For Scripted TV and Movie Podcasts and Blogs, Visit Our Sister Site at

Survivor Podcast Double Header: Erinn Lobdell on Tyson, Matt Hoffman on Hayden

Watch the Show on Youtube

Listen to the Podcast

In this Super-Size recap podcast, we’ve got two great interviews with former castmates of two of the players from Survivor Blood vs Water, in Erinn Lobdell (tribemate of Tyson Apostol on Survivor Tocantins) and Matt Hoffman (alliance mate of Hayden Moss on Big Brother 12).

Erinn Lobdell

Subscribe to RHAP on iTunes

CLICK to Subscribe to Rob Has a Podcast on iTunes

Rob welcomes Erinn Lobdell (@EmarieLO) back to the podcast for the first time since November 11, 2011 during Survivor South Pacific.  In addition to celebrating her birthday on Monday, Erinn got engaged to her longtime boyfriend, Dave.  Rob starts off by asking Erinn about the transformation that Tyson has made over the course of his three seasons on Survivor.

Specifically, Rob wants to know if Erinn likes the game that Tyson is playing and whether now is the time to target Aras in the game.  Tyson has always played the game alongside another strong alpha male (Coach in Tocantins, Boston Rob in Heroes vs Villains) and Rob and Erinn discuss whether this time Tyson has perfected the strategy.

Erinn Lobdell joins Rob Cesternino to discuss Tyson Apostol's game on Survivor Blood vs Water

Does Erinn think Tyson is being a Jackass this season?

Turning to this week’s vote, Rob asks if Erinn thinks that the tribe made the right move in taking out Kat.  Erinn agrees with the move because she feels that Kat has proven herself to be untrustworthy.

Later in the show, Erinn answers a number of questions from the Rob Has a Podcast audience, including whether or not Tyson is morphing in to Coach, whether Erinn would ever have dated somebody who didn’t make the merge and if there is anybody who is this season’s Jackass.

Click Here for Erinn’s earlier podcast appearances

Matt Hoffman Interview (Starts at 1:23:10)

Matt_Hoffman (1)

Matt Hoffman on watching his Big Brother alliance-mate, Hayden Moss, play Survivor

Rob welcomes fellow new Dad, Big Brother 12’s Matt Hoffman (@HeadofHoffHold) to discuss his old friend Hayden Moss on Survivor Blood vs Water.

Matt is friends with Hayden and Kat Edorsson, so Rob asks Matt about Kat’s reaction to being voted out this week.  Rob and Matt discuss whether Kat being out of the game will either help or hurt Hayden’s game.

Plus, Rob and Matt discuss the idea of reality stars not wanting to date reality stars who don’t make the merge or jury on their shows.

Finally, Rob and Matt listen to your voicemails about a number of different subjects and the latest tweets from the former Survivor players on twitter.

This Week in RHAP:

Talking with the Latest Player Eliminated from Survivor Blood vs Water

CLICK the image to hear Rob’s interview with Brad Culpepper

Rob’s Interview with Brad Culpepper

Rob Cesternino and Stephen Fishbach are the Survivor Know-It-Alls recapping Survivor Blood vs Water Episode 6 Recap

CLICK to See This Week’s Survivor Know-It-Alls

Listen to this week’s Survivor Know-It-Alls

Subscription Links:

Subscribe to RHAP (All Shows) on iTunes:

Subscribe to RHAP (All Shows) on Stitcher:

Subscribe to RHAP (All Shows) on Soundcloud:

Subscribe to RHAP (All Shows) on YouTube:

Subscribe to ONLY Survivor Podcasts on iTunes:

Build Your Own Website with SquareSpace: – Save 10% on new accounts with promo code: RHAP10

Rob Cesternino

Rob Cesternino is a two-time Survivor player and reality TV aficionado. Rob gives his thoughts on his favorite Reality TV shows as the host of "Rob Has a Podcast" More From Rob Cesternino »

Become a Patron of Rob Has a Podcast

  • yesimsquidward

    I love Erinn!

  • damnbueno

    Erinn’s point is an excellent one. Of all the pairs, Aras and Vytas are the most likely to defy each other. The only other pair that fit in that same category were Gervase and Marissa.

    Tyson is playing with a little more humility this time around, but I’ll be surprised if it lasts. If he makes it that far, his cockiness — even if he’s joking — will show under Jury questioning, and will turn people off.

    His chances of winning really does depend more on who’s sitting next to him than anyone else left in the game. If he’s in a final 3, at least one of the other 2 has to have pissed off multiple jurors. I’m not sure if he could beat two likeable people.

    • Trixie02

      Tyson didn’t sit out with an injury and he helps around camp. I don’t think his cockiness will impede him. A final trio of Gervase, Tyson and Vytas would be pretty funny and awesome.

      • damnbueno

        Tyson’s social game has impressed me so far. I really didn’t think he was capable of toning down his faux-superiority act, but I think his injury forced him into doing that too.

        Much like Brenda last season, Tyson’s injury has done wonders for taking the focus off of him and making him appear a little sympathetic. And he doesn’t appear to be milking it too much.

        But I agree with Rob and Erinn when they say you can’t put on an act for 39 days. Tyson is who he is, and his natural persona will come out at some point. The question is will it overpower the adjustments he has made, or will he pull too much confidence out of his newfound sympathetic status and shoot himself in the foot again?

        Gervase and Tyson seem to believe they’re the power players right now, but they’ve yet to manipulate a single vote. Far too often someone who THINKS they’re calling the shots gets the rug pulled from under them by the real power player. Tina just did it to Kat.

        The most memorable example I can think of is when Cirie did it to Ozzy in FvF1. Tyson isn’t being nearly as cocky as Ozzy was that season (and neither is Aras for that matter), but overconfidence has always been Tyson’s downfall.

        The unknown factor right now is that we don’t know how well Aras is developing his relationships with Ciera, Caleb and Hayden. We know Aras has a great social game. Laura didn’t trash Aras at the duel, so there doesn’t seem to be a solid reason (yet) for Ciera to dislike Aras for voting her mother out.

        I love it when players can recognize their past mistakes and correct them. Even though I don’t like Parvati, I always credit her for changing her approach from Cook Islands to FvF1. Tyson appears to have made half the transition. He’s playing differently, but I haven’t seen him acknowledge what he did wrong the first two times, so I can’t be sure if he’s consciously adjusting, or just fell into a better position, and is riding the wave.

        • Trixie02

          Tyson is one of those players who is very entertaining. This whole Coconut Bandits schtick reminds me of “Home Alone.” I don’t think they’ll win, but they’ll be entertaining. [On a tangent, I wonder if Monica and Laura B will realize the crabs are no longer eating the coconuts.]

          Taking out those with loved ones is not a bad strategy. On his tribe, that leaves only Aras unless you count Hayden and Ciera.

          • damnbueno

            I’m loving the unpredictability this season is bringing. I’m glad I wasn’t one of those who trashed this twist when it was announced.

