a great deal because it gets people's hackles up (ie. you), and when that happens their eardrums tend to close. The misinterpretation is that people who have faced adverse circumstances are being told that their lives are easy because they're Caucasian, but that's not really what's being referred to.
It is, summarily: if you were in Group X, you would have to worry about A,B and C, or have a different perspective on them, but you don't really have to think about it because you're in Group Y.
I think they did a pretty good job of communicating that POV in this episode.
Thank you! I almost had to turn if off at times…but I love them all too much! Please Please Please Find a new word, this one drives me crazy as my boys tend to do the same!
1. It is not a meme about political elections at all, you just associate it with being one. Also, the idea that you can’t have an advantage over another person unless you understand it is quite flawed as a notion.
2. More to the point: I generally dislike the term a great deal because it gets people’s hackles up (ie. you), and when that happens their eardrums tend to close. The misinterpretation is that people who have faced adverse circumstances are being told that their lives are easy because they’re Caucasian, but that’s not really what’s being referred to.
It is, summarily: if you were in Group X, you would have to worry about A,B and C, or have a different perspective on them, but you don’t really have to think about it because you’re in Group Y.
I think they did a pretty good job of communicating that POV in this episode.
Thank you! I almost had to turn if off at times…but I love them all too much! Please Please Please Find a new word, this one drives me crazy as my boys tend to do the same!
Should I go to Korea or El Salvador and complain about majority privilege, or have they wiped theirs out already?
Me: Some people are really concerned about XYZ.
You: In El Salvador and Korea, they have even more XYZ! So, there!
Me: …
Your analogy is also poor because you are suggesting that you- as a foreigner with no association with those countries- shouldn't lecture them about their social issues. The discussion in the episode was, rather specifically, about Americans of various ethnic/cultural backgrounds, living in America. Your actual argument would be that El Salvadorians and [South] Koreans shouldn't complain about discrimination or social issues in their own countries if they're not part of a majority group, which I'll assume, as a favor, is not what you actually mean to be saying.
Incidentally, your approach of “I don't have this problem, therefore so what” is almost perfectly deaf, given what's being discussed.
Should I go to Korea or El Salvador and complain about majority privilege, or have they wiped theirs out already?
Me: Some people are really concerned about XYZ.
You: In El Salvador and Korea, they have even more XYZ! So, there!
Me: …
Your analogy is also poor because you are suggesting that you- as a foreigner with no association with those countries- shouldn’t lecture them about their social issues. The discussion in the episode was, rather specifically, about Americans of various ethnic/cultural backgrounds, living in America. Your actual argument would be that El Salvadorians and [South] Koreans shouldn’t complain about discrimination or social issues in their own countries if they’re not part of a majority group, which I’ll assume, as a favor, is not what you actually mean to be saying.
Incidentally, your approach of “I don’t have this problem, therefore so what” is almost perfectly deaf, given what’s being discussed.
Careful, if you overreach any further you'll pull a muscle. I'm sorry that you so drastically misinterpreted the question, though, from your attitude, I can safely assume that it was by choice. At any rate, my earnest question was whether this is strictly a Western phenomenon or if other countries suffered from it as well, important subject that it is. The topic of race and racism can't be kept to any one country because majorities also have rights, and what's considered an acceptable balance vis a vis majority vs minority is an issue that every nation must deal with and comparisons are very illuminating. For instance, Japan gets some guff for its immigration policy (a policy that would never fly here) but one could argue that to force it to change would impinge on the rights of Japan's majority.
To wit: if majority privilege is unacceptable here, does it follow that it should be equally unacceptable in every nation on earth? But if it does follow, what of the majority's rights? The problem with discussing this with your kind is your selectivity. Only certain countries tend to get flogged for this particular sin, and other nations are excused from the same standard due to, ahem, X,Y, or Z. The original question was short and sweet because I didn't know who you were or exactly where you were coming from, but your rote SJW language gives me some confirmation.
If I were to immigrate to Korea or El Salvador (“foreigner with no association” tsk tsk), should I expect the opportunity to, say, ascend to the presidency? And if not, would you rail against such injustice with such bloviation as you have on this thread, or just shrug your shoulders and say it's their country as you insipidly accused me of doing?
Careful, if you overreach any further you’ll pull a muscle. I’m sorry that you so drastically misinterpreted the question, though, from your attitude, I can safely assume that it was by choice. At any rate, my earnest question was whether this is strictly a Western phenomenon or if other countries suffered from it as well, important subject that it is. The topic of race and racism can’t be kept to any one country because majorities also have rights, and what’s considered an acceptable balance vis a vis majority vs minority is an issue that every nation must deal with and comparisons are very illuminating. For instance, Japan gets some guff for its immigration policy (a policy that would never fly here) but one could argue that to force it to change would impinge on the rights of Japan’s majority.
