• Home
  • Start Here
  • Podcast
  • Thinking Bigly
  • Investing
  • Arts
    • Contact/Donate
    • Sign Up
    • Search
    • Privacy
    • Disclaimer
    • Arts
    • Investing
    • Newsletter
    • Theatre
    • Poetics
    • India (1997)
    • Indonesia (1998)
    • Popular
    • Blogs
    • Food
    • Photography
    • Personal
    • Mingle
    • Writer Bio
    • Investor Bio
    • Me
    • Yellow Gentlemen
    • Investment Aphorisms
    • Places in Between
    • Grants
    • Angel Investing
    • Shop
    • Unconference
Menu

Then Do Better

Street Address
City, State, Zip
Phone Number

Your Custom Text Here

Then Do Better

  • Home
  • Start Here
  • Podcast
  • Thinking Bigly
  • Investing
  • Arts
  • Support
    • Contact/Donate
    • Sign Up
    • Search
    • Privacy
    • Disclaimer
  • Archive
    • Arts
    • Investing
    • Newsletter
    • Theatre
    • Poetics
    • India (1997)
    • Indonesia (1998)
  • Blogs
    • Popular
    • Blogs
    • Food
    • Photography
    • Personal
  • About
    • Mingle
    • Writer Bio
    • Investor Bio
    • Me
    • Yellow Gentlemen
    • Investment Aphorisms
    • Places in Between
    • Grants
    • Angel Investing
    • Shop
    • Unconference

Fergus Butler-Gallie: priesthood, frocks, scouse, faith, Liverpool, and Mummified Hearts | podcast

July 19, 2023 Ben Yeoh

Fergus Butler-Gallie is a priest and writer. His latest book, Touching Cloth, is a memoir on his time as a priest in Liverpool.

We cover many topics relating to Fergus's life, work, and perspectives on faith and the Church of England. I also ask him what he would do with the Church of England if he had a magic wand.

Fergus provides insights into life in Liverpool, discussing local culture, diversity, and the famous Liverpool accent. He argues that many stereotypes and assumptions about the city are inaccurate.

We explore how Fergus's time as a minister in Liverpool impacted his faith, with Fergus sharing that it was an overall positive experience that affirmed his sense of calling.

Discussing the Church of England, Fergus critiques the managerial bureaucracy and argues for decentralization and a return to an earlier model. He wants more inspiring, eccentric bishops.

We discuss eccentric reverends from history that Fergus has chronicled, including a food-obsessed dean who famously ate the mummified heart of King Louis XIV. Fergus shares thoughts on the Eucharist and transubstantiation, after I suggest an analogy to actors embodying a role. We discusses how wearing a clerical collar changes how one is perceived.

"Dean Buckland was dean of Westminster, which is a very high profile job in the Church of England. And he made it his mission to try and eat everything that had ever existed. So he ate mice, he ate tadpoles...And they go and say, "Oh, now we reach the most impressive thing that we have." And they're very carefully taking it out this casket. And they said, "Because you're such a privileged group of people, we're going to hand it around to all of you. And this is the mummified heart of King Louis XIV smuggled out of France at the revolution and now kept here in our private museum." And it goes around all the people. They look at it and think, "Oh, this is amazing. This is wonderful." It gets to Dean Buckland, he looks at it and he says, "I've never eaten King before." And he pops it in his mouth."

We play a short game of over rated under rated and end on Fergus’ life advice.

Fergus rates: James Bond, the British monarchy, Afternoon tea, The House of Lords, Double decker buses , Black cabs, Pubs, and Cricket. On life advice:

Fergus recommends reversing our instincts - don't take seriously what we think we should, and take seriously what we think we shouldn't. For those considering ordination, he advises prayer and cautions it's not for everyone. "There are things in life that should be taken seriously and there are things in life that should not be taken seriously. The real thing to realize is that they're the opposite way around to the way you think they are. Anything you think should be taken seriously, don't take it seriously. Anything you think should not be taken seriously, take it seriously."

Podcast available wherever you listen. Video available on Youtube or above. Transcript below.

PODCAST INFO

  • Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3gJTSuo

  • Spotify: https://sptfy.com/benyeoh

  • Anchor: https://anchor.fm/benjamin-yeoh

Transcript: (only lightly edited)

Ben

Hey everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Fergus Butler-Gallie. Fergus is a writer and priest. His latest book is “Touching Cloth” which is a memoir of his life so far in the Church of England. Fergus, welcome.

Fergus

Thank you very much. It's lovely to be here.

Ben (00:00:19):

What do you think is most misunderstood about Liverpool?

Fergus (00:00:23):

Everything is the answer. Almost everything is misunderstood about Liverpool. You get people who make jokes about lack of employment or people stealing cars, all that kind of scally culture; that idea of scouters being sort of dangerous or idle. That very much-- that's obviously misunderstood. There’s the scandal around Boris Johnson, the spectator interview, the Republicans as a sort of grievance mongers. Again, I don't think that's true. But I think Liverpool has some myths about itself as well. I think it's actually, deep down in my experience, a very sort of small sea conservative city. It's a red city scout socialist. It doesn't like change very much. So I think the myths about Liverpool are the ones that are imposed on it from the outside which are generally very negative. Those are completely untrue. The people that are exceptionally welcoming, they're incredibly hardworking. 

Then there are the myths that Liverpool itself cultivates. We've always been a city of immigrants. We've always been this, that or the other. It isn't really true. The history of Liverpool is exceptionally interesting, I should say. I think the most fascinating of any city in Britain and from how it goes from a sort of fishing village founded by King John to this center of global trade, to what it is now in its 20th century history. But what I would say about Liverpool is the one thing that isn't a misunderstanding is that it's different. It is different. It feels different to other cities. It feels like it has a culture to itself. Fascinating stat recently that every single accent in the UK, every single regional accent is softening; i.e., moving towards a kind of center point, whether it's people who speak in a very received pronunciation; the queen-- famously the late queen. Her voice got sort of, “Started like this, near some clipped,” and by the end it became a little more elongated with the vowels.

Every accent is doing this; from Tyneside to Devon to sort of Cockney except Liverpool. And the Liverpool accent is getting harsh. Scouse is getting more scouse, more sort of harsh, which I think says something about its willingness and its desire to be different and do things differently. So that sort of myth. But I think everything else, the way in which that unfolds I think can lead to misunderstandings.

Ben (00:02:59):

And does their sense of identity and culture span most of the city, everyone who speaks scouse have it? Did that also span rich to poor, or was your ministry mostly in a kind of poorer community?

Fergus (00:03:16):

Very much it span rich to poor. The thing about Liverpool is having said, it has always been-- It is a huge diversity, but diverse in ways that people don't quite expect. So its wave of sort of, for instance-- It got the oldest Chinatown in the UK. Now, most immigrants to the UK from China came in the late 19th or late 20th centuries. In Liverpool, they came in the 18th century. And so you have people who are from Chinese Liverpool families who have been running businesses there for nearly 300 years. And that is a very different kind of routing. Ditto. It's black communities, partly because of its links with the slave trade, which again, Liverpool perhaps keeps quiet in some ways. So yes, it's very diverse and that, but that scousness is sort of throughout, it goes like a stick of rock. It really is throughout the whole of society there.

But my ministry was with everyone. That sort of is the great joy of the parish church I served in. So it is the oldest institution in Liverpool. Liverpool was founded as a little chapel by the River Mersey, which became the Church of our Lady in St. Nicholas, which means you were dealing with the Lord Mayor, the political elite, the mayor Joe Anderson, who was famously arrested on corruption charges. You are dealing with the Earl of Darby, because again, Liverpool is still hugely aristocratic in a number of ways. The Duke of Westminster and the Earl of Darby own vast tracks in the city center in a way that isn't the case in Manchester or Newcastle or even Central London which is considered to be more aristocratic.

But because you're in the center of the city and because in Liverpool distances are shorter, so you can have these glorious Victorian apartment blocks, Edwardian apartment blocks which are filled with comparatively wealthy people with these new skyscrapers and things like that. We had a skyscraper opposite us where there was a box on the top of it which was a self-contained apartment where Jurgen Klopp had lived for his first few years as manager of Liverpool. So you've got that, and then literally one street away you will have council housing, estate housing, you have people living very close to the poverty line. So unlike London where you can sort of categorize it, there are pockets of social housing in places like Chelsea and Westminster. But in Liverpool, it really is very, very obvious that from one street or even on the same street, one street to another, you have this incredibly close-knit living of the super-rich in terms of the footballers and some of the businessmen who were there and really, some of the poorest people in the UK. So yeah, we had to deal with both of them because they were in the parish and that's sort of the point of the parish church.

Ben (00:06:04):

Did they make you choose sides between Everton and Liverpool?

Fergus (00:06:08):

Yes.

Ben (00:06:09):

Although difficult congregations.

Fergus (00:06:11):

They did. And gosh, I have to say it. I followed football. My father was a director at Charlton Athletic football club when he left the Army. So again, I had always gone round-- I knew about football. I never quite believed the level of the intensity and the kind of rivalry is a big deal. I had a colleague who wouldn't wear anything red. He wouldn't wear red clothing. He just wouldn't wear because he was such Leviton. I will say I went to Goodison Park more-- I went to Everton more than I went to… I used to get out of it by saying, “Of course, I was really Tranmere Rovers fan who were the team in Birkenhead who play in white.

Ben (00:06:50):

So very good. Safer to be wearing black then, really. 

Fergus (00:06:55):

Yes, exactly.

Ben (00:06:56):

And so did your time in Liverpool confirm your faith or dent it in any way? Or did it swing in roundabouts? I have my impression from reading your work that faith is something that compounded and crept up on you over time. Crept is probably not the right word, but compounded over time as opposed to-- And I guess most people don't have a kind of damaging moment where they convert except for these occasional saints and perhaps like that. But I think for most ordinary people at it is, there's a kind of quiet growing, or not even quiet or maybe in steps and things. I get my impression that actually perhaps your faith was confirmed, at least in the everyday ministry. Was my impression correct or was it dented at all, or what happened?

Fergus (00:07:44):

It certainly changed and adapted. I think it was confirmed. I think your point is absolutely spot on. I think there is a myth that people have; maybe people outside Christianity, and I think some people in Christianity have this idea that there is a kind of burning bush moment. There is a road to Damascus. There is a radical showy thunder and lightning, jazz hands, assorted choirs moment where you say, "I now believe I'm a Christian." There are certain churches and certain people within the Church of England who I don't think help that. In that there's this idea that people say sort of, "Well, that was the day I knew I gave my life to Jesus. That's the day. I can pinpoint the day I became a Christian."

I could tell you when I was christened, when I was baptized as a baby. But I think part of the historic prevalence of infant baptism, of baptizing children in the Church of England which has always been its tradition, means that actually people then have faith on a back burner almost. If you're cooking a large meal and you've got something-- Let's say you are cooking a roast and you've got your gravy on the back burner, the gravy is a thing that will make the meal. But you're not paying attention to it for most of that meal until it becomes critical, until it bubbles over or until you realize the gas wasn't on at all and you haven't cooked it full stop. So I think for most people it is this sort of this slow burn, but as you say, compacted and confirmed by certain experiences undoubtedly.

But those often aren't one moment, they are whole periods of our lives. The period of my life that I spent in Liverpool absolutely did that. It showed me multiple things. It showed me the good the church can do. It was a very positive experience of what the church is doing, both in practical terms as we talked about. There is poverty. Enormous practical help is being given by the church in terms of food banks, in terms of legal advice, in terms of giving people kind of a sense of purpose, a place to go, a roof over their heads, et cetera. But it also showed me that the church can have a kind of sparkling intellectual life. My colleagues were fantastic there. It showed me that it can really give meaning, not just practical help, but actually something much deeper than that.

So I was hugely confirmed. It was a hugely positive experience for me and sort of selfishly. It showed me what the church can do, the capital C Church, it showed me what that small C, that individual church was doing. But it also confirmed in me, I suppose, a sense that this is what I should be doing as well. And I think inevitably talking about that thing about faith, I think there is a sense of imposter syndrome with clergy because you go up there and it's your job to do something that is in itself impossible, make it impossible to know God known as an unworthy servant of the most worthy God as certain theologians put in. But also you are aware that your faith does change. There are days when you don't feel like you're doing the right thing. And there are days where you don't feel you're in the right job. And there are days where sometimes you go downstairs and you're not even sure you believe in God.

But the whole point is you're held within an institution and you're held within a sort of cradle of worship, a rhythm of things that can keep you going. That's why that regularity and that rhythm is so important in the church. But for me, it sort of confirmed me against having had that before, there was sort of this, "Oh, should I be doing this?" I had raucous teenage years, I didn't behave well, not the kind of people who knew me when I was at school or university. When they hear that I've become ordained their kind of jaws hit the floor. There's a sort of, "Really him?"

So there is a sense of that kind of imposter syndrome. And I think that happens to people from all kinds of backgrounds and all kinds of traditions in the church. I suppose what Liverpool taught me is, of course, it's not actually about me. It doesn't matter if I have imposter syndrome. Every priest necessarily has that. It's about being held in the kind of cradle of the whole, held within that tradition, held within that rhythm of doing things and actually knowing that it could operate, it will operate, it does operate without you. And then knowing that you are sort of useless, so to speak, being liberated to then do what you need to do and becoming a kind of agent of that which is good and right and speaks to glory, I suppose.

Ben (00:12:31):

And have you ever lost your faith or come to a very low ebb that it might be? I recall a story. So we are recording near Ladbroke Grove which is in West London, and there is actually a set of karma like nuns around the corner. These particular nuns, a bunch of them have a vow of silence as well as prayer and live what most people would say such an austere life that it seems incredible that they are around. But there was a documentary that someone managed to fathom after writing to them continuously for quite a number of years. And the head nun, I get the terminology wrong-- But one of the most important nuns there described her time when she first joined the monastery. And she'd graduated from Cambridge from I think a reasonably well-to-do family who didn't understand her choice. And so she said, "No, I've done like a university thing and now, this is what I want to do."

But she also described for what seemed to be a number of years where she really questioned whether she was doing the right thing; these enormous vows of poverty, austerity, and continuous prayer for others. And I was listening to her and she wasn't sure for years that it was the right thing. Then she came closer to her faith and now very important. And that really struck me as someone who's living such an incredible life coming so close to losing faith or essentially I think had lost a sort of faith and then come back to it. I wonder if that was something you've come across or you come across in clergy who you meet?

Fergus (00:14:22):

Absolutely. And I very much find that faith that has gone through serious encounters with doubt. I mean serious encounters, not just, as I said, those moments where you think, "Oh, I can't be bothered today” because everybody has those. People have that with whatever job they do. But I think faith that has gone through serious encounter with doubt is always stronger at the tail end than faith that hasn't. And I do encounter people who haven't really experienced doubt. And actually I, for a long time didn't really experience it. I suppose I experienced, as I say, this kind of sense that, "Oh, should I be doing this?" But I don't know whether I'd undergone some of the real kind of horrors that some people undergo.

