Distractible - What Distractible Stands For

Episode Date: January 8, 2024

The guys decide to put their reputations on the line. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A fresh voice can speak to you and open your ears and your mind to new views and new perspectives. The call of the wild, a crescendo of culture. Listen as a chorus of fresh voices moves you, taking you to greater heights. Add your voice to the mix and let fresh answer back with perfect harmony in pure Michigan. Keep it fresh at Michigan.org. Whoa, what are you listening to this for? Wait, who's talking? You know you're driving a 2024 Ford Escape with available Alexa built in so you can change the music.

Oh yeah, Alexa, change station to 99.2. can change the music oh yeah alexa change station to 99.2 see purchase a 2024 escape st line all wheel drive with tech pack at 3.49 apr for 72 months with down payment that's just 267 bi-weekly cash value of 40 294 plus eligible ford owners get a thousand dollar bonus for details visit your local ford store or ford. Ooh, French lavender soy blend candle. I told you HomeSense has good gift options. Hmm, well, I don't know. Mom's going to love it. She'll take one sniff and be transported to that anniversary trip

you took to San Tropez a few years ago. Forget it. She complained about her sunburn the whole trip. It's only $14. $14? Now that's a vacation I can get behind. Deals so good, everyone approves. Only at HomeSense. Good evening, gentle listener, and welcome to Distractable. This episode, menacing Mark gets a huge package and tries his best to destroy his friend's reputations.

Well-hung Wade encourages excruciation, belittles buxom bots, admits to being prem, and bulls for backers. Big bald Bob defends deathlessness, rewards lenses, and has a boner for bones. From eating nuts to polyamory and

polygamy, yes! It's time for What Distractible Stands For. Now sit back and prepare to be distracted and enjoy the show. Hello and welcome back to Distractible. Thank you so much for watching on this new year. I know we already celebrated the new year, but it's still a new year and I want to thank you, new year, but it's still a new year, and I want to thank you, our loyal listeners and or viewers who are still listening to this podcast in the car. Brave of you. I'm your host, Markiplier, here to guide you through an experience that's unlike any other, definitely unlike anything that we've done before. I'm joined on this journey of, uh,

newness with my friends, my fellow handsome men, extraordinarily large testicled Bob and Wade. It's very uncomfortable. Yes, it's a burden. It's like having an eternal bouncy ball between your legs. It's like being a Meryl forever. Isn't that the Pokemon that bounces on its tail a little bit? A what?

No, I for some reason imagined Meryl Streep and I was like, Meryl Streep bounces on her testicles all the time. So is in this episode, we're going to be talking about something that is going to be fun, adventurous, happy, freeing. Some might say liberating

for those who are participating in it and also damning and condemning and will probably annihilate the reputation and or future livelihood of one of our contestants here and or both that's that's exciting i think or maybe terrifying it's both points are on the line and uh reputations are on the line and no matter what happens in the episode

the winner shall be declared free of all taint from the episode all balls no taint you'll actually absorb the testicles of your opponent and you'll grow a second set that will exist where your taint currently resides dates are low stakes are high let's do this yeah let's do this but before we do this how are you guys doing my car is broken it's a stupid thing that's broken it's literally like a bolt on the seat bracket backed out and it's a it's a thing that i can't tighten myself because both it's difficult to reach and because it's a torx head bolt and a square nut and i have no tools to you to do i don't have a big enough torx bit i don't have a thing that fit anyway it's just annoying if you play your cards right you might have a square

nut at the end of this episode i'm gonna three square nuts a day but that's none neither here nor there man i feel you on the car front my car did your car become like a little crushed up cube or something what happened to that thing yeah where is it it just got totaled so the insurance company was like oh it's in very bad shape here's some money and then they took it and they put it in a box and swept it away okay so in other news, Wade still doesn't have a car. Now, Bob, you don't have a car. What happened to it? I own a car. I just, it's just as broken. It's literally just the seat. Nothing about it is broken mechanically. It works fine. It's just the driver's seat. And I just have to wait for the part to come in to get, to go have the dealer basically screw it back together.

And that's it. And like, I could drive it, but and that's it and like i could drive it but the driver's seat just kind of like you know and like that's not that's i did look my car in college that i drove you remember my blue volkswagen that i had do you remember that the driver's seat was held up with milk crates i don't remember that specifically the driver's seat bracket rusted out and broke and so what i did was i took two plastic milk crates and wedged them between the back seat and the back of the driver's seat and then shoved the driver's seat back into it as hard as i could and that's what kept the driver's seat from literally flopping over backwards while i drove that years i drove around like that that's industry standard now i think oh yeah i mean that's basically better than stock so i i'm considering doing that with this car it just

it doesn't aesthetically it doesn't go with the look that i'm trying to achieve so it's you know it's less desirable it's basically a safety feature because if you get hit head on somehow you'll go flying out the back with your seat included and out the rear window and you'll be totally fine no you know how you know how the the cyber truck is facing a lot of scrutiny because it has no crumple zones right now and that's a big say i basically added another crumple zone into that car the front has a crumple zone the back has a crumple zone and then the driver's seat has its own crumple zone yeah that's the safest thing i ever did probably way safer than putting up bunk beds with chopped up plastic coat coat hanger point for bob all right wade what's going what's going on

in life or like right now i just dipped a nuggy in some ketchup right now either way well i dipped a nuggy in some ketchup and i was getting ready to take the bite when you said my name i was really excited for the bite but now i'm holding off to tell you about the bite. Of 87? Are you wanting me to get out of your way so you can carry on with your meal? No, no, no, man. I love talking to you. It's almost as good as this bite of nuggy I'm waiting for.

