Blog

For the second time this year a major figure in comedy has made controversial public remarks about the funniness of women.  Adam Carolla, of the #1 ranked podcast The Adam Carolla Show, stated in a New York Post article that “[t]he reason why you know more funny dudes than funny chicks is that dudes are funnier than chicks.”  He went on to cite a few famous women that he finds hilarious, but the damage had been done.  Twitter and Facebook lit up with denunciations by women and a few super enlightened men.  Some sources, like the Huffington Post questioned why we would even care about Adam Carolla’s opinion. Other comedians, mostly female, were hurling the “irrelevant” label at Carolla.

Before I get to the larger point, a quick defense of Carolla’s “relevance.”  He is the #1 podcaster in the world – a format that comedians have embraced wholeheartedly and that he has done better and with more success than anyone on Earth.  Calling him irrelevant would be like calling Dane Cook irrelevant back in 2006.  Carolla, in my opinion, is also one of the 5 or 10 funniest people in America.  His ability to be funny off the cuff, which I think is the purest form of funny, is second to none.  He is also a best-selling author of “In Fifty Years We’ll All Be Chicks,” which is one of the funniest books I’ve ever read.  He may not be Louis CK or Chris Rock in the stand-up comedy community, but to call him irrelevant is a surefire sign that you are out of the loop in comedy and media.  And full disclosure – I was never in a fraternity and before I ever listened to his podcast I just assumed (wrongly) that Carolla was an unsophisticated douche from the commercials for The Man Show (which I never watched).  Of all the women criticizing him I wonder how many were regular listeners to his podcast or had read his book or had ever seen him perform live.   Now back to the issue.

My first basic question is, what if Carolla is right or at least why is the idea that men are generally funnier than women such a sin that to even think it is a capital offense?  This has become such an article of faith among female comedians (and some super enlightened male comics) that no gender is funnier than the other.  Of course, any objective marker of comedy success, from the reverence given to Louis CK, to the financial dominance of “comedian” Jeff Dunham suggests otherwise.  As I wrote in a piece in January about the firing of Eddie Brill ( https://jlcauvin.com/?p=3225), comedy may be subjective, but all objective evidence point to the overwhelming popularity of male comedians  over female comedians.  And Carolla never said a woman cannot be as funny as a man.  So each individual female has an opportunity to be a Sarah Silverman or a Joan Rivers, but he said if he were playing the odds he would bet on a male comedian.

To the point of whether a woman can be as funny as a man – why is this not enough?  Why is it so offensive to female comedians to say that men are funnier on average?  Carolla offered no reasons as to why this is the case in the short interview, but might I suggest there are numerous cultural factors within and outside of comedy that lend itself to being a male art form?  The lifestyle of comedy is one that is still more socially acceptable for men that may weed out women.  Women who pursue the long and lonely journey of stand up comedy are potentially giving up a lot more in terms of family than men who pursue it.  Furthermore, we are a culture that has long praised men for being outgoing and attention seeking by being “the life of the party.”  Women, not so much.  Without getting into the Christopher Hitchens article  on women not being funny, is it possible that our culture (even if not going back to our evolution) has stacked the deck against women being “the funny ones?”  And if all these things are true, why do we have to still go ahead and say “But women and men are equally funny,” or at least are not allowed to hold the opinion that men are funnier without being considered misogynist monsters?  To say nothing of the fact that stand up comedy has been a largely male art form so we have shaped the content and the expectations of viewers for generations.   None of these factors are saying that women can’t be as funny in individual cases and some of these factors are unfortunate for the additional roadblocks they create for women seeking success in comedy.  But thinking something is unfortunate or unfair does not make it untrue.

Here’s something that I rarely heard at any office I worked in or class I attended, “You know who’s hilarious?  (Insert female name)”  I have known more funny men that never picked up a microphone than I know funny female comedians.  Do I know funny females? Obviously.  But female comedians seem to lose sight of the fact that they are already in a self-selecting group.  They do not represent the female population as a whole. They are 51% of the population, but definitely less than 50% of the stand up comedy world.  This has been my life experience and may reflect my taste in comedy, but there is something in our culture that  encourages men to be funny, and rewards them if they are.  But it has become this article of faith in comedy, like Grover Norquist’s anti-tax pledge, that unless you say “I don’t see gender, I only see a comedian and there are funny men and funny women and that is all I know,” you become some sort of monster on the wrong side of a Civil Rights struggle.  For some reason, “Women can be as funny as men” is not good enough if you believe on the whole that men are generally funnier than women.  Even if you suggest that the root cause of this is not biological, but merely social and cultural you are still a pig.

