Comments on: If They Say Why, Tell ‘Em That Is Human Nature

By: Tawni

Tawni — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:45:23 +0000

We are huge Tiger fans around these here parts (<—charming Oklahoma-speak, please enjoy). I don’t care what he does in his personal life enough to negatively influence my high opinion of him as an athlete. The thing that really bugs my husband and I about the situation is that Tiger is taking a break from golf because of it.

That said, the first thing out of my mouth upon hearing about the accident was, “Back window? Domestic dispute. You don’t pull an unconscious driver out the back window… it was already broken.” It didn’t make any sense. And I won’t deny that I was as curious as yourself to find out what actually happened.

I have no idea why we care about the personal lives of celebrities. I completely agree with you, that it is human nature, but wish I could do a better job of rising above the smut and gossip sometimes.

By: The Nervous Breakdown

The Nervous Breakdown — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:04:03 +0000

[...] Cox wrote a cool piece about the hoopla surrounded the Tiger Woods imbroglio, which—because we are above it here on this blog—somehow descended into a debate about the [...]

By: Richard Cox

Richard Cox — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:27:08 +0000

I tried to figure out what it means but my Google research was inconclusive. But I did find some links you might like. Haha.

Rat’s ass

Don’t give a fuck

By: Richard Cox

Richard Cox — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:17:10 +0000

Hi there, Paul.

You can totally join us. And I like the chicken/egg-type comparison you make, because it does seem as though the two groups (audience, media) feed each other, but how does it get started? Is either group more to blame?

By: Richard Cox

Richard Cox — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:10:31 +0000

Well, most of us writers have. But we do so because we know people want to read it. Where to draw the line, though?

By: D.R. Haney

D.R. Haney — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 12:21:39 +0000

Actually, I only realized yesterday that you’d already covered my first point in an earlier comment to Richard. Hey, I’ve been sick; my brain’s sluggish. But glad we see eye to eye.

By: Erika Rae

Erika Rae — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 04:11:42 +0000

Oh how that row of vans in that picture turns my stomach. I was around for Columbine, so, man. Bad memories. Such a media circus.

…and still, I looked into the whole Tiger accident, too - all the while knowing I couldn’t give a rat’s ass about any of it.

Heh. Couldn’t give a rat’s ass. I haven’t said that in a while. What does that even mean?

By: Paul Gilmartin

Paul Gilmartin — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:24:50 +0000

Hi Richard,
Excellent and though-provoking writing (as usual).
A couple of thoughts:
1. Can I join the new religion you’re forming with Matt (I assume the 2 required criteria are atheism and an intense desire for hell to exist for some carefully chosen people, in which case, I’m happy to report, I qualify!)?
2. Not that I’m defending TMZ or their ilk (I loathe them, just like you), but it’s difficult at this point to blame either scum-journalists or zombie consumers. Would the row of tv satellite trucks be there were there not an audience for such dreck? However, the opposite also holds true, do the scum journalists dictate who the masses read about or watch?
3. I’m a fan of Tiger and love watching him win.
4. Finally, the idea that we would feel better upon seeing that celebrities make mistakes and are therefore human just like us is, to me, abhorrent. The reason being that, in order to feel that way, you had to have previously looked at that person with an air of perfection/infallibility. This strikes me as particularly child-like. Certainly I have my “heroes”, mostly in the sports arena but, as the cliche goes, they still have to put their shoes on one at a time.

By: Chrissa

Chrissa — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 05:10:40 +0000

Absolutely…I agree on all parts

By: N.L. Belardes

N.L. Belardes — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:27:58 +0000

Tiger’s lady interest has man hands. I don’t even know why I’m pointing that out.

As for gossip. Being a journalist I’ve written my fair share. I try not to read too much of it though.

By: Becky

Becky — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:13:28 +0000

The brains are old; only thing that’s new is the type and amount of information we pack into them.

The curiosity to know what they’re up to is one thing; the chasing them around like dogs is another–namely a drive to take advantage of situations for our own benefit (in this case, for example, paparazzi capitalizing on our natural interest in our peers). Sad, but true: Evolution is woefully unrehearsed in (and often hostile towards) our modern notions of ethics.

By: Richard Cox

Richard Cox — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:42:36 +0000

It’s definitely in our nature, whatever the evolutionary benefit might be. However, like many of our encoded behaviors, the sentient human mind makes conscious decisions that have an unexpected effect. Interest in the social lives of our peers is natural, but chasing them around like dogs seems exaggerated.

But I guess we haven’t evolved to do things in moderation.

By: Becky

Becky — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:31:07 +0000

The short answer: It’s hard-wired. Interest in gossip is an evolutionary tool that evolved as part of our elaborate and impressive social talents/mechanisms as a species. Regardless of whether or not knowledge of Tiger’s saga is beneficial in the way that nature “intended,” you’re programmed to react to it as if it is. (And, in a round-about way, it may be perfectly beneficial, at least when it comes to water coolers and even TNB posts.)

In other words, TMZ and the urge to follow a link there are perfectly natural–healthy, even. No shame, man.

By: Richard Cox

Richard Cox — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:08:59 +0000

I think Tiger understands he could quell public curiosity by going on the Jay Leno show and admitting whatever it is he did. Anyone with half an eye on recent scandals regarding wandering men could see this. He’s simply choosing not to. His actions and words seem to indicate that he refuses to be persuaded by public opinion to air his dirty laundry. He knows the consequences of his actions and has chosen this course anyway. No one but his family deserves to know what happened. His life would be a lot easier if he publicly admitted something, sure. But that doesn’t mean we deserve to know.

By: D.R. Haney

D.R. Haney — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:32:41 +0000

I think, Chrissa, that your question about Tiger’s wife and her stature can, turned on its head, be applied to Tiger himself: Would he have stood a chance of marrying a model, Swedish or otherwise, if he weren’t wealthy? Good God, does he seem dull! Not on the links, sure, but, once the subject has turned from golf, it would be torture, I think, to attempt a conversation with him. So seeing him interviewed has persuaded me.

But, hey, that’s a very superficial opinion of the kind we’re spurred to make in these very superficial times. It’s been a while since I was sufficiently curious about a celebrity scandal so as to read about it beyond scanning headlines at the supermarket, but when I was curious, I indulged myself without much guilt. I think it’s natural to have an interest in the private lives of people, famous or not. We all have a touch of the armchair anthropologist, don’t you think? Especially narrative writers.