Now, I did go through a period of that, of feeling really very-- I took a job in London that was misery inducing. I hated it. I hated where I worked. I hated who I worked with. Hate is a very toxic emotion and it is cancerous in the sense that it spreads. If it isn't sort of treated, it will cause lasting damage essentially, and it will kill other parts of your life other than where it started. And I was beginning to find that to be the case. So when you are treating something cancerous, one of the ways of treatment is of course you blast where this has come from, that you try and kill with radiation. So part of me thought, "Well, maybe I should cut faith out of my life completely. Maybe I need to kind of chemo on that. I need to just irradiate that so that the other parts of my life cannot be poisoned by the real nastiness and poison that I'm experiencing in the world of faith in where I was working.

So I did come close to making that decision, but slowly but surely I realized that actually the analogy with it being sort of cancerous is wrong because actually the way faith works is sort of like anything. It has the potential for enormous good and it has the potential for enormous wickedness and evil and enormous bad. My job I felt as a person of faith was to, as I think anything, is it speaks more perhaps to the human spirit than to the specifics of faith. That when something that was good and enriching becomes bad and poisonous, it's about going back to basics and working out, "Well, what got me here in the first place and why do I feel this cool?" Everything has a potentiality of good, everything has a potentiality of bad. How do I go back to the beginning and turn back along the path of the good? That's what I sort of had to do, which meant actually quite the opposite of cutting it out completely. I had to go back to the very root basics of it. It's more pruning than irradiating. It's a kind of horticultural synonym is perhaps more helpful.

Ben (00:17:39):

I definitely got that sense for your time at Liverpool. And I got a real great sense of the rhythm of ministry; births, weddings, and particularly deaths and funerals. And I also got this sense that you wrote that a your kind of feeling fulfilled by this-- I would call it everyday ministry although every day sort of seems to not do it justice. And actually through that you were also conscious that you are holding something larger than yourself, which I thought was very telling. But I'd be interested in that theme of death which goes through the book. So my fun question would be, what reading or music would you have at your own funeral or what have you found most touching in funerals that you've been to? I asked this partly because I've had a show for the last couple of years, a performance lecture show where you get to help me create my own funeral. So I've had many different pieces of music chosen by my audience, but I'm always interested in what people would choose themselves.

Fergus (00:18:49):

Yeah. I have been to obviously lots of funerals and each funeral is different; that is important to know, even if the words you are using are ostensibly the same. I have a long running joke with my mother about this. My mother wants a kind of everybody coming in bright colors, celebration of life sort of thing. She wants happy music, cheerful music. That to me sounds appalling. I can't think of anything worse. So I keep on threatening that I would predecease her just to avoid having to go to her funeral, because what I would like is-- And this is partly because I think-- It's not that I-- Again, there are some clergy who can be very sort of judgmental. I have been to funerals like that, that work; that sort of make you feel happy to be alive. But the more funerals I go to, the more I realize I think we have a kind of myth. We like to think the funeral is about the dead person, but it's not. The funeral is about the living and how they can cope and carry on.

Now, for some people that might be a kind of celebration of life thing. But I think actually a really important moment with funerals is it's one of the only times we do acknowledge death, where we actually say death is real and people do die and we will die. And so for me, there's something I think enormously salutary about basically telling people that, "Yeah, okay, this has happened." Yes, life carries on, but death is a thing that we pass through. Now again, as a Christian, I don't believe death to be the absolute end. I don't. So for me, this idea that in a funeral you don't acknowledge death and you simply focus on that life that has just been lived and the wonders of it is sort of slightly counterintuitive because to me, there is much, much better to come.

Firstly, because I believe in the concept of eternal life. I believe in heaven. And two, death then becomes the elephant in the room. I think it's much better to look at it head on and be honest about it. So for me, what would I have? I've sort of said I want everybody dressed in black. I want it pouring with rain. Only the priest is allowed an umbrella outside. I want my will read out by a kind of crusty lawyer and there to be a kind of-- I want an absolute textbook kind of church; historic Church of England funeral. Partly because as I say, I think there needs to be an acknowledgement of death and an acknowledgement of eternal life. Those are the things I'm interested in. And again, what I've said explicitly is there will be a reading from the Bible and there will be a sermon, and the sermon cannot mention me.

I don't want it to be about me. I want it to be about the thing that I hold to be true and the thing that I've cultivated my life around, namely the idea that Jesus Christ, by His death and resurrection has defeated death. Preach on that, not on me. I'm thinking of employing a bouncer to remove anybody who uses the phrase celebration of life including if need be my mother from whatever church it's held in. I'm being slightly facetious, but I am-- Ironically, of course, as someone who is quite kind of cynical, that funeral would probably reflect me more than a kind of all singing, all dancing. I've been to all of them and as I say, I do think the ones that work best are the ones that say, "Yeah, this person has died. Death is not the end, but death is real." Whereas some of them I think are attempts to pretend it's not.

Ben (00:22:28):

If I recall correctly, I think you wrote in your book that people were the church's greatest treasure. Do you still believe that to be true?

Fergus (00:22:40):

Yeah. Well, so that goes back to the story of St. Lawrence. So St. Lawrence is the patriot saint of all kinds of things; comedians, barbecues which relates to his manner of his death. He was roasted alive. And midway through being roasted, St. Lawrence sort of summoned over the Roman guards. He went, "Come over here, come here." What could you possibly want? You're being burnt alive. He said, "I think you need to turn me over. I'm done on this side.” So he got them to flip him around. But the prank that he got into trouble with was when the Emperor of Rome asked him to bring him the great treasures of the church. “I need money. He could bring me the church greatest treasures,” meaning silver and gold.

And St. Lawrence bought him a group of people. He bought him specifically the lame, the old, the children, the mute, the deaf, et cetera, the blind. So yes, I state that the church's greatest treasure is people. However, I would preface that with the fact that some of the church's greatest problems are rooted in people as well. And the thing with the church is it is a human institution. If the church shouldn't have humans in it, it could be perfect, but it isn't. And the reason why it's not perfect is because it's got humans in it. Yet its whole existence is predicated on the fact that there are humans in it. So that sounds very roundabout, but what I'm essentially trying to say is that I am not some great candle carrier for human nature.

I actually have a very low view of human nature. I do think we are inclined to do bad things. I think we regularly do bad things. I can only speak for myself in that regard. But yeah, I have a kind of swiftian view of human nature, which is not positive. That said, it is the job of the church to see in the human the possibility of the divine, the possibility of the good and the perfect and the beautiful and the truth. And again, it goes back to what I was saying about funerals. The best way you can do that is not by pretending that the bad stuff isn't there, but by acknowledging the bad stuff, saying, actually, "Yes, we are bad and wicked and do things wrong," full stop. That then enables us to live in a way that is so liberated by acknowledging that, that we can work towards the good and the beautiful and the true. Does that make sense?

Ben (00:25:09):

It does. It also explains how you want your funeral constructed. So if you were to ask that same question, "What is the greatest treasure of the church" to the synod or to the manager class of the Church of England, do you think they would respond in the same way? And I guess my question is getting at, I think a lot of people on the outside of the church don't really understand the church's institution or the church's bureaucracy. And actually there's been quite a lot of mumblings from frontline vicars and priests about the problems of the institution of the church, which is, as you say, rooted in its people, perhaps rooted also in its economics, in its governance, in its long checkered history. So I'd be interested in your reflections on the institution of the church and whether they value the same things in the same ways, or how it has come about.

Fergus (00:26:05):

Yeah. I think we are in the midst of a serious problem at the moment of disconnect between the ordinary people of God, the ordinary people of the church and its managerial class. Were you to ask them, “What are the greatest treasure of the church?” You would get a consultative process, you'd get a 600 word policy document, you wouldn't get an answer. You would get a claim that they'd followed due process, that they'd done this, that and the other. You would get a working group formed. You wouldn't get anything that speaks to anything that is beautiful and true. That is my big issue. We've reached a point yes, where the structures are hugely complicated. But the way I describe it to people-- And again, people who don't understand it, is that there are two churches of England.

There is the Church of England that is your local vicar who often has many, many churches that he or she has to look after. It's all the people who help them. It's the people who try and live according to the principles of Jesus Christ on a day-to-day basis, who volunteer their time and their money and their effort, who say their prayers, who struggle along. These are the Church of England. They are the Church of England and they are the people if you go into your local Church of England church nine times out of 10, they are who you will encounter. Particularly if you're in a place where it isn't kind of lots of gathered churches, you get a problem in London where you have people traveling all over to these sort of big, showy churches who then don't really have much connection with the specifics of where they are of the parish. But nine times out of 10, that's what you'll get.

You then have Church of England PLC. You have a kind of managerial class. And again, they are increasingly monochrome; not in there necessarily in the externals of diversity, but in the way they think. So absolutely fascinatingly. I'm not a huge fan of the Myers-Briggs test. I think it's mostly voodoo. But I think it was very telling that whilst the external diversity of the bishops has changed in terms of their class background, their gender, their race, their educational background, their areas of interest ostensibly, that has become considerably more diverse. What's become much, much, much more mono is the way they think. And tellingly, I think it was said that there was only one or two bishops on the bench who didn't have the same Myers-Brigg profile as the rest.

So that is why we have institutional inertia, I would suggest is that people who think in the same way, namely that, what should triumph is the procedural over the human. What should triumph is the sort of technical over the mystical. Now, these are people who to my mind be fantastic as your bank manager. I'm not sure they'd be very good. Well, they haven't proved to be very good as bishops. They haven't proved to be very good running the church because yes, the church needs procedures. Yes, it needs management. Yes, it needs the technical. But what you cannot do is try and make the people whose job it is to set hearts on fire, to make people go and do great sacrificial things, namely the bishops, the leaders, the shepherds of the flock, the people who are the successor to the apostles.

Remember who Jesus choose as disciples are not managers. He chooses very unlikely people, dangerous people, difficult people, people who make mistakes, grumpy people, unrealistic people. That's who He chooses as His disciples, not the safe managerial class. And the problem is that now we have a church that is run by a safe managerial class in the interests of that safe managerial class. And that will then mean that that first Church of England we talked about, the kind of the good or ordinary people of God will always play second field to procedure. And that actually you have sucked out the human as well as the divine. And you were left merely with a kind of husk of policy, paper that doesn't mean anything.

Ben (00:30:11):

And does that explain why the church has run into such troubles over safeguarding and its response, or at least a bureaucratic response. And there has also been, at least in Britain at the moment, a dispute on pay and on economics as well. I have one reflection hearing that. This is from Corporate World. We often joke that you cannot change or influence corporate culture by policy. And in fact, putting a policy on it is usually your death now. That's because there's people very well meaning going, "Ahhh." The only thing we can do is create a policy because actually culture is arranged by leadership and behaviors. Actually, even in corporate world is defined by corporate purpose. What you want to achieve in the organization or company that you work for?

And I found it's an interesting paradox because you would've thought that with the church-- And in fact you do meet people like you who are full of faith and purpose so that you would've made it easier. Yet it seems to be not so. Is that your major through theme for why it has run into these troubles with safeguarding and economics and things like that? Or is there something more going on?

Fergus (00:31:37):

I think there are multiple layers there. I think every institution has people who will enter it to do bad things. There are bad faith actors. And the problem with the church is much with education or the health service. Is that as an ostensibly caring profession, ironically it will attract a higher number of sociopaths, basically, because there is a curtain behind which one can hide. So, yes.

Ben (00:32:06):

Interesting. And do you think they always give people because of its nature as well, the benefit of the doubt first time round?

Fergus (00:32:12):

Absolutely. And there's a whole-- We're told to forgive people. So there is an inbuilt problem there for Christianity. But that's not an impossible problem, that's not a circle that should be square, because Jesus is also very clear. Anybody who harms those-- He specifically says this about children, about vulnerable children. He says, "Anybody who harms these, it's better for him that he would have a stone thrown around his neck and he'd be thrown in the sea." So there is clear structure there. I think what you have is-- and it's absolutely fascinating to hear what you say about the corporate world, because I get the impression that the corporate world is, as you say, moving away from this idea that you can manage your way out of problems, that you can simply slap a policy on it, that you can simply follow due process and things will fundamentally then work.

Former bishop of the Church of England famously said, "You can rely on the Church of England to enter a room just as everybody else is leaving it." And it strikes me that the Church of England is still in the room of managerialism, of policy, of paper. I have friends who work in the corporate world. They are being sent on meditation retreats, their leadership; people in their leadership roles. They're being sent to rediscover the ideas of Ignatian spirituality, to connect themselves, to create healthy rhythms within which they can operate. My leaders, someone whose job it is to speak spiritually, we are being sent on kind of hackneyed MBAs out in conference centers in the home counties. And I hope this will somehow help us manage our way out of decline. It's deranged.

And it is essentially doing exactly what it's doing; trying something that the rest of the world has found wanting and we are thinking, “Hang on.” And it means, again, that bad faith actors can work very well. So there's this recent absolute scandal in the Diocese of London where this guy, Martin Sargent, who's now gone to prison for defrauding the diocese of millions of pounds, essentially could walk in saying, "I know all this business voodoo. Let me run things." And rather than saying, "Hang on, actually that's not how we run this institution. This is a different institution that works essentially on a completely different hierarchy to that,” the leaders of the church turned around and said, "Three bags full. Yes. How can we give you everything you need?"

So there's a kind of this sense that because we need to-- Because yes, the underlying issue in all of this, of course, is that fewer people are going to church. The church's assets are increasingly spread too thinly. The economic problem goes back to at least the 1950s, the 1960s, when essentially every vicar was paid a different amount; different parishes were worth more because the way that it was funded were based on the historic assets of that parish. Now in the 1970s, the church says, "Well, let's centralize that. Let's bring it all into the center and we'll spread it out evenly." The problem is that what the center did inevitably was spend more money on the center and less money on the peripheries. And so now you have a system where the center is-- the managerial class has grown enormously.

It used to be that the bishop had one, two secretaries and that was it. And now you have 70, 80, 90, a hundred, 200 people in some diocese and offices, vast corporate buildings. That money has to come from somewhere. And where it has come from is from the parishes. Now, it's almost impossible to give that back because of the way the centralizing of that funding has worked. But you do have an economic problem because fewer people are going to church. And again, that perhaps is a problem of leadership because we can't convince people. When we are totally caught up in this argument over, “How do we pay people and how do we keep the show on the road?” We are not focusing on how we actually encounter people. But again, how can you encourage people with the skills you need to come and join that institution, to come and give up opportunities to earn elsewhere, opportunities to have more comfortable lives elsewhere. To say, "Yes, take up your cross. Follow me," when you can't even pay them. You can't even give them a house in some cases. You can't even offer them anything. You have to say, "Well, not our problem."

Ben (00:36:27):

Interesting. It strikes me that that reading of the church shows me that the churches reflects all of the problems that we see in society. But maybe a step, half a step to three steps behind. It also strikes me that actually that manager class is performing like a very poor corporate. And this is probably maybe imitating something that's not. Whereas if you had-- I'm just going to throw it out because people would know; Patagonia, which is a very purposeful clothing company. Purposeful companies tend to have a mantra of three P's, which is people, planet, profit. But they put the P’s in because without profit, you can't support the people and the planet. So this is why it comes within a corporate form, not obviously for church. But it strikes me that churches actually haven't had very good CEOs or managers, but actually they wouldn't necessarily.