Perhaps as our society and culture change what Carolla said will not be true, but right now, if an alien landed in America and studied comedy he (OR SHE) would come to the conclusion that men are funnier.  He could go to an office, a happy hour at a bar or a comedy club and the evidence would be overwhelming.  Yes there are more male comedians than female, but I am arguing that in a larger context of our culture, not just in stand up circles.

Of course, if an alien were to turn to the Huffington Post comedy page and see their numerous lists of funny women you should follow on Twitter it might disagree. Then they might be confused by articles on the same site claiming that we need to stop taking gender into account in comedy.  And then they might look at some of those Twitter lists and say, “Wait, some of these aren’t that funny – are they simply on this list because they are women? That doesn’t seem like it will advance gender equity and respect in comedy.”

The truth is I would welcome this discussion going away, much like many of the female comics and super enlightened men who support them wholeheartedly.  But the fact is beauty and comedy are two things that are in the eye of the beholder and as much as it may sting, America largely agrees with Adam Carolla. Don’t take my word for it – look at the numbers.

Now I look forward to critics rolling their eyes at this and telling me “I am obsessed and need to let this go.” Why?  Because I wrote twice this year about it when Eddie Brill got fired and when my favorite podcaster got attacked?  Wow – truly obsessed.  I just get annoyed when I see irrational arguments bashing Carolla.  Of course every woman who jumps on this issue and bashes Brill or Carolla just gets a bunch of “You go girl’s” like she’s the Rosa Parks of comedy and is in no way “obsessed.”  It is the cyber equivalent of “support the troops.”  And then there are the female comedians who could not wait to call themselves hilarious on Twitter and Facebook as a way of sticking it to Carolla.  If you want to stick it to the Carollas of the world let someone else say it for you.  If you are funny someone surely will.

And then listen to Carolla’s podcast.

There are many reasons to root for Lebron James and several reasons to root against him.  Ont he plus side he is the most physically impressive basketball player since Wilt Chamberlain. With all due respect to Michael Jordan, Karl Malone and Vince Carter, no athlete since Wilt Chamberlain has combine evolutionary-step-forward athleticism with size that seems impossible to support that athleticism.  Statistically he has put together seasons that are only rivaled by Michael Jordan for completeness (30 points per game, 7+ rebound, 7+ assists per game, with a first team all defense selection).  He is a gifted passer, a generous teammate (at least on the court) and one of the most impressive athletes on the planet.  For my money, the only athlete I would want to see perform in person more than Lebron James is Usain Bolt (though I have already seen Lebron play in Cleveland and Miami as a member of the Cavs).

The reasons to hate Lebron – The Decision and the fact that at age 28 he has not won a championship (to say nothing of the fact that there are dozens of great players who never won or at least did not win in their first 9 years – just ask Hakeem Olajuwon, Dirk Nowitzki, Jason Kidd, Steve Nash, Karl Malone, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, etc.).

I hated The Decision. I hate the pomp of it and I hate the fact that he left Cleveland.  I perform a lot in Cleveland and that city was in love with their (relatively) home grown superstar.  They felt disrespected and betrayed and in an era where hometown sports heroes are a rarer breed it stung extra hard.  But one group of people, more than any other forced me back into being a Lebron fan (beyond the obvious reason of wanting to watch him play):

New York Knick fans.

