advertisement

COLUMN: Young women should take advice from Tina Fey and avoid Tucker Max

Monday, May 23, 2011 | 5:55 p.m. CDT; updated 11:41 a.m. CDT, Tuesday, May 24, 2011

When I think about the fact that we live in a world where Tucker Max is not only famous but admired and praised, I begin to question American society more than Alec Baldwin or the French do.

On the other hand, when I think about the fact that we live in a world where Tina Fey is also famous, I smile to myself and press play on my audiobook version of her autobiography, “Bossypants” (which, for the record, has left me LOLing and spitting out my Diet Coke all week. Everyone, read it).

I guess to call Tucker Max “famous” might be an overstatement as he isn’t exactly a household name (unless you’re surveying the houses located on East Campus or in The Cottages, in which case, many brahs would beg to differ). For those left wondering who this person with two dog’s names is, let me save you the trip to Wikipedia: “He chronicles his drunken and sexual encounters in the form of short stories on his website TuckerMax.com, which has received millions of visitors since Max launched it in 2002, making him an Internet celebrity.” He also turned these stories into a book, titled “I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell,” which, much to my dismay, made The New York Times Bestseller List three years in a row.

Now usually, Max is left in the portion of my brain where I store thoughts of people I dislike but just don’t feel the need to ever think about, like Glenn Beck or the kid who ate my snack while I gave show-and-tell in kindergarten. I’m not a hater and would rather spend my time enjoying people I actually like than loathing people I dislike.

However, I recently caught wind of one of Max’s tweets, which read: “To Women: We don’t give a f*** about your shoes. We care about your body. Go to the gym, not the mall. From: All straight men.” For the record, I only saw this tweet because a male friend retweeted it (This person later apologized and claimed he doesn’t even follow Tucker Max). I responded to this person by saying, “To Men; Never retweet Tucker Max. Especially if it involves him telling women to go to the gym. From: Every woman ever.”

I can only hope that every woman ever would back me up on this. I mean, I like going to the mall and the gym, and I can confidently tell you I don’t buy shoes for men (At 5’9”, I wouldn’t own one pair of heels if I were buying them for the male species.) or go to yoga class for men (Does anyone really care about my Savasana meditation? No.). The fact that Tucker Max and his band of idiotic followers would assume that everything a woman does is to impress a man makes me throw up in my mouth a little. And I know that my glasses-wearing, comedy-writing idol Ms. Tina Fey would have to agree.

In “Bossypants,” Fey touches on a lot of issues related to the female body. From Photoshop to skin care, she comes to a hilariously unfortunate conclusion for all women hoping to achieve perfection: “Now every girl is expected to have Caucasian blue eyes, full Spanish lips, a classic button nose, hairless Asian skin with a California tan, a Jamaican dance hall ass, the hips of a nine-year-old boy, the arms of Michelle Obama and doll tits. The person closest to achieving this is Kim Kardashian, who was made by Russian scientists to sabotage our athletes. Everyone else is struggling."

I’m quite certain Tucker Max would prefer this lab creation of a woman to anyone who simply goes to the gym instead of the mall, and this is why I just can’t stand the guy. My biggest problem with him, though, comes from the fact that he has FEMALE fans (or fans at all, really). That is correct, the man who gleefully calls himself an "asshole" is liked by 361,277 people on Facebook – and by the looks of it, nearly half of them are women. In the Facebook community, 454,135 members are also a fan of his book (most likely listed on their profiles along with, “I don’t read,” I mean come on, people).

I understand that college kids, myself included, like to hear funny stories that involve people getting drunk. However, if you take a trip to Max’s website, it is apparent that his sexual exploits take center stage and that he has absolutely no regard for anyone else on this planet but himself. He admits this.

I talked with my friend and fellow Vox editor Caitie Carter about why people, and more specifically, girls, like him. She has a theory that they might be trying to be “one of the guys” or “a guys’ girl”: something I’ve heard before, but about liking hockey or watching "Entourage." These excuses are marginally understandable at best, but quite honestly, they just scream, “I have no self esteem.”