        • BobbyKe

          “Gervase and Tyson seem to believe they’re the power players right now, but they’ve yet to manipulate a single vote. Far too often someone who THINKS they’re calling the shots gets the rug pulled from under them by the real power player”

          They are the power players & they’re letting Aras think he’s in power until they can conceivably eliminate him. Aras thinks he’s in control but lost it by being as outspoken as he’s being strategically. It’s good that Tyson & Gervase haven’t manipulated a vote yet because nobody is seeing either of them as the threats that they are compared to Aras. It wouldn’t be hard for Tyson & Gervase to create enough numbers to get rid of Aras at the right time (All 3 newbies now with them Hayden, Caleb & Ciera would be on board with a vote Aras out plan)

          • damnbueno

            I define a “power player” as one who can convince others to do as they’d like them to do.

            And of course in that department, there’s nothing more important than Tribal Council votes.

            Aras convinced his tribe to vote out Laura M. instead of Laura B.

            You apparently agree that Tyson and Gervase have not manipulated any votes. But inexplicably you think they have power simply because you believe they can manipulate a vote if/when they want to.

            I prefer to deal with “what is,” as opposed to “what could be.”

            And right now the only players to manipulate the votes are Aras (Laura M.), Tina (Kat), Caleb (Brad) and Brad (Marissa, Rachel & John.

            I’ll call Tyson and/or Gervase a “power player” AFTER they use their power.

          • BobbyKe

            Well then you’re going to call them power players after the merge vote because it’s been made VERY obvious that they’re blindsiding Aras after the merge. The past 3 episodes have been setting it up

            They certainly have the capability to use their power, now they’re just getting the pieces together for when it’ll be used

            Power also includes preparing for “what will happen” & It’s clear Tyson & Gervase are going to get the upper hand over Aras

          • damnbueno

            ” it’s been made VERY obvious that they’re blindsiding Aras after the merge.” — You really like making predictions don’t you? This could just as easily end up like your prediction that Caleb wouldn’t get power hungry — made just before Caleb claimed he had all the power.

            “Power also includes preparing for “what will happen” — Not in my book it doesn’t. Kat was preparing for Monica to be voted out. Would you call Kat a “power player?” Katie was preparing for Kat to be voted out. Would you call Katie a “power player” too?

            “It’s clear Tyson & Gervase are going to get the upper hand over Aras” — This remains to be seen. It might happen, it might not. We have not seen Aras talking about what he thinks Tyson or Gervase are thinking. We also haven’t seen how Aras is building his relationships with Caleb, Cierra and Hayden. Its just as possible he’s already got those three in his pocket. And we HAVE seen that Aras has a deal in place with Tina and Monica too.

            This is not a prediction, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Aras cripples Gervase by blindsiding Tyson, or he cripples Tyson by blindsiding Gervase.

          • BobbyKe

            People are much more likely to listen to Tyson & Gervase then they are Kat. Power comes from having a voice. Their voices matter, Kat’s didn’t. You gain power once people start to connect information with you & gain trust levels with you. None of that has ever applied to Kat

            If you understand the editing, predicting becomes easier. Tyson is talking about eliminating Aras, Aras isn’t talking about eliminating Tyson, therefore Tyson eliminating Aras is significantly more likely. If Aras were going to blindside Tyson he would be talking about it like Tyson is

            It doesn’t make any sense that they would be building up Tyson defeating Aras (It’s not Tyson v Aras if Aras doesn’t even know it’s a battle) if he weren’t going to do so. It just comes from understanding what the edit implies is going to happen next, which is not hard at all to do. There’s a TON of foreshadowing in every episode especially in the pre merge period.

            It’s no different then Philip setting up Corrinne’s merge boot for 3 consecutive episodes last season. Aras is in the Corrine position (Although, thankfully, Tyson’s position is very different from Philip’s)

            Tyson was seen blaming Aras for every little thing in the last episode increasing his target & the other 5 are seen all plotting Aras’ boot in the preview, if we don’t see anybody plotting against Tyson then it’s just more of the same proving more & more that Tyson will get his wish – Aras gone

          • damnbueno

            Ahh how quickly you backtrack.

            BobbyKe damnbueno • 17 days ago

            “I view your scenarios as trying too hard to think of unlikely possibilities”

            “As I’ve said, there’s no indication Caleb is capable of that (getting power hungry).”

            What’s to misunderstand? You pretty much spell it out.

            “Power comes from having a voice.” This part I agree with. Voices are tested most when it comes to the voting. Tyson and Gervase’s voices haven’t been tested in that area yet.

            “Aras isn’t talking about eliminating Tyson, therefore Tyson eliminating Aras is significantly more likely.” — Are you making a prediction or not? Keep in mind, if you’re wrong, I will post your incorrect prediction. I will also acknowledge your accuracy if you’re proven right.

            “It doesn’t make any sense that they would be building up Tyson defeating Aras if he weren’t going to do so” — Really? How many fans were sure that Russell would beat Natalie, or Coach would beat Sophie? How about Denise outsmarting Malcolm?

            Producers know there is more entertainment when the audience is surprised than there is when the outcome is predictable.

            “Tyson was seen blaming Aras for every little thing in the last episode…” Yes, this is true, but what has NOT been confirmed is whether or not Hayden, Ciera and Caleb are buying what Tyson is selling.

            “The other 5 are seen all plotting Aras’ boot in the preview…” Don’t tell me you believe everything you see in the previews. I thought you were smarter than that. Some of this season’s previews hinted Tyson would switch with Rachel, and Monica would switch with Brad.

            So are you predicting Tyson gets rid of Aras or not?

          • BobbyKe

            I’m not getting into the Caleb thing again

            I think I’m making it very clear about my Tyson blindsides Aras prediction, the editing isn’t being subtle at all here. It’s crystal clear to me understanding what they’re setting up. Hell, I even think a 6-5 scenario at the merge with Tyson, Gervase, Hayden, Caleb, Ciera & Laura M v Aras, Vytas, Tina, Katie & Monica is most likely possibility – Not certain enough about that though, the who’s with who things aren’t as clear, I’ll revisit that after this weeks episode though. But Aras being the eliminee is clear

            And anybody who thought Russell or Coach was ever winning was completely oblivious. And Malcolm was a potential winner, but the golden god edit to me screamed “last eliminee” more then anything. Denise had more end game foreshadowing scenes then Malcolm did

            And I’m not taking too much importance in the previews, just saying it’s more evidence that Tyson continues to go after Aras & if we don’t see anybody say a pro Aras comment then we can correctly indicate they’re going to side with Tyson

          • damnbueno

            Ok, so you’re officially on record that you’re predicting Tyson gets Aras voted out, with support from Caleb, Ciera and Hayden. Duly noted.

          • BobbyKe

            Well, looks like I had everything right except for Monica switching (Which admittedly, I was most unsure about that at the time anyway)

    • Jouni Knuutinen

      Tyson himself is quite likeable. Maybe not to you, but the players.

      • damnbueno

        If you’re including Erinn and Sierra as some of “the players,” you’re wrong.

        Erinn likes him now, but she didn’t when she was playing with him in Tocantins.

        And if you’d bothered to read and comprehend all of my comments about Tyson on this thread, you’d know I’m quite impressed by his play so far this season.

        • Jouni Knuutinen

          I did read your comments, which makes your comment about him not being able to beat to likeable opponents all the more confusing.