So if you had a magic wand or God's powers for this, is there one thing or a couple of things that you would wave and change around the Church of England or organized religion? Because increasingly I hear-- I guess it's with the stats on the organized religion bit across all of them are pretty much going down. But if you ask the question slightly differently; something around spirituality or something around community and faith, particularly in this country, although I see it echoed in surveys around, it's still roughly where you would've thought it might be because at the margin, human beings do seem to believe in one another. Yes, you have bad faith, you have bad apples everywhere. But actually, there is a stronger sense of community around that which I find quite striking. So magic wand, what would you do?

Fergus (00:38:16):

Yeah. How one does that? How one is able to take that goodwill, that real desire. And I do think there is such a strong desire for what the church can offer and the church is failing to get there. So what I’d do with the magic wand, I would distribute the money more effectively. The way the Church of England has billions of pounds of assets, the way that is distributed is completely shockingly bad. Talking about what we went to earlier, if it means actually saying, "Okay, we're going back to position one," where we are unraveling all of the bad change that has happened in the last 40, 50 years, and then let's work out how we can do it more fairly from there. That's what I would do.

I would say actually we will completely repeal the concepts of common tenure, which is how barista employed. We will completely repeal all of the centralization of funds. And then let's see where we are. Distribute that out. I would sack almost the entire current pension bishops frankly. One of the reasons why I will never get really prolonged in the Church of England, but I would, because I don't think they're up to scratch. I think they are theologically uninspiring. I think they're managerially incompetent. And I think they are stuck within a cycle of dehumanizing technocracy, which means they cannot see the wood from the trees and they can no longer see the humanity of the people of God. And I have replaced them with people who can. Those people may be too old, they may be too young. They may be not skilled enough in the technical ways of the world; technical managerialism. None of that matters.

I would make sure that every diocese has a bishop who can speak comprehensively and coherently of the beauty of following Jesus Christ because that's what it's all about. I don't think you have that in the current crop, frankly. And so I would make sure that-- Again, I would change the way we appoint it. I would return some of that power back to people who are independent of the church because this is part of the problem that we have become much more introspective in how we appoint people in the Church of England. And much more power is held within a very small, very churchy, clique essentially. It used to be that you had input from the state, you had input from external people.

It was much more you say, "Hang on, what are the skills?" A bit like, if in a company you don't always want that to be a totally internal appointment. If you're appointing a CEO in a company you don't want, “Well, what we're going to do is simply have the board. The four people who sit on the board are going to choose one of themselves and they'll hold it in rotation.” That is not a recipe any for kind of construct engagement. You get people from the outside and say, "What do you think we need? What do we think we need? What are our values?" That doesn't happen. So I'd have a return to that. And then having said all what's wrong, I would have a big campaign both in terms of reminding people in the parishes, going round and telling them this. But also telling people outside the church of all the good that is done and all the good that can be done, and the enormous fulfillment that it can bring.

Being engaged in the Church of England, being employed by the Church of England, being a minister in the Church of England, finding my calling and my identity in the Church of England is by far and away the most rewarding thing I have ever done. That I include all the world travel, degrees, books, relationships, et cetera. My engagement with the Church of England is the thing that has rewarded me more than anything else. We need to get out and tell people that that's possible. And I fear we're not doing that. So yeah, I would have a blitz on how we communicate. I'd have a blitz on how we encourage. I think that's the huge thing that's lacking. I cannot emphasize how low morale is, and it shouldn't be, because morale is low in the rest of the country. The frontiers of the state are kind of constantly shaking. The political parties are hugely demoralized. The city is not hugely buoyant with confidence. There's stagflation, there's nothing works. The church should be a beacon of hope, not simply a circus mirror in funny outfits to the misery that permeates the rest of society. That's what we need to recapture. That's what we need to get.

Ben (00:42:44):

Sure.

Fergus (00:42:45):

It is magic wand stuff.

Ben (00:42:46):

Yeah. That sounds amazing. Actually, the cities, although there are stagflation things, is currently reasonably thriving, actually. But that's an aside. I summarized that as really interesting. That has given me more insight than I was expecting. So decentralization, I'm not sure about how the economics of its work. But that's really interesting, the decentralization and a call to an earlier time. I could see that you might not be very popular with bishops or the manager class, but I think there's an element of truth to that.

Fergus (00:43:22):

I would say there are some incredible people. I can pinpoint two or three bishops who I think are hugely impressive. And I can pinpoint people who are in that managerial class, particularly some of the people who are fighting around the safeguarding staff who are trying to do things who are fantastic. So I would say it is not all of them, but as you know through the kind of corporate world, there is a kind of management brain that has affected the vast majority.

Ben (00:43:48):

Sure it's not one way. But it actually strikes me that the church has a governance problem. And like you say, there's good people, but the system has come across which is causing people in the middle-- And yes, maybe there is a lack of diversity of thinking as well, but the weight has compounded the wrong way and they cannot escape from that. Because, for instance, just your comments around how elections happen. So in a corporate world your board is meant to be very independent. And in fact, you have shareholders who will sack the board if they get very grumpy about it. So there are the other mechanisms. But you are right, this idea is that you are choosing the best that you can for your long-term purpose. And there was lots of things around that.

But it strikes me that the church, if it's just choosing within its own way and if the same people are going to choose people who are like them, which you would generally gravitate towards because it takes a certain kind of person to choose people not like you. And actually, that strikes me as a governance problem because you can actually change those decision making things by policy or by different mechanisms. But if the people in charge know about that and that, and you have your synod and all of that time, it strikes me as that. But maybe harking back to the earlier time, you've written a great book on clergy over the last, I guess few hundred years and they come in different flavors. And so listening to this also that the church has lost some of these flavors of eccentrics, I guess intellectuals, people who are kind of borderline heretics, I would guess as well.

You've also written a great book on how they stood up to fascism and the like. So my thought on that is, if you were going to be one of these types of reverends or priests, who would you have chosen to be? Or maybe you can channel them as they were back in their time, but they're now transported to here and you are going to be one of these reverends. Would you prefer to be an eccentric or a prodigal son? A bon viver would be more spun. I don't know whether they have the most change. Which class would you do?

Fergus (00:46:04):

Margaret Thatcher had a line about being lady-like; being a sort of classy lady and she said, "There is one cast iron rule telling people about being a lady if you tell people you aren't." And I sort of think there's something about that, about eccentricity. I think if you go around telling people you're eccentric, then you are not a true eccentric because it can't be studied. The whole point of eccentricity has to be a complete detachment from other people's opinion of you. Now, as my previous comments probably suggest, I generally do have a pretty low interest in what other people think or say about me particularly people with senior roles.

I think each of these operate in their own time. If I could have the capacity and the free time and the bank account to be a true bon viver, that'd be fantastic. I would like nothing more. Seriously, I think God calls us in Christ to say that all things are blessed and you shall not call these things unclean and you must enjoy the great gifts God has given us. I think there is a reason why the central right of Christianity is a meal with food and wine and shared with friends. And I think that is sacramental. That is where we can encounter God. God institutes the sacrament in and of himself. He says, "This is my body." So, I think, yes. I suppose someone who enjoys living.

Ben (00:47:57):

Who was the most underrated bon viver then that you wrote about, do you think?

Fergus (00:48:01):

Well, one of the most famous ones was the former Dean of Westminster, Buckland. Dean Buckland was dean of Westminster, which is a very high profile job in the Church of England. And he made it his mission to try and eat everything that had ever existed. So he ate mice, he ate tadpoles.

Ben (00:48:26):

This is Dean of Westminster Abbey.

Fergus (00:48:27):

Dean of Westminster Abbey, yeah.

Ben (00:48:29):

When was this?

Fergus (00:48:29):

This was in the Victorian era. So again, this is sort of the height of the church's bar. And they put as Dean of Westminster, this man who's obsessed with dinosaur faeces. So he excavates dinosaurs. And again, that was considered a threat to the churches. This shows you just the catastrophic declining in confidence and culture that we have that at the height of the Victorian era, the height of the problems around Darwin and questions around the origins of the universe, they're pointing to Westminster Abbey a man who believes his main role in life is not to sort of minister at the great moments of church and state, but to eat everything that he possibly can, including every kind of type of animal. He even eats the mummified heart of Louis XIV.

He goes to a museum, his private museum, they only let 10 people in-- Looks around this big. And he gets a ticket because he's the Dean of Westminster. So they think, "Oh, he'd be a very good person to have on our private tour." And they go and say, "Oh, now we reach the most impressive thing that we have." And they're very carefully taking it out this casket. And they said, "Because you're such a privileged group of people, we're going to hand it around to all of you. And this is the mummified heart of King Louis XIV smuggled out of France at the revolution and now kept here in our private museum." And it goes around all the people. They look at it and think, "Oh, this is amazing. This is wonderful." It gets to Dean Buckland, he looks at it and he says, "I've never eaten King before." And he pops it in his mouth. Of course these people are completely horrified. And his only comment was, "It was very dusty." This is the kind of person they're appointing.

But he's an incredible figure and an incredible sort of gourmand and incredible thinker. I mean, his lectures on geology are still studied at Oxford today. So he was a great liver and eater and drinker. The more recent underrated bombardier is a man called Brian Brindley, who was a great manager on this civil action. He very recent only died in the last 25 years or so. I think it was the year 2001 he died. He was a great lover of food and drink. He used to go shopping in red high heels to his local Tesco and he would fill his trolley with double cream because he ate double cream with everything because he said it made it less rich. Famously, he put on this party for his 70th birthday; party where he decided to have seven courses.

And unsurprisingly given his mode of living, midway through the-- I think it was the dressed crab and the birthing Crut in between the two, he killed everyone dropped dead. And the people said the only person who would've considered carrying on eating in such a circumstance was of course him. But it was a great way to go in his grand 70th birthday at the Athenaeum Club. So I think he's a lesser well- known one. Although, interestingly, when people talk to me about that book, he is the one most of them have met because he was…

Ben (00:51:28):

His funeral had to have been a great feast. That would've epitomized his life. I spent about five years of my life going to Westminster Abbey three times a week and listening to stuff. And I had never had anyone like Dean Buckland. But that would've been really inspiring. Underrated saint, do you have an underrated saint? What does Church of England think about saints nowadays?

Fergus (00:51:53):

We have saints.

Ben (00:51:53):

You do have saints, but kind of more famously in the Catholic traditions. But you have your own. I feel they're all underrated then, aren't they?

Fergus (00:52:00):

Well, the Church of England has a funny deal whereby it's sort of about the reformation. It said, "Well, we're not going to get rid of saints. We still believe in the community of saints, but we're not going to make any new ones.” They did actually make an exception there with King Charles the first when the restoration happened. Charles was declared St. Charles King and martyr and put in the calendar. Now since then, in the 20th century actually, the Church of England has put together a calendar whereby it includes holy people; often unlikely holy people from recent years, martyrs of the 20th century. People like Dietrich Bonhoeffer is in there. People like some of those sort of anti-apartheid activists in South Africa are in there. Teachers and preachers from the 19th and 20th century; bishops, Charles Gore, who founded a lot of monks and nuns back in the Church of England. He helped bring them back. He's in there.

So there's a real mix of people, but they tend not to call them Saint X. I mean, in terms of most underrated saint, there are so many glorious ones. There is a saint, my absolute favorite saint whose name is Joseph something. He is a saint not in the Church of England; he is in the Catholic tradition. But he's a patron saint of loud noises. He was a junior brother in a monastery in Peru, I think it was. They needed money to rebuild the church. It had been destroyed in an earthquake. He said, "We don't know what to do, we can't farm, we can't do anything." So this chap said, "Okay, I've got you." So he found the noisiest donkey he could, went around and he listened to the constant bray, “hee-haw, hee-haw,” went to the owner and said, "Can I buy your noisy donkey?" He said, "You'd be doing me a favor to take it off my hands."

And essentially he went around every house in the town and he parked the donkey outside the house and said, "I'm going to leave this donkey here until you give some money to the donation of the church." And eventually people got so fed up with the donkey making this loud noise and they gave him money. So this chap became a saint because he rebuilt the church, but entirely through making loud noises and annoying people. And I think he's such a good reminder that the saints-- We think of the saints as kind of doe-eyed, very pious, constantly in prayer, but often annoying and loud people can be saint as well. And that's quite a good corrective. When someone annoys you, you think, "Hang on, they could be a saint."

Ben (00:54:34):

Yeah. That's a theme I get through all of your books and writing. And actually we've had it in this conversation that the church even today, but in its huge history, has a lot of diverse thinkers. People who you wouldn't necessarily associate with the myth of a do gooder church goer now, much more wide-ranging in their thinking, in their interests, in their passions. Much more human in a concentrated humanity, which I found really fascinating. You bring that to life very well and with a lot of humor. I think my favorite saint, although I think this might be apocryphal, I think it's Saint Drogo who's meant to be a saint of coffee, but I think it's a late one or something on trading.

Fergus (00:55:19):

I'll have to look it up.

Ben (00:55:21):

So I have an esoteric question for you because it has only recently come to my mind. And that's around transubstantiation. So this is the idea of becoming something. I have this in my theater work and practice, and I was thinking about this and speaking with other theater practitioners. In theater, we say an actor-- There’s as an actor that comes to mind. Maxine Peak, she's a great actor. She becomes Hamlet. In that moment, she is Hamlet. And you don't say, "Well, she's obviously not a Prince of Denmark. She's obviously on the one hand, not Hamlet.” But actually in that moment she is obviously Hamlet. And we're not saying there's any process change. We are simply calling her Hamlet. And it occurred to me that that is actually a form of transubstantiation. So if other people are really saying, "This is the blood of Christ, this is the whatever," actually in that moment who's to say that's not the same process which is happening when we say, "Maxine Peak, you are Hamlet." And so my question is, has this ever come across in your thinking? And then maybe as my little segue as that's a little bit esoteric, is do you think you become a different person or do clergy kind of become a little bit of a different person, although you are the same person, when you are wearing the collar? Is that in itself a kind of form of transubstantiation?

Fergus (00:56:47):

Absolutely. I think that's a really interesting analogy. And again, there are lots of strands of theology around the Eucharist; of thinking around what the body and blood and what the bread and wine is from memorialism which says you're simply doing something because that's what Jesus did and you're sort of copying Him. Which again, there is a school of thought in acting that says you are simply copying. There's consubstantiation that says, "Okay, well it is more than simply... You have a kind of spirit with you and through you the reception of this, but it isn't necessarily in an essence itself." You have transubstantiation. You then have the kind of the slightly Anglican mess of the idea of the real presence that you affirm the idea that Christ is present, but you don't necessarily want to know how. It comes down to how technical you like your metaphysics and how technical do you like to know, "Well, what is this?" And as you say, would you technically say Maxine Peak is Prince of Denmark now? In that moment, perhaps. But I suppose as a good Anglican, I think the technicalities are less. It's about incidents and accidents. The technicalities of it are perhaps less interesting than the fact of the moment, the living in the moment.

