Latest / Uncomfortable Conversations with Josh Szeps / Jason Arday, Suey Park & the Identity Hunger Games

Transcript

Jason Arday, Suey Park & the Identity Hunger Games · Uncomfortable Conversations with Josh Szeps

• 0:02
  Hey, humans, welcome to the safe space for dangerous ideas.
• 0:07
  I hope you've had a lovely weekend.
• 0:09
  I was at the Festival of Dangerous Ideas this weekend, which is a two-day intellectual lollapalooza that's held every two years in Sydney.
• 0:17
  I was interviewing Glenn Lowry, the brilliant American historian,
• 0:21
  academic on stage.
• 0:23
  You'll be able to hear that in coming weeks.
• 0:25
  It was fabulous.
• 0:26
  And thanks to Glenn, he's such a mensch, such a delight, such a sparkling mind to be able to wrestle with in front of several hundred people.
• 0:34
  And yeah, the whole thing was great.
• 0:37
  I have been asked constantly about my opinion about Jason Arday.
• 0:42
  And we're a little late to the party on this.
• 0:44
  I could have opined last week, but I didn't because I was trying to wrestle with my...
• 0:50
  I guess, more nuanced interpretation of the whole Cambridge University affair for my column, which I was writing for the Australian Financial Review, which you should subscribe to, as well as my Substack.
• 1:02
  And there's nothing like trying to get your thoughts down into just under a thousand words to really hone the point of what you're trying to say.
• 1:12
  And I didn't think that there'd be any better way to articulate my...
• 1:15
  my take on the whole affair than to just read you the piece from the Australian Financial Review.
• 1:21
  And before I do so, I just want to preface it with an earlier piece, which was actually my inaugural piece back in February when I joined the paper.
• 1:29
  And that was in the wake of a writers festival series of cancellations, counter cancellations and counter counter cancellations, where the board of an ideas festival,
• 1:41
  had uninvited somebody on the basis of their opinion about Gaza.
• 1:47
  And then in protest, other participants resigned because they were standing up for free speech.
• 1:53
  And then the whole festival fell apart.
• 1:55
  And then the person who was originally cancelled was plucked up by another festival just to prove that they're actually the free speech festival and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
• 2:02
  It kind of became totemic for me of the way in which conversations are careening off the rails.
• 2:08
  So let me preface the R-Day comments with these other remarks that are perhaps more broadly applicable to the way that we're thinking and talking about sensitive cultural issues.
• 2:20
  This was entitled Festival Tolerance of Intolerance Sends Conversations Off the Rails and subtitled Instead of Believing That Ideas Are Strengthened By Rational Debate,
• 2:30
  Much of our media and our online spaces behave as if ideas deserve to be insulated from criticism.
• 2:37
  And I wrote, so let's get this straight.
• 2:39
  First, the Adelaide Festival Board decided that Randa Abdel Fattah was intolerable.
• 2:47
  The board's intolerance towards her made the board itself intolerable to festival participants who staged a boycott.
• 2:56
  The boycott rendered the participants intolerable to many others, whose intolerance in turn made them intolerable to the Sydney Writers' Festival.
• 3:05
  So the Sydney Writers' Festival will now showcase Abdel Fattah in part to demonstrate its tolerance of the intolerance of the boycotters and its intolerance for the intolerance of its Adelaide counterpart.
• 3:19
  Virtue signalling?
• 3:21
  It hasn't shone this bright since the bat signal lit up the skies of Gotham.
• 3:26
  Something has happened to the way we have conversations.
• 3:30
  Instead of believing that ideas are strengthened by rational debate, much of our media and our online spaces behave as if ideas deserve to be insulated from criticism.
• 3:44
  This applies to the pro-Israel activists who got Abdel Fattah uninvited the first time.
• 3:51
  It applies to the festival participants, whose defense of free speech applies only to those with the correct view on Palestine.
• 4:00
  It applies to hawks who shriek anti-Semitism at every criticism of Israel.
• 4:06
  And it applies to Abdel Fattah herself, who had previously successfully agitated for the New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman to be uninvited from the very same festival.
• 4:19
  To rehash why Abdel Fattah is offensive to people who've paid close attention to the weaponization of maximalist Arab nationalist mischief would be beside the point.
• 4:31
  Sure, she singles out an ethnic group for delegitimization and its country for erasure, writing that, "'Zionists have no claim or right to cultural safety.'"
