Jump to content

Top 10 funniest women


Jimbo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Bearing in mind this was a poll in "Readers Digest" magazine.....

 

 

1 Victoria Wood

2 Dawn French

3 Jo Brand

4 Jennifer Saunders

5 Julie Walters

6 Joyce Grenfell

7 Hattie Jacques

8 Joanna Lumley

9 Maureen Lipman

10 Kathy Burke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are they taking the piss? :D

 

Victoria Wood is mildly amusing but gets annoying very quickly, same goes for Kathy Burke...

 

The rest just aren't funny at all IMO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 Manc - Mag

2 Alex

3 Jo Brand

4 Jennifer Saunders

5 Julie Walters

6 Joyce Grenfell

7 Hattie Jacques

8 Joanna Lumley

9 Maureen Lipman

10 Dot Bum

14342[/snapback]

 

Fucking hell..that one doesnt even rhyme!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 Manc - Mag

2 Alex

3 Jo Brand

4 Jennifer Saunders

5 Julie Walters

6 Joyce Grenfell

7 Hattie Jacques

8 Joanna Lumley

9 Maureen Lipman

10 Dot Bum

14342[/snapback]

 

Fucking hell..that one doesnt even rhyme!

14344[/snapback]

The 'creative juices' must have dried up. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

:D

14351[/snapback]

That's even worse, fair play to you for putting that shite into the public domain though, if you want some tips feel free to pm me :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

:D

14351[/snapback]

 

Graphic!

 

Did you type that with one hand, Tommy Dickfingers? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

:D

14351[/snapback]

That's even worse, fair play to you for putting that shite into the public domain though, if you want some tips feel free to pm me :D

14357[/snapback]

 

 

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

:D

14351[/snapback]

 

Graphic!

 

Did you type that with one hand, Tommy Dickfingers? :D

14359[/snapback]

 

Have to love you and leave you now girls i really have got shit to do.

 

(off to meet a kid in the wall to score some gange)

:sun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have to love you and leave you now girls i really have got shit to do.

 

(off to meet a kid in the wall to score some gange)

:D

14364[/snapback]

Is that a bit like ganj?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Catherine Tate is pretty funny.

 

Jo Brand has three jokes:

 

1. I'm fat.

2. I like to eat cake.

3. Did I mention I'm fat?

14366[/snapback]

 

Started watching that Catherine Tate show accidentally as it's on straight after Extras. Didnt realise it was a second series-missed all of the first. Some funny stuff in there.

 

Jo Brand is absolute gash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Catherine Tate is pretty funny.

 

Jo Brand has three jokes:

 

1. I'm fat.

2. I like to eat cake.

3. Did I mention I'm fat?

14366[/snapback]

 

You forgot:

 

4. I hate men

5. Men are hopeless at everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Catherine Tate is pretty funny.

 

Jo Brand has three jokes:

 

1. I'm fat.

2. I like to eat cake.

3. Did I mention I'm fat?

14366[/snapback]

 

You forgot:

 

4. I hate men

5. Men are hopeless at everything.

14415[/snapback]

 

I was going to add basically the exact same 4 and 5 as you!

 

Though having said her stand up is pretty much those 5 things repeated ad infinitum i do think when she is on tv progs like buzzcocks, QI, have i got news for you, they think its all over and all the others that she is funny and can holder own with all the blokes on there.

 

Sadly without trying to be sexis there isn't exactly a wealth of funny women, though as somebody said Caroline Aherne should ahve been alot higher, and Catherine Tate is an excellent performer if some of the shows writing is at times hit and miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

14351[/snapback]

:blink:

Genius, surely the work of a future poet laureate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alex i'm impressed with your fine use of words,

shame your silver tongue doesnt work with the birds,

lickin blokes hoops is a pastime of yours,

greasing them up before bursting their doors,

every weekend off to rock-shots you trot,

hopeing a faggot will take a shine to your bot,

then its straight back to your place with your latest slag,

videoing the lot to show your boyfriend, Manc-Mag

 

;)

14351[/snapback]

That's even worse, fair play to you for putting that shite into the public domain though, if you want some tips feel free to pm me :blink:

14357[/snapback]

 

 

It'll look great on his CV..........................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
Why Women Aren't Funny

