Refrigerator Firefighter

Welcome to the Judge John Hodgman Podcast.

I'm Bailiff Jesse Thorne.

We're clearing the docket this week in chambers.

How are you, Judge Hodgman?

I'm fine, thank you.

How are you, Bailiff Jesse?

I'm holding on by the skin of my teeth, as they say.

Ew, I hate that.

I may or may not have used multiple

medical treatments over the course of today for migraine headaches, and I may or may not lapse into incoherency at any moment during this program.

Well, let me tell you something.

We had such a good time moments ago recording the donors-only pageant of pedantry that I completely failed to prepare for this episode at all.

So, I will be totally

totally winging it, but I will not be saying hang on by the skin of my teeth because I've always found that expression both confusing and disgusting.

So, let's just jump in and see if we can find some justice.

Have you ever seen that video of the newscast woman who has a migraine on air and she just starts saying random words because that can be a side effect of migraine?

Bench.

Phrase.

Dog.

Hello?

Like that?

I always felt I had been kind of cheated because I don't have that kind of migraines.

I just have the pain kind.

But I tend to feel bad for watching local news anchors mess up or fall down or have horrible injuries on YouTube or whatever.

There's so many of them, but I just like those people are just

people are just working hard jobs.

You know what?

I have a friend from middle school named Cam.

What's up, Cam?

Yeah.

And Cam, I saw on Facebook not that long ago, moved to Arizona.

He always loved weather.

Talk about how much he loved weather.

And he was, you know, when I was in middle school, I went to this kind of like ultra-progressive, high-end private school for genius type thing.

And Cam was like one of the most jockey people at the whole school, like a real chill, athletic guy.

Sure.

But he always loved weather.

Like he just would always be like, I love weather when we were like 12.

He moved to Arizona and became a television meteorologist.

Yeah.

It's crazy that real people that you might have known from school get that crazy job.

Yeah, they're not grown in bats, Jesse.

Meteorologists are real people.

They're not grown to be that way.

That's the one difference between meteorologists and Cylons.

They're not grown in bats.

I will say that I will always remember being visited when I did Vacation Land to the show.

It was one of the earliest shows I did in Charleston, West Virginia, with a wonderful introduction.

by Justin and Sidney McElroy.

Right there, basically in the statehouse of West Virginia, I think it's the Museum of West Virginia, where they record that mountain stage.

Judge John Hodgman fan named Kate Mantic

came up and said hello afterward, and she told me her story that she was from St.

Louis, and now she, but she decided she wanted to be a meteorologist.

And the meteorology department of the United States stationed her in West Virginia, and that was her job.

And I thought, what a weird and wonderful job to have that you just get sent.

I mean, obviously, it's not the U.S.

Department of Meteorology.

You get hired by a station.

But it's one of the last things that can truly only be local in broadcasting is saying whether it's raining or not outside right here.

And to have to move to a whole new community and learn about the weather patterns there.

Hi, Kate.

I hope you're still having a good time doing weather in West Virginia or wherever you may be now.

Thanks for coming and saying hello that time.

And thanks again, Chase, for setting up that event.

And thanks again to the McElroys for introducing me.

And gosh, this has been the Judge John Hodgman podcast.

Can we stop now?

Because Jesse's got a headache.

No, no, no.

We've got to get some DACA cases in.

Here's something from Bill.

Justice will not wait.

My wife and I share a bathroom and are currently at war over form versus function.

She unplugged.

Split the bathroom in half.

Next.

She unplugs the hair dryer after every use and stores it under the sink.

I keep it plugged in, but also stored under the sink.

She finds the cord unsightly, but I don't like having to plug it in all the time.

Who's correct?

P.S.

My wife also has a fear that appliances left plugged in can cause fires.

I tell her to please not unplug the refrigerator.

Wow, that is some real sass talk.

Bill's really bringing the heat sass-wise.

Take that, love of your life.

Here's what I have to say, Bill.

Starts, popcorn, contract,

distance, finish, bring.

Oops.

Oh, no.

Judge Hodgman's having a neurological episode.

No, I don't want to diminish people who suffer from migraines.

I was faking it, Jesse.

I'm sorry.

I was malingering there.

Well, fair enough.

Because I got Judge John Hodgman's senioritis.

I feel like we're having class outside today.

You got a migraine.

I'm winging it.

I just started reading words from the next case in order to pass that off as judgment.

All bets are off.

Yeah.

You'll hear those words again when we hear from Brian and the next piece of justice that I adjudicate.

But first, let's get back to Bill.

I don't like you sassing your wife, Bill, and telling telling her, don't unplug the refrigerator.

Come on, you come to my courtroom and you treat your spouses with respect.

I don't need your rhetoric.

I don't need your snark.

I would say, so in fairness, in our house,

I never use the hair dryer,

but I always prefer to leave it plugged in

because I know my wife uses it all the time.

And in the rare instances that I want to use it, I want to get it out.

Even though I never use the hair dryer, I like to believe I I can just blow-dry some hair at any moment.

It's ready to go.

And over the years of it being plugged in in our bathroom, in our home in Park Slope, Brooklyn, which is now 10, we have never had a catastrophic fire.

So I would say

that Bill's wife's fear of a fire is as rational as a fear of fire from anything else, and that it could happen, I suppose.

But ultimately, I would have to rule in favor of the person who uses the hair dryer the most.

And if that is Bill with his long locks of damp hair, then he should leave it plugged in.

They don't call him long, damp Bill for nothing.

No, right.

Bill, if you've got that thick Kenny G hair, if you've got the beautiful, luxurious locks of, say, the famous author and wonderful person Nathan Englander back when he had long hair, and you've got to blow-dry that hair every day, and you're the one who's using that hair dryer, for sure, you can leave it plugged in.

But my guess is that probably Bill's wife uses it more often than not.

Maybe that's a little bit of a prejudice thing, but it does seem to be statistically that dudes who are married are lucky to have hair at all.

So if she is the one who is using it more than you, Bill, she gets to decide.

This is sort of a split decision because I don't know what the answer is, but you know in your heart, Bill, that you're wrong, probably.

I mean, I think that Bill is really discounting a couple of key considerations here.

Go on.

Well, for one thing,

a refrigerator isn't essentially fundamentally a narrowly contained fire,

which is basically what a blow dryer is.

Right.

Like, it's a fire that's just barely within human control.

Yeah.

True.

I had forgotten, Jesse, that the way hairdryers work is there's a small bird inside who is using a tinderbox to start a little wood fire and then blows on it and then looks at the camera and goes, it's a living.

I would say also that.

For those of you who thought I was just spatting off random words again,

Jesse and I are very old, and that was a reference to the Flintstones and a pretty hacky one at that.

But what were you going to say, Jesse?

Don't let me get in the way of your 50-year-old references.

Okay, so the other thing that Bill is failing to consider is that a refrigerator isn't something that is designed to be used in a fundamentally wet venue, which is to say the bathroom, usually right next to the sink.

Like I would imagine that part of her concern, and I'm sure you have,

I certainly hope you have code-compliant outlets in your bathroom that have a breaker inside them so that they don't electrocute anymore.

Oh, no, they work.

I mean, they spark all the time, if that's what you're asking.

Yeah, that's how you can tell it's working.

Constantly spitting off sparks and going,

I just, I feel like were I a judge, which obviously I'm not, I'm just a bailiff, I would have given it to Bill's wife just on the basis of Bill's obvious penchant for disingenuousness.

Also, you don't want anyone to be electrocuted in that house.

Yeah, I don't want anyone to be electrocuted, and I want people to be,

you know,

nice to their partners, even when they have a disagreement.

All right, I'll find in favor of the wife.

Put the thing away.

Sorry, Bill.

I'm weaning it, and Jesse's got a headache, and you suffer.

That's the way it goes sometimes.

Justice is served.

And you know, a lot of devices, and I don't know if hair dryers are among them.

I'm not an electrical engineer.

Yeah.

But a lot of devices continue to draw a certain amount of power when plugged in, whether they're turned on or not.

You're saying that the hair dryer is stealing electricity from them?

I'm just saying it's a fair idea environmentally to be considerate of unplugging devices that are not in use.

I think you make perfect sense.

And even if Bill does have

long wet locks draped from his head and over his shoulders every morning, and it's an an inconvenience to plug in that hairdryer.

I'm going to make you do it, Bill, because my bailiff makes a lot of sense.

He's got a headache, and I also got a text from my wife saying our refrigerator's on fire, and I got to go soon.

So let's move on to the next case.

It'll hold for a while.

Yeah, no, she said that I got a good 35 minutes before it's really necessary.

I mean, what am I going to do?

I'm not a refrigerator firefighter.

At the moment, the fire lines that she's carved in the linoleum are holding.

Okay, here's something from Brian.

I bring the case against my wife, Becca.

Our dispute is basically.

Brian actually named his wife.

That was nice of you, Brian.

Good job.

Yeah.

Our dispute is basically when to eat the popcorn while out at a movie.

I contend the popcorn should be eaten during the movie we came to see, not during previews.

I like to wait as long as possible to purchase the popcorn so it's still warm when the movie starts.

If Becca could, she would finish it all before the movie starts.

She also believes she's distracting other customers while eating during a movie.

I think eating popcorn in a movie theater is part of the social contract.

We generally share one medium popcorn because it's far cheaper than buying two small bags of popcorn, which wouldn't be affordable in the long term.

