South Park, the irreverent cartoon about a group of fourth graders living in South Park, Colorado, is one of the better satirists of current culture.
Unlike many who try to poke fun at society, this show is difficult to pigeon-hole politically; it lambastes the foibles and excesses of both the right and the left. Andrew Sullivan even coined a phrase, South Park Conservative, to describe a younger demographic which questions the political correctness of the current media. Other more social conservatives have glommed on to the description, believing South Park to be at its base socially conservative also. It’s fair to assume that South Park reaches a significant young fairly-conservative audience.
Last night’s show, The Egg, took on the subject of gay marriage.
I found the episode to be remarkable in its ability to correctly identify the arguments against gay equality, the motivation behind them, and some of the methods employed.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
The plot centered around someone who, for want of a better description, is ex-gay:
If you follow the show (and if you don’t, why not?) you know that the fourth grade teacher is Mrs. Garrison. She used to be Mr. Garrison but has now had a sex change and is a real woman, not a fag!! (Basically, she’s the old bald Mr. Garrison with earrings and lipstick).
Mrs. Garrison decided that she wanted to rekindle things with Mr. Slave, her boyfriend when she used to be Mr. Garrison. However, Mr. Slave wasn’t interested in this and instead wanted to marry his new man, Big Gay Al (Colorado having just voted in gay marriage).
Mrs. Garrison become enraged. Mr. Slave can’t marry Big Gay Al, they’re just a bunch of faggots. He should marry her, a woman.
So Mrs. Garrison tries to rile up the citizens for a good old-fashion queer-dragging. Since the citizenry isn’t much interested in this, she settles for leading a movement to get the Governor to veto the legislation.
This touches on the current activism on the part of much of the ex-gay movement and their efforts to overturn laws of gay equality. No longer gay themselves, they – like Mrs. Garrison – feel free to slime gays and oppose gay-equalizing legislation.
The Governor doesn’t really care about gay marriage and just wants to be left alone. He won’t veto the law without a good excuse. So Mrs. Garrison declares he has to veto the legislation “for the children”.
This is, of course, the number one claim of the anti-marriage activists.
The Governor states that there is no study that conclusively determines that children raised by gay parents are in any way harmed. So Mrs. Garrison sets out to provide the Governor with such a study. He gives pairs of children an egg to take care of, believing that the pair of boys would break their egg, thus proving same-sex couples can’t be good parents.
This parody of the efforts by anti-gay activists, especially Paul Cameron, to create artificial scientific backing for their efforts had me rolling.
While South Park has taken on gay issues before, balancing somewhere between respect and nudge-nudge wink-wink, this episode seemed to more or less endorse gay marriage, showing the baselessness of the opposition. I think it has spread light on the gay marriage debate in a way -and to a demographic – that marches and protests never could.
Fantastic! There’s a lesson in this. Behavioral science shows that people who are in, or hold, deep seated fears can only be brought out of their view of reality (frame) by kindling another fear to get their attention, or by humor. Humor requires more sophistication and skill.
On another note- I was one of the people quoted by the TV station in Seattle. The comment below indicates that there was nothing said that would appeal to conservative Christians. That much is true. What was left out were all the quotes that addressed Christianity directly, God was mentioned several times, and there were other references. This is ‘Journalism’… grrr. As well, the name of the group I represented is Faith Media Democracy. Did that get on the site? I’ve got a short piece on the event, and how weak they are. I managed to get Scott Davis adulation and then pointed out the deep sadness of his situation, in front of some admirers. A youth minister got called on his need to examine his scripture, and address his ignorance of gay people – and then embarassed in front of a very entertained friend. The next day brought a face off between me and another youth minister from the same anti-gay church. He was not triumphant, and the tired talking points sounded tired coming out of his mouth after a few minutes. One could hear the enthusiasm vanish. They are so weak, and so pathetic, but not to be underestimated. It took months to prepare for this.
Oh, darnnit!! I’m sorry, Dan. I should have remembered to assume the reporter’s bias, not yours.
Timothy – thanks. We have the strength, yet we speak from our fear. The right has been so effective. We act, for the most part, as do people who have been abused, verbally or physically – there’s little diffence when you soul is being stolen.