          You need to remember that Tocantins was his first season. He has made adjustements since and he was quite popular in HvV. Everyone playing this season knows what he’s like and are less likely to take offense to his cockiness, which by the way seems to be down from his previous seasons (or maybe that’s just editing ;).

          • damnbueno

            I’ll clarify then.

            Based on what I’ve seen so far, I don’t think Tyson could beat Tina, Monica, Aras, Vytas, or Hayden in the finals.

            He would have stiff competition if he faced Gervase, Caleb, Kat or John in the finals.

            He would have a good chance of beating Laura B., Katie, Ciera, or Laura M.

            This is purely subjective, and entirely based on how I’m perceiving each player feels about each other and Tyson. Some players have been described in a bad way by other players, and some in a good way. Tyson falls somewhere in the middle in my perception.

            My opinion is NOT based on what I think of Tyson, but on what I’ve seen from the other players.

            “Everyone playing this season knows what he’s like…” — that’s a HUGE assumption considering Katie, John and Vytas haven’t spent any time with him yet, and Caleb, Hayden, and Ciera have only been with him a day or so to this point.

            “and are less likely to take offense to his cockiness” — another huge assumption. Russell, Parvati and Danielle sure took advantage of his cockiness. Sandra and Courtney weren’t impressed by Tyson either.

          • Jouni Knuutinen

            You make some bold claims there and pretty much ignore the fact that the season isn’t even half-way through. I think he could beat just about anybody at the finals depending on how the game turns out. It all depends on what his opposition had to do to get to the end. He might not be the most likeable player this season, but he’s likeable enough to win.

            The votes are not based on pure likeability and even if they were some game moves are certain to lower a player’s likeability factor. Dawn in FvF is a good example. At the beginning many thought it would be dangerous to go to the end with her, but by the time she reached the finals she was pretty much a goat. Even someone as likeable as Tina could make moves that would upset the jury and open the door for Tyson. Something as simple as voting out Katie could turn the jury against her.

            Every player should know Tyson’s reputation and that includes the newbies. They’ve seen him play twice, they’ve read his interviews. Some of them have probably even met him in Survivor events, but even if they haven’t they should have an idea of what he is like. Hopefully you did notice that I used the words “less likely to take offense” there. That means the probability is lower for people to be annoyed than in his first season but someone could still think he’s a cocky jackass.

            It’s pretty clear your opinion is based also on what you think of him, not just on what the players think. That’s totally fine of course, it’s only human.

          • damnbueno

            Please look up the definition of the word “subjective,” then try replying again.

  • fotopoulosalex

    That was a very enthusiastic intro. I’ve never been so pumped up by a podcast before.

  • BogDa

    ROB –regarding the length of podcasts. I’m great with however long you want to go. I especially love the epic Tyson, Aras one etc.

    Can we please get Jerry on I’m dying to hear her perspective on these people.

    Erinn was a fun podcast! Haven’t gotten to Matt yet.

    • Morty

      I would LOVE to get Jerri’s take on the Linda Holmes article!

      • BogDa

        Jerry also would have a lot of insight into some of these people’s games like Tina in particular — Rupert, Candice. I’m sure she’s met Gervase, Laura B, Katie, John.

  • Morty

    Woo-Hoo, Rob mentioned my “grassy knoll” crack on the show! Thanks, Rob!

    As to the length of the podcasts, I think they’re fine. If you’re continually gaining new listeners and getting podcast awards, it must not be broke and therefore probably doesn’t need fixed. People can easily listen in segments if need be, as I’m doing with this one; the Hoffman segment is tomorrow.
    T’is no biggie a’tall…it just spreads the fun out even more!

    Next Day Edit: #Civilian

  • Dave

    Ace podcast as usual – both Erinn and Matt are always great.

    Rob, I don’t want to tell you how to do your job, but I am just going to leave two pieces of unrelated info on the table here.

    1. Shane Powers mentioned on twitter that he is following this season.
    2. Shane Powers was once on a Survivor season with one Aras Bush-cows-kiss.

    • @Wharfrat1625

      I know Shane is an elusive Get, but Rob should suck some kneecaps and make that happen while we still have some dueling Bush-cow-kiss bros out there. Get to work padre Cesternino!!

  • Trixie02

    Why can’t the clue recipients just turn to their respective tribes and ask what to do Family Feud-style? That should remove the target associated with it.

    • Ron

      Agreed. Why couldn’t the RI winner simply bequeath the clue to their love ones’ tribe as a whole?

    • Dave L

      Well if you watch Family Feud, you know they always yell “Play Play!” So it’s a meaningless action.
      But back to your question, I think the problem is that there are obviously aren’t two teams… some people are more loyal to people on the other tribe. So somebody might yell “play play”, but that won’t stop them from being angry with them later… in the same way that John got burned.

      • Trixie02

        It’s complicated. I picture a scenario in which one is given a clue. If one decides to burn it, that might upset people. If one decides to keep it, that might upset people. The best thing to do is to ask for advice. Should I burn it or should WE keep it? Someone still may blame you, but you’ve shared in the decision.

        John decided to keep it without consultation. He needed to make a group idol out of it. Had he done that, he might not have had the target on his back. MIGHT. The dynamics are quite complex and he may still have been targeted to take out Candice or Marissa.

  • @Wharfrat1625

    Loving the endurance casts! I for one am always glad to have a solid 2+ hours on nearly any RHAP subjects, especially when you’ve got guests as great as evil super genius Matt, and the fresh off the market Erin. They are never to long for this dude.

  • Ron

    The longer the better!! I listen to the recap guest – usually- in one sitting, and then come back in a day or so for the second half. But…. I totally enjoy that there is more that I can enjoy over the course of the weekend in more than one sitting! Please don’t shorten ’em, make ’em longer!! A six-hour podcast, well I’d enjoy it!!

    Also, Erinn! Go Pack Go!!!

  • #Civilians
    Count me in among those who enjoy marathon podcasts. I just slap my headphones on and listen while doing housework. And the longer the podcast, the more I get done, so it’s all good!
    And, as other said, there’s always the possibility of listening to the longer podcasts by sections. So I say, keep doing what you’re doing, it’s just fine.

    Very much enjoyed this one. Matt and Erinn are both great guests and these two and a half hours just flew by.

  • Ron

    Re: Linda Holmes: I’m sure you know that she is a veteran Survivor recapper (who used to pull in a huge audience for her survivor writing). I would love to hear her talk about survivor, in all different capacities. I would also love to hear her talk about her own experience as ‘Miss Alli’ at TWOP. But she’s an awesome writer, and I very much respect her work. Please include her!

    • belinda

      Holy crap, Holmes is Miss Alli? I loved her old TAR recaps.

  • Ron

    Continuing to listen to more of the podcast: Fincher, just fine. So he didn’t like her. Does she like him? Whatev.

  • Mary Carmen

    I agree that Hayden was an underrated Big Brother winner. I think it has everything to do with the fact that the Brigade was such a strong alliance ( except when they turned on Matt Hoffman). There really was no question that one of them would win.