That would also require both of us to leave at separate times to get popcorn.

Please help us avoid a concession-related calamity.

So, Jesse, I went to the movies the day before yesterday.

Congratulations, Mr.

Teen Kids.

No, I took my kids.

We went as a family to see the movie Black Panther, which I had not seen because I was on the Jonathan Colton Cruise when that movie opened.

Fun movie.

It was great.

I went to see that with Ben Harrison from The Greatest Generation.

Boy, oh boy.

What did Ben Harrison say?

I believe he enjoyed the film.

I really enjoyed it a lot.

Yeah, it was a hoot.

As does everyone.

It's an important movie.

It's a gorgeous movie.

The acting is spectacular.

The costumes, the design, everything is incredible.

And obviously, the not-so-sub-subtext of what it means for people of color to see themselves in a movie like that, it's amazing.

I love it.

I loved it.

And to me, the most incredible thing, like, I would say the first 15 minutes, because it had been so hyped up, I was a little like, did I get oversold on this?

Because this is an enjoyable action movie, but that's what it is so far.

Like,

I'm not sure that I'm totally feeling everything that everyone's feeling about it.

But then, as soon as that Michael B.

Jordan shows up in Wakanda and lays down the human stakes,

oh, my boy.

That's what I said out loud.

No one's ever said it before.

People are like, are you a migraine sufferer?

No one ever says, oh, my boy.

I just said it.

I just said it because I was like, this is all I ever want to watch now.

This can go on for five hours now.

This is all I need.

And my son, who is 12 and a half, is like, turned to me at one point in in the middle of the movie and just whispered, the reason this is a good movie is that they are both good guys and they're both bad guys.

Yeah.

And I'm like, if you're feeling that from this movie, then this movie is one of the greatest accomplishments of all time.

I think another reason why it's a good movie is because even a heterosexual man like me is aroused by Michael B.

Jordan at this point.

Michael B.

Jordan is so gorgeous in this movie.

Oh my God.

I know.

They all, yeah.

He may have moved me one or two points on that one to 10, how heterosexual or homosexual are your romantic interests scale.

Yeah.

The Kinsey scale.

Sure.

He may have single-handedly pulled me two over to the left.

So the fact that my son, he's a smart kid, but you know, like the fact that that's what's happening in this movie and he gets it and he feels it and he's able to see this is what makes it a movie.

This complexity and the nuances and the hard choices these two characters have to make, the fact that they both know they're wrong and right at the same time.

That's made that was one of the great movie-going experiences of my life.

But then I also turned to my son and said, stop being so loud with the Sour Patch kids.

You're making a huge racket with those.

How do you even do that?

Sour Patch kids, and this is not buzz marketing because I'm mad at them.

You get a box of Sour Patch kids.

They are hard to get out.

Like, there's a plastic liner and you have to, like, that's hard to open.

And then you, apparently, you need to, based on the experience of the person sitting next to me, my son, you have to dig around in there for about 45 minutes loudly to get one out.

Now, I would say that Sour Patch kids should stop being so loud.

It was really like there was a lot of scrunching and crinkling or whatever.

Like, there are certain things that are too loud, but I will agree with Brian on this point

that popcorn, the eating thereof, is built into a communal movie watching experience.

If you're hearing that munching, that's fine.

Becca does not have to be self-conscious about disturbing other people with her popcorn eating unless she's eating the popcorn by throwing it at her face and missing.

So, Becca, put that concern out of your mind.

Stay away from the sour patch kids.

But you can eat your popcorn during the movie, that's fine.

What I will say about Brian is, from my point of view, he's wrong.

You get that popcorn, you sit down, you eat it as fast as possible, hopefully finishing it all

before the previews end.

And by all, I mean the catastrophically large amount of popcorn that they give you.

And then you feel sick for the rest of the movie.

That's how you see a movie.

What's wrong with you, Brian?

Come on.

It really is true.

I feel like if you order even a small popcorn, you get a bag of popcorn so big that you will be physically ill at the end of it.

Yeah, I had only a few few handfuls of popcorn.

I think that it has something to do with the fact that I am not a child anymore and my metabolism is slowing and my stomach is getting sensitive because obviously all the children around me were throwing popcorn at their face and missing, Becca style, but they were getting a lot in there and they did not seem sick, they seemed happy.

But they're not circling the drain of their own mortality like you are.

No,

even though I gave them notes to that effect.

in any case,

you know that story about how Steve Martin, anytime someone would come up to him, he would silently hand them a card saying you've had an authentic experience with Steve Martin or something like that.

Yeah, it seems kind of jerky in retrospect.

I hand out cards to children that say,

you have met John Hodgman.

Ask your parents who he is.

Everyone dies.

It's fun.

Okay, Brian, listen.

I get that you like to eat popcorn your way.

Becca likes to eat her popcorn her way.

Neither way is better than any other.

I'm more with Becca.

I think it's weird that you get up right before the movie starts and then buy your popcorn to come back.

If you did that, unless you were in the aisle seat, if you started climbing over people to go get your nice hot and toasty popcorn because you love it that way before the movie starts, I would divorce you.

Just like that.

I would just say, divorced.

Papow.

Papow.

That's legal for divorced.

But anyway, you guys need to get your own popcorn.

I'm sorry.

It's not, what did you say?

That it's not affordable long term?

None of you.

Yeah, in the long term.

They could do it short term.

Yeah.

For a time, they would be able to get two small popcorns.

But realistically, looking at their household budget, within a few months, it would become untenable.

Look, I love going to the movies and I love movie theaters, but none of that, it's all ridiculously overpriced.

They're charging you $10, $12

to watch something that you can watch on YouTube for free in two seconds.

And that popcorn costs 35 cents to make, and it's $45 a bucket or whatever.

Build it into the experience.

If it's that important to you, invest in buying your own popcorn.

And if it's not within your means to get separate popcorn at the movies, and it might not be, I recognize that.

Get a little brown paper bag and bring it with you into the theater and have Becca pour some out for you.

And then bring in a little pocket hair dryer and warm it up for yourself when the time comes.

Boom.

That's justice.

Move it on.

Move it on.

Oh, my boy.

We're going to take a quick break.

More items on the docket coming up in just a minute on the Judge John Hodgman podcast.

Hello, I'm your Judge John Hodgman.

The Judge John Hodgman podcast is brought to you every week by you, our members, of course.

Thank you so much for your support of this podcast and all of your favorite podcasts at maximumfund.org, and they are all your favorites.

If you want to join the many member supporters of this podcast and this network, boy, oh boy, that would be fantastic.

Just go to maximumfund.org/slash join.

The Judge John Hodgman podcast is also brought to you this week by Made In.

Let me ask you a question: Did you know that most of the dishes served at Tom Clicchio's craft restaurant are made in, made in pots and pans?

It's true.

The Brace Short Ribs, Made In, Made In.

The Rohan Duck Riders of Rohan, Made In, Made In.

That heritage pork chop that you love so much, you got it.

It was made in, made in.

But Made In isn't just for professional chefs.

It's for home cooks too.

And even some of your favorite celebratory dishes can be amplified with made in cookware.

It's the stuff that professional chefs use, but because it is sold directly to you, it's a lot more affordable

than some of the other high-end brands.

We're both big fans of the carbon steel.

I have a little

carbon steel skillet that my mother-in-law loves to use because cast iron is too heavy for her, but she wants that non-stick.

And I know that she can, you know, she can heat that thing up hot if she wants to use it hot.

She can use it to braise if she wants to use it to braise.

It's an immensely useful piece of kitchen toolery.

And it will last a long time.

And whether it's griddles or pots and pans or knives or glassware or tableware, I mean, you know, Jesse, I'm sad to be leaving Maine soon, but I am very, very happy to be getting back to my beloved made-in entree bowls.

All of it is incredibly solid, beautiful, functional, and as you point out, a lot more affordable because they sell it directly to you.

If you want to take your cooking to the next level, remember what so many great dishes on menus all around the world have in common.

They're made in, made in.

For full details, visit madeincookwear.com.

That's m-a-d-e-i-n cookware.com.

Let them know Jesse and John sent you.

Judge Hodgman, the Max Fun Drive is right around the corner.

Yes, Jesse, I'm very excited about it.

It kicks off on April 2nd, and it is running for less than two weeks.

Is that correct?

Yeah, only till April 13th, Friday night.

We're going to have a live streaming show at maximumfun.org to celebrate the finale.

It is the brief window when we run our best shows, we have the most fun, and we ask you, the Judge Sean Hodgman listener, to support the production of our show.

That's right.

We'll be offering great gifts for new and upgrading members, and as you say, releasing some really amazing episodes.

And every year I look forward to Max Fun Drive because although it's for an important cause, which is supporting the work that we do, it also is a great time to check in with all of our amazing listeners listeners and create some incredible moments.

So, please support Max Fun Drive starting April 2nd if you can.

Welcome back to the Judge John Hodgman podcast.

We're clearing the docket this week.

Here's a case from Erica.

My husband Taylor has proposed that only one of us carry car insurance.

This means only one person in the household could legally drive.

He's a delightful and loving husband, but occasionally his frugality leads him to suggest impractical schemes like this one.

He's been immune to my arguments that in an emergency both of us should be insured to drive.

I would never give up my ability to drive legally because having that independence is very important to me.

So he suggests that he be the one who is not insured.

However, I refuse to be a chauffeur.

