Quite often (and quite naively) I think I’ve conquered the language of women.
My chest puffs out, I hold my head a bit higher, my chin juts a little more prominently and I walk confidently with a swagger.
And then — just as quickly — something like this week’s episode of New Girl comes along, deflates everything and whisks me right back to square one. Ever experience that? Do you understand it? You do … ?!? Good then explain the following things to me:
Why the analysis of the vagaries of how someone wears polka dots? What’s the point of name-calling among your friends against the character of someone not even in the room? What is the point of telling a foe to leave the restroom because you have to cry? Will the embarrassment of the act cause that much more consternation if it actually happens with your opponent present? Because (and correct me if I’m wrong here) you’ve already told her you’re about to cry … so … what difference does it make if you cry with or without her in the room? Is the act itself more cathartic alone? Does it make your adversary wonder whether you actually will cry if she leaves the room … or is it all just “display-of-feathers” posturing?
One of the more strange things to come out of this airing of New Girl was what Jess said as she addressed Nick: “It’s just how girls fight sometimes. There’s a lot that’s unsaid.”
What? What … ??!?
Seriously: How the hell does someone fight about something that is “unsaid” … ?!?
Don’t get me wrong: Men have their own language that needs deciphering at times … but it’s nowhere near what comes out of the minds and mouths of women. Men’s language is much, much more easily decoded.
Women’s language. I hear it all the time. I’ve gotten a little wiser to it, however: I don’t question it like I used to. It’s just better that way.
Notes:
Quotes:
“Ah! Damp towel! Damp! It’s like a really big wet nap! I feel like I’m being licked by a Golden Retriever! Look at this bathroom: There should not be two girls in this bathroom. You’re too humid. You make everything damp …” — Schmidt complaining to Jess and Julia having just gotten out of the shower
“80% of the products in here are yours …” — Jess
“Blah, blah, blah, yawn, yes … I use sculpting chutney … and once I’m done with my chutney, back in the row it goes … the hair everywhere, the multi-color rubber bands, I’m fine with it. It’s all okay with me … but a damp towel is where I draw the line …” — Schmidt
“Hey, Nick! Want to hang out in your room?” — Julia
“Jess if you’ll excuse us … Julia is about to be very disappointed.” — Nick
“This lesbian community you speak of: Do they look more like this one (*motions to Cece*) … or kind of Nick-ish?” — Schmidt
“You are Jewish.” — Jess to Schmidt who is in need of a towel
This episode was hilarious. I’m still laughing at Nick crying in the men’s room. As for fighting over things that are unsaid… perhaps as a man, you may come right out and say, “I hate those blue flats, Jess.” But if a women says something seemingly innocuous like, “You sure like those blue flats, Jess,” the speaker does not openly state how she feels about the flats, suggesting that she doesn’t like them (otherwise, she would simply say, “I love those flats, Jess”). The implied judgement in the comment is subtle and extremely irritating because you cannot respond to it directly without coming off as insecure or belligerent. In the end, you end up dissecting and stewing over the comment and trying to think of an equally subtle putdown.
*POST AUTHOR*
. . . . .
I rest my case.
Nice review, this was a great episode. I wasn’t so sure about New Girl at first but I stuck it out because, well because Zooey Deschanel is in it. After the cast kind of shook off the pilot-jitters, as I call it, New Girl started growing on me fast. I just wish the timeslot worked better for my schedule. As it is, I almost never get to see it as it airs, fortunately my employer, DISH, has this live streaming site called dishonline(dot)com that not only has New Girl but tons and tons of other shows too. It’s definitely worth checking out, especially since a lot of the programming is available to subscribers and non-subscribers alike.
I felt I might have responded to this episode better in season 2. It wasn’t difficult to decipher the passive-aggressiveness and insecurities, but I’ve only just started caring about the five regulars, and literally just met the Julia character the last time out. There was no emotional investment in the tentative hostility and relationship-forming, and the time spent on that squeezed out a lot of the usual comedy. And it might have been the hiatus, but I didn’t remember June Diane Raphael’s character at all.
Still better than watching Happy Endings, though.
I love seeing a man totally at a loss to understand what is going on between two women. It somehow makes easier all the [use your imagination to find an appropriate word to fill in this blank] we have to put up with the rest of the time.
You see, the truth is, “Women are relational and Men are confrontational.” [Yes, of course there are exceptions. What rule would be a rule without exceptions? My husband is the window shopper/mall wanderer in our family … and I’m okay with that.]
I was reading a recipe today that talked about using a particular ingredient not because you could actually taste that ingredient in the final product, but because including the ingredient added a “depth of flavor” to one of the other ingredients. Why go on record with “I don’t like those blue flats, Jess” when you can say the same thing AND imply lack of taste – possibly intelligence – in anyone who does like the blue flats … especially Jess, just by saying “You sure like those blue flats, Jess” in a certain tone of voice? That, dear sir, is “depth of flavor”.
So the act of crying and someone watching is extremely more vulnerable than someone knowing you are going to cry. It’s not a winning thing or anything, it’s limiting vulnerability.
I love Schmidt. I wonder how much this episode would have put into the douche bag jar. Did he say head an Irish walking cape?
You. Are such a guy …