    I love your podcasts. I always look forward to watching Survivor, watching Know-it-Alls and your interviews with past players during the week. Keep up the good work!

  • belinda

    For some reason, learning that Enzo’s son’s name is also Dominic gave me a giggle fit. 😀

    p.s. thanks for the name compliment, Hoffman. :)

    Movie suggestion? Something on the lines of Teen Witch, because that was a really great podcast.

  • Kyle Pennington

    Hey Rob – frequent listener and infrequent commenter here. make the podcasts as long as you want. From my perspective, the longer the better…I can always press pause and get back to it later. I think so long as you’re still feeling energy and enthusiasm, that’s carrying through.

    • Agreed – I need 8 hours of podcasts a day at work or I have to listen to the personal phone calls of the guy whose office is next to me.

    • Alycia Swift

      I agree. A four hour podcast would be perfect for me. Two hours to work. Two hours back. I need a new job.

  • Stephen

    On the topic of sexism, after reading Jessica Liese’s blog about the teams you see on every race season, there is an identical piece to be written about castaways you see on every survivor season. I feel like the female archetypes are generally less flattering, resulting in the cast generally having more interesting men than women, and there are usually more male archetypes that Probst finds interesting.

    • Easy peasy:

      1. The totally interchangeable girls who look good in a bikini (you need a few of these because some of them will get voted off early, and if there’s no T&A the ratings will suffer)
      2. The older mom type ladies (no more than two per season, because fewer viewers will want to bang these ones, therefore they are apparently useless as far as ratings go)
      3. The uppity, opinionated woman who needs to be shown her place (often a minority – trust me, the subtle racism on Survivor can be at least as bad as the sexism)
      4. A bunch of really big strong buff guys (if none of them go far, Jeff Probst will spend the rest of the season and most of the hiatus pouting)
      5. The really smart old guy
      6. One or two crusty working-class people from a rural area, for redneck color (or they can just take a totally normal person from a rural area and make him wear a wifebeater, like they did with Chris in Vanuatu)
      7. The nerdy brainy person with an Ivy League degree who disappoints their tribe when they aren’t the best puzzle-solver in human history (at the reunion, Jeff usually mentions about twelve times how high their IQ is and is incredulous that this didn’t translate to capably putting together a picture of a pineapple)
      8. The unstable person who probably should have failed the psych evaluation
      9. The gimmicky one (either a returning player, a person who pursues a trendy hobby, or someone who’s already famous for something else)
      10. A gay man who embodies every negative stereotype about gay men
      11. A self-professed evil mastermind who thinks the game is rigged because Russell Hantz has never won it

      • damnbueno

        Don’t forget the “Angry Black Man,” who makes fairly regular appearances too.

        • Richard Weed

          I feel like outside the last couple years (Shamar and kind of Artis who was more grumpy older guy) that this isn’t really true. Thinking back on black men on the show most that I can think of are actually nice and very likable, like Earl or Gervase.
          On the other hand if you wanted to add the “Sassy black woman” who inevitably pisses everyone off and is voted off first, I would agree with that one.

          • damnbueno

            First, let me clarify a bit that I believe the PLAYERS are the ones who perpetuate the “Angry Black Man” stereotype, not the Producers. If the players don’t act angry, they can’t be shown acting angry.

            There have been plenty of even-tempered and likeable Black people on the show, don’t get me wrong there. I believe Earl played the cleanest game of Survivor ever, and had the all-time best social game.

            But the Survivor Producers love player fights, and they’ll usually cast Black men whom they think will stir things up.

            Recent players who’ve fallen into this trap include:

            Shamar & Phillip last season
            Phillip in R.I. Nicaragua
            Tyrone in Nicaragua
            James in HvV
            Jaison (a little bit) in Samoa
            G.C. in Gabon
            Dreamz In Fiji
            Bob Dawg (a little) in Panama

            And of course there are “Angry Black Man” Hall of famers (I say this with tongue firmly in cheek) like Rory (Vanuatu), Ted (Thailand) and Sean (Marquesas)

            Many of these guys even expressed a desire NOT to be seen as the “angry black man,” but still succumbed.

          • Rory is one of my favorite Survivor characters of all time.

          • Richard Weed

            Why can’t a black guy get in a fight without perpetuating a stereo type of “Angry black guy”? I don’t even understand that line of thinking at all. They cast people in a way to have conflict because it adds excitement, who cares what color their skin is.

            Most of the people on your list I barely remember the fights they had a certainly would never think of it as a reflection on race being portrayed on the show or the show reflecting some stereotype.

            Like Rory, I seriously do not remember his being angry, maybe it’s just the passage of time but I remember him as opposite, more of happy likable guy.

          • damnbueno

            “Why can’t a black guy get in a fight without perpetuating a stereo type of “Angry black guy”?” — Some black men can.

            You notice I didn’t list Russell Swan, Bill Posely, Albert, or Nate as perpetuating the sterotype. All of them got into fights, but didn’t necessarily cross that border into “Angry Black Man” land. James didn’t do it in China or FvF 1 either.

            Rory was very angry and headstrong. His temper is the reason he got voted out first at the merge instead of one of the better athletes. The women were sick of his attitude.

          • I do, however, think the editors do tend to portray every black man who gets angry AS an Angry Black Man, if that makes sense. Women, too. A white woman who gets into an argument with another Survivor will not be subjected to the same level of criticism as a black woman.

            I have heard interviews with ex-Survivors who are minorities who have gone into the game very conscious of how they’re going to be portrayed and of how it will reflect on the overall portrayal of race on television. Rory might actually have been one of them, now that I’m thinking about it. I’m pretty sure Jaison was. (I remember Jaison being pretty level-headed for most of Samoa and yet he made your list.)

          • damnbueno

            Well, the editors don’t control how we as viewers interpret the players’ actions. They don’t flash the words “Angry black rage” on the screen. They don’t create those actions either. This is why I was careful to say I believe the PLAYERS perpetuate the stereotype, not the editors.

            But yes, I think Black players have to be very conscious of how they behave because its probably a little easier for people to believe the stereotype that all black men/women have anger issues.

            As for the type of criticism White players get as opposed to Black ones, that’s an issue that goes way beyond Survivor.

            And Jaison? I did put “(a little)” there too. For the most part, he was level-headed and even tempered. He only made my list because of the way he went off on Erik a couple of times. The same applies to Bob Dawg’s fights with Courtney in Panama. He was cool with everyone else.

            I recall minorities discussing how they’d come off on Survivor at length in Cook Islands. Yul and Becky didn’t care for Cao Boi’s penchant for telling Asian jokes, and Billy got flak for cracking about Hispanics being on a boat.

            But the Black players that season (Nate, Sekou, Sundra, Rebecca and Stephanie) all avoided the “Angry” stereotype quite well. Nate even got into a fight with Brad, yet nobody accused him of being an “angry black man.”

            For as much flak as CBS got for dividing tribes by race, I thought it accomplished quite a bit to erode some stereotypes simply by stimulating discussion about them.