 

by Christopher Hitchens

 

 

Be your gender what it may, you will certainly have heard the following from a female friend who is enumerating the charms of a new (male) squeeze: "He's really quite cute, and he's kind to my friends, and he knows all kinds of stuff, and he's so funny … " (If you yourself are a guy, and you know the man in question, you will often have said to yourself, "Funny? He wouldn't know a joke if it came served on a bed of lettuce with sauce béarnaise.") However, there is something that you absolutely never hear from a male friend who is hymning his latest (female) love interest: "She's a real honey, has a life of her own … [interlude for attributes that are none of your business] … and, man, does she ever make 'em laugh."

 

Now, why is this? Why is it the case?, I mean. Why are women, who have the whole male world at their mercy, not funny? Please do not pretend not to know what I am talking about.

 

All right—try it the other way (as the bishop said to the barmaid). Why are men, taken on average and as a whole, funnier than women? Well, for one thing, they had damn well better be. The chief task in life that a man has to perform is that of impressing the opposite sex, and Mother Nature (as we laughingly call her) is not so kind to men. In fact, she equips many fellows with very little armament for the struggle. An average man has just one, outside chance: he had better be able to make the lady laugh. Making them laugh has been one of the crucial preoccupations of my life. If you can stimulate her to laughter—I am talking about that real, out-loud, head-back, mouth-open-to-expose-the-full-horseshoe-of-lovely-teeth, involuntary, full, and deep-throated mirth; the kind that is accompanied by a shocked surprise and a slight (no, make that a loud) peal of delight—well, then, you have at least caused her to loosen up and to change her expression. I shall not elaborate further.

 

Women have no corresponding need to appeal to men in this way. They already appeal to men, if you catch my drift. Indeed, we now have all the joy of a scientific study, which illuminates the difference. At the Stanford University School of Medicine (a place, as it happens, where I once underwent an absolutely hilarious procedure with a sigmoidoscope), the grim-faced researchers showed 10 men and 10 women a sample of 70 black-and-white cartoons and got them to rate the gags on a "funniness scale." To annex for a moment the fall-about language of the report as it was summarized in Biotech Week:

 

The researchers found that men and women share much of the same humor-response system; both use to a similar degree the part of the brain responsible for semantic knowledge and juxtaposition and the part involved in language processing. But they also found that some brain regions were activated more in women. These included the left prefrontal cortex, suggesting a greater emphasis on language and executive processing in women, and the nucleus accumbens … which is part of the mesolimbic reward center.

 

This has all the charm and address of the learned Professor Scully's attempt to define a smile, as cited by Richard Usborne in his treatise on P. G. Wodehouse: "the drawing back and slight lifting of the corners of the mouth, which partially uncover the teeth; the curving of the naso-labial furrows … " But have no fear—it gets worse:

 

"Women appeared to have less expectation of a reward, which in this case was the punch line of the cartoon," said the report's author, Dr. Allan Reiss. "So when they got to the joke's punch line, they were more pleased about it." The report also found that "women were quicker at identifying material they considered unfunny."

 

Slower to get it, more pleased when they do, and swift to locate the unfunny—for this we need the Stanford University School of Medicine? And remember, this is women when confronted with humor. Is it any wonder that they are backward in generating it?

 

This is not to say that women are humorless, or cannot make great wits and comedians. And if they did not operate on the humor wavelength, there would be scant point in half killing oneself in the attempt to make them writhe and scream (uproariously). Wit, after all, is the unfailing symptom of intelligence. Men will laugh at almost anything, often precisely because it is—or they are—extremely stupid. Women aren't like that. And the wits and comics among them are formidable beyond compare: Dorothy Parker, Nora Ephron, Fran Lebowitz, Ellen DeGeneres. (Though ask yourself, was Dorothy Parker ever really funny?) Greatly daring—or so I thought—I resolved to call up Ms. Lebowitz and Ms. Ephron to try out my theories. Fran responded: "The cultural values are male; for a woman to say a man is funny is the equivalent of a man saying that a woman is pretty. Also, humor is largely aggressive and pre-emptive, and what's more male than that?" Ms. Ephron did not disagree. She did, however, in what I thought was a slightly feline way, accuse me of plagiarizing a rant by Jerry Lewis that said much the same thing. (I have only once seen Lewis in action, in The King of Comedy, where it was really Sandra Bernhard who was funny.)