• 4:44
  that the goal is decolonization and the end of this murderous Zionist colony.
• 4:50
  Blah, blah, blah.
• 4:51
  To be honest, Jewish Australians have become accustomed to such selective moralizing.
• 4:56
  We should know by now that banning it is more sinister than refuting it.
• 5:02
  And unlike the mobs at rallies, at least Abdel Fattah has a Palestinian-born father.
• 5:08
  It's understandable that she has a dog in the fight.
• 5:12
  The real problem, I wrote, is not Abdel Fattah or Gaza or even Bondi.
• 5:18
  It's the curious way in which our conversations about the most pressing issues of the 21st century have skidded off the rails.
• 5:29
  We are trapped in an information ecosystem where legacy spaces like festivals, universities and newsrooms reward groupthink.
• 5:40
  while new media platforms reward outrage.
• 5:46
  In intellectual spaces, timidity.
• 5:50
  On social media, chest thumping.
• 5:53
  In both, self-certainty.
• 5:57
  Debates in mainstream outlets are often either superficial or phony.
• 6:04
  Panel discussions, for example, are the former superficial.
• 6:08
  Guests are scrupulously diverse in their ethnicities and sexualities, but homogenous in their worldviews.
• 6:16
  Political interviews on current affairs shows, meanwhile, are the latter.
• 6:20
  Phony.
• 6:21
  The journo fishes for a gotcha.
• 6:24
  The guest replies with rehearsed talking points.
• 6:27
  It's as authentic as a professional wrestling match.
• 6:31
  In the online space, on the other hand, the problem is an excess, not a lack of bravura.
• 6:38
  Left-wing and right-wing hacks catch algorithmic fire, peddling canards about evil corporations, imperialist Americans, sinister Zionists, dangerous vaccines, biased journalists and feckless politicians.
• 6:56
  These are the consequences of algorithms shaping our information diet in anxious times.
• 7:04
  It's a natural human instinct to ensconce ourselves in the glow of our own self-regard while getting fired up about everyone else.
• 7:13
  But we risk creating a society of intellectual silos, a honeycomb of uncomprehending digital tribes, punishing each other for wrongthink.
• 7:26
  It's 2026, folks.
• 7:29
  Remember, this was written back in February.
• 7:32
  We are closer to the 2050s than we are to the year 2000.
• 7:37
  The challenges of this century's second quarter will be fast and ferocious.
• 7:43
  Artificial intelligence, algorithms, climate chaos, the nativist right, the censorious left, immigration, education, liberalism, multiculturalism, partisanship, Trump, Putin, China.
• 7:54
  Things could go to the dogs, or they could blossom into a kaleidoscope of civilizational opportunities.
• 8:03
  The difference will hinge largely on how we wrestle with divisive ideas.
• 8:11
  Unfortunately, we've rigged our culture with enough conversational tripwires to discourage reasonable people from honest debate.
• 8:18
  Men are reluctant to discuss positive masculinity for fear of being called misogynist.
• 8:25
  Feminists are reluctant to talk about female-only spaces for fear of being called transphobic.
• 8:32
  Multiculturalists are reluctant to talk about integrating regressive migrant communities for fear of being xenophobic.
• 8:40
  Non-Indigenous Australians are reluctant to question acknowledgements of country, that's what we call land acknowledgements, for fear of being called racist.
• 8:49
  Jewish Australians are reluctant to criticise Israel for fear of stoking anti-Semitism.
• 8:54
  Muslim Australians are reluctant to tackle jihadism for fear of betraying the team.
• 8:59
  Straight people are reluctant to criticise Mardi Gras or Pride for fear of having internalised homophobia.
• 9:07
  So the tripwires stay untripped, the eggshells go untrodden, the echo chambers stay intact.
• 9:16
  The only people willing to touch the third rails are divisive provocateurs.
• 9:24
  Whoever had a problem with Abdel Fattah's original Adelaide invitation ought to have agitated not for her cancellation, but for a genuine public exchange of ideas.
• 9:36
  Festivals don't need to let every speaker orate unchallenged.
• 9:40
  You can put her in conversation with an informed, empathetic Jewish interviewer.
• 9:45
  If the Sydney festival is committed to ideas rather than to scoring culture war points, that is what they should do.
• 9:55
  I humbly offer myself as her interlocutor, I put in parentheses.
