By Pat Murphy
The Daily Record Newswire
Q. What’s the difference between a mother-in-law and a vulture?
A. The vulture waits ‘til you’re dead before it eats your heart out. -- Jokes.Net
Ah yes, the mother-in-law, one of America’s more enduring targets of comedy.
And we can all breathe a sigh of relief now that the mother-in-law joke has survived its first legal challenge. Yes, a federal judge ruled last week that the old battle axe can’t sue us for poking fun at her expense.
But that doesn’t mean you would want to be in Sunda Croonquist’s shoes when the relatives gather next Thanksgiving.
She has everyone mad at her.
Croonquist is a Los Angeles comedian of African-American and Swedish descent. A large part of her act is talking about being a woman of mixed race who marries into a Jewish family.
Ruth Zafrin is her mother-in-law and is often the butt of Croonquist’s jokes.
Croonquist posts video clips from her comedy act, on her website, www.sundalive.com.
In one of those clips, entitled “Jewish Mother-in-Law,” Croonquist allegedly referred to Zafrin by name, accused her of being a racist and stated, “Have you ever met someone and in the first five seconds you say through your teeth ‘I hate this bitch.’”
In a MySpace posting Croonquist really went over the line, allegedly asserting that Zafrin treated her other grandchildren better than the Croonquist’s children, “probably because they’re white, they’re better in her eyes.”
Unable to leave well enough alone, Croonquist allegedly took potshots at her sister-in-law, Shelley Edelman.
In one video clip entitled “Jewish Friends,” Croonquist allegedly compared Edelman’s voice to a “cat in heat.” The comedian allegedly characterized Edelman as “someone who makes racist remarks” and impersonated her sister-in-law saying to her husband, “Oh my God, Neil, look at her; she’s got light eyes and light hair, what kind of black person is she?”
Now, if this is a fair sample of Croonquist’s material, it’s not surprising that I’ve never heard of her until now. Let’s face it, folks, we’re not talking Henny Youngman here.
And I’m not the only one who didn’t fully appreciate Croonquist’s comedic talents.
The mother-in-law and sister-in-law understandably didn’t like being characterized as racists all over the Internet, so they sued Croonquist for defamation.
In an odd twist, The Associated Press reports that Croonquist’s husband, Mark Zafrin, is a partner in the law firm that defended her.
This family feud landed right in the lap of U.S. District Judge Mary L. Cooper in New Jersey.
In a decision filed last week, Cooper concluded that none of Croonquist’s statements could be considered defamatory because they were expressions of opinion.
Judge Cooper said that Croonquist’s “discussion of her ‘ill feelings towards Mrs. Zafrin,’ particularly her statement, ‘Have you ever met someone and in the first five seconds you say through your teeth “I hate this bitch,"’ merely conveys the defendant’s opinion of her mother-in-law. This opinion is protected under the First Amendment and not defamatory.”
Regarding some of Croonquist’s other comments, the judge concluded that “calling her sister-in-law ‘Jewish broad’ and referring to her mother-in-law as ‘Ruthie’ lacks a ‘natural tendency to injure’ or subject the plaintiffs to ridicule, and the plaintiffs have not contended that either characterization is false. The ‘cat in heat’ comment is mere ‘colorful, figurative rhetoric that reasonable minds would ‘not take to be factual.’”
The judge had a little more difficulty handling Croonquist’s charges of racism, but ultimately concluded that “characterization of her in-laws as racists is a subjective assertion, not sufficiently susceptible to being proved true or false to constitute defamation.”
Judge Cooper noted that Croonquist believes Zafrin is a racist because she perceives a difference in the way she treats her grandchildren. Croonquist’s observations similarly led to her opinion about her sister-in-law.
“Based on these explanations,” the judge wrote. “the other challenged statements ... merely constitute additional reiterations of the defendant’s opinion that the plaintiffs are racist vis-a-vis her interactions with them.” (Edelman v. Croonquist)
So the case was dismissed and Croonquist tells her fans to expect more (and hopefully better) in-law jokes in her act.
For the rest of us, we can be thankful that the mother-in-law joke survives as a time-honored means of venting family frustrations:
Q: What’s the definition of happiness?
A: Getting up in the morning and seeing your mother-in-law’s picture on a milk carton!
My mother-in-law said to me, “If you were my husband I’d put poison in your coffee” I replied, “If I were your husband, I’d drink it!!”
There was a knock at the door, I knew it was the mother-in-law because all the mice were throwing themselves on the traps. — Jokes.Net
