When I was in 5th grade, I decided that I wanted to try out for “Clay Hill Idol,” my elementary school’s annual talent show. It would not be my first time on the big stage- in 4th grade I performed a clumsy basketball-themed dance set to the tune of High School Musical’s “Get’cha Head in the Game.” Yearning for a different method of entertaining the masses, I turned to stand-up comedy. Inspired by monologues from The Late Show and the comedic stylings of Brian Regan, I wrote a three-minute set that landed me a spot in the show. I insisted upon wearing a men’s suit and a top hat on opening night, a choice that probably made my parents think “lesbian Mr. Peanut.” While I wasn’t approached by a highfalutin network executive who would whisk me away to my own version of The Late Show like I hoped, I considered the performance a success. Hungry for the laughter of peers and elders alike, I decided to stick with comedy for the long haul.
Over the years, I wrote satirical newsletters in the style of The Onion, injected humor into academic papers, performed award-winning stand-up, and even took an awkward stab at making a satirical short film. However, after several rejections from McSweeney’s and a five-year long battle with mental illness, I decided that I didn’t have what it took to be a comic. I felt that I was a failure- the rejections and lack of readership made it obvious that I simply wasn’t funny, a belief that was reinforced by my highly depressed psyche. I gave up comedy writing altogether, deciding to focus all of my energy on finishing my master’s degree. The fact that my project was on women in comedy wouldn’t be a problem- writing about comedy was something I still felt capable of doing. Depressed by the death of my comedic aspirations, I nevertheless set out to finish the project.
Standing Up: Women in Comedy is an educational blog created to showcase the intersectional feminist history of American women in comedy. On the main page readers will find nine “tiles”- each featuring a female comedian. Readers are given a diverse roster of comics to choose from: Moms Mabley, Minnie Pearl, Lily Tomlin, Carol Burnett, Roseanne Barr, Joan Rivers, Margaret Cho, Tina Fey, and Leslie Jones are all featured comics.
Each tile links to a blog post about the featured comedian, with information divided into four sections: a biography, the comedian’s experiences as a woman in comedy, the comedian’s impacts and influences on the world of comedy, and the comedian’s connections to feminism. Photos and videos accompany the text of each blog post, allowing users to experience the comedic stylings of each comic.
The blog also features an “About” section that contains much of the content from this paper and a “Want to contribute? Contact me!” option that allows readers to contact me directly with any questions or comments. The Contact option is especially important to the blog’s long-term success, as it allows readers to share thoughts and material related to women in comedy. I see it as a potential method for others to contribute to the space, making the blog a democratic project. The web address for the blog is http://www.womenincomedyblog.wordpress.com.
When I mentioned this project to a fellow graduate student in the Center, they said something along the lines of “I guess they will let you do anything for a project.” While I believe this comment was made in jest and not out of any malice, it made me wonder about the significance of a project on women in comedy. After all, other people in the Center were doing theses and projects on clearly important topics such as the #MeToo movement, girlhood studies, and intimate partner violence. These were serious topics for a serious field of study. While I’d written about feminist comedy in previous graduate courses, I felt that the academy was largely uninterested in the subject. The combination the academy’s perceived dismissal of feminist humor and a lifetime of hearing the feminists can’t take a joke, I internalized the idea that feminism is humorless. I agonized for months over how to get the Center to take my project seriously, wondering how anyone would find value in a project that had “comedy” in the name. Fortunately, when I sat down to do the research for the project, the answers revealed themselves.
In this paper, I will argue that Standing Up: Women in Comedy is relevant to feminist scholarship for a variety of reasons. I will first examine the patriarchal assertion that women are humorless, with the following section introducing the comics as the antithesis of such an assertion. I will then describe how women in comedy subvert oppression through feminist consciousness-raising, arguing that humor is an excellent tactic in building the feminist movement. I will then stress the intersectional feminist nature of the history of women in comedy, showcasing the diversity of the comics’ identities and experiences. In the final body section of the paper, I will explain my decision to create a non-thesis project with a blog format, arguing that easy access to feminist knowledge production is key to the success of the feminist movement. I will then end the paper with a brief discussion of where I plan to take this project in the future, including a personal note about the project’s impact on my comedic aspirations.
“Conflict, Not Comedy:” The Perception of Women and Feminists as Humorless
As usual, there’s patriarchal bullshit afoot. This time, it’s directed at women who dare to be funny. The patriarchal idea that women are not and should not be humorous has existed for a long time in this country, as examined in Gina Barreca’s They Used to Call Me Snow White… But I Drifted. In this book, Barreca theorizes that women are perceived as “humorless” because they are supposedly “less likely to laugh than their male counterparts.” Women are often seen as being unable to “take a joke,” especially when they fail to be “good sport” about jokes that “had to do with abuse and insults,” (Barreca). Essentially, because we often do not laugh at male attempts to put us down, we are seen as humorless.
Barreca also discusses how women have been discouraged from telling jokes- in one instance, she cites a 1972 book called Teen Scene- 1001 Groovy Hints and Tips that advises girls with “quick wits” to “cool it” when men are around (insert citation). She also cites psychologist Rose Laub Coser, who argues “In this culture women are expected to be passive and receptive, rather than active and intimidating. A woman who has a good sense of humor is one who laughs (but not too loudly!) when a man makes a witticism or tells a good joke… The man provides; the woman receives,” (insert citation). Barreca then theorizes that the “unalterable truth” that women can and should not tell jokes was simply “manufactured and perpetuated by someone who will benefit by our believing it,” (insert citation). Who benefits from women who can’t tell jokes? My prime suspect is, as it usually is, the patriarchy.
In Women in Comedy: History, Theory, Practice, the notion that women aren’t funny is examined further. In the preface, which is also written by Barreca, the question “Why is humor considered ‘unfeminine’?” is posed. Barreca argues that “You can’t be fragile and traffic in humor, and conventional femininity insists on fragility and delicacy as trademarks,” (inset citation). Barreca goes on to theorize that “Women’s humor relies heavily on two other unfeminine acts: a lack of inhibition and a corresponding lack of shame in exaggerating pernicious stereotypes in order to reveal their vicious underpinning,” (insert citation). Since society’s conception of femininity and the characteristics necessary to perform comedy are incompatible, it is no wonder that men have always pushed back against the idea that a woman could be funny.
The idea that women are incapable of producing humor is still a common male assertion, one which has survived even in the 21st century. As the modern argument goes, men develop senses of humor to attract women, whereas women rely on physical beauty and therefore never need to make men laugh. This argument was famously taken up in a 2007 article titled “Why Women Aren’t Funny,” written by the late Christopher Hitchens, author of other hot takes like “Religion Poisons Everything” and “Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani Could Have Been a Perfect Match.” After making the familiar arguments that women only want to please men with their bodies and that comedy is too “aggressive” for them anyway, Hitchens concedes that women who are “hefty or dykey or Jewish” may sometimes develop a sense of humor (Hitchens). Similarly, in 2000, comedian Jerry Lewis stated that he had “trouble” with the idea of a Lucille Ball as a comic because he saw her “as a producing machine that brings babies into the world,” (Kilday).
Even within the past decade, insidious stereotypes regarding women’s supposed humorlessness have prevailed. In 2013, when asked why Saturday Night Live hadn’t employed a black woman as a cast member for several years, Kenan Thompson suggested that black women were simply never “ready” to be on the show (Gennis). In 2016, Mike Lazzo, the executive vice president and creative director for Adult Swim, was asked why less than three percent of its content was credited to female creators. His response? “When you put women in the writer’s room, you get conflict, not comedy,” (Wright).
