Blog of the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research

It’s Official: At Least One SNL Writer Fears and Disrespects Women’s Bodies

January 19th, 2010 by Elizabeth Kissling

Guest Post by Heather Dillaway, Wayne State University

First, it was Tampax, and then it was Vagisil. But it’s good they didn’t leave out Summer’s Eve. And I expect Midol (for those irritating PMS-y women) and something about menopausal women’s hot flashes (can’t they control themselves with hormone therapies?) to be next. Although probably SNL writers aren’t savvy enough yet to even contemplate what menopause is or how they feel about it, so they’ll probably stick with skits that revolve around women’s body parts and younger women’s reproductive experiences.

I was frustrated with SNL’s skit about ESPN’s coverage of a women’s billiards tournament, “Tampax to the Max Tournament of Champions” (see my blog post about it). I was disgusted and concerned that SNL writers revised this skit for a second airing, to include a spoof about women’s yeast infections during a Women’s bowling tournament, “Vagisil Superstars of Bowling Tournament”. After seeing the second skit, I (along with many other critics) knew that the power of the skits was not in jokes about women’s menstruation alone but, rather, in jokes about the disgusting nature of women’s bodies more generally.

This past weekend, SNL revised the skit once again to be a skit about ESPN coverage of a women’s darts tournament, and the main sponsor was Summer’s Eve, “Summer’s Eve Stars of Darts Competition”. The skit was as dumb as it was the first two times, but the one-line jokes within the skit carried even more jarring phrases in my opinion (e.g., “when your situation down south makes him breathe through his mouth” or “when your man’s in a coma from your panty aroma”). As a trio, these skits point to the fear, dislike, and disrespect for women’s bodies. The three skits also all revolve around talk about women’s vaginas, and the mysteries, misunderstandings, fears, and disgust surrounding this body part. As a trio, the skits produce the message that vaginas are gross, that men do not understand women’s reproductive processes and conditions, and the not-so-subtle message specifically to women is that women should keep their vaginal “conditions” private and not bother men with them. Indeed, the message in the one-liners this time around is that vaginas should be good-smelling, unbloodied, and available for men’s use at all times (and no other situation is acceptable).

After watching all three skits, I think we can safely conclude the following:

  1. Commenters on our previous blog entries about these skits that thought it was “just a spoof on ESPN’s early coverage of women’s sporting events” were wrong. While this may be one of the ideas behind the initial creation of the skits, the skits’ messages move way beyond and mask this. These skits are about making fun of women’s bodies.
  2. Commenters  who suggested that SNL writers were just picking random products, and that these skits “could have very well been about Preparation H” were wrong. These skits will never be about products that everyone could use. The power of these skits is the fact that they are making fun of women’s bodies and products for only women’s bodies.
  3. One commenter on the previous blog entry about these skits also suggested that we have “been taught since childhood that vaginas and penises are serious business. Laughing at them is naughty, so we laugh at them because being naughty is fun.” Sure, this is true, but everyone also knows that when you decide to continually joke about one body part over the other funny ones, there is a reason. (Just like when that one kid was picked on over and over in elementary school – that kid wasn’t picked at random.) At least one SNL writer (and probably several, given how television writing typically works) doesn’t understand and respect women’s body parts. They understand penises and respect them and therefore aren’t joking about them in this particular skit. If they were making fun of everyone’s body parts and everyone’s products, then we wouldn’t be writing about these skits here at re:Cycling.
Readers should note that statements published in re: Cycling are those of individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Society as a whole.