• 10:00
  They haven't called yet.
• 10:02
  You know, give them time.
• 10:04
  This column is intended modestly as an escape hatch, a faltering attempt to tackle touchy subjects with frankness, generosity, and an allergy to can't.
• 10:16
  We can only muddle through our problems by taking the most generous interpretation of our opponents' arguments and gnawing on them until they either fall apart or stand up.
• 10:26
  Then we need to do the same thing to our allies' arguments and to our own.
• 10:33
  Australia is at a fork in the road.
• 10:36
  There are only two ways to resolve our disputes, by conversation or by violence.
• 10:44
  So that was my first column in February and I was reminded of it amid all of the conversations and analyses about the death of Jason Arday, the Cambridge University professor and the fact
• 11:00
  As well as that article, I was also reminded of maybe the first time that I ever had the experience, at the time, head spinning and weird experience of being in conversation with someone who was treating me completely as an avatar or a cardboard cutout of my identity, rather than engaging with the ideas that I was trying to discuss with her.
• 11:23
  This was 12 years ago.
• 11:25
  The clip went viral, but you may not have seen it.
• 11:28
  You may not have been born at the time.
• 11:31
  So before I read this piece, which refers to this clip, why don't you just revisit and have another look or listen at an interview I did with an Asian-American activist named Sui Park.
• 11:45
  And I was a host on Hot Post Live at the time in New York.
• 11:50
  And Colbert still had his old show, The Colbert Rapport, you know, before he did the late show, before he replaced David Letterman, where he was playing a character.
• 12:01
  He was playing a satire of a right wing news talk host.
• 12:05
  And he did a very funny bit, which probably bears explaining here.
• 12:10
  where he was criticizing the owner of the Washington Redskins sporting team for refusing to change the name of the team.
• 12:19
  This was considered a racist name by many people.
• 12:23
  Redskins, you know, an old sort of cliche about Native Americans.
• 12:27
  And instead of changing the name of the team, the owner established a fund, a charity,
• 12:35
  to help young Native American people go to university.
• 12:39
  I think it was a college fund.
• 12:42
  And everyone saw this for the sort of glib attempt to distract attention that it probably was.
• 12:49
  And so Stephen Colbert went on the air one night and he said, I've been criticized in the past for occasionally making jokes at the expense of Asian people.
• 12:58
  And he showed some clips of him doing these sort of obscenely racist comedic bits, which he had concocted for the purposes of this particular comedy segment.
• 13:12
  Him wearing a kind of a rice paddy farmer's hat at the desk and the kinds of things that only the most right wing racist personality might have been able to get away with in the past.
• 13:25
  And Colbert came back on the air and said, so in order to prove my anti-racist bona fides, I hereby announce that I am creating a charity called the Ching Chong Ding Dong Foundation for Orientals or whatever.
• 13:42
  So that was the gag.
• 13:46
  funny gag.
• 13:47
  He's obviously making fun of a person who's trying to dodge the accusation of racism.
• 13:54
  The target of the joke, the subject of the joke, and this is a good insight, I think, that Ricky Gervais has made.
• 14:00
  The subject of a joke is not necessarily the target of a joke.
• 14:03
  The subject of that joke is, I suppose, Asian-Americans and
• 14:08
  The target of the joke is the owner of the Washington Redskins and all people who think that they can get out of accusations of racism by doing some other thing that supposedly wins them anti-racist cred.
• 14:21
  So this activist came on and she started a big campaign called Hashtag Cancel Colbert, which wanted to have the Colbert show cancelled for being racist.
• 14:33
  She came on.
• 14:34
  I mishandled the interview.
• 14:37
  It was not a perfect interview by any means, but it gives you a sense of the kind of vibe that we're talking about and what it was like in the early days of wokeness and cancel culture to try to deal with
• 14:48
  people who were extremely exercised about their point of view.
• 14:52
  Here's that clip.
• 14:53
  Thanks for being with us, Sui.
• 14:55
  Of course.
• 14:55
  Thanks for having me.
• 14:57
  Why cancel Colbert?
• 15:00
  What did you hope to achieve with that?
• 15:03
  That's a loaded question.
• 15:04
  I think it's sad, but unfortunately, a lot of times our demands aren't really met unless we have really serious asks or we generate these larger conversations.
• 15:13
  Unfortunately, people usually don't listen to us when we're being reasonable.
