Episode 94 — Hands In The Air

[dbvidmar 5]

Going the gay-wood route. Couldn't screen grab a pic from the actual segment, so I found an old pic of Paul instead:

 

[Joe Lerini 7329]

The whole debate about tricking an animal into a sexual act reminds me of a National Geographic article I read a few years ago about how orchids have developed particular smells that mess with the pheromones of bees. Basically, trying to have sex with these flowers is what causes the pollen to rub off onto these bees, and then the bee flies off to try to screw another flower, and that's how we get pollination, which is how flowers reproduce. The article made a point of how the bee ejaculated onto the flower and then left, humiliated.

 

All of that, just for me to say that flowers are exploiting these poor animals and something obviously needs to be done about these bastard plants.

 

 

 

 

 

Moving on, this episode was hilarious. I would love to hear this whole group come back for another episode. I'm a big fan of all of these people.

[MichaelStanford 69]

It's not your job to try to make the show funny

 

It's not your job to police the show, so I guess we're all wearing our volunteer underpants today!

 

Really, though, it's not necessary to be so condescending toward Don. The show was entertaining. We listen to it for laughs.

 

If it got you this upset, maybe you shouldn't invest so much emotion into a comedy podcast solving pseudo-important societal issues.

[dbvidmar 5]

I'm just glad there's no debate about sex with vegetables.

[vgfitzger 46]

Why would you want to argue with someone who has the conviction that there is no such thing as right and wrong? How annoying. If he truly thinks there is no such thing as morality why does he draw the line of acceptability at causing harm to other living things? Seems arbitrary. Asking a normal person to argue against Gemberling about bestiality is like asking Gemberling to defend his belief that it's wrong to cause suffering for a animal to a sadistic psychopath. It would be pointless.

[MichaelStanford 69]

How annoying.

 

Oh hey look it's this guy.

[BesidesIllegal 45]

 

It's not your job to try to make the show funny nor is it your job to decide that the topic doesn't deserve a debate just because Gemberling has a strong opinion. When Matt asked for a serious debater to come on the show, coming on with the attitude "haha im going to ignore Matt's request and show off how funny I am because a real debate isn't funny" is a dick move. If Matt didn't think that he could have started a scene based on a serious debate, he wouldn't have asked for a serious debater to come on in the first place.

 

Edit: I am referring to your statement

 

 

This is the exact sentiment Matt tries to discourage.

 

 

Did the episode really make you this mad?

 

It seems like you really want a chance to get on the show and give your side of the debate. Again, why don't you ask Matt and try to do a better job?

 

To say that I "decided the topic didn't need a debate" is ridiculous, because I WAS IN THE DEBATE. At no point did I say "I don't think we should talk about bestiality. I don't want to debate this". And I certainly didn't ever try to force my humor into the scenes. I'd love for you to show me where Matt tries to discourage people from giving him and others on the podcast information for scenes.

 

Here's the thing: my honest opinion is the one I stated on the show during the debate. So if you're getting mad at me for not being as angry as you wanted me to be, or not being as hardcore-anti bestiality as you wanted me to be during the debate, it's a waste of your time. I truly think that the only moral way to have sex with an animal is by letting it come to you on its own accord, letting it initiate on it's own accord, and then letting it leave on it's own accord, and that's what I stood by. I stated that, and presented my reasons why. You seem to think that's a joke. It might sound funny, but it's a legitimate opinion. One that I got to express and you didn't, which is why I think you're so mad.

 

 

 

I've seen a lot more posts here and on the live stream saying they greatly enjoyed the episode than posts telling me that I was a dick. So I think it went alright. If you didn't like it, why didn't you ask to join the debate in the first place. After all,

I'm the only person who posted to volunteer.

 

If Matt didn't like it, he should and could have cut the whole segment, or stopped the interview short. But he didn't. So until Matt Besser comes on here and tells me I'm a dick, I'll kindly ask you to fuck off.

[Nicolas Rage 313]

Why don't we all just chill out! Unless this podcast gets brought up before congress as a landmark discussion of animal rights, I'm not sure the quality of the debate (or the quality of the debate about the debate) really matters. The show was funny.

[BrettMorris 1862]

 

Hey Noah,

 

I'm that guy from the debate, and I feel I should clear the air about me "trolling" the show. I had no intention of going on I4H and putting one over on Matt and the gang. In fact, when I first learned I was going to be on the show, I WAS preparing a serious argument. But then I thought of something: I'm not going to be able to change Gemberling's mind, and nobody wants to hear a screaming match that goes nowhere (and certainly nobody wanted to hear some loser call in and berate the hell out of a much funnier comedian) I decided that my job in the segment was not to give a mediocre lecture on philosophy to some amazing comics, but to instead provide them with fodder for good comedy. I'm sorry if I disapointed anyone hoping for an official stance on bestiality, I just wanted to maybe find some common ground with Gemberling and inspire some funny scenes.