To wit: if majority privilege is unacceptable here, does it follow that it should be equally unacceptable in every nation on earth? But if it does follow, what of the majority’s rights? The problem with discussing this with your kind is your selectivity. Only certain countries tend to get flogged for this particular sin, and other nations are excused from the same standard due to, ahem, X,Y, or Z. The original question was short and sweet because I didn’t know who you were or exactly where you were coming from, but your rote SJW language gives me some confirmation.
If I were to immigrate to Korea or El Salvador (“foreigner with no association” tsk tsk), should I expect the opportunity to, say, ascend to the presidency? And if not, would you rail against such injustice with such bloviation as you have on this thread, or just shrug your shoulders and say it’s their country as you insipidly accused me of doing?
WELL said!
WELL said!
1. You brought these strawman ideas with you. I did not say such advantages don't exist. I said they might be counter productive. And I'm correct, they might be. They are used to deny advice and tacitly to excuse not taking advice, as in “that advice only works for you because you have privilege, it won't work for someone without privilege.” It's begging the question. Maybe, ones lack of “privilege” has something to do with not following the advice.
2. It doesn't raise my hackles. It strikes me as begging the question. Then I point out that it is begging the question. Why do we usually hear about it? Because some group is apparently disadvantaged and Democrats tend to see their role as Robin Hood. Otherwise we'd rarely hear about it just like a lot of other slightly true but mostly irrelevant ideas. The idea that it ticks me off (or that I don't care about other groups) because I want a piece of victim pie (as per Greg Proops) or am enjoying and guarding my privilege is also begging the question.
As for everything being filtered through politics nowadays, look at how “check your privilege” is actually used. I am correct right that it is usually used to shut someone up in the context of some political agenda. Did you listen to the Greg Proops episode? I only bring it up because it's like, the last time the issue was brought up. He, a comedian, pretty much summed up that it is a political meme. Sure, without politics it would exist, we'd just never hear it incessantly and illogically.
Nowhere did I say that an unperceived advantage doesn't exist. I do however believe that it pretty much doesn't exist and that is one reason why I don't perceive it. And when you can't perceive it, you can't point it out, you can't measure it, and you can't really account for it or accurately address it. Even Daniel, as he is being harassed by the cops, assumes the minorities being harassed a little worse because they were minorities. Why assume they are being targeted? Maybe they were drunk.
1. You brought these strawman ideas with you. I did not say such advantages don’t exist. I said they might be counter productive. And I’m correct, they might be. They are used to deny advice and tacitly to excuse not taking advice, as in “that advice only works for you because you have privilege, it won’t work for someone without privilege.” It’s begging the question. Maybe, ones lack of “privilege” has something to do with not following the advice.
2. It doesn’t raise my hackles. It strikes me as begging the question. Then I point out that it is begging the question. Why do we usually hear about it? Because some group is apparently disadvantaged and Democrats tend to see their role as Robin Hood. Otherwise we’d rarely hear about it just like a lot of other slightly true but mostly irrelevant ideas. The idea that it ticks me off (or that I don’t care about other groups) because I want a piece of victim pie (as per Greg Proops) or am enjoying and guarding my privilege is also begging the question.
As for everything being filtered through politics nowadays, look at how “check your privilege” is actually used. I am correct right that it is usually used to shut someone up in the context of some political agenda. Did you listen to the Greg Proops episode? I only bring it up because it’s like, the last time the issue was brought up. He, a comedian, pretty much summed up that it is a political meme. Sure, without politics it would exist, we’d just never hear it incessantly and illogically.
Nowhere did I say that an unperceived advantage doesn’t exist. I do however believe that it pretty much doesn’t exist and that is one reason why I don’t perceive it. And when you can’t perceive it, you can’t point it out, you can’t measure it, and you can’t really account for it or accurately address it. Even Daniel, as he is being harassed by the cops, assumes the minorities being harassed a little worse because they were minorities. Why assume they are being targeted? Maybe they were drunk.
Nothing feels more comfortable on your junk short of another person's junk, MeUndies.
Working backwards-
Bingo! We almost agree: the exact issue I was referring to was that because you don't perceive it (emphasis on *you*), you then consider it to be insignificant or nonexistent. You can't perceive it, you can't point it out and you can't measure it, I would argue, because you have no interest on doing so. Whether or not it exists is, obviously, an entirely different issue. That part of your argument necessarily borders on solipsism.
