Detailed description setting the scene for a male-female romantic or sexual interaction, ending in failure to obtain an assumed goal on the part of one or both parties. Rhetorical question as an attempt to force the reader to relate to the previously described situation (“Has this ever happened to you?”).
Generalizing statement concluding that both assumed goal and cause of failure in obtaining said goal are common among audience’s peers (or, for the truly bold columnist, the world). Promise to relieve reader of woes with exclusive wisdom that can only be found in the following column, without any indication of credibility or reliability on the writer’s part.
Unnecessary statement regarding the existence of differences between men and women, sometimes accompanied by an admission of the existence of variation within each sex. Breakdown of personalities within the sexes into oversimplified categories. Filled with obnoxious and often derogatory or explicit slang terms to give the writer an in-your-face or pushing-the-envelope image.
Description of male and female personalities, relying heavily on stereotypes and gender roles. Despite previous acknowledgement of individuality within the sexes, only two or three categories of personality are used to cover the entire span of both the masculine and feminine experiences. Use of pop-psychology to analyze male and female psyche, resulting in obvious conclusions that usually contradict an archaic stereotype (“Most men actually like committed relationships!”; “Most women actually like sex!”), but presented as new and innovative additions to modern thought. No acknowledgement of specifically abstinent or non-heterosexual experiences.
Three suggested solutions to problem addressed in opening scenario: two that reflect opposite extremes, and one that is outrageous. Report of pros and cons for opposite extremes, with an attempt (often obviously strained on the writer’s part) to portray both options as equally viable.
Description of outrageous solution with the underlying suggestion that said solution is meant for comedic effect and not a realistic or reasonable answer. All proffered solutions contain clichés, further assumptions about gender roles, and stolen ideas from stand-up routines or sitcoms (bonus points if the comedian or sitcom is critically acclaimed but has a very small following).
Conclusion that the reader has the power to make his or her own decisions regarding sexual and romantic life, presented as though the writer is generously relinquishing this power. Avoidance of claiming an opinion or preference of one solution over another in spite of the column’s location in the opinion section of the newspaper. Ending is either another cliché or a terrible pun remotely relating to the title of the piece.
Jenna Ray is an English senior and a Mustang Daily guest columnist.