Cracking up at Eliza’s comment about the pope in the beginning-“Everyone has that older relative online. I think it’s humanizing for the pope” 😂
I just want to thank you all for this podcast. I live in Portland, OR where it is wrongspeak to talk critically about any of this because everyone is captured by the politics. It is so refreshing to hear nuanced discussions and breakdowns of what’s happening. I appreciate each of your unique perspectives and backgrounds, and the work you are doing. Y’all make me feel more sane!
First, Cory. I'll say it: the ballcap flatters you, and you've selected the dictionary definition of "jaunty angle." There's a lot of weeds I could get into and won't, but the main thing I see is, it opens up your face, which gives off a vibe of clarity, consideration and calm--pretty much exactly the kind of thing that will advantage your case (our case!) as you go before your many, varied and often unhinged audiences. The softness is there, but you don't look pained.
Now that I've said this, I fear we won't see you in it again. There's also the possibility of my being assailed with virtual tomatoes from every corner, in which case I'm making virtual lasagna and you're all invited. I said what I said and I'm *glad* Cory experimented. Thank you.
Public broadcasting was originally conceived as educational broadcasting aimed at two demographics--the very young and the very old--because commercial networks were aiming at 18-49 for the advertisers.
Neither PBS nor NPR are actual networks. They are program distributors to local stations who pay for the programs but schedule them as they see fit. Not all stations carry the same programming. Most public radio stations also pay for programs from other distributors, such as American Public Radio (which handles This American Life). Not all stations can afford all the programming so quality of stations varies greatly.
I don't know the breakdown but they get most of their funding from corporations and donations--not as much federal funding that would make them fully "public" the way European state-funded broadcasters are.
Jamie, if you were watching a college course on TV as a child, you were likely watching cable television. Cable operators are required to provide channels to local educational institutions. In return for a local monopoly, cable operators had to provide public access facilities, educational channels, and governmental channels for things like city council meetings. Back in the day, nearly every college had a cable channel that they could program as they liked.
Sorry to go on but so-called "public" broadcasting has been on the chopping block forever, always has been, and the broadcasters themselves have long since weaned themselves from dependence on much federal funding. They will carry on as long as their audience wants them (which is questionable but not impossible).
It's er-raht-a, Jamie. Cori, you sound like a Brit saying taco. When I lived in London there was a restaurant named Fatso's Pasta Place and it hurt my brain to hear Brits pronounce "pasta."
My non-gender thing of the week is related to Cori's: this interview with science and religion researcher Dr Emily Qureshi Hurst on "The Theology of Spacetime and Quantum Mechanics" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7O_1FR6APc
I've never really "gotten" philosophy and theology until listening to her talk about it. Really fascinating.
Btw you should add https://www.reddit.com/r/picrew/ to your research grounds, population there is either trans themselves (lots of autobiographical threads) or make trans characters (lots of talk how is like to be trans)
Seconding adding Picrew to research grounds in some capacity. Once you recognize a few of the more popular picrews, you'll realize how often you've seen both TIMs and TIFs with one as their pfp! They work like the old dollmaker flash games, via layers, which you'll see clicking through any of those. And some have mountains of add-ons, almost always some flag overlays or actual flags/buttons to put on the character. Vitiligo and scars are common as well. Definitely something going on there
Jamie, can you comment back? This comment is about high status lesbians in inclusive enviroment and seeing myself in them - or rather how I just fucking can't see myself, can't relate. Today I saw doc https://www.imdb.com/title/tt34966013/ about lesbian poets Andrea Gibson (they/them) and Megan Falley and Andrea's fight with cancer and I just couldn't finish watching, I left the cinema in 3/4. Queerness, being non-binary and huge importance of gender were major themes (Andrea however described very relatable experience of being naturally masculine and just like me not long ago making sense of it through transgender narrative). The movie was albo about how wholesome and strong and unique and funny and bright is Andrea and how much they/them and Meg love each other (2137 scenes of cuddling). I sensed narcissism and curated life. I strongly feel like the inclusive lesbians, the ones who earned token lesbian icon status in sjw subculture and love this shit, are psychologically messed up people and I'm scared of them. Around Andrea Gibson was this vibe that she's so special, so kind, so awesome and her sexuality is source of this specialness that you can't possibly be this person. Her gf Meg was more relatable, but kinda positioned as ancillary to Andrea, like her role in life now is to love - and their love is so perfect. Jamie, do you too feel like the remaining lesbian representation are narcissists or like approved lesbian representation (thanks to transbians) is purifiied from human flaws? If so, do you think it can be a reason why young lesbians transition? Because ngl I was lesbophobic and very appealing thing about "becoming a man" was dream of dating hetero women, who are just... so down to earth and normal compared to sample size of lesbians I met.
