Episode 76: “Doctor” Pauly McGuire

26 thoughts on “Episode 76: “Doctor” Pauly McGuire”

1. First 10 minutes. Man I love you guys.

   • <3 <3 <3

   • As good as the interview was, the first ten minutes were probably better.

     “I feel like I am a bit more inclined than some of our listeners to read a racial dynamic into things,” paraphrased AB. As one of those potentially less inclined listeners, I think, actually, the situation you describe is exactly the type of ordinary interaction that is most likely to have a racial assumption motivating the cashier’s behaviour towards you. It has all the ingredients. I believe the main prerequisite to recognize though, is that the cashier is an asshole in general (not just to ‘other’ people), because no professional cashier should pass judgement on people’s purchases like that, etc yadda yadda yadda.

     Next time ask “Why the face?” in a curious tone :).

     • Gareth C with the super winning last line!

       I think “putting the action” back on the racist person in situations like these is a skill that I struggle with. It’s very easy for me in AB’s shoes to be in complete and strong disagreement with someone like that cashier, and yet not find any words. Unfortunately, my silence is not read as strong disagreement but rather quite the opposite. The Gareth C response is great because it lets Andrew show whose side he is on and questions the cashier’s motives behind the private moment he wanted to share.

       It reminds me of a live cash game session where an obnoxious white guy tried to make the table laugh by comparing stubborn calling stations to Asian drivers – his opinion being that Asian drivers stubbornly continue no matter what situations arise in front of them. The dealer of this game was an Asian man and of course was in a position where he specifically could NOT speak up at all without putting his job at risk. Not to mention there were other Asians playing at the table during this. I’m sure I’m not the only person on this blog who has been in this situation – what would Gareth do?? I’m generally quiet at the table, and I regret that I stayed quiet through this guy’s racist remarks. In my opinion, I share a burden of calling that kind of thing out, not unlike the way AB describes players in multi-way pots sharing the burden of defending against bets.

2. I think what’s so great about Gareth’s response is that it reflects the racist commenter’s words right back to him. If AB had taken the woman’s side the cashier could have just rolled his eyes at both of them. It’s a challenge to let a person’s actions or words hang in the air for them to deal with.

   Pauley was an interesting guest. I’ve never been to Vegas but the way he perceives it is the way I envision it.

   Keep up the good work and making it look like play!

3. “I think what’s so great about Gareth’s response is that it reflects the racist commenter’s words right back to him. If AB had taken the woman’s side the cashier could have just rolled his eyes at both of them. It’s a challenge to let a person’s actions or words hang in the air for them to deal with.”

   This makes a lot of sense!

4. Nate, any chance for some links to those funny reviews of unexpected dead-hooker hotels? (I think you mildly categorized them as “some of the best non-fiction writing ever”.) I can’t even figure out how to start looking, since I don’t really know Vegas.

   • Filtering any hotel review site for Las Vegas / low quality ought to do the trick. Here’s one:

     http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g45963-d97850-Reviews-Crossland_Economy_Studios_Las_Vegas_Boulder_Highway-Las_Vegas_Nevada.html

     • Haha. Best part of that thread is the lame responses from management IMO.

     • Nate, I live in something similar to what you would call a dead hooker hotel. My past 3 neighbors have been a weed smoking black dude, a weed smoking white chick, a weed smoking black couple who fought a lot, and now a mixed couple who I think may be smoking crack. I dont recognize the smell. It’s like burnt plastic.

       Back when that room was empty, this was one of the best places I had ever lived. For only $170 a week, I get internet, cable, housekeeping, etc. The only thing that could make this deal better is if they threw in a dead hooker.

       • As long as you don’t mind the smell I wouldn’t think weed smokers would make such bad neighbors. Plus you occasionally get to be part of a live audience for the filming of Cops.

         • I do mind the smell and that is my only problem with people who smoke in general. They cannot do it without affecting others. From what I understand, you get high if you eat it as well. I wish that was the conventional way to consume it.

           These walls are thin and I hear a lot. This guy was always such a punk on the phone with his ex claiming she was doing him wrong for breaking up and occasionally not letting him see his kids. A few hours after hanging up, I could usually hear him having sex with some random chick and when his kids were here, they got yelled at a lot. The mom equally bad about this.

