In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter four When Women Perform Charged Humor The (Gendered) Politics of Consumption Do women and men laugh at the same jokes? Will a hermaphrodite meet you half way? I ­ can’t answer that but I can tell you that female comics have a harder job than male comics. It’s that simple. Lewis Black, History of the Joke I kept thinking to myself, why was she [Elaine May] not as big a comedic actor as, say, Will Ferrell or Adam Sandler? And the question remains to this day. I think the unfortunate answer is that women just don’t get as far being hilarious as men do. Period. Merrill Markoe, We Killed: The Rise of Women in American Comedy In Vanity Fair (January 2007), Christopher Hitchens published the derisively titled editorial, “Why Women Aren’t Funny,” echoing a long-­ held general cultural perception that men are funnier than women. Humor, on his terms, is best pursued by men, is understood most clearly by men, and should include only those issues pertaining to men. His insight into the gender divide in humor consumption is as follows: “Male humor prefers the laugh to be at someone ’s expense, and understands that life is quite possibly a joke to begin with—­ and often a joke in extremely poor taste. . . . ​ Whereas women, bless their tender hearts, would prefer that life be fair, and even sweet, rather than the sordid mess it actually is.”1 Hitchens’s essay articulates an argument that upon closer inspection quickly unravels. He is correct in saying that women are perceived as less funny, but he offers (sexist) biologistic and otherwise deterministic arguments to explain a cultural and economic phenomenon. In doing so, he When Women Perform Charged Humor   107 reduces audiences’ reception to and consumption of humor to something natural , innate, predetermined, and therefore moot, which for him is ideal because it leaves him and every other swinging dick with the upper hand, the “equipment ” necessary to incite laughter and the arbiter of precisely what should elicit laughter. Christopher Hitchens’s article sparked public discussions both online and in print, introducing arguments from the biological and so­ cio­ log­ i­ cal to cultural and psychological explanations for public perceptions of women’s inadequacy in the realm of humor production. What Hitchens overlooks and what the current public/print investigation of mixed audiences favoring male humor over female humor indicates, however, are cultural explanations of the economy of humor or the way consumption of humor is shaped by the cultural economy, the material incentives shaping pop­ u­ lar cultural forms in the United States. How we belong shapes our identity and its material accessories, for example , shoes, jewelry, and cars. The artists we consume also shape our identity , whether a style of music, an aesthetic created by attraction to certain fine arts, and yes, even comics. To that effect, Lauren Berlant, writes that “identity is marketed in national capitalism as a property. It is something you can purchase , or purchase a relation to. Or it is something you already own that you can express.”2 Stuart Hall agrees that a “greater and greater number of people (men and women)—­ with however little money—­ play the game of using things to signify who they are.”3 Just as we can buy or obtain an image by wearing certain clothes and consuming certain music, we can also shape that image by buying into and supporting certain comics. This consumption is irrevocably wedded to and props up our ideas of who we are, including our national affiliations and where we see ourselves fitting into the national imagination. Mainstream markets, comprised of the White middle-­ class (often referred to as middle-­ America though this is not entirely homogenous) and multiple niche markets like those targeting blue-­ collar workers, religious groups such as Muslims, Christians, and Jews, racial/ethnic communities, the differently abled, sexual minorities, and young adults, together constitute which comics achieve visibility. While these markets generally operate based on the profit potential of comic performers, there are exceptions to this, and some cultural gatekeepers do take financial risks on comics in whose work they believe or want to invest for personal or po­ liti­ cal reasons. Yet, a single vote of confidence from a booking agent, producer, or entertainment executive will not maintain itself for long if the comic yields little revenue or lacks a loyal fan base. Mainstream audiences—­ here defined as those having purchasing power regardless of sexual orientation, race/ethnicity...

Share