          • Dave L

            The problem is that the nonangry black men and women get voted off right away too often. Even if you say it’s not racism, when you are the minority in a tribe, it makes it harder for you to socially get in an alliance. Francesca is an attractive strong level headed person. As a very strong woman, she is possibly the most important physical competitor on her team. Each season the reason she was targetted wasn’t exclusively because she was black, but I believe her being black was why she couldn’t get into the majority…especially on the first season.

          • She’s a subtype of #3, I think.

      • Morty

        Although I have a teeny-tiny, minor, nit-picky, quibble or two with a few of these, this is an AWESOME overall summation!

        • Well, this is just in 5 minutes off the top of my head. I’m already quibbling with my own list as well.

      • Jasssi

        I agree with this 100%. I think the whole sexism issue on survivor (and also the race issue) is more of a casting problem than anything else. But I also want to point out that many of the sexist comments made by Jeff, I feel have more to do with him 1) not understanding survivor challenges(ie. Just because someone is big and strong, doesn’t mean they are good in challenges. 2) Favoring more entertaining players. He does not give credit to Kim, but he also does not give credit to players like Yul. He also called Aras the most boring winner ever. The 2 female players That Probst gives the most credit to are Cirie and Parvati. Out of all female players that I can think of, Parvati and Cirie were given the best edit. This could be because they both are really good narroraters or because they played more dominent and obvious, generally played by males, games. I’d bet on the former because Kim also was dominent but was boring like Yul. I don’t think Kim was boring, but I think most casual fans would find her boring. What I know for a fact is that everyone in my family besides me is a casual fan of the show and none of them even remember who Kim is. So yes, there absolutely is a problem with sexism on Survivor, but I definitely think that a lot of what hard core fans of survivor strategy may see as blatent sexism, could just be people not understanding subtle strategies. And also, many people are sexist so it would make sense that reality T.V would mirror that. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem. I applaud everyone who has been pointing out the issue because that’s the only way things are ever going to change. I just don’t think the issue is as black and white as some would would make it out to be. One last thing that I think is worth pointing out is that I am a 17 year old girl and maybe the reason I am not seeing all of this as blatent sexism is because I am young, probably a bit naive, and don’t have as much life experience. I have never really felt like I have been treated poorly because I’m female. Maybe as I get older that will change and my opinions on this issue will change. Also, I typed this out on my phone so I apologize for any grammatical errors.

        • Guest

          you’re not too young to comment, on the contrary you’re too young to have vanity. Not every people care about the truth or objective views.

        • The “favoring of entertaining players” is actually a key place where Survivor fails in the gender-equality department. Survivor drastically underedits female contestants every season (look up the confessional counts for each season if you want to see a good concrete example of this). Is this because they aren’t casting entertaining women, they ARE casting entertaining women but their entertaining-ness makes the cutting room floor, or are women just plain not as entertaining as men?

          If it’s one of the first two, then yes, Survivor has a bit of a sexism problem. If it’s the third, then I should probably take my shoes off and get back into the kitchen.

          • Dave L

            I think it’s the 3rd one…women are not as entertaining as men. I say this as a man that considers himself a feminist. As a gender, women typically work toward unity and the good of the group. I would assume that is because of their history as the primary child raiser. Men on the other hand are often more about tooting their own horn. They are more concerned for themselves then for the greater good.

            Now considering the average human is a nitwit, it means the average Survivor viewer is a nitwit. A show about the complex interpersonal relationship of women would be beyond them. It might appeal to some viewers, but Survivor needs a lot of viewers to survive, so it appeals to the lowest common denominators first. And ultimately Survivor is all about one player destroying the rest… it’s a man’s game. It’s much easier to show a flashy often stupid, arrogant or pompous player. Surprise, they tend to be men! They are people like Coach, Phillip, Russell, Colton…pretty much all men.

            Now there are women that are aggressive and have those “male” qualities, but they are often voted out early. I think that’s because of some ingrained attitudes toward women, that extend far beyond survivor.

            I think women are the better survivor players. The fact that the winner count is near equal proves it in my mind. We live in a society where both men and women elect predominantly male leaders… if women are rising above that and winning ~50% of the time, it’s because they are better at Survivor.

          • You make a good point that some of this is more indicative of larger societal problems than of problems specific to Survivor. I hardly think Survivor is a rare blemish on the face of an otherwise egalitarian and fair-minded cultural landscape. If things were awesome for women everywhere else, I probably just wouldn’t watch reality TV.

            However. I don’t think the fact that the larger world is as bad if not worse excuses Survivor from, to name a few, casting a preponderance of women from one demographic/body type for the sole purpose of openly objectifying them; or from giving a grossly imbalanced edit to male characters in general at best and male characters who are open misogynists at worst; or from allowing their host to openly champion the idea that the only people whose stories are worth telling, and who are worth winning, are aggressive, athletic men. These are all concrete things the show could be doing differently without the quality of the entertainment suffering (and, indeed, things it did differently earlier on).

            You raise a good point about the way boys and girls are socialized differently playing into some of these dynamics. But I also think that there are plenty of women who DON’T fit this mold to a T who’d be great on this show but aren’t being cast (and in fact some who actually have been cast, the guest on this podcast included, whose post-show interviews suggest that they probably WERE more entertaining on the island than the editors gave them credit for – you see what I did there? I brought it back to the topic).

            I think I have said quite enough on a subject that’s been only tangentially related to the podcast under which this discussion occurred, though. I’m half inspired to start up a side project on this where we can continue the dialogue in greater detail. (Which isn’t to say I don’t want it to continue on RHAP in some form – I just don’t want it to derail RHAP entirely.)

          • Jasssi

            When I said “entertaining” I meant that they were playing a more obvious game and so it’s easy for people who just watch Survivor for fun and don’t overanalyze everything, to see what their strategy was (not necessarily a better strategy just a more obvious one). My thought is that most people who watch Survivor probably are casual fans and would find obvious strategy more entertaining, but clearly I can’t prove or know for sure what most people find entertaining and memorable. I find most female contestants memorable even with the edits that they are given, but some people may not and I feel that has more to do with the person watching/remembering than anything. It’s just a thought. And of course I’m not disregarding the sexism for entertainment purposes like having girls in bikinis. Clearly, there is a problem. For the most part I agree with you and you’ve definitely given me something to think about, so thank you for that. Anyway, I’m no expert in this area. I understand what you are saying. I just wanted to add in my 2 cents.

      • Alycia Swift

        I’d add to that list a subcategory – really old woman who is nutty and not like the really smart old guy.

        I’d also add that when they do cast an Aisan woman, somehow she is usually seen as annoying.

        Also, the loudmouth females who don’t necessarily look good in a bikini (Abi, Naonka, Alicia)

        • Category 3, in my head, encompasses both the sharp, opinionated women as well as the loudmouths. Neither get portrayed in a flattering light. (And seriously, Abi, Naonka, and Alicia all looked better in a bikini than I ever will!)

          And yeah, “nutty old woman” is another one that shows up a lot. Outside of Survivor, most of the nutty old woman types have struck me as totally normal, bright people whenever we hear from them.

          • Alycia Swift

            Well, I looked over the word uppity and just saw opinionated so I was thinking the smart female players and not the loudmouths that I mentioned.

