Chatological Humor* (Updated 1.28.05)

Gene Weingarten (Richard Thompson - The Washington Post)

*Formerly known as "Funny? You Should Ask."

Gene Weingarten's controversial humor column, Below the Beltway, appears every Sunday in the Washington Post Magazine. He aspires to someday become a National Treasure, but is currently more of a National Gag Novelty Item, like rubber dog poo.

He is online, at any rate, each Tuesday, to take your questions and abuse.

He'll chat about anything.

This week's poll:
Poll B:For Women Only
Poll A:For Men Only

Weingarten is the author of "The Hypochondriac's Guide to Life. And Death" and co-author of "I'm with Stupid," with feminist scholar Gina Barreca. "Below the Beltway" is now syndicated nationally by The Washington Post Writers Group.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

_____________

Gene Weingarten: Good afternoon. Good Monday.

Sunday's column managed to offend women, fruitcakes, religious people, religious fruitcakes, aromatherapists, women aromatherapists, men who love women fruitcakes, and professional quacks. I got a lot of angry letters but my favorite is excerpted here:

...What bothers me in particular about your condescending attitude toward things that I imagine you have not looked into in any depth is not that you think it's worthless. Lots of clueless people will always believe that. But that you make it out to be a girly thing. Sort of like only women could be that stupid. And that real men know better.

Well, tally me up as the exception. I'm a 58 year old male who eats up all that new age stuff and I also think I could kick your ass. I could be wrong. And I don't think astrology or the tarot will predict the outcome. It takes three three minute rounds. Wanna find out? I think it might lead to a cleansing of both our souls.

Regards,
Alan Reeder-Camponi

----
Last week's poll proved illuminating; today, we have the opposite. Women take the poll, men try to anticipate how the women will answer.

Since I was incompetent to write the questions, I asked Chatwoman -- Liz Kelly -- to write them. She has already submitted her analysis, which I will paste in later on.

Last week, and again this week, some gay men have complained that the poll excludes them. This is true, is regrettable, and was unavoidable. Fortunately, we will address this issue foresquare next week, when the poll will be written by my colleague Hank Stuever. It will ask opinions of gay men only; others will be asked to anticipate how the gay men will respond.

(If lesbians officially complain that they are misrepresented, I will address that in due course, too. We aim to annoy ALL strata of society.)

A special thanks to Laura Prebeck, who supplied the Mercury link below. It continues my important coverage of Vaseline-related crimes.

Okay, some good comics this week. We link below to three runners up and the Comic Pick of the Week, Friday's Pearls. (Pearls is on a roll.)

Let's go.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Comic Pick of the Week:
Pearls Before Swine, (Jan. 21)

Runners Up:
Frazz, (Jan. 21)
Rhymes With Orange, (Jan. 21, you'll have to scroll back to Friday's)
Pearls Before Swine, (Jan. 24)

Also mentioned:
Man Sentenced for Open Lewdness, (The Mercury News, Jan. 19)
Below the Beltway: The Feminine Mistake, (Post Magazine, Jan. 23)

Vote in today's poll:
Women | Men

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Two questions:
How do you view Johnny Carson's place in American humor?

Is having the chat on Monday one-time or a permanent change due to your new back-of-the-magazine column location?

Gene Weingarten: It is only for today. I am going to attend Marjorie Williams's funeral tomorrow.

As far as Johnny, I think the next poster sums it up well.

_______________________

Matt Neufeld: Johnny Carson was brilliant, and he was brilliant in many, many ways. He was an entertainer -- funny; impeccable with comic timing; socially aware; a writer of great, insightful and socially-conscious jokes and observations; a great conversationalist; a journalist in several ways; a great joke-teller; a great sketch character actor; and a warm, inviting presence in entertainment, popular culture and television by just being himself. He was also talented in other ways -- he played the drums; he performed magic tricks (he started his career as a magician); he performed on radio; and he was a great host of the Academy Awards. He was a shrewd businessman. He was a family man -- yes, he was married four times, but he was married nonetheless, and he had several children. He was a friend -- either to the millions who watched him on television, or to his friends who he hung out with in his private life. And he was a mentor -- he jump-started the careers of more people in show business than probably anyone else. Johnny Carson was the gold standard, and he will be sadly missed, but always remembered. Goodnight, Johnny.

Gene Weingarten: Can anyone seriously disagree with this?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Ok Gene,

Somebody's gotta ask. As a professional, trained humorist who specializes in scatology, do you have a version of "the Aristocrats?"

Also, since I don't hang out in vaudevillian greenrooms or, alas, the Sundance film festival, this is a theory based on second-hand information, but it sounds to me like the entire point of the joke is the delivery, given that the framework is so exquisitely... lame. So maybe it's the comedic equivalent of stunt car driving -- a show-off-y kind of thing that can be gaspworthy and noteworthy and occasionally transfixing when done by skilled people who really understand comedy and have timing and experience and [parts] of brass, but in the hands of virtually anyone else, it's a pointless wreck.

