Rum Doings Episode 174: A Buttered Bath
by John Walker on Oct.28, 2014, under Rum Doings
In our 174th ever Rum Doings, our topic is, isn’t it about time to renationalise One Direction?
In an episode beset by a strange satellite delay (we talk over each other more than usual), we dominantly discuss how lovely and thoughtful John is, and Nick’s hate for all humanity. We consider the bath/wee dilemma as posted by 5 year old Judy. There’s shouty arguments over terms like “trigger warning”, and Nick’s contempt for John is laid bare. But actually it’s about ethics in games journalism, as well as Nick’s frustration with John’s interactions with the arseholes. Finally there’s some chat about giving birth and becoming dads.
If you don’t leave a review on iTunes then everyone will die. Thank you to everyone who has so far – you’re keeping the human race alive.
Make sure to follow us on Twitter @rumdoings. If you want to email us, you can do that here. If you want to be a “fan” of ours on Facebook, which apparently people still do, you can do that here.
To get this episode directly, right click and save here. To subscribe to Rum Doings click here, or you can find it in iTunes here.
Or you can listen to it right here:
[audio: http://rumdoings.jellycast.com/files/audio/174_rumdoings.mp3]
October 28th, 2014 on 15:08
Thank you for another great Podcast and best wishes on the upcoming birth. I realise emotions may be somewhat heightened but I have to say that the podcast is decidedly less pleasant to listen to when you get into shouty arguments – maybe you can add one of those *trigger warnings* next time so I know to skip ahead.
October 28th, 2014 on 18:53
Shouty Nick is not fun Nick, especially when his argument is just plain silly. Later on in the podcast, John mentioned how much more empathy one has when one is in a similar situation to one who has suffered a misfortune. I have similar reactions, and find myself more affected by stories where small children suffer than I used to. I recently read Ocean at the End of the Lane, which includes parental abuse, and almost stopped reading because of it. The idea that our experiences inform our emotional reactions is hardly a heretical one, so the idea that victims of sexual abuse might be more affected by descriptions of sexual abuse is hardly surprising.
I think its fine to give content notes if you want to, and maybe its reasonable to point out (provided one does in a non aggressive manner) when one has been “triggered”. I think both can descend past this somewhat reasonable point, and I suspect such instances are what annoy Nick so much.
Good luck with the baby! I agree with Nick that they aren’t that good for the first few weeks, but then they start smiling and it just gets better from there.
October 28th, 2014 on 19:53
Nick was nearly verging on a “political correctness gone mad” argument, there. Trigger warnings, if you bother to acknowledge their utility, require so little effort on the part of a writer or editor that it seems ludicrous to get worked up over them. They’re the equivalent of a “floor slippery when wet” or “caution: low ceiling” sign.
Most people will never need them, but it’s nice to not be caught unaware.
October 29th, 2014 on 04:29
I liked the episode. It’s good to passionately punctuate nicety every so often. I dislike affected English civility anyway; gimmme blunt Bronxer social vetting any day!
—
To hell with trigger warnings. They fetishize trauma and victimhood.
“Hark, sufferer, I’m about to shield you from my words!”
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy, ntm infantilizing.
Abused identities are popular effigies in western culture (see the ubiquity of victim blaming and tokeninistic charity even among progressives). We won’t de-effigize them by repeatedly and preemptively highlighting their supposedly-acute frailty.
—
The suggestion that RPS review an extravagant trip rather than the associated game really needs to happen.
October 29th, 2014 on 04:31
I liked the episode. It’s good to passionately punctuate nicety every so often.
(I have a strong distaste for affected English civility anyway; gimmme blunt Bronxer social vetting any day!)
—
To hell with trigger warnings. They fetishize trauma and victimhood.
“Hark, sufferer, I’m about to shield you from my own words!”
This is a self-fulfilling prophecy, ntm infantilizing.
My criticisms of western culture tend to highlight a lack of empathy but I’m increasingly wary of hyperempathizing. I’m imaginative enough that accounts of suffering can wreck me and spur desire to knock the rough edges from a victim’s reality.
I am ever-more suspicious of this desire. I don’t want victims ignored or told to “grow up” or whatever. Rather, I want more focus on the indomitability of the human spirit and less on the unique enormity of having been abused in specific ways.
Abused identities are popular effigies in western culture (see the ubiquity of victim blaming and tokeninistic charity even among progressives). We won’t de-effigize them by repeatedly playing-up their supposedly-acute frailty.
Also: the idea that suffering increases amenability to trigger warnings is gross special pleading. Be a woman to opine about abortion! Minority about affirmative action! White man about our history of social dominance!
Or, you know, just have a conscience. God forbid.
—
The suggestion that RPS review an extravagant trip rather than the associated game really needs to happen.
(fixed missing slash)
October 29th, 2014 on 04:37
(also: in fixing the missing slash I apparently pasted back in a lot of fluff I’d edited out because I ramble too much)
(rambling about de-rambling)
(that’s enough)
October 29th, 2014 on 13:42
I think Nick at the end where he says there are things people don’t understand until it happens to them proves Johns point about Trigger Warnings. We do not know what triggers something so why not be nice about it?
I really don’t understand how two words that can be skipped can cause so much being pissed off. Its stupid