I want an injunction from Judge Hodgman preventing my husband from following through on this scheme in order to save us money.

Well, I just yelled at Brian and ordered him to spend all his money on popcorn.

For a brief moment, forgetting

some of the letters that I had received recently saying that people appreciate it when I remember that not everybody can afford two bags of popcorn at the movie.

So I want to be respectful of Taylor's frugality here

and appreciate the fact that saving money may be really necessary in this family.

And if that's the case,

and you can really only afford a car insurance policy that only covers one driver in the household,

then I would take him up on the offer, Erica, because

you might as well have the benefit of independence.

You may want to drive away from this person forever.

What if Taylor's the kind of guy who walks out right before the movie starts to buy fresh hot popcorn?

Divorced.

Kapow.

Drive away.

Kapow.

But I'm, you know, as I say, as has been painfully obvious this entire time, and maybe people are getting a visceral thrill out of it, or maybe others are rolling their eyes.

But I'm totally winging this one.

If I had prepared properly, I would have done some research into auto insurance, family coverage, multiple driver coverage versus single driver coverage to see what the actual financial difference is.

Jesse, you and Teresa both drive cars, right?

Absolutely.

And are you both covered for driving?

Yes.

You essentially, you have two choices.

Because car insurance, at least the way it works here in California, because car insurance covers occasional drivers,

anyone who is in your house of driving age has to either be insured, they have to either carry insurance or be excluded.

from your policy.

So, you know, like when I was 16,

my parents had cars, but they they could not afford to pay for me to be on their respective insurances.

They lived in two different houses.

And so they excluded me from their insurance

when I became eligible to drive.

And I would have had to pay the hundred bucks a month per parent extra in order to be included on their insurance.

Yeah, but no one wanted a teenage Jesse Thorne driving their car anyway.

Goodness no.

No one wanted a teenage Jesse Thorne for anything.

So, based on your experience, because I feel you know more about this than I do.

When I signed up for car insurance, both my wife and I drive with some regularity, so there was no question that we had to pay for dual coverage.

But in your experience, that if, say, in Taylor and Erica's household, Taylor is excluded from the insurance, would he still be covered as an occasional driver or he would not be able to drive at all?

No, at least least the way it works here in California, where insurance is compulsory,

the wife's insurance would not cover the husband.

The husband would have to get his own insurance because the wife's insurance would see that there was another driver in the household, and that driver would be excluded from her insurance.

I see.

Okay.

Well, I do not know whether Erica and Taylor have children.

I do not know whether Erica or Taylor have more use of the car, one versus the other, for their professional or other aspects of their lives.

I think that

the rational thing to do

is to evaluate seriously whether Taylor's frugality here is a necessary frugality based on your budget, that carrying that extra insurance so that you can both drive your car is really outside of your budget, or whether it is just Taylor's

hobby

to try to

save a little bit of money everywhere he can.

And if it is Taylor's hobby and it is affordable, then I think they need to get coverage that covers both of them.

The only exception would be if it is truly not within their budget to carry car insurance for both of them, auto insurance for both of them, in which case, even though Erica

does not want to be Taylor's chauffeur, she should take the coverage so that she can enjoy her independence and simply refuse to drive him around.

That's his payment.

If he doesn't want to carry car insurance, then he doesn't get to drive around or be driven as much as he might like.

How's that sound?

I'm on board.

Yeah.

Literally, you're my passenger in this one.

Oh, can I also order them to do one more thing?

Yeah, sure.

Put an awooga horn in your car.

Put a really loud awonga because you might get a discount on your car insurance.

Truly, come on.

This is one of the most competitive industries in the United States.

All I ever do

is see television commercials for car insurance.

They're all trying to rob clients from other car insurance companies.

I don't even watch television.

There's got to be some rate that can cover both of you guys.

Come on.

And then with the money you save, buy Brian some extra popcorn.

All right, there we go.

Solved.

Go ahead, Jesse.

Here's something from a listener named John.

He has a dispute with the whole city of Seattle.

Oh, this is exciting.

Finally.

He writes, I would like to petition the court to order an injunction against the citizenry of Seattle for one of their driving habits.

They often suddenly stop driving in the middle of busy streets for pedestrians who do not have a crosswalk.

This seemingly altruistic behavior is actually quite dangerous to them, to the drivers behind them, and to the pedestrians they're attempting to help.

In my experience, we are the only city in America that does this.

This is also bothersome as a sometimes pedestrian.

It's part of the leisureliness of walking to wait for the actual break in traffic.

Now, normally, I would not hear a case that is not between two non-fictional individual human beings.

I do not take cases against concepts.

I do not take cases against public practices in general, and certainly not against whole cities.

And under normal circumstances, the only exception that I could have imagined before now would be if the entire city of Portland, Oregon, wanted to take Seattle to court.