Thoughts?

washingtonpost.com: Take My Wife -- Please? Well, Not Quite., (Post, Jan. 24)

Gene Weingarten: Okaaay. I was going to make this little subject the introduction to my chat today, but got preempted by the story in today's paper, which is linked to above. Read it. I'll wait right here.

Okay? Okay.

The first time I even heard of this joke, sadly, was last week. Since, however, I have developed my own version. Mine involves interactions between beloved religious figures. I am certain that I will never tell it to a roomful of more than one person.


The Aristrocrats is not a single joke, really, since its details vary so greatly with the teller, whose goal is simply to be as disgusting and offensive as possible. It is, really, not a joke so much as an icebreaker; a test of sensibilities; a plumbing (good word!) of the limits of sedition in coaxing a laugh. One reason comics laugh when they hear it is that it is a joke about their profession: About its limits. It is no coincidence that the punchline is not, actually, funny. The joke carries the challenge to somehow MAKE it funny.

Now, I have to proceed verrrry carrrrefully here, by agreement with Chatwoman Liz. Ms. Lizzie, Protector of Innocents. Listen carefully: There exists on the Web a clip of one version of this joke that can be accessed. It is the South Park segment of the movie: The joke is delivered by Cartman, to the others. They are horrified. You can probably find it, if you try. We will not help.

Here is the thing: You should not try! Really! Because the joke is truly disgusting, and would offend or discombobulate many completely reasonable, non-prudish people, even big, tough guys as well as people I would respect and love and marry and sleep with. My wife saw this clip and, though she was not offended, rolled her eyes and called it "tedious." Tedious, even though it is about ninety seconds long. My son and I did not find it tedious. We laughed till it hurt.

But we are bad people, my son and I, and I am urging all readers not to see this clip. But if you do, please report back what you think.

I do plan to see the movie.

_______________________

Psychic, OR: OK, granted, us chicks are more likely to fall for BS artists and charlatans. However, men are more inclined towards the fanatical -- Women will go to a lecture on "crossing over" or crystals, but men will go to war over a cross. Women are open to new ideas, men have their ideals ripped from their cold, dead hands after fighting to force everyone else to believe them. I am, of course, using rash generalizations -- something else that is indicative of my gender. But still...

washingtonpost.com: Below the Beltway: The Feminine Mistake, (Post Magazine, Jan. 23)

Gene Weingarten: I agree with you completely.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Gene, please help me... what am I dying of?
My left arm has been falling asleep constantly, almost whenever I lean on it. Normally, my appendages don't fall asleep unless I'm sitting or leaning in a weird position for some time. What's happening here?

Gene Weingarten: You are compressing a nerve. "Leaning on it" is the clue. You are probably fine, unless it is a presenting symptom of Lou Gehrig's Disease.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: That was a REALLY hard poll to fill out as a lesbian! For the last questions I felt like I was narrowed down to "financial solvency," "height", or "sports fanaticism." Although if my girlfriend had a really hairy back or male pattern baldness I'd probably have a problem with it...

Gene Weingarten: SEE, SEE? Lesbians don't complain -- they accommodate! They go with the flow!

_______________________

Clueless, Md.: Why have I never heard about the Aristocrats joke before? Are there other such jokes? Penn Jillette notwithstanding, I had never conflated comedy and magic before. But it seems that comics have a secret brotherhood/sisterhood, too.

This is much more fascinating to me than Illuminati theories.

Gene Weingarten: I had never heard of it either, which embarrasses me. Dave Barry knew, was surprised I didn't. BUT I GOT ME A GOOD VERSION NOW, LET ME TELL YOU. Well, okay, don't let me tell you.

_______________________

Rockville, Md.: The recent controversy with Lawrence Summers at Harvard reminds me of a theory a guy I knew at college had -- that in just about every area, men and women are on average the same, but men generally tend more to the extremes. So, on intelligence tests, men and women average the same, but more men test both as geniuses and as morons than women. And in math classes, men tend to be clustered at the top and the bottom of the class (This is true in my personal experience). Likewise, he continued, more men than woman are great athletes, but more men are completely out of shape; more men than women are great chefs, but more men can't cook at all; more men than women are neat freaks (well, so he claimed), but also more men are complete slobs.

Obviously, this "theory" completely confuses innate and cultural factors, and the "evidence" is almost all anecdotal. But it does explain some of the nonsensical theories advanced by people in your past chats: like, the claim that men can't deal with poop (which would be a surprise to male proctologists or sewer workers); or men are babies about pain (a surprise to male soldiers or football players). Your chatters proposed these because they were familiar with one extreme but not the other.

My friend also had some elaborate "biological" explanation for this theory, but this isn't Achenbach's chat, so I'll stop there. Thoughts?

Gene Weingarten: Actually, if you think about it, this is a fairly sexist theory. I know you don't mean it that way, but it is. It suggests women are incapable of reaching pinnacles of achievement, and I don't think that is true, empirically.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I'm puzzled by next-to-last sentence of lewdness story. Doesn't sound like he has any problem doing that at all.