There can be no doubt that the New York Knicks are now professional sports most overrated franchise.  They have not won a title in 39 years, they won a playoff game this year for the first time in eleven years, after setting a record for consecutive playoff losses.  But two years ago, all of Knick land was buzzing with the hope that Lebron James would leave Cleveland to bring greatness (back?) to the Knicks.  Photoshopping was out of control with Lebron in Knicks #23 jerseys, every Knick fan from the ardent supporter to the legion of wall street johnny-come-latelys-after-doing-coke-and-escorts.  No one in the NY fan base or the NY media was saying, “Hey, what about Cleveland? Shouldn’t a homegrown superstar stay with their team?”  Instead they were ready an willing to gut an entire franchise because, despite 37 years of championshipless basketball at the point, the Knicks were entitled to Lebron and it was inevitable.

And then Lebron picked Miami for less money to play with his friends.  Cleveland, justifiably exploded.  The burning of jerseys was a tad much, but their anger was justified.  But you know who the second angriest city in America was?  New York.  And that has not abated.  Never has a group of fans maintained a sense of self-righteousness about NOT being able to be the scumbag that gutted Cleveland.  Let me get this straight Knick fans – Miami and Lebron are scumbags because they did not let YOU destroy the Cleveland Cavaliers?  New York is no longer the Mecca of hoops, but it is the Mecca of hoops hypocrisy.

The hatred of Lebron has also reached a faith based level.  Anyone watching basketball right now with an objective eye cannot doubt that he is right now, the most talented player in the game.  Admittedly he has exhibited less than stellar play at the very end of games, but he has still hit big late shots THIS postseason.  He still can guard anyone on the other team from point guard to center, and has done so as recently as the Celtics series (no one seems to ever mention how good he is on defense when they critique his game).  He has great clutch playoff moments in his career – look at his one man battle against the 2008 championship Celtics or his epic one man take down of the 2007 Detroit Pistons.  He may have changed some of his mentality and that will effect his placement among the all time greats, but the evidence is in – Lebron James is great.  Dan Marino was great and never won a title.  Ken Griffey Jr. was great and never won a title. Only in basketball and especially in Lebron’s case is greatness so obvious to the eye, but denied by haters based solely on the lack of a championship ring.

But fans who need a WWE style villain love attacking Lebron – that has become the sport itself (to say nothing of the fact that Dwyane Wade flops more, bitches more, plays worse, argues with his coach, was an unfaithful husband and won a championship on the strength of great play AND an unprecedented number of free throw attempts, more than a handful of which were on dubious calls). But Lebron abandoned Cleveland and went to Miami and announced it on television (a program that millions watched) so he now deserves a visit from Seal Team 6.

As I watched Game 5 of the Celtics-Heat series on Tuesday I felt bad for Lebron.  I know, I know he is a millionaire and there is a book about him called The Whore of Akron, but I watch him because he is a great basketball player and seems to conduct himself in a good manner on the court and in a non-criminal fashion off of the court.  What more, as a fan of the sport, do I need to appreciate a great player and athlete?  As I sat alone in a bar watching the final quarter of Game 5 in midtown Manhattan (now a hotbed of financial industry employees, despite Occupy “Wall Street”) and it was great to see a bunch of rich men working in finance, an industry with about as much good will as 5,000,000 Decision announcements, booing Lebron James, calling him a scumbag and cheering for the Boston Celtics.

Now the Celtics are an actual longtime franchise rival of the Knicks, but Lebron was worth supporting the Green and White.  It was a great symbol of what New York and New York Knick basketball fans really are: hypocrites with no sense of history – they actually have always had the impatience and petulance of the Twitter generation, which the rest of American culture is just adopting now (of course I know plenty of quality Knick fans, but the die hard fans with knowledge and perspective rarely, if ever, drive the story with the Knicks). I would rather appreciate what Lebron is doing, rather than make him more of a villain so I can feel good about myself.  And hopefully Lebron gets a title or two as a stamp of his greatness at some point, because Knick fans have already gotten what they deserve: Carmelo Anthony.

Hey folks – I wrote this for Comedians at Law today – so read it and click that Facebook like button if you are on Facebook.  Thanks – enjoy. Regular blogs later this week.

http://comediansatlaw.com/2012/05/29/the-things-you-must-know-before-and-after-the-bar-exam/

By next week my movie review page on my website should be ready to go, but for this week I am putting the Intro video and the first review up here. Enjoy and please subscribe to the YouTube Page www.YouTube.com/JLMovieLife  New movie review every Monday (starting next week you wil be able to check out all reviews at the J-L Movie Life link on my site.