            I do wonder though where some of the women that have recently won or come close fit here: Sophie Clarke, Kim Spradlin (yes, she looked good in a bikini but was not interchangeable like, say, Angie, the cookie girl) and Sabrina for example. They weren’t “uppity”, or “opinionated” and put in their place.

          • I’m not saying every single person who’s ever been on Survivor fits into a pigeonhole exactly. Just that most do. And it absolutely enrages a big chunk of the fan base when a woman wins the game who DOESN’T fit a stereotype. Those victories are seen as boring.

            And Sophie was definitely the brainy nerdy type who wasn’t as good at puzzles as Jeff thought she’d be. (She was great at them, but Jeff always seems to be expecting to find a Rubik’s Cube savant out there.)

          • Alycia Swift

            Another category I first thought of – the wiseass. These are the jokers. Most of them trash talk other players in their confessionals even though it is tongue in cheek for the most part. They are well liked by players for the most part. Rob C., Johnny FairPlay, Tyson’ Cochrane and Boston Rob are the most prominent of this group. I can’t remember any females that would be a part of this group.

          • Two words: Courtney Yates. <3

          • Also known as the only person in Survivor history to receive a less visible edit than Purple Kelly. Really. Look it up.

            (I do adore Courtney, FYI. I wish we had a Courtney every season.)

          • What? Courtney had a less visible edit than Purple Kelly? Not sure I follow here.

    • Also, I’m going to take it as a high compliment that there’s someone out there who seeks out and downvotes every single comment that has both my name and an allusion to sexism in it. They say you haven’t made it until you get your first hater.

      • damnbueno

        Welcome to the club.

        I’m pretty sure whoever it is, is down voting the person, not the comment. It happens to me all the time.

        Up and down votes are meaningless to me. Say what’s on your mind. That’s what this forum is for.

      • Trixie02

        For every down vote, there are more of us who think you’re terrific!

        • Aww, thanks! And that time I wasn’t even fishing! (Trust me, you’ll know when I’m fishing.)

      • Aaaaand there they are.

        • Joel P.

          Woe is you. You’re such a victim.

      • Dave L

        Well theoretically if the person didn’t think it was sexism, then it makes sense that you’d got a downvote if you keep saying it was sexism. The person is just being consistent.

        Personally if I disagree with somebody, I’ll just give an alternate opinion. I’ll just give them a downvote if their comment is obnoxious or needlessly attacking. On rare occasions I’ll give a person a downvote if they say something completely contradicting what they’ve said before…like hypothetically a person that tallied all his up and down votes to brag that he was more favored, and then later said that votes were meaningless to him. :)

        And since this comment is needlessly attacking…here I go…

  • BogDa

    I’d love to hear some more movie casts. Like The Goonies, Rocky Horror, Scream.

  • Bobby Lewis

    I’m thinking all of this “Tina + Aras: Power Couple” stuff you touch on is a bit exaggerated. I don’t think they have shown that enough to not classify it as “fan fiction.”

    • Maybe you’re right… but I can’t NOT think the only two winners in the game who are the only two with loved ones in the game are working together.

      • Bobby Lewis

        Maybe they know better than to talk to the camera too….

  • I listen to the whole podcast (I even suffered through the long John interview even though I wasn’t a big fan of him). But I always love your survivor podcasts Rob keep em’ coming, especially the Survivor Know It Alls!

  • Toll

    You have to do Troll 2 with Matt Hoffman it is soo bad its good that would be really funny

  • Richard Weed

    Regarding Gervase faking his lack of swimming ability. I thought in the first challenge was just him being out of shape and being really tired by the part he looked bad at swimming. He not only looked bad swimming but could barely climb over the boxes.

  • uyiu

    I couldn’t believe Erinn was onboard with this recent article. I thought the article was polluted thoughts of people who think they’re somehow right about things. They’re bullies to me.

    • terrified

      the irony with the article is that it is infact complaints like that that will kill the show eventually. Seriously

  • Alex

    the longer the better! i usually listen to them on 1.5 speed. always listen to the whole thing. maybe not all at once but usually over the course of a day or two.

  • Liam Carlson

    If the podcast isn’t 24 hours, then it isn’t long enough.

  • Bret Greenacre

    I listen to the whole thing every week! It’s great background for all the homework I have to do in college, so – if anything – the longer the better, ’cause I spend upwards of 15 hours a week working on stuff!

  • ParasocialDude

    Thanks for the heads up on the Culpepper spoilers. I barely wanted to listen to him to begin with, so you gave me a good reason to avoid the Pep altogether.

  • Ross Kiely

    Erinn is like, the worst guest since like, Nov 11, 2011. Very little insight, and she is like, very difficult to like, listen to.

    On Length: The longer the better! To the complainers, hit the pause button!
    On Fincher: GREAT guest! This is one more listener who supports having him on.

  • Matt Holtzclaw

    Erinn has a ton of insight and is great to listen to, despite what Ross Kiely states below. I’d go so far to say (with all due to respect to Sophie and Andrea both of whom i love) she is the best female guest on the show not named Kim Spradlin.

  • Matt Holtzclaw

    Rob, you credited two of Sophie’s tweets to Eliza. Both the Kat related tweets. Eliza actually has a “girl crush” on Kat according to her twitter and was sad to see her go.

  • Dave L

    As far as the relationship between Aras and Vytas, I feel like I’m watching a different show than Erinn and some others. The body language and comments they’ve made suggest to me that they are incredibly tight. In fact I feel they both feel bad about their past relationship, and they are using this as sort of a therapy to finally work together on the same team to help each other. The “supposed” rivalry between them seems distant and all fluff… it’s subtle, but their reactions to Aras beating Vytas in the shoving match challenge tells how close they really are.

  • Michael Norris

    Two awesome guests, but this making the merge vs. not making the merge bit got old fast. Great podcast otherwise.

  • Michael Norris

    I think it’s sexist that people make fun of Erinn for insisting she would’ve beaten Stephen, but they don’t make fun of Stephen for insisting he would’ve beaten Erinn.

    In all seriousness though, she has two confirmed votes with Taj and Coach, and I can see JT being bitter, and maybe Debbie being swayed by Coach. A good speech could’ve done it.

    • damnbueno

      I agree. We saw that Stephen didn’t hold up well under Jury questioning. The unknown factor would have been how well Erinn answered their questions.

      The Tocantins Jurors were also unique in that they had a huge preference for athletic accomplishments in challenges. While Stephen won one Immunity, his win involved math more than strength. So his win might not have mattered much when compared to Erinn’s zero wins.

      Stephen and Erinn would have been a very evenly matched finals pair.

      • Michael Norris

        Well, Erinn’s best chance would’ve been if Stephen had won the final immunity and voted JT out. She could’ve pulled the whole Cochran to Stephen’s Dawn, where the perception the jury had of him made his betrayals a lot more upsetting to them than Erinn’s who they never really trusted. She could easily paint it as if she was the one who kept convincing Stephen to betray his own allies for her, because she kind of was. Of course, it was because it benefited Stephen, and if it didn’t, he wouldn’t have done it, but she doesn’t have to tell them that.

        • damnbueno

          I guess it depends on which “out” the Jury preferred — Outwit or Outlast.