 

In any case, my argument doesn't say that there are no decent women comedians. There are more terrible female comedians than there are terrible male comedians, but there are some impressive ladies out there. Most of them, though, when you come to review the situation, are hefty or dykey or Jewish, or some combo of the three. When Roseanne stands up and tells biker jokes and invites people who don't dig her shtick to suck her dick—know what I am saying? And the Sapphic faction may have its own reasons for wanting what I want—the sweet surrender of female laughter. While Jewish humor, boiling as it is with angst and self-deprecation, is almost masculine by definition.

 

Substitute the term "self-defecation" (which I actually heard being used inadvertently once) and almost all men will laugh right away, if only to pass the time. Probe a little deeper, though, and you will see what Nietzsche meant when he described a witticism as an epitaph on the death of a feeling. 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. Humor is part of the armor-plate with which to resist what is already farcical enough. (Perhaps not by coincidence, battered as they are by motherfucking nature, men tend to refer to life itself as a bitch.) Whereas women, bless their tender hearts, would prefer that life be fair, and even sweet, rather than the sordid mess it actually is. Jokes about calamitous visits to the doctor or the shrink or the bathroom, or the venting of sexual frustration on furry domestic animals, are a male province. It must have been a man who originated the phrase "funny like a heart attack." In all the millions of cartoons that feature a patient listening glum-faced to a physician ("There's no cure. There isn't even a race for a cure"), do you remember even one where the patient is a woman? I thought as much.

 

Precisely because humor is a sign of intelligence (and many women believe, or were taught by their mothers, that they become threatening to men if they appear too bright), it could be that in some way men do not want women to be funny. They want them as an audience, not as rivals. And there is a huge, brimming reservoir of male unease, which it would be too easy for women to exploit. (Men can tell jokes about what happened to John Wayne Bobbitt, but they don't want women doing so.) Men have prostate glands, hysterically enough, and these have a tendency to give out, along with their hearts and, it has to be said, their dicks. This is funny only in male company. For some reason, women do not find their own physical decay and absurdity to be so riotously amusing, which is why we admire Lucille Ball and Helen Fielding, who do see the funny side of it. But this is so rare as to be like Dr. Johnson's comparison of a woman preaching to a dog walking on its hind legs: the surprise is that it is done at all.

 

The plain fact is that the physical structure of the human being is a joke in itself: a flat, crude, unanswerable disproof of any nonsense about "intelligent design." The reproductive and eliminating functions (the closeness of which is the origin of all obscenity) were obviously wired together in hell by some subcommittee that was giggling cruelly as it went about its work. ("Think they'd wear this? Well, they're gonna have to.") The resulting confusion is the source of perhaps 50 percent of all humor. Filth. That's what the customers want, as we occasional stand-up performers all know. Filth, and plenty of it. Filth in lavish, heaping quantities. And there's another principle that helps exclude the fair sex. "Men obviously like gross stuff," says Fran Lebowitz. "Why? Because it's childish." Keep your eye on that last word. Women's appetite for talk about that fine product known as Depend is limited. So is their relish for gags about premature ejaculation. ("Premature for whom?" as a friend of mine indignantly demands to know.) But "child" is the key word. For women, reproduction is, if not the only thing, certainly the main thing. Apart from giving them a very different attitude to filth and embarrassment, it also imbues them with the kind of seriousness and solemnity at which men can only goggle. This womanly seriousness was well caught by Rudyard Kipling in his poem "The Female of the Species." After cleverly noticing that with the male "mirth obscene diverts his anger"—which is true of most work on that great masculine equivalent to childbirth, which is warfare—Kipling insists:

 

But the Woman that God gave him,

every fibre of her frame

Proves her launched for one sole issue,

armed and engined for the same,

And to serve that single issue,

lest the generations fail,

The female of the species must be

deadlier than the male.

 

The word "issue" there, which we so pathetically misuse, is restored to its proper meaning of childbirth. As Kipling continues:

 

She who faces Death by torture for

each life beneath her breast

May not deal in doubt or pity—must

not swerve for fact or jest.

