Tag Archives: dating advice
SNL's 1991 Clarence Thomas sketch resonates today. But is it problematic in the #MeToo era?
As sexual assault allegations mount against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh, the country finds itself remembering a similar situation: When Anita Hill accused then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment in 1991. That memory grows even stronger with Thursday’s testimony by Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor who has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when she was 15 years old.
As “Saturday Night Live” prepares to kick off its 44th season Saturday, Ford’s testimony raises the question of how the show — which traffics in political satire and has been especially topical during the Trump era — will address the thorny issue.
During the Thomas hearings, shows as wide-ranging as “Murphy Brown” and the family-friendly “Dinosaurs” addressed the Hill allegations with varying degrees of obfuscation, but SNL faced them head-on.
One cold-open in particular attracted attention: an Oct. 12, 1991 send-up of the hearings in which the Senate Judiciary Committee essentially mocks Thomas for not getting a date with Hill, before swapping progressively appalling and boorish techniques to pick up women.
Many have praised the sketch as politically biting, and it’s ended up on a few “best of” lists — including a list Al Franken wrote for The Washington Post of his personal favorites. (Franken resigned from the Senate earlier this year over sexual misconduct allegations.)
But in the #MeToo era, the sketch might be seen by some as problematic in that it “reduces the whole issue to gags about sex,” as Allison Yarrow wrote in a November essay for The Post.
Longtime SNL writer Jack Handey, who conceived of the sketch, told The Post via email that it “was one of those rare occasions when the idea just hits you like a bolt from the blue.”
Handey, known for his “Deep Thoughts” interstitial sketches, was standing in executive producer Lorne Michaels’s office for the show’s weekly pitch meeting when “the idea for the Clarence Thomas hearing sketch suddenly came to me. I laughed and blurted it out. People liked it, so I took charge of it.”
“The idea,” he added, “was that the senators would question Clarence Thomas to find out how to pick up women.”
The sketch opens with Kevin Nealon as Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) addressing Hill (portrayed by Ellen Cleghorne).
“Professor Hill, I want to thank you for your patience today,” he begins. “You’ve shown remarkable courage throughout your testimony. It couldn’t have been easy for you, or any of us, to sit here for the last seven hours and talk about penis size, or large-breasted women having sex with animals, or pubic hairs on soft drink cans, or oral sex, or the black man’s sexual prowess, or large-breasted women having sex with animals. But we appreciate your candor.”
“Thank you senator,” Cleghorne’s Hill responds, as she walks off stage. It’s her only line, and she isn’t seen again.
The committee then brings in Thomas, played by Tim Meadows, and they begin grilling him about how he went about asking Hill for a date. Then, rather than criticize him, they start to trade dating advice.
“Was she aware that, as your boss, you could have her fired? And she still didn’t go out with you?” an incredulous Nealon-as-Biden asks.
“There have been charges by Professor Hill that you talked causally with her about graphic scenes from a pornographic movie. Is that true?” Nealon’s Biden asks, adding, “And did that work? Did it break the ice?”
Then Dana Carvey as Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) and Chris Farley as Sen. Howell Heflin (D-Ala.) begin to discuss whether women prefer hardcore or softcore pornography.
Later in the sketch, Phil Hartman’s Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) offers dating advice, such as “Have you ever tried coming out of the bathroom nude and acting like you didn’t know someone was there? . . . That works, too.”
At first glance, the sketch is silly, skewering the senators for their boorishness.
“We try to be funny first and foremost. We don’t mind if the work also makes some important points, but we’re ostensibly trying to be funny,” former SNL writer Jim Downey, who contributed jokes to the sketch, told The Post in a phone interview. “It just seemed like a nice, funny take on the thing. Like a silly idea. We, generally speaking, prefer silly to, like, angry and preachy.”
Handey agreed, saying “to my mind, good political humor proceeds first from a funny idea, not from the editorial point you want to make. If the silliness makes a point, that’s fine, but secondary.”