But our friendship always comes top 10. Uh-huh. So, Wade, before you eat that nug... Yeah, please. What's is there is there a plan for the foam on your office wall behind you or where's that where's the foam at how's that going oh yeah plan is to keep it right there i'm hoping it doesn't run away i've got trackers on each individual square just in case uh before before you eat that nugget yeah no before no i just have some more questions yeah yeah sure you said you were gonna go car shopping and i believe that you are aren't you

worried about your you're gonna hurt the feelings of your old car i know it was totaled but it it still has feelings uh if so it doesn't really matter because it's dead to me and so are its feelings it's kind of like when you lose a person you kind of talk to him for a little while you go to the cemetery and then you forget and you go less and less over the years and it's kind of like when you lose a person you kind of talk to them for a little while you go to the cemetery and then you forget and you go less and less over the years and it's kind of like oh god they don't even care about me anymore anyway i've forgotten them they forgot me you know it's just how cars are wait i i haven't forgotten um about you though uh i know you have more foam can you grab a piece i know you have some by your desk just like show me i want to know exactly how you're mounting this i'm worried about the safety.

All my ketchup dripped on my desk. Oh, that's fun. Yeah, I've got this corner piece, for example, that goes in the corner. So what I do is I double sticky the back and I to the corner and it's there. That's really cool. What about the flat pieces? Yeah, man. I got those too.

Here's one. flat pieces yeah man i got those too here's one uh i also just put two of the command strips on the back of these and crazy how that works yeah where'd you buy it oh uh mr bezos sent it my way for a small cash fee who's that uh i think he used to work at mcdonald's uh and now he owns amazon wade uh follow-up question yeah man we can see we can see the posters the framed posters but you can only really see the bottom three edges and i'm just curious does the frame go all the way around the fourth edge of those yeah the top edge the top did you cheap out on the framing or is the top also framed no they're they're there see oh cool yeah cool yeah okay oh wait wait now that i'm looking at your camera i think the white balance is a little off i think

you might need to go into the menu uh you it seems a little on the cold side it's not really showing like the warmth it's pretty well very balanced as all things said look how white that is. That's damn. Look at all blue. No. No, very white. Isn't that beautiful? You know what? Now that you already took your nugget, I don't want to talk to you anymore. Oh, okay. What did you just spit out?

What's wrong with you? No, I just wiped my mouth, man. Why did you wipe your mouth like that? It looked like you were... Because I put on chapstick earlier and i felt like a crumb was sticking to my lip fair point for wade it's all tied up for the small talk which means we got to go to our special wheel over here sam play some game show music i can almost hear it yeah just run the run the whole intro for the game show keep going keep going maybe do one of those features where they're like today's episode is sponsored by sandals contestants have a chance to win a trip to sandals trinidad tobago maybe

even have like a full 90s sitcom opening just us like and your host markiplier! Yes, welcome to what might be the sequel of an episode that I don't remember the name of! Woo! Yeah, part two! If only this were written down somewhere. Also, I don't want to say it out loud, but I think it is because it's going to spoil it. But what we're going to do here is determine who's going first! Also, I love the thought that you were like, I need 15 minutes to spoil it. But what we're going to do here is determine who's going first. Also, I love the thought that you were like, I need 15 minutes to get ready.

And it was to make a wheel that had our names on it. All right, Wade, you're up first. Congratulations, you are... It's a wheel that has pro, con, for, against. Uh-oh. Oh, crap. You are pro.

Oh, those are small. This is another big wheel that i can't read while it's spinning you are oh man torture great all right does that mean i'm anti-torture yes this is the game show probably an offshoot of morals or no morals, but it's not determined who has morals and who hasn't because it's random every time. Wade. Why is Hitler on the list? Yeah, no, you were, Wade was almost just pro-Hitler. I don't know about that one. It's not just bad things.

There's also good things on here. So I have a list of things written on a list on a big wheel that I'm going to spin. It's all random because we're going to alternate after the first round. Wade goes first. But after that, it is still going to be random what side Bob is going to be on. It's going to be a wheel that's spun telling him whether he's for or against a random subject on the next wheel. We'll go back and forth. We'll have 60 seconds to make your case, 60 seconds for your opponent, and then 30 seconds to make a counterpoint. And I may reduce the

timer as the game goes on. Winner at the end is absolved of all sins, so they can say whatever they want right now. It's all good unless they lose, and then they will get responsibility for all the words that they said, and they believe everything, and it will be written on their tombstone. So, wait, here's what you need to do in order to win the point here. You need to convince me. I am the impartial judge here, an arbitrator. You're making the argument for torture. Bob, you're making the argument against torture.

90 seconds on the clock to make your case. Bob will have time to counter it and you'll get 30 seconds to match it actually let's make it 60 60 and then 30 for a counterpoint all right and 60 seconds on the clock all right so here's the thing uh if someone tortures somebody you torture them because eye for an eye but wait eye for an eye the whole world's blind yes you know what else is blind justice and justice is a good thing so Therefore, not a good argument. Second of all, if you need to get information fast, what you do, poke, prod, waterboard, light them on fire, tickle their toes, all kinds of disgusting, horrible shit. Hide the remote.

It will get them talking because they want it to stop. Another thing, Mark, being a masochist, you understand that sometimes torture can be good for both parties, right? You get the fun and joy out of being the one poking and prodding but also that person might be like oh no please don't do yeah uh where internally they're really enjoying it but it's the whole fun role play aspect of things uh second of all sometimes you have to right like it's it's not a fun thing to admit but sometimes whenever you need to get information for something like you i've watched the show 24 and jack bauer sometimes he has torture, get info to save the whole world. So if you're going to have to do it, it's got to be done.

Wow. That was compelling. You know, I like the approaches you took. I don't know if I like the masochism route. You do. Bob, you, you are against torture. That was a very strong opening statement by Wade. Are you ready?

Yeah, sure. All right. Here we go. First, I just want to to say my opponent my opponent doesn't even know how to count so i don't know how much validity you should lend to his arguments he said secondly on his fourth point uh also i want to say my opponent conflated the idea of uh pain pain for pleasure with torture the very notion of torture is that it is negative, it is harmful, it is hurtful, it is for the purpose of obtaining information. And to that point, it is successful, you are successfully going to extract information when you torture someone, almost definitely, especially if you're willing

to go however far, you know, it takes to get to torture them to get information. But do you want accurate information? Or do you want any information that they'll say while you torture them? Because if you really want someone to tell you the truth, torture is a scientifically proven method to get untrue, inaccurate, unverifiable information. If you actually care about what information you are getting or if you actually care about, I don't know, humanity, torture is not effective or valuable. Does somebody get a rebuttal? You get 25 seconds.