      • Stephen

        I think the Tocantins jury had one goal, and that was to try and turn JT and Stephen against each other. Pretty much every single juror asked a question to set off a response like that, and when JT cottoned on to it, Stephen seemed to get incredibly flustered. I think Stephen would have beaten Erinn, although Erinn beating Stephen wouldn’t be a massive shocker.

        • damnbueno

          I think for the most part, the Tocantins Jurors actually bought into Coach’s “Warrior” crap, and chose to center their questions with that in mind.

          No other Jury in 25 seasons has mentioned the challenges as much as the Tocantins Jurors did.

          I think J.T. picked up on that, and Stephen didn’t, which is why J.T. had better answers for them. Stephen still thought the winner would be decided by strategy.

          These Jurors also bought J.T.’s lies easier than Stephen’s.

          I thought by far Stephen was the better overall player, but of course, I wasn’t on the Jury.

          • Stephen

            It seems as though Tyson, Brendan, Debbie, Sierra and even Coach basically asked a question where they were meant to trash the other. Once Stephen threw JT under a bus and said he would have taken Erinn to the end had he won the final challenge JT repeatedly gave the jury what they wanted. But I do agree with you, they seemed a lot more receptive to JT than to Stephen.

          • damnbueno

            In Stephen’s opening speech, he talked about how much personal growth he experienced. J.T. said he was a natural leader, provider and physical competitor, and wasn’t afraid to be strong even when those people usually get booted early.

            Brendan asked Stephen “I look at the Challenges and don’t see that personal growth matters. Why does it?” Brendan just reacted to Stephen’s statement, he wasn’t necessarily trying to make Stephen and J.T. go after each other.

            Debbie asked J.T. “Is honesty important?” then she bought his line about “my mama says I have a good heart, but I should lie if I had to.” Then she asked Stephen “If you won Immunity, would you have taken J.T.?” and Stephen hemmed and hawed, then said he never made a choice in his heart. Again, J.T. and Stephen both chose to argue over their answers, but I don’t think that was Debbie’s intent when asking her question.

            Coach asked “Give me examples of your honesty, integrity and noble behavior.” He didn’t ask each one to give an example of the other one lying, which would invite a fight.

            Sierra actually took a shot at J.T., saying “J.T. you want to be praised for being strong but you took weak players with you including the weakest in Stephen and Erinn instead of strong ones like Brendan and Tyson.”

            and Tyson asked “J.T. how was Stephen an asset?” and J.T. said he could have done it without Stephen, but it wouldn’t have been as easy.

            I just don’t see that any of these Jurors were trying to make the finalists fight. Their fights were just an unexpected result. I think the Jurors had their voting criteria in mind and wanted to see which finalist best satisfied them. To their credit, both Stephen and J.T. knew the competition was solid, so they fought hard for the million. It made for one of the most entertaining final Tribal Councils ever.

            Erinn asked “Why should I vote for you Stephen when your alliances – Secret, Jalapao and Warrior – all fell apart?” I don’t see her inviting one to trash the other either.

            And Taj asked J.T. “If it was so hard for you to boot Coach, why was it so easy to blindside me?” J.T. claimed that was a hard decision for him. Stephen pointed out several times when J.T. had earlier wanted Taj gone, then J.T. closed it out by saying he felt like a fool after he found out Stephen would have taken Erinn to the finals.

            J.T. was just better at telling the jury what they wanted to hear than Stephen was.

  • Dave L

    With all due respect to Erinn regarding the massage, I think she’s being unfair to Laura. The massage was likely meaningless, however it was edited to be the reason why she was voted out and the last guest certainly took it quite a bit farther.

    If the T.V. says, “a lot of kids named Bob know Dave L…. and a lot of kids named Bob had their puppies murdered”, I might also go out of my way to make sure people don’t try and connect dots that should not be connected.

  • Micaela Howard

    the longer the podcast, the better

  • Micaela Howard

    Can’t wait for more Tyson podcasts after the season is over!

  • Brett Barsanti

    Team Tyson! (I like Aras a lot too though)

  • Michael Norris

    “I won’t tell you what show Hayden said was harder, but his answer was what I would’ve assumed.”

    *goes on a five minute rant about how much easier BB is than Survivor*

  • LosPollosHermanos

    very good ep

  • BogDa

    Can you and Matt do a review of Problem Child 2?

  • leConnard

    Love Erinn as a guest. Don’t know how much I agree with her analysis of certain things but its nice to hear her chirp you.

    I thought it was a bit inconsistent of Erinn to complain about the gender imbalance on survivor then announce that she would prefer the company of a testosterone laden ex-football player and his big boobed wife (the Culpeppers) over a strong, self-actualized woman and her doting husband (the Codys).

    Also I can’t believe that you’re going to indulge the feminist author about the sexism in Survivor. I suppose it will be good to hear a different position but I am sort of getting sick of a certain social group consistently getting offended by the perceived misogyny in our society. I remember reading a feminist writer announcing she was boycotting Breaking Bad because of the lack of strong female characters.

    Anyway my little rant is over. Keep up the good work Rob.


      I hope Rob doesn’t go on all season and in every podcast about the so called ‘sexism’, it’s getting really tiring to listen to.

      • Dave L

        Those with privilege rarely want to hear about the struggles of those without.

        Survivor is a game about social dynamics. It is difficult to be politically correct when a camera is on you 24/7. Where better to discuss racism, sexism, bigotry in general, than in a space dedicated to Survivor, the game of social interactions (I suppose perhaps a Big Brother forum). And it’s not like Rob spent 150 minutes talking about it.

        Male presidents= 44 Female presidents= 0
        White presidents=43 anything else=1
        Clearly our society does not see everybody equally.

        • PHILtheCANADIAN

          I’m tired of hearing about it because the article that stirred a lot of this conversation is ridiculous and grasping at straws. If people want to talk about Jeff Probst obviously favoriting males, go for it. If you want to call Hayden sexist because he’s upset that the women on his tribe can’t beat their aging mothers, you’re ridiculous. If you want to call John Fincher a sexist because he clearly doesn’t like Laura M, you’re ridiculous.

          And I don’t know why you’re giving me random statistics like I don’t know sexism in some forms exists. Also pointing out the past presidents is pretty silly because a lot of them were elected in a time when women and other races absolutely weren’t seen as equals to white males. Here’s a more recent and relevant statistic though:

          Survivor male winners: 14
          Survivor female winners: 11 (12 if you count Sandra twice)

          • Dave L

            There have been several homosexual winners, but that doesn’t make Brad’s “four guys and a gay guy” comment any less homophobic. The point is not that the challenges are sexist, it’s that the editing and some contestants are. Nobody wants to call John Fincher a sexist because he doesn’t like Laura M. The last Big Brother season wasn’t the most tolerant one ever just because of who won.

          • PHILtheCANADIAN

            Except nobody is talking about Brad’s comment, they’re making up sexist stuff elsewhere. And yes, people do want to call John sexist for not liking Laura M, because that’s exactly what happened when Fincher’s podcast went up.