Washington Post columnist Jaclyn Friedman, who is also the editor of “Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape,” tackled this very same issue in a 2009 column about Max. Although I give feminist props to the writer, I felt like we were on completely different pages when I finished reading. She summed up her opinions on why the women of my generation love him when she said, “Women who love Tucker Max feel rebellious because he shocks their parents and their preachers.”

My refutation to her is that this isn’t "Footloose."

I grew up in a Midwestern, somewhat-small-town suburb, and the “cool” thing to do wasn’t to refute and rebel against our parents and preachers. In fact, anyone I knew who actually “had” a preacher did so because they were religious and enjoyed it. I think to assume that our entire generation is sex-crazed because of a pro-abstinence upbringing of Sunday sermons and dance-free Saturdays is a major generalization that’s borderline ridiculous.

With that being said, I don’t have the answers. I just have a plea for all the gals, and my plea is this: Don’t let jerks be jerks. When talking about how men try to trick women into thinking they’re in competition with one another, Fey says, “Don’t be fooled. You’re not in competition with other women. You’re in competition with everyone.” I think all young women should take this to heart and realize that you’re never going to beat a man at a job or at anything if you let him think he can treat you terribly, as Max does to presumably every woman he meets.

Fey goes on to say, “My dream for the future is that sketch comedy shows become a gender-blind meritocracy of whoever is really the funniest.”

My dream for the future is that more young women take Fey’s advice in realizing that men aren’t better than them instead of reading chauvinistic and, frankly, quite disgusting crap written by Tucker Max.

We grew up on the Spice Girls, ladies, so remember that girl power and exercise it in your personal and professional lives. If you learn to love yourself, you’ll realize that you don’t want a guy like Tucker Max or a guy that likes Tucker Max to like you. And that fact will put you ahead in the competition with everyone. 

Amanda Koellner is a graduate of the magazine sequence at the Missouri School of Journalism. She is a columnist for the Missourian and a music department editor for Vox.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Paul Allaire May 23, 2011 | 6:40 p.m.

Yesterday I saw someone who looks a little like you walking downtown in pumps so tall that she could not straighten her legs when she walked. She sauntered up the block as uncomfortably as you could imagine. I thought about telling her that she was lending credence to the legends of blond stupidity, and then realized that she may have dyed her hair.
The reason she couldn't straighten her knees is because her ankles were so out of shape that she wasn't able to stretch them enough to stand up straight. On closer examination I thought that she definitely needed a trip to the gym or at least a few minutes stretching out. Who do you suppose, exactly, that she was trying to impress?
If you think I'm making this up, go be outside some of the bars on Broadway on a Friday or Saturday evening and see the same thing times 100, albeit maybe not exactly as pathetic as the example I just attempted to describe. Hell, I would tell ANYONE to go to the gym. Whatever you think of so and so, who I have never heard of, he can't be as repulsive as some of the people I see walking around here. Or trying to walk around here...

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 23, 2011 | 8:54 p.m.

Since you inspired my curiosity I had to read some of the things that whats his name wrote and all I started to wonder why. Disgusting? Maybe. But what do you think about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE_v1HbPe...

(Report Comment)
Corey Parks May 24, 2011 | 7:01 a.m.

LOL Pretty funny link Paul

I also hate free speech Amanda. I think the Govt should censor people like this.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking May 24, 2011 | 8:05 a.m.

A lot of women like "jerks". They're more exciting and unpredictable than "nice guys". I think some women just like the adventure/shock value aspect of someone like that.

To each their own.

DK

(Report Comment)
tina fey May 24, 2011 | 9:17 a.m.