Mark, I'm feeling strong about this episode. I gotta be honest. Okay, good, good. All right, and go. Mainly, I want to focus on the fact that Bob said torture and is inherently torture, but torture for one person can be pleasure for another. And sometimes people do have their pain

and pleasure centers somewhat crossed. So you can get pleasure out of pain, i.e. like clawing down the back or biting various other things. Tickling to one person could be complete torture where someone else might enjoy it. So it really depends on if you're focusing on the torture being torture of the person or the torturing by the torturer. So they can be the same thing. So with all the arguments on the table, I feel like Wade was too focused on torture being pleasure.

And even if there are masochists out there which i'm not which i'm not oh wink i'm going to give the point to bob for saying that torture is bad i can't believe it took that much for us to get to that point but here we are what a boy it's such a bad person i feel like you're focusing only on my rebuttal not my original prompt that's fine whatever but bob did have a good point about, no, torture being scientifically proven to get incorrect information because the subjects are too

focused on making the pain stop. Have we even scientifically proven that science is good? Ah, he's got a point. You want me to put science on the wheel? I could, we'll determine it. Add science to this! Alright, we replace torture with science because we don't know I didn't know what some of those words were can I be honest so I'll go through

the list for you just to make it a little easier health murder mental health coffee time travel lenses space elevators zymology what's that one We'll get to it. Death, Numismatics. Don't know what that is. Endangered Species, Cryonics, VR, Nanobots, Cryptocurrency, Cryptozoology, Speleology. Don't know what that is. Narcotics, Surveillance, Necrophilia, Colonization, Polygamy, Sex Robots, Onology, Patriarchy,

Matriarchy, Hedonism, Hitler, Blowing Up the Moon, and Science. We're going to be diving in. Some of these topics seem a little bit heavier than others. VR or Hitler. I mean, okay. This is like the secret mod discussions for mods of a conspiracy theory subreddit. These are what we're going to really focus on this year.

Look, it'll all bounce out because you don't know if you're going to be focus on this here. Look, it'll all bounce out because you don't know if you're going to be pro or against it. Are you pro time travel or pro Hitler? It's got to be one. I don't know. We're going to find out. Bob, you are going to be. Also, I'm spinning a wheel for for or against.

You're going to be pro. Oh, you're going to get like lenses or something to just auto win. Here we go. Well, we don't know. We don't know. Come on, science. All right.

We you are pro living forever. Yeah, that's one of the worst ones, Bob. You're screwed. This is interesting. All right. So Mark is making this the screen do seizure things. Mark, why is that? Click reset for God's sake. All right. Mark is making the screen do seizure things. Mark, why is that happening?

Click reset for God's sake. All right. What the hell? I don't know what that was. So let's be clear. When it comes to shipping internationally, can I provide trade documents electronically? Mm-hmm. The answer is FedEx.

Okay. But what about estimating duties and taxes on my shipments? How do I find all the... Also FedEx. Impressive. Is there a regulatory specialist I can ask about? FedEx. Oh, but let's say that... FedEx.

What? FedEx. Thanks. No more questions. Always your answer for international shipping. FedEx, where now meets next. Only got small amounts of time but want big amounts of flavor? Knorr has got you.

Our new Knorr rice cups deliver all the taste without the prep or wait time. We're talking yummy, creamy, hearty goodness. Choose from loads of delicious, more-ish flavors ready in only two and a half minutes. It's not cup food, it's good food in a cup. Visit Knorr.com to learn more. Hooray! Bob, as going first, you're going to have a minute, and then you'll have 25 seconds for your final rebuttal. And, beacon!

This is an easy one. Philosophically, the question of whether or not you would want to live forever is tough, and the answer is unclear, because living forever poses a lot of conundundrums you'd have to watch everyone you ever knew or loved die there are certainly downsides to it the the simple and and all be all answer to this argument is it's better to live forever than to die forever the thing about living forever is that there is infinite opportunity in that there is more things there that. There is more things. There are more people. There are more things. There is more to experience. There is more to do.

It may cause you a lot of philosophical anguish, but you may eventually ascend to be a superhuman being. You may learn the secrets of the cosmos. I don't know because I don't get to do that. But I do know that if you die, you are dead forever. There is no coming back to life. There is no going back. There's no undoing that.

And it's always better to have opportunity than to shut a door permanently and unreconcilably. That was a compelling point. I'm not writing down a point here. I'm just trying to remember where we stand. So we are against torture. Distractible as a whole, so far as definitively here at Distractible, we are against it. Anyway, Wade, are you ready? Let's do it. Begin. Thank you, Bob, for agreeing with me for the first 15 seconds of your point. Living forever sounds terrible. One,

what if your body continues to age or your mind continues to degrade? Then what is your existence? Outliving all your loved ones, as you pointed out, means that you're left alone and with nothing eventually. Existence once your body, planet, etc. are gone means means what you're just a floating mind out there with nothing to do besides think and remember and regret being alive no peace found in death whereas you know peace and tranquility might actually come once the end is there especially if your mind and body are degrading uh die dead forever you claimed as a fact what about religion faith in something such as heaven reincarnation other theories and what might happen to the mind once the body is gone or the soul. There's a lot to be debated about what the soul even is. On top of that, I would say that living forever just doesn't even sound like something I would

want. Like, I don't want to live long enough to see like my children outgrow and die and then my grandchildren outgrow and die and everyone else. Unless you're assuming everybody lives forever, in which case it's just not feasible to think that because then about resources and everything else, what's going to end up happening? Disagree. Very good points across the board. I think that was compelling. I didn't think I would be swayed. But Bob, you have 25 seconds for a final rebuttal.