That I definitely would have heard, and it would have taken years

to a massive class action lawsuit.

I would probably bring a case against the city of Seattle for its insistence on wearing shorts in the rain.

It's true.

Oh, I saw a guy wearing shorts in the snow this morning.

I think he moved here from Seattle.

In any case, however, we have a friend of the show, an occasional expert witness, and a fellow Max Fun podcaster who also is the once and future, in my opinion, mayor of Seattle, Mr.

John Roderick of the Friendly Fire podcast.

Celebrated Seattle bon vivant, John Roderick.

Indeed.

And I also know that he is one of the best drivers of automobiles in the world and someone who has driven around Seattle quite a bit.

So I, to reality test it, I asked him on his opinion.

And this is it.

Thank you, Judge Hodgman.

This person is describing the situation accurately and succinctly.

This is a regional convention that's just a form of vehicular virtue signaling.

By Seattle law, pedestrians have the right-of-way at all times, not just when in crosswalks.

That's true.

But a subset of drivers act like that means they must come to a complete stop for all pedestrians rather than just to avoid hitting them.

Now, as you know, I like to cross mid-block and I gauge openings in traffic so that everyone keeps moving like a normal person.

But in Seattle, drivers will slam on their brakes as though I'm stumbling blindly rather than clearly nimble-footed, and they cause a traffic snarl where none was needed.

The fact that drivers perform this contrition nowhere else in the world is further evidence that it's motivated by hippie hand-wringing more than by people's safety or even by social politeness.

Even further evidence is that Seattle police cars never stop for pedestrians.

They just drive on by.

I usually find police cars to be driven almost exclusively by consideration of others on the road.

That is a weird piece of evidence that John brought up for sure.

But on balance, I think that I have to find in favor of John.

Well, maybe the, wait a minute.

I didn't realize that the listener who brought this case against Seattle is named John.

I wonder if this is the same John Roderick.

Has John Roderick gaslit us into putting him in our podcast again?

Well, it's always a pleasure having you here, John.

Whichever John brought this case against the city of Seattle,

in a completely unenforceable way, of course, I find in your favor.

People in Seattle listen, keep moving.

If they see someone in the road, obviously don't hit anyone.

Don't do anything dangerous, but keep it it moving.

Also, people driving on 8th Avenue in Brooklyn between, say, 15th Street and Flatbush Avenue, don't double park in the mornings.

Come on, you guys.

We got to keep it moving on 8th Avenue.

Let's go.

John, I got to disagree with you here.

Oh?

Yeah.

I grew up in San Francisco as a pedestrian.

Neither of my parents had a car until I was basically a teenager.

And

I believe very strongly in stepping out in the middle of the road in front of cars.

It is a core belief of mine.

And in San Francisco,

cars are considerate of pedestrians and will slow or stop for you as necessary.

And I think it's important to remember that pedestrians move much more slowly, and so they have need to cross the street in the middle sometimes in order to save themselves a not insignificant amount of time.

And that car drivers, of which I am substantially one now in my life,

are the ones driving hurdling death machines

down our shared roads.

And so I think it is incumbent upon them to be considerate of pedestrians rather than the other way around.

I will also mention that while John Roderick may very well be an experienced and good driver, the last time I visited him in Seattle, He was driving a Chrysler Sebring convertible that may have had three wheels, And he told me the story of how his automotive philosophy is only to drive cars that other people have given to him.

Yeah, but he drives them well.

He's an artist.

Hey, Jesse, look, I grew up in the Boston area.

And there is definitely a culture that still pervades the Boston area of people stepping out into traffic and just walking across the street outside of crosswalks wherever they darn well feel like it.

And that is a long entrenched culture there, as I guess it is in San Francisco as well, and I presume it is in Seattle, for sure.

And obviously, job number one, if it's not clear, job number one of a driver is to not hit people ever, ever, ever, ever, and to do what it takes to not hit people.

While I would encourage the people of Seattle to not, and San Francisco and Boston, to not march out into the middle of the street in traffic, because they are not merely endangering themselves should a driver not be able to stop in time, but the cars behind that driver might crash into that car and might hurt themselves as well.

It is woefully irresponsible to walk out into the traffic.

It is still incumbent upon the driver to make sure that even a woefully irresponsible human being continues to live.

I took this letter to be something different as opposed to, if you see,

not for permission to mow down people.

But if you see someone, I think what I understood this to mean, and I could be wrong here, was that drivers in Seattle, if they see someone angling to get ready to cross the street, they will preemptively slow down, stop traffic, and let that person cross, as opposed to someone who's already in the middle of the road.

Here, you and I may disagree,

but I would say that

within the bounds of safety, people in Seattle don't march out into the middle of the street, and people driving in Seattle, keep it moving.