INTRO

EPISODE 1 – REVIEW OF MEN IN BLACK 3

A few months ago I was asked by a friend of a friend who had seen me perform at Gotham Comedy Club if I would be willing to discuss my career at their South Bronx high school career fair.  My first question was, “which career – my defunct practice of law or my depressing practice of comedy?”  The answer was all of the above.  Now truth be told it was rather ironic to ask me to speak to young people about my two careers, because other than print journalism I am not sure you could pick two careers more on a path to destruction than law and comedy.  My guess is that law will be the first white collar profession to start going the way of manufacturing in America.  Companies are looking to get leaner and reduce their legal expenditures, and other than the absolute top legal talent which will always be in demand and command top dollar, much of the grunt work done in private practice will eventually be automated.  Fortunately government work will always exist as long as we have a society that has both an increasingly large group of have-nots and for-profit prisons because people will always be needed to defend and prosecute crimes.

Not only did I bring this uplifting message about a career in law, but I also brought a wealth of knowledge on how to not succeed at comedy despite doing everything under the sun to increase exposure and develop one’s comedic skill set.  Thanks to Twitter and YouTube, which have everyone thinking they are hilarious, and a system that favors cheap labor force (newcomers who do bringers and local mediocre talent to emcee and feature without the need for lodging) and benefits the already established upper echelon of comedic talent (unlike many of the banking 1%, at least the comedic 1% still has to work hard and provide an actual product to people to maintain their elevated status), the ability of an up and coming, hard working talent to rise through the ranks by simply working hard as a comedian is becoming more and more difficult.

But despite this depressing duo of life failure I of course said yes for a couple of reasons.  The first reason was this had the potential finally to be my moment to plant the seed of an inspirational movie.  After all my father is Morgan Freeman black and my Mom is even whiter than Michelle Pfeiffer so let’s just get Lean On Dangerous Minds into production already!  The second and more serious reason is that it is important for inner city kids to see people from different walks of life and to get real exposure to careers that they might not encounter in great abundance, or at all, in their neighborhood.  Having been lucky enough to go to an elite private school, most kids have Ivy League on their minds from the first day of high school and even if your parents were not lawyers, bankers or doctors, many of your classmates’ parents were.  We often take this exposure for granted, but in some communities “college is a white people thing,” is a common idea, not because of some laziness, but because it is so unfamiliar to them (this was an actual quote a friend of heard at a Boys and Girls Club a few years back from a black teenager).  So before I resume mocking myself and the career fair, the idea behind the career fair is essential to broadening the minds of kids like those I met yesterday.

And of course the third reason I said yes is that I love the Bronx because it is full of Latin women.

So I arrived at the career fair and my name tag said J-L Cauvin – “Comedians At Law.” I chose to use Comedians At Law, my touring band of lawyers-turned-comedians, because at least it was an eye catching and semi-respectable title for an affiliation. My other options were “J-L Cauvin – 270 pounds of wasted potential” or “J-L Cauvin – ticking time bomb.”  In other words it may have said “career fair,” but I occuppied that thin line between “inspirational career fair” and “scared straight program.”

I sat down at a table flanked by an attorney, an actor/aspiring producer and a speech coach and waited for the kids to come in and soak up my years of bitter knowledge.  Of course I immediately became a softie when these kids came in. I underestimated how young 10th and 11th graders actually look and finally was willing to admit to myself that R. Kelly really may have been in the wrong.  Despite the youth of some of these kids their questions seemed oddly adult and parental.  Here’s a sample:

• “What made you go from law to comedy?” Truth: Laid Off What I said: I wanted to follow my passion.
• “Don’t you make more money as a lawyer?” Yes. (while holding back tears of rage)
• “How come I never seen you on TV?” What I said: Because I was on at 130 in the morning. What I wanted to say: Who is Your English teacher?  And you are a 16 year old Latino with a tongue stud so you are not in my target demographic.
• “What’s your best joke” What I said: I don’t really tell joke jokes, but more like funny mini stories that aren’t safe for high school.  What I wanted to say: Well it starts with anal sex with an ex girlfriend…
• “Have you been on Comedy Central?” (no answer – I just walked out and went to the train to go home)

This was just a sampling of the interactions I had, but it was a worthwhile event for these kids.  They were able to meet many people in different fields from acting to PR to computer science to medicine, and that is all well and good, but I would like to think that I may have done the best work of anyone.  Thanks to me, dozens of kids in the South Bronx met me and will now probably avoid attempting careers in law and stand up comedy like the plague.  Now they have a fighting chance at a good life.