Sexism against women in comedy doesn’t just exist within the industry, as trolls from the Internet will constantly remind us. Backlash against female comics and comedy writers is particularly strong when they enter comedic arenas that previously only contained men. For example, when women were finally added to the writer’s room of the immensely popular animated comedy Rick and Morty, fans doxed, harassed, and threatened them for “ruining the show,” (Barsanti). Even worse was the backlash against the female-led Ghostbusters reboot, with an army of trolls tanking the film’s online reviews and sending co-star Leslie Jones misogynistic, racist, and violent messages (Kreizman). Despite these challenges, female comics have prevailed in making a name for themselves, as I will detail in the following section.
Women in Comedy: Subverting the Trope of the Humorless Woman
While the idea that women aren’t funny is pervasive in the comedy industry and in American culture at large, female comedians have repeatedly and consistently debunked this patriarchal bullshit with their writings and performances. In fact, Moms Mabley began performing comedy before Jerry Lewis could even form the words to express his dipshit opinion on female comedians. Releasing over twenty albums in her lifetime, Mabley was the first black comedian to break into mainstream comedy- a credit usually given to Richard Pryor (Goldberg). Meanwhile, Minnie Pearl delighted southern audiences on The Grand Ole Opry as early as 1940, performing as “the quintessential southern spinster,” (Country Music Hall of Fame). Hitchens’ theory that female comedians are exclusively “hefty or dykey or Jewish” is easily debunked by Pearl, a name that Hitchens probably never bothered to research.
Women in comedy continued to disprove the “unfunny woman” theory, with several key figures entering the game in the middle of the 20th century. Joan Rivers made her television debut in 1965 on The Tonight Show, racking up over 80 appearances by 1983 (Heigl). As the first woman to host a variety show, Carol Burnett introduced the idea of women performing sketch comedy in the late 1960’s. The Carol Burnett Show stayed on the air for 11 years, with Burnett winning 25 Emmys, a Presidential Medal of Freedom, and the Kennedy Center’s Mark Twain Prize for Humor. Around the same time, Lily Tomlin first appeared on Laugh-In, a sketch comedy show where she developed characters such as Ernestine the telephone operator (Tomlin Wagner). Tomlin would go on to win too many awards to list and is still active on the groundbreaking dramedy Grace and Frankie.
By the end of the 20th century, women in comedy were gaining even more momentum against the humorless-woman argument. Roseanne Barr hit the scene during this time, showcasing working-class feminism on the immensely popular 90’s sitcom Roseanne. Additionally, the raunchy and politically-charged humor of Margaret Cho shocked and delighted audiences on the national stand-up circuit. Many of the previously mentioned comics continued to work during this time, leaving the field of women in comedy more diverse than ever.
Though stereotypes regarding women’s supposed lack of humor survived into the 21st century, dozens of female comics became part of the mainstream comedy scene. In this project I focus on two women who entered mainstream comedy via Saturday Night Live during this time. Tina Fey was SNL’s first female head writer, appearing as a “Weekend Update” anchor beginning in 2000. She would go on to write and perform in critically acclaimed television shows and films such as Mean Girls, 30 Rock, and The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. The final comedian in my project is Leslie Jones, who spent decades trying to break into mainstream comedy. After she landed a role on SNL in 2014, Jones would go on to star in the female-led reboot of Ghostbusters.
Disproving the humorless woman myth is only a fraction of the feminist labor that these nine comedians performed. As I will show in the next section, women in comedy have historically engaged in feminist praxis through consciousness-raising.
Feminist Praxis: Comedy as Consciousness-Raising
At the First National Conference for Stewardesses for Women’s Rights in 1973, Kathie Sarachild gave a talk on “radical feminist consciousness-raising.” Though the idea originated from Sarachild’s presentation at the First National Women’s Liberation Conference in 1968, the 1973 talk expanded on the idea of conciouisness-raising. Sarachild addresses the concept of “radical” first, noting that it simply means that radical feminists are “interested in getting to the roots of the problems in society.” The aim of radical feminists, according to Sarachild, it to “start a mass movement of women to put an end to the barriers of segregation and discrimination based on sex.” She goes on to argue that “in order to have a radical approach… it seemed logical that we had to study the situation of women, not just take random action.” To best study the situation of women, Sarachild and her group of other radical feminists decided to “raise its consciousness by studying women’s lives by topics like childhood, jobs, motherhood, etc.” She goes on to define the act of consciousness-raising and arguing for its benefits: “consciousness-raising- studying the whole gamut of women’s lives, starting with the full reality of one’s own- would also be a way of keeping the movement radical by preventing it from getting sidetracked into single issue reforms and single issue organizing,” (Sarachild).
In 1971, a pamphlet on how to start a consciousness-raising group was distributed by The Chicago Women’s Liberation Union. The pamphlet describes consciousness-raising groups as “the backbone of the Women’s Liberation Movement” and as a places where women could share problems they thought they were alone in experiencing. The pamphlet argues that “We see that ‘personal’ problems shared by so many others–not being able to get out of the house often enough, becoming exhausted from taking care of the children all day, perhaps feeling trapped–are really ‘Political’ problems. Understanding them is the first step toward dealing with them collectively.” Tips on starting such a group include gathering a small group of women to meet informally every week, choosing a weekly topic that each member would discuss in relation to their own life, and eventually moving on to considering action projects. Suggested topics for discussion include “What did you want to do in life? What kept you from doing it?”, “What is a ‘nice’ girl? Were you a ‘nice’ girl?”, and even “Do you pretend to have an orgasm?” (CWLU Herstory Project).
Consciousness-raising is further discussed in bell hook’s Feminism is for Everybody, where she describes the process by which people come to understand “the way male domination and sexism” is “expressed in everyday life.” Theorizing that “Feminists are made, not born,” hooks believes that we must change ourselves before we can do anything about patriarchy (31). Hooks notes that the two main sites of consciousness-raising are homes of feminist thinkers and women’s studies classrooms- places where open discussion of patriarchal bullshit can form individuals into feminist thinkers and actors (32). Hooks admits that many consciousness-raising groups disbanded as feminist reading material became readily available, leaving the women’s studies classroom as the most common physical location for consciousness-raising (33).
While the concept of feminist consciousness-raising is incredibly important to the success of the feminist movement, I often find myself questioning its practicality. Most people never take a course in women’s studies, and even though feminist texts are widely available, only certain portions of the population will read them. The question of raising the male consciousness complicates things even further- hooks argues that the support of men is necessary for the success of the feminist movement but admits that male consciousness-raising rarely occurs (37). Fortunately, with the rise of modern media platforms, feminist consciousness-raising can take place on a scale never seen before, but the question of how to reach the uninitiated remains. While serious feminist argument is certainly part of the solution, a Saturday Night Live sketch from 2008 offers us a glimpse of humor as a consciousness-raising tool.