Like, I agree that Tucker Max is a MCP - male chauvinistic pig - but, like, I understand why he exploits, like, TAW - tragically air-headed women. Like, so many young girls today, like, OMG, are basic, like, they can twitter while driving and facebook while studying, and, like, they can eat yogurt while wearing a midriff and a belly ring, and like, LOL, shop at the mall and read a headline on the Internet that mentions a book about women's liberation. Like, I TOTALLY understand why Tucker Max targets these, like, GURLZZZZZ -smh. And, like, Amanda Koellner is SO much better that Tucker or these girls I, like, am talking about. She is like, a journalism major, like, how awesome is that. I mean, like, just ask her what she is going to do, like, when she grows up, and she will, like, totally not be like these TAW - tragically air-headed women.

(Report Comment)
Michelle Markelz May 24, 2011 | 11:20 a.m.

@CoMissourian: Every time I read the comments section of this website it makes me wish ages were required alongside REAL full names. I just want to know how many 40-somethings are using texting language while poking fun at students who are trying to make it their careers to be professional writers. For the record, I am 20.

@Paul: Thank you for liberating all of us women from the shackles of high heels. Here I thought we would be bound to a life of podiatric strife, but you, sir, have opened my eyes. Never mind that professional women nearly always are expected to wear heels. I bet their employers would prefer they wear shape-ups so they can tone while on the job. But why even talk about professionalism? Women's real jobs are in the home, and they certainly don't need heels there. Am I right?

I think you missed a main point of Koellner's column: women do not calculate their every decision to impress men, or anyone. Some times they just do things for themselves —shocker!

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 12:04 p.m.

"Like, I agree that Tucker Max is a MCP - male chauvinistic pig - but, like, I understand why he exploits, like, TAW - tragically air-headed women. Like, so many young girls today, like, OMG, are basic, like, they can twitter while driving and facebook while studying, and, like, they can eat yogurt while wearing a midriff and a belly ring, and like, LOL, shop at the mall and read a headline on the Internet that mentions a book about women's liberation. Like, I TOTALLY understand why Tucker Max targets these, like, GURLZZZZZ -smh. And, like, Amanda Koellner is SO much better that Tucker or these girls I, like, am talking about. She is like, a journalism major, like, how awesome is that. I mean, like, just ask her what she is going to do, like, when she grows up, and she will, like, totally not be like these TAW - tragically air-headed women."

FLMAO!!!!!

"@Paul: Thank you for liberating all of us women from the shackles of high heels."

Think nothing of it.

"Never mind that professional women nearly always are expected to wear heels. For the record, I am 20."

Well then, it sounds like you have a lot of professional experience. What was your profession? Would it be other "professional" women making this requirement? Or would it be some male chauvinist pigs?

"I think you missed a main point of Koellner's column: women do not calculate their every decision to impress men, or anyone."

This directly contradicts the last quote, the one about expectations for professional women. Clearly something is missing here. Possibly it is your honesty?

"Some times they just do things for themselves —shocker!"

All things are possible. Yet somehow I cannot imagine that someone who is wearing shoes that almost completely inhibit their ability to walk is doing it for themselves. That much is self evident.

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield May 24, 2011 | 12:14 p.m.

"Every time I read the comments section of this website it makes me wish ages were required alongside REAL full names."

That's often easy enough to find out. For example, if the poster is a registered Boone County voter, you can get his/her year of birth from the county clerk's office. Or you can plug the poster's last name into the Tribune's online archives to get his/her age when arrested and then calculate to the current year.

(Report Comment)
Jon Hetheriton May 24, 2011 | 12:47 p.m.

Is this the same Paul Allaire that punched a 50 year old woman in the face in 2005? I think it is. Yes, please, enlightened sir, tell us your views on women's lib and how they should behave. We are all on the edge of our seats.

http://michellemalkin.com/2005/04/25/ano...

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 1:16 p.m.

