Quote: Harridan @ March 3 2012, 3:04 PM GMTGuess we've been watching a different show.
Indeed in the show I've been watching they treat every attractive woman they come across as a sex object to be bedded. It's no different to the sexism in the old Bond movies it's just more up to date and set in Croydon.
Sexist characters don't necessarily make it a sexist show. If the female characters were as submissive as they are in Bond films it would be sexist, but they aren't. The female characters are self-determining.
Quote: Harridan @ March 3 2012, 3:12 PM GMTSexist characters don't necessarily make it a sexist show. If the female characters were as submissive as they are in Bond films it would be sexist, but they aren't. The female characters are self-determining.
There's no difference. Half the women in the old Bond movies are trying to kill him. I haven't seen it in a while they're probably lesbians the new Bond films.
Of course there's a difference. You really think that Peep Show and Bond films present women in the same way?
I guess it's also man hating as all the male characters are complete and utter losers and dicks? Or does sexism only count if it's against women?
Dobby strikes me as a perfectly good female character.
Quote: Harridan @ March 3 2012, 3:28 PM GMTOf course there's a difference. You really think that Peep Show and Bond films present women in the same way?
Yes as sex objects to be conquered. The Peep Show is worse if anything as David Mitchell is fat and unattractive but he still gets good-looking young women into bed. As if.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 3 2012, 3:36 PM GMTI guess it's also man hating as all the male characters are complete and utter losers and dicks? Or does sexism only count if it's against women?
Dobby strikes me as a perfectly good female character.
No as the female characters are not sexist towards the male characters. The two sharing the flat are the hero characters from whose perspective the show is written. In one of the episodes one of the managers actually tries to buy the girlfriend of the poor one. Tell me that's not sexist.
Quote: Safdar Shah @ March 3 2012, 3:55 PM GMTYes as sex objects to be conquered. The Peep Show is worse if anything as David Mitchell is fat and unattractive but he still gets good-looking young women into bed. As if.
No as the female characters are not sexist towards the male characters. The two sharing the flat are the hero characters from whose perspective the show is written. In one of the episodes one of the managers actually tries to buy the girlfriend of the poor one. Tell me that's not sexist.
I quite fancy David Mitchell, actually. Though I'm fat and unattractive too, so my feelings on the matter are irrelevant, I'm sure.
The humour for a lot of Peep Show lies in how outrageous the characters are being. Unlike something like Two and a Half Men where the womanising is treated as laudable, in Peep Show the womanising makes the characters look stupid and dirty. Mark and Jeremy generally don't live happily ever after having used underhand methods to get women into bed, they either get found out and chastised or they feel disgusted with themselves.
Quote: Safdar Shah @ March 3 2012, 3:55 PM GMTNo as the female characters are not sexist towards the male characters. The two sharing the flat are the hero characters from whose perspective the show is written. In one of the episodes one of the managers actually tries to buy the girlfriend of the poor one. Tell me that's not sexist.
It's an exchange between a more or less mad man who believes he and his money can get whatever he wants and a morally questionable, poor idiot. Is the action itself sexist in some way? Well sure, that's the characters, that does not make the show sexist against women, just as having men act in such a way does not make it man hating. All that exchange does is make you, once again, realise what horrible characters they can be, in an amusing fashion.
Because Basil Fawlty was horrible to Manuel and would verbally and physically abuse him does not make Fawlty Towers racist or pro-violence.
There's a difference between a show that portrays such people and shows that actually do things in a casually sexist way.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 3 2012, 4:34 PM GMTIt's an exchange between a more or less mad man who believes he and his money can get whatever he wants and a morally questionable, poor idiot. Is the action itself sexist in some way? Well sure, that's the characters, that does not make the show sexist against women, just as having men act in such a way does not make it man hating. All that exchange does is make you, once again, realise what horrible characters they can be, in an amusing fashion.
Because Basil Fawlty was horrible to Manuel and would verbally and physically abuse him does not make Fawlty Towers racist or pro-violence.
There's a difference between a show that portrays such people and shows that actually do things in a casually sexist way.
Those are the values portrayed in the Peep Show and yes they are disturbingly sexist. Mark stalking a young student is shown as acceptable. Mark going to bed with a schoolgirl is shown as acceptable etc etc Fawlty Towers was racist in places. I remember a racist cricket joke in one of the episodes and I don't think you get could get away with lines like "It's alright he's from Barcelona" these days. Racism was pretty routine in those days.
Quote: Safdar Shah @ March 3 2012, 4:56 PM GMTThose are the values portrayed in the Peep Show and yes they are disturbingly sexist. Mark stalking a young student is shown as acceptable. Mark going to bed with a schoolgirl is shown as acceptable etc etc
Right. I'm out.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 3 2012, 5:08 PM GMTRight. I'm out.
Same here.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 3 2012, 5:08 PM GMTRight. I'm out.
You don't get it do you ? If all the characters in a show accept particular behaviours as normal and acceptable then those are the values that that show is presenting. There are no free passes just because you find it funny. Some people found Bernard Manning funny but his act was still a bit racist.
I don't think you're really supposed to consider the characters and situations in Peep Show normal. I think you're supposed to find them exagerated, grotesque, unusual and therefore funny. It's not a kitchen sink drama, it's a comedy of embarrassment.
Claiming that the show's writers and actors want us to think that Johnson is a rational, down to earth role model is loopy; by that logic you'd have to conclude that the presence of Super Hans suggests that everyone involved in Peep Show find taking crack, being dishonest, and making incredibly poor music to be astoundingly good ideas. It would be like claiming that The Office is designed to teach us that being a pompous, needy, insufferably annoying person is what we should aspire to.
Ironically, of course, Ricky Gervais is a pompous, needy, insufferably annoying person, bt that's by the by.
Mark and Jeremy are both aware that some of the things they do and say are weird or inappropriate, their internal monologue (particularly some of Mark's neurotic ramblings) showing that.
And the women for the most part think they're idiots. The show practically screams "Our main characters are likeable but also totally odd!"
Quote: Safdar Shah @ March 3 2012, 5:16 PM GMTYou don't get it do you ? If all the characters in a show accept particular behaviours as normal and acceptable then those are the values that that show is presenting. There are no free passes just because you find it funny. Some people found Bernard Manning funny but his act was still a bit racist.
What the hell are you doing on a comedy website? I have no idea why you would ever watch a comedy if this is your attitude, unless it's merely to work yourself up into a frothy, self righteous rage at how sexist/racist/homophobic or otherwise offensive everything is. Basically, you are the type of person that every comedian dreads having in his audience: the kind of person that can't take a joke.
