TV’s biggest hit is innocent fun outside, hardcore social liberalism inside.
OK, I don't watch TV, and maybe things are a bit different in America at large, but I was under the distinct impression that A Game of Thrones was bigger than Glee. Unless they just mean size among teenagers, which is eminently sensible, meaning that I'm an idiot.
Oh, the very first sentence gives me a lot to talk about, so I'm going to quote it:
TYPESETTING DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! Standard practice is to put show titles in italics, episode titles in "quotation marks". The Conservative Teen screws that up by using quotation marks for the show title, as well as for CBS Evening News when news generally doesn't get any form of emphasis other than capitalisation.
And FOOTNOTES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY EITHER! First of all, if you want to clarify a word, don't do it in the middle of the text. Stick it in a footnote at the end, like English-language newspapers over here do when they run an article in Irish (as occasionally happens).
And come on, cameo? Teenagers probably know what this means, and if they don't, they can look it up in any dictionary. I would suggest they could also look it up online, but since this was released as a print mag instead of an iPad app, I'm guessing it's geared towards the offspring of parents who don't let their kids use the Internet at all lest some reality, or at least lesbian fisting, seep through into their wholesome little bubble of denial.
Wow, three paragraphs and +2 Morbos on just one sentence! Let's see if this can possibly get any worse...
The next two paragraphs ridicule Katie Couric for going from a presenter on a light-hearted chat show to a proper newsreader, as if it's utterly impossible for someone to adopt different personae for different situations. It also uses parentheses to snidely imply that CBS is inane and ridiculous liberal propaganda; I did some Googling, and CBS doesn't seem to be any worse than any other American media, and it's certainly better than Fox News; then again, this is clearly written by the sort of people who think that Fox is objectively true and it's those who report facts contrary to the far right line that are the liars.
Anyway, the article goes on to say that, though she may have appeared nice, Couric is actually... a LIBERAL! Dun dun DUNNNNN!
Minerva, this is getting weird. The writers have this bizarre idea that liberals cannot possibly be kind, friendly, or fluffy people; they should really try talking to a homeopath some time, and hopefully if they do the two will annihilate each other in some sort of matter-antimatter reaction.
Ahem. Among Couric's crimes is having a picture of [[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger Margaret Sanger]], founder of Planned Parenthood, in her office, and that's bad because Sanger endorsed eugenics. OK, time for a reality check.
I'm actually surprised the writer doesn't bring up abortion here, as that's one of the things Planned Parenthood does. However, it's actually only a small part of their total work, which is primarily in the realms of contraception, sexual health, and STD screening. But since the right wing hates sex and thinks it's bad and evil, Planned Parenthood is therefore a tool of Satan and anything connected to them is evil.
As for eugenics, yes, Sanger was a fan. Remember, however, that this was 1925. Everybody was into eugenics back then. Demonising someone from that era for agreeing with the prevailing views of the time would be like saying Gandhi was a bad man due to not helping the black population of South Africa.
This segues into the following comparison:
Maybe it is all that, to liberal eyes. But conservatives have to wonder what’s “quirky and sweet” about a show in which half the teenagers are sexually confused and the other half are sleeping around, or how ridiculing conservative principles and figures equals a “nonpartisan funfest.”
Well, for the second part of that, there's a simple reason - there is a direct correlation between the prominence of a conservative figure and them being completely guano insane. Just look at George Bush, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan, Grover Norquist... even Mitt Romeny got crazier as he became more prominent.
As for the sex stuff, I would like to reiterate that I haven't seen Glee and so am just speculating off the top of my head here, but sexual confusion is commonly used for humour, and as long as it isn't done hatefully, I don't see what's so bad about it. However, I find myself unable to say anything about how much sex everyone has, though since the people who write this thing come across as the sort who hate everything other than 15-year-old boys in the bathroom heterosexual consensual sex in the missionary position between husband and wife for the purpose of reproduction, it seems like they're just whining that it isn't 1959 any more.
It goes on to say that Hollywood is pushing a liberal agenda, citing Ben Shapiro's
book Primetime Propaganda as evidence. From what I can gather by reading stuff on the Internet, the book is all about Shapiro interviewing people and then whining about how they don't share his own views. This seems less like bias and more like the general population not sharing the same views as him.
Oh, and this is good:
If this is true, I wholeheartedly approve of this Ryan Murphy fellow. He seems like just the sort of person we need to improve society.
Why is sex considered shameful? Why is it something we hide from our children? Sex is where adorable little babies come from; shouldn't we be encouraging people to be open about something so important, sweet, and fun? Why do people feel the need to hide it away?
The writer whines about the presence teen drinking, sex, pregnancy, and homosexuality, because homosexuality is wrong and the best way to prevent those other things is to suppress all evidence of their existence.
Oh, and Rachel dressing in a miniskirt and bra-exposing belly top is another crime, because a teenage girl in a show marketed towards teenage girls should never dress like a teenage girl. The article helpfully identifies the word smutty as meaning obscene, indecent, reminding the readers that the writers have no idea how to use footnotes.
And just to prove that Glee is shamefully sexual, an issue of GQ published a photospread of several of the actresses, in charcter, being all sexy. Which proves that Glee endorses wanton teenage carnality because... wait a minute. No it doesn't. GQ is entirely seperate from Glee, and while the GQ editors were indeed going for a sexy Glee theme with said photos, that was something they did on their own, and is in no way connected to Glee. Saying it is is like insisting that Daniel Radcliffe appearing in Equus proves that Harry Potter promotes bestiality, or that the existence of erotic Videogame/{Tetris}} fanfic proves that Tetris condones sticking your long, hard rod into waiting crevasses. (I've seen that somewhere, but can't find it now).
More complaints about how Hollywood is totally biases due to making fun of the batshit insane, because Sarah Palin was totally in her right mind. Seriously, this is the woman who claimed to have foreign policy experience due to being able to see Russia from out her window, and this article berates the Glee writers for calling her stupid.
And now for the crowning moment of idiocy:
Our hormones are driving us too crazy to abstain. The second we start telling ourselves there’s no compromise we act out. The only way to beat teen sexuality is to be prepared. That’s what contraception is for.
Hey, writers? ++THIS IS WHAT REALITY IS LIKE!++ Teenagers do have trouble abstaining from sex; in fact, it's a well-know fact that the more sex education focuses on abstinence, the more likely teenagers are to get pregnant (PDF). Fun fact: George W Bush tried to suppress this evidence.
Then there's one final whine about reality's liberal bias before closing.
Well that was unpleasant.
To the right of the page is a banner soliciting contributions from readers. Too bad there are no readers.
At the bottom is a cartoon of a guy arriving in Hell, and not being terrible surprised that it's a division of the IRS. Two things: first of all, with humour, less is more. Any joke is funnier if it takes the reader a second to get it; for evidence, see The Far Side. This would have been funnier without the man's thought at the bottom. Actually, it would also have benefitted from the sign just saying "Welcome to the IRS". Secondly, teenagers don't give a toss about taxes; if they pay anything, it's just what is taken directly out of their payslips.
Next update, a guy complains about movies. Oh joy.
Comments