Another note on the Douthat column, which was a really brave piece of commentary, but still seemed to reinforce the conflation of homosexuality with transgenderism. This made me think of the rampant homophobia my middle schoolers are observing in their school in this ultra-progressive city. "You're so gay!" is an insult and the object of giggles and mockery, while being trans makes you cool and interesting and a hero for social justice. So it seems entirely plausible that kids would choose a trans identity over being seen as gay.
Disentangling gay rights from transgenderism is the key to getting through to liberals on this issue, and Douthat's column didn't really help with that, unfortunately.
This is exactly what I witnessed happen to my son. Bullied for years because he was perceived as being gay. I was the mom in there making noise about the bullying and why was gay still being used as a pejorative. When school reopened after pandemic closing, I thought the bullying had been shut down - not knowing my son was now being celebrated at school for being a courageous “trans” kid since the school “protected” him by keeping me out of the loop. Yep, the mother who was in there fighting to stop the bullying of a “gay” kid was now the enemy. And of course “trans” protection and celebration looks like the holy grail of acceptance to kids who have been previously scorned for their “gayness.” LGB needs to stop right there and let the rest of the alphabet soup go (I’d maybe make an exception for Ace).
This really breaks my heart. It is unbelievable that this insidious ideology is pushed while the bullying of gay (or perceived as gay) kids is ignored, leading to them harming themselves with such interventions, with liberals cheering them on. I hope your son is going to be ok.
Being told I can't understand (or criticise) Trans because I'm Cis is like being told I can't understand (or criticise) religion because I'm an atheist. The idea that belief systems can only be questioned from within is just foolish and many of the people who are pushing Transgenderism identify as atheists and skeptics (like Zinnia), so they have even less of an excuse.
I have a lot of time for people explaining what it's like to be an ABC in XYZ from their own POV, but that stops applying once we get into the realm of Theology, Philosophy, and Ideology.
Just because Christians are persecuted in many parts of the world says nothing about the truth of Christianity. Being persecuted has no bearing on the truth of a belief system. It's the same with Trans, I don't have to dispute anyone's sincerity to disagree with the underlying system of belief.
I also love when someone says that I cannot possibly understand what it feels like for a man to "feel like a woman inside". While that is true, I certainly do know what it feels like to BE an actual woman, and how can a man claim to know what that feels like? How can he claim to "feel like a woman" when he isn't one himself? This ideology is so full of contradictions, it's self-invalidating.
When I was in college I did some analysis for a PBS documentary, with a long-time PBS/Frontline filmmaker. I was surprised to learn that the majority of the funding for a program does not necessarily come from PBS/CPB. Frequently it comes from private individuals or private foundations. This is not unimportant as the people who pay for independent documentaries necessarily have an interest in the topic they pay to support.
Unfortunately, this opens the door to bad actors who provide funding to projects and artists who have established relationships with PBS to investigate or provide information about specific topics. That does not mean that the filmmakers are not independent-they are. It is more to say that the funding of these projects is much more complicated than it appears, even for PBS. I still watch PBS, and have for years, but because I understand the funding structure behind much of the PBS independent programming (Frontline, Documentary Programming) I have always been more wary of the writing perspective.
I would say the bigger issue I have with PBS has been the leftward shift of the PBS News Hour. I emailed them and never received a reply to questions about their analysis of PEN America, School Library Curation & Banned Book lists. Recently I have been further upset that they have failed to report on the Cass Review and the HHS Report on Youth Gender Medicine. To my mind, these issues are being reported in a one-sided way. I agree with Cori, I now no longer think that there is a way to save PBS.
I also watch pbs newshour and have been really disappointed. I keep consuming leftist media but they make it hard. It’s to the point where I would probably shrug if they get defunded.
I would love to see you guys have Ross Douthat on. Did you see his recent interview with Sen. Chris Murphy? He pressed him on whether Murphy thought that boys playing on girls' sports teams was unfair, and Murphy tried really hard not to answer, going so far as to claim he couldn't possibly have an opinion on the issue because he doesn't have girls. It was pathetic. I've always respected Murphy for his advocacy for sensible gun policy, but this interview has really put a dent into my esteem for him. "Have some empathy!", Douthat had to admonish him.