We must step outside our comfort zone, in our strength, boldly in our vision, nothing less will suffice! For then we will rapidly take back the reality, the reality that the momentum is leading. We are with it. When I spoke from that place, there was nothing that could be a barrier.
Maybe it’s chanelling your ‘inner drag queen’ – the leaders who propelled the Stonewall riots into history – or the spirit that honors Rosa Parks, Bayard Rustin, Mohammed X, the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr, Ghandhi, or those who paved the path we all need today, we are a fabric. A fabric holds the golden thread.
Sleep tight, sweet dreams – there are a million lights across this land with the same vision. All we need is to take strength in our words and let them flow, imperfectly and with such force that we retake the high ground this land so deserves.
Scott Davis’ pupils dilated and burned a hole in my crotch. He’s searching for the rich sexuality and love that knows no depth or height. If his wife truly loved him she would set this caged bird free. Preach it. It’s our salvation, not just his. It’s our, our, our . . . . . salvation.
Why were the suits afraid of what I said? Next time it will be on. That will be quite a day, for everyone.
You are all incredible. We are all incredible. Let go of the self serving, help everyone let them go.
Bold faith, generous love.
We find South Park to be too stupid to watch on a regular basis. We watched part of this episode, and it appeared that the anti-same-sex-marriage person was either transgendered or transexual. At the end of the spisode, he or she went berserk.
BTW, there was a column over at James Glassman’s “astroturf” operation TechCentalStation a couple of years ago “South Park Republicans” I don’t pay any attention to TSC, since it is merely an advertising vehicle for Glassman’s clients. I don’t pay much of any attention to South Park, in large part because I find it…stupid.
The odd thing about South Park is that it allegedly is the number one show watched by gays and lesbians. So they may be preaching to the choir here. Or at the very least, know their audience.
Side comment.
We did not watch the entire episode of South Park (I find the alleged animiation on the show annoying), but the comments about the episode remind me somewhat of Dog Day Afternoon.
From the Internet Media Database https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072890/
The problem for those in the “heartland” of the US is that people who have sex-change operations are still considered the genetic sex that they were allegedly born with.
That obviously presumes, XX and XY sexual determination. One might seriously question, though, what sex is someone with XXX or XXY? That is not unheard of. Or XXYY. Or other combinations. This “genetic” issue is a red herring–a complete diversion–because the courts in those states do not want to deal with the issue of same-sex marriage directly.
The couple years old Littleton decision in Texas could be read as saying that genetically intersexed people don’t legally exist in Texas. Also that all AIS women are legally men there. There have been some seriously convoluted court decisions about transsexuals’ right to marry. The Littleton one effectively contradicted itself when it said at the beginning that the court didn’t have the jurisdiction to decide what legally constitutes a man or a woman and then said at the end that it’s genes. They also ignored the full faith and credit clause, since she had a female birth certificate.
There was another one in Ohio where the court stated that the full faith and credit clause required the state to recognize a birth certificate but not the gender on it. Weird.
As for South Park, I was pleasantly surprised that they actually came down pro gay marriage. Their treatment of transsexualism is just so weird I’m not sure whether to be offended by it or not. If they’re actually satirizing the media’s depictment of transsexualism, then it’s brilliant.
Mr. Kinkaid- weird or not, Mrs. Garrison should be referred to only as “she.” Pronoun consistency is important.
I love South Park! And like all great satire (MST3K, Daily show, anything by Mel Brooks, etc.) you either get it or you don’t. And conservative is NOT the word I would ever use to discribe anything that SP has done. May I recommend “The Passion of the Jew”.
Another media exgay thing–yesterday on Hannity and Colmes, John Walsh says plainly that heterosexuals and heterosexuals cannot change at all. I am sure Hannity was hating it.
Boo
Sorry. I thought I had used “she” throughout but saw that I slipped up once. “He gives pairs…” should read “She gives pairs…”
Gender neutral marriage is a trans issue for a number of reasons, including immigration. The article Transgender Spouse Is Denied Green Card Again is an example how DOMA has been applied to transsexuals.
Immigration Daily put together a fairly thorough explanation of how the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) perceives The Status of Transsexuals Under US Immigration Law. The piece has a link to a CIS interoffice memo that indicates the CIS won’t recognize any marriage, or intended marriage, between two individuals where one or both of the parties claim to have changed their sex.
lollollollollollol