Gene Weingarten: I know! It is a terrible sentence. He absolutely has no problems masturbating in public. He apparently has problems doing it in private.

_______________________

Snickerers Gap, Va.: Gene,
Comedy lost a great one this weekend. May Rosemary Woods rest in peace.

Gene Weingarten: Hahahahaha.

_______________________

Wondering, No More: Gene:

I have to assume, that since there is no big headline today "Deepthroat was Rosemary Woods," that Rosemary Woods was NOT Deepthroat informing your paper's ace reporters way back when. Is this true, or is it possible that Ben is waiting a day to reveal the TRUTH out of respect for her departure?

...of course, I realize that he is a newspaperman, so maybe that possibility isn't really a likely one.

Gene Weingarten: Deep Throat was male.

_______________________

Gene Weingarten: REad the next post carefully, and pause before checking the answer.

_______________________

Solve this mystery: Dear Gene,

Sticking with last week's theme of solving mysteries -- a colleague sent me the following.

Read this question, come up with an answer and then scroll down to the bottom for the result. This is not a trick question. All the information you need is provided in the four sentences below.

A woman, while at the funeral of her mother, met this guy whom she did not know. She thought the guy was amazing, her dream man! She fell in love with him instantly, but never asked for his phone number and could not find him after the funeral. A few days later she killed her sister.

Question: What is her motive in killing her sister? (Give this some thought before you answer) then scroll down for the answer.

Answer:
She was hoping that the guy would appear at the funeral again. If you answered this correctly, you think like a psychopath. This was a test by a famous American psychologist used to test if someone has the same mentality as a killer. Many arrested serial killers took part in the test and answered the question correctly.

Gene Weingarten: Wow. I love this. It is really thought provoking. Anyone out there who saw the answer? Please submit your name and address to Liz. No, no prizes. We just want to keep them on file.

_______________________

Gene Weingarten: Hi! Is anyone still here? Let me assure you that this was not our fault. It is the fault of all of your servers out there. Liz did not cause this, although I have just learned that she was employed by AOL when they had their infamous 18 hour outage in '95. The great outage of '95.

_______________________

Bowie, Md.: Submitted for your consideration:

Theory: Frazz is none other than a grown-up Calvin.

Observation #1: Timeline fits -- if Waterson created six year old Calvin in 1985, that's make him (Calvin Frazz) about 26 now.
Observation #2: They're both brilliant underachievers
Observation #3: Same haircut

Thoughts? Other observations? Is Mallett actually a nom de plume for Waterson? WHAT DID HE DO WITH HOBBES!?!

Gene Weingarten: I know Jef has addressed this question before, though briefly. Since this was submitted early, I forwarded it to him. Here is the definitive, long-form answer:

I'm flattered by the comparisons, but honestly, it'll take me the rest of my career to get anywhere close to being worth mentioning in the same sentence as Bill Watterson and Calvin. I learned a lot from following Watterson, but then, so did every other cartoonist of my generation. I just didn't bother to conceal it very well, it seems. But those are good observations. Let's have at them in reverse order:

Observation #3: The haircut. Or, rather, non-haircut. This, I imagine, is where most of the comparisons start. Frazz has messy, spiky hair because kids dig messy, spiky hair. I have messy hair. Also, since it's never really in style, it never goes out of style -- an important consideration if you have any illusions about your comic strip lasting a few years.

Observation #2: Brilliant underachievers. Well, yeah. I couldn't make them normal, and I didn't want to make them dumb. But they have that in common with all sorts of cartoon (and literary, and theatrical, and musical, etc.) characters.

Observation #1: The timeline. This is great! It's the first time I've heard this one, and it really caught me off guard. It's so close to accurate, and it never occurred to me. Technically, Frazz is 30. But he'll always be 30, so that means the timeline will be dead-on if we just wait a bit.

And finally, to the non-numbered question: If you were going to choose a nom de plume, would YOU choose "Mallett"? I'd as least choose something more of the world had a shot at pronouncing correctly. Like "Watterson."
----
World: It's Ma-LETT. -- Gene

_______________________

Help, ME: I don't think I am a psychopath. I think that is how every single woman would answer the question. Is this another gender difference?

Gene Weingarten: You are clearly a sociopath.

Please, ladies, tell me you didn't all know the answer to that question. Pleeeeease.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Gene, I have a challenge for you. I feel the same way you do about the marriage ceremony. How do I convince the man who wants to marry me that he does not want to see me heading up an aisle in a huge white dress with an audience of people making fun of the whole mess?

Gene Weingarten: You tell him that you are sorry that you are disappointing him, but that you feel very strongly that you do not want to endure this. You tell him that it has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with you. You weep a little (just a little -- you know how) and tell him that if it is terribly important to him, you will do it. At this point you need to have daubed up the tears from your face, but left your eyelashes moist. (This is a very important step.)