John. If your wife or daughter hits me there is a good chance I will at least start to hit that person back despite any previous bogus arrests for doing exactly that. If you have a problem with that just let me know and I'll tell you where to come find me. I see you got on here just for the purpose of trifling with me about the smallest trifle you could, mainly because you can't find anything else to trifle me about. Perhaps you are mad because I chased away your source of trickle down education, fRANK Christian and Mikey Williams. Don't worry, there are plenty of others standing ready to pour their "kool-aid" down your throat. I read the blog you just linked to and I see you, who now posted a single comment, already have a source. You obviously have an agenda, and a most underhanded way to advance it. Good for you.

Press a little more and I'll have one too. And I have to agree with Michelle on at least one thing. I'm glad you came on here with your real name.

(Report Comment)
Jon Hetheriton May 24, 2011 | 1:35 p.m.

Nice response. I had yet to see such a glaring example of hypocrisy on this board but you gave me all the nudging I needed to sign up. I'm not sure 3rd degree assault is "trifle", but to each their own. I also couldn't care less about your opinion on agendas, I merely Googled your assault and picked the first of literally hundreds of accounts (how's it feel to be famous?). I have never read the blog in question nor do I care to, it just contained the information needed to show my point.

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 2:29 p.m.

John, I sincerely disbelieve you. You didn't look up the tribune. You looked up a stale article that was essentially copied by one of the most vile media personalities that I can think of. That site would not show up had you looked up an article on the tribune. I google my name occasionally and the first hundred hits have to do with a Paul Allaire who was instrumental in the administration of Xerox corporation. So you already knew about what you looked up and that makes you a liar. And I did not contradict myself once. If (whatever female you have an attachment to) hits me while I am not paying close enough attention and manages to catch me off guard, there is a strong possibility that I will strike that person back out of nothing more than a surprise, just the same as I would you, except I would be much slower to stop for you. If I were to see it coming then I probably wouldn't mainly because there is a deeply ingrained stigma, right or wrong, in my mind and in others that it is wrong to hit women, regardless of my being "assaulted". Had I noticed that particular woman moving to strike me then I would have easily been able to laugh it off. I was actually in a good mood that day.
At this point I will add that I have been in situations where if someone hit me it was not because of a petty reason such as something I said but rather because they were intending to hurt me, kill me, or steal from me. I actually tend to freak out when someone as much as lays a hand on me, particularly when there is or has been any kind of confrontation. That is a learned trait. I was not always this way. I believe that if you and I shared some of the same experiences you would be the same.

But you know this. And it doesn't matter to you. You have an agenda. Your only purpose on here is to badger me because my viewpoint on unrelated subjects differs strongly from your own and you therefore find it necessary to continue another person's underhanded attempt at character assassination. For example, "(how's it feel to be famous?)" is a question that indicates you have held some sort of grudge for a long time. Try to hide that if you feel it necessary, but you are as transparent as a clear running stream on a calm day.

And at this point I'm telling you nicely to back off. In light of your creepy underhandedness, I don't know if I can say that in a nicer way.

(Report Comment)
Jon Hetheriton May 24, 2011 | 2:45 p.m.

I have to apologize if I creeped you out, not my intent. I will leave you to continue the good fight. Just keep in mind it was not I that assassinated your character.

(Report Comment)
Amanda Koellner May 24, 2011 | 3:05 p.m.

-Paul, after you described the girl in heels, you went on to say, "Whatever you think of so and so, who I have never heard of, he can't be as repulsive as some of the people I see walking around here. Or trying to walk around here..." I was a bit taken aback by this comment and the general negativity of this entire thread, as I thought one thing everyone could agree on is that Tucker Max is a pretty despicable person.
If you visit Tucker Max's website (www.tuckermax.com), you can see that among other things, he's proud to "sleep with more women than is safe or reasonable, and just generally act like a raging dickhead." I personally do not believe that young women wearing heels around Columbia are more repulsive than the person I just described, but I suppose we can agree to disagree.
My point in this column, as Michele touched on, is that I hope young women can learn to respect themselves enough to see that they are completely equal to men and that they don't have to force themselves to read and pretend to enjoy stories about a young man disrespecting women for a living.

