Tues. 12/07/03 12:35 EDT
.post #197
Okay, now to get back to your question, which was[url=Why blacks were freed and women received equal rights? - #30 by John_James]
You asked this with regard to what I said here; I said:
The “point” of this rhetorical question is that, in my opinion, a woman who learns more about (for example, World War II) does not (necessarily) make herself more attractive to Adam Carolla.
[url=Why blacks were freed and women received equal rights? - #33 by John_James]
I don’t know how to answer this question, since you’ve used the word “inferring” incorrectly.
The speaker implies, insinuates, intends;
the listener infers, interprets, construes.
When what I intend is close to what you infer, we are “communicating.”
When what I intend is far from what you infer, we are miscommunicating.
[url=Why blacks were freed and women received equal rights? - #32 by ClaytonB]
This is a minor point, but I want to stress that I did not use the word “should.”
Let me first synopsize the clip and then respond to some of your observations.
0:47 - “But, things that men don’t care about. Encourage them to wanna do things, and focus on and spend time thinking about things, that men are not interested in.”
The fact that women’s magazines feature articles which women, and not men, are interested in, makes perfect sense. What doesn’t make sense is to complain that women’s magazines (quite understandably) do this. Does Carolla’s wife complain that men’s magazines feature articles which men, and not women, are interested in? What’s ironic is that by complaining, he exhibits in himself the very behavior he ridicules in “chicks”: wanting the other person’s behavior to change so he’ll be happier. It’s neither “manly” nor logical.
2:22 - “This is the problem with chicks …”
(paraphrased): When men look at pictures of carnage in Kosovo, they’re happy to be sitting on the sofa.
When women look at pictures of white sandy beaches, they’re unhappy to be sitting on the sofa.
Well, sure. The problem here is that Carolla has got the man and the woman looking at very different things, so of course their respective reactions are going to be very different. This is not a profound observation, and it’s not a “problem with chicks.” It’s a mundane fact of human nature that seeing a situation worse than our own tends to make us grateful for what we do have, while seeing a situation better than our own tends to make us envious of what we could have.
This “theme” continues until about 3:39, at which point Carolla begins ranting “How 'bout you broads pick up a textbook every once in a while” and also “How 'bout you learn something about World War II.” Their eighteen-year-old call-in listener “Rebecca” never does have her question answered, nor does she even get a chance to ask it.
So, why does Carolla suggest that women “pick up a textbook” or “learn something about World War II”? Is it because, as you suggest, that “…perhaps they should study history and put their current situation into perspective”? On the face of it, this seems plausible. But let’s consider something you said earlier:
Although this might be Carolla’s point, it’s not a point I agree with. All humans, both women and men, act, and their human action demonstrates their dissatisfaction with their current status. We all act to improve our status, or at the very least, to prevent our status from degrading.
In your third paragraph, you point out that both women and men are materialistic.
I agree. By marrying, each hopes to get more of what she or he wants. This inevitably involves giving up something one values less to get something one values more, i.e., it’s a trade. Obviously, the less one gives up, the “better the deal,” and both sides haggle for this reason.
And this, to me, is what Carolla’s “complaining” all distills down to: He’s simply whining that he’s unhappy about having to give up so much to get what he wants. He’d rather not have to pay for expensive trips to sandy beaches in order to keep his woman happy (“happy” meaning “happy enough with what she’s getting in order to give Adam what he wants from her”).
So, while I find Carolla somewhat funny and entertaining, I don’t find what he has to say particularly profound or enlightening.
By the way, here’s another clip in which Carolla admonishes (young) women for their lack of war knowledge:
Adam Carolla – Women Don’t Know Anything About Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6t6Yfu3HEIThis seems to be a recurring peeve of his, but I find it all a bit silly. Women don’t need to “know anything about wars,” nor do they need to be funny, nor do they need to be interested in many of the things men, typically, are interested in. They already possess what they need to survive and thrive. It’s also hypocritical, since Carolla is attracted to, and married, precisely the type of woman about whom he “complains.”
His schtick seems to be “look at what big brains we men have, compared to you women.”
It’s juvenilia, a product which, apparently, one can make good money peddling.