If that doesn't do it, you might need to try the Lysistrata thing. But I doubt it.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Let's say the Weinsteins of Miramax just called and they're making a movie of your life. What's it called, who's starring, who's directing and what is the seminal track on the soundtrack?

Gene Weingarten: It is titled "You Said Seminal."

_______________________

Aristocrats Clip: Seen it. Eh.

Maybe it's vaudevillian in the sense that it was probably a lot funnier and more shocking 60 (70?) years ago. I'm a guy in his 40s, and while I laugh out loud at Bob 'n' Bing and "The Simpsons," I'm no longer able to smile at the Stooges.

Gene Weingarten: You laughed out loud at Bob and Bing??????

No wonder you didn't find the Aristocrats funny.

_______________________

X vs. Y: Hi, Gene. This is a long post regarding male vs. female behavior, but let me assure you up front, I am not a nut. Well, mostly. Really, the pertinent fact is that I'm not the kind of nut that sends long, pointless messages to strangers. Are you feeling relaxed and trusting now? I knew you would be!

I am a woman. Most of my colleagues, probably 60-75 percent, are men. Last spring, I received as a promotional item a padded hanger of the girliest type -- gold hook, deep purple satin. I had no need for it, so I donated it to the office coat rack, which is otherwise loaded with wooden hangers. Judging from the layers of filth on most of them, they date back to the 1960s. I thought nothing more of the hanger until the fall, when I noticed the lovely purple hanger never, ever got used. In fact, not only was it not used, but the hangers on either side of it were avoided, too, at least until the weather got really cold.

I mentioned this to a couple of female colleagues who sit near the coat rack. After we finished laughing at the menfolk, we hatched a little experiment. We would all stop using the purple hanger. I would bring in a dark green padded hanger from home and add it to the collection to see if the avoidance was a matter of color or hanger style. And they would watch the coat rack and see if any of our male co-workers had the confidence in his masculinity to use either one.

Both hangers were avoided as fervently as if they contained anthrax powder. One guy sighed deeply and muttered about having to use the "lingerie hanger." In a separate incident, my colleague reported, "Another employee, as he grabbed for a padded hanger in disgust, told me not to tell anyone I saw him use the hanger. I of course asked why, in a tone showing I was perplexed how this could possibly be an issue for anyone. The reply: 'Because it's a girlie hanger. It's like driving a chick car.'"

At that point, we ended the experiment. We knew we would never get a better response than that one.

So, Gene: Can your readers, a group of intelligent, reasonable, rational beings, learn anything from this experience? And can you, as a ball-bearing being, explain why a man would choose a filthy wooden hanger over a new fabric-covered one that's actually easier on one's clothes?

Sincerely yours,
The Brownie Lady

Gene Weingarten: As it happens, the issue of padded hangers comes up, briefly, in "I'm With Stupid." It comes up in a list of things that I say would not exist in an all-male world. Others are toilet brush caddies, melon ballers,"pillow shams" and those pats of butter with embossed designs on them.

The padded clothes hangers totally confound me. What, clothes feel pain?

_______________________

Gene: "Lesbians...go with the flow!;": Ewwwww. Couldn't you come up with a better way to say that?

Gene Weingarten: I thought it was pretty good!

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Vote in today's poll:
Women | Men

_______________________

I'm still here: A sad commentary on my life I know.

Gene Weingarten: I know. I love all of you who are still here. But you poor, sad, wretches. Of course, I am still here.

_______________________

Ronald McDonaldland: Gene,

I wanted to alert you to a very important development in your impact on American pop culture. Remember that awful McDonald's commercial, where the woman abandons her salad to the care of a co-worker for an undisclosed emergency? You deduced that the only possible explanation was that she was running to the bathroom. Well, I saw the commerical the other day, and the woman now SAYS THAT SHE HAS TO TAKE A PHONE CALL! I am in awe of your power --v please use it only for good (well, good humor anyhow).

Gene Weingarten: Really? They found the need to come up with an excuse? Hahahahaha.

Or is "take a phone call" universal girl talk, the equivalent of one's grandmother falling off the roof?

_______________________

Los Angeles, Calif.: Is Honey from "Doonesbury" weirdly based on Marcy from "Peanuts?" With the glasses and the hair and the "Sirs". I can't be the first to ask this question can I?

Gene Weingarten: This is a pretty good question. I am not sure which came first, though. Honi is a Vietnam War relic, no? And Marci was fairly late in the Peanuts canon...

_______________________

Smoki NG: I don't smoke anymore so I don't know if people still use Butane lighters, but isn't there something weird about Bhutan being the first country to ban tobacco? A coincidence? I think not. This means there is a God and he/she has an odd sense of humor. Like you.

Gene Weingarten: Well, that is not as big a coincidence as is this fact: Just yesterday I was reading a book about presidential elections, and I learned an anti-aptonymic fact so startling I actually dropped the book. I admit beer was involved, but still.