• 15:16
  So I think it's really to make a statement that this sort of thing happens weekly, that Asian-Americans are always a punchline.
• 15:23
  And so I think we're just trying to make a point that people will be held accountable the next time they do these sort of things.
• 15:28
  So just to clarify the context, the tweet was related to a segment that was lampooning Dan Snyder, who's the owner of a certain Washington, D.C. football team that has a racist name.
• 15:37
  It was meant to be it was meant to be satire.
• 15:39
  I mean, do you understand the point of satire that you say something that's intentionally absurd in order to ridicule not the people who are the target of what you're saying, but the other people who might say it?
• 15:48
  Of course, I understand satire.
• 15:49
  I'm a writer.
• 15:50
  I think satire caters to the audience that you're speaking to.
• 15:53
  So it says something about what the audience finds humorous or acceptable when you're using those sort of jokes.
• 15:58
  And I think satire is supposed to punch up.
• 16:01
  So unfortunately, he's not doing that when he draws a parallel to Orientalism to make a point about Native American mascots.
• 16:07
  But isn't his point that there are lots of stupid racist people who, even in their attempt to be conciliatory on race, end up putting their foot in it and saying something dumb?
• 16:17
  I really don't think they were going to add racism by joking about it.
• 16:19
  Like, I'm glad that the white liberals feel like they are less racist because they can joke about people that are more explicitly racist.
• 16:25
  But that actually does nothing to help people of color.
• 16:28
  Why attack a satirical attack on Dan Snyder's racism instead of just attacking Dan Snyder's racism?
• 16:34
  Well, if you're familiar with my activism or my work, I've been very vocal about Native American mascots.
• 16:39
  I went to the University of Illinois for my undergraduate career.
• 16:42
  We had Chief Illiniwik and I was incredibly vocal about it and I had the same sort of backlash.
• 16:47
  And that kind of backlash happens no matter what you're really attacking, whether it be the word Oriental being used as a slur, yellow face jokes against Asian American people, or if I'm really just talking about Native American mascots and Dan Snyder.
• 17:00
  I know I helped trend Not Your Mascot,
• 17:02
  on Super Bowl night to fight the name Redskins and not your tanto, and I had the same sort of backlash.
• 17:08
  So it really isn't fair to kind of individualize these things and ask why I'm not shifting my behavior.
• 17:13
  Because honestly, if white liberals cared about really getting rid of the mascot, there's a lot they can do to help organize or get involved besides caring about their joke.
• 17:21
  So for them, it's not really about whether or not
• 17:24
  the Redskins exist or whether or not racism is over, it's really about them feeling like they can't have fun anymore and feeling entitled to be able to laugh at things that aren't really funny.
• 17:33
  Jason, part of the whole gag here is the use of the term Orientalism, which is such a weird old loaded, like it's just a stupid, stupid word.
• 17:42
  But to get upset about the use of that word when it's in a satirical context strikes me as misguided.
• 17:47
  I want to take a look though at a tweet which Colbert Rapport has tweeted out, says for the record Colbert Rapport is not... As a white man you don't
• 17:54
  Hang on, hang on, hang on.
• 17:54
  So I'll come to you in just a sec.
• 17:56
  For the record, Colbert rapport is not controlled by Stephen Colbert or his show.
• 17:59
  He is at Stephen at home.
• 18:00
  Sorry for the confusion.
• 18:02
  Colbert himself has responded to some of the criticism on Twitter.
• 18:04
  Hashtag cancel Colbert.
• 18:06
  I agree.
• 18:06
  Just saw at Colbert rapport tweet.
• 18:08
  I share your rage.
• 18:10
  Who is that though?
• 18:11
  I'm Stephen at home.
• 18:12
  Sue, you were just going to jump in.
• 18:15
  Yeah, I was going to say that I feel like it's incredibly patronizing for you to paint these questions this way, especially as a white man.
• 18:20
  I don't expect you to be able to understand what people of color are actually saying.
• 18:24
  with regards to cancel Colbert.
• 18:26
  He has a history of making jokes.
• 18:27
  So, being a white man doesn't prevent me from being able to think and doesn't prevent me from being able to have reasoned perspectives on things.
• 18:36
  I didn't give up my right to be able to have an intellectual conversation when I was born.
• 18:40
  I know, but white men definitely feel like they're entitled to talk over me.