-Tina Fey, I'm not sure what you were striving to accomplish by mocking me, but I wonder how you would have responded if a middle-aged woman would have written this column. If you'd like to actually discuss this piece without using cliches and stereotypes about today's young women, I would be more than happy to.

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 3:10 p.m.

Thus implying that I did.
You didn't hear a thing I said.

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 4:26 p.m.

My last comment was for "jon". Now for the author...
"I was a bit taken aback by this comment and the general negativity of this entire thread, as I thought one thing everyone could agree on is that Tucker Max is a pretty despicable person."

Juvenile? Yes. Disgusting? Probably. But honest. If he talks or writes like that has given anyone every clue they should need. Admittedly I only read one of his stories, and one other from a young woman who intentionally had sex with him. Someone pursuing anything with him obviously knew what they are in for. So why is he the despicable one? There is a gender divide in your critique. It takes two to tango. Possibly you can provide me a link that shows me a victim.

"I personally do not believe that young women wearing heels around Columbia are more repulsive than the person I just described."
"after you described the girl in heels, you went on to say, "Whatever you think of so and so, who I have never heard of, he can't be as repulsive as some of the people I see walking around here. Or trying to walk around here"

I should have been a bit more clear in what I said. I enjoy watching young women in heels. Even if they can barely walk. Sometimes especially then. But I don't enjoy watching people who are terribly out of shape walking around in any sort of garb, particularly not when they can help it, and especially in heels. That just sort of kills the whole mystique. Kind of like that guy did on that video. Except at least he/she put things in perspective. And made me laugh quite a bit.
Which brings me to the point. You launched your criticism of someone for linking a statement that said girls should spend less time shopping for shoes and more time taking care of themselves. Admittedly he said it in a cruder manner, one that was intended to stir you up the same as Anne Coulter might have while standing in her miniskirt and six inch stilettos. And it grabbed your attention. And you made him more famous.
But the essence of what he said is really some good advice. I know that a lot of people spend a lot of money on clothes, skin care, make up, jewelry, and even automobiles sometimes in an effort to make themselves more presentable or attractive. And sometimes that is like a pig trying to apply lipstick, be the pig male or female. But at the end of the day when you park your car, get out of your clothes and jewelry and hopefully wash off your make up you are still the same person you were before you had spent all of that money. This is not the case if you had been exercising, eating well and generally maintaining good physical hygiene, which I should also do better. When you do those things, your health radiates regardless of your clothes, unless they are really awful clothes. You feel better all the way to the bone. Being well dressed or groomed can make you feel better temporarily, but being in shape will make you feel better completely and keep you from the doctor.
Continued...

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 4:28 p.m.

I sometimes hear people boast about their physical ineptitude, or their lack of desire maintenance. Generally, a few years later, the result is apparent and at that point most people only make furtive steps to turn the tide, if at all. People talk as if being out of shape is a part of their personality. I don't agree, but if so, it is a bad part.

When I say that someone should be in shape I don't mean that they should fit into a certain size. That is ridiculous. And that is what most women seem to be doing when they launch into an exercise program. And that is why they get frustrated and quit. And that is probably why you are taking offense to the remark in question, and then to me. And I maintain that someone who is trying to fit a certain size is >>>definitely<<< trying to impress others. I see people in all sizes and shapes that look great. And I see a lot of people who don't and mostly from not trying.
The bottom line, (no pun) is that it is your life. You can choose to check out in twenty years or you can choose to check out in ninety years. Maintaining your health is something that you should do for yourself, and just maybe your family if someone is depending on you. That someone might think you look better should come second to that. But please, don't pretend that when you get dressed up it isn't for the way that others perceive you. It is. So let's start being honest, engage in some critical thinking, and * the whole gender gap thing. It's really stupid.

(Report Comment)
Amanda Koellner May 24, 2011 | 5:14 p.m.