My opponent posits that your body and mind will continue to degrade, but I would say that if your argument is that you're going to live literally forever, that the point is that you get to continue to live forever in a state that counts as living. You're not going to be a puddle of goo that's technically alive. Also, my opponent focuses entirely on this life, but the whole point of living forever is that it's beyond the fathoming

for humans because we don't get to do that. You would essentially be some kind of God as far as we're concerned, and who knows if that's good or bad. An interesting argument. This is pretty tough. I don't know where my gut wants to go on this because instinctively me, I am not really of the mind that I want to live forever. I am kind of just like one life is a very motivating thing, death occurring and being there. However, as a collective here, Bob did make some very strong arguments as for the ascension to Godhood. And that is appealing to me i know wade you brought up religion but the whole basis of religion and that feels that that idea of like

an afterlife a lot of it the phrasing is based around the idea of living forever so bringing that up i don't know helped your cause because if you go to church and a lot of religion based on like you can have eternal life in the kingdom of heaven, which I feel works to Bob's point. Eternal life only comes after death. Yeah, but Bob, then he made another point saying like it doesn't mean like the series of existences doesn't have to be permanent physical forever. He opened it up to many different possibilities. I think I have to give this one to Bob, even though it's against my personal philosophy no i'm shocked uh what an upset we at distractible are for living forever and bob gets the point congratulations bob all right but you know wade it is one of those things where it could go either way it's not guaranteed that

you're a for this next thing you could argue against so but you as being the first person go do have an advantage you didn't in the last one or the the one before you had an advantage you still lost but three is a pattern two is a coincidence sure man let's go let's do this wade is against all right you are against sex robots you are anti-sex robots of all things i wanted to really fight against this was number one on my list i'm glad to be of this position let's go all right all right three two one look sex robots aren't real they're robots right we're not talking about ai sophisticated living being we're talking about a robot that is programmed to have sex so you're not gonna get any meaningful companionship out of it is literally just meaningless sex and that's it. And I gotta throw out a big one here,

maybe the biggest one. A robot has to be maintenanced and cleaned. So you're not even talking about something that's gonna go like hop in the shower afterward. You gotta scrub down when you're done and that just sounds very unpleasant and kind of completely defeats the purpose of the mood. On top of that, what is a robot going to offer you

outside of the sex? Anything else? Where are you going to store it? How are you going to explain to people that come over, friends, family? It's like, oh yeah, that's just the fuckbot in the corner. It's not like you can hide it in your drawer. It's a whole fucking robot that's going to be chilling around. You're going to bring it to a dinner party with you? Like, oh yeah, this is...

Robot, sure, might give you a good 10-15 seconds of fun, and then it's 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 40 seconds of being in the fucking way. Oh, man. I love the self-reporting there, right? The boldest self-reporting distractible history. Did I say 15 seconds? I meant 15 minutes.

15 hours straight is what I meant. Yeah, 15 hours. Bold play. It was, you know, it might have worked in your favor there. Look, if I'm going to argue, I got to be honest. I respect the honesty, sir. 23 hours, 59 minutes and 45 seconds of being in the way. All right, Bob, you're in a bit of a disadvantage here.

Oh, I'm ready. I'm ready. I'm ready. Three, two. We here at Distractible are positively in favor of living forever. And part of the scientific research that needs to go into living forever for humanity is the development of robotics. I think we can all agree that in a future where humans can be uploaded into robotic bodies, sex is

a thing that we're going to want. We want systems that will give us the full human experience, that will give us the full connection and intimacy that you can have with a normal, fleshy human partner. This is just part of that development. I'm not going to comment on the social questions around whether it's good or bad for the individuals. That is for you to decide on your own basis. But this is important robotic development.

We need to develop these systems now because in the future, when humans' bodies fail them, but their minds seek to persist and we develop the rest of the science to make that happen, we're going to want this part of the robotic science to be well developed. Wow. That was really good. Coming at it from an angle of future use and utility i like that a lot that swung me back a bit but wade you have 25 seconds to final are you ready yes all right three two do you have sextol pistons stuck in your ears because i mentioned the fact that we're not talking about ai yet we're talking about robots and robots are underdeveloped

right now and therefore just a chunk of metal and fake flesh sitting in our way. And you could talk about what might be in the future and developing something sure sounds great. But as it is right now, a sex robot in the current moment, 15 seconds of good, 23 hours, 59 minutes, 45 seconds of being in the way. Not AI, robot. That is an interesting point. And you reiterated it in your first one because

you you did kind of define you defined the parameters of the argument around robot being a more machine-like thing uh are it i just have a quick question when you think of sex robot are you thinking of like a steam press that lowers from the ceiling above your bed and just kind of chunk, chunk, chunk, chunk? Or is it still in human form? Anything robotic. I was picturing a sex doll that has like three peens in a pod. We talked about like the whole program, but there was one that had like six programmable

personalities or something. I'm thinking of something like that where it's got like, oh, I want, I don't know, Texan cowgirl personality. And it's got like oh i want i don't know texan cowgirl personality and it's got like 18 voice lines you fucking pull the nipple and all of a sudden it's like oh you sure are big it's like great i love that thank you i'm with you hesitantly only because you have somehow in my mind painted the most abhorrent idea of a sex robot. You have distorted my idea of what a sex robot could be and reduced it down to just the most bizarre, unlubricated, hard-edged metal monstrosity.

It's like the Cybertruck with the vagina. Yeah, it's just like that. Or Gonk from Star Wars, just like you little trash can guy. No crumple zone. You have made this so unappealing that I don't care if I only last 15 seconds. I think I am against this, and I'm going to give Wade the point. We are at Distractible, are officially against Big Timer.

Now, have you guys seen the new plug-in hybrid sex dolls you gotta pull cord it but it's also got a battery run silent under five miles an hour just hands and mouth uh no you know what so there's definitely a like a youtube channel out there that's like one of those funny diy ones it's gonna do like a two-stroke chainsaw powered sex doll you put a chainsaw in her hand and she's all like yeah well you know it's all about converting the motion it's all about the angles and the thing you know and i'm not i'm not the engineer this is why distractible we are again sex sex robots because you can't...

Robots? Robots. Sex robots? Because you can't trust these two to design them. We cannot be trusted here. All right, Bob, you are going to be... Oh, good. I'm in favor of something.

For... I thought I distributed these to be like opposites but let's uh i'll fix that next time you are four that's it it's you are four four lenses give me the point i already win baby oh god damn it dude can we just skip this and give him the point we'll make this a quick round how about we just keep this to 30 second, 30 second, and a 15? We'll just like- What's even the point? Let's go through the motions here.

