I can’t speak to the Mickey Mouse thing, but along similar lines you have Popeye. But Bluto wasn’t about to rape Olive Oil, he sincerely thought they belonged together, and was always trying to use his muscle to get her away from Popeye. Now, granted, one could say that a person like that is either going to wind up an abuser, a rapist, or both, but at the end of the day Bluto was just a bully, not some horrible person. Pete might have been intended in a similar manner. More recent (c. 1985-1995) kids’ shows have played with the idea by portraying the “villain” as a hopeless romantic who kidnaps the girl, and then tries to woo her in stereotypical old-fashioned ways once he has her attention.
As for Bowser, I always thought it was a strictly political thing. He’s trying to take over the Mushroom kingdom. I mean, he has 8 kids (the koopalings, and the Bowser Jr. that’s appeared concurrent with him in games like Mario Sunshine) with no wife. Obviously Bowser has no interest in a romantic marriage, and seems to be quite the ladies’ man amongst his own kind. I don’t think he has any interest in Peach Toadstool that way.
And for the record, as a kid I thought he was holding her ransom for the Mushroom Kingdom’s surrender.
They broke up. But a read of the episode guide reminds me they did reunite after all.
That was the thing about that show, though; it was much more realistic than other shows with married couples, IMHO.
It was Cliff that I always felt bad for. Everyone hated him, including his own mom. It was a rare day when he wasn’t shat upon by everyone in the cast. Norm? Hell, EVERYBODY liked Norm. They even shouted out his name whenever he entered.
Eh, with Pepe, I always figured that, much like the Coyote, he had been thwarted in reaching his “goal” at every occasion for so long that he no longer even knew what he was supposed to do if he’d succeeded.
…Of course, from all the FBI psychological studies I’ve read, I think that means he’d then turn to murdering his victims to keep them from reporting him. But that would give him some sort of bizarre satisfaction, and he’d feel the urge to kill again…and again…
Well, I guess we know where Speedy Gonzales disappeared to, now. "Mon Chou puts ze lotion on it’s skin, or else it gets le hose again!" :eek:
Starting with Goof Troop, Pete’s not even a villain, he’s a family man whose worst crime is being a sleazy car salesman. I think in the Goofy Movies, he’s an employee at a K-Mart type place along with Goofy. He’s still a jerk, but he seems to mean well.
In how many kids shows are the parents even PRESENT anymore?
They’ll sit there and watch and for at least a half hour some 13 year old girl is going to be running around their town, shopping (who knows where she GETS the money for her 6 bags of shit), seeing friends, going out to movies, going out to a burger joint with friends, with nary an authority figure in the picture.
It’s not just the lack of parental involvement, it’s the utter lack of responsibility that the main characters seem to have. Never see them in school, never see them doing homework, never see them doing chores, they’re just hanging out and having fun 24/7.
I can understand the strangling thing, since Bart and Homer are supposed to be “real” people on the show. But what’s so creepy or unsettling about the violence in Itchy and Scratchy? They’re so over the top and ludicrous parodies of cartoon violence that I can’t see anything creepy about it at all. (Which, incidentally, I think explains the Bart strangling in the early episodes: it was a parody of cartoon violence, but the more we got to know the characters, the less it played like a parody and the more unsettling it became. Unless we get to know Itchy and Scratchy on a human level, I don’t think the same will happen to them.)
To me it’s not racist, but sexist. Here’s a woman who can literally do anything, and she’s married to a guy who insists that she not use any of her special abilities. He also wants her to minimize contact with her relatives. For some reason she tries to accommodate him instead of divorcing the schmuck.
Imagine a show about a woman who has several degrees in various fields: physics, literature, languages, economics, etc. Most of her relatives are wealthy entrepreneurs. She is married to an insurance salesman who insists that she not have her own career or pursue her own interests. The guy gets annoyed when his wife’s relatives come over and encourage her to have her own life. To me, that’s what Bewitched is like.
I Dream of Jeanie is also pretty creepy.