When Sarah Palin joined John McCain on the 2008 Republican presidential ticket, Saturday Night Live producer Lorne Michaels approached Tina Fey with a proposition. Noting her physical resemblance to the vice-presidential nominee, Michaels asked Fey to play Palin in an upcoming episode’s cold open. The cold open, written by Seth Myers and Amy Poehler, presented “A Nonpartisan Message from Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton,” with Fey playing Palin and Poehler playing Clinton. While the cold open’s most enduring line would be Fey’s Alaskan-accented “I can see Russia from my house,” Fey later pointed to Poehler’s “it is never sexist to question female politicians’ credentials” as the “thesis statement” of the piece. In Bossypants, Fey writes that the sketch boiled down to “two women speaking out together against sexism in the campaign,” as the two candidates “experienced different sides of the same sexism coin.” Fey goes on to point out that ten million people watched the sketch, pointing out that “You all watched a sketch about feminism and you didn’t even realize it because of all the jokes… Suckers,” (216).
Tina Fey was not the first female comedian to trick audiences into raising their consciousness through listening to feminist comedy. Moms Mabley may have been the first woman in comedy to employ this strategy, disarming audiences with humor in order to spread an anti-sexist, anti-racist message during the Civil Rights Movement. By playing into a “mammy” stereotype that disarmed white audiences, Mabley was able to get away with jokes that dealt with highly sensitive topics (Goldberg). My favorite Mabley joke, which I found in Hysterical! Women in American Comedy, goes like this:
“Colored fellow down home died. Pulled up to the gate. St. Peter look at him, say, ‘What do you want?’ ‘Hey man, you know me. Hey, Jack, you know me. I’m old Sam Jones. Old Sam Jones, man, you know me. Used to be with the NAACP, you know, core and all that stuff, man, marches, remember me? Oh, man. You know me.’ He just broke down there, ‘You know me.’ He looked in his book, ‘Sam Jones,’ he say, ‘No, no you ain’t here, no Sam Jones.’ He said, ‘Oh, man, yes, I am; Look there. You know me. I’m the cat that married that white girl on the capital steps of Jackson, Mississippi.’ He said, ‘How long ago has that been?’ He said, ‘About five minutes ago,’” (Mizejewski).
We can see other examples of feminist consciousness-raising from many of the comedians in this project. Lily Tomlin’s Netflix dramedy Grace and Frankie depicts the marginalization of older women, dispelling the myth that older women are inherently asexual with lots of masturbation references. Carol Burnett’s “The Family” sketches on The Carol Burnett Show depict the depressing circumstances that many housewives of the time faced. By sharing her experiences with online harassment and hacking, Leslie Jones shows us the hatred that many successful women of color face. Additionally, Margaret Cho’s book I’m the One that I Want discusses women’s issues such as weight obsession and drug addiction, bringing what are normally private experiences of oppression into the light. These examples are just a fraction of the consciousness-raising that women in comedy do, but they all highlight how a seemingly trivial field in entertainment can contribute to the feminist movement.
The Intersectional Feminist History of Women in Comedy
When I first chose women in comedy as my project topic, I worried that I would be criticized for embracing white feminism. At the time, I was only familiar with Tina Fey- a self-proclaimed “obedient white girl from the suburbs,”- and other 21st century white women like Amy Poehler and Amy Schumer (Fey 119)[1]. I was afraid that all nine of the comedians I studied would be middle-class white women who never contended with multiple vectors of oppression. I imagined every member of the Women’s Studies faculty (including affiliates) lining up at my defense to lambast my project for its lack of intersectionality, leaving me with a failing review. Fortunately, now that my research is complete, I can say with confidence that the history of women in comedy is diverse. While six of the nine comedians I studied are white, it is important to remember that race is not the only signifier of diversity. This section will cover the intersectional histories of the women that I studied, featuring seven of the nine comedians. While both Tina Fey and Joan Rivers faced discrimination on the basis of gender, I have decided to omit them from this section due to their white, heterosexual middle-class privilege.
If you ask a comedy fan to name a black comedian from the Civil Rights Era, they will undoubtably name Richard Pryor. If you ask them to name the first queer female comedian to reach mainstream status in America, they might guess Ellen DeGeneres. If you ask them to name a working-class, queer woman of color who performed anti-racist and anti-sexist comedy during the Civil Rights Era, they almost certainly won’t know the name Moms Mabley. Though Mabley was largely erased from American cultural memory after her death, she remains a radical figure in the world of comedy. By adopting a modest style of dress and playing into a “mammy” stereotype, Mabley was able to joke about serious topics such as sexism and racism. Though she was queer, her stage persona had a penchant for young men, resulting in jokes that poked fun at older men. This type of confrontational stand-up was not seen in female comics prior to Mabley, which is likely why Whoopi Goldberg observed that “Moms opened a door for women to stand up and be funny,” (Goldberg). Those interested in researching Mabley can look at the following sources in my bibliography: Bennetts, “Moms Mabley” from Ebony, Watkins, Goldberg, “Moms Mabley” from Biography.com, Thompson, Studs, Fulton, Wolk, and Mizejewski.
Minnie Pearl’s association with intersectional feminism is complicated, as she had dubious political leanings. While she never engaged in hate speech, she supported the openly-racist George Wallace in his 1958 campaign for governor of Alabama (Jones). I might seem odd for me to include Pearl in a project that claims to promote intersectional feminism, as there are plenty of female comics that would make a clear impression of diversity. Though I do not agree with Pearl’s politics, she represents a group often excluded from feminist discussion: working-class Southern women. Presenting a brand of rural comedy generally only seen in men, Pearl was able to connect with Southern audiences through her performance on The Grand Ole Opry, later introducing the rest of America to her southern charm on the hit show Hee-Haw. Even today, viewers will be hard-pressed to find a mainstream female comedian who showcases working-class Southern heritage, making Pearl’s career an important note for anyone interested in comics from marginalized backgrounds. Those interested in researching Pearl should check my bibliography for O’Connor, “Minnie Pearl” from Country Music Hall of Fame, “Just So Proud to Be Here” from Wide Open Country, Fox, and Jones.
It might seem obvious to call Lily Tomlin privileged- as a middle-class white woman, she was able to attend college and did not experience the racial barriers that would keep many comics of color from entering the public eye. Fortunately, she used her immense popularity to promote anti-racist values, with a notable example being the 1974 “Juke and Opal” sketch she performed with Richard Pryor. In the sketch, Tomlin and Pryor tackle drug addiction and poverty- Pryor plays a poor man on methadone and Tomlin plays a working-class diner worker. Fast forward forty years and Tomlin is tackling ageism on the Netflix dramedy Grace and Frankie, a show that explicitly explores the sexualities of mature women. It should also be noted that in 2013, Tomlin married Jane Wagner, her writing partner of 45 years (McNiece). Lily Tomlin is certainly privileged in many respects, but as a queer woman who embraced intersectionality before the term was even coined, she should be seen as a feminist pioneer. Those interested in researching Tomlin should see the following sources in the bibliography: “Lily Tomlin” from Biography.com, “Lily Tomlin” from LILY, “From Stand-Up to Netflix,” Reed, and Silverstein.
Carol Burnett is yet another comedian to come from a working-class background. She grew up in a tiny apartment in Hollywood with her mother and Nanny during The Great Depression, spending whatever extra money she had on seeing movies. Both of her parents suffered from alcoholism, splitting up when Burnett was a child. She could not have made it in comedy without the charity of strangers- the college tuition she could not afford appeared in the mail from an unknown sender and a benefactor that she will only refer to as “Mr. C” paid for her move to New York City when she was a young actress. On The Carol Burnett Show, the first variety show ever to be hosted by a woman, she explored themes such as the oppression that housewives face (The Family: Sorry!). Though she never explicitly discusses feminism in her act, Burnett considers herself to be a feminist, working to help pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970’s. Those interested in researching Burnett should see the following sources in the bibliography: Burnett, “Carol Burnett” from PBS, Brennan, DeCaro, and Boyle.
