[Robin_K2]

"I sprained my wrist j**king off a horse."

And I'm pretty sure it was a rerun tonight. Yes, a quick internet search shows that I'm correct. Those were the actual words on March 9, rerun tonight, a laugh-line in one of the sketches. (Good lord, they let it go through twice?)

Am I that old? Hey, I have a lot of fetishes, but -- that line, those words --  on broadcast network television?

I wouldn't say that here on the BEA! (And if I did, I'd expect to get banned.) Am I too old? Have broadcast standards fallen that far?

[pedonbio]

I dunno, Robin. I've never jacked a horse off. 

[TheZookie007]

It was a rerun: the host and musical guest was Justin Timberlake, marking his "induction" in the Five-Timers' Club (people who have hosted the show at least five times).

[gonZo]

Robin, it was 12:45am; broadcast standards are more relaxed after midnight.

Pal adds: yah, that wouldn't even cause me to raise an eyebrow. But then again, I gave up on SNL many years ago and think that what happens between a horse and it's owner is between them. I'm sure those folks who got all riled up at that Progressive insurance commercial where the pig is in the car with the (human) woman... angered that the commercial endorsed be5tiality... THEY'D probably burst a blood vessel if they were up that late and caught the joke on SNL.  

[xenon]

Well, I am with Robin K. Late night is not the only time people watch this. And relaxed or not for late night TV, I really like SNL and find that line frustrating at best. While I haven't seen this skit specifically, I don't see why this line needs to be on SNL. Broadcast or not. Leave lines like that for other comedy shows. I have never thought of SNL as a controversial show, and I would rather have it stay that way.

[Palomine]

...I have never thought of SNL as a controversial show...

Somewhere, Lorne Michaels is sobbing into a wad of cash.

[Robin_K2]

In the midwest, SNL comes on at 10:30 p.m. and ends at midnight.

Anyway, the line isn't funny in itself. There's no comedy or real wit about it whatsoever. It was offered only for shock value. That is the easiest, most base way to get a laugh possible, the equivalent of a kindergartener shouting "booger."

I don't care what happens on cable, but there are supposedly limits in broadcast. And there should be. Now that masturbating a horse is acceptable, what will be the next boundary of shock comedy?

This is not entertainment. This takes no talent or creativity whatsoever.

[pedonbio]

There's no comedy or real wit about it whatsoever.

I've had that opinion about SNL since about 1990.

[xenon]

In the midwest, SNL comes on at 10:30 p.m. and ends at midnight.

Anyway, the line isn't funny in itself. There's no comedy or real wit about it whatsoever. It was offered only for shock value. That is the easiest, most base way to get a laugh possible, the equivalent of a kindergartener shouting "booger."

I don't care what happens on cable, but there are supposedly limits in broadcast. And there should be. Now that masturbating a horse is acceptable, what will be the next boundary of shock comedy?

This is not entertainment. This takes no talent or creativity whatsoever.

Completely agree. This line and and method is not comedy.

As for SNL overall, I enjoy it. And it certainly isn't the only form of comedy I like. But if I want shock value or more "hard" comedy, there are plenty of other sources. SNL doesn't need to be one of them. And broadcast TV certainly doesn't need to trend into cable boundaries in any genre. I prefer them separated.

While SNL has been a little stale for me lately, I still enjoy the show here and there. And I always wonder who will be the next star on SNL to branch away from SNL into the mainstream. I liked Chevy Chase days, I loved Will Farrel days.

Most importantly, you are not talking about the quality of SNL. Which some of us have commented on. But you are commenting on broadcasting standards. Which sure, the line has been sliding for a long time. Cussing has increased, etc. But yeah, I would say this is a low point in broadcasting. And I am sad that it was done by SNL.

[TheZookie007]

I'm not entirely sure that that phrase violates NBC's S&P for late-night programming though. After all, if Samuel L. Jackson could get away (barely) with a full-blown "bullshit!" during a "What's Up With That?" sketch...hey.

