When Cartoons Attack!!!

The Palin-pushing, Bachmann-buffing "Non-Partisan" Tissues-Before-Issues feminists of the New Agenda have always, as any dissenting visitor to their enthusiastically moderated blog can attest, been able to embrace censorship, not so much as an issue as a lifestyle. Now they have published an article on a study by the also laughably “Non-Partisan” Parents’ Television Council, the one founded by arch-conservative Brent Bozell, the one with a rogue’s gallery of conservative faces on its advisory board, along with poor token liberal Steve Allen——-and he’s dead.

But what of the study? It certainly seems to indicate that violence against women on TV is rising exponentially, which is harming the Children, trapped as they are in front of their parents’ 52 ” flat screens with horrific images pouring into their unblinking little eyes. (Actually, babies are born with full-size eyes, which is both adorable and upsetting).

That violence against women, as well as violence against men, and violence in general, occupies way too much of American culture is undeniable. But Parents Television Council has been cited for inaccuracy by the Daily News’s TV critic Richard Huff, and had to pay the World Wrestling Federation 3.5 million dollars for falsely claiming that one of its shows caused the deaths of four children.

The article by Richard Huff shows off the PTC’s methodology in all its glory: the enemy of Children and Decency in this case is——SpongeBob SquarePants. SpongeBob, in one of the episodes almost any SpongeBob enthusiast would have include in the top ten SpongeBobs, learns an important lesson about not using swear words. Swear words are never heard in the course of the show; any “swearing” is replaced by dolphin noises. SpongeBob and Patrick don’t know quite what to make of them at first, but Patrick explains swears are :

“sentence enhancers you use when you want to talk fancy.”

Then SpongeBob and Patrick take their newly enhanced sentences for a spin:

The PTC, in a move which anyone familiar with the NAG would recognize, immediately issued a factually-challenged press release, in which they magically divined exactly what swears were hidden underneath the Flipper chuckles, and were they dirty! (Note: some people following that link may find themselves riven with regret that they didn’t see more of “Sister Sister.” Remember, there’s always YouTube.)

The PTC also is more than a little concerned about mentioning homosexuality in front of the Children. Though they protest that they merely object to mentioning any form of sexuality in great detail in front of the Young, they appear not to be nearly as concerned with depictions of heterosexuality.

And the worst offender, the menace harming the Children the most?

Family Guy! And American Dad. But at least Peter Griffin gets thoroughly bashed, stomped, nuked, run-over, dismembered, and overall just plain destroyed more regularly than Lois. Indeed, even counting Peter’s Giant Chicken troubles, FG remains an oasis of gender-neutral violence in my recall.

Siskindians being evidently powerless to prevent Siskindian children from ingesting and internalizing mounds of pop culture at which Siskindians are perennially shocked,  naturally they would turn to such non-partisan groups as Brent Bozell’s—-but wait, what is this? Who is this on the Parents Television Council Advisory Board?

It’s Billy Ray Cyrus! Miley’s creepily permissive, allowing-his-underage-daughter-to-be-exploited-in-a-totally-inappropriately-sexualized-manner-dad! And not only is he ON the Advisory Board, but the PTC loves his riveting new show!

Country music star Billy Ray Cyrus stars as Dr. Clint Cassidy, a country doctor who follows his love interest to New York City. After the romance unravels, he decides to keep his job at Westbury Medical, a busy HMO. There, his old-fashioned ideals frequently conflict with hospital policy, but Clint’s dedication to his patients and overall optimism have earned him the respect and friendship of most of his peers.

Greenlights all the way. Take that, Hugh Laurie. You’d better hope House doesn’t have to go up against Billy Ray, with the PTC behind him. And how does the PTC like House, btw?

In the season opener, House disdains having to treat a feminist patient. “I dated her,” he says. “Well, not really. More metaphorically raped her by having a penis.”

Oooph. A bit rough for the PTC. Triple red-lighted, in point of fact, but we kind of knew that.

Well, Louis and Stewie Griffin are astonished, shocked, in fact, at the depravity and indifference to the exploitation of Miley Cyrus’s young female flesh exhibited by the New Agenda, Billy Ray Cyrus, and the Parents Television Council. You would never find Lois and Stewie in a compromising picture like that.

Posted by Mrs. Polly on 11/03/09 at 04:53 AM • Permalink

They are taking aim at Family Guy with an e-mail campaign here. The prewritten complaint to the FEC includes a description of the offending Family Guy episode, in which

husband Peter lies in bed, his naked rear exposed. A horse enters and licks Peter’s rear, as Peter moans in pleasure. “Mmm, what made you come around, Lois? I love you so much. I love you so much, Lois,” Peter groans. The FCC has the DUTY to enforce the law and fine Fox for this gross violation of broadcast decency standards.

I thought it a rather sweet moment, myself.
~~~
There is a new article by Amy Siskind at the Daily Beast, which includes her usual almost bewilderingly dishonest linking; the first three links I followed supporting her contention that young girls were the age group most at risk for violence used gender-neutral language that Amy seemed to assume meant “females”: “tweens” or “adolescents”. She also didn’t link to the actual statistics, just dropping off the hapless reader in front of the CDC site and expecting the reader to do the rest.

In one instance where a statistic cited girls and boys who suffered violence by intimate partners specifically, the surprise was how many boys had: 7o% of girls and 52% of boys who are abused report suffering an injury from a violent relationship.

Then, neither link in the next paragraph supports it:

“Sure, the victim was sober during the dance, but had she been drinking before the attack?”

Her contention that this was widespread, malicious media speculation doesn’t hold up. The article mildly reports that the victim was an honors student, and she presents no evidence of any media outlet suggestingor even asking if the girl had been drinking.

“She asked for it, right?” “It’s like the college girl who goes to hang out with one guy and ends up getting raped by eight…well, she chose to go to the fraternity.”

Here the link is to a baffling 21-year-old document, perhaps from Amy’s own college days, with articles on feminism and feminist groups on campus. I didn’t peruse it closely, but paged through it without finding anything to do with Amy’s topic.

Some of the commenters express frustration with her shoddy, “truthy” methodology. It’s certainly of a piece with what we’ve learned to expect of her.

Apologies, everyone, for writing a comment on my own thread longer than the post.

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.