My big gig this weekend was performing for the alumni of University of Pennsylvania Law School on Friday.  I wrote the recap for Comedians At Law on their website so check it out:

http://comediansatlaw.com/2012/05/14/penn-law-alumni-have-greatest-reunion-ever/

New podcast tomorrow on The Avengers. That’s all for now.

Monday – Bar show I am supposed to host gets cancelled due to hockey playoffs.

Tuesday – Upload a great new episode of my podcast. But for the first time in 14 weeks I fu*ked up the audio and it ended up having irritating audio playback, this guaranteeing fewer listens than normal, even though it was one of the best episodes yet.  Then I went to Hoboken and appeared for three hours on Chucklefu*k Radio. I made zero dollars.  It was fun and funny and I think I gained one Twitter follower.

Wednesday – Recorded an episode of Robin Quivers’ The Chatter on Sirius XM.  It went great.  I made zero dollars. I think I gained one Twitter follower.

Thursday –  I headlined a Cancer fundraiser at the Triad Theater in NYC.  Had a great set.  I was paid with an Amex gift card (which was actually nice because I had offered to do the show for free).  I sold three CDs, but only because I promised the money to the charity.  I gained zero Twitter followers, but a guy can’t have it all.

Today – off to UPenn Law School to do a show with Comedians At Law, which is the only paid gig of the week (well paid), but all the money will be going into the CAL business.  So in other words I will make zero dollars.  Let’s hope I get at least get one Twitter follower.

This is a very simple post.  My new album has been available for free for a month on my website – you can download it here (still for free for another couple of weeks):

https://jlcauvin.com/?page_id=3578

But of more importance today is that my album is now available on iTunes right here:

http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/too-big-to-fail/id523993775

If you have the free copy of the album, if you don’t have it or if you feel like being generous and buying it through iTunes please do me a favor as a reader of this site and presumably a friend or fan of what I do – go to the iTunes link and give the CD 5 stars (and if feeling generous with your time please write a nice sentence or two about the album or my comedy).  Please do this as soon as you are able to and ask friends and family to do the same in this time period through Facebook, Twitter or e-mail.  It costs nothing (unless you want to be nice and buy the album) except a few seconds and will really help me out.

That’s it.  Thanks very much. And I hope you enjoy the album.

This weekend, the 2nd Annual Comedy Awards took place. These are the awards where comedians do what every other industry does for itself, while maintaining enough of a distance so as to still plausibly mock the idea of awards shows.

As I followed some of the results via Twitter the name Louis CK kept coming up.  No big surprise there.  He has established himself as the man of the moment in comedy.  A sort of infallible figure of fallibility for comedy fans.  His show “Louie” won best show, in the alternative show category, helping it avoid a showdown with comedy series winner “Parks and Recreation.”

But as a stand up comic I was most interested in seeing who won best stand up special. The nominees were Louis CK, Daniel Tosh, Colin Quinn, Patton Oswalt and Norm MacDonald.  First I will offer my opinion that of the nominees (for their specials, not their bodies of work) I would have CK no higher than third. MacDonald’s special was better and Colin Quinn’s Broadway show was absolutely terrific.

But CK’s special represented a game changer, or so I was repeatedly told.  He bucked the industry by self-producing his own special.  Jim Gaffigan and Aziz Ansari copied his model.  Now, thanks to Louis’ example, at least a dozen comedians can do this. Maybe even two dozen. And after that, I don’t think it will have any effect on the careers of individual comedians. The widespread distribution and opportunities offered by television are still needed by almost all comedians to get to the next level.  Did CK change the game? Or did he just demonstrate that after decades of climbing within the ranks of the business he now has the clout to reject it?  And before continuing I must say, because, as I have learned, when people read my posts with their own pre-dispositions, they read what they want out of my words, that this is still a compliment to CK.  He made a brilliant decision for HIS career.  My only qualm is the extrapolation that fans have made from his career to the rest of the industry. If he has changed the game then he is bigger than just a comedian and therefore worthy of cultural icon status, which may have already occurred.  But if, as I would contend, he has not changed the game, but merely his own game, then some of the praise heaped on him is overblown and is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of greatness around all that he produces, regardless of whether it is actually always great or not.

