This is the artificial intelligence voice of Jordan Peterson narrating this pod slice summary of the Jordan Peterson Podcast.

At the heart of this Jordan Peterson Podcast, comedian Matt Rife and Peterson take a deep dive into the role of comedy in today’s society, the consequences and attacks on comedy deemed ‘offensive’, and Matt’s innovative approach to dealing with controversy.

Rife, a young comedian who has witnessed rapid success in the comedy scene, was recently the target of critical remarks due to a joke he delivered that centered around domestic assault. He explains his strategy to tackle this controversy, which instead of apologizing and complying with the pressure, involved a satirical response intending to mock those who were triggered by his joke.

Throughout the podcast, the duo explores the philosophy behind comedy and the tactics comedians employ. Rife elaborates that comedy is a reflection of what makes him happy, which he shares in hope that it will make his audience life’s easier or happier. Peterson points out the risk in Rife’s practice of spontaneous wit and humor, which requires him to act on instinct without censoring his thoughts.

Rife further describes his experience with his critics—how he thinks they represent only a small portion of society and those who don’t really attend comedy shows anyway. To him, critics have the choice to remove themselves from a humor type or a specific comedian they dislike, just as he dismisses heavy metal music, for instance. He questions the logic behind those who keep complaining about a person or a performance they don’t appreciate.

Peterson further probes Rife about his significant female fanbase, and it emerges that female members of the audience interact more through heckling, which gives Rife more opportunities for crowd-work. This plays into Rife’s strategy of posting crowd-work on YouTube, to avoid burning-through materials built for years. His ‘crowd-work’ strategy enables him to uniquely engage with his audience, without compromising the novelty of his prepared shows.

The conversation navigates the reasons behind Rife choosing to appear on Peterson’s podcast, shedding light on Peterson’s portrayal both in society and to his fans. Rife expresses his admiration for Peterson as kind, well spoken, and someone who stands on their morals, a rare quality that he appreciates.

The podcast conversation further dives into Matt Rife’s journey into the world of comedy. Starved for entertainment growing up in a small town of 1,200 people, Rife turned to comedy early, finding humor as an accessible and enjoyable escape. He seeking an open mic stage in Columbus, Ohio at fifteen and quickly discovered a passion and talent for making others laugh, specifically his beloved grandfather.

Matt’s career got a considerable boost when he fearlessly reached out to comedian DL Hughley over Twitter, then a fresh social media platform, and requested an opportunity to perform a guest spot on one of his Ohio shows. Hughley’s generosity opened doors for Rife, leading to more opportunities to perform guest spots for influential comedians.

Simultaneously, a comedy club owner from Atlanta, Gary Abdo, noticed Rife’s exchanges with Hughley on Twitter. Intrigued, he invited Rife to perform at his club. After clicking well with Abdo and his vision, Rife invested his summer breaks during high school performing in Atlanta and receiving unconventional, yet effective training from Abdo — even performing with distractions like tennis balls being thrown at him and honking horns to help him deal with potential stage disruptions better.

Training at Abdo’s club, renowned as one of the toughest comedy clubs in the country, prepared him to deal with indiscriminate audiences and harsh critics, with him opening for almost every comedian that performed at the Atlanta club.

As the podcast continues, Rife’s openness regarding his journey gives the audience a revealing look into the life of a standup comic, illustrating that laughter isn’t just born from wit and humor but also determined resilience, painstaking effort, and years of grinding on the comedy circuit. He shares how he welcomed every opportunity that came his way as he steadily built his career, a testament to his willingness to push boundaries and his unwavering commitment to his craft.

As the podcast unfolds, Matt Rife candidly discusses his transition from high school to the comedy scene in Los Angeles. Having determined early on that he wanted to pursue comedy rather than traditional academia, he took and passed the California proficiency exam, allowing him to graduate high school early. Upon receiving confirmation that he’d passed, he moved to Los Angeles, anticipating a new chapter in his life.

Initially living on friends’ couches, he spent many nights at comedy clubs. Some wouldn’t permit him to stay inside because of his age, but his steadfast dedication paid off. Opportunities to perform began to present themselves, often in unusual ways. For instance, due to age limitations, he was only permitted inside some comedy clubs during his performance time. He would rush onto the stage, deliver his act, and then have to leave immediately. Yet these restrictions didn’t dampen his resolve.

