A laughing matter?

Have you ever laughed at a joke and then later thought about what it meant and were shocked to realize it was really degrading? Sexism, among other types of discrimination, is often embedded in a humorous context. Because it is in the form of a joke, we are often not aware of it, or it somehow becomes acceptable because it's supposed to be funny.

I'm writing in response to the "Seven Questions" in Oct. 17's Daily, which I found to reflect this type of sexism put into a humorous context. Before I discuss the jokes in the 7Qs in detail, I would like to make it clear that I don't think that there was a conscious motivation to offend or hurt. I also want to make it clear that I'm not suggesting the Daily get rid of 7Qs or even that the Daily censor its content. Instead, I'm suggesting that readers of this 7Qs or articles like it consider what the implied message is behind the joke, and perhaps who it might harm or degrade in the process of trying to get a laugh.

While Seven Questions provides some biographical information about athletes (hometown, birth date, sport played) I believe that its main goal is to be humorous. The humor in 7Qs is often sexual in content, on both the part of interviewer and interviewee. While I have read 7Qs in the past and found it funny, I was not laughing after reading this particular installment. On the premise that the main purpose of 7Qs is to provide a humorous discourse, I'd like to think about what kind of humor the comments in this article constitute and what the implicit messages are behind them.

In the first question, the interviewer asks the interviewee if there is anything he would like to share about his past. The interviewee responds "I got raped in the shower freshman year, so remember to lock your doors when you are in Miller." Resting on the assumption that the article is supposed to represent a humorous discourse, what's the message here? I think the message is that rape is a joke, rape is funny. Yes, women (and men) do get raped. It is a painful and traumatic experience and it has an enormously negative impact on their lives. Maybe I just can't take a vulgar joke and you might call me uptight, but I find it hard to see how rape is a laughing matter, in any context.

Questions five and six pertain to a discussion of comedian Dave Chapelle's jokes about threesomes. Interviewee describes the type of threesome he finds to be unfavorable, specifically two guys and a girl because "chick looks like a chicken on a rotisserie." Again, if we are supposed to find this humorous this would mean that referring to a woman as an animal in a degrading sexual context is funny. I'm going to guess that a fair amount of people on this campus did in fact find this funny. I'm also going to concede that often times, you can't help what you laugh at, even if it seems grossly inappropriate. Having said that, and I can't speak for anyone but myself, describing a woman being penetrated by two males and comparing her to poultry strikes me as nothing but degrading, and certainly not humorous.

Interviewer asks interviewee how he feels about decreased hockey roster spots "due to Title IX." Interviewee responds "If women here had as much enthusiasm about playing sports as they did about eating ice cream up in Carmichael, then we wouldn't have this problem." The connection between women's sports participation and their ice cream consumption is unclear to me but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume Title IX (legislation which provides for women receiving equal funding as men in college sports) is being disparaged here in some way and women are being criticized for eating foods which would make them fat.

I've probably gone too far already in reading into the "deeper" meaning of these comments, but I'll go one step further. There's also some implication that as far as women playing sports negatively affects men's sports, it must be a bad thing. So back to the question of whether these comments constitute something humorous: if we are assuming these comments express humor, disparaging women's increased participation in sports and criticizing their eating habits is...funny. Maybe I feel especially strongly about these issues, being a former Tufts athlete in a sport that largely grew out of Title IX, but I'm struggling to see why its necessary to put down women here (in multiple ways) in order to get a laugh.

By closely analyzing these comments, I'm suggesting that readers be aware of the implicit messages of the humor we are exposed to everyday (whether in print, in a movie or in a conversation) and consider who it might degrade. Whether sexism and other forms of discrimination are subtle or blatant, even simple awareness of their existence is a step towards their elimination.



Rebecca Stein is a senior majoring in international relations.