South Park

> What's the verdict?

Yeah,videos long then hour should have a decent summary,at least more a sentence

Especially when the subject seems to have a wholly predictable answer. Unless they arrive at a very surprising conclusion, I'm not going to sit through two hours to hear what I already know.

Me neither. I'm glad someone isn't holding up South Park as a Holy Grail but I'm 5 minutes in and am finding it bland. Instead I skipped to the end and it's still too drawn out.

I watched her video on Suite Life (which was a Disguised in Drag episode, for the record, not a "trans episode") and it was fine. Not really visually interesting (the conclusion was basically "gender stereotype jokes are lame") but I might check this out, if only because I think South Park goes into more specific and complicated territory and it's worth listening to trans women on trans satire.

(I'm not trans but in my personal experience, most trans women online don't seem to be fans of the satire, while other trans people appear more mixed. This makes sense because trans women tend to get the harshest, sometimes cruelest treatment on the show, whereas I can only think of maybe two or three times trans guys and nonbinary people came up and it was never as inflammatory as their trans woman depictions.)

Edited by mightymewtron on Dec 14th 2023 at 8:11:57 AM

I was part of a server with LGBT groups...most aren't thrilled about South Park, mostly younger ones but even one who is in 30's has misgivings about it. Also part of me want to ask if there should be comparison with South Park series and the game, especially Stick of Truth. Like it seems like Wolf Among Us, which is based on Fable comic that had a conservative-libertarian bent with an overreaching and intrusive council as antagonist but the game is about an underfunded council with a major plot centered around resident's need for expensive glamour magic. South Park: Stick of Truth explored American systematic discrimination (or in one case, racist foundations of Cthulhu mythos with an eldritch abomination that eat "black meat") with "skin color difficulty" and plotline being about "white guy named Chris" superheroes, gender identity, and microaggression...all of which South Park omit or mock. This ties into trangender since the game creator—Obsidian—also had videogames exploring LGBT...The Outerworld is one I can think about. This might reflect if videogame's more thorough representation of LGBT might have to do with the game creators rather than Trey and Matt.

Edited by t209 on Dec 15th 2023 at 8:08:49 AM

The game was more about bullying straight men by forcing them to dress in drag if they wanted the strongest armour and weapons in the game. I enjoyed it regardless, but I can tell that was not the intention.

Yep, this might be another explanation. Thought this was case of same works but different developers and different tone based on different time context.

Question: Do you guys think that people have a hard time understanding that Cartman is a satire of the far right?

trust me,they don't really care if he satirical character or not.

It doesn't help that much of the show's satire seems to be more hostile to the left.

At first glance I’d say it does appear to be more hostile towards the left when it actuality it attacks both sides.

I’ve been a number people in geek culture who act like Cartman.

I think a big part of the problem is people watching the show before they were old enough to understand the political/satirical elements and then not really wanting to deepen their understanding as they got older because they think saying slurs is comedy gold. Some will only acknowledge the show as "satire" as a "Just Joking" Justification while not actually acknowledging they're repeating jokes out of context that aren't meant to be seen as in the right.

I think since the funnier/memorable lines are the "wrong" ones, i.e. stuff Cartman or Garrison say, it sticks with people more and they just miss the point so badly because of it.

Cartman has sociopathic tendencies and depicted as such before "far right" was considered a thing. A number of episodes show him with sympathetic traits and even be unfairly maligned, the Post-Covid specials and the dog training episode even clearly that he has the capacity to be good. While Stan and Kyle represent the more moderate positions of Parker and Stone, Cartman represents their trolling inclinations. A handful of episodes do show Cartman crossing a line, such as the "Coon and Friends" trilogy in allying with Cthulhu, but he is also equally capable of compassion, decency and moral standards.

End point, I don't think Parker and Stone are interested in one-note characters so Cartman doesn't easily fit that description. Originally PC Principal was meant to be a caricature but managed to find something redeeming about him in the process.

Agreed, Cartman was never a satire of the far right. He was just a nasty kid with laughably nasty views. The intention was to shock the audience, not to satirize their politics.

People acting like Cartman was virtually unthinkable back in the day. There just wasn't an extreme right to speak of; that sort of people were still very fringe and rejected by anyone in politics back then, even on the right. Simply put, there was nothing to satirize back then. Cartman's behaviour was just shock comedy, nothing more.

It's rather ironic that the most shocking thing about Cartman nowadays is that right wing politics has managed to catch up to and resemble him.

Ah so it’s a case of people inadvertently becoming like Cartman who was just meant to be seen as utterly ridiculous?

The show does make it clear though that you aren’t supposed to act like Cartman.

Edited by powerpuffbats on Dec 16th 2023 at 6:34:12 AM

Cartman Crosses the Line Twice, but far-righters admire him for just crossing the line once.

Edited by AudioSpeaks2 on Dec 16th 2023 at 8:47:58 PM

Yes, very much so. It was originally intended as Comedic Sociopathy: shocking the audience by having a ten year old act like a hardened antisemitic neonazi.

Basically, yes. Some people clearly miss the point that just because the protagonist is a horrible person, that doesn't mean you should admire or emulate them.

I think that, ironically, and unintentionally, South Park itself has contributed to this trend of radicalization by normalizing this sort of extreme black comedy. When people hear Cartman spew antisemitism and see him act like a Nazi, over and over, that tends to subconsciously normalize that to the viewer as the shock wears off over time.

I noticed the same with their toilet humour. At some point, it just stopped shocking me, especially after You're Getting Old.

Edited by Redmess on Dec 16th 2023 at 1:51:05 PM

I think this saying says it best "When you are being neutral or just "no one is bad/everyone sucks" you are just enabling the awfulness of the opressors"

We are getting another special soon and but the trailer leaked early.

Edited by Deadpoolrocks on Dec 16th 2023 at 7:57:12 AM

Online discussion tends towards the extremes, interpretation of content is only one thing rather than Applicability where the audience fills in the gaps. In "Cartoon Wars" Cartman was used to both deride the low quality of Family Guy humor and as the villain hoping to capitalize on the Muhammed controversy to get it canceled.

People online often get really confused if they can't pigeonhole a character or person into one box, when real life people have immense complexity. Reminds me a little of how Adam and Jaime of Mythbusters have stated they are not friends but great coworkers, with so many people questioning how you can respect someone and not be best friends.

I thought Adam and Jamie were brothers for a long time.

Also on Cartman, part of me feel like it was a jab at Saturday Morning cartoon cliche of "complainers are always wrong" (like anyone against the group being shown as "bad" to endorse "pro-social" message, be it Wheeler from Captain Planet and Cavalier from D&D cartoon, and maybe Grumpy Bear from Care Bear even if his point was that Complainer can be sometimes right). Like same with Token as a character, who only work when the main exposure is...Burger Kings kid's club mascot and the network's tendency to have "Wheel Chair kid, minority kid, female, and male kid" characters set up.

Edited by t209 on Dec 18th 2023 at 11:39:18 AM

I’m watching the new special. The satire so far is much stronger than in the last one.

Is it just me or was there almost no advertising for this one? I mean they did get a billboard in Times Square so it's not pure Invisible Advertising but I saw almost nothing online/on TV, not even on Comedy Central.

I think I saw "Not Suitable for Children" once but mistook it for a tagline, not the actual title.

Its because of the huge anti-social media slant it has.