While Roseanne Barr’s reputation will be forever marred by her racist and anti-feminist comments in recent years, her origins and the majority of her work come from a place of Jewish, working-class feminism. For Barr, a Jewish woman who grew up in a region heavily populated by Mormons, comedy was essential, as it signified that she was “not threatening to non-Jews.” In her early twenties, she was already a mother of three and lived on an unsteady, working-class income. Interested in the intersection between motherhood and her working-class status, she became interested in feminism, learning about the movement at The Woman to Woman Bookstore (Jewish Woman’s Archive). Her working-class feminism would inform the content of her 1988 sitcom Roseanne, a groundbreaking show that tackled topics such as substance abuse, teenage pregnancy, homosexuality, divorce, motherhood, domestic abuse, and toxic masculinity (Pioneers of Television: Roseanne Barr). Though Barr will likely be remembered as anything but an intersectional feminist due to her recent disavowal of the movement, her legacy of working-class feminism would forever change the way low-income families are depicted in media. Those interested in researching Roseanne Barr should see the following sources in the bibliography: “Roseanne” from Jewish Women’s Archive, “Roseanne Barr” from PBS, Press, “Roseanne Barr” from Bibliography.com, Hughes, Zimmerman, Teeman, Chavez, Scott, Wittmer, Clark, Iley, and Bennett.
As a queer Korean American woman trying to make it in comedy during the 1980’s and 90’s, Margaret Cho faced multiple vectors of oppression in her career. While she was able to handle racist and sexist comments from audience members on the stand-up circuit, she faced immense difficulty when trying to break into the world of television. As the star of All-American Girl, the first Asian American sitcom ever created, she was asked to drop 30 pounds in two weeks to conform to the stereotype of the skinny Asian woman. Though the weight loss landed her in the hospital with kidney failure, she was determined to make the show a hit. Unfortunately, producers at ABC forced Cho to tone down her boisterous comedic style and did not allow her to write for the show, worrying that her influence would make the series “too ethnic.” As a result, All-American Girl was a flop. Cho faced several years of body dysphoria, addiction, and depression after the show’s cancellation, showing just how damaging sexism and racism can be to a woman of color (Cho). Fortunately, Cho rebounded after the success of her I’m the One that I Want comedy tour, which focused on the discrimination and resulting hardships that she faced. In the 21st century, Cho’s raunchy feminist humor defies the racist and sexist discrimination that once held her back. Those interested in researching Cho should see the following sources in the bibliography: Gates, Cho, “Margaret Cho Opens Up…”, “Margaret Cho Biography,” and Machado.
The story of Leslie Jones, an African American comedian, is proof that black women still face institutional sexism and racism in the world of comedy. Jones gained notoriety among black audiences for her boisterous style but found that she was not getting high-paying gigs in front of white audiences. Even after performing with big names like Katt Williams and Dave Chappelle, Jones found that her career was stagnant (Marantz). Jones was only able to break into the mainstream after demanding to perform in front of white audiences, hitting the big time when she landed a spot as a cast member on Saturday Night Live. Her comedic style is loud, boisterous, dynamic, and raunchy, showing just how far female comedians have come since the days of having to disarm white male audiences. Those interested in studying Jones should see the following sources in the bibliography: “Leslie Jones” from Biography.com, Gardenswartz, Smith, “Leslie Jones Found Her Funny at CSU,” Marantz, Binkow, Gay, Fisher, Welk, “Saturday Night Live Writer Leslie Jones…”, and McDonald.
After looking at these comedians in chronological order, it is clear that major advancements in what female comics can get away with have been made over the past several decades. While Moms Mabley discussed a penchant for younger men, she had to adopt a disarming persona and appearance in order to get audiences on her side. 60 years later, comedians like Margaret Cho and Leslie Jones are openly discussing sex in a very confrontational, unapologetic, in-your-face manner. Discussion of social issues has become more straightforward as well- while Mabley would tell anti-racist jokes, her anti-racist message was never as blatant as Margaret Cho’s anti-homophobia joke in Beautiful, which involved miming lesbian sex with an imaginary Sarah Palin. Because of the work of early comedians like Mabley, Pearl, Tomlin, Rivers, and Burnett, comedians like Barr and Cho could be more blatant with their politics and jokes. Similarly, the work of Cho paved the way for raunchy female comedy that we associate with the 21st century- Amy Schumer may be considered the first raunchy female comic, but Cho was the first to talk about “eating ass” on stage (Machado). Unfortunately, though women’s comedy has become more in-your-face, male hostility towards women in comedy has continued. That won’t stop these women, however. Leslie Jones, who openly jokes about the hate she receives, is proof that women in comedy can overcome even the nastiest of trolls.
The Non-Thesis Route: Why I Created a Blog
At the University of Florida, students pursuing a master’s degree in Women’s Studies are faced with a choice during their first year of study: they can commit to writing a 50-100 page thesis or they can work on a something called “a non-thesis project.” When I was presented with these options, I wasn’t sure what to do. The thesis track certainly sounded more legitimate- to this day, I firmly believe that the term “non-thesis” makes the project option sound like the lazy woman’s version of knowledge production. This section will explain why I chose the non-thesis route anyway and will first include background information about preferred forms of knowledge production in the Women’s Studies discipline as well as information on writing in a personal voice.
Though the faculty at the Center will tell you that the thesis and non-thesis project options are valued equally, the history of Women’s Studies shows a privileging of certain types of scholarship over others. In the “Articulating Projects” chapter of Ellen Messer-Davidow’s Disciplining Feminism, Messer-Davidow describes the tensions between radical feminists who viewed Women’s Studies (WS) as a “potential revolutionary force within the university and society” and traditional academics who viewed it as “a new academic discipline” that needed established “legitimacy in terms of research, lectures, papers, exams, and grades,” (120). Essentially, while some feminists were focused on WS producing social change, others were most concerned with making WS similar to other academic departments like English, History, or, God forbid, Engineering.
Some feminists imagined a bridging of the two camps- imagining scholarship that would lead to social change while still garnering academic prestige. Unfortunately, “Feminists could not reconcile the academy’s objective of producing and inculcating scholarly knowledge with the movement’s objective of making social change,” and as a result, “feminists could not form the collective identity and action they needed to launch the hybrid projects that they envisioned,” (88, 124). Instead of working on these hybrid projects, the WS academy would “create careers in academic studies in women and have no relationship with the great majority of women to whom [the academics] will become like overseers,” (89). Messer-Davidow ends this chapter with a damning account of the WS field: “Fueled by the socioeconomic forces that grew higher education, formatted by the academy’s intellectual and educational venues, and fractured by the rules of its own discourse, the project that had set out to feed social change became a discipline that fabricated esoteric knowledge,” (127).