In 1904, the candidate of the Prohibition Party (he got one percent of the vote) was a man named ... Silas Swallow.

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.: I'm still here Gene.

So if I promise to buy the popcorn and JuJuBees, can I go to the movie with you?

Gene Weingarten: Ooooh. Jujubes. I love jujubes. They are the hardest things on the teeth I have ever found, though.

_______________________

Pittsburgh, Pa.: Padded hangers: Sometimes, if you hang up something that is made of a materials that may wrinkle or crease easily, like cotton or linen shirts, wire hangers will leave that pointy thing in the shoulder, requiring you to iron the shirt to get it out, or end up just wearing the shirt and looking like your shoulders come to a point. The padded hangers are supposed to help eliminate this problem.

Gene Weingarten: Well, this is an argument for those big plastic ones, with the shoulders. But not pincushions.

_______________________

Gene Weingarten: Now, here is Liz's analysis of how she felt the chat results should have gone:

And now my predictions for how the poll will turn out. I know Gene won't agree, and will have his own cute explanation, but then he's a man --
and like many of his kind, has a distorted view of what is of importance to women. He means well, tho.

Like last week, "face" is the only correct answer to the first question… but not only for the same reasons as last week's query about women. To quote Gene: "Face is the only no-brainer answer here. I doubt if I know any men who would select otherwise: It is a clue to everything:
Intelligence, humor, compassion, whatnot."

The above is still true, but also compounded by the fact that - and you know this to be true - the male body is not as aesthetically pleasing as the female. Yes, men can have an attractive physique, but there is no one part that stands out from the whole. Even option B isn't really a
"thing" of beauty.

On question two, machismo is the best answer because it is the early warning system, the precursor, to all of the other undesirable qualities (save addiction). If machismo is the first thing I notice about you,
guys, you won't be around long enough to display the others.

Question three - looks like the correct answer is leading (40 pounds overweight). This can be worked on.

The last question - there is more than one right answer here, but only one wrong answer: Sports fanaticism. The others can be overlooked or changed (by a licensed hair removal/hair addition specialist); but
sports fanaticism can't be reversed, leads to La-Z-Boy recliners
interrupting the home landscape, loudness, ridiculous team logo attire
and - in extreme cases - domestic violence.

_______________________

Gene Weingarten: Now, it looks like Liz came close to predicting how women would react. And it looks like men basically, hadn't a clue. Which somehow doesn't surprise me. It's interesting that men think women give a huge crap about whether they have money. And think women would hate it if they are "insecure."


Once again we seem to be underestimating each other, don't week. I can't WAIT for next week.

_______________________

Hint, hint: With regards to the poll, what's with the five women who said Size is most important for judging attractiveness? Do these women wander through relationships in a daze of ambivalence until they get their partners' pants off? Or do they judge by feet?

Or are they just joking?

Gene Weingarten: I am afraid of those five women. I am sitting here, all scared.

_______________________

Lansing, Mich.: Are Jujubes tougher on teeth than Milk Duds? (I've never tried Jujubes - if it's not chocolate, it's not worth bothering with.)

Gene Weingarten: Ha! Milk duds! Compared to what jujubes do to your teeth, Milk duds are like ... milk.

_______________________

I'm-Not-Telling, Md.: Dear Gene,
As a practitioner of one unnamed branch of "new age" practices, more precisely a religion, I'm actually sad to say I agree with you. It is actually one of those "inside jokes" -- the somewhat embarrassing cousin, shall we say. There are a lot of needy people attracted to "new age" stuff, but it isn't restricted to women. There are a LOT of women, but some men. What's interesting is that many men get attracted to the "macho" realm that involves drinking alcohol out of a horn and yelling. Women hold hands and chant. And maybe have a rebirthing ceremony. But there's also a lot of great people who are down-to-earth. We just tend to have a high percentage of fruitcake-to-normal-people quotient. Anyone who disagrees is probably in the former category.

Gene Weingarten: Many years ago, while writing a story about a brain-dead girl who was being worshipped as a Roman Catholic saint, I got to witness first hand an extreme edge of that religion. It was startling to watch. A little unnerving.

Didn't Jesus say NOT to look for miracles?

_______________________

Gum Drop Lane, Fantasy Land: Speaking from experience as a man who lacks confidence, insecurity is the single most debilitating flaw from which a man can suffer. Nothing attracts like confidence and nothing repels faster than insecurity. Women instinctively smell it on men and reject it faster than they do machismo, sports fanaticism, bad skin and extra weight. Gene, back me up on this.

Gene Weingarten: Well, if I were a woman, I would have chosen "insecurity." But I am not a woman, which is sort of the point.

Basically on the male poll I chose the equivalent entry for what I woul dnot want in a woman -- emotional neediness.

But, see, who are you and I to talk, here.

Also, back hair!!! It REALLY bothers the ladies. Who knew??

_______________________

Anonymous: What does it say if the thing I find most attractive in a man is his mathematical expertise?
This was a big joke with my friends in school as I could be found trolling around the engineering school getting things explained to me.