I hadn't read Douthat's column, and it is interesting. However, I found it frustrating that he conflates kids being gay or experimenting with bisexuality, and kids identifying as trans, seemingly not grasping the fundamental difference between those two and failing to make clear that the problem is entirely with the latter. Maybe if you guys manage to get him on the show, you can help him understand this better, so that he can maybe educate his New York Times audience about this important distinction in the next article he writes on the topic.
Though maybe not at NPR levels, the PBS NewsHour has had plenty of one-sided segments about "gender affirming care" (enough that the film "Do No Harm" opens with clips from the program). I share Eliza's wish for PBS/NPR: "I just want them to wake up and not be crazy". It is infuriating to me that the women who run those organizations seem not to believe in unbiased journalism (though my local station, KQED, has been fundraising aggressively for just that this week.) Paula Kerger, who runs PBS, was interviewed by the NYT this week and the conversation went like this: "Do you acknowledge any of the criticism that PBS is biased? No, I don’t."
Thank you for these conversations. I’m old enough to have had to get up off the couch as a kid to go turn the knob to watch Pro Bowling because nothing else was on!
I also have such fond memories of NPR. Makes me sad. I gave it up because of an NPR story on eco-anxiety. I realized that I have eco- anxiety and NPR makes it a lot worse! At least they have interviewed Hillary Cass - better than most other left wing media. Anyway… I now subscribe to Prince William’s Earthshot Prize YouTube channel to hear optimistic stories about people all over the world coming up with solutions to environmental challenges. It’s a good way for me to stay involved but not devolve into despair. Non-gender recommendation!
My one PBS story where I was shocked was after I got pregnant I was watching a PBS show on human development and THE FIRST EPISODE about fetus growth and babies heavily featured a she to him doula who was also a gestational dad. It was wild. Felt extremely radical. Bearded doula who had birthed multiple kids getting a good chunk of screen time. My husband and I who are super liberal LA natives were basically… disgusted 😂
Cracking up at Eliza’s comment about the pope in the beginning-“Everyone has that older relative online. I think it’s humanizing for the pope” 😂
I just want to thank you all for this podcast. I live in Portland, OR where it is wrongspeak to talk critically about any of this because everyone is captured by the politics. It is so refreshing to hear nuanced discussions and breakdowns of what’s happening. I appreciate each of your unique perspectives and backgrounds, and the work you are doing. Y’all make me feel more sane!
Sex-realist people in Portland, like you and Dr. Julia Mason, are heroic, every last one. May your numbers increase beyond all reckoning.
Ah, a two-comment episode.
First, Cory. I'll say it: the ballcap flatters you, and you've selected the dictionary definition of "jaunty angle." There's a lot of weeds I could get into and won't, but the main thing I see is, it opens up your face, which gives off a vibe of clarity, consideration and calm--pretty much exactly the kind of thing that will advantage your case (our case!) as you go before your many, varied and often unhinged audiences. The softness is there, but you don't look pained.
Now that I've said this, I fear we won't see you in it again. There's also the possibility of my being assailed with virtual tomatoes from every corner, in which case I'm making virtual lasagna and you're all invited. I said what I said and I'm *glad* Cory experimented. Thank you.
Public broadcasting was originally conceived as educational broadcasting aimed at two demographics--the very young and the very old--because commercial networks were aiming at 18-49 for the advertisers.
Neither PBS nor NPR are actual networks. They are program distributors to local stations who pay for the programs but schedule them as they see fit. Not all stations carry the same programming. Most public radio stations also pay for programs from other distributors, such as American Public Radio (which handles This American Life). Not all stations can afford all the programming so quality of stations varies greatly.
I don't know the breakdown but they get most of their funding from corporations and donations--not as much federal funding that would make them fully "public" the way European state-funded broadcasters are.
Jamie, if you were watching a college course on TV as a child, you were likely watching cable television. Cable operators are required to provide channels to local educational institutions. In return for a local monopoly, cable operators had to provide public access facilities, educational channels, and governmental channels for things like city council meetings. Back in the day, nearly every college had a cable channel that they could program as they liked.
Sorry to go on but so-called "public" broadcasting has been on the chopping block forever, always has been, and the broadcasters themselves have long since weaned themselves from dependence on much federal funding. They will carry on as long as their audience wants them (which is questionable but not impossible).
It's er-raht-a, Jamie. Cori, you sound like a Brit saying taco. When I lived in London there was a restaurant named Fatso's Pasta Place and it hurt my brain to hear Brits pronounce "pasta."
My non-gender thing of the week is related to Cori's: this interview with science and religion researcher Dr Emily Qureshi Hurst on "The Theology of Spacetime and Quantum Mechanics" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7O_1FR6APc
I've never really "gotten" philosophy and theology until listening to her talk about it. Really fascinating.
