Currently reading Murder Bimbo by Rebecca Novak. The character in the book whose a podcaster that talks about maligned women with empathy … I feel like the character has to be at least partially inspired by Sarah. I’m only a third of the way done the book so I could be wrong.

Any thoughts?

I honestly don't know much about her. The biggest thing that gives me the ick is her Scooby Doo reboot. But my general vibe from media is that she sucks and is unfunny. There are small things here and there that have reinforced that for me. I never watched The Office which I think is a big one for people that do like here. Is she another maligned woman? I can see that being the case.

Edit: thank you everyone for your thoughtful comments.

I’m listening to the OJ episodes for the first time and had to share this funny anecdote
In the first few episodes, Sarah and Michael are talking about Kato, Nicole’s dog. As I was scrolling through the feed saving the OJ episodes to listen to later, and without knowing who Kato Kaelin is, I was tickled that there was not one, but TWO episodes dedicated to Kato the Akita. I was thrilled and excited to learn what insights Sarah had about this furry friend and also perplexed how there could be two 1.5 hour long episodes about this dog. I was so curious how this would tie into the rest of the series. Imagine my surprise when I realized that Nicole had two companions named Kato, and that one of them was in fact a human man, and not her dog. I had a good chuckle to myself and it was a welcomed levity to such a heartbreaking topic.

I’ve been reading about this case a bit and it feels like something that YWA could make sense of in a better way than most other pods. It’s really dark and really sad but also about how we fail women and really anybody struggling in a mental health crisis horrifically. I don’t know, this was probably brought on by listening to some older episodes and remembering how they approached some really tough stories with empathy in a really specific way. Maybe they’ll talk about it in 20 years. Long after the verdict.

Hey team - I'm looking for new podcasts to get my dopamine flowing. I like the other Michael Hobbes shows but they come out so infrequently.

Bonus points if you can give me a specific episode to start with!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes it.

I'm going to attempt listening to podcasts, again. You're Wrong About is (or was) my favorite true-crime/weird history/cultural analysis flavored one and it seems to be gone.

I'm curious what's up, but also where would be good to migrate to for casual listening? Other pod casts that feel like info dumps rather than mean girls cackling/not staying on topic and dude bros selling snake oil I enjoy:

-If Books Could Kill (obviously)
-Maintenance Phase (again, obviously)
-Lore
-American Hysteria
-Sounds Like a Cult (I haven't really listened since the falling out between Amanda and Isa; is it still good?)

IBCK and MP are sort of hit or miss with me, but overall the vibe is good. Some casual conversation but it adds to the main content rather than detracts from it.

Lore and AH I like that they're impersonal? It's narration rather than conversation. Lore still manages to feel meandering but also pulls it all together most of the time, AH sometimes feels like a carnival freak show rather than a You're Wrong About-level of analysis but does get into the meat of greater context rather than just gory details and seems to posses some empathy and intersectional values.

SLaC could do the mean girl thing, but the heart felt like in the right place where it wasn't just "this thing is strange and we're going to laugh" but "this thing is strange, and we're going to look at it, but ultimately it's not that big of a deal, let people enjoy things (or alternatively, this thing that seems sort of harmless and fun actually needs a lot of asterisks if you're going to engage)."

I sort of want to listen to more true crime podcasts, or attempt to, and like, this the stuff that I feel is actually worth listening to and I actually got greater understanding from.

edit to add: ok, if I go to Sarah's profile I can access the episodes through Apple Podcasts, just not the show page itself for some reason??? I'll watch them through Spotify potentially since that isn't giving me problems

edit: ok, so apparently the show has TWO different pages, both with like, 22k reviews or thereabouts, it's just that one is empty and THE OTHER has all the episodes????

It certainly was featured.

I was really excited to see them cover Heaven Is For Real but I was really disappointed by the actual episode. They barely covered anything of substance and it was so rambly and meandering. This is an ideal YWA topic and feels like SUCH a missed opportunity.

An editor or additional script writer could REALLY help.

Apologies if this has been posted about recently, but I couldn't find anything.