(I know why it is, because I am terrible at math and I am in aw of anyone with skills in that area) but still what does this say to your poll?

Ah but what can you do? I am a college cheerleader and (for that matter I am a college cheerleader type) and the only guys that ask me out are big brawny and not all about the logarithms.

Gene Weingarten: Lady, do you understand the power you wield? You could REALLY make some nerdo's day.

_______________________

Who are you: to talk about what Jesus said? You aren't even CHRISTIAN!;!;!;

(A normal person impersonating a religious nut. And yes, he did say it)

Gene Weingarten: Thank you.

_______________________

That poll: Liz is so wrong.

For those of us women who like to have a life independent of our spouse, sports fanaticism is crucial. I get my shopping done, he gets his sports fix. We both get a chance to miss each other (absence makes the heart grow fonder).

washingtonpost.com: Point taken. I get the same from my SO's desire to read, paint and play music.

Gene Weingarten: Yeah, that surprised me, in her answer. My wife doesn't LIKE it, but I think she wouldn't trade it for some of them other things.

_______________________

Stay! stay!: Please, to make up for the lost time. Or it'll be The. Lamest. Chat. Ever.

Gene Weingarten: We're still here, aren't we?

_______________________

The mystery question: Hi again,

I am the one who submitted the question, I am a woman, and I did not get the correct answer. So, no, I don't think it's a woman thing. I thought maybe she killed her sister because her sister was nagging her for not getting the guy's phone number.

Gene Weingarten: Um, wouldn't that be somewhat psychotic, too?

_______________________

Lansing, Mich.: "Size" doesn't matter. "Smile" does. That's part of the reason women keep flinging their virtual panties at you.

Gene Weingarten: Wait -- WHAT DO THEY KNOW??? WHO TOLD THEM???

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Has your daughter gotten into any veterinary schools?

Gene Weingarten: Oooh, a good place to end. Vet schools have to be among the worst places for a woman who is single and looking. Sixty to sixty-five percent female.

Yes, Molly has been accepted by Cornell. She is still waiting on the others. Cornell is considered the best, so we are all excited.

Okay thank you all and I am grateful for those of you who lasted through The Horror.

Next Week: Stuever's poll.

_______________________

Virtual panties: Do you have to wash your virtual panties too, in case someone goes through your virtual trash?

washingtonpost.com: Just de-bug them.

Gene Weingarten: Nice.

_______________________

Updated 01.25.05

Mystery question: I thought she killed her sister in order to be the sole beneficiary of her mother's estate. Who gives a crap about the guy?

Gene Weingarten: I like this answer a lot.

_______________________

Poll Results: I totally agree with the sports fanaticism issue. I love the fact that my husband needs to have rules of baseball and football explained to him. I love the envy I get from my sister-in-law who complains about all the slack she takes up since her husband has to watch golf, baseball, basketball, football, skiing, NASCAR, and pool, etc. We don't have to schedule vacations around playoffs and we could care less about the athletes that whine and complain. I'm just happy to know that there are others like us out there!

Gene Weingarten: I am bad, but not horrible. When he got married many years ago, my good friend Dick Babcock was seriously worried that the Cubs might get into the playoffs. It would have meant postponing the wedding. My wife thought he was kidding. I knew he was not.

Probably the worst thing I ever did happened three football seasons ago. It was a Sunday late afternoon, and we were supposed to go out to dinner with guests. I watched my Giants lose a playoff game to the 49ers after leading by 20 points at the half, through a series of stunning ineptitudes that included TWO botched snaps on field goal attempts. I simply could not go to dinner. I could not get up off the couch. My wife left without me. She forgave me because she is a phenomenal woman whom I do not deserve.

Inexcusable behavior, but understandable to any fanatic. _______________________

Bowie, Md.: You missed today's "Out of the Gene Pool." Well, I thought the word-play was clever, anyway. Weighing in: I am a woman and did not get the "mystery." And I love mysteries and puzzles of this sort.

Gene Weingarten: You’re right. I liked it. (LINK LIZ) Hey, can we all agree that this is a good strip that has lately introduced a lousy character? The teddy bear. Zooky or whatever his name is. Lets lose him.

washingtonpost.com: Double-quick. Number one link monkey on the job: Out of the Gene Pool, (Jan. 24).

_______________________

UPDATED 01.26.05

Man, IA: That "meeting a man at a funeral" joke is a fine brainteaser, but the part of the note that says there is some sort of psycological test or that there is any pattern for psychopaths getting the answer right is urban myth.

Gene Weingarten: I was devastated to learn this.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Are editorial cartoonists funnier when their guys are in office, or when the other guys are?

My hypothesis is that they're funnier when their guys are in, since they're more relaxed and can work from true humor rather than spittle-flecked rage.