            I have no issue with real problems being brought up, it’s tiresome and annoying when we nitpick and make up issues that don’t exist. That’s what Linda Holmes did with a lot of her article, a few real issues with lots of fake ones to put emphasis on her point. And now she’s getting her own podcast on here which I will listen to just to see if she seems less foolish than she did with her article.

          • Dave L

            You are welcome to your opinion, but to be clear, the people were not saying he was sexist for not liking her. They were saying he’s sexist for him talking about her as if she was a whore. Now you don’t have to agree with that, but if you think people were calling him sexist because he didn’t like somebody, you misunderstood.
            What’s confusing to me is how you seem to be assuming everything you believe to be a fact, and anybody with an opposing opinion just is wrong. Until some scientific test can be performed to show Linda created fake issues, that’s just your opinion, and as far as I can see, possibly even a minority opinion on this site.

          • Morty

            Phil & the Connard are right!
            It’s sooooo annoying when a group of people feel they are marginalized or undervalued in some way due to nothing more than an accident of birth , and they then have the unmitigated gall to object to that treatment!

            The nerve!!!

          • PHILtheCANADIAN

            It’s pretty easy to tell who isn’t reading my posts

          • PHILtheCANADIAN

            So you really believe Hayden’s comment is sexist? I should have just saved my time and asked you that in the first place.

          • Dave L

            I think it’s slightly sexist/ageist but no more than the slight sexism that goes on everyday in our society where men are just assumed to be better than women. It registered more as a dumb comment than sexist when he said it.

            I forget which challenge it was after, but the mothers beating the daughters in a physical challenge is not a surprise… older men and women are often stronger than younger people, plus the women would never have made it on to Survivor to begin with if they weren’t strong/athletic. If it was after a puzzle, well that’s even more ridiculous.

          • damnbueno

            Dave L. still thinks Penner made a smart move when he turned down Lisa and Skupin’s final 4 deal.

            Even after Penner himself called it a “bonehead move,” Dave still thinks it was smart.

            This is who you’re debating with.

          • PHILtheCANADIAN

            Yeah, I wasted my time clearly lol

          • damnbueno

            Here are a few more Dave L. classics. You can see all of these on this thread unless Dave L goes back and edits them all.

            Dave L damnbueno • 11 months ago

            “Yes, I understand Penner. My brain functions similarly to his….I can understand his strategy as well as his analysis.”

            “Penner did have an agreement with Skupin. Just didn’t hold up and you didn’t see it on T.V.”

            “In fact I’ll go on and say that I think Penner has played the best game of anybody this season…That only leaves Malcolm and Denise. I think they haven’t done anything particularly good.”

            “There is no direct connection between him not saying yes to Lisa, and him being voted out”

            “And he did not say “no” to the deal.”

          • Dave L


            I think you are getting a bad edit. But I’m impressed that you took the time to collect all those quotes. Can you tell me what my horoscope was from last week too?

          • damnbueno

            Yes, it said “You will get egg on your face when it is once again revealed how badly you interpret Survivor strategy.”

            It also said “You will once again break your word by continuing to reply to damnbueno after promising you’d no longer do so.”

            Gathering the quotes was easy. 1 click on Survivor Philippines, 1 click on the Penner exit interview and a little cutting and pasting. You’ve had so many embarrassing moments, it was tougher to decide what to leave out.

            You and I have been warned by Rob C. before. That’s why you agreed not to reply to me anymore. Are you pushing for another warning, or will you finally start keeping your word?

          • Dave L

            Last time I checked, this whole conversation started because you nosed your way into a conversation between myself and somebody else that had nothing to do with you. It was a conversation on sexism in Survivor, and you decided my opinions of Penner’s play a year ago meant I’m not equiped to know about sexism?? I’m guessing you think that because you hit “reply” to a different person to talk bad about me, then it’s all good.
            What are you three, that you are worried about getting a 2nd warning from Rob, a newborn father that has a gazillion more important things to do than read comments in old threads? As Trudeau has told you…stop trolling.

          • damnbueno

            Yep, your word is still worthless.

            And you know nothing about Survivor.

          • Dave L

            I didn’t say it was smart. I said it was fairly meaningless… that Lisa was going to turn against him anyway. It was more complicated than a simpleton view of the edit would lead you to believe. Something else that also mystifies me is how Cochran was always accused of flipping to avoid the rock, as opposed to flipping to avoid the bullies. Some people don’t get that these players aren’t robots… to do so would make you a psychopath.

            But I hardly see how my opinion of Penner would have anything to do with a discussion on sexism. However I can totally see why you would want to bring it up, since Phil’s position is weak and unsupported. His inclusion of Survivor winners shows he has no clue what Linda Holmes was saying… as if there being equal female winners would somehow mean that Probst and the editing are not sexist.

          • damnbueno

            How quickly you change your tune.

            And your word is still worthless.

        • Joel P.

          Dave L: “Those with privilege rarely want to hear about the struggles of those without.”

          Yeah, about that…

        • Joel P.

          So you’re deleting my posts, huh?

      • BogDa

        Tired, because it is true.

  • Matthew Gregg

    Thanks for the great podcast, and for Moviecasts can you do Ghostusters.

  • finsburysghost

    Rob – I listen to your podcasts during the commute unless the outed guest is extremely annoying. Length is fine. There have been times this year when your guests on the Amazing Race pods have talked over the content, but I imagine that is the biggest challenge as a host. I think you are doing a great job, as are your Ed McMahons’ in Steven and Jessica. Great stuff episode after episode.

    Sexism – to put that extremely boring and simple challenge into the conversation is ridiculous. Balance beam and put numbers in order, that were not even out of order, 1 to 100.

    Kim is a great player, but her competition after Troyzan was eliminated ranks among the worst final 5 or 6 ever.

    I thought Sophie was a great winner.

    I think Tina is one of the best players ever.
    ***I wonder if Tina told her daughter to keep quiet last episode.

    I also wonder if they merge with Tina – daughter and the Ara twins, how will that 4-some find the numbers to remain a majority. I like Tyson making a move now. I think Hayden is in trouble if it’s not Aras.

  • Tammy L. Nelson

    Just started, but I have to say that Tyson is doing well this time because he doesn’t have to babysit Coach.

  • Trixie02

    If you want to go back to the 1980’s…Good cult films: “Repo Man” (original)
    “Down by Law”
    “This is Spinal Tap”

    Teenage Films:
    “Fast Times at Ridgemont High”
    “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off”
    “Night of the Comet”

  • sanjayP

    I loved the double header! You guys are soo funny!

  • Joe Byars

    I can’t get the podcast with Matt to play or come up, the video stops after Erin?? Am I doing something wrong?

    • Justin

      The interview with Matt is on the audio file only and comes in after the audio version of the Erinn interview.

      • Joe Byars


  • Sarah

    I would really LOVE to hear an Anchorman Podcast, especially since the sequel is coming out next month. Zoolander and Elf are also high on my list.

Next Post:

Previous Post:

Try the CBS All Access Pass for Free for 1 Week

Rob Has A Post Archive

Get Scripted TV Podcasts from Rob Cesternino at

Buy Survivor Seasons on DVD

Listen to the 1000th RHAP


The RHAP Original Web Series

Support RHAP by becoming a Monthly Patron