           Like a live version of The Wire, leaving here reminds me of what my life could have been like had I gone the traditional route of drugs, bad relationships, and kids I cant take care of. And if that’s not real enough for me, I can just go hang with either of my brothers for a day.

           Living in a hotel and getting 2-outted on the river 4% of the time for a living isn’t so bad when I put it in perspective.

5. Regarding the Nitcast moment at the Cheesecake story, I offer the following observations, which may appear harsh and mean. My intention is the opposite. Like a true friend who will point out that you have spinach in your teeth, when others fail to speak, I offer the following criticism of Andrew’s opinion.

   Andrew noted the woman looked as if she did not have a lot of money, and he questioned her judgment in purchasing expensive cheesecake. However, the only description of her given by Andrew is that she is older, black, and female. I think it is reasonable, without additional information, for a listener to conclude that Andrew’s judgment of the woman’s financial status and poor consumer choices were based a least partly on her race.

   Andrew also noted that he thinks the white male clerk was racist, because he was white, male, and showed disdain for the woman’s nitty cheesecake standards. It seems reasonable for a listener to conclude Andrew identified the clerk as racist based partly on the clerk’s race.

   It seems Andrew judged both parties, at least in part on their race. Andrew may very well be correct. Or it could be the clerk’s snickery was sexist, or agist, but not racist. Or it could be, he’d had a long day serving demanding customers and that was his way of apologizing to Andrew for the delay in serving him. If the clerk is racist, he’s very bad at it. He served the woman, and gave her exactly what she asked for. Seems to me, a racist would have said “no, take this piece or leave it”.

   I don’t know the truth about the clerk, or about Andrew. I remain a loyal follower and internet friend of Andrew and this podcast. However, as I’ve aged, I’ve found it is tough to know what is in another’s heart, especially based on a 2 minute exchange. I also think life is better when we have an optimistic base view of people, not one that defaults to seeing racism in every eye roll.

   Lastly, I echo Gareth’s suggestion, and take it to the next level. If one genuinely suspects racist behavior, one should confront it, and in my opinion, confront it strongly.

   • I take your point, though you’re putting a lot of words into my mouth. I never said the clerk “was racist” nor did I claim to know “what is in [his] heart”. I said that I thought there was a racial dynamic both to his interaction with the woman and his interaction with me. The closest I came was describing his eyeroll as an attempt to “share a private racist moment” with me. I acknowledged the possibility that I was reading too much into the situation, and my lack of certainty was the main reason (I’d like to think – cowardliness and laziness are probably in the running as well) why I didn’t have any sort of response.

     I think the central misunderstanding/disagreement here is that when I use the word “racism” you are thinking of fire hoses and burning crosses. There are plenty of people I wouldn’t describe as racists who sometimes do racist things, myself very much included (perhaps even in my recounting of this very anecdote, as you suggest). Likewise I don’t consider myself as a selfish person but I have done selfish things before, and I’m sure I will again. I try to be vigilant against selfishness, jealousy, racism, and all of the other unpleasant things of which I am capable. I find that being vigilant, as opposed to turning a blind eye, is the best way to prevent it.

     The clerk’s eyeroll puts me in an awkward spot because it asks me to be a party to his vice, whether that vice was racism or sexism or agism or just general rudeness. While I admit it’s not 100%, I don’t think you can deny the possibility the clerk’s read of the situation and desire to roll his eyes at me had something to do with the fact that we both appeared to be white, whereas the woman did not. If I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt or just ignore it, as I did, then I risk condoning it, letting the man think that we do in fact share an opinion on what just happened and why. The dangerous thing about little moments like this is that they reinforce the idea that racism is normal and expected between white people and that we all just have to put on a show when non-white people or human resources staff are around for the sake of political correctness.

     I certainly see the appeal of wanting to be optimistic and the danger of defaulting to seeing a racial dynamic where they may not be one. There is a danger to this stance as well, though, which is failing to see and address instances where race and racism are in fact problems. Although I have an opinion on the matter, I don’t consider the debate over whether it is overall better to have more “false positives” or “false negatives” to be a slam-dunk for either side. The problem, I think, is that those who stand to benefit from racism, even those of us who would rather it didn’t exist, also benefit from not seeing it and therefore not addressing it. Only very indirectly do we feel any harm when racism goes unnoticed or unaddressed. I am therefore reluctant to adopt this position, because it is self-serving and I am not convinced that I can be objective about it.

