msmongolian

Agreed, I definitely did not get a sense that Josh or Jeremy were acting poorly last night, even in confessionals. Honestly, I found it refreshing that their attitudes were basically "game on." They didn't make it personal; they just knew that the other one had to go. And I'm not sure that either of them were glaring so much as seeing what the other person was doing and thinking about how to counter the move. It was really fun to watch these two guys maneuver. I'm not sure who is the bigger threat between Josh and Jeremy. On one hand, Josh is still in his pair, which gives him an advantage. No matter how tight Jeremy is with Natalie and Missy, I don't think those bonds can compete. Missy will always be more loyal to Baylor, and I could see Natalie voting against Jeremy, particularly if she thinks that she can't beat him in the end. But I also feel like Josh isn't as good a strategist as the show portrays him to be. He kept arguing for a couples alliance with Jon & Jaclyn but somehow never explained how Alec was in that alliance but Missy and Baylor were not. And he kept saying that Jeremy is targeting couples, but he never explained how Jeremy would have the numbers if Jon & Jaclyn went with him. The pairs (Missy, Baylor, Jon, and Jaclyn) could vote Jeremy and Natalie out at Final 6 after Pagonging Josh's alliance. Am I missing something? I have no idea why Jon suddenly decided to switch to Josh.

Really interesting idea! I think that could work, except that I'm not sure the benefit would be worth the risk. With Julie's quit, there are eleven people left in the game. A Final Two with a nine-person jury is possible, and the contestants probably don't know if it will be Final Two or Final Three. If it's a Final Two, it sure would be nice to have both members of the pair up before the jury. If it's a Final Three, it might be nice for one person in the pair to be working within the jury, but when would that person be voted out? I think Final Four is the best bet, or else the remaining person in the pair risks being voted out themselves after losing their closest ally. And there's not too much time to work the jury if you only arrive at Ponderosa right before the final tribal council.

I agree. Also, if Jon and Jaclyn are thinking about the merge, then they could wonder who they'll team up with when the tribes come back together. Jon was on the outs in original Hunahpu, so it makes sense to try to get in with people from original Coyopa. That means Baylor, who is allies with Josh, Wes, and Alec. So they keep Keith (in order to get Wes back on their side later) -- notice that Keith was in on the vote-splitting strategy in this episode. Dale was on the outs in original Coyopa, so he doesn't bring Jon and Jaclyn much for the post-merge game. But siding with Baylor and Missy means that Jon and Jaclyn at least have a chance of being in the majority alliance after the merge.

I thought this was a really fun episode, despite the NEL. I like detours and roadblocks that rely more on skill than sheer strength, and all the tasks on this Leg fell on the skill side of things. Even the cake transport detour seemed to be more about balance (and in the cyclists' case, foresight) than physical strength. So I get that none of the cakes is actually going to be eaten by anyone, what with the racers pawing all over them with their dirty hands (I sure didn't see anyone stop to wash) and dropping pieces all over their bikes, but Misti's treatment of her cake was horrifying. Did anyone see the shot of her holding the little flags in her mouth after they started falling out? She had both her hands on the cake to keep it from toppling, so I guess there was no other place to stick the flags? The flags were back in place when they walked into the restaurant, which means that she stuck them back into the cake after getting her saliva all over them. Gross!

I don't think Rob is sexist, but I also don't think he is uber-sensitive to issues of gender in the media. I do think that he, like many people who watch Survivor (myself included!), likes "big" moves and the people who make them. The editing on this show relies on gender stereotypes -- it's easier to tell a story if the characters are archetypes (the mom, the silly pageant girl, the arrogant dude-bro, the aggressive alpha male, etc.) -- and Rob doesn't push back on editing choices that show us one specific type of "big move" (usually made by a Tony Vlachos type) as the only kind of "big move." For instance, I think Baylor did a great job in choosing to bite her tongue and not call out Alec for his irritating and condescending behavior in this episode. You could argue that it's merely a facet of her social game, but if your social game is to keep people loyal to you, even if you can't stand them, then doesn't that qualify as a strategic move as well? But anyway, I love listening to Rob, and he doesn't need to be all things to all people. He's mostly fair and that's good enough. I will say that I wish Rob would occasionally call out Jeff Probst on his ridiculous sexism, but I can't blame him for laying low where Jeff is concerned. At this late date, Jeff is not going to change, and Rob wouldn't gain anything by getting into a hopeless feud with a Survivor EP. I love it when Rob and Stephen disagree! Agree with you that they work really well together, even when they are diametrically opposed on an issue. And it would be super boring if Stephen always agreed with Rob or vice versa -- having two smart people hash things out leads to some interesting insights! Speaking of sexists ... ugh, I am with you 100% on the Hantz-casts. I tried some of the early ones, and they were unfortunately as annoying and self-aggrandizing as I imagined. Yeah, there are times when Rob (and honestly, I think Stephen also sometimes does not give women contestants enough credit) says something that rubs me the wrong way, but I guess it would be unrealistic of me to expect him to be a tireless podcaster, brilliant Survivor strategist, and a feminist after my own heart. And I do think he has to play along with his guests sometimes. In the most recent podcast, Eliza had a number of things to say about Julie's chest -- no way is Rob going to tell Eliza that she's being inappropriate and embarrass her like that. But yeah, I feel ya about the sexist remarks.

Hehe. Shreveport is probably closer, culturally (and definitely geographically), to East Texas than to New Orleans. But yeah, that was definitely worth a chuckle. Oh, Keith. I will say that I was impressed by how agile he was in the water during the immunity challenge in this latest episode. He wasn't the strongest swimmer on his tribe, but he was solid.

I agree completely with this. There's a lot of downtime on the island, especially for the tribe that keeps winning immunity challenges, so I would not be surprised if the idea of throwing a challenge had come up, either in passing or as a joke. People get real bored out there. It seems pretty characteristic of Drew to take idle talk and turn it into whatever he wants it to be -- Drew can be astoundingly single-minded, to say it nicely. Also, I was a little annoyed during his exit interview with Rob when Rob called him out, and Drew's excuse for his rude comments about the women was that he didn't really remember what was going on on the island and that being on Survivor just made him lose his mind. Everyone else was also on the island, starving and getting worn down by the elements, but most people manage to not spew arrogant, misogynistic B.S. I would be much more impressed with Drew if he apologized for making those remarks and said that he'd learned something from this experience.

I do enjoy the non-Survivor people when have their own take on Survivor. I really like the Survivor archetypes podcast he does every season around the final 12 (I think with AJ Mass?). I also really enjoyed the latest podcast with Angie Chaunce about the types of Survivor characters. She really put a ton of effort into cataloging past Survivors and it was fun to hear about how casting goes back to the same character types over and over.

Not sure if it's ok to quote outside content, but I think it might be ok to link? I was going to mention that I read Drew's interview with Gordon Holmes and he basically called Kelley a b**** again. When Gordon asked him why, his answer basically boiled down to: (1) she got the same portion of food as he did, (2) she knows a lot about Survivor, and (3) she was trying to vote out him and Jon. Of course, Survivor megafan Jeremy also voted against Drew, but Drew calls him "calculating."

I love RHAP and feel so grateful to Rob for producing so much content every week. It's an incredible resource. Who are your favorite Survivor guests? I have to say that I love Penner and have loved him since Cook Islands. Even though he made some factual mistakes in his latest podcast, it was a blast having him back on. Wish there were a way for Rob to bring him on every season.