[gonZo]

It was evidently acceptable to S&P, since (as Robin mentioned) "jerking off a horse" wasn't bleeped on either broadcast of this episode.

<modvoice> Just realized that this thread has nothing to do with breasts, so I have to move it. Robin, please mind the board categories. Thanks. </modvoice> Yah, I should have realized that before. -Pal

Pal adds: I acknowledge the disdain/disappointment some of you clearly feel about this, yet I remain surprised by your reaction. At its best (many, many years ago) SNL WAS controversial, though the controversies surrounding their skits tended to involve social commentary and/or political satire, instead of just crude humor inserted for shock value. To regard SNL as even being gently funny or devoid of controversy is to ignore reality and the legacy of the show. And to pretend that network/broadcast TV hasn't been pushing the envelope of what's acceptable for 20 years now, in an effort to compete with the commercial success of cable programming is to close your eyes to history. Prime-time dramas (NYPD Blue being one of the better ones) and more recently, reality tv (everything from Fear Factor to Big Brother) routinely include words, images and actions that (to my POV) are just as shocking and cheap as a quick offhand joke about a man pleasuring a horse.

To read some reactions, you'd think they actually showed a guy jerking off a horse on live TV, instead of simply verbally referring to the act for a cheap laugh. -Pal

[xenon]

Yup, though I don't think anyone is claiming to disagree with the fact that broadcast TV boundaries have been pushed for a really long time. I clearly will admit that. Not sure I agree with saying that social and political satire itself is the definition of being controversial. Then again, maybe it's only the shock value stunts that trigger a response in me that I define as controversial. I think of things like some content of MTV (multiple channels now) and The Rolling Stones, as controversial. In all my watching of reruns and live SNL shows, controversial have never been a feeling of mine.

To break it down further, correct me if I am wrong Robin K, is that he is making a thought provoking question about "Is broadcast TV going too far in pushing the boundaries?"

Of course that wouldn't be a new question. I am sure that has been asked since the inception of mainstream TV. But more so since the separation of Cable and Broadcast.

I personally want cable and broadcast to be very separate in their boundaries. And I watch a lot of different kinds of content. While a spoken line of this nature isn't an issue for me, I don't feel it belongs on broadcast TV. If SNL wants to be that way, they need to move to cable. And SNL isn't the only show and this isn't a new issue. This stems from revenue streams as well. Producers have to take into account an audience that won't/doesn't pay to have cable TV. So they feel they have to keep pushing for the attention for those who don't have cable TV.

This example makes me feel like I am a minority in the content viewing audience. SNL thought this wasn't too shocking or they likely would not have done it. Which likely means the audience is more accepting of this than I would have originally thought.

Sad that this is even considered "cheap laugh" material. SNL, like many shows, I enjoy some episodes immensely and others are complete trash.

[pedonbio]

I want to give credit for the ghost of DruulEmpire for this inspiration, but, forgive me, Robin_K and others, is it fair to gather that you haven't spent any time on farms? Many, if not most, horses are bred by artificial insemination; virtually all cattle are, and in North America all elephants are.

Despite the impression you may have, in order to "harvest" semen the vet does not give Trigger a cup, a copy of "Thoroughbred" magazine, and send him to the bathroom. Jacking off horses, bulls, and elephants is a lucrative (and slightly dangerous) occupation. And I suspect that vets have better jokes about it than does SNL.

[gOOber]

Large animal vets got brass balls lemme tell ya.

[Robin_K2]

Robin_K and others, is it fair to gather that you haven't spent any time on farms?

Yes, I grew up on farms, and artificial insemination has nothing to do with the SNL sketch. It was obviously intended that the character who said the line was engaging in b3astiality. Hence the shock, hence the supposed comic value.

Reimagining (from thin air) the context of the joke does not make it funny. In fact, it makes it far less so.

And quick fact-checking via google reveals that less than 10 percent of U.S. cattle are bred using artificial insemination. Hardly "virtually all," Pb. That has nothing to do with comedy quality or FCC standards -- the real issues -- but you raised it as a defense, and I wanted to address it. I still love you, ya big lug!