June 7, 2023 - 4:00pm
Look at the conversation around the podcast Whatever, a sprawling, five-hour-long “dating advice” roundtable discussion with an impressive 4.1 million subscribers on YouTube, and you’ll see hundreds of people making the same claim: it’s bait to make women look dumb.
Of course Whatever is bait. The hosts routinely invite “easy target” guests (like Ali Weezy, a morbidly obese 23-year-old beauty influencer with the audacity to carry herself with confidence in spite of her physical shortcomings) with the twin intentions of setting them up and then clipping those set-ups into 30-second TikToks, which regularly go viral. Naturally, the reason they go viral is that they hit every branch falling out of the “lowest common denominator outrage” tree. They even employ borderline pornographic headlines like “OnlyFans girl gets ROASTED”.
But as Magdalene Taylor points out in Vice, neither this format nor its success is a new phenomenon. Take, for example, Howard Stern: he’s been a master of the craft for over 30 years. The virality of the clips isn’t new either, even if the scale might be. For anyone over the age of 25, chances are that they’ve seen dozens of Howard Stern clips without ever listening to a single episode. And if not Stern, then some other American shock jock or daytime television host, like Maury Povich, Dr. Phil, or Jerry Springer.
What is interesting, however, is that this entertainment format is experiencing a renaissance after being declassé for at least half a decade. Beyond Whatever, there’s Manosphere icon Rollo Tomassi’s The Rational Male, the smaller but just as incendiary Vers and Lukas, Fresh and Fit, Andrew Tate’s Tate Speech, The Grift Report with Hotep Jesus. There are even female equivalents, too.
But there’s something else going on with the success of Whatever and similar podcasts. It’s not necessarily fair to say that it’s because of — as Brooke Kato suggested for the New York Post — a “disturbing new fad” to belittle female guests. The real reason is a lot less cynical or, at least, a lot less hateful than that.
For entertainment to work, especially in the Digital Age, it needs to be participatory. In an increasingly atomised world, we don’t want to be alienated from our podcasts too. Meditative art is out; participatory media — where the audience can play an active role — is in.
Most podcasts flop because they’re just not parasocial enough: there’s no easily identifiable way for the audience to latch on. The best of anything online allows the audience member to feel like they’re involved in something, even if all they’re doing is reading or listening. It has to be discourse-worthy, even if that discourse isn’t particularly enlightening or challenging. It’s more like improv or text-based roleplaying. Podcasts like Whatever are the perfect fodder for that “yes and”-style of communication. They present binary issues where people can easily pick a side and argue for days or weeks if they so desire.
It’s hardly distinguishable from arguments about politics. There’s no meaningful difference between this and the latest round of the Current Thing, or the most recent incendiary op-ed. In essence, it serves as fan fiction for people who don’t write fan fiction. The reason the format doesn’t change is that the medium of discussion hasn’t changed — the content is just updated for a new audience.
Why does dating seem to have this effect more successfully than politics? For a start, it’s more personal. Pretty much everyone feels strongly about relationships in a way that not everyone can really bite into a question like, “Why is Ron DeSantis going to lose the Republican primary?” Sex, unlike GOP primary candidates, sells — and that will likely never change.
Katherine Dee is a writer. To read more of her work, visit defaultfriend.substack.com.
default_friend
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThat gigantic guy in pink is no “beauty influencer”. If he truly wanted to carry himself with confidence, he could stop crying on Tik Tok and man the hell up.
And perhaps buy a gym membership.
Thanks for explaining who the blob is.
I thought it was UK ambassador to USA.
And perhaps buy a gym membership.
Thanks for explaining who the blob is.
I thought it was UK ambassador to USA.
That gigantic guy in pink is no “beauty influencer”. If he truly wanted to carry himself with confidence, he could stop crying on Tik Tok and man the hell up.
“For entertainment to work, especially in the Digital Age, it needs to be participatory. In an increasingly atomised world, we don’t want to be alienated from our podcasts too.”
Alienated from my podcast?
I suspect that the young me wouldn’t have been a success in this era.
“For entertainment to work, especially in the Digital Age, it needs to be participatory. In an increasingly atomised world, we don’t want to be alienated from our podcasts too.”
Alienated from my podcast?
I suspect that the young me wouldn’t have been a success in this era.
Ugh.
When glancing at the accompanying photo to this article, I was shocked to discover that I wasn’t just checking the women’s appearance, but also their ‘sex’.
Now that the term ‘woman’ officially includes men, I’ve found myself double-checking women on the street. I realize that I can no longer take women’s appearance at face-value.
I’m married, but should I find ever myself single and dating again, I can quite easily see myself having to ask a prospective date ‘so, how long have you been a woman?’, just in case.