     I wish I’d had the wherewithal, as Pat suggested, simply to comment on or ask about the eyeroll while doing my best not imply anything. This avoids any complicity on my part while giving him a chance to clarify his vague gesture and perhaps even causing him to question it himself.

     • That’s fair. I was trying to be a little over the top to demonstrate that you might have been as well. Perhaps I was arguing against a straw man I created that you never mentioned. And if I failed to do so earlier, let me state that I find the racial dynamic of these events very plausible. I don’t deny your take, I just wanted to point out the likelihood of other dynamics, some innocent, some sinister but not racist.

       I was motivated to comment at all by your description of the woman, that you judged her to not have a lot of money and to question her decision to purchase the desert. To judge someone’s wealth and choices of how to spend their own money, simply based on visual observation, is as upsetting to me as to judge them by their race.

       I’ve learned part of my optimism from Carlos. He’s described to me a few situations where my immediate thought was someone was mistreating him based on race, yet he dismissed it or ignored it. Right or wrong, his approach leaves him with a better, more positive outlook on life than mine, so I’ve tried to be more like him.

       • Understood. I agree that my assumptions about the woman are much more tenuous. I mentioned them at all only in the interest of giving the counter-arguments to my position. For instance, I think that if someone is buying a piece of cheesecake for which she is not adequately bankrolled, she is likely to have unrealistic expectations and be setting herself up for disappointment. Thus, she might be more picky about what her cheesecake looks like, less inclined to be polite when dissatisfied, etc. And of course rudeness or grumpiness on her part is likely to prompt the clerk to respond in kind. I included this very tentative read in an attempt to be charitable to the clerk and give some possible mitigating factors for his response to her. As it happens we recorded our introduction for Episode 79 yesterday and there are actually some throwbacks to how inappropriate it would have been for me to suggest to the woman that she not spend $9 on this cheesecake at all!

       • Oh this reminds me a little bit of one thing I do while traveling. There are many situations I have been in where I am the only person who is a “westerner” and many situations in which I could choose to interpret people’s demeanor, attitudes, actions, words, lack of words, service, lack of service, and so on, as racially motivated or discriminatory.

         But there are two things about this. One is unpacking how they view perceived rich people, people who don’t work as hard, people who are young, in the case of regions of Peru, people who don’t keep a clean shave, and so on… it becomes impossible to isolate how much my pigmentation is playing a part. They could just be discriminating me on basis of my language, or that I am foreign. For example in Turkey if I spoke Turkish, I am pretty confident my appearance would not matter, because Turkey is a country of many cultures and peoples within a language umbrella. People view foreigners with suspicion (in certain circumstances) but there skin doesn’t necessarily cue that whatsoever.

         The other thing though, trying to get back on track, is that in 99% of these situations, I realize that the person could be having a really bad day, or just a meh day, or is just a jerk. The way they would act if they were a virulent racist and how they would act if they were having an awful day, in the circumstances I find myself in at least, are identical. Isomorphic if you want a 10 dollar word. So I will be happier for my day if I choose to either remain ambivalent and let it wash, or to assume they were having a bad day. What would nag me is if I choose to believe they were discriminating against me. So I don’t.

         • That all makes sense (and is interesting, thanks for sharing it!). The important difference here is that I am not in a position of choosing whether or not to interpret something as a slight to myself. I am (maybe) being asked to participate, at least passively, in a slight towards a third party.

           • Yep, totally agree. You are definitely being put in a participatory role that you have to navigate.

             I actually wrote that without reading your reply to Russ (replying to Russ myself). Just a similarity I see on the cues he was saying he was taking from Carlos.

     • I like this discussion.

       Two intellects I respect coming at a question from different positions.

       I agree that the private racist moment happens often. I enjoy privately embarrassing people when I recognize them for what they are. Not knowing half my ancestry, I don’t even know if I could participate in these moments in good faith!

       It is not always so easy to know what they are, so saying what a genuinely curious person would (even if you aren’t genuinely curious, or a mix of things inside) like “Why the face?” it puts the onus back on the person while you don’t assume anything. I like that approach.

       Generally, though, it is hard to always be witty. I find that. So sometimes we will trudge along and that’s fine, we can be vigilant still, even if our batting average isn’t 100%.