Gene Weingarten: Ummm, no. You seriously underestimate the value of spittle-flecked rage. The other point is that to a good editorial cartoonist, "their guys" cease to be "their guys" when they take office. You ever see some of the stuff Herblock did to Jimmy Carter? One of my favorites is one where Carter has called a TV repairman to fix his TV. He tells the repairman, "It looks fuzzy," and in fact, the image of Carter on the TV does look fuzzy. Unfortunately, the real Carter looks fuzzy, too.

This actually reminds me of one of my favorite unpublished entries to the Style Invitational. We gave sounds and people had to explain what the sound was. One sound was "Fizz Fizz Plop Plop." And the entry was: "Two babies drink Drano." Sorry.

_______________________

Sunday's Pickles: Resolved: This would have been funnier had the final word balloon only contained the first two words. Why do I suspect an editor said, "Dude, you need to explain this. No one will get it"?

Gene Weingarten: I disagree. I think the word "cross" is so old-fashioned, it needed that last balloon. I don't think it was gettable without it. I also know the editor for that comic, and I want to state that I have implicit faith in her wisdom. Um, she is also the syndicate editor for my column.

_______________________

UPDATED 01.27.05:

Incontinen, CE: Gene, I'd be surprised if you haven't already received this bit regarding Aussie women making a bold stand for lavoratory equality: Aussie Girls Can Stand to Pee, (news.com.au, Jan. 20) given your loyal and expanding (Congratulations!) fanbase.

Gene Weingarten: : I find this story fascinating, but disappointingly short on detail, no?

_______________________

Size: So, six years into a relationship my SO says to me that he really would like to be bigger. All this time I've found him perfectly wonderful and let him know it. Are you all so insecure?

Gene Weingarten: Simple, honest answer: The average guy thinks he is smaller than average. (Polls confirm this particular neurosis) All men want to please their women. Most guys know that, whatever women say, size matters. So most guys wish they were bigger. I think this about as far as I can penetrate this subject.

_______________________

Laurel, Md.: How old is Liz? She just got engaged (presumedly for the first time) right? Her answers to questions 3&4 suffer the fatal flaw of thinking undesirable charactersitics in men CAN BE CHANGED! No, Liz, they CAN'T (by women). This is the leading cause of divorce -- you knew he was a jerk and married him anyway.

washingtonpost.com: Wait, wait... 40 pounds overweight doesn't make someone a jerk. And losing that extra poundage is something I'd hope he would want to work on... since men tend to carry weight in the torso, near their heart, leading to increased risk of heart attacks.

Gene Weingarten: I would add this: Men can change in certain small, largely cosmetic ways. A man can learn to pick up after himself. A man can learn to curb certain repulsive habits. A man can lose weight. A man can learn to dress better (but only by letting you dress him, which he will do.)

What you can never change are basic, hard-wired impulses. Love of sports. Sexism. Juvenile humor. A roving eye. I have a good friend who deeply loves his wife, does not cheat on her, WOULD not cheat on her, and yet is simply incapable of ignoring other women, even in his wife’s presence. He tries, he really does. He knows it is bad. Boing. He looks. He leers. He slavers. He is an animal.

_______________________

UPDATED 01.28.05

Silver Spring, Md.: I was one of those guys who answered "wrong" on the poll about what we find most physically attractive about a woman. I found your response unsatisfying, and I couldn't figure out why until now.

The question was, "In assessing the physical attractiveness of a woman, what feature is most important to you."

The problem is, there are two ways to interpret this. Because you said "physical attractiveness," I took this to mean what's attractive about someone you are just looking at, not someone you would have a relationship with. Yes, the face is the clue to "intelligence, humor, compassion, whatnot," but a woman's intelligence, humor, and compassion have very little to do with how long I might linger looking at a pinup of her.

When looking for potential romantic partners, I'd be looking at faces rather than other assets. Without the misleading "physical" in the question, I probably would have gotten it right.

If I'm not alone in this misunderstanding, then your results may be skewed -- and it may be even worse if the variation in interpretation had any tendency to fall along gender lines.

Gene Weingarten: Okay, I am going to answer this question honestly, even at the very real risk that it will make women love me deeply. This also happens to be true, though, and I am guessing it is true of many other men, particularly men of my age:

I don't ogle dumb or shallow-looking women, whatever their physical assets. To me (and I think more men than many people think) smarts and sophistication and whatnot are an essential part of the package, even the package to be glanced at in appreciation, for two seconds, in the Metro. This extends to age. Nineteen year old gorgeous young women look like little girls to me.

But that's just a subset. The main set in this category is dumb/trashy. For example, I find Paris Hilton not only uninteresting, but unattractive. Ugly. Almost hideous. It is because she looks stupid, and vapid, and easy, and cheap, and bored.

_______________________

Landover, Md.: As to the "Out of the Gene Pool" mystery. To a lot of people when you put sheet in quotes it means sh-t. Not a great name for a perfume.

Did you see the "Mistake" in Monday's appreciation of Rose Mary Woods? After 5 - 6 paragraphs, the article is cut off in mid sentence and has a "18.5 minute" worth of white space followed by a new half sentence and paragraph that has nothing to do with her or the article. TOO FUNNY!