But that leads onto do you become a different person when you're wearing the collar? Yes. Because you become a cipher for everybody and you've become a different person to each individual person you encounter. So you are a different person to the lady who comes to the midweek communion service, to the guy sitting outside Tesco who you give five quid to, to the person who just sees you on the bus. But you are necessarily a cipher then for that person's encounter with the church, that person's encounter with God, that person's encounter with themselves and their own relationships with the world and the divine. So you necessarily become, whilst I should say-- this is why it is a good analog-- whilst also maintaining the kind of bread and wineness of your own, the fact of your own being.

You are still at that point son or daughter or husband or wife. You are a friend, you are a lover, you are an irritant. You are someone who is allergic to milk. You are someone who doesn't eat tuna. You are someone who prefers sparkling. All the things that are bound up in the sense of self are still there. Yet you also then have this fact that you are no longer yourself. You are now a type, a cipher, a kind of placeholder for on one level the church, but on a better level, you are there to represent Jesus Christ. And that's a huge responsibility.

Ben (00:59:42):

That's fascinating. I hadn't heard it explained that way. It makes a lot of sense as to that communal being that you can bear. Okay. So back from the esoteric. Little deviation into hardcore theology there for a moment. We'll go to a few more fun things. Who would you like to write a biography of yourself? Or would it have to be autobiography, which you're doing. But if someone's going to write a biography of you, who would it be?

Fergus (01:00:12):

Can I have a dead person?

Ben (01:00:16):

Yeah, Shakespeare.

Fergus (01:00:18):

No, not Shakespeare. I would like Laurence Sterne, the author of Tristram Shandy because I think that he is kind of absurdist and he was a clergyman so he'd get it. I think he is one of the funniest writers ever to write in the English language. His kind of almost modernist rush for the absurd that you get interest from Shandy is unparalleled. And I think might be the only way-- Sometimes I find myself in a situation and think, “This is so absurd. There is no way of communicating this with a straight face.”

Ben (01:00:48):

Yeah. So there's a whole branch in creative arts where-- There's an argument that humanities have gone slightly wrong by not following more of the Tristram Shandy line. Because the other line in modern novels, which you'll probably know more than me, I haven't particularly studied literature as a theory, more as a practitioner. Is you have the kind of modern story which needs to be, perceived to be quite close to how we think life is. And if it feels too farfetched, it's we don't believe it. Whereas we have this phrase now is that we see things in real life and we go, "Oh, if that was a story, you wouldn't believe it."

Whereas if you follow the Tristram Shandy line and you have got elements of this magic realism and these other things which are obviously fantastical fantasy and science fiction would be there. But actually that fantasy in science fiction, magic realism and all the like, what we found is that by being so obviously not of the real world, it's actually revealing something deeper. It also shows much more what we call narrative plenitude. And actually, I think about it because it's a little bit of your critique of the institution and the church because it doesn't have that variety anymore because it's adhering itself to something that it thinks it wants to be, which is closer to this modern life concept as opposed to towards that you are eccentrics, you're Buckland's, your Tristram Shandy.

Fergus (01:02:21):

The thing of course which book does that better than almost anything else? The Bible. People say to me, "Do you think it's true that x, y and z happened in the Bible where you have Balaam's ass, where the donkey starts talking?" It's like, "Well..." My other great argument is who is one of the best theologians of the Bible is Pontus Pilot because he asked the question, "What is truth?” And then he answers his own question when he says, "Behold the man." So the truth is necessarily then encapsulated in the lived experience of Christ. That is where truth is from.

Ben (01:02:52):

Deep Bible stuff.

Fergus (01:02:54):

When someone says to me, "What about all the kind of crazy stuff in the Bible? Is that true?" It's like, "Yeah. Crazy stuff happens all the time." And actually, something that is crazy and as you say, magic realism, that can speak more earnestly of the truth than someone describing their, “I went to the shops and I bought some toothpaste and then I went home and I spoke to my friend and then I went to bed.” Something that is ostensibly more anarchic or more absurdist can speak much more deeply of the truth than something that is simply procedural.

Ben (01:03:25):

Yeah. Gets closer to the mind, gets closer to the human. Given that we're nowhere near close in any of that. So your writing day or your week? So you minister, you are going to have hopefully another job soon, but where do you find time for your writing? Are you one of those who writes an hour a day or four hours a day? Or does it come in fits and starts and do you have anything particular to your writing process?

Fergus (01:03:53):

It's quite erratic. I used to always carry notebooks with me. I've now gone into the appalling habit of the notes app on my phone, which I hate. But I do find myself-- I might be on the tube or on the train. I have a really small notebook laptop with me that I try and keep with me at all times. I do try and keep written notebooks on me, but the thing I always have on me is my phone so I can always take notes on that. So I will often write whole paragraphs or whole articles just if they come to me if I'm traveling. I spend a lot of time traveling. So I've now got to a point where I work really well on the train. I'm traveling around the country if I'm doing promotion to the book.

I was in Scarborough the other week, I'm going up to Yorkshire again. I've been in Liverpool. I'm going to the West Country in the autumn for a big tour there. So there's a lot of traveling. I don't drive so I use the time to work and I find that is hugely helpful. But if it comes to actually sitting down and writing a chapter, I do like to have done all that noting and all that. I've got hundreds of-- What I tend to do is I copy it. This is incredibly boring, but it does speak to the slightly chaotic nature of it. What I will do is I will write it in the notes app on my phone. I will then copy it to a Gmail document, a draft Gmail, send that email to myself, this whole random array of notes, and then put that on a Word document. And then from that, extrapolate further word documents that are like, "Okay, well that relates to that article that relates to that chapter." But when it comes to actually sitting down and writing the chapter, I like to write generally in the evenings. Sometimes in the afternoons actually I can work from-- I don't like really working in the mornings. I like to have a bit of a lead in, but I can work from 11. 11 o'clock I can probably start work. I like to sit and get a really solid three or 4,000 words done.

Ben (01:05:40):

That's pretty good in the day. But it strikes me you write a lot from observation. Your writing seems to me very well observed. And I'm guessing that comes from your notebooks and other observation. Then the other thing which is not utterly unique, but it's not perhaps super common, is a very strong thread of humor. And therefore actually both your observations and your commentary is often undercut-- Undercut isn't the right word either, but crosscutting both humor to either emphasize a point or to make some other observation. And the humor is obviously often centered around yourself like good standup comics do or in the footnotes or even in some of your sentence structure. And it strikes me that you've been funny for all of your life starting from young.

I think I heard your one podcast say that you were a little bit of a clown as a boy. But I was just interesting. Is there anything which comes around how you make those observations and the way that your humor comes out? It also strikes me as if we were to call something, because we don't call it much, but there is a ‘Britishness’ to your humor or an English. Actually, you hear it-- I don't know whether this might be a public school thing; Touching Cloth. If you know, you know is all I'm going to say on that. So there is a strand of that which I find also really intriguing. Is it something that you have to work upon or is it partly, I can now hear in this because you've got a slight irreverence for authority or rather you will see something and tell it how you see it, which is actually there's a big strand in a great English tradition of that as well. So I guess the question is humor, observation, how does it all come about in how you think?

Fergus (01:07:37):

I suppose they come about through-- I always think through kind of being sort of anti-systematic, if that makes sense in that I know that I am a paradox and I know that Christianity is paradoxical. I grew up in a kind of very paradoxical context of being. I had a very privileged and very happy childhood in many ways. But equally it was sort of erratic and slightly bonkers and disorganized. So I suppose there are one of two routes you take when that is kind of the way you come into that. Either you then seek systems very strongly, even try and impose order. I talk in the book about my father's whole life has been kind of an attempt to impose order on the order list.

It's why he likes recycling bins. When I go back to my parents' house, the bin is divided into four different things going that you can seek to impose on or you can begin to embrace the idea that order is not in fact the norm. That again, the only thing I think that has any kind of coherent order on itself is the concept of God. And that's too ordered for us to understand. So to us it seems absurd and yet it is in fact your order. So there's this sort of an embrace of paradox, which I suppose is very British, the kind of idea or English perhaps. Again, speaking of someone who is irreverent of authority and yet knows he is part of an authority figure who is part of an establishment, who is a clergyman. And again, we've always been very good at that; I think, of holding that intention.

The finest writers in English, the comic writers in the English Canon are people who are both insiders and outsiders. It's Jonathan Swift who is an Irishman. He seems like an outsider. He fails to get political performance because he's too scatological and controversial and yet he is Dean of Dublin. He is an establishment figure. He's an Oxford graduate. Look at Jane Austen similarly, you look at Sterne. I think if you look at those great English comic writers, all three of whom interestingly have-- Two of them are ordained, one of them is the daughter and sister of cleric. And I think actually the great gift the Church of England has given perhaps to global literature is that ability to hold the paradoxical and say, "Yep, okay, these things are..." And it means you can poke fun of something without necessarily saying, "I want to destroy this thing completely." So I can poke fun at the Church of England and still say, "But I still believe it's better that it's there."

Ben (01:10:07):

I just laugh because you are saying that basically the Church of England is full of clowns.

Fergus (01:10:13):

Yeah.

Ben (01:10:14):

But with love and kisses.

Fergus (01:10:17):

Exactly. Exactly that.

Ben (01:10:18):

I read, I think you did a very good defense of P.G. Wodehouse as well as a comment correcter.

Fergus (01:10:24):

Yeah. Again, Wodehouse is very good at that. That whole concept of Wodehouse living in a sort of dream. I mean, the person who writes the finest defense of Wodehouse is George Orwell, who when Wodehouse is getting a lot of stick because he was living in France and the Nazis and entered and they made him some right things where he sort of says, "Oh, maybe we shouldn't be fighting after all chaps," that sort of thing. But Wodehouse’s genius is kind of living in that fantasy world yet also saying something true through the absurd.

Ben (01:10:54):

Yeah, paradox.

Fergus (01:10:54):

Paradox

Ben (01:10:56):

Great. Okay. We’ll do a fun section now of underrated, overrated, and then finish up. So I'll name something and you can go underrated, overrated, or you can pass or you can make some sort of comment. We've got a few. The theme is kind of Britishness on this. So overrated, underrated James Bond movies? Got to be careful with this one.

Fergus (01:11:21):

Yes, I do. It very much depends. Again, this is very Church of England to both. I think certain James Bond movies are overrated. I actually think the Daniel Craig movies are overrated, I'm afraid. I think some of the Sean Connery films are actually overrated. I think the Roger Moore ones are underrated again because they are preposterous and I enjoy that. I think Timothy Dalton is underrated, George Lazenby is underrated. I think actually Pierce Brosnan is underrated.

Ben (01:11:50):

All of the underdogs underrated. That's interesting. That's very British. Okay. Underrated, overrated, the monarchy? Let's go for the British monarchy.

Fergus (01:11:59):

Again, both. I think what is underrated is a lot of-- I think the crown actually operates in a way that it can create a kind of degree of coherence and a degree of cohesiveness, which again, is ridiculous. But rooting your national myth in something ridiculous is a hell of a rooting than rooting your national myth in something that you can practically oppress people's lives with. I am a monarchist. I am an ardent monarchist. What I think is overrated is, I think the human aspect of it. I actually don't want to know about what their feelings really, I don't really care. The psychodrama of it I think is overrated. But I think the concept of the crown is underrated. I think we don't realize how strong.

Ben (01:12:51):

Very fair. Afternoon tea?

Fergus (01:12:55):

Overpriced. I'm a man who can eat clotted cream until I die, which is exactly what would happen if I only ate it. 

Ben (01:13:06):

Good job. You are in the clergy then.

Fergus (01:13:08):

I know, yeah. Underrated. I think it has become too kitch. I think the actual roots of it are very good.

Ben (01:13:15):

Yeah. I think I would agree. The House of Lords?

Fergus (01:13:19):

Underrated. I'm a great advocate for the House of Lords.

Ben (01:13:23):

Should we still have bishops in them?

Fergus (01:13:25):

Yep. I would have only bishops. Just not these ones.

Ben (01:13:26):

Maybe the ones elected by elected bishops. Very good. Double decker buses?

Fergus (01:13:38):

I love the tube. I love trains. I hate traveling by bus because I get this sense that I could be walking quicker certainly, and I hate that idea. And I hate the fact that some bus routes, which I know they have to do, will take me away from my destination in order to get me there quicker. So if I'm on the tube, I can't see that happening. If I'm underground or I'm on the train line, I can't see that happening. So I think buses are overrated.

Ben (01:14:06):

Yeah. So you're using travel to travel as opposed to, I would say, well maybe you just sit on the top of the double decker bus, watch the world, don't worry if it's going to take you 12 minutes or 17 minutes. This is London. It's just going to take you whatever. Whatever route you decide to choose will always be about the same type. Actually, I really do recommend walking, but it will be the same. You have to walk away, around and you get stops.

Fergus (01:14:29):

I like walking and I get this sense that I could be walking.

Ben (01:14:34):

That’s true. Okay. Black taxis?

Fergus (01:14:37):

Underrated. I think with the rise of Uber and Bolt and Free now and all that they sort of say, "Oh, one of the black cabbies." But there are genuinely times where hailing a black cab has felt like saving my life when I've been walking in the pouring rain and I've got to get to a train or stuff. So yeah, there have been black cabbies that have undoubtedly saved my bacon a number of times. So I will say underrated.

Ben (01:15:05):

Pubs.

Fergus (01:15:08):

I love pubs. I don't think it's possible for them to be overrated because I cannot speak too highly enough of them. That said, there are a number of appalling pubs, particularly in Central London. There are bad pubs. So some of them are underrated, some of them are overrated.

Ben (01:15:27):

Yeah. Community pubs which have got more family orientated. I'm assuming-- I haven't been too much around Liverpool, but Liverpool wouldn't be the same without its pubs either, right?

Fergus (01:15:37):

Some of the pubs in Liverpool are just... It would be impossible to overrate them because they're so good.

Ben (01:15:43):

Okay. And then last one, cricket?

Fergus (01:15:45):

I've got a bit of a kind of tan partly because I have spent the last 10 weeks essentially playing cricket. I think cricket is underrated and I don't mean because I think it's some sort of great sporting thing, but I think cricket is long. It can often be boring. It has moments, flashes of inspiration that seem gone too soon. And it is often, as we saw in the ashes yesterday, incredibly unfair. Therefore I think it is a very good metaphor for life more generally. So I will say it is underrated.

Ben (01:16:21):

Yeah. I think I tend to agree on that. So I think the long form test match or things over days-- Well for theater, I think it does tend to reflect a five act play or the acts of life of which in any good five act play now that you have is partly boring, at least for modern life. Even Shakespeare in its long acts we cannot stomach it in the same way. Shakespeare in its time was actually a much more community sport, community practice than we have it today. And naturally I do think it ties together, Britain. But interestingly, if you go to India or Pakistan-- I guess this is mixed colonial legacy, but it really does tie together the country as well. So it's interesting although it's not a huge worldwide sport. I think it does reflect a certain amount of humanity, perhaps a little bit better than it might seem. Great. So what are your current projects or things you're working on or thoughts?