Paul, I completely agree that it takes two to tango, and I am in no way defending any of the women who have slept with Tucker Max. I do however, believe that just because he CAN get a woman to sleep with him, get her to agree to have anal sex with him, proceed to have a friend secretly film it - sans the woman's consent - from a closet and then share the story with the world (it's on his website, and it's quite horrifying) doesn't mean he SHOULD. Alas, he does, and people eat it up. In this column, I was just trying to get at the heart of the WHY people find these stories so enthralling, especially women my age.

I'm also aware that physical health trumps beauty gained through material items such as make up and high heels. I think your argument here strayed entirely too far from my original point in this column, because no one is going to argue that good health is important. However, I would hope that perhaps personality or a girl's mind might factor into Max's original tweet a bit more than what he presented as our options: either A.) Go to the mall or option B.) Go to the gym. He has no regard for anything deeper than a woman's appearance. But I get it, he's found a way to make money being an a**hole, and he's eating it up. I also get that he's probably much smarter than any of the women knowingly engaging in these sexual activities with him when he's treating them quite terribly.

That isn't where my problem lies. My problem lies in other men retweeting what he said because they think it's okay to tell a woman how to present herself with little regard for her personality. My problem also lies in women excepting this fate and thinking that everything they do is simply to find and please a man. Yes, he is honest. Yes, woman are consenting to his actions. Yes, health is important. But, I believe this column strived to delve deeper than that. So, my apologies if I failed or if you simply cannot see that.

(Report Comment)
Victoria Guida May 24, 2011 | 5:30 p.m.

The sad thing is, Amanda, I'm not so sure Tucker Max is wrong when he assumes women do stuff like wear high heels to look good for men. There is also, of course, looking good for other women, but that invariably brings us back to competition among women for men's attention. The issue here, and I think this may have been what you were getting at, is that Tucker Max's antics work at all. He is a living experiment whose results show that many, many women have very low opinions of themselves. This, of course, is nothing new.

The problem with Tucker Max is that he reassures men that it is okay to treat women badly, and that it will in fact result in success with women. Because it will. I don't know whether to blame men or women (both, I'm sure, bear some blame), but far too many women *like* to feel inferior to men. They like to be taken care of. Because for thousands of years, it has been pounded into their psyches that they need to be.

Fighting against this will take time. Obviously, some women are extremely empowered and successful. And we should do a better job of using those people as role models, instead of people like Kim Kardashian. That doesn't mean that women shouldn't strive to look good. They should, everyone should. But the issue is that men like Zach Galifianakis can become famous, when women of comparable appearance and talent could never be. The issue is that Marie Curie is the only woman scientist well-known by society, that WNBA players are often called "ugly," that people say Erin Andrews should be thankful she was filmed naked in her hotel room against her permission because it will "boost her career" (as if any woman who wants to be taken seriously would appreciate that). The issue is that some men still like exerting power over women because that's what it means to be a man. Society tells us: men be more powerful than women, or you are not a man. Women, be too weak to do some things, or you are not a woman.

The issue here is that women don't want to control the way their gender is seen because they still want guys to like them. But guys should be taught to like that kind of girl. And some are. More should be.

Tucker Max is a douche bag, sure. But he isn't the problem. He's just figured out the system and points out some uncomfortable truths in the process.

(Report Comment)
Amanda Koellner May 24, 2011 | 5:55 p.m.

Victoria, I think you make some great points, and I really agree with most of your comment. I think the conclusion of this column, where I said, "If you learn to love yourself, you’ll realize that you don’t want a guy like Tucker Max or a guy that likes Tucker Max to like you. And that fact will put you ahead in the competition with everyone.", was my main point. I realize Tucker Max isn't the end all be all of the relationships between young men and women, but reading that tweet ignited something in me, so I ran with it to make a broader opinion in this column.

I also agree with you when you say, "The issue here is that women don't want to control the way their gender is seen because they still want guys to like them. But guys should be taught to like that kind of girl." I think I just wanted to point out that there are many other young men out there like Tucker Max, and that women who endorse Max's actions aren't helping the rest of us who actually want our gender to be seen as equal to men and to one day find a man who will like "that kind of girl" (as, in turn, we will look for the kind of guy who will see us equal, unlike Max and his fans).