Unless there's someone in the road, their clear intention and their motion is moving through the road, just slow down a little bit and keep going.

I'm going to get letters on this one, I can tell, but that's how I feel.

Yeah, because only one person in the transaction is captaining a killing machine.

Yeah, well, everyone should be driving a lot slower to begin with.

Pedestrians don't ever hit cars.

Look, do you know what?

I want to continue to carry my auto insurance.

I do not want this podcast used in court in Seattle after someone takes out John Roderick as he crosses the street.

So I am going to reverse all of my decisions and just say, car drivers, stay away from people.

And if you don't like it, John and Seattle, just mind your own business and cross in the crosswalks.

One of the many things that I love about our friend John Roderick of Seattle, Washington is that as a sometime local personality and politician, a candidate for office in Seattle, he worked very hard to alienate punk rockers.

He once wrote a famous article in the Seattle Weekly against punk rock and hippies,

leaving only Sir Mixilot to vote for him in Seattle.

Yeah, but Sir Mixilot's a super delegate.

Yeah, that's true.

Okay, we're going to take a quick break.

When we come back, we've got more docket to clear on the Judge John Hodgman podcast.

You know, we've been doing my brother, my brother, me for 15 years, and

maybe you stopped listening for a a while maybe you never listened and you're probably assuming three white guys talking for 15 years i know where this has ended up but no

no you would be wrong we're as shocked as you are that we have not fallen into some sort of horrific scandal or just turned into a big crypto thing yeah you don't even really know how crypto works The only NFTs I'm into are naughty, funny things, which is what we talk about on my brother, my brother, and me.

We serve it up every Monday for you if you're listening.

And if if not, we just leave it out back and goes rotten.

So check it out on Maximum Fun or wherever you get your podcasts.

All right, we're over 70 episodes into our show.

Let's learn everything.

So let's do a quick progress check.

Have we learned about quantum physics?

Yes, episode 59.

We haven't learned about the history of gossip yet, have we?

Yes, we have.

Same episode, actually.

Have we talked to Tom Scott about his love of roller coasters?

Episode 64.

So how close are we to learning everything?

Bad news, we still haven't learned everything yet.

Oh, we're ruined!

No, no, no, it's good news as well.

There is still a lot to learn.

Woo!

I'm Dr.

Ella Hubber.

I'm regular Tom Lollum.

I'm Caroline Roper, and on Let's Learn Everything, we learn about science and a bit of everything else too.

And although we haven't learned everything yet, I've got a pretty good feeling about this next episode.

Join us every other Thursday on Maximum Fun.

Welcome back to Judge John Hodgman.

We're clearing the docket.

Here's something from Leela.

My boyfriend Pat and I disagree on the appropriate time to wake up in the morning.

We both leave for work around 8.45.

6.45 a.m.

is my ideal wake-up time, but I'd settle for 7.15.

He'd prefer to wake up at 8.25, but he'd settle for 7.50.

I like to take my morning slow and enjoy a moment of relaxation.

Wake me up when these numbers stop.

Pat would prefer to bounce right out of bed and head to work.

We've tried waking up at different times, but he's a light sleeper and he gets frustrated if I make too much noise while he's trying to sleep.

Also, I find it extremely difficult to actually wake up and get out of bed if I'm the only one doing so.

Wow.

That is some next-level codependency.

You took the words right out of my mouth, headache man.

We've tried waking up regularly at 7.15, but he says he doesn't think it's fair to make that compromise if I'm just going to waste my morning sitting on the couch.

If we just get into the routine of waking up at 7:15, our bodies will become used to it, and it won't be so difficult.

We're almost always in bed by 11, and he's usually the one pushing for us to get in bed earlier.

This is a man who values his sleep.

Jesse, you know when my alarm is set for?

When is that?

7 o'clock.

You know how long it's been set for 7 o'clock?

How long?

Ten years.

Do you know when I got used to waking up at seven o'clock?

Granted, seven o'clock is kind of right down the middle.

It's not particularly early.

Certainly not particularly late.

Do you know

how long it took me before I got used to waking up at 7 o'clock?

Nine and a half years?

Never.

Never, ever, ever.

Leela's argument that your body will get used to waking up at a certain time is not necessarily true.

Your body, like, everyone wakes up and everyone has a different sleep pattern.

That's why human beings should never live together.

That's why the profound, solitudinous intimacy of sleep is challenging to share with even the most beloved person, even in the kingest of beds.

I don't think that there's any truth that Pat will eventually get used to waking up at 7.15 if that's your preferred wake-up time.

I also have no reason to believe that Pat would bounce right out of bed even at 8.25.

Pat's got his own weird thing going.

I will say this.

If you have the opportunity to wake up slowly, that is to build a slow waking up process into your morning routine, that is, in my personal experience, Very, very, very preferable.