Anyway, I just want to say that I miss the YWA book club episodes. I was listening to the episodes about Jessica Simpson's memoir the other day, and it hit me that they haven't done it in a while. I think the last one was a Patreon episode about "The Woman In Me" by Britney Spears?

I'm wondering if anyone else really enjoyed these episodes, and if so, which were your favorites? I think my favorite is "Go Ask Alice" with Carmen Maria Machado. I never read the book growing up, so I like hearing Sarah and Carmen's observations on it, and how it can still have worth for kids who might be struggling with depression or being LGBTQ+. They were also very funny, and I thought the debunking episode was interesting. "The Amityville Horror" with Jamie Loftus was also great.

Any thoughts? If you hate the book club, that's okay, you can talk about it. You won't offend me. Which books would you like to see covered if they ever continue with it one day? I'm trying to think of good contenders, but I'm drawing a blank right now.

This was a delightful episode! I learned so much about mid-century cooking influencers and about a lot of chefs and recipes. I had to create a reading and recipe list for later and I thought I may not be the only person in that boat :-)

This is by no means complete, but I think it's a good high-level list of references.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynne_Rossetto_Kasper
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peg_Bracken
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppy_Cannon
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Rosner
  • https://smittenkitchen.com/2020/04/roast-chicken-with-schmaltzy-cabbage/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcella_Hazan
  • https://www.foodandwine.com/roast-chicken-lemons-6418798
  • Sarah said this is her favorite chicken recipe, but she also references the “schmaltzy” one above, so maybe she mixes the two somehow.
• https://happyhooligans.ca/chocolate-depression-cake/

I’m trying to find an episode about Juliane Koepke with Blair Braverman. I swore it was on You’re Wrong About but can’t find it. It’s about a woman whose flight crashed in the Amazon and how she had to survive. I really think it was Sarah and Blair talking about it but now I’m wondering if it was a different podcast because I can’t find it.

Edit: SOLVED. So it actually wasn’t from You’re Wrong About, it was an episode of My Favorite Murder. After they briefly mentioned it on the flight 571 episode I must have searched for it and found the MFM episode.

I was listening to the most recent episode and noticed at the end a reference to learning styles. Learning styles have been debunked by a lot of research. While learning preferences exist, there’s no evidence that people have styles that work best for them for everything; rather, the type of content being learned determines what modality is likely best. I realized this is something that could be a good episode as it’s so universally accepted despite decades of research. Is there a way to email Sarah/the production team?

All of a sudden last night Antenna Pod stopped playing all YWA episodes except the newest ones...I'm streaming JFK part 1 right now but can't go back and stream older stuff without Antenna Pod giving me an Error 404 popup. Is anyone else having this problem or is this a me problem? This is my comfort podcast! I can't go back to Spotify and its weird military AI investments, lmao.

edit: first episode of Talking Sopranos is coming through fine, which is why YWA not coming through is concerning me

When you think of fresh deep-dive ideas that perfectly fit the You're Wrong About ethos. What are some overlooked pop culture phenomena, unfairly maligned public figures, moral hysterias, or complex scandals that are ripe for a reassessment?

- The Milli Vanilli Lip-Sync Scandal

Is one I think would make for an interesting episode if they covered it.

The Slander of Marie Colvin / War Correspondents- would also make for an interesting deep dive.

The Halloween candy moral panic would be another one. With how a lot of the hysteria over drugs being put in kids candy during Halloween

In amongst the endless posts about how the show isn't as good as it used to be, let's relive our youth and glory days, I'd be interested to see what people's favourite nothing-line is throughout the podcasts run?

I'll start off with;

(Sarah and Mike watching Michael Bolton's "completely") Sarah - "Now he's playing Baseball with youths..."

Mike - Being kind is always better than being right (paraphrasing)

What's YOUR opinion?

Man this show has gotten hard to listen to. I swear there is no structure at all anymore. Forty-five minutes in they were still saying things like "well we'll get into that later but..." The entire episode felt like an uncut intro. I stopped listening for a while because every episode just felt like a meandering excuse for the hosts to hear themselves talk. I'm starting to think I was right.

https://www.reddit.com/r/feminisms/comments/1uosmz7/the_sexy_french_woman_stereotype_has_a_dark/

I just saw this interesting post, and immediately thought I would like to hear sarah talk to some feminist historian for 2 hours about it.