Cori: "We need to have an intervention with her (Lisa)". Nope, let her cook...
Non-gender recommendation: these picrews are quality picrews
https://picrew.me/en/secret_image_maker/cJpExp1Mlsbeavr7
https://picrew.me/en/image_maker/1473879
https://picrew.me/en/image_maker/482731
https://picrew.me/en/image_maker/257476
https://picrew.me/en/image_maker/1469769
What are these??
Btw you should add https://www.reddit.com/r/picrew/ to your research grounds, population there is either trans themselves (lots of autobiographical threads) or make trans characters (lots of talk how is like to be trans)
Seconding adding Picrew to research grounds in some capacity. Once you recognize a few of the more popular picrews, you'll realize how often you've seen both TIMs and TIFs with one as their pfp! They work like the old dollmaker flash games, via layers, which you'll see clicking through any of those. And some have mountains of add-ons, almost always some flag overlays or actual flags/buttons to put on the character. Vitiligo and scars are common as well. Definitely something going on there
Online dress-up games of our time
Jamie, can you comment back? This comment is about high status lesbians in inclusive enviroment and seeing myself in them - or rather how I just fucking can't see myself, can't relate. Today I saw doc https://www.imdb.com/title/tt34966013/ about lesbian poets Andrea Gibson (they/them) and Megan Falley and Andrea's fight with cancer and I just couldn't finish watching, I left the cinema in 3/4. Queerness, being non-binary and huge importance of gender were major themes (Andrea however described very relatable experience of being naturally masculine and just like me not long ago making sense of it through transgender narrative). The movie was albo about how wholesome and strong and unique and funny and bright is Andrea and how much they/them and Meg love each other (2137 scenes of cuddling). I sensed narcissism and curated life. I strongly feel like the inclusive lesbians, the ones who earned token lesbian icon status in sjw subculture and love this shit, are psychologically messed up people and I'm scared of them. Around Andrea Gibson was this vibe that she's so special, so kind, so awesome and her sexuality is source of this specialness that you can't possibly be this person. Her gf Meg was more relatable, but kinda positioned as ancillary to Andrea, like her role in life now is to love - and their love is so perfect. Jamie, do you too feel like the remaining lesbian representation are narcissists or like approved lesbian representation (thanks to transbians) is purifiied from human flaws? If so, do you think it can be a reason why young lesbians transition? Because ngl I was lesbophobic and very appealing thing about "becoming a man" was dream of dating hetero women, who are just... so down to earth and normal compared to sample size of lesbians I met.
(attending film festival is exhausting, I'm sooooo tired)
Another note on the Douthat column, which was a really brave piece of commentary, but still seemed to reinforce the conflation of homosexuality with transgenderism. This made me think of the rampant homophobia my middle schoolers are observing in their school in this ultra-progressive city. "You're so gay!" is an insult and the object of giggles and mockery, while being trans makes you cool and interesting and a hero for social justice. So it seems entirely plausible that kids would choose a trans identity over being seen as gay.
Disentangling gay rights from transgenderism is the key to getting through to liberals on this issue, and Douthat's column didn't really help with that, unfortunately.
This is exactly what I witnessed happen to my son. Bullied for years because he was perceived as being gay. I was the mom in there making noise about the bullying and why was gay still being used as a pejorative. When school reopened after pandemic closing, I thought the bullying had been shut down - not knowing my son was now being celebrated at school for being a courageous “trans” kid since the school “protected” him by keeping me out of the loop. Yep, the mother who was in there fighting to stop the bullying of a “gay” kid was now the enemy. And of course “trans” protection and celebration looks like the holy grail of acceptance to kids who have been previously scorned for their “gayness.” LGB needs to stop right there and let the rest of the alphabet soup go (I’d maybe make an exception for Ace).
This really breaks my heart. It is unbelievable that this insidious ideology is pushed while the bullying of gay (or perceived as gay) kids is ignored, leading to them harming themselves with such interventions, with liberals cheering them on. I hope your son is going to be ok.
Being told I can't understand (or criticise) Trans because I'm Cis is like being told I can't understand (or criticise) religion because I'm an atheist. The idea that belief systems can only be questioned from within is just foolish and many of the people who are pushing Transgenderism identify as atheists and skeptics (like Zinnia), so they have even less of an excuse.
It's called standpoint theory or standpoint epistemology: https://www.britannica.com/topic/standpoint-theory
Agree it’s BS and an easy way to shut down discourse.