We all know how this is going to go, but Bob, are you ready? I'm ready. All right, and go. Mark, the historical significance of the Minolta, the Leica Minolta cooperative lens that they, it just can't be overstated. You're preserving history. Yes. And it's, they're hand

ground. It's artisanal lenses. They're never going to be recreated. They don't even use those chemicals to coat lenses anymore. Yes, they don't. Once they're gone, they're gone if they're not preserved oh man i only lasted 30 seconds okay uh wait that's twice as long as i lasted with the sex robots wait do you want to go oh yeah i'm ready the violent jagged sex robot

all right three two there's other types of lenses too contact lenses while seemingly good if you sleep in contact lenses they can be harmful over time you don't want to do that also looking at lenses the lens can also be used in like a political spectrum to look at different lenses of things such as personal uh state nation global there's different lenses with which to apply looking at the world but if you look at things only in lenses you kind of lose the forest through the trees because you're only looking at things through one lens at a time whereas you need the big picture sometimes so lenses can also be bad in that sense interesting Interesting. Alright. You know, that's taking it in a direction.

It was very open-ended. It just said, again, Wade's strategy is defining the parameters of the argument. I think that's interesting. Very, very fun. Bob, you have 15 seconds for your final rebuttal. Drybox. 40 lenses. Oh, man. You crack it open. The satisfying whoosh

of the airtight seal being broken the smell of the 1970s era glass and metal i feel like giving uh the host a handy should be prohibited but like that no in the bylaws that we stated a distractible when we founded this organization we declared anything goes for points bob you win wade eat your nuggets we are four lenses here oh thank you bob for declaring distractible to be four lenses i am so ready and i was impartial i was impartial yeah that was a close one i want everyone to know i i am oh god all right now give wade pro hitler and let's get this over with wade here we go you are going to be i'm excited he's pro he's pro we're already basically a third of the way there he's pro okay pro come on baby come on wheel of fairness you're pro oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh

oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh

oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh

oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh

oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh

oh oh oh oh oh oh Wine away. All right. So I'm pro the study of a lot of things. I think studying almost anything can be useful because even if something is like bad or unhealthy or unhelpful, studying and knowing that isn't of itself helpful and knowledge and knowledge is always useful. Wine itself, one, tastes delicious. As someone who doesn't drink a lot of alcohol, I can tell you that there is bitter wine. There's kind of like wine in the middle.

There's sweet wine. I'm a sweet wine kind of person. Wine, though, can help just take the edge off. You know, anything in excess is bad, but like a glass of wine can actually even be good for you. I believe red wines are actually good for like your liver, different organs that have like a glass a day, kind of like a cup of coffee can be good.

So wine, pro wine, as long as you drink in moderation, the study of wine, why not? And also wine is just one of those things that seems fancy. It's fun to hold a wine glass. You can kind of put your pinky out. It gives you another topic of conversation to have. And we've even had it where we've gone to a restaurant and had an entire conversation with a wine expert while eating. And it's been fascinating learning not only the study of wine itself or about specific wines, but the history of wine, the location of wine, which helps you learn more about culture.

That was very compelling. Extremely. So dense. Your argument is extremely dense and diverse. And it takes me on a nice journey that I feel like is a view into your mind. And I don't know if I like that or not, but we'll find out. Bob, ready for your counter? Yeah.

Three, two. I lived in wine country for four years. And I can tell you that the only thing people who make wine are studying when they study the making of wine is how to make wine that costs more per bottle. The subjective nature of whether a wine tastes good or bad to a person is almost entirely up to the development of your palate, what you like, what you don't like. Wine doesn't cost more because it tastes good. It costs more because they found a way to justify it. It comes with a name. It comes with a label. It comes with a whatever. It's a capitalist scheme to convert money from your pockets into money into their pockets

and give you the fanciest grape juice that they can in return. I have no problem with studying things that are worthwhile and beneficial, but there are about a million crops that you could study that would tell you more valuable information about farming and crop yield and all kinds of stuff than grapes do. It's nothing more than a money-making scam. Ah, so going at it, it's like it's just an empire built to make money? That's not worthy of study. Interesting developments.

Wade, you have 25 seconds. Whoa. 23, 22, 21. Oh, okay. Wade, your time has already started five seconds ago. Go! And we go. All right.

So despite human fault, wine still has the benefits mentioned before, being one, tasty and good, two, actually good for you to have in moderation, and making conversation everything else. We can't blame wine for humans wanting to make money on it. Two, cost capitalism are temporary in our infinite existence since we're all living forever, right? So if we're so worried about capitalism, that's not really taking temporary in our infinite existence since we're all living forever, right? So if we're so worried about capitalism, that's not really taking into account our infinite existence,

which seems kind of cynical for someone who argued against all for eternal life. Did I miss a technological development? Are we currently living forever? You got to use that in an argument against me. Oh, wait, we're living forever. I am in favor of that experience. It doesn't exist.

Oh, I won't count anything after the timer as being part of this. I will kick you in the nuts. I will punch you in the navel. I could take it. I could give it. I just want to see if my body can take it. I just want to see if my body can give it.

Markiplier 2025. I just see if my body can give it. I've been taking her too long. So there was a good arguments across the board. However, Bob, I feel like you focus too much on the financials. Whereas Wade had a myriad of reasons, including health and prosperity and just goodness for the meal, like making it a more enjoyable experience. You know, ever since I've gone to the steakhouse I go to, they actually have a sommelier. I think you guys were there. It's in Glendale. I've gone. Yeah, there's a sommelier

there. Wait, he recommended that weird, kind of oddly stinky, but deliciously captivating wine. I don't drink much, but I had a sip and I was like, I'm not a wine guy. I was like, what the frick? This is actually good. And he recommended a cheap bottle at the same time where he's like, you get this expensive one. But he's like, like don't worry about that this one's an affordable bottle that'll give you the same experience and i appreciated that so i think that we at distractible are pro oenology i'm shocked and that's another point for wade congratulations wade bob you got lenses you got no room to complain the rest you got the one trump card of the episode he could have been against lenses too so bob you got to consider

yourself lucky okay bob you are going to be uh you are four oh i forgot to remove the last one i hope you get four deaths after being for living forever i would love to see how you would uh oh i could reconcile that easy oh no oh i'm in favor of necrophilia oh no well it's bob's responsibility to guide us the future of this podcast is in your hands bob in favor of necrophilia and go the human experience is complicated and we are not here to say whether someone's in their most desires are true or false but what i am here to say is that distractible is in favor of freedom we are in favor of you having the right to do what you will with other consenting adults and there can be such thing as consent given before one passes away. And there can be such thing as love that persists even through death.