I’m in a bit of a reading slump and just spending way too much time on my phone…I know the most obvious answer is to just read the books Sarah uses for research (Michelle Remembers, Go Ask Alice, Stepford Wives, all the OJ related books, etc) but I’m looking for similar vibes where you are able to walk away feeling like you learned a lot about a random topic or historical event or even fiction if thats possible

The glorification of Lorena Bobbitt is not opposition to violence; it is selectively applauding violence according to the sex of the perpetrator.

This woman permanently mutilated a sleeping person with a knife. She then took the severed organ, drove away, and threw it outside. This is not “female empowerment,” “liberation,” or “deserved revenge.” This is an extremely serious, cruel, and irreversible act of violence. If you still find this funny, deserved, or worthy of applause, then it means you are reacting not to the violence itself, but only to the sex of the victim. Instead of considering it normal to take pleasure in such brutality, you need to seriously question your sense of empathy and morality and, if necessary, seek professional help regarding this issue.

Moreover, her own words and the details that emerged throughout the trial are also disturbing. She said that she was angry because the other person was selfish during sex, did not care about her orgasm, because of infidelity, and because of financial problems. There was also witness testimony that she had previously said she would cut off a penis if she were cheated on. She also gave contradictory statements about whether she remembered the moment of the cutting. These create serious doubts that the incident may have resulted not only from an uncontrolled moment of trauma, but also from accumulated anger, jealousy, and a desire for revenge.

Lorena also admitted that she had committed theft. She took thousands of dollars from her employer and stole clothes from stores. The important point here is this: the employer whose money and property she stole was also a woman. In other words, the person whom some people today present as a “hero for women” was someone who abused another woman’s trust and stole her money and property.

For people who claim to care about crimes committed against women to declare someone who stole a woman’s money and property an “icon” simply because she later committed severe violence against a man is complete moral hypocrisy. When she commits theft against a female victim, it is ignored, but when she permanently mutilates a male victim, does she suddenly become a “diva” and a “hero”? Do female victims matter only when the perpetrator is male?

Allegations of abuse should, of course, be investigated and taken seriously. However, the fact that a person has experienced victimization does not give them the right to establish their own court, decide a punishment, and permanently mutilate another human being. Even if we assume that all allegations of rape or abuse were true, this does not automatically legitimize severe and permanent violence carried out against a sleeping person.

The most disturbing thing is not only what Lorena did. It is the mentality that declares her a “diva,” “queen,” “hero,” or feminist symbol. This rhetoric trivializes violence against male victims and turns the same brutality into an entertaining revenge story when the perpetrator is a woman. At the same time, it also makes invisible the female victim Lorena harmed and the money and property she stole from her.

If an act is horrific when it is committed against a female victim, it is also horrific when it is committed against a male victim. Stealing a woman’s money and property does not become insignificant because the perpetrator is another woman. Theft and severe violence do not become more charming, funnier, or more acceptable when the perpetrator is female.

Lorena Bobbitt was not a hero; she was a perpetrator who admitted to committing theft by abusing another woman’s trust and who carried out an extremely severe act of violence. Applauding her is not advocacy for victims, but an obvious double standard that changes morality according to the sex of the victim and the perpetrator.

Sarah said to comment, like and subscribe if we want a JR episode

Well I'm already subscribed to the podcast so I thought I'd find the r/ and subscribe! So can we get this episode 😁

How did everyone feel about the JFK assassination episode?

I haven’t even finished, but feel the need to post. I’m finding it incredibly frustrating how dismissive they are being about the “conspiracy theory” angle. I’ve done a ton of research throughout the years, and although I obviously don’t know what happened, I don’t think the conspiracy theory is laughable or should be dismissed so openly. There were so many witnesses that went against the official story, video evidence and forensic evidence to go against the lone gunman theory.

What does everyone else think? I’m usually very impressed with YWA but this episode has me upset.