 

Men are overawed, not to say terrified, by the ability of women to produce babies. (Asked by a lady intellectual to summarize the differences between the sexes, another bishop responded, "Madam, I cannot conceive.") It gives women an unchallengeable authority. And one of the earliest origins of humor that we know about is its role in the mockery of authority. Irony itself has been called "the glory of slaves." So you could argue that when men get together to be funny and do not expect women to be there, or in on the joke, they are really playing truant and implicitly conceding who is really the boss.

 

The ancient annual festivities of Saturnalia, where the slaves would play master, were a temporary release from bossdom. A whole tranche of subversive male humor likewise depends on the notion that women are not really the boss, but are mere objects and victims. Kipling saw through this:

 

So it comes that Man, the coward,

when he gathers to confer

With his fellow-braves in council,

dare not leave a place for her.

 

In other words, for women the question of funniness is essentially a secondary one. They are innately aware of a higher calling that is no laughing matter. Whereas with a man you may freely say of him that he is lousy in the sack, or a bad driver, or an inefficient worker, and still wound him less deeply than you would if you accused him of being deficient in the humor department.

 

If I am correct about this, which I am, then the explanation for the superior funniness of men is much the same as for the inferior funniness of women. Men have to pretend, to themselves as well as to women, that they are not the servants and supplicants. Women, cunning minxes that they are, have to affect not to be the potentates. This is the unspoken compromise. H. L. Mencken described as "the greatest single discovery ever made by man" the realization "that babies have human fathers, and are not put into their mother's bodies by the gods." You may well wonder what people were thinking before that realization hit, but we do know of a society in Melanesia where the connection was not made until quite recently. I suppose that the reasoning went: everybody does that thing the entire time, there being little else to do, but not every woman becomes pregnant. Anyway, after a certain stage women came to the conclusion that men were actually necessary, and the old form of matriarchy came to a close. (Mencken speculates that this is why the first kings ascended the throne clutching their batons or scepters as if holding on for grim death.) People in this precarious position do not enjoy being laughed at, and it would not have taken women long to work out that female humor would be the most upsetting of all.

 

Childbearing and rearing are the double root of all this, as Kipling guessed. As every father knows, the placenta is made up of brain cells, which migrate southward during pregnancy and take the sense of humor along with them. And when the bundle is finally delivered, the funny side is not always immediately back in view. Is there anything so utterly lacking in humor as a mother discussing her new child? She is unboreable on the subject. Even the mothers of other fledglings have to drive their fingernails into their palms and wiggle their toes, just to prevent themselves from fainting dead away at the sheer tedium of it. And as the little ones burgeon and thrive, do you find that their mothers enjoy jests at their expense? I thought not.

 

Humor, if we are to be serious about it, arises from the ineluctable fact that we are all born into a losing struggle. Those who risk agony and death to bring children into this fiasco simply can't afford to be too frivolous. (And there just aren't that many episiotomy jokes, even in the male repertoire.) I am certain that this is also partly why, in all cultures, it is females who are the rank-and-file mainstay of religion, which in turn is the official enemy of all humor. One tiny snuffle that turns into a wheeze, one little cut that goes septic, one pathetically small coffin, and the woman's universe is left in ashes and ruin. Try being funny about that, if you like. Oscar Wilde was the only person ever to make a decent joke about the death of an infant, and that infant was fictional, and Wilde was (although twice a father) a queer. And because fear is the mother of superstition, and because they are partly ruled in any case by the moon and the tides, women also fall more heavily for dreams, for supposedly significant dates like birthdays and anniversaries, for romantic love, crystals and stones, lockets and relics, and other things that men know are fit mainly for mockery and limericks. Good grief! Is there anything less funny than hearing a woman relate a dream she's just had? ("And then Quentin was there somehow. And so were you, in a strange sort of way. And it was all so peaceful." Peaceful?)

 

For men, it is a tragedy that the two things they prize the most—women and humor—should be so antithetical. But without tragedy there could be no comedy. My beloved said to me, when I told her I was going to have to address this melancholy topic, that I should cheer up because "women get funnier as they get older."

 

Observation suggests to me that this might indeed be true, but, excuse me, isn't that rather a long time to have to wait?

 

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features...1?currentPage=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.