In Elizabeth Deeds Ermarth’s “Professionalizing Feminism: What a Long, Strange Journey It Has Been,” Ermarth further discusses the way feminist knowledge is produced in the WS academy. She argues that “What is at stake for feminists are the tools of thought,” going on to explain that “New information always has important uses; but information alone does not provide meaning, as art continually reminds us. What confers meaning and value is the format, the method, the code, the medium. Content is the secondary carrier. Filling the same old explanatory models with new content only leaves intact the tools of thought that have created the problem in the first place. How many women in women’s studies have been willing to challenge power by challenging the medium, the method, the foundations of practice, academic or civic? How many have been aware that, in writing a history of women’s novels in a particular century, they leave intact the very processes and methodological commitments that disadvantage women in the first place?” (49). My reading of Ermarth’s argument? While new feminist knowledge is important, it is even more important to deliver this information in a useful way that does not leave women outside of the academy out of the loop.
Both the Messer-Davidow chapter and the Emerarth article seem to make the point that Women’s Studies’ traditional form of knowledge production serves the academy more than it serves people outside of the academy. Based on these readings, it would seem that the typical WS academy is a machine with the primary function of turning out new scholars. Whether these scholars produce knowledge that will reach and impact people outside of the academy is a secondary thought, if it is thought of at all. If you follow these arguments, it becomes abundantly clear that the “hybrid projects” that Messer-Davidow discusses are needed in WS. Thankfully, by offering the non-thesis project option to graduate students, the WS center at the University of Florida is clearly addressing the need for scholarly work that impacts those outside of the academy.
This brings me back to my original choice: thesis or project? When I decided that my research topic would be women in comedy, I thought about who would view the final product. In theory, anyone could read a 50-page thesis on women in comedy, but in actuality, who will? Academics certainly could, assuming that they are interested in the topic. My academically-minded parents probably would, provided that they run out of science-fiction novels and vampire-themed television dramas to consume first. After garnering what would probably be less than ten reads, the thesis would likely gather dust in the UF libraries. Up-and-coming female comedians, a group that I hoped would view my final product, would likely never even hear of my thesis paper. A thesis paper on women in comedy seemed against the spirit of feminism and I feel that it would have contributed to what UF graduate Tim Kavaklian-D’Annecy called a “hegemony of inaccessibility,” (4).
Not wanting to fabricate “esoteric knowledge” that would be inaccessible to those outside of the academy was part of my decision to pursue a non-thesis project, though I did have another reason for choosing this form of knowledge production. Ever since I wrote my 8th grade History Fair paper on George Carlin, I have preferred writing in my “personal voice” rather than a traditionally academic voice. This preference has been controversial with teachers and professors- some praised me for my “unique” writing style, while others claimed that I did not appear professional enough. This controversy dates back to the George Carlin paper- judges at the county level of the History Fair loved my writing, but judges at the state level circled all of my jokes and labeled them as “offensive.” In the remainder of this section, I will discuss scholars who have argued for the use of “situated knowledge” and the “personal voice” in academic writing, making my case for the legitimacy of my writing style.
In Dorothy E. Smith’s “Women’s Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology,” the topic of “situated-knowledge” is explored. Though this article is about women’s voices in the field of sociology, I argue that the field of WS privileges the academic paper in the same way that sociology does. In this article, Smith discusses how “We learn to discard our experienced world as a source of reliable information” in order to “confine and focus our insights within the conceptual frameworks and relevances which are given in the discipline,” (87). She goes on to say that as women, “we must suspend our sex, and suspend our knowledge of who we are” in order to fit the mold of the respected academic (91). Basically, in order to be seen as good academic sociologists, women are supposed to give up their situated knowledge. Smith clearly disagrees with this notion, as she argues that “The persistence of the privileged sociological version relies on a substructure which has already discredited and deprived of authority to speak, the voices of those who know the society differently,” (93). Smith argues that the solution to this problem is to place the academic “where she is situated” and to make her “direct experience of the everyday world the primary ground for her knowledge,” (91).
In Nancy Sorkin Rabinowitz’s article “Personal Voice / Feminist Voice,” Rabinowitz makes the argument for the personal voice in academia. She states that “personal voice scholarship is related to feminism” because “the professional voice is associated with masculinity, if not necessarily and essentially, then in the ways it has been performed and by whom,” (192). Because the professional voice has historically been associated with men, writing in this voice is like wearing a “costume” for women (192). I certainly agree with this notion- donning a professional, or strictly academic, voice has always seemed foreign to me, and I am much more comfortable writing in my own voice. Rabinowitz also notes that “There are power imbalances that lead to a reluctance to adopt the personal voice because it might make you seem ‘not serious,’” (195). While the fear of appearing unacademic in my writing has bothered me for this reason, it should be obvious by now that I didn’t let that fear stop me from writing in my own voice- I too want to “get out of the straightjacket of formal scholarly language,” (192).
When my advisor told me that the non-thesis project option would afford me the opportunity to reach audiences outside of the academy while maintaining my own voice, I made my decision. Choosing a blog as the product of my research was easy, as it was clear that it could easily be shared with anyone. The blog could also be added to after graduation, allowing for the continuation of the project. Additionally, the blog would be the most “democratic” option of knowledge production, as the “Want to contribute? Contact me!” section would encourage anyone- including those outside of the academy- to contribute information to the project. Information contributed wouldn’t even have to be about the biggest names in comedy- in the contact section, I encourage readers to share information about lesser-known comedians that I can potentially feature. Because of these reasons, I felt that the blog could truly make a difference to people outside of the academy.
Before I start getting hate mail, I want to make it very clear that I do not think the thesis option is a less valuable than the project option. I simply believe that the non-thesis option is a under-appreciated form of knowledge production in the academy and that it deserves to be regarded with the same esteem that the traditional thesis garners. I do not believe that anyone in WS at UF has engaged in the production of “esoteric” knowledge, though I would like to challenge my colleagues to share their knowledge with those outside of the academy. We all chose the form of knowledge production that made the most sense considering our areas of research, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Problems only arise when our feminist knowledge remains exclusively in the academy’s ivory tower. As bell hooks tells us, “Feminism is for Everyone,” and it is up to us to make sure our scholarship is part of this feminist spirit.
Before I end this section, I want to briefly argue against the term “non-thesis project.” By using this term, the academy seems to be delegitimizing the work that is done outside of the traditional academic paper. “Non-thesis” suggests that the process and/or final product is lacking something, whether it be academic rigor, professionalism, or even a basic thesis statement. My project, including both the blog and this paper, totals in around 80 pages of double-spaced material, not including pictures. I cite dozens of sources, my thesis statement is at the beginning of this paper, and, as I just argued, my use of personal voice should not delegitimize my work. “Hybrid project” seems to be a much better name for the non-thesis project, as it does not carry the connotation that something is missing. Additionally, calling the non-thesis option a “hybrid project” option is in the spirit of the types of projects that many early feminists wanted the academy to produce. Yes, I am willing to take this argument to the Dean’s office.
Conclusion: Future Plans for this Project
Now that I’ve alienated everyone who’s ever written a master’s thesis, it’s time to wrap this paper up. While an insidious belief that women aren’t funny remains both in the comedy industry and in Internet culture, the female comedians I discuss in Standing Up: Women in Comedy prove that this assumption is a load of sexist horse shit. These women raise audiences’ feminist consciousness not through stone-faced argument, but through humor that encourages even the uninitiated to observe the absurdity of oppression. Emerging from diverse backgrounds, these comedians prove that the history of women in comedy is intersectional and feminist, as we see with the stories of marginalized women overcoming the odds to speak their truths.