       • I hope someone gets something out of it. It hurt my insides to speak up, because A) I’m often an ass when I “debate” B) I’m far from certain I am correct in this case C) Andrew is the bomb as the kids say, and D) fear I made a mountain out of a mole hill and ruined an otherwise great podcast. Pauley may never come back on now if he thinks all listeners are like me.

         Still, your input on what you experience travelling was a nice add.

         • Nothing wrong with speaking up, I hope I wasn’t too snippy/defensive (I was still drinking my morning coffee while responding). I know we don’t see eye-to-eye on these matters but I know you well enough to know that you are an open-minded interlocutor and not a troll. My biggest concern here is that others are going to read this and accuse me of making a mountain of a molehill. Although I do think that seemingly small moments like this actually play a meaningful role in maintaining the sort of low-level, behind-the-scenes racism that I believe persists in contemporary America, my intention really was only to share what I thought a kind of humorous anecdote and not to make a big stink about it. That said, you know I am always up for a debate!

           Do you watch Louie? There’s a moment on that show that is a great counterpoint to my experience. He is talking to a waitress at a comedy club where he’s just finished a set and she says something about having a bad night because she has two tables of black customers and so knows she isn’t going to get a tip. Louis/Louie recounts this conversation to a black waitress, clearly with the intention that the two of them will share a moment of disdain for the racist waitress.

           Instead, the black waitress tells him “Are you nuts? N—-s don’t tip, everyone knows that. Have you ever waited tables before? Then shut up a—–e.”

           When googling to find the exact quote, I stumbled across some truly horrifying sites where it was quoted. There’s certainly the danger of it being read as a very straightforward justification of racism.

           What’s interesting about it to me though is that it represents a kind of nightmare for a white liberal and turns his own judgmentalism and attempt to establish himself as part of an in-group by denigrating someone else back on him. He wants this waitress to acknowledge him as a white guy who “gets it”. Instead he finds himself treated as the outsider while the black waitress claims solidarity with the white waitress on the basis of their shared experience as servers.

           • I do. I’ve seen that episode. It shows LCK’s genius. He’s very aware of race, very well meaning, and still able to show how complicated it can be instead of just congratulating himself for being in the right.(BTW, he’s profiled in the May issue of GQ. Google it).

             I’ll be more careful. I get great benefit from your blog, and I would hate to lessen its reach by putting words in your mouth as seen by the casual reader.

             Ironically, a serious race issue it raging in the sports world while we banter about a private eyeroll. Three hours of sports radio with everyone calling in to say how outraged they are over Sterling. That should take 5 minutes. He’s wrong and he’s bad. More important is what to do about him. That is the hard question.

6. First of all, “the kids” who say “the bomb” all have all have facial hair and bad knees by now. I haven’t heard that phrase in 20 years.

   I agree with Andrew that he is more inclined to read a racial dynamic into things than most. Way more than me in fact. I didnt see any racism in this at all, but I understand Andrew’s desire to not participate in the event that it was there. Gareth’s response seems like a good solution to that.

   I would caution everyone against referring to this dude as “the racist” though because I dont want to be referred to as “the sexist” when I choose the open seat at the poker table on a lady’s right. Yeah, my intentions may have some sexist undertones, but there has to be a slightly higher bar before you get a label otherwise we would all have about 10 of them.

   In moments like these, I generally try to focus on doing what I feel will make me happy. Sometimes that means ignoring it and sometimes that means saying “fuck you.” Most times, I try not to lose much sleep over this stuff. I just try to be a good person as best I can for my own sake and if some stranger chooses not to, that’s on him. In your shoes, I can see myself saying that aint got nothing to do with me and walking away.

   • Thanks, Carlos. Definitely agree with “I would caution everyone against referring to this dude as “the racist” though because I dont want to be referred to as “the sexist” when I choose the open seat at the poker table on a lady’s right. Yeah, my intentions may have some sexist undertones, but there has to be a slightly higher bar before you get a label otherwise we would all have about 10 of them.”

   • Thanks Carlos.
     That was my fault. Andrew didn’t label the male clerk a racist. He said he thought maybe the clerk thought they were sharing a private racist moment. My observations of the event brought that poor description into play. I apologize.

Comments are closed.