The last time I remember a comedian becoming as big (and CK is now bigger) as this was Dane Cook.  Dane Cook had a methodical, social media-driven, hard work climb over 10+ years to become the biggest name in comedy.  But the backlash against Cook was swift and furious.  Probably because the comedy community and the public at large had no real qualms about bashing a young, fit, charismatic performer, regardless of how well he did for stand up comedy as a business. Louis seems to be bulletproof.  Some of his invincibility comes from his soft underbelly, literally:   his words are harsh and honest, but his delivery device is humble and not intimidating.  Almost all friends of mine who are CK devotees acknowledge to me that they did not think that the Beacon Theater special was his best work and that there were more worthy specials this year.  But because of the “game changing” aspect of the special it was worthy.  But as I already indicated, I don’t really think it changed the game.  The same way George Carlin claimed voting was just the illusion of power, at this point, only those entertainers who already have power, can wield enough power to buck the system.  So if it was not the best special of the year (or at least not definitively) and not truly game changing, what is the justification?

My biggest disappointment in seeing the nominees and the eventual winner though, was the absence of the late, great Patrice O’Neal.  In a twist of sad irony to this post, Louis actually dedicated the Beacon Theater special to the memory of O’Neal.  O’Neal passed away late last year, but not before leaving the comedy community with Elephant In The Room, which is really just a notch below Chris Rock’s Bring the Pain for me on my all time favorite comedy specials, and Mr. P, his hilarious album, released posthumously.  I remember watching Elephant In The Room and thinking “this is going to get Patrice the next-level recognition he deserves.”  I thought it was hands down the best special of the year. No distribution gimmicks, no hype, just great stand up.  The silver lining to his tragic death should have been an increased visibility and respect for his work.  But then, late last year I noticed a poll on a comedy website that had eleven or so comedians up for “Favorite Comedian of the Year” and he was not even on the list.  And then the Comedy Awards did not even NOMINATE Elephant in The Room

Now people reading this who are already pre-disposed to embrace all that is Louis CK will probably just call me a hater.  I’ll admit there are a ton of comedians whose comedy I like more than Louis CK (if you want to know, Bill Burr and Chris Rock are my favorite living comedians).  But I also greatly respect CK’s dedication, his work ethic and and the prominence that he has brought to stand up.  If you are not quite at the “fu*k you J-L you hater” level, then maybe you would like to say “Hey J-L, I respect your opinion, but why is it so wrong for Louis to have won this? He is a great comic and it is all subjective anyway, right? How is your opinion ‘better’ than mine?”  Go watch Elephant in The Room and the Beacon Theater special and tell me there is not a difference.  And it is also just the notion that CK was crowned the way Adele was at the Grammies.  I don’t like a comedy world where we sort of have a coronation.  Even Carlin’s second to last special sucked and it was reviewed as such. But he came back and did a great one for what would be his last special.  That is how comedy should work.  You are only as good as your last show. Sure fans will give you a break because they are your fans, but should an entire industry be giving the same blind loyalty to a performer? That is largely what makes it difficult, especially when you reach that upper echelon.  You have to produce new material regularly and it has to meet the high standards you have established for yourself.  Dane Cook tapered off after his hard-earned climb to the top and he was crucified for it.  For Louis CK, however,  it seems that there is no objectivity even allowed because the comedy community is so enamored with him (“Did you think his last special was an A+ or an A++? A B+? Well fu*k you you jealous hater!”).  There is a lot to appreciate and respect about CK and I have laughed at plenty of his material.  But every so often, the avalanche of adoration impedes a deserved and justified opportunity for someone else.  I think the Comedy Awards, for whatever they are worth, did Patrice O’Neal and stand up comedy a great disservice by not awarding, let alone failing to nominate, Elephant In The Room.

