It clearly states at the beginning of each episode that the show is intended for "mature audiences only" so if you are going to cry like little bitches because they make fun of bikers or use the word "homosexual" then quit watching.
One of the great things about South Park is that they don't single anybody out. They put everybody on blast. Quit being so sensitive and get a sense of humor!!
ssouthparkk4602 wrote:Hurry before link gets deleted!
You are a God.
gudlyf wrote:The alien in this week's South Park: http://clak.us/traj
Thanks dude, I kept looking on my tv and couldn't find that alien. Dang tv, it cuts off part of the sides of the show for some reason. I need a new tv. Lol, only one i couldn't find.
Stan: No, no you can't do this do me!
Me: Goodbye Stan. *closes package* Have fun in Scottsdale.
jwin1 wrote:The worst episode ever. The episode wasn't even funny.
I truly believe in free speech, relish this American freedom, and believe South Park has every right to be offensive or say anything whenever desired. However, a few references here and there to "that's gay" or other such hate-speech (week after week and year after year) is a FAR cry from an entire episode devoted to the word "homosexual".
South Park would be off the air in seconds if there had been an entire episode using 'n*gger' or 'spic' or 'kike', but you feel it's OK to hit the airwaves with 'homosexual'. It's more than offensive, it's disgusting. Trying to excuse homophobia by claiming there are variations of word usage/meaning is unacceptable.
I've been a big fan since the show's inception but I am angry and unwilling to be tolerant of blatant on-air hate speech. I think South Park's creators, writers, and producers owe the GLBT community a huge apology.
I'm so confused... On one hand this is the first episode I can say I truly didn't laugh while watching.. once.. but on the other hand I feel like I need to defend it from retards like the poster I quoted above. How someone with any semblance of a working brain cell could watch the entire episode (or even just parts of it) and come away with the idea that they were being in ANY way homophobic, truly astounds me. Good lord man, they even had homosexuals in the episode taking offense until they understood what was going on. How did you not relate to that??? And don't for a second say that an episode dedicated to "ni**ers" is an ANY way the same as "f*gs". Like they pointed out in the episode, "f*gs" has been used to label people for HUNDREDS of years (and for what it counts, the majority of the time it hasn't had anything to do with homosexuals. Relatively speaking, that's a new term). No one gets cut off by a random guy and says: "ni**er" or "k*ke" or any of the other examples you listed, "f*g" on the other hand IS used, so don't pretend like it's the same thing. The funniest part is that homosexuals and a small handful of ignoramuses are the only ones making sure homosexuals and "f*g" are still related with each other. If they would just stop going out of their way to take offense every time someone says "f*g", it would only be a few years before people started to forgetting that's what it used to mean. If you hate the word so much, STOP CLAIMING IT!! People are asking for it to mean something else and you're complaining about that??? I'm actually starting to think you LIKE that it's still your word and you'd miss it if it was gone... Hypocrite.
SP fan for life
Oh wait. There was that one from season 3... Oh, and the one where Cartman ragged on Kyle... oh and I almost forgot that one where Kenny died...
Yup, almost certainly the best episode to date... probably... I guess.
EDIT: (( haha, they switch F_word for Homo6ual == fag homosexual homosexual fags faguals ))
This is why context and intentions matter in speech, not word choice.
I want to address the episode. I understand it's intentions and I know they weren't attempting to assail homosexuals. That being said.
I disagree with the point they were trying to make and many people on this forum are trying to make. Number 1: homosexuals did NOT take the terms "gay" and "F4G" and use them for ourselves. Those were terms that were attached to us by other groups:
The word "Homosexual" was invented in the late 19th century in order to describe a "disease" or "disorder".
Today, we hear "homosexual" and barely bat an eyelash at the thought. However, to a Victorian-era individual, "homosexual" was a term that was synonymous with medical abnormality, akin to a lethal disease. To this end, euphemisms and other creative ways of referring to this [same-sex attraction] were created - one well-known expression was "the love which dare not speak its name" -- people HAD to have a term to refer to this concept of same-sex love, and "homosexual" was considered a term reserved for serious medical discourse. Some observations were formed about the character of homosexuals - that they were carefree with their sexuality, and they deviated from conventional norms - and thus the term "gay" was applied to them. In fact, "gay" began as a term referring to any non-conservative sexuality.
At this point, we should perhaps clarify the distinction between "accepting" a label and "picking" a label. Minorities are notorious for having little to no say in what labels are put upon them, and I highly doubt that homosexuals at the time willingly petitioned to be called "gay". HOWEVER, considering the options available at the time - "homosexual" still being the medical disease word - there's not much of a choice, and at least "gay" implies a degree of "happiness".
SO, in a nutshell:
I suppose the bigger question to the nay-sayers is "Well, if not 'gay', what should same-sex relationships have been called, excluding 'homosexual'?"
F4G the word has been used since the late sixteenth century to mean "old or unpleasant woman". ibid. Female terms are often used with reference to homosexual or effeminate men (cf. nancy, sissy, queen) and this seems the most likely derivation. It is also possible that the meaning derives from the use of the word as a derogatory term for street prostitutes, female and male, because of their association with the gutter, where "faggot-ends" of meat were thrown by butchers. The term "homosexual girls" for prostitutes is attested from the late 19th century.
The problem today being that because these terms were attached to homosexuals they accepted them as identifiers and attempted to reduce the hurtfulness of the words by making them positive indicators. This is similar to the use of terms like "Brother" and "Nigga" by African Americans today in an attempt to reduce the hate in those words or similar words.
The problem that stems from that is that because those words are still recognized as identifiers by a large part of the population, they still carry a hidden connotation regardless of the intent of the speaker. Someone who says "That's gay." can very easily only be meaning "That's stupid." but to anyone who has the connotation of "gay=homosexual" the connotation reads "gay=stupid thus homosexual=stupid". Even without the speaker's intent the word and usage is seen as implying negative connotations with homosexuality.
Additionally the terms "F4G" and "gay" would never have gained their negative connotations in this time period if it hadn't been for their connection to the homosexual community and the general hate and misconception directed towards gays in the earlier, and current, parts of the 21st and 22nd century. The terms had been "dead terms" that had fallen out of use in conventional english until they were revived with their homosexual attachment.
Regardless of if you agree or not, the question is, why are "gay" and "F4G" acceptable go to insults when things like "N*gger" and other racially charged epitaphs are not? Why is it that you can't use other terms that have inherently bad connotations (stupid meaning lacking intelligence is a good example) when you intend to insult someone or something?
The fact of the matter is that if you didn't want to offend someone you COULD choose to use other words, the fact that you don't and that you take offense to being asked to use other language or that you take offense to people being offended by those terms doesn't speak to the idea that you're beliefs are correct or acceptable, only to the fact that you don't have enough respect for the groups you're offending to be considerate of their feelings. In the end it makes you look inconsiderate at best.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests