“You know what MY pussy needs to relax after a long day in court”

Link

Day 304

This week’s pop-culture digest

The Argument, “Is the Supreme Court Broken?” episode A new podcast from the New York Times aims to have a civil discussion of current events among a republican, democrat, and someone who claims to “fall in between the two”. I appreciate the NYT’s effort to give a voice to multiple perspectives, but was the only republican they could find someone who shuns modernity and believes that prayer should be in public schools? I think that when finding an opposing voice for an audience that mostly leans to the left, it would be more fruitful to find someone who is more centrist. But I’ll take what I can get. The first episode discusses the aftermath of Brett Kavanaugh’s induction to the Supreme Court. Though each person had a different perspective, not all were good at defending them. I think there’s something to be said for persuasion and debate. Even if your stance is crazy, when you can make a convincing case for it and defend it, it’s powerful. Not being able to defend a good idea doesn’t make it bad. But it does make it unbelievable. Overall I enjoyed the podcast except for the light-hearted recommendation segment at the end. It has to go. I think it’s intended to be unifying, but the first episode did the opposite. It was the republican saying that he disliked A Star is Born. Ok, are they trying to have the audience hate him?! Those who don’t like entertainers giving their political opinion will find that the inverse is also true.

Bradley Cooper Is Not Really Into This Profile, NYT What is the job of the writer? Are they to be a character in the story they write? Are they to pull back the curtain to let the reader know the effort that went into reporting? Or is it only when they don’t get what they want from their subject? I’ve been asking myself these questions since I read this article from one of my favorite writers, Taffy Brodesser-Ackner. It’s funny because the same writing devices she used in the Gwenyth Paltrow profile I loved so much seems to be working against her here—inserting herself and her inner dialogue in the story, sharing how the interview affected her personally, and showing the process of interviewing her subject. What’s my problem? Is it old now? Was it not enough about Bradley? I think one of the hardest tasks that a writer (especially a celebrity profiler) can face is having a subject that is not forthcoming. That makes it hard to get new information—which is pretty much their only job. No forthcoming subjects, no reporters. I don’t know what a writer does when they don’t return with anything good and yet have to justify their job. But should the reader care? I don’t know.

Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard, “Amy Schumer” episode I’ve been an occasional listener of this podcast since its inception earlier this year. I only listen to episodes whose subjects I am interested in, so my loyalty is more to the guest than the host. However, I do like Shepard’s open-mindedness, curiosity, and perspective. I think it’s rare to find someone who thinks like him, in that he is not dogmatic and has empathy toward those with varying political beliefs. This episode was a good illustration of that. They discuss the male and female experience, and how females often feel scared walking home alone at night. Shepard said that he understood her experience as he was raped by a guy. Schumer was dismissive and said it’s still worse for girls. It got sticky. His experience was awful. Also, that doesn’t mean that in general the male experience is equal to that of a female. Sometimes I feel like we’re playing a game of who has it worse than others. What good does it do? I get that intervention is needed in some cases, but how do we know when tipping the scales will help? Sometimes it does, and sometimes it backfires. This applies to a lot of social issues, but it’s something that keeps me up at night. I was glad that both Dax and Amy could apologize to each other and reconcile.