Comedian Jenée: People are Idiots

Defining Traits

In regard to the gender-confused American Idol auditioner: I liked that judge Randy came right out and asked him if he’s a male, unafraid to acknowledge his disparate appearance. There’s this underlying belief in our society that it’s wrong to point out people’s differences. As a result, many people end up referring to others in confusing terms because they’re afraid the most obvious characteristics are too offensive to mention. It happens all the time but the best example I’ve experienced went something like this:

Friend: Listen to what happened to Barney Flarney* (not his real name)
Me: I don’t think I know a Barney Flarney
Friend: Sure you do. He’s tall-over six feet, wears flannel shirts and cut off gloves.
Me: Doesn’t ring a bell.
Friend: He always hangs out with Steve and Bobby.
Me: I don’t think I know him.
Friend: I know you know him. He came into some money and drives a new Mercedes.
Me: Maybe I’ve never met him.
Friend: You have. He’s uh…dark.
Me: Do you mean black?
Friend: Well, yeah, but he’s very dark…….. He has burns over 70% of his body.
Me: Oh the burn guy! Sure I know the burn guy! Everybody knows the burn guy!

(Before anybody accuses me of mocking him, I should note that’s essentially how he referred to himself).

The point being it’s ridiculous to describe random qualities a person possesses when there’s one in particular that clearly identifies the person. Don’t make me guess who the blue-eyed blonde you’re talking about is when all you have to say is she has a “pre-Trim Spa, Anna Nicole Smith-sized rack.” And don’t tell me about the sweet, quiet girl when you can tell me she has a “pre-Trim Spa, Anna Nicole Smith-sized body.”

Quite frequently I experience people’s circumvention of descriptions having to do with race, sexual orientation, body shape, handicaps, etc. even though that feature might separate the person a bit among others within our mutual frame of reference. Perhaps they think it’s PC to avoid partitioning people based on attributes that have been the basis for much discrimination. But to me, eschewing the obvious implies it’s something shameful. If it’s a biological trait (like skin color), there’s no reason for shame and if it’s a chosen trait (like sporting a porn star moustache), I say: out the fool.

I’ll show how important it is to stop this dilution of the English language. I’ll write the PC descriptions of some famous people along with the real world descriptions. Which would you prefer to see in the Final Jeopardy round?

I’m not saying it’s necessary to use harsh terms like “tub of lard” to describe people, just don’t run down 20 traits before you get to, “He has no arms or legs.”

The Religious Wrong

On Thursday night, I saw my first preview for The Book of Daniel, a quirky new dramedy about an Episcopalian priest and his dysfunctional family. I thought it looked interesting but I probably wouldn’t have sought out the program. Then I read that several NBC affiliates had removed the show from their schedules in response to some boohooing from religious groups. That got my attention. No matter what the critics or fans say about a show, nothing is more likely to get me to tune in than hearing the Religious Right has a problem with it. I think they should do away with the current stars and thumbs in ratings and implement a system of crosses for each cult, I mean religious group, who opposes the show. The more the crosses, the more likely it is I’ll like it.

I wasn’t quite clear where the pre-premiere controversy came from. Ok, the priest is a Vicodin-popping hottie (Aidan Quinn) who has regular chit-chats throughout the day with American Idol runner-up Bo Bice. Or maybe that’s supposed to be Jesus. As far as I know, taking painkillers is neither unlawful nor immoral. And I thought religious dudes talked to their imaginary friend all the time. It could be worse- he could be carrying on with Ryan Seacrest. Then there’s Father Hottie’s wife who’s quite fond of her martinis. Again, not a sin unless she’s drinking cheap vodka. They have a teenage daughter who gets arrested for selling pot. I’ll give the religious groups that one, though I’d have to put that in the category of “illegal but not sinful.” They have an adopted Chinese son who’s half naked in every scene as he tries to make it with his girlfriend. The only sin there is the warm feelings I get when I see this stud, who’s quite possibly a minor. Rounding out the family is the oldest son who’s a gay Republican. Clearly, he’s the most objectionable character on the show, being a Republican and all. But methinks the uproar is over the fact that both he and the show’s creators are gay. Oh wait, I don’t have to just presume that, a spokesman for the American Family Association came right out and said that was the problem.