When I talk to people about this project, the most common question I get is “Why didn’t you do a tile on (insert famous female comedian here)?” With limited time to complete the project, I could only feature nine comedians, choosing to focus on women that contributed to the field in unique and historically significant ways. Though I stand by my argument that my project is intersectional, I wish I could have written about more women of color. Additionally, with so much diversity emerging in the field of women in comedy in the 21st century, it was particularly tough to select only two comics from the past two decades. I would like to highlight some of the 21st century comedians and their work here: Ali Wong’s Netflix specials Hard Knock Wife and Baby Cobra, Amy Schumer’s Comedy Central show Inside Amy Schumer, Aparna Nancherla’s album Just Putting it Out There, Amy Sedaris’s cult-classic Strangers with Candy, Robin Tran’s Hulu special Don’t Look at Me, Melissa McCarthy’s role in Bridesmaids, Chelsea Handler’s Netflix show The Chelsea Handler Show, Samantha Bee’s TBS show Full-Frontal With Samantha Bee, Amy Poehler’s hit mockumentary Parks and Recreation, and Shazia Mirza’s podcast The Kardashians Made Me Do It are all amazing comedic works that deserve your attention!
One of the nice things about creating a blog for my project is that I can address these concerns in the future- something that I legitimately plan on doing. Since I want to study feminist comedy as part of my PhD, continuing this project seems like a fairly obvious choice. Additionally, by allowing readers to contact me directly with information on women in comedy, this project will become democratic, a development that will make the knowledge produced more feminist than ever. I already have several women in mind for my next round of tiles: Phyllis Diller, Ali Wong, Whoopi Goldberg, Wanda Sykes, Aparna Nancherla, Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Sedaris, and Robin Tran all make the short list.
A Note on Failure
When I quit performing and writing comedy, my reasoning boiled down to the idea that I was a failure. I became too afraid to perform on stage because of social anxiety and severe body image issues. Failure. My humor publications were rejected from McSweeney’s. Failure. I worked on a humor article for weeks and only three people read it. Failure. My depression became so severe that I stopped cracking jokes and making my friends laugh. Failure. The feeling of failure didn’t stop at comedy either. I tried over ten medications to improve my mental health and none of them worked. Some days, I couldn’t get out of bed to go to class. I had to take an incomplete in one course because, at that point, I was totally unable to function. Failure failure failure. (Note: I want it to be clear that having a mental illness does not make someone a failure. Having a mental illness that one is unable to recover from simply makes one feel like a failure.)
When we look at successful people, we do not see them as failures. The comedians I studied are no exception. When we look at Carol Burnett, we see the first female variety show host and a winner of the Mark Twain Prize for Humor. When we look at Leslie Jones, we see a hilarious Saturday Night Live cast member and movie star. When we look at Margaret Cho, we see a successful stand-up comedian brimming with confidence. While all these accomplishments are important, I believe it is equally important to look at the failures that these women experienced.
In her first acting class at UCLA, Carol Burnett was convinced that her first performance would dazzle. Her professor gave her a D minus, adding that the only reason she didn’t receive an F was that she had managed to memorize the lines. When she moved to New York City to pursue an acting career, she was rejected from every role she tried out for, only succeeding when she put on a self-written show with her fellow “failures,” (Burnett). Several decades later, Leslie Jones gave up her college basketball scholarship to become a comedian, got on stage at the famous Comedy Store, and “bombed like a frickin’ 747.” When she opened for Jamie Foxx at another show, she was booed off the stage. She quit performing for three years, and when she came back, it took her another 25 to break into the mainstream comedy scene (Smith). Margaret Cho is perhaps the biggest “failure” of all- she fired the manager that had her best interests at heart, her sitcom was almost universally panned, and her addiction to drugs and alcohol would lead to terrible performances in front of hundreds of people. Cho was booed off the stage on several occasions and left the public eye, miserable and hopeless. It was only after reconnecting with her former manager and beginning a journey of self-love that Cho was able to perform again, telling the story of her failures to audiences in the I’m the One that I Want tour (Cho).
By bringing up the failures of these women, I am not attempting to compare my talent to theirs. The message I’m trying to deliver is that even some of the most successful comedians were failures at one point. This is an important message to deliver to anyone who is struggling, whether it be in college, in comedy, or in life in general. While we may wish to hide our failures because they embarrass us, I believe that stories of failures who eventually succeeded are essential to helping anyone who feels that they will never win. I feel that this is true because of how these stories of failure impacted me- I vowed never to write comedy again after my failures, but knowing how poorly these women faired in their early careers gave me hope that I too would eventually emerge victorious. This realization is perhaps the most important takeaway I got from creating Standing Up: Women in Comedy, and I hope that readers will garner the same sense of hope after reading these stories of failure. Because these women dared to share their failures, I have decided to go back to my comedy passion. Who knows? Maybe one day I’ll be able to feature myself as a truly successful woman in comedy.
Bibliography
Alderman, Melody. “Margaret Cho Opens Up About Her Addiction, Relapse, Childhood Sexual Abuse And The ‘King Of Offensive’ Donald Trump.” YourTango, 23 Sept. 2017, http://www.yourtango.com/2017306752/margaret-cho-interview-addiction-relapse-sexual-abuse-donald-trump-fresh-bloat.
Barsanti, Sam. “Dan Harmon Is Pissed at Rick And Morty Fans for Harassing Female Writers.” The A.V. Club, The A.V. Club, 21 Sept. 2017, www.avclub.com/dan-harmon-is-pissed-at-rick-and-morty-fans-for-harassi-1818628816.
Barreca, Regina. “Preface.” Women in Comedy: History, Theory, Practice, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2013.
Barreca, Regina. They Used to Call Me Snow White: Women’s Strategic Use of Humor. Viking, 1991.
Bennett, Tara. “25 Years Later, ‘Roseanne’ Creator Reflects on Working-Class Inspiration.” TODAY.com, 2013, http://www.today.com/popculture/25-years-later-roseanne-creator-reflects-working-class-inspiration-8C11405474.
Bennetts, Leslie. “The Pain Behind The Laughter of Moms Mabley.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 9 Aug. 1987, http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/09/theater/theater-the-pain-behind-the-laughter-of-moms-mabley.html.
Binkow, Gary, director. Problem Child: Leslie Jones. Amazon Prime, 2010.
Bonfiglio, Michael. “My Next Guest Needs No Introduction.” Season 1, episode 5, Netflix, 2018.
Boyle, Katherine. “Carol Burnett Awarded the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor at the Kennedy Center.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 20 Oct. 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/carol-burnett-awarded-the-mark-twain-prize-for-american-humor-at-the-kennedy-center/2013/10/20/3a801504-3832-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html?utm_term=.faeae8ee6c3f.
Brennan, John Vincent. “Carol Burnett.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 13 Feb. 2019, http://www.britannica.com/biography/Carol-Burnett.
Brody, Richard. “Why ‘Mean Girls’ Is a Classic.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 3 Oct. 2018, http://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/why-mean-girls-is-a-classic.
Burnett, Carol. One More Time: a Memoir. Random House Trade Paperbacks, 2003.
“Carol Burnett.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 24 July 2015, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/carol-burnett-the-carol-burnett-interview/90/
The Carol Burnett Show Official, director. The Family: Sorry! from The Carol Burnett Show (Full Sketch). YouTube, 26 Nov. 2015, youtu.be/oNG1DkS_f4g.
Chavez, Danette. “Can Roseanne Be Fixed?” TV Club, TV Club, 23 May 2018, tv.avclub.com/can-roseanne-be-fixed-1826207773.