Fergus (01:17:20):

I'm writing on bits. I'm hoping to have a new book out next year that I'm sort of working away on and I'm negotiating the exact format of at the moment. But once that is finalized, which I'm hoping will happen this week or next, it will be a very busy run of the season.

Ben (01:17:37):

Is that a secret theme? Or can you mention?

Fergus (01:17:40):

It'll be something to do with places around the world. It'll be a bit more global than previous ones. We'll feature churches in some way, shape, or form. So it will keep its religious theme, but I hope it will be a bit more global. As you mentioned, I have been appointed to be vicar of Charlbury in Oxfordshire, just north of Oxford starting in January. So I've got a lot of kind of prep for that really. So yeah, it's keeping me busy.

Ben (01:18:08):

Keeping you out of London and the London church politics. Great. And then last question then. Do you have any life advice? So this would be very appropriate for clergy, or I guess you could say -- We've covered a lot. So either life advice about thinking about how to live in the world or maybe also advice for young people or people thinking-- because you don't need to be young-- thinking of a life in the clergy what it might mean to be ordained or not. So you can go either or; so vague life advice or thoughts that you want to end with.

Fergus (01:18:46):

So my vague life advice is this that there are things in life that should be taken seriously and there are things in life that should not be taken seriously. The real thing to realize is that they're the opposite way around to the way you think they are.

Ben (01:19:00):

Interesting. So reverse it.

Fergus (01:19:03):

Yeah. Anything you think should be taken seriously, don't take it seriously. Anything you think should not be taken seriously, take it seriously.

Ben (01:19:10):

Very good. Okay.

Fergus (01:19:11):

That's my advice. In terms of those considering holy orders in terms of ordination, it seems an obvious thing to say, do pray about it. I think prayer is helpful. Prayer works. It is a huge life-changing decision. It is not to be taken lightly. I have a clerical colleague who I love and respect very much. And he says, "I always think when someone comes to me and says, ‘They want to be ordained,’ it's my job to do my very best to put them off. And if they still want to do it, then to encourage them as much as I can.” It has been the most important thing I have ever done. But it isn't for everyone. And you can be a fully authentic and impressive person and a fully authentic and impressive Christian without having a piece of cloth around your neck. So do always bear that in mind.

Ben (01:20:06):

Very good. And I guess that means you're a fan of meditation in general, prayer as a specific form, all of that.

Fergus (01:20:11):

Yeah. And for me it is about rhythm. Keep some form of rhythm. For me it is saying-- One of the things I hate most in churches today is where you go in and you don't know what's going to happen. Where it's just like, "We're going to change it today because it's blah, blah, blah." I use the same words every morning and every evening to pray with because I think-- Again, it goes back to what we said at the very start about faith and doubt. If there is a day where actually I go and I don't feel it, I'm held in the rhythm of that regularity. If you're constantly trying to do something different every day then you're not going to get that rhythm in.

Ben (01:20:48):

It's the same with some Buddhist chanting practices. Actually Catholic chanting practices as well with that would help.

Fergus (01:20:54):

Repeated words. And they enter into your soul then in a way. I've seen people on their deathbeds who have that rhythm. And it will kick in, in the important times of your life when you cannot hold things in yourself, whether that's when you die or when you're going through major things, you'll just find those words.

Ben (01:21:06):

Yes, I've read about it within Mystic Practice as well, though I haven't personally seen it.

Fergus (01:21:10):

Yeah, and I've seen massive. But for me, the Book of Common Prayer, just this rate which has been part of the rhythm of English life and prayer for 500 years nearly now, it works. It's that rhythm. It's just keeping that rhythm of prayer taking over until you need it.

Ben (01:21:27):

Great. Well, on that note, I'll just highlight once again the book, "Touching Cloth." And Fergus, thank you very much.

Fergus (01:21:35):

Thank you.

In Podcast, Life, Writing, Arts Tags faith, priests, Fergus Butler-Gallie, religion, podcast

Aella: escort work, home school, rationalism, circling, working in a factory, losing faith, polls and endless questions | Podcast

November 14, 2021 Ben Yeoh

Aella is perhaps most famous on twitter for shining a light on the life and economics of Camgirls and escorts; and asking challenging questions. But her independent research is larger than that and has encompassed reporting on LSD and psychedelics use, circling, the nature of faith, and enlightenment. She grew up homeschooled in a fundamental Christian household before leaving home at 17.

The transcript and conversation includes adult themes and mild profanity from Aella and is recommended 18+.

We discuss what is most misunderstood about escort work and the additional needs of men such as emotional intimacy. How Aella thinks of her own compartmentalisation.

What you should say about male anatomy size. How insecurity can go both ways on male thinking on size.

What Aella thinks about Twitter and making questions and polls.

What it was like to have ideas you took for granted completely turned on their head. For instance, what she was taught to think of gays.

We chatted about her interest in psychedelics, speaking to people who think they are enlightened and spirituality. And what that intersection with rationality is for her. 

 She discusses several viewpoints of the Rationalist community and her views on Effective Altruism. Her thoughts on archaeology and  thinking about moral arguments in their place in time.

Why she feels to strongly about home school. 

Her thoughts on losing faith.

What it was like working in a factory, and what the point of secret messages she scratched at her work were. 

How she has struggled with cultural norms.

How she answers some of her own questions:

You're in a room with 10,000 people. You get to ask three binary questions. Yes or no.  For each question, the people who answer the question according to the way you want, they stay and the people who don't leave the room.  What do you ask? 

We play underrated / overrated on these topics:

  • Accordion

  • Ballroom Dancing

  • Pronouns

  • Abalone

  • Sweating on command


She talks about emotional pain and tells me what the practice of circling is all about. 

We end on what her research interests are and what her life advice is.

Her family friendly twitter is here. Her website including her research, analytical research on escorting, essays on faith, circling and more - find here.

PODCAST INFO

  • Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3gJTSuo

  • Spotify: https://sptfy.com/benyeoh

  • Anchor: https://anchor.fm/benjamin-yeoh

Click below or wherever you get podcasts.


Aella transcript (this has not been deeply proofread, so expect typos etc)

Ben Yeoh (00:00): Hello, and welcome to Ben Yeoh Chats. If you're curious about the world, this show is for you. What is most misunderstood about escort work, on this episode I speak to Aella there's occasional profanity in this podcast and adult themes, which makes this conversation unsuitable for children. We have a fascinating chat on the challenging questions Aella asks, her strict Christian upbringing and why she is so passionate about homeschooling, her thinking about rationality and enlightenment, and why she is a camgirl. If you enjoy this show, please like and subscribe as it helps others find the podcast. Thank you, be well.


Ben Yeoh (00:44): Hey, everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Aella; Aella is perhaps most famous on Twitter for shining a light on the life and economics of cam-girl and escorts and asking challenging questions, but her independent researcher is larger than that has encompassed reporting on LST and psychedelic circling the nature of faith and enlightenment, and she discusses many viewpoints of the rationalist community and I find her work fascinating, welcome.


Aella (01:14): That was a lovely intro, thank you.


Ben Yeoh (01:16): You're welcome. First question, what do you think is most misunderstood about sex work?


Aella (01:24): Most misunderstood, it depends on the population you ask, but probably a very common one is that there's no emotional component or that the guys just want to get off and then they hire a girl and then there's no additional importance beyond just the physical expression.


Ben Yeoh (01:42): So it's not just the transactional thing, there's more to it.


Aella (01:47): Well, it depends on how you define it, but it is very transactional, the thing that's being transacted is more than just sex. There's a lot of additional needs that men tend to have that are very common to get fulfilled with sex workers specifically because the men that don't have those needs go and watch porn. Because with porn, you don't need this live interaction to the same degree and so the men who tend to seek out live sex workers tend to also have additional desires that they won't fulfill emotional intimacy.


Ben Yeoh (02:19): Sure, that makes a lot of sense to me but that's also partly because I've read your guide, which you've written recently to escorting which covers pricing, marketing, safety analytics, all great practical advice. But it's also part essay I found and you had a section on what I think you called the heart or the heart of escorting and I'm intrigued about this heart because it's not quite what I might have expected and critics might suggest perhaps there's a bit of romanticization in it. But I think your reflection seems true to me that there is more meaning in sex work, there's the emotional part and there's the other part of all of that and I was just wondering how true it is from your experience and what you've seen in the wider community and maybe you'd want to reflect on that heart of escorting work.


Aella (03:07): I think it depends per person again; most of my answers are going to be hedged like that. But I think for me, I have the ability to have love in this way because I'm so compartmentalized about escorting like when I escort versus not escort. It's almost like there's two separate ME's that do it; there's the escort me and then the not escort me and there's a mode that switches and that feels very protective, like when I'm in that mode, I don't have to worry about feelings or what this means or if I'm making a good decision about sex work, it's a job. I become job mode and then when I'm in that job mode, I feel sufficiently insulated from myself that I feel it gives me the freedom to be able to bond with these men in some ways, like a part of me is I feel safe enough to be vulnerable in some way with them.


Aella (04:00): And so, for me, I enjoy that. I enjoy looking for the ability to be vulnerable with men, some of them don't feel they give me very much of an opening, it seems they want me to be something, but I like looking for it and taking it where I can find it and some people are good at doing that. That's me specific, a lot of escorts don't feel the same way, other escorts have different ways they approach compartmentalization, some don't compartmentalize, some find a lot of effusive like bonding vulnerability without having to do the compartmentalization thing, so it's different for everybody.


Ben Yeoh (04:43): Sure, but for you there's, I guess, a persona as well in this compartmentalization or is it just another version of the you that you think is you.


Aella (04:43): I'm not sure what the difference is, I feel we are sort of our environment in some way. If you put me by my parents, I've become an unrecognizable person and if you put me in front of a crowd, I change and it's not like I'm going to become like a crowd Aella or like parents Aella, it's a reaction to the incentives in the environment. And so, it's a natural response to optimizing for the situation you're in, so the Aella that escorts are very different and I wouldn't say it's a conscious persona in some way, it's just an organic persona, it's just what happens when I'm in that situation and it is very different from this Aella, I have a body language changes and my tone of voice changes, I seem a little bit less nerdy and a little bit more feminine but I don't consider any less real in some way. I am self-protective in some way but I wouldn't consider it not genuine or something, I am dishonest sometimes when escorting like, if somebody asks me what they think of their penis, I sometimes am very dishonest about it but in general, yes.


Ben Yeoh (05:51): And that's presumably because you're always flattering.


Aella (05:55): Yes, or sometimes even the opposite way. Sometimes guys who have big dicks are very insecure and I realize if I try to tell them that their dick is big, they're not going to believe me, so I have to act chill about it; it's pretty good so it's in both directions.


Ben Yeoh (06:10): That's quite subtle, that completely makes sense to me because I always say it on Christmas dinners or festive seasons this is where often you're trying to be two people at once. Like if you're trying to be a girlfriend and a boyfriend and a good son or daughter and that's it because you aim to play the daughter and you aim to play the girlfriend and often that's conflicting personas slightly. And so that's why I think you get so many arguments and those sorts of things because people end up trying to play two or three things at once and at a point in time you sometimes can't be those two things, so something slightly cracks and you get all of these arguments.


Aella (06:48): And that's a fascinating theory.


Ben Yeoh (06:51): And you can see it and you often the outsider will see it with close family like if you're invited to a family gathering or whatever, and then you can see it because you can see them, their boyfriend/girlfriend there but now they've been dragged away. And now they're having to try and be the son and they've got different pressures, but you can almost see the tension in what I say because I would normally say this in front of my parents, but I would normally say this in front of my partner and it all splinters.


Aella (07:18): I haven't paid close attention to that, I'm about to go to a large extended family gathering so I will use your theory.


Ben Yeoh (07:25): Particularly with those who you know you've just been this other person and now you can't evolve both of those personas at once and that leads me on to you seem utterly brilliant at asking questions and your questions are awkward, challenging, silly, funny, deep, and kind and they range from your surveys and polls to your dating form. And I was just wondering, how do you think of your questions and you seem to have so many, probably not in danger of running out but do they just occur to you, or is this how your mind works in the curiosity of what makes people, people?


Aella (08:00): I guess that's the way my mind works at this point; it's just such a habit now. I feel like the question is why is everybody else not doing Twitter polls, to me it feels like coming up with questions all the time. To me, it feels like the obvious thing that everybody should be doing, and then sometimes people ask me why do you do questions? Why is that the question?


Be Yeoh (08:23): Why aren't people doing more questions, everyone else is weird, I'm the normal one here.


Aella (08:28): I know I'm the normal one. A lot of my tripping or something a lot of the themes around this were finding the right question. It wasn't so much about finding the right answer to your questions but rather figuring out how to look in the right direction. Because a lot of our questions are hedged in by what the invisible norms that we have in the society around us that we can't even see and so to me new curiosity feels like it's an indication of poking at the invisible walls. And it's almost not the point what the answer is, the point is the poking and so I get a lot of thrill out of that and I don't know how to answer for why I seem to do this more than other people.


Aella (09:10): Part of it is Twitter. The fact that I do have a very fast response thing, like if I'm having a conversation with somebody and you're like, man, I wonder if people who are more agreeable tend to be firstborns more; we can just check that fast, um, through Twitter. And so, I think having that fast feedback thing helps increase the amount that I think about Twitter questions and my Twitter questions, I mean, my proxy questions in general so, that was all also very useful.


Ben Yeoh (09:36): And did you have that as a teenager as well or did that develop as you came onto Twitter as well?


Aella (09:42): I think it developed on Twitter; I do think that I was into questions when I was a teenager but not in the same manifestation. Right now, the manifestation is social questions like what generates interesting social confusion or social conflict whereas as a teenager, it was more figuring out philosophical questions that I didn't register as being socially controversial.


Ben Yeoh (10:05): Sure, I see and if anyone listening is interested in questions, you can go to askcole.io, I think. And there's a bunch of questions there and you can buy the questions or I think you can...


Aella (10:16): We're out of stock, but we do have it downloadable for free.


Ben Yeoh (10:20): There you go, find out more or I think there's at least over a hundred; I have skimmed them more than we might ask a couple of them later. So that also leads me to think because you are known as well for a lot of your rationalist thinking and being a part of some rationalist communities. There is also a lot of curiosity. How did you fall into rationalist thinking?


Aella (10:43): A long time ago I dated a guy who kept sending me LessWrong articles [a rationalist website forum] and I was like whatever, I'll read it later and then I started reading it and then they have interlinked and I started following the interlinks and then it was no going back from there. I suspect it falls close to the questioning thing because there's an orientation that not just a lot of people have which is decoupling your moral response from questioning a thing. A lot of people in the rationalist community used to be religious, I used to be very religious and I had this wake-up shock, I'm not sure if you've ever had a very radical mental change.