Do you really have difficulties? Maybe it is just my primitive caveman reflexes, but I can clock a ‘MtF’troon from two hundred paces within half a second. The way they walk is usually distinctly man-nish due to a different bone structure and the waist. Their shoulders are usually far broader, and they walk without a slight hip sway. They tend to be gigantic compared to the average woman, and height in itself is often a dead giveaway given how few 6’4 women there are outside Holland.
The outfit tends to be cripplingly over-feminine, almost parody. There is almost always a garish amount of makeup involved. The jawline and adam’s apple are usually extremely visible, and the skin (particularly on the nape) is not soft at all. The hair is usually a dead giveaway also, for reasons that should be obvious. The above allows the average man to filter out these people in half a second, but then they are usually ‘transbians’ aiming their lust at vulnerable young women, so perhaps our radar does not count for much.
I think a lot of it has to with age and sophistication of surgical procedures. Some are indeed very obvious, others not so at first glance.
For instance, if I were to ‘transition’ I would make for a very ugly lady with my 6 foot frame, bulging muscles, chiseled features and five o’clock shadow.
I think a lot of it has to with age and sophistication of surgical procedures. Some are indeed very obvious, others not so at first glance.
For instance, if I were to ‘transition’ I would make for a very ugly lady with my 6 foot frame, bulging muscles, chiseled features and five o’clock shadow.
Do you really have difficulties? Maybe it is just my primitive caveman reflexes, but I can clock a ‘MtF’troon from two hundred paces within half a second. The way they walk is usually distinctly man-nish due to a different bone structure and the waist. Their shoulders are usually far broader, and they walk without a slight hip sway. They tend to be gigantic compared to the average woman, and height in itself is often a dead giveaway given how few 6’4 women there are outside Holland.
The outfit tends to be cripplingly over-feminine, almost parody. There is almost always a garish amount of makeup involved. The jawline and adam’s apple are usually extremely visible, and the skin (particularly on the nape) is not soft at all. The hair is usually a dead giveaway also, for reasons that should be obvious. The above allows the average man to filter out these people in half a second, but then they are usually ‘transbians’ aiming their lust at vulnerable young women, so perhaps our radar does not count for much.
When glancing at the accompanying photo to this article, I was shocked to discover that I wasn’t just checking the women’s appearance, but also their ‘sex’.
Now that the term ‘woman’ officially includes men, I’ve found myself double-checking women on the street. I realize that I can no longer take women’s appearance at face-value.
I’m married, but should I find ever myself single and dating again, I can quite easily see myself having to ask a prospective date ‘so, how long have you been a woman?’, just in case.
Ugh.
The women invited don’t have to accept. The podcast has been running for a while now, the style and setup is well known, nobody is being ambushed and put on the spot in the street. Yet they keep turning up to take part.
Obviously, they’re willing to risk looking like a pudding-brain.
The women invited don’t have to accept. The podcast has been running for a while now, the style and setup is well known, nobody is being ambushed and put on the spot in the street. Yet they keep turning up to take part.
Obviously, they’re willing to risk looking like a pudding-brain.
what is this cr**p?
what is this cr**p?
Or maybe they discuss and argue (sometimes heatedly) both sides of issues of importance that other forms of media bang on about from one viewpoint. It isn’t rocket science. Another issue not discussed is the age/racial demographics of these sorts of programmes, again not represented in the mainstream media.
Or maybe they discuss and argue (sometimes heatedly) both sides of issues of importance that other forms of media bang on about from one viewpoint. It isn’t rocket science. Another issue not discussed is the age/racial demographics of these sorts of programmes, again not represented in the mainstream media.
You have to understand that the podcast is for mostly vain and stupid people. Only a fool or a person with an axe to grind can use it as a reasonable gauge of what all women are like.
Indeed, it is like using the female contestants of ‘Love Island’ as a type to measure all women by.
Which prompts this question – what woman or group of woman could we use “as a type to measure all women by”? (Or, obviously, all men?)
What is at issue is whether we are allowed to measure all people at all.
Which prompts this question – what woman or group of woman could we use “as a type to measure all women by”? (Or, obviously, all men?)
What is at issue is whether we are allowed to measure all people at all.
Indeed, it is like using the female contestants of ‘Love Island’ as a type to measure all women by.
You have to understand that the podcast is for mostly vain and stupid people. Only a fool or a person with an axe to grind can use it as a reasonable gauge of what all women are like.
Han, Han, make-cheesay! Pa’sa tah ono caulky malia. Ee youngee d’emperiolo teesaw. Twa spastika awahl no. Yanee dah poo noo!
Han, Han, make-cheesay! Pa’sa tah ono caulky malia. Ee youngee d’emperiolo teesaw. Twa spastika awahl no. Yanee dah poo noo!