I have a lot of time for people explaining what it's like to be an ABC in XYZ from their own POV, but that stops applying once we get into the realm of Theology, Philosophy, and Ideology.
Just because Christians are persecuted in many parts of the world says nothing about the truth of Christianity. Being persecuted has no bearing on the truth of a belief system. It's the same with Trans, I don't have to dispute anyone's sincerity to disagree with the underlying system of belief.
I also love when someone says that I cannot possibly understand what it feels like for a man to "feel like a woman inside". While that is true, I certainly do know what it feels like to BE an actual woman, and how can a man claim to know what that feels like? How can he claim to "feel like a woman" when he isn't one himself? This ideology is so full of contradictions, it's self-invalidating.
When I was in college I did some analysis for a PBS documentary, with a long-time PBS/Frontline filmmaker. I was surprised to learn that the majority of the funding for a program does not necessarily come from PBS/CPB. Frequently it comes from private individuals or private foundations. This is not unimportant as the people who pay for independent documentaries necessarily have an interest in the topic they pay to support.
Unfortunately, this opens the door to bad actors who provide funding to projects and artists who have established relationships with PBS to investigate or provide information about specific topics. That does not mean that the filmmakers are not independent-they are. It is more to say that the funding of these projects is much more complicated than it appears, even for PBS. I still watch PBS, and have for years, but because I understand the funding structure behind much of the PBS independent programming (Frontline, Documentary Programming) I have always been more wary of the writing perspective.
I would say the bigger issue I have with PBS has been the leftward shift of the PBS News Hour. I emailed them and never received a reply to questions about their analysis of PEN America, School Library Curation & Banned Book lists. Recently I have been further upset that they have failed to report on the Cass Review and the HHS Report on Youth Gender Medicine. To my mind, these issues are being reported in a one-sided way. I agree with Cori, I now no longer think that there is a way to save PBS.
I also watch pbs newshour and have been really disappointed. I keep consuming leftist media but they make it hard. It’s to the point where I would probably shrug if they get defunded.
I would love to see you guys have Ross Douthat on. Did you see his recent interview with Sen. Chris Murphy? He pressed him on whether Murphy thought that boys playing on girls' sports teams was unfair, and Murphy tried really hard not to answer, going so far as to claim he couldn't possibly have an opinion on the issue because he doesn't have girls. It was pathetic. I've always respected Murphy for his advocacy for sensible gun policy, but this interview has really put a dent into my esteem for him. "Have some empathy!", Douthat had to admonish him.
I hadn't read Douthat's column, and it is interesting. However, I found it frustrating that he conflates kids being gay or experimenting with bisexuality, and kids identifying as trans, seemingly not grasping the fundamental difference between those two and failing to make clear that the problem is entirely with the latter. Maybe if you guys manage to get him on the show, you can help him understand this better, so that he can maybe educate his New York Times audience about this important distinction in the next article he writes on the topic.
Though maybe not at NPR levels, the PBS NewsHour has had plenty of one-sided segments about "gender affirming care" (enough that the film "Do No Harm" opens with clips from the program). I share Eliza's wish for PBS/NPR: "I just want them to wake up and not be crazy". It is infuriating to me that the women who run those organizations seem not to believe in unbiased journalism (though my local station, KQED, has been fundraising aggressively for just that this week.) Paula Kerger, who runs PBS, was interviewed by the NYT this week and the conversation went like this: "Do you acknowledge any of the criticism that PBS is biased? No, I don’t."
"Pope Leo XIV has a brother who lives in Florida..."
Just based on that I knew the story was going to be hilarious...
Thank you for these conversations. I’m old enough to have had to get up off the couch as a kid to go turn the knob to watch Pro Bowling because nothing else was on!
I also have such fond memories of NPR. Makes me sad. I gave it up because of an NPR story on eco-anxiety. I realized that I have eco- anxiety and NPR makes it a lot worse! At least they have interviewed Hillary Cass - better than most other left wing media. Anyway… I now subscribe to Prince William’s Earthshot Prize YouTube channel to hear optimistic stories about people all over the world coming up with solutions to environmental challenges. It’s a good way for me to stay involved but not devolve into despair. Non-gender recommendation!
Awesome, thanks!
My one PBS story where I was shocked was after I got pregnant I was watching a PBS show on human development and THE FIRST EPISODE about fetus growth and babies heavily featured a she to him doula who was also a gestational dad. It was wild. Felt extremely radical. Bearded doula who had birthed multiple kids getting a good chunk of screen time. My husband and I who are super liberal LA natives were basically… disgusted 😂