Aella (11:23): But realizing that a lot of things that you took for granted that were tied into your moral sensibilities were wrong, like I used to be disgusted by gay people but I'm embarrassed to say that about me in the past but I genuinely felt I'm horrified by the fact that people like two men could kiss each other; this is a moral.  So that turned out to be wrong, I no longer have that moral discussed response, but now whenever I do have a moral discussed response, I'm like, well, I can't trust that like once one was proven to be incorrect. And so, I think, this is driven by the questioning, this curiosity, like curiousness about your discussed response where is that coming from?


Aella (12:02): Does that hold up if I change the circumstances in various ways? So asking a lot of hypothetical questions about how your moral intuition handles this alternative role or this alternative role, it tests to see if this is just something people told you to feel and now, you're feeling, and it feels like your own because so much of what we feel, feels like our own. But anyway, this is something that the questions do very well, but also rationalists are very interested in doing; very interested in sousing out exactly why we think about the world and what is justified.


Ben Yeoh (12:31): I hadn't appreciated that, in some ways, it is a counterforce to being like you say, a lot of rationalists used to be very religious, already had a set of values tied into them, and that there's been a complete change. And therefore, you can question everything because something that you took as a hundred percent truth, when you learn that you don't think is a hundred percent truth more within, you can then question everything which was a hundred percent truth and I didn't appreciate that about.


Aella (12:58): I suspect it's similar to psychedelics too; psychedelics do the same thing where they knock out things that you thought were true a little bit, they shake the foundations of your belief, which generates a lot more questions than questions about who you are, it’s a very similar principle, I think.


Ben Yeoh (13:11): So, that's another strong, long strand in your writing investigates spirituality and enlightenment, you've got these set of enlightenment interviews and research that you're continuing to do and although I can see it now, it almost seems to me that's potentially a conflict with a rationalist point of view looking at that, but I can see while if you take the rational point of view that it's questioning then maybe not. But I was interested in why there is such a deep fascination there and what have you learned or are you learning from interviewing so many self-feed enlightened people or people who feel they've reached a certain level of spirituality or thinking there?


Aella (13:54): The interest in spirituality came well, I had some strong spiritual experiences and pretty isolated from the spiritual memeplex, there's a map that people have made about what spiritual experiences mean, what and where they land and what comes before and after and I had gone through my thing independent of this. So it looked a little bit weird and also, I had no idea what was going on with me in regards to the way that other people understood it so I started talking to some prominent mediators about this to get insight and then eventually I heard, I just talked about other things and then I started hearing them disagree with each other. I talked to one monk who told me that another, a very famous meditator, was full of bullshit and thought that they knew what the progression of meditation was, but had no idea.


Aella (14:46): And then that made me fascinated. I was like, there's something going on in the spiritual realm or whatever, but everybody seems to have very strong opinions about it and in different directions, so that made me want to figure out what people meant by the word enlightenment. I use that word as a hook but I explore a lot of things close to it, like awakening or stream-entry and so are people like, what is your experience with this and people have done this before but I wanted to come at it outside of the spiritual memeplex because I'm mostly untainted. And I try to protect myself from exposure to that, just to see if the patterns that I organically observe happen to align with what already exists or just to put my spin on it, I don't know, to see if I can detect my own patterns. So, I talked to a bunch of people who claim to be enlightened to have to try to figure out if there was anything, how they disagreed with each other mainly.


Ben Yeoh (15:39): So that's almost like a rationalist framework approach to it or does it not square with your rationalist thinking as well or it's a completely other thing for you?


Aella (15:47): Well, it depends what you mean by rationalist; rationality is the practice of attempting to minimize bias and make predictions and the enlightenment thing is pretty hard because it's outside of the realm of predictions. Enlightened people don't make predictions better than other people, so it's outside the scope of rationality to some degree and a lot of rationalists consider this to be an irrational thing like coming out of a lot of biases. So there's some disagreement there inside of the rational community, for example, one concept of rationalities that the map is not the territory, the word is not the concept. We're using these references to this landscape of concepts.


Aella (16:34): And a lot of people get attached to the concepts and the words. When I first got into rationality, I was pretty tribalistic and I was anti-feminist and I once asked somebody are you a feminist, wanting to know am I going to be an ally or not? And the person responded, this was a rationalist being like, I don't know what you mean by that word, what concepts and this is rerouting from the per-formative layer into what are we talking about? They name the concrete thing and I'll tell you if I support it or not and so there's something that was a rational skill that I took to the enlightenment thing, I'm not looking to find out is it or isn't its enlightenment? This is just a word that people are using to refer to a landscape of concepts and my interest is the concepts, not the word like I give a fuck about the word, so that would be an example of the way that rationality related to that inquiry.


Ben Yeoh (17:26): That's interesting because I viewed that sometimes rationalists seem to me that I'm not super close to the communities. There's not as large a community here in London, in the UK but potentially a little bit narrow in where they look because of that and therefore not as rich as those who look beyond that. But like you say, some of it is beyond the bounds and I hadn't quite appreciated your point about the map and the territory of that, well you got to try name and articulate the thing and then know about, are we talking about the same thing or not; not just the word on it. And is that then intersectional about what psychedelics and other things have taught you because you've taken quite a lot of psychedelics and for quite a period and that again seemed to be quite an eye-opening or pivotal point in your life and thinking, and is that a third pillar or does that interweave with how you're thinking about rationalism frameworks and how you're thinking about your life?


Aella (18:28): I'm not sure about the third pillar, like psychedelic rationality, and what was the third?


Ben Yeoh (18:35): Well, I guess was this enlightenment/interest in that otherness or faith spirituality part; however, you want to name it? I was just thinking that psychedelic initially, at least in my thinking was perhaps again, something slightly apart from rationality, quite hard to explain, you got very personal and different experiences, the framework for talking about it is quite tricky, doesn't seem to fall into a rationality framework that easily, or I'm mistaken and that you were going to explain to me how it might fit in quite neatly. I was just intrigued because you've written quite well about it in terms of your essays and are quite open but articulate it quite well, so I was just fascinated by your experience.


Aella (19:22): I would say the psychedelic for me is quite tied into the interest in spirituality; my spiritual experience is I think a direct result of my heavy psychedelic. A lot of rationalists are; I just had a moment of delight, I don't think I've ever been on a podcast where people ask me about the intersection of rationality and psychedelics, this is so cool; sorry, that aside.


Ben Yeoh (19:45): I'll try and make it in your top three podcasts ever then.


Aella (19:51): Serious points for the novelty here. The novel is just what do girls do to get more money, [on] only fans. So a psychedelic, let's see, there's a lot of distress about psychedelics in the rationality community, but I think that this comes from a chronic misstep of failing to see that you doing the thinking is part of the thinking. There's this separation of I'm going to figure out the truth, me and the truth are separate, and I'm going to discover it or something and then there's some subtle mental move that people do, where they don't consider the sensation of having a concept to be part of that concept, almost a creation of that concept and so that's where some of the schism comes in with rationality and psychedelics and spirituality. But for me, I got into psychedelics before rationality which was a good idea. I'm not sure but it worked out well for me.


Ben Yeoh (20:56): Well, both aspects seem to sit well in you and you talk about compartmentalisation, but they do seem to coexist quite nicely or at least in your essays and things; think about that and on the rationality part. So a lot of rationality community people to me seem to be quite into EA effective altruism type ideas as well. And that expands often, a lot of them seem to me to be not only giving away their money say but also into vegan and vegetarianism, is that something which has interested you in that part or are you that's an expected value thing on moral decisions and doesn't compute as well with you?


Aella (21:39): When I was taking psychedelics, I became a vegetarian for two years because I felt empathy for animals and all that and then stopped being a vegetarian when I decided that I was okay with killing but that's a more difficult thing to explain. I support EA, in general, it seems they're doing a good thing for the world and mostly having fun doing it.


Ben Yeoh (22:09): But do you consider yourself an EA yourself?


Aella (22:12): No, I don't, maybe it's just uncharitable, but I view them as a little too uptight for me. I like a little bit of a wild and controversial, like taking my clothes off and they're the kind that wear suits and try to look nice.


Ben Yeoh (22:32): And are the many rationalists then like, there's a wild subpopulation of rationalists as well as the nerdy VA types.


Aella (22:40): There's the post rationalist which is a little bit of tongue and cheek firm for rationalists who like rationality, but is also being embodied and doing weird things with their brains.


Ben Yeoh (22:52): Well, this is a good point to ask all questions which is; which of your habit's conflicts with your values and I've been thinking more than the fact that for me eating meat is probably one of my moral failings thinking that I probably should, or I believe that we should treat animals better, yet I could probably not eat them and I do, although I'd be completely fine. I have killed to eat and that thing, I'd be okay as a hunter-gather. [] I don't know what it might be for you. Are any of your habits you think in conflict with your values?


Aella (23:32): Probably the same, maybe the meat-eating thing, but part of the thing is I have quite a bit of self-compassion, so I don't feel like that much in the conflict that often, occasionally I do, but with the eating thing, I've come to terms with it. It's also an indication of compassion for other people who do horrible things, so much throughout history. People are like, man, it would be moral or you could imagine them saying it would be moral, not to have slaves but it's just so inconvenient and so if we can do this on a very small scale and it feels good and normal, it shows how the other people have committed atrocities in the past were also very human and doing very reasonable things.


Ben Yeoh (24:13): That's very true, I think this is one of the things about the time we are living in or considering or the time slavery's quite a good example. If you go back 300 years or so a fair amount of time or even only 150 so years, and you said you were anti-slavery, you would've been the weirdo, you are in the minority and you would've defined it; tough going. So I think today, I am still quite sympathetic for these minority and weirdo views because I'm not certain exactly, which are the ones that are going to turn out to be the ones we view as very moral, today you are anti-slavery, that's a thing but 200 years ago, I'm not sure everyone would've necessarily come to that position.


Aella (24:59): There's a thing where I feel I wish we had more of a focus on argument archeology, where we focus on the arguments for horrific things at the time, like things that were widely accepted and what the discourse was like. People were talking about this and making arguments for the horrific thing and so there are arguments against women's rights and pro-slavery that are quote-unquote like, well seeming to be clear for those listening. I do not endorse slavery, I do not find the arguments to be valid, but if you were at that time, you weren't educated in morals whatever, if you didn't think hard about it, they seemed convincing. And I wish that people were aware that people didn't commit atrocities just randomly, because they were bad, but that they were held up by these arguments that seemed good. And it just seems so important for our understanding of current moral issues. Right now, we're probably going through several atrocities that we're not aware of that are propped up by arguments that we consider to be good.


Ben Yeoh (26:00): And that's exactly my point, going on the slavery one if you go back to something where we feel distant to so 2000 years, so no one can blame for that. I remember reading about it. I think it was the Babylonian king and we have the code or the codex of Hammurabi  and he specifically gave a price for slaves, I think it was 10 or 20 [silver shekels]  and female slaves were worth less than male slaves. Then you went up to the equivalent of the middle class and gave specific values and it was codified in law, so you would've been breaking the law had you thought differently on that. Have you given even male and female slaves equality, you would've been not only extremely weird, but you would've been breaking the law and the thinking of that.


Ben Yeoh (26:49): And so, 2000 years seems almost incredibly long in some respects or not, but that is how far we've evolved, at least in our social and moral thinking but we don't have very much evidence at that time, but we have it in the Kodak. That thing would mean a lot of arguments for that time. I see that's quite a good segue into thinking about school and I was wondering what you thought about home school or unschooled or generally educational institutions because your experience was quite different but grown-up has a Christian homeschooler, but I guess in a slightly more fundamentalist type of experience and way. But I think a lot of your essays have also been quite critical about the institutional thinking you get in, say a more mainstream type of schooling on that. So I was thinking, what do you think about the advantage of an unschooled/home school type of thing and how it viewed you and does some of this more, I guess, it's critical thinking about the way we are, the way we have been spring from having a fewer rules-based approach to learning that you might get in a more mainstream institution.


Aella (28:03): Yes, you are right, I was home school to my entire childhood, very isolated from the outside world, I only ever interacted with other homeschoolers, I didn't watch media with the public school in it very often, so I didn't know anything about schoolwork. I remember when I was 14, maybe you mentioned this, I went to school for three months when my parents tried me going to public school and there were some shocking things like that, I didn't expect; one is the wasted time would probably be the top one, is that I was shocked by how much time it took to learn almost no information; at home I would've learned all of my entire school day in an hour and a half. And, I was just shocked we just spent a lot of time waiting, walking around, hanging out, the teacher would get ready to talk and the teacher would go very slowly through things and I'd be holy shit, I'm not learning anything. In hindsight, I feel the problem here is that it took away my free time, as a kid I would do my homeschooling, schedule in a couple hours, four to five days a week and then I'd have the rest of the day, a hundred percent free to do what I wanted and what I wanted to do was awesome shit, I learned to juggle, I wrote a million words of fantasy fiction, I read nonstop, I learned how to sew, I was constantly creating because I had all of this spare time. 


Aella (29:38): And as an adult, when I look back on what was valuable about my childhood, I think about the shit I taught myself because that's the stuff I was passionate about and that's the stuff that carried over to my adulthood. I think very little about the stuff that I learned that I was required to learn that I didn't want to and so, I'm horrified at public school because they take that away from kids, it's not just that they're bad at teaching them is that they take away the ability for kids to teach themselves; it's so upsetting to me. So I was home school the whole time, I ended up getting out and then shortly after I entered the normal adult world, I lived in a house, a bunch of other people who had gone to public school, which was by the way pretty culturally isolating because they all had this or understood history, vocabulary, culture, awareness but that's a different point. But hearing them talk about their school experience made me increasingly grateful for mine, also the school social experience, it's abnormal to have a bunch of kids stratified by age group and have almost no adults there or older/younger kids present. With my upbringing I always hang out with families, I was constantly exposed to other people's parents, we had homeschooler times around Mondays, all of the families would get together and educate each other as families and so there was no opportunity for weird social hierarchies to evolve, in your tiny age range. 


Aella (31:05): In my opinion, it was much healthier and so these people would talk about getting bullied in school with emotional stuff, how people are trying to become the queen bee or having people insult you or invite you to a party and laugh at you. Like all of these are traumatizing emotional experiences I had never once been bullied by a fellow child at any point, I had never once had another kid be mean to me in my entire childhood. When I was three and somebody stepped on my sandcastle, and I saw these emotional traumas that my friends were carrying, way more insecure in some ways than I was, which is saying something because as I was a pretty insecure person, and way more oriented around their appearance, I have a good relationship to my appearance, but they got bullied for it and picked on. It was important for them and I went through my childhood because nobody cared about appearance, so I don't have any of that fucking bullshit traumas that everybody else seems to have. And I think it comes straight from public school, I am ranting a little bit because I feel very passionately about this. Public school seems like one of the worst things to happen to humanity, it just takes the joy and the independence and the confidence and the love of learning out of children very systematically and my childhood wasn't even good, I had abusive parents; my dad worked from home and we were homeschooled, so I was stuck in a house with a monster my entire childhood. And I still think that was a better outcome than the sh*t that I see my friends go through in public school. There I'm done with my rant. Thank you.