The same spokesman went on to say, “This was not a realistic portrayal of a minister’s life. This was so far beyond the pale, it was almost a comic strip version.” Whoever said that television portrayals had to be realistic? Does anybody believe there’s even one street in America with fortysomething women who always look as fabulous as those of Wisteria Lane or that Jack Bauer can save the world in 24 hours without ever encountering rush hour traffic?

I watched the first two episodes of The Book of Daniel last night to see if there was something missing from the news reports that got the religious groups so upset. There was no bashing of religion or religious figures (as I’d hoped there would be). It was basically about a guy and his family who make some mistakes. Heaven forbid that a priest should be portrayed as (gasp!) human! Even if he wasn’t, what makes religious groups believe they should be above parody when every other group is subject to it? Even more disturbing is the fact that these tv stations give in to the complaints.

A few weeks ago, some Catholic group complained about a recent South Park episode with the following premise:

A statue of the Virgin Mary is believed to be bleeding from its rear end, inspiring faithful parishioners to flock from miles around to be healed by the miraculous blood.

Eventually, Pope Benedict XVI is called in to investigate, whereupon he determines that the statue is actually menstruating and thus is nothing special.

“A chick bleeding out her vagina is no miracle,” the pope declares in the episode. “Chicks bleed out their vaginas all the time.”

Comedy Central appeased the group by removing the episode from a scheduled rerun and possibly even permanently. I thought it sounded pretty funny so I got my hands on the episode. It starts with the kids mocking an Asian man’s accent then features a drunk father driving the kids home. He instructs one of the kids to hold the wheel so he can urinate in a bottle. He gets pulled over and arrested and later forces his eight-year-old kid to drive so he doesn’t violate the terms of his DUI. It’s one incident after another where characters’ behavior either inflict or have the potential to inflict harm on others and the Catholic group bitches about a female statue miraculously undergoing a natural biological process. Maybe they were upset because it was such an accurate portrayal of the type of believers who will pay $28,000 for a grilled cheese sandwich that appears to have the Virgin Mary on its crust.

Everybody’s entitled to complain when they’re not happy about something. If I couldn’t, this blog would be empty. It just seems to me that with the sort of resources these groups have, perhaps they should focus their energies on more productive endeavors, like getting Jerry Falwell’s bigoted ministries off the airways. At the very least, I hope tv stations will stop placating these morons and realize sin is in!

Can We Still Tease Pollacks?

The country of Kazakhstan is threatening to sue comedian Sascha Baron Cohen because one of his characters, Kazakhstani journalist Borat Sagdiyev, ridicules its people.

Are they serious? Can a freakin’ country sue for slander???

For those unfamiliar, Cohen is the star of the very funny Da Ali G Show, which airs in the U.S. on HBO. His main character is Ali G, a Cockney dude decked in rapper gear who primarily assaults political figures from around the globe with inane questions. The humor isn’t as much in his persistent denseness as it is in the responses from his interview subjects, who delicately indulge his stupidity to save face.

Cohen’s second character is the aforementioned Kaz (I can’t spell it out anymore- they need to buy some vowels) journalist Borat. This guy’s also clueless, but he’s lovable clueless. He’s the naiive foreigner trying to understand a language and culture that are totally unfamiliar to him. The fact that the character is from Kaz is almost irrelevant. He could be from any non-English speaking country and his antics would be just as funny.

Somehow the Kaz people have been oblivious to the Borat character through his five years on the air in the UK and America. I guess they don’t get HBO or BBC over in Kaz. But apparently they do get their MTV, because it was his recent hosting job on the 2005 MTV Europe Music Awards that got their burkas in a bunch.