Comments, please and a link, please chatwoman (the gap was on the online version also -- therefore not a mistake of typesetting).

washingtonpost.com: Well, you're a bit demanding: In the Garden of Secrets, Rose Mary and Time, (Post, Jan. 25)

Gene Weingarten: Well, you got the existence of the joke, but you missed the punchline. That is not unrelated material at the bottom. Think about it. Look up the medical discipline, if you must.

_______________________

Gambrills, Md.: "Fizz fizz plop plop?" Wow. I'm not surprised you didn't print that one. Who sent it in? I'm guessing that it wasn't Chuck Smith. (I wish I had thought of it.)

washingtonpost.com: And thanks Gene for sharing here, online, where we clearly have no standards.

Gene Weingarten: I've been using the old "inch at a time" method with Chatwoman. Pretty soon we'll be simply publishing rank porn here, and she'll never even know anything happened.

washingtonpost.com: Two words, inchworm: Lorena Bobbitt.

_______________________

Eagleville: Okay Gene, can we get past this sexist poo that men love sports and women would rather go shopping for a nice blouse! I'm a girly-girl, I say panties, never let my slacks touch a bathroom floor and always wash my undwear before throwing it out (very similar to your mom telling you to wear clean underwear in case you're in an accident I always fear that the squirrels will get into my trash and I want the neighbors to see clean panties if they have to see panties), but I digress. I am also the biggest sports fan! I love my teams and have been known to schedule my life around them. My male partner does not share in this craziness but he is kind and never complains. He refuses to watch sporting events with me, something about abusive language and possible injuries when the refs screw up a call. I have explained games to him and even gotten him to watch PTI and SportsCenter with me on a nightly basis but mostly he just humors me, he'd much rather read a book or go to a museum. And Gene, I would totally have skipped that dinner, too, and I wouldn't have felt bad about it at all. I've avoided Super Bowl parties when they were just too painful to watch and ruined my honey's birthday more than once when I was too distracted by playoffs to enjoy dinner out. But what can I say -- I'm such a girl!

Gene Weingarten: Okay, this is entertaining, particularly the image of the squirrels and the panties.

I would like to add a related anecdote. I may have mentioned this before, but it is on point, and off point at the same time. Unequal sports genes can work, but equal sports genes can be bliss.

My daughter met her sweetie in a bar in Philadelphia during the seventh game of the 2001 World Series. The bar was filled with people rooting against the Yankees. At the final out, the were the only two deeply miserable people in the bar. They found each other.

_______________________

Cleveland Park, Washington, D.C.: Thought You'd like this:

Senator Wants Boxing Gloves on Chickens
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - A state senator has a plan for saving Oklahoma's gamefowl industry now that cockfighters are legally prohibited from pitting birds fitted with razor-like spurs.

State Sen. Frank Shurden, a longtime defender of cockfighting, is suggesting that roosters be given little boxing gloves so they can fight without bloodshed. The proposal is in a bill the Democrat has introduced for the legislative session that begins Feb. 7.

"Who's going to object to chickens fighting like humans do? Everybody wins," Sen. Frank Shurden said.

Oklahoma voters banned cockfighting in 2002. The practice is still legal in Louisiana and New Mexico.

Removing the blood from the sport takes away the main argument animal rights groups have against cockfighting, Shurden said.

"Let the roosters do what they love to do without getting injured," Shurden said.

In his search for a new way to let gamecocks fight, Shurden learned about a California man who is an attorney for Gamecock Boxing Inc., which was formed to promote a nonlethal form of cockfighting.

"The company has a patent now pending on this game and the equipment designed to score the 'hits' of these sparring live gamefowl," Californian John R. Cogorno wrote in a letter to Shurden.

Shurden said electronic sensors can record the number of hits by each gamefowl to determine which rooster won the boxing match.

Gamecocks would wear sparring muffs, which are padded gloves placed over their natural spurs.

"To me it answers everything. It saves the industry, takes blood sport out and generates revenue for Oklahoma," Shurden said.

Janet Halliburton, an attorney who led the initiative petition drive to ban cockfighting, said, "What this is going to do is make a platform for him to continually try to amend the existing ban. They don't want electronic cockfighting any more than anybody else does, or they'd be doing it."

Shurden said he's not trying to amend the existing cockfighting ban, something he tried the past few years without success.

Shurden's legislation would create the Oklahoma Pari-mutuel Gamecock Boxing Act.

The Oklahoma Horse Racing Commission, which has jurisdiction over pari-mutuel horse racing, would have jurisdiction over this gamecock boxing.

Shurden believes it could be incorporated into horse racing, providing the boxing between horse races.

Some of the money earned from wagers on gamecock boxing matches would go to the state.

"I guarantee it would work," Shurden said of the nonlethal fighting of roosters.

Gene Weingarten: Approximately seventy five million people sent me this.

_______________________