Ben Yeoh (32:34): I hope that was cathartic for you as well, but that's a very good advert for homeschool, and you picked up on the last point which was, I wasn't sure about having such a fundamental Christian, which you now probably disagree with that part of the upbringing, but you said you probably would take that trade off again, almost you saying between a public school and I guess not that upbringing or the freedom that an unschooled/ home school environment gave you. I think that's fascinating. So I don't know about that-- you think that's a separate strand, you home school regardless of whether you're brought up in a fundamental way or not, it's just a better way of thinking and I guess the fundamentals of public school or how we come about them, I guess was a Anglo Saxon invention to get industrialized people, factory workers to read and write and have this working class, middle class bit of when the schooling went, because the elite from a hundred years ago or so still used family learning.

Ben Yeoh (33:38): Essentially, they had a governor/governess, although you did also start to send children away to boarding school, somewhat on that, so yes, I think that's quite interesting. And your upbringing was very strictly religious and you write about studying logical Christianity but you lost your faith and that was also quite painful. I was interested in whether your reflection of that has changed over the time as you've become more distant to it and whether the home school/unschooled thinking that freedom that you got to potentially think for yourself helped unwind some of that. I know you get told one way, like gays are evil or whatever, so that doesn't compute but that's a little bit of freedom of thought that home school gives you, also opens the door to that way of thinking. So I don't know whether you'd reflect on losing your faith or how that came about and how that was for you.


Aella (34:38): My upbringing was pretty anomalous even among other Christian homeschoolers because my dad was a professional evangelical Christian, so we were a little bit more focused around the intellectual defense of the Christian faith than other people. I do think that part of me losing faith was genetics, I think that I just got born with a weird brain that is more disagreeable and more open than most other people which is more likely to change your mind, I guess. And a lot of the people, the friends who I was brought up with, the majority of them are still very Christian and still in that life. So for me, I think I was abnormal, I think that my dad specifically tried very hard to instill good thinking in us. As far as he could, he was quite smart and taught us logic stuff. Some of my earliest memories are him playing logic games with us as kids; he'd be like, does a monkey have, or does a cat have two legs? And I'd be like, no, he has four and my dad would be like, yes, the cat has two legs and four, just stuff like that to make sure that our thinking was crisp and precise, so like four years old, I was child and so I think that did help to some degree. There's some question everything, I remember having that from a very young age being taken by the concept that there were other Muslim kids because the Muslims were the worst for us.


Aella (36:08): There are other Muslim kids being raised, very similar to the way I was and they were devoted Muslims. And I feel exactly the same way that they do, so how do I know that my faith is true and theirs isn't? I have to cling to something beyond my sensation about this, like my conviction because I think that was helpful. Part of the weird brain thing is being very interested in the way things feel for other people and checking to see if that is the way that I also feel and that was also vital in losing my faith because somewhere in my brain, I had this constant awareness that this might be wrong and I think that's something that a lot of Christians don't have and I was very lucky to end up with that.


Ben Yeoh (36:52): That's fascinating; you were given the seeds through all of that questioning to unpick your faith. Well, what would you say to others who might be on the verge of losing their faith?


Aella (37:09): I felt a wave of compassion and sadness for that. Losing your faith is so hard and I respect it because you're losing a lot. It's losing your comfort and your sense of direction and morality in society and it means so much. I think it's better on the other side of it, but if I had to say I'm sorry that you have to go through that, would be my feeling,


Ben Yeoh (37:43): But at least for you, it's better on the other side, even though it could be painful going through it.


Aella (37:49): It's terrifying, it's scary, but it's great. I swear, at least for me, it's great; some people have more trouble than I did, some people have less but it can be great,


Ben Yeoh (37:59): But I guess there's light at the end of the tunnel, not to use the heavenly metaphor for it. And then you left home, you're in these new gigs and stuff and I think you went to work and I read an essay, I think, which only briefly talked about waking up even something like 4:00 AM or very early to go to work in a factory in quite a miserable type of job. And I'm not quite sure how long you did that for, but it seems like a significant amount of time or felt significant there. And I was just wondering, because that's an insight into what a lot of Americans or a lot of people do in the world and I think there's a lot of people who are born richer or listen to podcasts and stuff who don't ever get that sense of what it was like to be, I guess what we think; working class, you're working at a minimum wage, hard living job. So I don't know whether you wanted to reflect on that experience and how that then shaped you into where you are now or what it's like or what people might not understand about what it's like to wake up at 4:00 AM and go to work in a factory.


Aella (39:12): I had very little standards for my life at that point; I was expected to become a housewife. The cultural idea of what I would do with my life was not very grand, I was supposed to have children and so when I didn't go to college, or I did very briefly and I didn't have a hope of becoming a higher-class person. So for me getting a job, it was slightly above minimum wage, believe it or not and that was very exciting for me and at that point I was going hungry because I didn't have enough money and I was applying to every job; I was applying for jobs like working in the sewers to scoop poop. So when I got a factory job, I was thankful because it was a step up from what I was prepared to do in order to live.


Aella (40:03): So I got the factory job and I made the best of it. I tried hard to like it, I was like, I'm going to make my life good, I'm going to enjoy it. We worked at a factory and we had got these trays with the units on it that we would assemble then pass the tray and the tray had a little pad on it. And so, when I had a couple seconds of downtime, I would scratch little messages because these pads got circulated throughout the factory and were seen by the other factory workers. But you had to angle it just right, at a certain light to be visible, so it was like a little bit of a hidden message, so I would do this, I would scratch these messages to other factory workers. It was like that sort of thing. I tried to make the best of it but it was hard working weekends and waking up that early and working for 10 sometimes 12 hours a day, it sucked, man. It's stretched even my ridiculous optimism, but some people there at factory seemed to like it somehow or they just were good at emotionally handling it, I'm not sure. But during that time the spare moments I had, I was doing photography on the side and I got briefly employed by a photography job, which allowed me to quit my factory job and then the photography job fired me because I was 19 and not good. And then after that I was like, I can't go back to the factory job, I just can't make myself go back because when I left on my last day, all my coworkers were like, good job for you, go get them, go out into the world, you got out. And I just go ahead and bear the thought of being like I failed, so I did not do that and then that's when I ended up doing sex work after that.


Ben Yeoh (41:46): That almost feels slightly Hollywood film script, but on the factory work thing it's interesting because you do get some people and I'm not sure if this is true but people are doing this low paid work. So the classic story is I think a janitor or the janitor in the white house goes, I'm not just cleaning the corridors. I'm helping put a man on the moon or the cleaner cleaning toilets in a hospital says, you know what, I'm not just cleaning poop, I'm saving people's lives because you bring this purpose to your job. But it seems to me pretty rare and I almost wonder whether it's a romanticization from other people who are not doing this thinking, this is what people can make or do of it. And it's just either physically tiring or mind numbing or both and you have to do these. I'm interested that you have a little piece of creativity, a little piece of something other, which makes it human, which I hadn't quite fully appreciated in it. But it was so the economy was so poor, even though it was slightly above the minimum wage, which you thought on the one hand was great, but it was too so destroying to go back to, or do you think had you not had that little step up, did something better like a photography job that maybe you would've, but it was that you feel you couldn't fall further back down the ladder?


Aella (43:10): Well, I didn't know how to get out, I didn't know how to do anything, I had zero community, no network, I was completely unknown. I had no conception of steps I could take to make my life better. I just knew that I should pursue, I should just try. I think I was also very high risk. I was willing to take a lot of high risks which helped, I'm not sure if that answers your question though?


Ben Yeoh (43:40): Well, I guess it does and I guess your next step is into escort and sex work. The economics of it are so much better, but comes with all of risk and everything. And I guess without it, you wouldn't be where you are today with it, but it does seem it's such a large jump with that. Did you feel there was nothing else around that or was it just a more expected value like, this might be quite risky but there are high rewards, I could do this, why not?


Aella (44:12): I didn't even think that far. It was mostly after I quit the thing that I moved back down to Boise, which is five hours away from the city that I was working at the factory. And I wanted to figure out how to do my own thing, so I tried doing photography, I tried doing product photography, but again, fucking 19, I was homeschooled, no idea how the world works, no friends or at least very new friends, not a good community. So all of my attempts were shit and so I was living on a friend's couch, living off savings, trying desperately to make my way, trying pretty poorly because I had vowed never to have a boss again, the factory was so terrible. I was like, I want to make my own business somehow, I don't know how I just can't do that and then so I would try a couple of things and then a friend suggested camming and then I, I caned my first night, made $60, which is fucking loads of money for me at the time and I was like, this is something I could pour my effort into and get something out of it, and so I didn't have long-term concepts at all. All I knew is that for the first time I was able to make money doing something that I was directing, so I just threw myself at its full heart and soul.


Ben Yeoh (45:29): So entrepreneurial spirit in charge of your life and destiny, with all of that, I think it interesting that you came out to be smart with lots of critical thinking, homeschool skills, but then none of the other because I guess what public schools would give you or say, west coast or east coast CIHI public schools give you that social capital and network that allows you to use all of these other things, but that without it it's difficult to use whatever smarts you might have. You've referred to community loads of times and it is interesting and then you've got communities now, but coming out at 17, 18, 19, 20, that lack of community means you didn't have that social capital to rely on.


Aella (46:15): I should probably be a little bit more precise or something there. I was able to make friends but there was a very strong cultural divide at that point. I had grown up completely with a separate set of media, and a separate set of social norms and so it was very much coming from a different cult country. And I remember many times hanging out around normal people and feeling I was an alien and there was no way I could explain it to them because to them, I looked the same, I talked the same, I had grown up in the town over. But there were just tiny little things about the way they interacted and the words they used that I did not understand. I was like, there's some other thing going there. And I must have been very strange to them too, there was a lot of things that I did that were like, what the fuck, she's weird. She's not hanging like normal people behave and to be clear, I grew up with homeschoolers and all homeschoolers behaved like that. So I was pretty socially good with homeschoolers, but it was this transition to this new thing that made it hard for me to develop friends that were good. And I think that's one of the reasons I was unable to keep my job as a photographer because my cultural norms are too different. I'd been raised to be extraordinarily submissive and they needed somebody who was able to say no to people and able to be confident and engage with people who might have different wants and I was unable to do that. I had that beaten out of me, so it's just stuff like that. So, when I say community, I don't mean that I was unable to go to meet-ups and make friends, it was just that it was a constant handicap.


Ben Yeoh (47:54): Well, I guess there are two things there because on the one hand it's speaking a different cultural language but on the other hand, it's also that your character was shaped in a way that it wasn't able to fit into this new culture so easily and I guess both points were difficult for you. But you learned this new language and it sounded like it took you quite long to fit into the non-fundamental Christian world but that came through. So your character changed and your understanding of this new world changed, was that a year's long process or did you have two or three aha type moments? I guess this comes on to creation and invention. Is it small incremental innovation or do you have moments where it all crystallizes together, which loops into a little bit like enlightenment or where steel things, is it constant, almost meditation? Do you get there through prayer or do you have this aha moment where you think, this is another force beyond which speaks to me.


Aella (48:59): I like the analogy, for me it was incremental, I think it took about seven years until I no longer had that feeling of being a stranger. Now I still get it; I get little flashes every now and then but it's very pretty rare, but I think it was around 25 because I left home when I was 17 and it was when I was 25 years old, I noticed I don't feel I'm an outsider anymore. So about that long and it was very slow.


Ben Yeoh (49:27): Alright, you still spent more years feeling as an outsider than as an insider then really?


Aella (49:35): I guess so.

Ben Yeoh (49:36): I was just thinking about life's journey. Well, here's one of your questions, which I thought was interesting because I didn't know how to answer it quite and so I'm still thinking about it. So this is the one when you go, you're in a room with say 10,000 people, maybe a thousand people and you get to ask three binary questions, so yes, no and so for each question, the people who answer the question, according to the way you want, they stay and the people who don't leave the room. So I don't know if you've ever asked yourself this question, but what are the three questions that you ask people?


Aella (50:15): I had a good set of answers to these that I forgot, but I'll try and generate some, but they're not going to be as good. I think probably one is freewill was one of my favorite questions, do you believe that we have freewill or not? And my preferred answer is no, so I would take those people, maybe something about sense of self, where's your sense of self located? That's not a yes/ no question, I'd have to think more specifically.


Ben Yeoh (50:48): And what's the correct answer: sense of self, in you or outside of you? Is that the idea?


Aella (50:55): Because that's the thing I feel something in that direction of a sense of self, maybe like the location isn't quite right, but there's some malleable sense of self or the sense of being a character on a stage and play a little bit.


Ben Yeoh (51:12): Acting out, that’s one of your questions.


Aella (51:15): I like that a lot and I find that I bond well with people there. And then have you ever changed your mind on something drastic, like huge, like fundamental to who you are,


Ben Yeoh (51:29): I guess the answer you're going to want to hear is yes.


Aella (51:32): What are your answers for that question?


Ben Yeoh (51:37): I don't know, I keep on thinking about it and now I'm riffing on your freewill one but I guess that's just so if there isn't one, that's like a destiny, but it feels almost the same as your second question because that is, I think, how do you class it again, I think I've taken this from a survey where you say life is a story, a game and we have don characters to play it; billionaires play the game of money, religious fanatics play the game of heaven and hell, people who watch the children die, play the game of grief and that we are all playing parts. But if that's true, that's almost true that you don't think there's freewill if we're all playing these character games and parts in it. So I think that's a double question: you're going to not lose that many people. I guess, minus to do with mindsets to be with things like curiosity or curiosity and open-mindedness would be one and then if I'm going to hang out with these people, it depends on how you're using this, there'll be something to do with liking food or conversational culture. Could we have a good party together, that type of thing but I'm not sure exactly what it would be because I don't think I necessarily party well with everyone and then I don't know what my last one would be, I'd have to still think about it. It might be something to do with love of travel, which is a lot of this or you have an opportunity, but this idea of wanting to visit places or go places.


Ben Yeoh (53:02): Because particularly when I was younger, I traveled a lot and I think it's been influential and I think people still now don't travel enough or they make pronouncements about things, which they don't have any idea of because they either have no lived experience or they haven't gone there, which is like a point you made way back about, rooting where we were in history and what the pros and cons of an idea debated on that time. And so that was one, I was fascinated about your working in a factory, so I've never worked in something like that, but I did stay on an open cast gold mine in Borno, in east Malaysia when I was about 17 and that was quite eye opening. I wouldn't say, I don't know whether it was completely dramatic, I held something close to me and then it changed. But I think I had that slightly, what I would call a paternalistic view that I know better than these poor people who live in villages with no running water. And this must be the way you should think and to do better. And then when I went to stay with these people, it was like, you know what, you are completely rational, this is exactly what you would do. If you have no running water, you'd find a job, you are pulling in a hole, you are digging that week it changes your mind. You have no credit card or family to get you out of that and this is your whole life ahead of you and many of you are very likely to die young, so why would you bother with a pension if you thought there was a higher than 50% chance you're going to die before you're 60. You just wouldn't.