You did a great job, and the show was hilarious. That said, I do think for future reference, this is the wrong way to approach it. Being reasonable and agreeable are good qualities in a debate, but these guys don't need any kid gloves and definitely don't need any help finding comedy fodder. It would have been equally funny with a truly outraged caller like Matt wanted. Things tend to work better with the caller just being honest and themselves and not strategizing to be funny. Maybe for other shows this is a totally understandable mentality, but not so much this one. Again, very fun debate! I don't think you were trolling and you made plenty of serious points, it's just a slippery slope mentality for callers in general.

[BrettMorris 1862]

Also also: Can you guys include the links to the YouTube videos you watch? I'd love to see a man sexually arousing himself using ice cream. That's what that was, right?

All of the videos are in the submission thread on this forum!

[BesidesIllegal 45]

You did a great job, and the show was hilarious. That said, I do think for future reference, this is the wrong way to approach it. Being reasonable and agreeable are good qualities in a debate, but these guys don't need any kid gloves and definitely don't need any help finding comedy fodder. It would have been equally funny with a truly outraged caller like Matt wanted. Things tend to work better with the caller just being honest and themselves and not strategizing to be funny. Maybe for other shows this is a totally understandable mentality, but not so much this one. Again, very fun debate! I don't think you were trolling and you made plenty of serious points, it's just a slippery slope mentality for callers in general.

 

 

Engineer Brett!

 

What an honor. Thank you for the constructive criticism, and the advice. I feel like a running theme in this thread is that the words in my original post were not as well put as they should have been (My fault), and that has lead to them maybe being misconstrued. I just want to re-iterate that what I stated WAS an honest opinion, and I was not "strategizing" to be funny. And being a fan of everyone involved, I definitely understand that they do not need kid gloves. My apologies to everyone involved if it seemed like that. I really didn't mean to imply that I had any intention of pushing the show in a different direction to suit my own agenda. In fact, I was surprised at the amount of time they kept me on the show.

 

I didn't have some grand scheme for the call. I simply answered a request to give my opinion, researched some talking points, realized that my stance on the topic wasn't as black and white as I thought, and attempted to go into the call with a relatively open mind while not taking things too seriously. Again, thanks for the criticism, you know more about how these shows work than I or anyone else in the thread.

[MichaelStanford 69]

Real quick guys

 

if you could have sex with any animal from history, who would it be?

 

I'm going with Wishbone.

[BesidesIllegal 45]

Real quick guys

 

if you could have sex with any animal from history, who would it be?

 

I'm going with Wishbone.

 

 

including fictional animals from fictional histories?

 

Charlie Tuna, because he could give vocal consent and he kinda smells like a vagina

 

OR

 

the sky dragon thing from The Neverending Story. He wants it.

[MichaelStanford 69]

Good choices.

[Corky Kneivel 113]

Jessica Rabbit. Or wait was she a rabbit or just married to one?

[jsl 36]

I think Gemberling kinda got screwed by the fact that his opponent made a huge concession right off the bat. It basically forced him to either argue an even more extreme position, or have no debate at all.

[Kickpuncher 5012]

Just listened, loved the debate and the related scenes. Awesome job by Donald and the group.

[HunterM 14]

This episode has easily become one of my favorites. Lauren's audible disgust throughout the the whole episode was hilarious!

[saddlebags 581]

Great episode. Paul, Lauren, and Gemberling are my fav earwolf guests so having them together + Brandon = amazing. Don did a good job, too. I much preferred his style to just bickering like the people in wheelchairs/cyborg segment from a long time ago. Loved how blindsided Matt was when Don started stating his position. Could almost hear his face twisting. Hilarious.

[mergeandsee 3]

i really dig all the pictures from this show. very nice

[thestray 361]

Plus who actually hasn't seen bestiality, I'm not saying jerking off to it but just seen it with friends or anything in High School? I mean everyone knows who Mr.Hands is...

 

What? WHO THE FUCK IS MR. HANDS??? There's a well known animal fucker? Nevermind, don't want to know. I've never seen bestiality. Don't plan to.

[mattman92ish 823]

Real quick guys

 

if you could have sex with any animal from history, who would it be?

 

I'm going with Wishbone.

 

wish bone great choice!

 

Can i choose fudgie the whale?

[Jachin 123]

I would drop everything right now and move to LA to be the improv4humans intern. All I need is a couch to crash on. In fact I'd could just sleep in the studio. OK, when should I come down?

[Joe Lerini 7329]

if you could have sex with any animal from history, who would it be?

T-Rex from Jurassic Park. Which, I'm pretty sure if he didn't consent, I'd know about it.

[RyanCampbell 38]

if you could have sex with any animal from history, who would it be?

 

Lil' Sebastian. Obviously.