#empty netters pod

[nereiids]

you are in ottawa, bro. and then on top of that, you come in all fucking blacked out, cut-offs, pipes, glasses, looking like the terminator. looking like the sperminator, dude. he went full sperminator, and then waltzed through the airport. people were probably fucking getting off the whole way, the whole way through baggage claim. you've gotta be kidding me no one recognized you. there's no one left alive back there.

[larkral]

Ok I know you're all mostly here for my extremely hot gifset reblogging game, but I also have TAKES and I am an original podcast girlie (gender neutral) and I just have to say: It's pretty damn clear even in the original article that the Empty Netter drama texts were from before they watched the show. And even if that wasn't the case, I think it MATTERS that they were willing to be so vocally into Heated Rivalry on their podcast.

Why?

Because of contextual expectations. And code switching. Because if you're someone who is expected to be intensely bro-y, that's a persona you put on in certain contexts. Are those contexts texting with other intensely bro-y people? YES, OBVIOUSLY.

Can we hold people accountable for bro-y stuff they say to bro-y people? Yes. But we shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that that's the real, deep expression of their humanity.

Similarly, if you've been gently pressured into reviewing queer media on your podcast, and you decide to do that. And your podcast exists in a media landscape where your established audience is, statistically, mostly bro-y, lightly-to-very homophobic guys, and you decide to review that queer media anyway, that's something that deserves positive attention, regardless of how their review turned out.

BUT!! The review was also overwhelmingly positive. In a context where, as people who are probably at least marginally capable of context-switching, one would expect these guys to lean into the bro-y vibe, but instead they invented a new gay-positive straight bro-ish-ness that is meaningful even if some of it is exaggerated or fake. Because of who it's coming from and the context in which it's being put forth.

Can we appreciate a full-throatedly positive take on queer media regardless of whether its enthusiasm was influenced by the audience they expected to listen to and appreciate it? Yes. And we shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that there's nothing real behind it.

And...I'm going to be honest, if this is purely a grift in the service of getting Heated Rivalry fans (which they will most likely not retain) to subscribe to their podcast or in the service of getting ad revenue (for which the advertisers will be unlikely to see conversion, thereby making the podcast's ad space less valuable), then they are both the most excellent actors and improvisers I have ever had the privilege of seeing perform.

In the end the question I want to ask is: are you mad that some straight hockey guys talked about how hot and romantic they found the gay hockey show in a place where other straight hockey guys could hear them? Even if part of their enthusiasm about it was because they got a little bit caught up in the eye of the Heated Rivalry storm?

I'm not.