I am not a fashionable person. I was wearing flannel before, during and twenty years after the grunge movement of the early 1990s.  I wear New Balance sneakers and sweatpants a majority of the week.  I buy my suits at Jos. A Bank (how can you beat “buy 1, get 47” free sales?).  But sometimes things are so awful that even my primitive fashion sense is offended.  One thing that has been number for many years on my “fashion items I hate” are babydoll dresses, or as I refer to them “FUPA” covering dresses.   The most misleading item in fashion basically begin at the end of a woman’s breasts and then finish at the conclusion of the woman’s flaws or bloating, depending on whether she is on a permanent or 4 day expansion, respectively.   For several years this Trojan Horse of fashion has been my least favorite item of clothing, but over the last couple years it has been bumped out of the #1 spot buy New Era baseball caps with stickers on the brims.

I own a New Era baseball cap.  It is a Yankee fitted (the game version, not one of the 477 varieties of Yankee caps that have been released – you know so that you have a specific Yankee fitted hat for every holiday from 4th of July to St Patrick’s Day to Arbor Day) and I have owned it for several years.  It is broken in and lacks any price tags or stickers because I am not a fu*king moron.

I do not know the day the trend of leaving stickers on a cap began but I know it has emerged in the last couple of years.  Here are the many different explanations I have seen on-line:

• Emulating athletes who receive brand new caps on draft day
• Maintaining a “fresh” cap to symbolize the freshness of the person wearing it
• Wearing the sticker to pretend that you have so much money that you don’t care

One explanation that a friend of mine had offered, not by way of knowledge, but just hypothesis, was that maybe it started as an act of civil disobedience.  Since it is a trend that began among black people, the idea was that with mall security and store employees discriminating against black youth in stores (questioning, following around suspiciously, etc.) keeping the sticker on after purchasing would act as a deterrent to being questioned, or would at least make people who are eyeing young black men suspiciously could be made to look foolish.  I thought this would be a great reason… if it were at all true.  However, I could find no evidence that this fashion AIDS has any root in civil disobedience.  Sorry, but when you look at Martin Luther King Jr.’s brim in any old photos you will not see a tag or sticker still on it.

Another explanation that I have pondered, (and at the risk of accidentally stealing material, I think comedian Yannis Pappas may have said this before I did in my presence at his show in Brooklyn), is that black people were simply doing the dumbest thing they could think of and seeing if white people would still steal/copy it. (If Yannis tells me he did not say this, consider it a new joke of mine).

But assuming none of these are true, all I can think is that this trend started out of sheer stupidity.  It is this generation’s pet rock.  But it is also evidence of the power black people have on influencing our culture.  Enough talk about “Girls” on HBO, black people can take some (non-compensated) comfort that they still disproportionately influence the culture (and in most cases is good, but not in this one).  Here’s is my brief, informal history of the sticker-on-brim phenomenon across racial lines:

• Black youth start wearing stickers on their brims for some unexplained or unjustifiable reason
• Latinos, as with the N word, quickly begin using it  as well to get grandfathered in when the race war begins
• White people resist and mock
• White people begin to actually market stickers and the hats now have bigger and more ornate stickers KNOWING that people will not leave the sticker on the hat (perhaps googly eyes or scratch n sniff are next)

• Dumb white teens begin doing it, as evidenced by J-L Cauvin seeing no less than 7 white youths wearing stickered brims at the Yankee Game on April 27, 2012 (and only 2 were Guido-types!)

There you have it – white people stole blacks from Africa, stole their music for Elvis and stole golf back from Tiger Woods.  But now they have tipped their hand too much.  It is now clear that white people will try to copy any trend from black people no matter how dumb.  Just three years after a black man got the Presidency, a white dude is trying to take it back, despite clearly being an awful job.  But the brim sticker phenomenon is inexcusable.  No one can offer a legitimate explanation for why people do it and the people who do it refuse to acknowledge that it is absurdly dumb looking.  So shame on you black people for starting a stupid trend and shame on you Latinos and white for copying it.

But thank you Jeremy Lin for not doing it. Yet.