I watched the awards ceremony (anybody who’s read more than a few of my blogs can guess why) and I thought he was hilarious. After Madonna’s opening number he said, “It was very courageous of MTV to start the show with a genuine transvestite. He was very convincing. It was only his hands and his testisatchels that gave it away.” He introduced performers by other bands’ names and closed the show with, “To the world, I love you! Apart from Uzbekistan. Assholes.” It was a rare occasion when I considered an awards show host entertaining instead of annoying.

But the Kaz foreign ministry disagrees with me and held a press conference yesterday on the matter:

We do not rule out that Mr. Cohen is serving someone’s political order designed to present Kazakhstan and its people in a derogatory way.

Do they actually think anybody has an agenda against Kaz? For that matter, do they actually think that a week ago more than three people knew or cared where Kaz is? They should realize this is good publicity for them. Borat put them on the map- literally. He should be their hero. They can’t possibly think their bustling tourism industry could be severely affected by one outlandish character’s appearance on an MTV awards show. Nobody’s going to be packed and ready to go to Kaz only to declare, “I heard that Borat guy mention cow punching is a sport over there. Maybe we should go somewhere more civilized and exciting like E. Timor.”

The whole world talks shit about Americans and it’s usually not in jest. But our politicians don’t hold press conferences every time it happens because we know we’ve got it good here. It kind of relates to the esteem issues I mentioned in my last two blogs: when you’re confident with who and what you are, you don’t really care what anybody else thinks. The Kaz government needs to just chill because taking a comic to court over a few little jokes makes them look much dumber than anything Borat says or does.

Fucked up Perspective

When I decided I absolutely had to buy Green Day’s American Idiot album, I was on the road and stopped at the first store I thought might carry it: Wal-Mart. I couldn’t find it on the shelves so I asked a salesperson who told me they don’t sell albums with “explicit lyrics.” The fact that Wal-Mart sells bullets but won’t carry music with profanity is perfectly logical because we’ve all read the statistics on how many kids die each year from the word “fuck.”

It really is amazing to me that America, the land of the free, still has such screwed up priorities. Howard Stern has been practically forced off the public airwaves, while Tom Leykis gets to propagate misogynism to young impressionable men because he’s a bit more proficient with euphemisms. Connoisseurs of comedy have to pay to watch a quality sitcom like Curb Your Enthusiasm just because it contains a few naughty words while Joey rapidly contributes to the dumbing down of Americans on network television.

It’s not that I particularly like profanity. In fact, when someone uses it excessively they just sound ignorant. But even worse are the people who can never say a so-called “dirty word” or they use it in a censored fashion. Do people really think they’re somehow classier for saying, “the f word” instead of saying, “fuck?” I cringe when I see somebody write “n*gger” when what they mean is “nigger,” as if it’s the letter “i” that has oppressed black people all these years and a cute little asterisk somehow softens the word.

A woman I know told a tale about how upset her friend became when a guy called her “the c word.” Give me a break. You walk up to any woman and say, “You’re the c word” and she’ll be laughing too hard to get offended. Tell me he called her a “cunt” and maybe I’ll sympathize with her (unless, of course, she is one). Otherwise, don’t bother telling a story if you can’t tell it accurately.

I remember my sophomore English teacher telling the class, “Instead of calling somebody an ‘asshole,’ call him a ‘dolt’ or ‘dullard.’” That’s one hell of an English teacher who instructs his class to water down their statements with ineffectual words. Sadly, I think his message reflects the backward mentality of too many Americans: it’s perfectly fine to express a negative sentiment as long as you use an acceptable combination of letters.

I know I’m not saying anything new or profound here, I just really can’t comprehend the hang up people have with certain words. Let’s get the proper perspective on the problems that actually harm our society. But leave the vowels alone.

Frankly, I’m glad that I was unable to purchase American Idiot, an album that deals so much with the bullshit and hypocrisy in America, at Wal-Mart. Those sanctimonious assholes don’t deserve my 14 bucks.