• 18:43
  They definitely feel like they're entitled to kind of minimalize my experiences.
• 18:47
  And they definitely feel like they are somehow exempt and so logical compared to women who are painted as emotional, right?
• 18:53
  No, no one's minimalizing your experiences.
• 18:55
  No one's minimalizing your right to have an opinion.
• 18:57
  It's just a stupid opinion.
• 18:58
  I mean, it's a misunderstanding of what satire is.
• 19:01
  You just called my opinion stupid.
• 19:04
  You just called my opinion stupid.
• 19:06
  That's incredibly unproductive.
• 19:08
  And I don't think I'm going to enact the labor of having to explain to you why that's incredibly offensive and patronizing.
• 19:14
  Explain.
• 19:16
  I just told you I wouldn't enact that labor.
• 19:18
  Okay.
• 19:18
  Thanks for being with us, Sui.
• 19:22
  So that's how that went down.
• 19:24
  And, you know, that went viral.
• 19:26
  And Colbert talked about it on his show and Joe Rogan played it on his show.
• 19:31
  And for a while, you know, that was just a kind of a not particularly edifying part of my career.
• 19:39
  But I was reminded of it last week.
• 19:42
  And so let me read you the piece that encapsulates my opinions about this whole affair better than I can on the fly.
• 19:51
  Jason Arday's life and death show how nasty the identity politics game is.
• 19:56
  The piece is entitled, Do Not Get Cast as a Representative of Your Identity, it's subtitled.
• 20:03
  Assert Your Glorious Human Messiness, Defy the Whole Sanctimonious Circus.
• 20:09
  And it begins, My guest explained my whiteness to me patiently.
• 20:16
  Her voice was syrupy in my earpiece.
• 20:20
  As a white man, I don't expect you to be able to understand what people of colour are actually seeing.
• 20:27
  Under hot studio lights, I frowned down the barrel of the TV camera, bamboozled.
• 20:35
  It was 2014.
• 20:37
  She was an Asian-American anti-racism activist.
• 20:41
  I was a host at Half Post Live, a New York-based television network.
• 20:46
  She'd been booked to discuss her campaign to have Stephen Colbert fired for an apparently offensive joke.
• 20:54
  In my fuddy-duddy way, I saw her as a human being to be engaged with on the field of ideas.
• 21:03
  Okay.
• 21:04
  She appeared to see me differently.
• 21:07
  I was a representative of whiteness and maleness to be engaged with on the field of identity.
• 21:18
  I interrupted her.
• 21:19
  Being a white man doesn't prevent me from being able to think.
• 21:23
  She retorted, well, white men definitely feel they're entitled to talk over me.
• 21:28
  it was a head spinning initiation.
• 21:33
  You've surely felt it, the realization that you're not a human, but a proxy for your identity.
• 21:42
  You've been conscripted as a character in someone else's game.
• 21:48
  It didn't stay head spinning for long.
• 21:50
  This dynamic became the dominant way of discussing issues of social justice for the next decade.
• 21:58
  The interview went viral online.
• 22:00
  Colbert addressed it on his show.
• 22:01
  It was all a bit of a laugh.
• 22:05
  When a Cambridge professor was found dead in a South London flat last week, I was reminded for the oh how manyth time since I was side swiped on TV 12 years ago, that it's not a laugh.
• 22:20
  It's a game with real stakes.
• 22:23
  Jason Arday was a human being with flaws.
• 22:28
  He had every right to live out those flaws.
• 22:32
  He didn't get the chance, because the game required him to be either a saint or a villain.
• 22:40
  He was either an oppressed person of color triumphing over systemic prejudice, or an enemy of the meritocratic foundations of the West.
• 22:52
  You probably know his basic story.
• 22:54
  A black kid with claimed learning difficulties raised in public housing by working class Ghanaian parents.
• 23:02
  After a pressure campaign to hire more people of color, Cambridge University made him the youngest black professor in its 800 plus year history.
• 23:12
  On BBC TV, the department chair held his hands and gazed into his eyes.
• 23:18
  She called him, quote, the best in the world in terms of the research you do.
• 23:26
  It turned out he was a fabulist and likely plagiarist.
• 23:29
  When colleagues and journalists asked questions, they were slapped with police investigations, racism complaints, and defamation threats.
• 23:39
  Cambridge University failed to do basic due diligence, dismissing the whole thing as, quote, a vile campaign.