I should probably set my alarm for 6 a.m.

and then wake up slowly and then maybe eventually 7 a.m.

will feel better.

But I'm not going to set my alarm for 6 a.m.

Come on.

I really want to sleep till 8, 8.15.

That's the perfect time.

I can only do it on the weekends.

But the problem here is, Leela.

Even though you guys are sleeping together, you're still individual human beings.

And as adorable as it may seem to you to say, I don't like to wake up alone.

You got to wake up alone.

There's still parts of your life that you have to do on your own.

One of the big ones is sleeping, and another of the big ones is waking up.

Believe me, Leela, I don't know where you are in your relationship so far, how long this has been going on, how long you've been sleeping over together or cohabitating without marriage or whatever it is your arrangement is.

There is going to come a time in the not-too-distant future when you will be so glad to be hanging around at 7:15 on the couch with Pat in the other room, having a little alone time.

And Pat, sorry.

If Leela wants to get up at 7:15, that's her biz.

That wakes you up in the morning, tough.

That's what you get.

That's what you both get for sleeping in the same bed together.

Humans aren't supposed to do this.

There has to be compromise.

And the compromise is each do things a different way.

Buy your own popcorn, Leela and Pat.

This doesn't even cost you money.

Set your own sleep schedule and stick to it.

And don't impose stuff on other people, especially around something that is as intimate and biologically solo as sleep.

Jesse, what time do you wake up in the morning?

Yeah, it was 6:40.

Yeah.

6:30.

I'm a lucky one.

The reality is that my alternative solution to this problem is just to send my one-year-old and my four-year-old to live at these people's house.

Then they won't have any trouble getting up up in the morning.

Right.

Right.

Their whole morning will be as mine is, just a long series of muttered under-the-breath expletives.

Yeah, I mean, obviously, these are people who do not have children in their lives because they're still able to, to some degree, set their own schedules as though they are whole human beings who get to have agency in their lives.

Yeah.

While you still have human agency,

set a schedule that makes sense for you.

Soon enough, that will be gone.

gone.

Here's one last question from Jesse.

Oh, Jesse Thorne?

No, Jesse with an I.

Okay, I was going to ask if this one was from you.

I was really hoping it was not from you because I am going to say right now that this is an old letter.

I've been trying to go back through my files and get to some of the stuff that I missed.

There's an old letter that I missed, and I'm sorry I missed it because I can say with all certainty, it is the greatest Judge John Hodgman case I have ever received, both for its content, its brevity, its form, and the fact that the question answers itself.

Jesse Thorne, you may proceed.

Dear Judge Hodgman, my husband does not get to own a flamethrower, right?

Sincerely, Jesse, who lives in a densely populated city and whose husband is an actor by trade.

Oh, hooray.

My favorite thing about it is that it's like the sentence, my husband does not get to own a flamethrower, right, is perfect.

I didn't think it could get any better until Jesse added the little PS, the little Black Panther mid-credit sequence.

Just giving a little bit more background, my husband is an actor by trade.

Oh, Jesse, you know the answer.

I hope you guys haven't set your refrigerator on fire by now because obviously no flamethrowers.

What would you do if someone offered you a flamethrower, Judge Hodgman?

Like, just straight up, would you like a flamethrower?

No, I don't want a flamethrower.

Yeah.

I don't think I would even want to

use a flamethrower in a controlled environment, like in a flamethrower range.

Yeah, they got that in Vegas, probably.

Yeah, they probably have that in Vegas.

No, I would not be interested in it.

And if you're an actor by trade,

there's an extra reason not to get one of your own flamethrowers.

Just go out for all those cool flamethrower roles.

Then you'll get to use one for free.

Yeah, they're probably making a Fallout movie by now, right?

Yeah, absolutely.

I got a flamethrower inside Fallout.

Yeah, that's fun, I guess.

Video games.

I've never played that one.

It's all right.

I prefer the minigun.

Did you call it a meaning gun?

No, a mini gun.

It was a meanie gun, wasn't it?

No, it was a mini gun.

You use it to shoot the meanies.

I happen to use it to shoot super mutants.

Thank you very much.

Well, that's it for another episode of Judge John Hodgman.

Our show, as always, is produced by the great Jennifer Marmer.

Here are some random words that I'm going to say.

At Jesse Thorne, at Hodgman, Twitter, Instagram, at JudgeJohnHodgman.

Sure make hashtag judgejohnhodgman hashtag jjho outcheck maxfund subreddit episode discuss cases submit maximumfund.org slash jjho

or electromail hodgman at maximumfund.org.

We'll see you next time on the Judge John Hodgman podcast.

MaximumFund.org.

Comedy and culture.

Artist-owned.

Listener supported.