Cho, Margaret. I’m the One That I Want. Ballantine Books, 2002..
Clark, Travis. “Every Controversial Step That Led toward ABC’s ‘Roseanne’ Cancellation – from Pizzagate to Parkland to the Final Racist Last Straw.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 29 May 2018, http://www.businessinsider.com/everything-that-led-to-abcs-roseanne-cancellation-2018-5#roseanne-was-a-huge-ratings-hit-with-over-18-million-viewers-during-its-two-episode-premiere-in-march-while-the-ratings-decreased-over-time-it-was-still-the-most-popular-show-of-the-year-so-far-7.
DeCaro, Frank. “Carol Burnett Talks About Her Show and a New Award.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 21 Dec. 2017, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/10/arts/television/carol-burnett-talks-about-her-show-and-a-new-award.html?_r=0.
Ermarth, Elizabeth Deeds. “Professionalizing Feminism: What a Long, Strange Journey It Has Been.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, vol. 26, no. 1, 2007.
Fey, Tina. Bossypants. Little, Brown and Company, 2013.
Fisher, Luchina. “’Ghostbusters’ Star Leslie Jones Quits Twitter After Online Harassment.” ABC News, ABC News Network, 2016, abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/ghostbusters-star-leslie-jones-quits-twitter-online-harassment/story?id=40698459.
Fox, Pamela. “Recycled ‘Trash’: Gender and Authenticity in Country Music Autobiography.” American Quarterly, 1998.
“From Stand-Up to Netflix, Lily Tomlin Helping Women in Comedy.” The Smith Center for the Performing Arts in Las Vegas, http://www.thesmithcenter.com/blog/from-stand-up-to-netflix-lily-tomlin-helping-women-in-comedy/.
Fulton, DoVeanna S. “Comic Views and Metaphysical Dilemmas: Shattering Cultural Images through SelfDefinition and Representation by Black Comediennes.” JSTOR, University of Illinois Press, 2004, www-jstor-org.lp.hscl.ufl.edu/stable/pdf/4137614.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ae058fa4459d83b27df36de3f65b3c00f.
Gardenswartz, Noah. “Leslie Jones: Just Wants to Make You Laugh.” LAUGHSPIN, 2010, web.archive.org/web/20141102051948/http://www.laughspin.com/2010/03/15/leslie-jones-just-wants-to-make-you-laugh/.
Gates, Henry Louis. “Finding Your Roots.” Season 1, episode 8, PBS, 2012.
Gay, Verne. “Leslie Jones Joins ‘SNL’ Cast.” Newsday, Newsday, 21 Oct. 2014, http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/leslie-jones-joins-saturday-night-live-cast-1.9526435.
Gennis, Sadie. “Kenan Thompson Blames SNL’s Diversity Issue on Lack of Talented Black Comediennes | TV Guide.” TVGuide.com, TV Guide, 15 Oct. 2013, www.tvguide.com/news/snl-diversity-issue-kenan-thompson-1072056/.
Goldberg, Whoopi, director. Whoopi Goldberg Presents Moms Mabley . HBO, 2014
Heigl, Alex. “Joan Rivers, Johnny Carson & the Bumpy Road to Tonight.” PEOPLE.com, 2014, people.com/celebrity/joan-rivers-and-johnny-carsons-history-on-the-tonight-show/.
Hughes, Sarah Anne. “Roseanne Barr Is Officially Running for President.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 3 Feb. 2012, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/celebritology/post/roseanne-barr-is-officially-running-for-president/2012/02/03/gIQAitrgmQ_blog.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cae05247e395.
Iley, Chrissy. “’People Don’t like Angry Women’ – Roseanne Barr on Rage, Cosmetic Surgery and Her Abusive Father.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 7 Oct. 2008, http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/oct/08/celebrity.comedy.
“Joan Rivers.” Jewish Women’s Archive, jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/rivers-joan.
“Joan Rivers Remembered by Stand-Up Comics, TV Legends.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 2014, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/joan-rivers-death/joan-rivers-remembered-stand-up-comics-tv-legends-n196156.
Jones, Ray, director. Minnie Pearl Opening For George Wallace in Florence Alabama, 1958 During The 1958 Governor’s Race. YouTube, YouTube, 11 June 2011, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilaAXCzKsPQ.
“Just So Proud to Be Here: Celebrating the Life and Legacy of Minnie Pearl.” Wide Open Country, 14 Dec. 2018, http://www.wideopencountry.com/just-proud-celebrating-life-legacy-minnie-pearl/.
Kavaklian-D’Annecy, Tim. “The Florida NOW Archive: Non-Thesis Project Overview.” University of Florida, 2015.
Keaney, Quinn. “14 Years Later, Tina Fey Reveals Her Favorite (NSFW) Quote From Mean Girls.” POPSUGAR Entertainment, 16 Apr. 2018, http://www.popsugar.com/entertainment/Tina-Fey-Favorite-Line-Mean-Girls-44734933.
Kilday, Gregg. “Jerry Lewis Drew Ire Over His Comments About Female Comedians.” The Hollywood Reporter, 23 Aug. 2017, www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/jerry-lewis-drew-ire-his-comments-female-comedians-1031730.
Kreizman, Maris. “I Was Rooting for ‘Ghostbusters’. I Didn’t Think the Trolls Could Win.” Esquire, Esquire, 28 Mar. 2018, www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/a51593/ghostbusters-2016-canon/.
Langer, Emily. “Joan Rivers, Comedian Who Skewered Everyone, Including Herself, Dies.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 4 Sept. 2014, http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/celebrities/joan-rivers-comedian-who-skewered-everyone-including-herself-dies/2014/09/04/f033ed16-2ec8-11e4-9b98-848790384093_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.951873cfdd96.
“Leslie Jones.” Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 2 Feb. 2018, http://www.biography.com/people/leslie-jones-071516.
“Leslie Jones Found Her Funny at CSU | Fall – 2015 | Colorado State Un…” Archive.is, 31 July 2017, archive.is/20170731092134/http://magazine.colostate.edu/issues/fall-2015/leslie-jones-found-her-funny-at-csu/.
“Lily Tomlin.” Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 16 Jan. 2019, http://www.biography.com/people/lily-tomlin-9508630.
“Lily Tomlin.” LILY, http://www.lilytomlin.com/wordpress2/.
Machado, Lorene, director. Margaret Cho: Beautiful. HBO, 2009.
Marantz, Andrew. “Leslie Jones: Always Funny, Finally Famous.” The New Yorker, The New Yorker, 12 July 2017, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/ready-for-prime-time.
“Margaret Cho Biography.” Margaret Cho Official Site, margaretcho.com/bio/.
“Margaret Cho Opens Up About Her Experience with Rape, Abuse: ‘Sharing the Suffering Alleviates the Burden’.” PEOPLE.com, 2015, people.com/tv/margaret-cho-opens-up-about-her-experience-with-rape-abuse/.
McDonald, Soraya Nadia. “Leslie Jones of ‘SNL’ Defends Her Jokes about Forced Breeding during Slavery.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 5 May 2014, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/05/05/leslie-jones-of-snl-defends-her-jokes-about-forced-breeding-during-slavery/?utm_term=.9f0d0932e5f3.
McNiece, Mia. “Lily Tomlin on Her 45-Year Relationship with Jane Wagner: ‘A Lot of Good Things Happen’.” PEOPLE.com, 2019, people.com/movies/lily-tomlin-on-relationship-with-jane-wagner/.