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield May 24, 2011 | 7:17 p.m.

"But the issue is that men like Zach Galifianakis can become famous, when women of comparable appearance and talent could never be."

Rosie O'Donnell and Roseanne Barr.

(Report Comment)
Victoria Guida May 24, 2011 | 7:39 p.m.

Jimmy — Point taken, but I would argue that part of Mr. Galifianakis' fame is *because* he is, well, overweight and unattractive, whereas Rosie O'Donnell and Roseanne Barr are famous despite that fact (and both women make much more effort in their appearances).

(Report Comment)
Jimmy Bearfield May 24, 2011 | 8:22 p.m.

Victoria, do you remember Roseanne mutilating the national anthem at a baseball game in 1990 and the grabbing her crotch? Being crude and obnoxious was her shtick for many years.

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 24, 2011 | 8:57 p.m.

You've got to be kidding. This sounds like a jealousy thing. A battle of the sexes. A competition to say who is the least inferior, defended by the premise that Rosie and Rosanne make some sort of effort regarding their physical appearance. I'd laugh but you're serious. The comedians in question earned their fame by being humble enough to completely ridicule themselves and anyone like themselves. They are completely beyond having a need for others to favor their appearance.

The first thing I remember about Rosanne is her greasy diner, her propensity to cook the most unhealthy food, and her lack of motivation to lift a finger. Somehow women saw empowerment through this, as was revealed by a slew of paperweights, tee shirts, bumper stickers, and coffee mugs. She became a celebration of American mediocrity. I remember viewing a promotional poster where she discussed her fantasy. A famous movie star who's name I can't remember was to take her to an exotic sounding Caribbean island where they would go to a restaurant and "really throw down". The reason I remember is because I always had a different idea of what throw down meant, kind of more like what I would like to do with Jimmy right about now for trying to recycle old garbage. I had to ask someone what she meant.
In that sense Zach is no different and for that matter neither are most of the people who performed in the Blue Collar Comedy Tour. However I find a bit of comic genius in their jokes and routines despite the fact that I disagree with some of the political viewpoints expressed. I can't really say the same for Rosanne. I find more humor in the fact that someone would quibble about which one of them attempts to look better, as if it makes a difference.
I recall that when I was younger I disliked anybody who was a famous celebrity that I did not identify with, be it Michael Jackson or Madonna. I now recognize this behavior for what it is - petty jealousy. And to top that you have to add gender into the equation. Stop it. Celebrities like we are discussing are nothing more than icons of our collective thought. A little bit of talent and a whole lot of luck. But one needs talent of some sort for that luck to persist.
Those people have an audience and millions of dollars and act like they have less talent than you who maybe only has a pile of debt and a bunch of papers to write. Get over it. Get over yourself. Or go be the next one of them. And remember that somewhere there is a janitor cleaning your hallway and a dishwasher washing your dishes who likely thinks similar thoughts of you.

(Report Comment)
Victoria Guida May 24, 2011 | 11:23 p.m.

Paul — I think you read way too much into my comment. First of all, the main point of my first comment has little to do with what we're now discussing. Second of all, I'm not jealous; good for Zach Galifianakis. I do know that Roseanne and Rosie are not the most glamorous of sorts, which is why I said, "Point taken." I just think that sort of thing is more out of the ordinary for women than men.

But you and Jimmy both certainly have the right to disagree. I was merely voicing my opinion.

(Report Comment)
Paul Allaire May 25, 2011 | 12:58 p.m.

I've got to say thank you all for introducing that Zach to me. He came up on some you tube clone program last night and I wound up watching several episodes of Between the Ferns and some other interviews.

FLMAO!!!!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_MvHyAZ7...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVIpY-r95...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCF-mCeW7...

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements