How come South Park hasn't inspired outrage?

Remember when Beavis and Butt-head first started how much public outrage there was against it? I even read about a millionaire lottery winner who tried to use his millions to get B&B off the air. B&B were falsely accused of inspiring at least one real-life arson incident, and uptight stuffed shirts scapegoated B&B for everything imaginable.

I would like to hear some opinions as to why South Park has not inspired the same degree of controversy and uproar. I mean, in many ways, South Park is even more subversive: the kids are younger than B&B, graphic gore is shown more frequently, and Jesus Christ is a recurring character.

"Eric Perlin" wrote in message news:P60f7.4343$[email]...

there

to use

at

B&B

the

even

Because no protest could stop anybody from pushing the envelope. We came to accept it, then to expect it. Hell, here we complain when they *don't* push the envelope. And the stuff surrounds us now, like American Pie, Freddy Got Fingered, Jackass, Scary Movie, There's Something About Mary... South Park is mainstream now, so there's no point in being controversial, much as Trey and Matt try these days.

Plus Southpark makes fun on everybody.

"Willie Westwood" wrote in message news:pA2f7.4154$[email]...

inspiring

scapegoated

is

more

to

push

Got

Trey

And I think that we are a lot more tolerant of content if it's aired after 10 pm.

Of course, it airs at 8pm here in Colorado..

Rob Shoofy wrote in message news:9lj08n$4c1i$[email]...

Plus that was 1993. Before Clinton and Monica, before the Republicans attempting a coup d'etat over a blowjob, before every kid on the block learned what a blowjob is. Oh sure, there are great pockets in "the red states" to take us all back to 1903. Every time I mention that I watch SP I'm derided as a satanic influence and every piece of work I do it tainted -- in their minds. Last night I saw a program than mentioned that in the 1920s, "the jaz age" neve made it in places like Kansas or Ohio or the "Heartland." In many ways, the entire 20th Century has skipped over a great area of the US and they are still trying to avoid it. I doubt they can escape it for much longer, but you're going to hear the old farts moaning even louder as they catch up on 80 years in another mere 20. Really -- look at what happened just after WWII -- the whole "How ya gonna keep 'em on the farm after they see Paree?" phenomenon.

Lest people forget, remember that I am not a Republican and despise them. That said, the whole Monica crap was not about a blowjob. Everyone and their grandma, GOP included, knows that Washington is full of politicians who cheat on their wives all the time. This has been known for decades. The Lewinsky matter was about *lying* about it. And before all the "like you wouldn't lie about it" replies come pouring in: yes -- lying about such is pretty much behavior to be expected -- but lying about it in front of a grand jury is different. Lying about it to billions of people while thousands of cameras are recording it all is different.

Just to clarify the last bit -- "to billions of people while thousands of cameras are recording it" -- a lot of guys don't equate BJs with intercourse, so when he said he didn't have RELATIONS with her, in his mind,like in Gingrich's mind too and some guys I know, he told the truth -- he hadn't fucked her. After all, Mr. Hankey said you can suck all the dick you want and still be a virgin!

"D.G. Porter" wrote:

Czech this owt:

A little young fer me, but heheheheheheheh anyway...

Ah, back on topic. Thanks, DG.

Well, when you *want* to make the dreidl spin, you *know* "those people" always win! (Hey, I'm Celtic, so I have to qualify the sentence!) BTW, the director of bands at UC Davis thinks "X-mastime in Hell" is the funniest thing he's ever heard!

In article , "D.G. Porter" writes:

When the hell did he say THAT?

Why would a piece of crap say something like it in the first place?

He and Kenny sang that exact song on the South Park CD entitled "Mr. Hankey's Christmas Classics." Aren't you a South Park fan?

Apparently not, just another right wing piece of trash who wanders thru here every week or two while his padded cell is being aired.

Yada, yada, yada...

Actually, you're right, fundamentally it wasn't about a blow job, it was a coup d'�tat, which failed thanks to the Senate. Sometimes the system works.

LiamD

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001 06:32:50 GMT, Liam Devlin wrote:

Actually, you're 100% correct. It had nothing to do with a blow job OR lying to the press or the Grand Jury. It had to do with a severe case of sour grapes by Republicans whose own lame candidate in 1992 blew (heh) a substantial lead to lose the election.

As for the system working...yeah, right. $65 million and three years later. The Republicans exacted their revenge in 2000. As Hunter S. Thompson commented in his ESPN.com column "The Fix Is In" last November (http://espn.go.com/page2/s/thompson/001127.html),

"The old man was the real tip-off. The leer on his face was almost frightening. It was like looking into the eyes of a tall hyena with a living sheep in its mouth. The sheep's fate was sealed, and so was Al Gore's. ... Everything since then has been political flotsam & Gibberish."

Sometimes the system sucks, too.

JJ Equal Opportunity Despiser

[email] wrote:

Gotta love Hunter S! I picked up on that, too, election night, not the old man, but the Bush family's certitude that the networks had the wrong numbers. After all, they'd gone over the Florida numbers just that afternoon with Jeb, and the networks didn't have those numbers, yet.

LiamD

In article , Liam Devlin writes:

Moron. If Bill had been kicked out, like he should have, AlGore would have become pres, not Bob Dole.

Did Liam say Bob Dole would have become president???

In article , "D.G. Porter" writes:

You really need to see a doctor about these issues of yours, or get that sand out of your vagina.

The Bush crowd sees nothing wrong with jacking off their pet dogs.

LiamD

Liam Devlin wrote...

who told you abowt that? not that im admittin to anything of course, but where did you hear abowt that from?

Shit, man, everbuddy knows it.

I hear it's one of Jenna's favorite pass-times.

"Hey, y'know, y'know buddy, sometimes, y'know, when I get a li'l drunk, there's this thing I like, y'know, t'do with 'r dog... yer cute, y'know..."

Red rocket! Red rocket!

Because they have Jackass instead to scapegoat for all the real-life incidents involving kids.

Also, Comedy Central is fucking WUSS MTV.

Dunno if anyone has said this yet, but here it goes...

B&B was on MTV, MTV is considered a basic cable channel. South Park is on Comedy Central, CC isn't considered a basic cable channel in most areas. For instance, the cable service in my area (Adelphia Cable) does not carry Comedy Central, but they do carry MTV. I have a Satellite Dish (Dish Network -Dish 500), so, therefore, I have Comedy Central, MTV, and MTV2...

Ray

"Eric Perlin" wrote in message news:P60f7.4343$[email]...

there

to use

at

B&B

the

even

Your Adelphi (your key to everything they say) doesn't carry CC?? Ours does, but we pay a little more for it.

I don't know. I remember when the Simpsons sparked outrage for being terrible for the kiddies. Funny how most of these parents have come to accept the Simpsons. Looking back at it, I don't think it is 1/4 as bad as South Park in terms of content.

"Eric Perlin" wrote in message news:P60f7.4343$[email]...

there

to use

at

B&B

the

even

"Eric Perlin" wrote in message news:P60f7.4343$[email]...

there

to use

at

B&B

the

even

Right, and it has inspired its share of outrage in some parts. Brent Bozo, for example, writes a fairly reasonable column about media bias most of the time, but goes apeshit whenever the topic is South Park - even though SP's "bias," to the extent it has one, is one he'd likely agree with if he weren't too prudish to see past the smut.

As for SP not being blamed for real-life incidents, someone already mentioned Jackass. Another problem is that the SP eqivalents are too far-fetched to be taken seriously. If any kid ever actually manages to burn himself to death by lighting a fart, I guarantee that some ambulance chaser, somewhere, will sue Trey Parker, Matt Stone, their parents, Paramount, the MPAA, Terrence, Kenny, Cartman, Winona Ryder, Conan O'Brien, Brooke Shields, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Jar Jar Binks, every movie theater that showed BLU, and most movie theaters that didn't.

And nobody's sued the makers of the Warner Bros. Road Runner cartoons for every kid who's fallen off a cliff, blew himself up with a homemade rocket, or just got run over by a truck?

Not to mention Superman - for every kid found crumpled up on the driveway with a towel tucked in their T-shirt like a cape.

Those cartoons were made years ago & we understood they were make believe. Besides, if I'd seen the coyote get flattened after falling off a cliff, then gone and done it myself, my father would have said something like "dumb kid, serves him right". NO one would have considered suing.

LiamD

The difference is, Kenny dies (though somehow makes it back for the next episode), whereas Wile E. doesn't. I think that makes the latter a worse example.

"Bill K." wrote in message news:[email]...

Which way does it cut? If anything I'd be more concerned that a kid might think he can do X and not die than thinking he can do X, die from it, and mysteriously reappear a week later.

My point exactly.

And The Man Show for that lyric "Quit your job and light a fart," and Mike Judge for the B&B Ep where Beavis did light a fart and scorched his butt and and filled his rectum with flames -- "Fire in the hole!" she cried, and Beavis projected himself several feet upon the insertion of the anal speculum.

(snip)

Plus everyone who's ever posted on USENET.

MTV is targeted towards those under 18 (as well as over). In some cases, well under. SP is only shown after 9P or 10P depending on where you live, and includes a warning that the content is *only* for adults; it is rated TV-MA.

Additionally, several years have gone by, and lots of things have gotten much racier. For starters, compare the content of Penthouse, Hustler, Swank, etc. vs. just three years ago. Or don't. ;-)

Hmmm, I haven't seen one of those since about ten years ago. And I remember how explicit they were around twenty years ago! What's changed?

Well, besides there being less pubic hair than 20 years ago, all three (and many others) show graphic and unobstructed penetration* (upper and lower), as well as semen -- at times "in motion."

• By this, I do not mean just dildos. Real penises.

You know (or you may not), if I want to see a hairy schlong I'll just look in the mirror, thank you. When I want porn, I want to see pussies and neato stuff like that...

Didn't mean to say it was a good change. Anyway, fwiw, the sclongs are quite unnaturally hair-free as well. If you like seeing two females together, the mags now show unobstructed tongue penetration.

Upper and lower ;)

Bao H. Lammy wrote...

My goodness!!! The President should IMMEDIATELY rehire Edwin Meese as Attorney General so he can spend several million taxpayer dollars on a new, updated study of pornography!

If that's not feasible, just send me 30 million dollars plus some hardcore pornography so I can study it.

I take it you're not yet confidant in your ability to recognize it when you see it?

LiamD :-)

Not good enough. A top quality witch hunt like that one that brought us news of clinton gettin his cock sucked ought to use up at last 70 million dollars.