And there can be such desires that we may not understand ourselves and may not mean anything to us. And as long as it is fully consenting, totally legitimate, totally safe, totally fair. I am not personally interested in this practice at all. But who am I to say that I know what is and is not a part of being human? I say live and let live as long as everyone is a consenting adult. That was very powerful. I feel like it would have been more powerful if it ended on die and let live. I hate how compelling that argument was.

I mean, someone has to be alive for it to be necrophilia. Otherwise, just two dead people fucking, right? You could have made that the basis of your argument, too. That would have been. But you do have a rebut. That was very compelling. Weirdly compelling. Wade.

Look, necrophilia has been admonished by cultures forever for a reason. Bob mentioned consent. I'm not sure how a corpse consents, even if they wrote a consent form prior to dying or said they consented prior to dying. I don't know how you feel once you're actually dead. Probably don't feel anything at all. how a corpse consents, even if they wrote a consent form prior to dying or said they considered prior to dying. I don't know how you feel once you're actually dead. Probably don't feel anything at all. Uh,

and death is the end. One sided sex kind of feels like the sex robot discussion, which we kind of already ruled on, uh, where if it's just a thing that's there to be good for 15 seconds, and then it's just a corpse, which I feel like it's a lot stinkier and worse than a robot in many ways. Not so good. Uh, on top of that, respecting the that respecting the dead like you know we'd have burial rights we do the whole like put you on a raft lights you on fire we have plenty planning making you a tree there's

all kinds of ways to like respect the dead body that don't involve putting your dick in it i feel like the heebie-jeebie-oo feeling we get thinking about necrophilia is probably argument enough to be against it. You have such a slam dunk. How did you? All right. I'm not going to make any judgments. That's fine. You doing a freaking the office looking at the camera.

Not so good. All right, Bob, I thought Wade was going to run away with it. I feel like I'm still in this fight with a shot. I feel like he's shockingly you are. Are you ready? Yeah, I'm ready. And go. My opponent focused entirely on the establishment of social norms, which both change and are often invalid as to defining what is or is not a moral and upright thing to do in this

world. And also basically just said it creeps him out. And I'm not saying that anyone has to do this. And I'm not saying that I would do this because I'm equally uncomfortable with the notion. But we are not saying it's for us. We are saying it's for consenting adults. I acknowledged consent in my topic as well. You basically dismissed consent and ignored the idea that you could give consent prior

to death, such as legal powers of attorney, so attorney so on so on there are all kinds of things you just ignored out of hand you didn't acknowledge it that is a point i'm not going to continue that in the argument i was i was i was already thinking that because yes it's like yeah power of attorney and like wills in general are like the last wishes of those who have passed and so i can't really say just looking at this from a judge here that is basing my decision and the future of this podcast on the arguments made here bob wanted the point so bad he made an incredibly compelling argument wade i feel like you fumbled it there a little bit by maintaining too much of the emotional attachment and like the ew factor of it,

which to be fair should stand on its own, but Bob came at it from an angle and I feel like it's the only angle. I feel like changing consent was also a pretty important thing. I just didn't dwell on it because it kind of stood on its own legs. Nope, we here at Distractible

are officially and forever pro-necrophilia. We're, oof. Bob, why'd you have to argue so good? The point is to win no matter the cost, right? Maybe we should make it so that at the end of the episode, the loser is for all of these things. We could do that. Yeah, yeah, sure.

Retcon it. There's definitely not an audio clip of you saying, we here at Distractable are for. It hasn't happened yet. Yeah, yeah, sure. Retcon it. There's definitely not an audio clip of you saying, we here at Distractible are for... It hasn't happened yet. It hasn't happened yet. I could change that to Wade here at Distractible. That wasn't even my argument. It was Bob's.

At the end of this episode, there would be some absolving of sins. Editor, can we keep the clip of a third of the way in, Mark saying, I'm the loser? I could change that to Wade here. here no taint will be obscured you're gonna get all of bob's taint if you lose but you still could win and this could work in your advantage sure sure you've won twice it's four all right i don't know why it seems very positive. It feels very positive. Maybe it's just the wheel likes the blue and the yellow. It's a good color.

It doesn't like. All right, Wade, you are for. Come on, Hitler. Come on, Hitler. Come on, Hitler. You are for the matriarchy. Wade, you're for the matriarchy. You have one minute to make your argument.

Are you ready? Yeah. And go. We've seen the patriarchy. The patriarchy obviously hasn't worked out to make your argument. Are you ready? Yeah. And go. We've seen the patriarchy. The patriarchy obviously hasn't worked out to be so great. There's a lot of problems in the world and people have been mistreated for a lot of reasons. Responsible, you trace it back to all the way to the patriarchy. The matriarchy, on the other hand, we haven't really gotten to fully see yet, except for in theory or some like smaller examples. As a person who personally was raised

by my mom, my grandma, more than anybody else, I think I turned out relatively well. I was a moral kid growing up, pretty smart kid. I behaved myself, haven't gotten into trouble and have seen relatively good success. And I feel like a lot of that's attributed to having two women raise me. I would love to see a society that is taken care of by the matriarchy because I feel like there's something nurturing about a mother's love that perhaps matriarchy or you know women in power would be able to express and carry on that men aren't able to and i think at the very least getting to see it in practice on a larger scale and getting to experience it would at least show us whether or not it is better and i believe it in fact very much would be fascinating excellent

discussion well done well spoken bob are you ready this is, I want to say something outside of the time. This does not count. I just want to say I'm going to take the high road and I'm not going to talk about what happened to your other siblings. Oh, well. I'm not going to, like, you're, you turned out really good and I'm not, I don't want to cast aspersions because honestly, I don't know your family that well, but I do know that at least one of your brothers turned out in a way that I would say would be less positive than you turned out as a person.