• 23:48
  Arde resigned, hunted by conservatives and hung out to dry by progressives.
• 23:56
  He was dead nine days later.
• 24:00
  In video game lingo, a non-player character or NPC
• 24:07
  is an extra who only exists so the protagonists can achieve their goals.
• 24:15
  In this case, Cambridge University needed anti-racist brownie points.
• 24:21
  Right wing tabloids needed wokeness to be out of control.
• 24:26
  Lefties needed to see every question about a new black hero as a racist plot.
• 24:33
  Jason Arde was a pawn in their morality play.
• 24:39
  He was an NPC.
• 24:43
  The tragic irony of this game is that it does the greatest harm to the people it claims to help.
• 24:51
  Who is most harmed by the maximalist vitriol of pro-Palestinian activists?
• 25:03
  Gazans cop it from a brutal, corrupt Israeli government, and also from pro-Gaza allies, whose demand for an Arab state from the river to the sea makes a two-state solution even harder to build.
• 25:17
  In the rules of this game, Gazans aren't humans with agency, they're NPCs in a crusade against colonial, genocidal Zionist fascism.
• 25:30
  Who is most harmed by trans activists' maximalist insistence that female is not a biological category?
• 25:41
  Transgender people are.
• 25:43
  Rather than being treated as individuals deserving of equal rights, they're NPCs in a weird ontological pronoun feud that alienates potential allies.
• 25:57
  Who is most harmed by the taboo on ever querying any acknowledgement of country or land acknowledgement?
• 26:05
  Indigenous Australians are, who deserve practical help to achieve real-world things.
• 26:12
  Instead, they're NPCs who cleanse white guilt if you recite incantations frequently enough.
• 26:22
  This is not a good game.
• 26:26
  This is a bad game.
• 26:28
  You would give it half a star in the App Store.
• 26:32
  It's easy to blame the game on its most visible protagonists, social justice activists, anti-woke tabloids, right-wing populists, left-wing identitarians.
• 26:44
  But the game is sustained more than anything by banal functionaries.
• 26:51
  It chugs along thanks to those of us who never say anything inflammatory, but like the Cambridge administrators, kowtow to a worldview that treats humans as non-player characters in a grander moral pageant.
• 27:08
  We were just following guidelines, after all.
• 27:14
  Decline to play.
• 27:17
  Decline to be cast as the sum of your identities.
• 27:22
  Decline to be bullied by groupthink.
• 27:26
  Decline to have your humanity extruded into a costume.
• 27:32
  You never signed up for these rules in the first place.
• 27:37
  More importantly, extend the same humanity to others as you extend to yourself.
• 27:41
  The Samoan footy player who refuses to wear a rainbow jersey is not a totem of structural homophobia.
• 27:51
  He's a Christian kid.
• 27:53
  The indigenous bloke doing a welcome to country is neither an emblem of timeless wisdom, nor an insult to Australian history.
• 28:03
  The bloke heckling him is neither a symbol of white supremacy nor an icon of the forgotten man.
• 28:10
  The Muslim woman wearing a veil at the supermarket is not a harbinger of Islamism.
• 28:16
  And the Jewish guy waiting for a bus is not a symbol of Zionist genocide.
• 28:24
  The game expects you to canonize or demonize people on the basis of their identity,
• 28:31
  That is its nasty little trick.
• 28:35
  But it's also its fatal flaw.
• 28:39
  It presents canonization and demonization as opposite poles.
• 28:46
  They're not.
• 28:48
  Canonization and demonization are flip sides of the same shallow identitarian move.
• 28:55
  Everyone is both.
• 28:57
  and to flatten anyone into either is to demean the sanctity of us all.
• 29:07
  Three years ago, a Cambridge department chair was holding Jason Arday's hands as she blew smoke up his bum on TV.
• 29:16
  No one was holding his hands in his lonely South London flat last week.
• 29:25
  I didn't see the trick when I blundered onto set 12 years ago.
• 29:30
  But everyone must see it now.
• 29:35
  Do not get cast as a representative of your identity.
• 29:39
  Assert your glorious human messiness.
• 29:42
  Defy the whole sanctimonious circus.
• 29:48
  This game is played for keeps.
• 29:54
  So that's what I thought.
• 29:56
  I hope it helps.
• 29:57
  I'll see you next time.
• 29:58
  Thanks for listening.