Through consistency and tenacity, he began booking more prominent stage times and securing TV appearances, starting with smaller roles in Disney shows before landing a major stint with MTV. His most notable role was on MTV’s ‘Wild ‘N Out’, where he filled a niche role following Pete Davidson’s move to SNL. Rife credits the show for significantly boosting his confidence and humor, despite the constraints that every joke had to revolve around him being the solitary white guy among the cast.

Taking charge of this constraint, Rife argues that restrictions can enhance creativity, similar to the confines of a Haiku poem which, when limited to a topic like spam lunch meat, can instigate innovative and humorous responses.

Shedding light on his original shyness, he elaborates that he developed a ‘fake confidence’ as a defense mechanism to cope with bullying in high school. Jordan Peterson challenges this notion, suggesting his ability to deflect hurtful comments humorously indicates real confidence. Peterson explains that generating witty responses, even when under attack, showcases depth and sophistication.

Rounding out his narrative, Rife describes his present status as a seasoned comedian, underscoring that with time and experience, he no longer doubts his ability to make audiences laugh. While he recognises that comedy is invariably linked to the threat of disaster and the danger of crossing lines, he argues that the intent is crucial. For Rife, the true essence of comedy lies in transforming pain into shared laughter. In his words, “when high schoolers are making fun of something about you, it hurts. But when a comedian is making fun of something about you, he’s just trying to make people laugh.”

Matt Rife continues his narrative by identifying a key difference between a comedian and a bully – the intent behind a joke. He emphasizes that the sole intention of a comedian is to make people laugh, but he accepts that not everyone may find his humor appealing due to different healing mechanisms associated with trauma.

When Jordan Peterson highlights that trauma often leads individuals to shield themselves from similar potential triggers, and consequently impede their healing progress, Rife agrees. He compares comedy to a psychological function reminiscent of a horror movie, where people voluntarily expose themselves to their fears. Comedy plays with the taboo, offering a safe space to face discomfort in unpalatable truths and ridiculing fear.

In defense of his brand of comedy deriving humor from culturally sensitive topics, Matt Rife cites the renowned comedian Russell Peters. He highlights how Peters’ act often leans on ethnic humor, resulting in an audience from various ethnicities eager to be targeted by his jokes. In this space, they find solidarity through shared laughter, showing they can also partake in the fun.

Rife finds it mind-boggling how people would squander their limited time on earth on taking offense, expressing resentment, or starting internet wars over a comedian they don’t find to their taste when there are countless alternatives available.

During their discussion, Jordan Peterson elaborates that celebrity apologies are often forced, not by guilt but by the pressure of a vocal minority of their audience. Matt Rife confirms this, pointing out that his contentious domestic violence joke was based on a playful exaggeration of a real event. It was not meant to belittle the severity of the issue; rather, it confronted the negative aspect in a way that could coax laughter out of the tragedy.

Jordan Peterson further emphasizes that the act of recounting tragic events in a humoristic manner shows transcendence and musters the resilience to face and discuss these things. To illustrate his point, Peterson recalls an anecdote of his daughter who, after experiencing severe illness, managed to retell her hardships in a hilariously engaging manner that belied their seriousness.

In comedy, the audience is aware that they’re entering a space set to “play with disaster,” a principle that Matt Rife follows in his performances. His aim is not to paint a rose-tinted reality, but to confront the darker aspects of life and transform them into a shared laughter experience. This approach is akin to traditional comedians, but with Rife’s signature modern twist.

Matt Rife compares comedy to a therapeutic process, arguing that it provides a unique avenue for healing. He shares an instance from his life where his friends bombarded him with “dead grandfather jokes” to help him cope with his grandfather’s death. His friends knew that humor would be his antidote to grief.

Jordan Peterson contributes human resilience as a key facet to this conversation. He suggests that to truly master a topic, one must approach it with a light touch – dealing with heavy subjects in a way that removes their weight and transforms them into aspects that can be discussed, even laughed at. This requires an understanding of comedy’s fundamental purpose in society – laughter as a vehicle for overcoming tragedy.

Peterson and Rife discuss the backlash that often comes when certain jokes offend a section of the audience. Rife acknowledges offending 12,000 people with a particular joke, however, he counters this by stating that if 12,000 people found it offensive, then 100,000 people found it funny and relatable – especially those who have experienced domestic violence and found healing in humor.

Peterson agrees, saying the laughter response from the audience can’t be faked and is genuine evidence that the joke has hit the right note. They discuss how societal norms are challenged by comedy, that it’s innately subjective and can stir different reactions in people. Herein lies the difficulty in measuring a comedian’s success – should it be based on how many people are offended or how many people found humor and healing in the joke?