Some, though, believe the sketch made the wrong point. Yarrow, author of “90s Bitch: Media, Culture, and the Failed Promise of Gender Equality,” told The Post, “The sketch is problematic, even more so watching it today.”
Its “interpretation of sexual harassment was that it was hysterical,” she added.
Yarrow said by focusing on the senators and Thomas, while literally removing Hill from the screen, the sketch ignored the victim and added insult to injury.
“The first problem is that the sketch centers the men, and not the woman. You could imagine so many ways that this sketch could have been done well and been fun, sort of centering Hill and hearing what she had to say, but she leaves the screen in seconds,” Yarrow said. And then, “they spend the whole sketch mocking sexual harassment, and conflating it with failed dating.”
Yarrow pointed to the Hartman’s Kennedy suggesting Thomas take a date on a boat, where it’s “hard for her to get away.”
“That’s not funny. That’s threatening,” Yarrow said. “I don’t find the sketch very funny. It sort of celebrates sexual harassment, and excused sexual harassment, and celebrates boorish behavior.”
“The takeaway of the sketch for me is that Clarence Thomas was bad at picking up women, which completely misses the point that he was being charged with sexual harassment, which is not only unlawful but perpetuates criminal activity,” Yarrow continued.
Handey readily admitted that he’s not sure if the sketch would fly these days, adding: “Political correctness hurts a lot of comedy efforts. Movies like ‘Blazing Saddles’ and ‘Animal House’ probably could not be made today.”
When informed of Yarrow’s perspective, he said: “A writer can only go with what pops into his head. If I had come up with a funny idea centering on Anita Hill, I certainly would have gone with that.”
“I don’t think the piece celebrates boorish behavior, but mocks it,” Handey added. “Characters acting boorishly — and oblivious to it — is one of my favorite things.”
Saturday’s premiere will probably include a piece on the hearings, Downey predicted, adding that if something bumps it then “this would be the wildest news week in American history.”
This time, Yarrow would like to see is a sketch that “centers the victim” and communicates her story and her feelings — and, in particular, the imbalance of power between the alleged aggressor and the victims.
“What [the Thomas sketch] centers as funny is the sex, and we know that sexual harassment isn’t about sex,” Yarrow said. “It’s about power.”
The 'Lemon Law' is the harsh but brilliant dating rule we all need to start doing.
The modern dating experience is a minefield.
People no longer meet in real life, swiping has replaced the meet-cute and while you think chemistry can be replicated through witty, banter-filled messages, you quickly learn that meeting up in person will always be the best barometer for human attraction.
That’s why after exchanging anecdotes about lacklustre dates with a friend, she surprised me with this piece of borderline-cruel, but surprisingly brilliant dating advice.
In actual fact, she borrowed it from the sitcom How I Met Your Mother, in which Barney Stinson thinks he’s discovered the secret of dating.
“From the moment the date begins you have five minutes to decide whether you’re going to commit to an entire evening,” he begins to explain.
“And if you don’t, it’s no hard feelings, just good night, thanks for playing, see you never.”
Now, for the uninitiated, Barney Stinson is a womaniser and a Grade A douche, but in that moment from one (arguably slightly bitter) single girl to another, it was as Oprah would call it – an ah-ha moment.
Although the five-minutes might be a bit presumptuous – let’s extend this to say 15-20 minutes – generally you already know in that short window of time whether the conversation flows naturally and whether or not you want to commit to a second date.
This isn’t to say you have to decide, but if there’s no spark and you’ve decided you’d rather be at home in your PJs watching the latest episode of The Bachelor, is it that bad if you bow out before the first drink?
Watch Barney Stinson explain the Lemon Law on How I Met Your Mother here:
Alas, the majority of my colleagues thought yes, and while I was left to contemplate the benefits of a dating sabbatical, they shared some more level-headed dating approaches.
One recommended the humble ‘first dates can only be coffee dates’ rule because she “didn’t want to waste money, time or a night out on someone that wasn’t worth it”.
Very fair.
Others thought the five-minute rule was too quick, while another agreed that although it was ruthless and incredibly judgemental, she also thought women too often ignore their first instincts when it comes to dating.