Messer-Davidow, Ellen. Disciplining Feminism: from Social Activism to Academic Discourse. Duke University Press, 2002.
“Minnie Pearl.” Country Music Hall of Fame, countrymusichalloffame.org/Inductees/InducteeDetail/minnie-pearl.
Minton, Melissa. “So Fetch: The ‘Mean Girls’ Musical Is Leading the 2018 Tony Award Nominations.” Glamour, Glamour, 1 May 2018, http://www.glamour.com/story/mean-girls-2018-tony-awards-nominations.
Mizejewski, Linda. Hysterical! Women in American Comedy. University of Texas Press, 2017
“Moms Mabley.” Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 19 Jan. 2018, http://www.biography.com/people/moms-mabley-38691.
“Moms Mabley.” Google Books, Ebony, books.google.com/books?id=LN4DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA88#v=onepage&q&f=false
O’connor, John J. “Review/Television; A Howdy to Minnie Pearl, Price Tags and All.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 26 Oct. 1992, http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/26/news/review-television-a-howdy-to-minnie-pearl-price-tags-and-all.html.
Press, Joy. “The Enduring Legacy of Roseanne, 30 Years Later.” Vulture, 19 Jan. 2018, http://www.vulture.com/2018/01/roseanne-legacy-30-years-later.html.
Rabinowitz, Nancy Sorkin. “Personal Voice/Feminist Voice.” Arethusa, vol. 34, no. 2, 2001, pp. 191–210., doi:10.1353/are.2001.0014.
Reed, Jennifer. Lily: Sold Out! The Queer Feminism of Lily Tomlin. Genders, 49. June 2009.
Rivers, Joan. “Joan Rivers: Why Johnny Carson ‘Never Ever Spoke to Me Again.’” The Hollywood Reporter, 5 Sept. 2014, http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/joan-rivers-why-johnny-carson-398088.
“Roseanne.” Jewish Women’s Archive, jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/Roseanne
“Roseanne Barr.” Biography.com, A&E Networks Television, 15 Oct. 2018, http://www.biography.com/people/roseanne-barr-9463817#early-life-and-career.
“Roseanne Barr.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/pioneers-of-television/pioneering-people/roseanne-barr/.
Sarachild, Kathie. “Consciousness-Raising: A Radical Weapon.” Organizing for Women’s Liberation, 25 Sept. 2012, organizingforwomensliberation.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/consciousness-raising-a-radical-weapon/.
“’Saturday Night Live’ Writer Leslie Jones Responds to Criticism.” EW.com, ew.com/article/2014/05/05/leslie-jones-saturday-night-live-slavery/.
Scott, Eugene. “’Roseanne’ Acknowledges an Issue Many Trump Supporters Deny: Islamophobia.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 9 May 2018, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/05/09/roseanne-acknowledges-an-issue-many-trump-supporters-deny-islamophobia/?utm_term=.82aeb66d671a.
Silverstein, Melissa, and Kerensa Cadenas. “Lily Tomlin on Feminism, Humor and Girls.” IndieWire, 28 Mar. 2013, http://www.indiewire.com/2013/03/lily-tomlin-on-feminism-humor-and-girls-209627/.
Smith, Dorothy E. “Women’s Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology.” Sociological Inquiry, vol. 44, no. 1, 1974.
Smith, Jay. “Leslie Jones: Comedian at Work.” Pollstar, 2010, http://www.pollstar.com/article/leslie-jones-comedian-at-work-15922.
Stanley, Alessandra. “Tina Fey Signs Off, Broken Barriers Behind Her.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 30 Jan. 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/arts/television/tina-fey-signs-off-30-rock-broken-barriers-behind-her.html.
Steinberg, Brian. “Joan Rivers Returns To ‘Tonight Show’ After Decades-Long Ban.” Variety, 18 Feb. 2014, variety.com/2014/tv/news/joan-rivers-returns-to-tonight-show-after-decades-long-ban-1201109889/.
Stern, Ricki, director. Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work. IFC Independent Film , 2010.
Studs Terkel, The Spectator: Talk About Movies and Plays With the People Who Make Them (New York: The New Press, 1999), 281.
Sun, Rebecca, and Marisa Guthrie. “Joan Rivers’ Rise From Rags to TV Retail Riches.” The Hollywood Reporter, 10 Sept. 2014, http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/joan-rivers-rise-rags-tv-731620.
“Tina Fey.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, http://www.pbs.org/wnet/pioneers-of-television/pioneering-people/tina-fey/.
“Tina Fey Calls out David Letterman – CNN Video.” CNN, Cable News Network, 5 May 2018, http://www.cnn.com/videos/cnnmoney/2018/05/05/tina-fey-calls-out-david-letterman-orig-tc-2.cnn.
Teeman, Tim. “Roseanne Barr on Losing Her Sight, Smoking Weed, Rejecting Feminism, and Not Voting For Hillary.” The Daily Beast, The Daily Beast Company, 20 Apr. 2015, http://www.thedailybeast.com/roseanne-barr-on-losing-her-sight-smoking-weed-rejecting-feminism-and-not-voting-for-hillary
Thompson , Cordell. “Moms Mabley Leaves $1/2 Million Estate; Disinherits Daughter.” Google Books, Jet, books.google.com/books?id=aLEDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA59&dq=Moms%2BMabley&as_brr=1&ei=nqd4SdjcKoj-lQS76aQu#v=onepage&q=Moms%20Mabley&f=false.
Watkins, Mel. African American Humor: the Best Black Comedy from Slavery to Today. Lawrence Hill Books, 2002
Welk, Brian. “Leslie Jones Hopes Comedians and ‘SNL’ Can Move Past Constant Trump Jokes.” TheWrap, TheWrap, 13 June 2018, http://www.thewrap.com/leslie-jones-snl-saturday-night-live-constant-trump-jokes/.
Whitney, Barbara. “Tina Fey.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 29 Jan. 2019, http://www.britannica.com/biography/Tina-Fey.
Wittmer, Carrie. “Roseanne Barr Is under Fire after a Racist Tweet about Former Obama Adviser Valerie Jarrett That Compares Her to an Ape.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 29 May 2018, http://www.businessinsider.com/roseanne-barr-tweet-racist-valerie-jarrett-clintons2018-5.
Wolk, Sarah Michelle. “Moms Mabley and the Civil Rights Movement.” California State University San Marcos, 2012
Wright, Megh. “Adult Swim’s Mike Lazzo Takes to Reddit to Defend Lack of Female Creators.” Vulture, Vulture, 3 Oct. 2016, www.vulture.com/2016/10/adult-swims-mike-lazzo-takes-to-reddit-to-defend-lack-of-female-creators.html.
Zimmerman, Amy. “How Roseanne Barr Abandoned All Reason and Embraced the Alt-Right.” The Daily Beast, The Daily Beast Company, 23 June 2017, http://www.thedailybeast.com/how-roseanne-barr-abandoned-all-reason-and-embraced-the-alt-right.
A Note on Copyrighted Images
While the three images I included of my blog are not copyrighted themselves, I do not have permission to reproduce the copyrighted images within the first two pictures.
[1] Poehler’s Yes Please and Schumer’s The Girl with the Lower Back Tattoo are both notable works by and about two very important women in comedy, though they are not covered in this project.
Standing Up: Women in Comedy 