# Roseanne Part Two? No Thank You **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 24, 2018, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120 "2018-03-24T18:03:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2018, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/141 "2018-04-09T17:55:58Z")
> [@Rilchiam](#): > > Darlene’s not gay. The actress who plays her is, but not the character. Unless you know something I don’t, and they’re going to reveal that that’s why she’s divorced. I took the joke to be another instance of Roseanne’s long tradition of inside meta-humor, but that’s an interesting angle, given that we don’t know why David and Darlene split. But then, if Darlene were gay, I think she’d probably be open about it. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2018, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/142 "2018-04-09T18:23:31Z")
> [@pdhenry](#): > > You’re welcome not to watch. Does SD have a threadcrapping rule? Technically this was started as an anti-Rosanne thread (as per the title and OP) 😉 So I’d imagine that even if the thread had continued in a different direction the original OP intent would still allow for anti-Rosanne posts and that would not indeed be crapping on the thread. ---
**Author:** ![tenacious\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/439d5e/32.png) [@tenacious\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tenacious_j)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2018, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/143 "2018-04-09T21:36:14Z")
> [@Rilchiam](#): > > Darlene’s not gay. The actress who plays her is, but not the character. Unless you know something I don’t, and they’re going to reveal that that’s why she’s divorced. I didn’t understand the comments in the last episode about that- didn’t Dan or Roseanne say something a few times about having a gay daughter and Darlene answered “not gay”? Is she? Isn’t she? I guess all that matters at this point that she’s divorced with 2 kids and unemployed. I was going to mention it but didn’t think much more about it until just now. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2018, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/144 "2018-04-09T22:17:58Z")
> [@tenacious\_j](#): > > I didn’t understand the comments in the last episode about that- didn’t Dan or Roseanne say something a few times about having a gay daughter and Darlene answered “not gay”? Is she? Isn’t she? I guess all that matters at this point that she’s divorced with 2 kids and unemployed. > I was going to mention it but didn’t think much more about it until just now. I agree with the others that it’s likely just a meta-joke, same as the stuff with the book and Dan dying and such. They wanted to acknowledge that, even though the actress is gay, Darlene the character is not. Or, at least, she currently does not identify as such–who knows with TV shows? It also just makes sense to come up when talking about Mark’s non-gender-conforming clothing. It’s establishing that the problem is not that they are some homophobic bigots, but that they just care about their grandkid. It was a nice bit of writing, I thought. And exactly the type of heartwarming stuff that made me think the show might appeal to me. (It never did in its first iteration, except during the crazy season, just for the absurdity.) ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_Door](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@Bill\_Door](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_Door)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2018, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/145 "2018-04-10T17:18:39Z")
> [@pdhenry](#): > > You’re welcome not to watch. Does SD have a threadcrapping rule? Do you think one should apply in a thread titled “ **Roseanne Part Two? No Thank You** ”? ---
**Author:** ![ZipperJJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zipperjj/32/211_2.png) [@ZipperJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZipperJJ)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2018, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/146 "2018-04-10T17:46:53Z")
I watched and enjoyed Roseanne in its original run. My family wasn’t quite as poor as them, at the time it ran, but we had come from such roots. What appealed to me was: 1. Seeing the strong “tomboy” character of Darlene. I wasn’t interested in being girly but I’m not gay. It was good to see that I could eschew girliness and still be into guys. 2. Seeing a unkempt fat woman on TV. I was only a teen but that was me. I can’t think of any fat female characters before her, or even after her except for Camryn Manheim, in a business suit (and then Melissa McCarthy) 3. Seeing a regular, beat-down, messy, no-frills house on TV. That was my house. Now I appreciate one other extra thing: 4. Seeing staunchly Liberal family members live side-by-side with Trump voters. I don’t live with my folks but I see them often. There’s a delicate balance to work at every time. It’s a real thing that I really deal with, and I appreciate it for what its worth, seeing it on TV. So I may not agree with Roseanne’s politics but I think in a sense that \*nobody \*likes her anyway, left or right. I honestly appreciate her ability to be a part of this show and to give in to some “liberal concepts” and keep up a sense of mocking both sides, but ultimately being part of a loving family that needs each other. ---
**Author:** ![pdhenry](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pdhenry/32/5561_2.png) [@pdhenry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pdhenry)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2018, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/147 "2018-04-10T18:29:28Z")
> [@Bill\_Door](#): > > Do you think one should apply in a thread titled “ **Roseanne Part Two? No Thank You** ”? Thanks! I acknowledged that in my response to the first person to point it out (where I observed that the thread had moved on from that viewpoint) so I’ll ignore other similar responses from this point on. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2018, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/148 "2018-04-12T03:56:29Z")