Probably. I would. I would. If we were actually going that route, I would. I would have a lot of a myriad of reasons why that happened. Let's keep it civil. Let's keep it civil. Let's keep it.

I just had you said that. And I had that thought. But I don't want to make. That's not my argument. I have a much. All right. We're not counting. Go for it.

Go for my balls. Punch. No, I don't. I don't. I want to. I want want to fondle your balls i don't want to kick them bob go i think the issues of patriarchal society as my opponent has pointed out are clear and myriad but i don't think that the solution is to swing violently in the other direction i think that society would be best served by actual egalitarianism, by people actually being allowed to be who they want to be, to be defined by their actions instead of by how they were born, who they are, things they have no control over. I don't think defining

women by motherhood is fair. I think that's limiting. I think women have a lot more than motherly love to offer the world, and that is not necessarily what every woman has to offer either. I think people should be valued based on what they do in this world and based on their value as a human, not their value as a man or a woman or a mother or anything like that. Wade, you have 25 seconds for your final rebuttal. Ready and go. Bob mentioned that we doesn't think the solution would be a good matriarch, but we don't know because we've not really gotten to experience

it. Defining women by motherhood isn't what I did. I added it as a positive attribute that I think would be affecting the things that I think would be positive. Not that it's the only thing. I just only got so many seconds. Experiences that we've had, I think I've all pretty much been patriarchal so we can talk

about egalitarianism but we haven't seen it so therefore the experiences of you ran out of time okay bob went like five seconds over last time but it's cool i i get how this goes you really want to pick a fight right now is that what you want to do before the winners have been declared yes bob i feel like your argument wasn't specifically targeting why the matriarchy itself was a bad idea and was more about trying to dismantle wade's points that he made without fully reinforcing why matriarchy bad so even though wade fumbled the bag stumbled across the finish line was doing like somersaults on the way there, and then insulted me at the line after he stumbled across the checkered flag.

I'm just pointing out your discrepancies in hosting. I have to give him the point because I'm a fair and impartial judge. Of course. This episode is brought to you by Secret. Secret deodorant gives you 72 hours of clinically proven odor protection, Of course. or just running late. Do what life throws your way and smell like you didn't. Find Secret at your nearest Walmart or Shoppers Drug Mart today. This episode is brought to you by Tresemme. Want silky smooth hair

that's still full of natural movement? The Tresemme Keratin Smooth Weightless Collection is your simple solution. This new collection features a wide range of products from nourishing shampoo and conditioner to lightweight heat protectants and a silky smooth serum for a sleek finish. Wave goodbye to frizz and say hello to three days of smooth hair with the Tresemme Keratin Smooth Weightless Collection. Visit Tresemme.com to learn more. It'll be Bob's turn to go more. Uh, it's, it'll be Bob's turn to go first, but what I'm going to offer both of you right now is a chance to wager points.

Bob, you have five. Wade, you have four. You can wager as many as you want. It's all or nothing, but you do not know what you're going to be doing, obviously, as the rest of the game goes. So you don't know whether you're going to be for or against something. It's just purely an opportunity to wager if you would like. I wager all of my points. I either win or I lose. Okay. Bob's wagering all of his points. I wager none. So I either win or I lose.

That's good way to do it. Yeah, sure. All right. Plus Mark's super biased in my favor. Yeah, absolutely. A hundred percent. All right, Bob, you are going to be against. All right. Interesting. you are going to be against. All right, interesting, interesting. Come on, ocean. Give me ocean. You are against polygamy. What is polygamy, technically, specifically? Because I don't want to operate on false information.

Okay, let's get the actual definition. Polygamy, the practice or custom of having one or more wife or husband at the same time in zoology it's pattern and mating which an animal has more than one mate in botany it's the condition of bearing some flowers with stamens only some with pistils only and some with both on the same or different plants that just sounds like flowers so you can take any of those definitions. The choice is yours. And go. The notion of being tied to someone

for the rest of your life is antiquated in and of itself. The idea that you have to take multiple husbands or wives and able to have a satisfying life or to be satisfied as a person in whatever ways that you're looking for, I feel like is equally antiquated. I am not against having multiple partners for fun and or social interactions or

whatever intimate things you might be into in your personal life. But specifically, I do not think it's necessary to wed multiple people. I don't necessarily think it's necessary to wed anyone at all. I think adult humans are able to make commitments to each other in meaningful and lasting ways and i think if we want to be a modern society progressing beyond the idea of defining something in such a narrow and specific way and moving towards more freedom and more personal uh oh yeah whatever look I already said the good stuff earlier. I don't know exactly where that last thought was going, because where it drifted off could have been ambiguously judged against your argument

with the freedom thing. Wade, are you ready? Let's do it. Your argument. Go. My opponent defined polygamy as being marriage-specific and saying, you know, having multiple partners, all that's good. I mean, that's part of polygamy is having multiple partners.

So I think he's partially arguing for me, which I appreciate. Multiple partners, whether it's in marriage or not, also means multiple incomes. It means more companionship, more reproduction if you want to have a larger family. Also, sexual variety keeps things fresh, keeps things fun and interesting. Love as being defined between only two people is a definition that we just kind of say and assume because it's what we were kind of taught growing up. But it's a limiting factor. It's not necessarily proof true. You can love more people than one.

And there are some very successful polygamous relationships. And I think one example of a polygamous relationship being successful and good is all you really need to show that it can be. There's bad examples of two people. There's bad examples of two people. There's bad examples of being alone. Sure, there's bad examples of polygamous relationships, too. But all you need to show is one for there to, in theory, be an infinite number of them. For those reasons, I'm pretty confident saying polygamy can be a great thing. That was compelling.

That was a much better showing than your last argument, Wade. Thanks, man. You know how to build us up. Bob, speaking of bad last arguments, it started out, man. You know how to build us up. Bob, speaking of bad last arguments, it started out strong. Now is your chance to either finish it off or address those points that Wade just made. Are you ready?