Continuing their exploration of the backlash, they observe that those who take offense often do so on behalf of others and not for personal reasons. The offended ones, argues Peterson, claim to voice the sentiments of the supposedly harmed without any evidence that the alleged victims are truly harmed. Instead of direct victims expressing their feelings, these proxies wear the mantle of the offense.

Rife concludes this portion of the discussion by highlighting the importance of finding humor even in dark topics, a technique he employs in his performances. He further opines that critics often focus only on the things that offend them personally rather than the content as a whole, signifying a selective outrage that he finds to be a selfish act.

In this portion of the conversation, Matt Rife discusses the controversy surrounding a joke he made and his subsequent unconventional response to his critics. After finding himself targeted by a cancel culture movement, Rife refused to apologize and instead countered with a link, purporting to be his official apology. However, this link rerouted to an online store selling helmets for special needs individuals. He explains that this was not an attempt to mock people with special needs, but rather those claiming emotional fragility.

According to Rife, social media platforms like TikTok facilitate clout chasing, generating attention for self-interest, and often at the cost of others. He argues that these actions display narcissistic traits disguised as compassion. Consequently, Rife expresses his disappointment with this online dishonesty, especially when there are many creative opportunities available that don’t necessitate such behavior.

During the conversation, Rife and Peterson also delve into the shifting demographic of Rife’s live shows. Rife observed that his shows were predominantly female in attendance until his rise on TikTok. He humorously suggests that it could be due to his face or humor, but also mentions the unusual trend of women voluntarily requesting to be ‘roasted,’ suggesting a sense of daring to push boundaries in comedy.

The duo also mention comedian Russell Peters, who uses comedy to make pointed and targeted ethnic jokes, owning his own ethnicity. Both Rife and Peterson recognize the importance of being open to making jokes about everyone, which Peters exemplifies, for comedy not to feel targeted.

The discussion then transitions to the topic of cancel culture and its disconcerting impact. Peterson affirms that, although it can be an intense experience, individuals who didn’t do anything wrong shouldn’t apologize but should resist the pressure. He explains that, historically, angry mobs indicating one’s wrongdoings used to hold weight, but the ease at which virtual mobs are whipped up today had changed the landscape and rendered instinctual responses to such situations outdated.

As for real-world interactions, Rife mentions that he’s never had anyone directly confront him over his controversial content, attributing this to the real-world consequences of face-to-face confrontations that the internet lacks. This transparency and accountability are absent in the online space, allowing hateful comments without repercussions. Nevertheless, Rife insists that in that case, they should be open to intellectual discussions or be prepared for possible confrontations.

Finally, in response to his perceived cancelation, Rife elaborated more on his unconventional apology dedicated to his critics, insisting that it wasn’t a calculated response but an instinctive humorous rebuttal. He adamantly states that he didn’t do anything wrong, perceiving those who found his joke offensive as weak-minded rather than addressing the misinterpretation of his joke.

Matt Rife delves into the wider reaction on social media to his unconventional response against his critics. He highlights how social media algorithms, like on Twitter, drive the visibility of controversies by keeping them confined to the concerned parties, creating the illusion of a more extensive outrage. Rife narrates how his faux apology idea, conceived spontaneously during a car ride and executed on Instagram, evoked laughter and gave rise to further conversations on other platforms.

He asserts that this incident won him many fans, as people, unfamiliar with his comedy, found his humorous response against his ‘cancelation’ appealing and innovative. This, according to Rife, was evidence of the majority’s exhaustion with the politically correct culture and expectations the society has placed on comedians.

In this context, Jordan Peterson brings up a critical point about the potential misstep of comedians apologizing when faced with backlash. He believes that apologizing to those who were not genuine fans to begin with, and thus weren’t genuinely upset, rob comedians of attracting a broader audience who might applaud their defiance.

Validating Peterson’s point, Rife shares his analytical observation of having gained more fans after the incident. He acknowledges that while his controversial joke about domestic violence may not have been his finest, it introduced him to a wider audience, who explored and appreciated his other works.

Rife further discusses the dichotomy among the extreme reactions to his controversy. He underlines how in today’s fraught political climate, when one group expresses outrage, another group instinctively supports the targeted individual—in this case, Rife—resulting in a balance that has ultimately been beneficial for him, despite the initial backlash. He reveals an increase in his fanbase, including many who hadn’t known about him before the controversy, indicating the accidental promotion his work received amidst the backlash.