Well Becky having trouble with her eggs was hardly surprising; women her age are usually the ones turning to egg donors & surrogates. I liked how everyone rallied around Becky in their own way. Also that look of total confusion on Dan’s face when he won an argument with Roseanne was hilarious. I’m getting a little annoyed that they seem to be implying Jackie never had Andy when Jerry still got mentioned if not seen. ---
**Author:** ![WildBlueYonder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ce7236/32.png) [@WildBlueYonder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WildBlueYonder)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2018, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/149 "2018-04-12T12:41:48Z")
ooops next post ---
**Author:** ![WildBlueYonder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ce7236/32.png) [@WildBlueYonder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WildBlueYonder)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2018, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/150 "2018-04-12T13:08:24Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I’m in a similar financial situation. It’s rather depressing hearing the supposed empathetic people judge people as losers based on their finances. Yes it is BigT. Must be a lot of well off class people in here. And its only a tv show, watch or not. Lots of stupid shows on tv that I dont like but I’m not cutting down everyone in the show or watching the show. > [@Misnomer](#): > > “Corporal punishment”? “Crossed a line”? “Abuse”? :dubious: > All she did was hold Harris’s head in the sink and get her soaking wet. It wasn’t waterboarding, for f\*\*k’s sake. > [@WolfpackJeep](#): > > You missed the part where she grabbed the actor (who is portraying a teenager) by the neck, then held her in the sink while pinning her against the counter? 😕 Maybe it was meant to be slapstick, but it came across completely wrong. > [@WolfpackJeep](#): > > Why would you need to hold someone’s head in the sink though? I guess that caught me off guard… To me, it was a bit of a jump to go from bratty teenager behavior to head-in-sink. I thought it was deserved, highly comedic and spot on! It served the purpose. Teenage girls do not like their hair getting wet therefore the “do” is ruined…well maybe not but it was still hilarious! 😃 > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > It’s already been renewed for a second season. [Roseanne Season 11: ABC Renews Roseanne Barr Sitcom Revival](http://www.vulture.com/2018/03/roseanne-renewed-season-11.html) That was quick. Seems odd to have it renew this quickly. Three episodes in? or is it 4? > [@WOOKINPANUB](#): > > Do people overanalyze all sitcoms, or is this one especially ripe because of it’s star’s political leanings? I’m getting a very weird, way too serious, vibe up in here 😕 Yes on the latter selection. Lecy seems so young looking. I think the high ratings is two fold-people love to hate, so they watch. Plentiful others can relate. Isnt it only Darleen and children the ones that moved back in? Is there something wrong with family coming and going in the family house. Especially since it seems the whole family lives in the area. I’d be in and out of my parents house if it were still available. They must be a close family. Does everyone have so many great friendships that they visit with them instead of family? > [@alphaboi867](#): > > I don’t see the Connors replacing still usable furniture unless someone dies. My grandmother got a convertible couch when she moved into a new house that ended up in my first apartment 40+ yrs later. Admittedly it was reupholstered at least once. So true for many of us. > [@alphaboi867](#): > > Yes, it’s hilarious how much some people are getting worked up over this show. No Trump references since the premiere, and only 1 confirmed Trump voter & one implied one in the cast. Hilarious? I cant remember as many verbal POTUS haters in the past as their seems to be with Trump. Is Trump’s policies doing that much damage to your lives? > [@ZipperJJ](#): > > I watched and enjoyed Roseanne in its original run. My family wasn’t quite as poor as them, at the time it ran, but we had come from such roots. What appealed to me was: > > 1. Seeing the strong “tomboy” character of Darlene. I wasn’t interested in being girly but I’m not gay. It was good to see that I could eschew girliness and still be into guys. > 2. Seeing a unkempt fat woman on TV. I was only a teen but that was me. I can’t think of any fat female characters before her, or even after her except for Camryn Manheim, in a business suit (and then Melissa McCarthy) > 3. Seeing a regular, beat-down, messy, no-frills house on TV. That was my house. > > Now I appreciate one other extra thing: > 4. Seeing staunchly Liberal family members live side-by-side with Trump voters. I don’t live with my folks but I see them often. There’s a delicate balance to work at every time. It’s a real thing that I really deal with, and I appreciate it for what its worth, seeing it on TV. > > So I may not agree with Roseanne’s politics but I think in a sense that \*nobody \*likes her anyway, left or right. I honestly appreciate her ability to be a part of this show and to give in to some “liberal concepts” and keep up a sense of mocking both sides, but ultimately being part of a loving family that needs each other. Agree on all points. I think a lot of people dont like her loud mouth, freely expressing her feelings and the fact that she controls every aspect of her life and others. Strong woman. I can relate. Still she can be a good example to females. We need more independent, thinking out of the box women in the world. Not enough aggressive/extroverted/outspoken women. ---
**Author:** ![Rushgeekgirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rushgeekgirl/32/3715_2.png) [@Rushgeekgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rushgeekgirl)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/151 "2018-04-13T02:27:31Z")
Is it totally outside the boundaries of reality that people can dislike her and her show without it being because of her politics? I don’t think she’s particularly strong on the show or in real life. She has gotten a lot of attention for attention seeking behavior. She’s very good at that. I personally can’t stand her VOICE and I know that’s just an awful thing to say, to pick on this pooooor woman because of a physical condition she can’t change, right? Call me awful then, but it has nothing to do with her politics. And yeah, what her character did to her grandchild is abusive. It wasn’t just getting her freakin hair wet and ruining her “do”. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/152 "2018-04-13T03:26:15Z")
> [@Rushgeekgirl](#): > > Is it totally outside the boundaries of reality that people can dislike her and her show without it being because of her politics? I don’t think she’s particularly strong on the show or in real life. She has gotten a lot of attention for attention seeking behavior. She’s very good at that. I personally can’t stand her VOICE and I know that’s just an awful thing to say, to pick on this pooooor woman because of a physical condition she can’t change, right? Call me awful then, but it has nothing to do with her politics. And yeah, what her character did to her grandchild is abusive. It wasn’t just getting her freakin hair wet and ruining her “do”. I don’t like the way the character changed. I suppose that is about politics, but it is more about character. Her going from a feminist who didn’t want to repeat the cycle of child abuse she grew up with, and then becoming a Trumpian conservative who got angry because her daughter didn’t beat her granddaugther was a really shitty decline as a human being. I feel like the original Roseanne had redeeming characteristics to balance the bad stuff, this new one is just all the bad stuff with new bad stuff thrown in. It is almost like the modern Roseanne is a caricature of what Roseanne in her 40s would consider an Evil Roseanne. I remember a Halloween episode in the original series where Roseanne was visited by the ghosts of Halloween past, present and future. The ghost of Halloween future said Roseanne would end up like her mother. And I think she did in a lot of ways. She has more in common with Bev than with her old self at this point. I could see Bev voting for Trump while she couldn’t afford her medications, I could see Bev getting angry her kids didn’t beat the grandkids. I could see Bev constantly complaining until it drove everyone around her insane. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/153 "2018-04-13T12:19:57Z")
Watched the first episode, it left me unimpressed. Yeah, funny in spots, but too much politics, yuck. She’s a trump supporter, which is cool. But to then make a stack of jokes about retired people not being able to afford their meds? Ha Ha Ha! Yeah, no, I’m not laughing, it ain’t funny, and I won’t tune in again. Sure a gazillion tuned in to E1, probably to see how all the players had aged. I didn’t see anything that will make them tune in a second time. I always felt ‘Rosanne’, WAS in part responsible for the full on embracing of that Bro attitude, say any offence thing then announce, ‘Its a joke!’. It seemed to me like the show shifted the needle to everybody just being louder and more obnoxious and in your face, like they all thought they were suddenly just as funny as Roseanne. I don’t think it will last long before being cancelled. People can see petty bickering over politics and other familial conflicts right in their own homes/neighbourhoods these days, no need to turn on the tv! ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/154 "2018-04-13T13:14:27Z")
Are you offended that they made a joke about not being able to afford their meds? (btw, they already announced it’s renewed for next season) ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/155 "2018-04-13T14:25:33Z")
I thought this last episode may have been the best of the new ones so far. It’s great to watch Lecy Goranson and Sara Gilbert playing off each other and to see Becky and Darlene’s contrasting personalities. And Roseanne had quite the humbling moment, for those of you who think she’s become irredeemable in the new episodes. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/156 "2018-04-13T14:25:34Z")
Offended? No. Disappointed. If Barr really is interested in fixing that problem, supporting Trump is the opposite of the right thing to do. If she isn’t, then making fun of it just shows her lack of empathy toward anyone without her money. This blue-collar family thing is an act. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2018, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/157 "2018-04-13T14:44:00Z")
Come on. It’s not making fun of people who can’t afford meds. In the original run, off the top of my head, they had their power shut off, Dan’s small business failed and they were conned by a guy who used Dan’s reno work when trying to flip houses. The jokes were ABOUT that crappy situation not making fun of it. ---
**Author:** ![tenacious\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/439d5e/32.png) [@tenacious\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tenacious_j)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2018, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/158 "2018-04-14T03:01:27Z")
I’ve made it clear that Roseane’s real life politics isn’t the only reason I don’t like this show. That said, I completely agree that it’s sad to see a Trump supporter cracking jokes about people who can’t afford their prescriptions. I’m not sure what was supposed to be funny about that. True to life, yes. Funny, no. How can she (and others) not see the irony? Maybe the writers are more liberal than I give them credit for, and she’s just blindly going along with the script? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2018, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/159 "2018-04-14T04:00:20Z")
Here’s my question: Do you disbelieve that there’s a decent number of real life women like this? In a similar economic condition to the show and still be a Trump supporter? If you think that’s an unbelievable character then ok but otherwise you’re more criticizing Rosanne for taking the role rather than critiquing the show. Which is ok too, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![ZipperJJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zipperjj/32/211_2.png) [@ZipperJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZipperJJ)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2018, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120/160 "2018-04-14T04:05:06Z")
Trump supporters are people who cannot afford their medications. The difference between them and liberals/Democrats that can’t afford their medications is that Trump supporters believe he can and will fix their situation, hopefully without single-payer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roseanne-part-two-no-thank-you/811120.md?page=9)