Which doesn't mean that it is invalid as a point of view, but it becomes problematic (there's another buzzword) in this context, because individuals are not strictly being discussed, and not caring about X problem correlates to not caring about X group because they aren't the same as yours. I am not accusing you of this, but it is an easy corner for you to paint yourself into, whether or not you mean it. (as you alluded to)
As for “check your privilege” etc- despite the fact that I find it to be rather aggressive and obnoxious, to say that it used in terms of political agendas is questionable, especially since you specifically mentioned political elections, earlier. In that context I would disagree, but speaking more broadly it depends on where you draw the line between a social POV and a political issue, since various ones are repeated as talking points by the far right or far left. But, why are we assuming that the most antisocial version of the group is the one who knows what they're talking about, and the entire broader concept is then faulty due to guilt by association?
But, then again, I don't get told to “check my privilege”, ever- therefore, it must not be a real thing.
In any event, this did not come up during the actual episode… But if you want to keep talking about it, OK.
But, TL;DR-
The concept is that you won't see or care about certain things that affect millions of others, because those things don't affect you, personally; if your response is then “but, I don't care, and I doubt they exist because I don't see them”, that's perhaps not the tack you want to take? Or, if it is, understand you're going to go around in circles because you will be talking past one another.
I'm going to do you another solid and overlook the fact that you are literally arguing in favor of “majority” privilege (the dreaded White privilege, in the context of this conversation).
This is more a broad question involving specifics which you have not provided, but what was being discussed in this episode of the show was literally recognition and understanding of someone else's point of view. Your hypothetical of such a thing impinging on the rights of a majority group is, again, poor. Though the fact that you bring it up suggests a lack of familiarity with what is actually being discussed.
You seem to also be unaware of the concept of the tyranny of the majority/masses, which is not helping you in this discussion, either.
You are running out of favors. Please do not assume that because you are biased, I must be as well because I disagree with you.
I don't expect you to understand how you come across by virtue of your throwing around the term SJW, but here's a hint: not well. Incidentally, also inaccurate, but I wouldn't expect you to understand that, either, for reasons mentioned above. Also, maybe you don't know what “rote” means.
The reason “only certain countries get flogged for this particular sin” may have something to do with the fact that everyone involved in this particular discussion is from the same country. More to the point: as I pointed out before, it has no bearing on whether or not the criticism is valid or important. The fact that America is being discussed does not automatically refer to or even imply an anti-Western bias. (which is my kinder way of stating what I think you are actually referring to)
I have found that whenever people seem to be off-topic, they tend to instead be very much on their own topic. In this case, you seem to be latched onto your vaguely xenophobic notion that an acknowledgement of the concept of White privilege will lead to some sort of unspecified injustice.
As for your question: if you were to head to one of those countries and attempt to be elected president (God help them), it would be your right to do so- whether or not you would be legally able to attain office in those countries would depend on their laws. Your own argument, however, is that you should not be able to (think of the poor majority!), and that if you decided you would be a good president and could serve the country well, then that would would make you an SJW. You should just cede to whatever the default desire of the majority/law of the land is instead of making your case and stirring the pot.
Nothing feels more comfortable on your junk short of another person’s junk, MeUndies.
Working backwards-
Bingo! We almost agree: the exact issue I was referring to was that because you don’t perceive it (emphasis on “you”), you then consider it to be insignificant or nonexistent. You can’t perceive it, you can’t point it out and you can’t measure it, I would argue, because you have no interest on doing so. Whether or not it exists is, obviously, an entirely different issue. That part of your argument necessarily borders on solipsism.
Which doesn’t mean that it is invalid as a point of view, but it becomes problematic (there’s another buzzword) in this context, because individuals are not strictly being discussed, and not caring about X problem correlates to not caring about X group because they aren’t the same as yours. I am not accusing you of this, but it is an easy corner for you to paint yourself into, whether or not you mean it. (as you alluded to)
As for “check your privilege” etc- despite the fact that I find it to be rather aggressive and obnoxious, to say that it used in terms of political agendas is questionable, especially since you specifically mentioned political elections, earlier. In that context I would disagree, but speaking more broadly it depends on where you draw the line between a social POV and a political issue, since various ones are repeated as talking points by the far right or far left. But, why are we assuming that the most antisocial version of the group is the one who knows what they’re talking about, and the entire broader concept is then faulty due to guilt by association?
But, then again, I don’t get told to “check my privilege”, ever- therefore, it must not be a real thing.