I disagree, though, with all the people who find Seinfeld and Everybody Loves Raymond creepy or offensive because the main characters are selfish jerks. Neither of these shows asks the audience to sympathize with the selfishness of these characters - they ask the audience to laugh at it. Laughter is often motivated by hostility - in this case, to some of the most self-absorbed people imaginable. It would be creepy and offensive if the humor in these shows were directed at the victims, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
Married with Children was a parody of the old shows like Father Knows Best in which family life was shown as being idyllic to the point of absurdity. MWC is about the opposite type of world - a world in which family members are ridiculously horrid to each other. My main problem with MWC is that it wasn’t very creative - most of it was just recycled insult comedy.
As for Homer choking Bart - The Simpsons is a very cartoonish cartoon, so the choking doesn’t bother me so much. People in it don’t look or act like anyone in real life. There’s a lot of unrealistic violence, like people being struck by lightning and falling down mountains, and in most cases there is no permanent damage. I would find it disturbing if, for example, in King of the Hill Hank choked Bobby. KOTH is much less cartoonish - the characters look and act more like real people than do the characters in The Simpsons.
Itchy and Scratchy is a commentary on both the violence and lack of imagination of some of the old-time cartoons. Itchy and Scratchy is (are?) about nothing except Itchy dismembering Scratchy in various ways. Most of the cartoons aren’t funny in and of themselves. The joke is in the slavish following the cartoons have in The Simpsons universe - the fact that even someone as smart as Lisa finds Itchy and Scratchy hilarious though the cartoons are formulaic and disgusting.
Well yeah but I’d say being oblivious, not recognizing the people…err…cats around you to the point that you don’t know what sex/species they are and fail to notice that they have no interest in you and only your own interest in them is pretty much the definition of creep. Imagine a human like that.
But I don’t want to get anymore carried away. Don’t want to burst anything. But it did creep me out as a kid.
Well that’s why I personally didn’t mention Popeye. Olive waffled between Bluto and Popeye, proving she was willing to be wooed by either of them. But Pete and villains like him physically grabbed the girls as they kicked and screamed to get out of their clutches. Upon reaching their lairs, the women were bound as the villains tried to force their kisses upon them (and, naturally, more, if the hero doesn’t come in time). That’s rape.
From my irregular “Who Do We Blame?” office newsletter:Monday, June 21, 2004
Character: Olive Oyl
First Appearance: Betty Boop’s Bamboo Isle (1932)
Culpable Party: Fleischer Studios
Identifying Characteristic: Whiny scream for help, Princess Leia hairstyle with art-girl combat boots.
Why Do We Blame Her?: Flat-chested, pencil-wristed instigator plays a hideously unattractive Helen to Bluto’s Paris, causing the intransigent Popeye to continually come to her defense. Irritating sidekick and possible illegitimate child Sweetpea frequently in tow, increasing the drain on Popeye’s already stretched finances, what between his tattoo fetish and spinach (wink-wink) addiction.And on the topic of Pepe Le Peu:Wednsday, June 23, 2004
Character: Pepe Le Peu
First Appearance: Merry Melodies (date unknown)
Culpable Party: Warner Bros.
Identifying Characteristic: Black fur with dual white dorsal stripe, debilitating musk, affinity for felines.
Why Do We Blame Him?: Introduced millions of children to the joys of interspecies stalking and bestiality.Stranger
I always wondered if that was a nod to the treatment of “fat” Carol Seaver, tothe point that the actress developed an eating disorder, on that other 80’s sitcom which name is escaping me. Kirk Cameron was the older brother. “Family Guy” makes a lot of 80’s references.
I think the name of the show was “Growing Pains”, and for a while after Titanic came out, Disney was doing all sorts of promos advertising how Leonardo Dicaprio was on that show (for all of like, one season, I seem to recall that the commercials came off as slightly ironic)
That may have been true at the very beginning, but many I&S cartoons are really hilarious in their inventiveness and surprise twists.
Perhaps my favorite is after Scratchy gets sucked under at the top of the escalator, ripping his fur off. Itchy sells the fur to a fur shop, a wealthy woman buys it, scratchy takes it back from her, drapes it around himself… and gets attacked by anti-fur protestors outside the mall. Comedic brilliance.
But it did creep me out as a kid.