"Amazon Women in the Mood" - what REALLY happened

After hearing the theories, I asked Patric M. Verrone what happened. He told me that after the first delay (because of last week's football schedule), somebody at Fox decided that, because of the "sexual theme" (my words, not his) of the show, it would be better if they saved it for February sweeps. It had nothing to do with Standards & Practices (like the famous "missing" episode of "Married...with Children".)

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Don Del Grande stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -

Which episode was that? MWC is currently being rerun here.

Paul Hyett wrote:

"I'll see you in court"

In article , Don Del Grande writes:

Uh huh... So they're not cutting it, right?

In article , Don Del Grande writes: *>After hearing the theories, I asked Patric M. Verrone what happened. *>He told me that after the first delay (because of last week's football *>schedule), somebody at Fox decided that, because of the "sexual theme" *>(my words, not his) of the show, it would be better if they saved it *>for February sweeps.

I'm not sure that works -- they postponed the new episode of "KotH" as well, which didn't look at all titillating.

(If somebody could reply to this message, I'd be grateful; I think my messages haven't been propagating outside umich.edu since I upgraded to MacOS 9.1. I'm hoping I've fixed it now.)

                                                  ----j7y

You're showing up on news.prodigy.com.

Sweeps periods only rob us of quality programming the rest of the year (although they also pre-empt much during that time to run popular movies.)

In alt.tv.futurama, on the "'Amazon Women in the Mood' - what REALLY happened" thread, Don Del Grande wrote:

Cool; thanks for posting this.

I think it's also interesting to note that "Futurama" would have aired against the last moments of the AFC Championship football game [*]. The competition might also have "encouraged" the network to air "Amazon" some other time. ("King of the Hill" was also a repeat that night, possibly in case the game went long.)

[*] For those outside the US: The AFC is one of two conferences in the NFL. The winner of this game plays in the Super Bowl, so it's important. At least in the football universe.

Hmm. I'll bear this in mind next time a network executive claims their shows do not over-emphasize sexuality.

Just for that, you're forbidden from telling Patric Verrone what my e-mail address is. So there.

What a load of #$@#$. When was the last time FOX cared about sexual themes...can you say Temptation Island? LOL

Sean Rea

Yep, or last Wednesday. First the 70's Show, where one of the big stories was Donna showing her bare ass in the yearbook. Then came Grounded For Life, where the parents discuss their 14-15 year old daughter getting a tatoo on her ass, and the mother asks the father why they never checked her butt (ok...). In fact, every other word on Fox is ass. I thought it was funny at first, but it's actually getting old, especially when you try to watch those shows with a 6 year old in the room.

On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 07:02:49 -0800, [email] (Sean Rea) wrote:

Compared to Survivor II it's Leave it To Beaver. It was revealed recently that one of the female contestants is engaged to marry her stepson. -------------------------- [cut to the infield. Cletus and Brandine kiss in the back of a pickup truck]

Brandine: Dang, Cletus, why'd you have to park by my parents? Cletus: Now, honey, they's my parents, too. [another hick plays a banjo flourish] -- Yee-ha, "Alone Again, Natura-Diddly"

Maybe so, and sick in its own right, FOX is just spewing another load of BS to its viewers...if only this were a communist country, this might not happen.

Sean Rea

In article , [email] (Zichron the Insistent) wrote:

Stardate Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:53:50 -0800 ... written on Mars by the contented [email] (Sean Rea):

Yes, communism!

	What better way to press our luck
	And stem the tide of filthy muck
	Which em'nates from society's core
	And live in freedom evermore ...

Sexual themes are okay when used to sell products and subtly distort minds with suggestive images. Futurama, however, periodically jokes about sex in an obvious and frank manner, and this cannot be tolerated. Furthermore, it is animated, and my cousin Bob believes animation is a childrens' medium, which makes it wrong, because children don't like mature themes such as sex-jokes, and because the rights of parents to control the reality their children live in, as well as the reality of anyone who might be watching television at the same time as their children, would be violated. My views are correct, as you can see by these images of women wearing in skin-colored clothing that I'm flashing before your eyes. (DESTROY DEMOCRACY!!!) Yes, that's right ... did you see the nice girls? They're pretty, huh? Excellent ...

On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Jordan Eisenberg stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -

Bet he must love South Park then! :)

In alt.tv.futurama, on the "Re: "Amazon Women in the Mood" - what REALLY happened" thread, Sean Rea wrote:

I think you've got the meaning in reverse. Fox *does* care about sexual themes, but so they can have as many of them as possible, not because they feel guilty about airing them. That's why they are airing the sexually themed "Amazon Women" episode during sweeps (if the ad after the 21 January episode is to be believed).