In any event, this did not come up during the actual episode… But if you want to keep talking about it, OK.
But, TL;DR-
The concept is that you won’t see or care about certain things that affect millions of others, because those things don’t affect you, personally; if your response is then “but, I don’t care, and I doubt they exist because I don’t see them”, that’s perhaps not the tack you want to take? Or, if it is, understand you’re going to go around in circles because you will be talking past one another.
I’m going to do you another solid and overlook the fact that you are literally arguing in favor of “majority” privilege (the dreaded White privilege, in the context of this conversation).
This is more a broad question involving specifics which you have not provided, but what was being discussed in this episode of the show was literally recognition and understanding of someone else’s point of view. Your hypothetical of such a thing impinging on the rights of a majority group is, again, poor. Though the fact that you bring it up suggests a lack of familiarity with what is actually being discussed.
You seem to also be unaware of the concept of the tyranny of the majority/masses, which is not helping you in this discussion, either.
You are running out of favors. Please do not assume that because you are biased, I must be as well because I disagree with you.
I don’t expect you to understand how you come across by virtue of your throwing around the term SJW, but here’s a hint: not well. Incidentally, also inaccurate, but I wouldn’t expect you to understand that, either, for reasons mentioned above. Also, maybe you don’t know what “rote” means.
The reason “only certain countries get flogged for this particular sin” may have something to do with the fact that everyone involved in this particular discussion is from the same country. More to the point: as I pointed out before, it has no bearing on whether or not the criticism is valid or important. The fact that America is being discussed does not automatically refer to or even imply an anti-Western bias. (which is my kinder way of stating what I think you are actually referring to)
I have found that whenever people seem to be off-topic, they tend to instead be very much on their own topic. In this case, you seem to be latched onto your vaguely xenophobic notion that an acknowledgement of the concept of White privilege will lead to some sort of unspecified injustice.
As for your question: if you were to head to one of those countries and attempt to be elected president (God help them), it would be your right to do so- whether or not you would be legally able to attain office in those countries would depend on their laws. Your own argument, however, is that you should not be able to (think of the poor majority!), and that if you decided you would be a good president and could serve the country well, then that would would make you an SJW. You should just cede to whatever the default desire of the majority/law of the land is instead of making your case and stirring the pot.
Loved this discussion! It was so refreshing to hear people who aren't black state some of the things my boyfriend and I joke about all the time (he's white/I'm black).
I've never had the experience of police harassment, but I also live in a small town with a cop – the most I get is teasing, because I called 911 about a one-legged man and a donkey once and they have a long memory. I couldn't imagine having people presume that I'm guilty of something all the time – I'd walk around in a pissed off mood too.
But the discussion about telling a black person who they look like cracked me up. Whenever someone tells me that I look like a famous black person, I think “that's just the first black person they can think of in the moment.” I had 2 women tell me I look exactly like Oprah and I was annoyed for the rest of the day; then I felt like a bitch, because my annoyance was saying Oprah is unattractive.
For me, it's important to have these discussions while maintaining an appreciation about our differences and similarities. It's so tempting to tell others “it's not THAT bad,” when we really don't know. Perception if reality and I try to start by respecting that how other people perceive life in America can be drastically different than my own experience.
And to toss my 2 cents into the Topic Sombrero, I never know if I should write Black (capitalizing the B) or black. Maybe I should stop calling myself black (Black) altogether and adopt the African American already. FWP
Loved this discussion! It was so refreshing to hear people who aren’t black state some of the things my boyfriend and I joke about all the time (he’s white/I’m black).
I’ve never had the experience of police harassment, but I also live in a small town with a cop – the most I get is teasing, because I called 911 about a one-legged man and a donkey once and they have a long memory. I couldn’t imagine having people presume that I’m guilty of something all the time – I’d walk around in a pissed off mood too.
But the discussion about telling a black person who they look like cracked me up. Whenever someone tells me that I look like a famous black person, I think “that’s just the first black person they can think of in the moment.” I had 2 women tell me I look exactly like Oprah and I was annoyed for the rest of the day; then I felt like a bitch, because my annoyance was saying Oprah is unattractive.
For me, it’s important to have these discussions while maintaining an appreciation about our differences and similarities. It’s so tempting to tell others “it’s not THAT bad,” when we really don’t know. Perception if reality and I try to start by respecting that how other people perceive life in America can be drastically different than my own experience.
And to toss my 2 cents into the Topic Sombrero, I never know if I should write Black (capitalizing the B) or black. Maybe I should stop calling myself black (Black) altogether and adopt the African American already. FWP