However, one colleague confessed that she had friends who had gone on dates where they didn’t even sit down or get out of their car because they knew it “wasn’t going to work” after just looking at the other person.
Despite this, the overall consensus was clear – be polite and wait it out because sometimes – most of the time – it takes more than one date to really make a good impression.
As one friend told me – no one is their best self in the first five minutes of a date.
But still, a part of me thinks the ‘lemon rule’ is just the more honest, upfront version of ghosting but condensed into a shorter period of time.
Don’t you think?
Would you ever use the ‘lemon law’ in real life? Share your story in a comment below.
Want to help Mamamia with some new ideas? Plus go in the chance to win $50? Take our quick survey now.
What the Tech: Phone bill cramming
WHAT THE TECH – You may be in a giving mood during the holidays but donating to what you think is a charity, could start draining your bank account for a few dollars at a time. It’s called cramming and it’s a trick scammers use to add 3rd party charges to your phone bill.
“Many years ago consumers didn’t have credit cards or online banking and the technology of your landline phone bill and now our cell phone bills, allowed us to charge something to our telephone bill,” says Kathleen Calligan from The Better Business Bureau.
“Today many of us have forgotten that but if we look on our telephone bill, and I know we don’t, you’ll see that there can be 3rd party billing,” said Calligan.
The charges are often for subscriptions to horoscope readings, love and dating advice or ringtones. If the consumer sees the charge and reports it to their phone company the scammers can show that you’ve subscribed by playing for them a call where you said ‘Yes”.
“All you have to do is say ‘yes’ to something, just in general conversation. A scammer can pick that out of a recording and they can put 3rd party charges on your phone bill,” explains Calligan.
How do the scammers get your ‘yes’? Earlier this year there was an increase in robo-calls where the person on the other end of the line asked “can you hear me?” The answer “yes” was recorded. Those ‘can you hear me?’ calls were being reported across the country.
The scammers are sly by adding the charges in $3 to $9 increments. “So small every month and you won’t even slightly notice a change in the bill and it will stay there for years,” said Calligan.
So how can you protect yourself? If you get a robo-call or a call with someone on the line asking anything that would draw a positive response such as “yes” or “okay”, don’t say anything and hang up the phone. The FTC also urges consumers to report the call by clicking here.
Oprah Winfrey's Advice On Dating Will Make It So Much Easier To Find “The One”
When it comes to dating, finding “the one” can be a challenge.
With over 7.5 billion people in the world, it should be easy to find a suitable partner, but it’s important not to just settle for anyone.
One person who knows this to be true is none other than Oprah Winfrey, who gave E! News a piece of dating advice in honor of National Singles Day.
“It’s the best time where you get to make yourself the lover, the friend, the companion, the nurturer, the supporter that you would want.
It’s the best time…you need to go through that ‘oh, oh, oh, I’m dating him, I’m dating him…oh that’s good…drop it like it’s hot’, all that.
And then you need a period where you just come down to yourself: that’s what you need. And then, when you are ready, he will show up.”
The queen of all media’s insight to romance isn’t just arbitrary either. She’s been with her boyfriend Stedman Graham since 1986.
“We wouldn’t be together.”
While Stedman popped the question to Oprah in 1992, they initially held off from planning their nuptials until a book proposal was settled, but eventually the idea of marriage was completely taken off the table.
“Nobody believes it, but it’s true. The only time I brought it up was when I said to Stedman, ‘What would have happened if we had actually gotten married?’” she told Vogue. “And the answer is: ‘We wouldn’t be together.'”
And as expected, she agrees with her beau.
“We would not have stayed together, because marriage requires a different way of being in this world,” Oprah continued.
“His interpretation of what it means to be a husband and what it would mean for me to be a wife would have been pretty traditional, and I would not have been able to fit into that.”
She told the publication that while it can bee seen as unconventional, it’s crucial that we learn to “live life on your own terms.”
What do you think about Oprah’s advice? Let us know in the comments!