I've got a harsh angle and I'm going to go right for it. Alright. 3, 2, 1. I'm so confident I don't even need the full 25 seconds to express the sentiment that I'm about to explain to you My opponent does not even know what polygamy is polygamy very specifically and particularly is having multiple spouses It exactly and is related to marriage. It is not polyamory or polysexuality

It is marriages. He doesn't even know what we're talking about I was thinking the same thing because Wade we took the time to go and establish the definition. And even if there are different definitions, the one that we used for this argument was more than one wife or husband at the same time. I also used the sentence that even if it is marriage prior to going in, I disagree with the establishment. But then I said, even if it is marriage and to going in. I disagree with the establishment, but then I said even if it is marriage and then I made all my points. So would you say that you correctly equated my argument with your argument,

even though you inaccurately described my argument? I'm saying some of your points about having multiple partners would apply even in the spousal way. You made points that relate to polyamory. This is polygamy. You made points that relate to polyamory. This is polygamy. You made points that argue in favor of things other than the one thing you were supposed to make points in favor of.

I don't think that's true. Because your points apply to polygamy and also polyamory does not mean that you argued effectively in favor of specifically polygamy. It's a different thing. Yes, you made points and they are valid. We are not invalidating those statements, but it's to the accuracy of the specificity of this topic. And Bob made a good point in the beginning, stumbled towards the end and then reiterated. And I finished all of mine and you're like, good points, Wade, much better showing. Yes, it was. I'm not saying it was bad.

I basically went all in on a technicality. I got gotta be honest. I'm shocked this is working so well, but I'll take it. This this is an example of Bob you like playing the rule book. You made good points, but he's playing the rules specifically in trying to get like the ref to wave a flag or whatever it is in the sport world that it happens. Tyler's a better analysis of this. So because my points were great, but they also apply to another scenario, they're not great? You're still operating on the basis that your points are great. You said they were! I said you argued well. Yeah, I think you did make good points. I'm just going to go smoke whatever you guys are on and join you here soon.

Oh, okay. All right. We got a sore loser over here just because he wagered nothing. Hey, Wade, this is a show about rules and following them. Alright, Wade is trying to debate something that is completely unrelated

because, uh, wait, keep it on top of it. This is about polygamy. And we here at Distractible are against polygamy! I feel like I completely got hosed in that look the torture when i got hosed this last one the biggest hosing in this show's history no not the biggest hosing in the show's history i think it might be you did specify into the area of polyamory and not specifically polygamy at the beginning and then i said but even if we're talking about

marriage all of these points are still better than ruling them out that's that doesn't mean you win clearly you're right you know what you're right yeah absolutely that's how it goes i think this is the biggest hosing in this show's history let Let me know in the subreddit. I think you're forgetting a lot of things that have happened on this show. Yeah, I think you're too focused on what you said and you're ignoring what Bob said in his first argument. No, I heard his first argument

and I heard his rebuttal. After his first argument and my first argument, it seemed like I was in a commanding lead. This seems contentious. This seems interesting. I'm gonna give a strange new thing here. You're each going to get 30 more seconds. And this time, because remember, we're talking about the argument of specifically polygamy. You want another opportunity, Wade, because you feel you're robbed.

And this is a very fair podcast. And I am a very fair judge. this is a very fair podcast and I am a very fair judge, even though I was convinced that Bob and his argument was superior and more specific. This is, I'm going to give you a chance because I know you feel like you're robbed. And if you, if you can convince me in 30 seconds, but remember, Bob is going to get another 30 seconds after this. Let's do it. And go again, a larger family. It kind of implies marriage. If you're building a family in theory you're getting married more incomes you usually don't combine your incomes until you're married so that also implies marriage specifically uh sexual variety in marriage because if you're with

one person for a long period of time half of marriages in the u.s at least usually fail give or take uh polygamous marriages have a chance at least maybe of keeping things fresher on the sexual side uh and then love if you're in love and you're together getting married is sometimes a consummation of that love marriage is an important aspect of that all right bob are you ready i don't need to make any further arguments i think everything i already said stands on its own but i am going to make a declaration this is not technically a loser's speech i made a commitment to make no further loser speeches in the year 2024 and i'm going to keep that commitment in saying that i will not be giving any speeches subsequent to this speech but i will be conceding the episode i will allow wade to win because he has been so wronged in the

past and possibly during this episode i'm not going to make an assessment on the quality of that i concede my arguments and i give all points to wade i don't like this at all. Hold on. Something. This is the boldest strategy I've ever heard. And because both Bob did not make an argument about polygamy and he made some declaratives, I am going to respect posthumously all of his statements. Wade, you are for polygamy. You win the episode. All of this is for you. You get every point.

What happened? You won, Wade. No, no is for you. You get every point. What happened? You won, Wade. No, no, no. This is not a win. This is like you guys text us like, Wade's really upset. I better give him this. What happened?

You have succeeded. No one on the subreddit could ever come to defend an illegitimate loss because you have succeeded. You have persevered. Everyone on the subreddit, celebrate! This feels like a pity win. If you zoom out, if you look at it through a wider lens wade huh uh this episode the point was for us to convince mark that we should be the winner ultimately in different ways and about different topics

you convinced both of us that you should be the winner which means both that you are actually the winner and that you earned this victory something does not smell right or taste right right now. This is I ordered the fish on airplane. I'm about to eat it. I see the pilot getting sick and something feels wrong about taking this bite. I don't think I should do it. All right. Is that your winner speech?

It's a speech. It's a speech of a winner. Congratulations, Wade. We don't even need to have a loser speech here because all eyes are on the winner with four grand big old testicles. Congratulations, Wade. I, this is the worst feeling of winner I've ever had. It's a dominating victory with nine points to zero.

Well done, Wade. We are going to be back very soon with another episode of Distractible where Wade will be bringing you the action. Thank you so much for listening and or watching. Hopefully you had a safe journey to wherever you were. Thank you, action. Thank you so much for listening and or watching. Hopefully you had a safe journey to wherever you were. Thank you, Wade. Thank you, Bob. Thank you, all of you, for participating. And remember, here is the recap of everything that Distractible is for.

Torture, against. Living forever, for. Sex robots, against. Lenses, for. Onology, for. Necrophilia, for. Matriarchy, for. Polygamy, for.

We are all about freedom here. Podcast out. I'm uncomfortable.