Ben Yeoh (54:45): And so that did change my staying on this gold mine and speaking to people and traveling around there and I was traveling by myself. It's like, okay my world view was wrong because I made these assumptions, I think you could have gotten there if you thought very hard about what it was to live there. But I would say maybe all of us, that's such a leap of imagination, if it's very far apart from the world that you've lived in, that you can't do it. It's very hard to imagine living for two weeks without running water, unless you've actually ever lived without running water and had to dig your own toilet. It's just such a different way of being, and it's a little bit like you were saying, going back 150 years ago, they had no running water and all of that, the time of it was very different. Anyway, that ties in with what you were saying. So perhaps now a little section on underrated, overrated, or you could just do a little commentary about what you might think about this item coming up, if you are happy to play this game, So underrated, overrated, or you can pass, or you could just make, a commentary on it. So underrated, overrated, the accordion?


Aella (56:00): Underrated; it's underrated.


Ben Yeoh (56:03): And why is it underrated? What don't we understand about accordion or accordion playing?


Aella (56:12): I think people like its accordion tend to play a type of music, which is very goofier oriented or French, you know something like that but I...


Ben Yeoh (56:23): Folk music, I guess.


Aella (56:25): Excuse me.


Ben Yeoh (56:25): Folk music.


Aella (56:28): But it feels like a great thing to play for a lot of different types of music, I find it to be also like a cable of great sadness, which I enjoy and also it feels like it vibrates your body when you play it. And in a way that piano doesn't, for example, or a flute, so it's like you're closer, almost like you're breathing with your instrument, which I find to be wonderful.


Ben Yeoh (56:52): Cool that makes a lot of sense, ballroom dancing or other social dancing like this.


Aella (56:59): Underrated.


Ben Yeoh (57:01): I know the underrated one. They're not going to be all underrated, well, we'll see.


Aella (57:06): Ben, it is underrated because it takes a lot of effort to learn, but man, it's so worth it. I think that the people don't understand how fucking fantastic it can feel to be good at it.


Ben Yeoh (57:17): Well, here in the UK, we are very obsessed by this program called Strictly dancing. I don't know if you've got a US equivalent, but the country's been mad about it for years, so there's quite a big ballroom dancing culture and even some quite because you don't associate it with young people. But there's quite a lot of young people who will do that or at least learn a little bit partly because of strictly and strictly it's been quite groundbreaking recently because they've introduced age or thoughts of ageism and then also gender and identity, should you have same sex or not in your dancing and things? So it's been weirdly progressive in what's considered not necessarily progressive art form, but anyway, the UK's a bit obsessed by it.


Aella (58:07): Well, it's interesting social dancing in general is weirdly progressive. So in the US, we have a lot of social dancing but it tends to be blues and fusion, not a lot of young people doing the ballroom specifically. So I might have to check out in the UK, but the scene is very progressive compared to others and I suspect it's because you end up being physically in close contact with strangers, which tends to select for more of the poly or sexually fluid crowd who are less uncomfortable switching, physical contact is my guess, my theory.


Ben Yeoh (58:35): And I guess the culturally or whatever, a lot of gay people have also been into this side of dancing and particularly in the UK forums been identified with that and performance and things. Okay, underrated, overrated or commentary; pronouns.


Aella (58:55): Are pronouns underrated; pronouns in general or are you referring to they, them pronouns?


Ben Yeoh (59:01): Well, you can choose.


Aella (59:03): I can choose, in generally I feel pronouns are exactly as rated as they should be


Ben Yeoh (59:08): Alright and they/them, him/her are identity pronouns?


Aella (59:15): It depends on your culture, if you're in a conservative culture, I think they're underrated and if you're in a liberal culture, I feel they're overrated.


Ben Yeoh (59:21): Overused in some not appreciated in another; that is fair. Abalone, overrated, or underrated.


Aella (59:31): You pronounced it right, It's a great game. I assume people don't know it's an abstract strategy board game with marbles, it's very fast and easy to learn and it's awesome, it's one of my favorite games.


Ben Yeoh (59:46): Very good, so this is a weird one which I picked up on your site, which is then, sweating or sweating on command, what's that about?


Aella (59:55): That one is definitely overrated. I have a hyperhidrosis condition where my hands and feet sweat excessively. I'm sick of it, I would like it to stop but I can do it on command, unfortunately.


Ben Yeoh (1:00:10): Can you? So you know that's cured by Botox.


Aella (1:00:16): So I tried that, I went to get Botox injections and my palm turns out, shoving a needle into all the parts of your palm and fingers.


Ben Yeoh (1:00:25): Quite painful.


Aella (1:00:26): Like 30 times it is excruciating, I do not recommend it.


Ben Yeoh (1:00:29): And I might pick up a little bit of needle phobia or no, not really.


Aella (1:00:33): Very needle phobic.


Ben Yeoh (1:00:34): 30 it's not going to do it for you then?


Aella (1:00:37): I lit up a lot of anti-anxiety meds for that which helped a lot, but still the pain was horrific.


Ben Yeoh (1:00:44): So I happen to know a [dermatologist] as a friend and so we were talking, she gets quite a lot of patients for sweating because also in the armpit, because you can't stop sweating there, but she said moderate, mild to moderate pain. I will go back to her and say, no, I spoke to someone who...


Aella (1:01:13): in every part of the finger, the sections of your finger, so like three in each finger, one in the base, one in the middle, one on the tip of every finger it's not mild to moderate pain, she's crazy.


Ben Yeoh (1:01:20): Well, I guess she's talking about her own book here. Well, that's mostly what I had on underrated and overrated, so we just had a couple more of your own questions here. So one was, I guess I'll paraphrase this, what do you make of emotional pain? And are there things that you would do where it was a lot of emotional pain but you would go through them again?


Aella (1:01:46): Well, I generally like emotional pain and sometimes seek it out intentionally. I suspect a lot of people do this to some degree that when you watch tragic movies and then you cry, that's a very intentional seeking out of emotional pain but there's some acceptance of it that I value and I suspect a lot of other people would like it too, if they could get it.


Ben Yeoh (1:02:28): And I guess they're seeking out emotional things, so I was interested in your essay on circling, which to be honest, I'd never come across and I don't think I would probably try myself. I'm not sure what I would get out of it, but it seems like you did and there are different forms of circling, which I hadn't appreciated either, but you seem to get quite a lot out of it. Some of that to me seems part of its mindfulness, but part of it is seeking an emotional or emotionality and a connection. What is circling for you? Is that right or I read that wrong and why do you like it?


Aella (1:02:45):  I think it stays out of curiosity, circling is an incredible novel, it's one of the highest density, novel experiences that I regularly get stuff out of. I'm regularly surprised by the things that people say and react and do in a way that I'm not surprised in normal conversations like this podcast thing is wonderful and I've been mildly surprised a few times by some of the things you say, but it's not like I'm losing my mind. So even in great conversations, there's this norm about how many novel things is said, but with circling, it's almost everything said of like what and then it triggers a lot of reactions in me, and the practice is to pay very close attention to what is triggered inside of you. So a lot of it is like somebody says something and I have a big reaction inside me and I'm curious about that and I get to look at it, so it's been just the highest information, for me.


Ben Yeoh (1:03:42): That's interesting and so it's very self-awareness on that. Well, next time I'm going to come up with even weirder questions, but I guess this is also people listening in that is slightly too weird and a couple of the other ones then would be, who do you hate most?


Aella (1:04:01): My dad probably, I don't hate him very much anymore because I've mostly gotten over it, so I wouldn't describe it as hating him, but if I had to say the most then maybe.


Ben Yeoh (1:04:13): And are you afraid of death? Why or why not?


Aella (1:04:18): Sometimes, if you put me near a cliff, I'm extremely afraid of death. If you drive me fast in a car. I am extremely afraid that there's some other way, which I'm ready though.


Ben Yeoh (1:04:30): Well, that might be; that's interesting because they feel dangerous things that you might not be scared of death, but of the actual activity. Although you say you like some quite other high-risk activities, I'm developing a show about death, partly because I don't think we think about it enough. So I'm interested in that enlightened bit and stuff, but it seems strange that we at least today, like versus a 100, a 150 years ago, death was present. The pandemic now more of us know people who have died but a hundred years ago you would've, by the time you were 20, 30, 40 seen loads of people die, would've been a normal part of your life, which particularly in richer countries, it isn't. So I think that's one of the reasons that we have become more afraid of death, in general. Anyway, the last couple of questions for you is, what are your favorite questions? Do you have questions that you like asking or questions at the moment that are playing on your mind?


Aella (1:05:31): One of my favorites is, what is your most controversial opinion, according to the people in this room or your peer group or whatever depending on the context I'm asking. But that's one of my favorites because it requires the person to one, make a guess about, well, the people around them are like and which is often wrong. You'd be surprised at how bad people are predicting, what people will find controversial and two, it requires them to set themselves apart from the other people there, which is people pick different methods of doing it and they're all fascinating. That's one of my favorites, I think.


Ben Yeoh (1:06:07): That's interesting, so you've got to, because you've got to know the room or your people and I guess if they're your friends, couldn't be surprising that you might not know your friends as well as you think you do.


Aella (1:06:20): And it's also asking you to take a bold social stand, it’s asking you to figure out what the thing most of the people in the room will think you're wrong about, so it is an emotionally charged thing to do as well.


Ben Yeoh (1:06:34): And what research worker are you doing at the moment? So you've got the enlightenment essays still going, there seems to be something that's still interesting in synesthesia kinesthesia. You're doing a lot of research, I guess, still collecting data on questions and escorts and that type of thing. What are you most interested in your projects at the moment?


Aella (1:06:58): Kinks is another big subject that I'm preparing to do, maybe a set of essays or surveys on sexual fetish issues. I've already done a couple on them, but I want to go deeper and more precisely. What causes them? That’s a big one: are people abused in childhood? Does that make kinks happen? Is it random and unpredictable? What about birth order? Just a bunch of stuff like that.


Ben Yeoh (1:07:15): I had to pause for a second there, because I thought you said pinks with a P not kinks for the chaos. What are pinks, I haven't heard of this one that was normal; cool. And then I guess with your life now, you've talked about going back a little bit into sex work and there seemed to be a period when you were suggesting, it's a real shame that my questions, or other things that I could do are just not as economically satisfying either. Do you feel that's a tension of where you would be, you'd prefer to be running a VC firm or entrepreneurial thing or the way you compartmentalize your life, are you relatively happy about how things are working out?


Aella (1:08:12): I'm relatively happy; I'm not fully happy, I'm extremely fortunate and grateful for the opportunities that I have, I also would love to just get paid to do research; that's my dream. I just want to not think about the sex work thing, it's fine, I don't get a thrill out of taking the 5,000 photo of my breasts, it's just boring. I want to solve problems, I want to solve problems and figure out knowledge that we haven't figured out before; that's my real passion, I'm hoping to take steps in that direction. I'm working on finding a research Institute for sex stuff specifically and I'm hoping to get funding which might happen, we'll see.


Ben Yeoh (1:08:52): Anyone interested in grant funding or anything for that, do you get in touch? So, this is interesting. Maybe you'll get someone from the crypto world or crypto bro who's interested in different things and I haven't seen it open up funding ideas. [ ] there’s a little bit of funding, little cover, interesting streams there but I don't think with funding things are radically different. And again, if you go back a 100, 150 years ago, there were many different ideas about how we should fund things or get things going and now we've got a bit of universities funding and then you've got the Silicon Valley thing but for stuff, which is interesting, but maybe not that commercial and not coming out of the university, it still strikes me as harder to fund than it should be. Anyway, I hope that catches someone to give you lots of funding for that and then the last question would be, do you have any advice for people in general? So the life advice that you've thought either, I guess people who might want to make a career in this kind of thing or you're thinking. Yes, advice that you'd have for people in how they might think about living their lives.


Aella (1:10:13): That's such a large question; that's huge. I should see if this would be a good ask all question because it's just so big, like if I had to, it would be to focus on asking the right question, probably if your life isn't going the way you want, then you probably haven't asked the right question yet, something in that direction.


Ben Yeoh (1:10:35): That's very on brand, asking the right question is your one big thing; that makes sense. Mine's often about curiosity on open mindedness and that's the same, that's the similar thing that asking the right question. I wonder whether you also need the counterpoint is you need to ask the right question, but you also need to be sensitive to listening because if you're not listening to the conversation and answers that you're having and which is part of your circling thing, that you might have asked the right question, but you didn't hear the answers that you wanted to hear or the answers already available to you and so you missed it.


Aella (1:11:13): Would it be something like performative asking, if you ask, but you're not interested in the answer or something like that.


Ben Yeoh (1:11:21): exactly, it’s that, or particularly in British/English speak, we've got a lot of things where we don't mean what we say. So the classic one is if a British/English person says with all due respect and then says something with all due respect is completely the opposite. They only say that when they think you are stupid, so we say with all due respect, if you hear that from a British/English person is no, they think we're completely stupid and we've got loads of these terms, this talking about the cultural difference. Americans often find it quite difficult, so they come in and they went like with all due respect; they must have respected my opinion and this example is no. We only say that if you are, this is like the rock bottom. And this is the step below. I probably would be better if we were swearing at you. This is the lowest of the low with all due respect. It just means...


Aella (1:12:09): I did not know that.


Ben Yeoh (1:12:10): You're such a total idiot that I'm not even saying anything. That's how we use it and another is the way we say, quite good or not bad. So when we say quite well, we don't mean that it was moderately good to even quite good, we normally mean that it was pretty bad. And when we say not bad, we normally mean quite good; pretty good. So it's confusing for Americans to come particularly in office environments with British workers, they'll go that was quite good. No, that was not good at all.


Aella (1:12:43): I had no idea.


Ben Yeoh (1:12:45): Where we say on the off hand, they're like not bad. That means keep going. That was good and you should try that. So there is this cracking the cultural code and that was why I thought that was very true. What you're saying is coming out whatever culture you are, and then implanted as someone who's been through public schools and all of these small, subtle things in word, how you might use your cutlery, what you even think of fast food and all of that, all of it is alien. And so, you're speaking the same words, but you're speaking a different cultural language and it's very obvious to those who are not in that cultural language that they didn't understand that with the classic one, like with the all do you respect, which is not with respect all. Great, so is there anything else? What is the question that I should have asked you?


Aella (1:13:45): I think you hit the fantastic ones, I'm not sure I could do better than you've already done.


Ben Yeoh (1:13:43): Well, that is a very good place to end with. So, thank you very much for speaking with me.

Aella (1:13:49): Thank you so much this is lovely, I appreciate your time.

Ben Yeoh (1:13:55): If you appreciate the show, please like, and subscribe as it helps others find the podcast.

In Podcast, Life, Arts Tags Aella, Escort, podcast, faith, rationalis
Join the mailing list for a monthly blog digest. Email not to be used for anything else.

Thank you! 

Follow me on LinkedIN
Contact/Support