Why is it okay to portray small boys as sex-crazed horndogs who are desperate for sex?
Imagine this same show where a precocious seven year old GIRL hits on her geriatric male school principal.
Oh the housewife brigade would be up in arms about that.
Somehow it's okay for a kid to be a really horny weirdo as long as the kid's a boy.
It's really weird that a group of writers and producers would sit down and make entire pages of dialog about a seven year old kid's sexuality. It's not edgy any more. It's just plain creepy.
FOX needs ratings and the only way to do that is to push the envelope.
Maya as well compare "Allen Gregory" to shoving the envelope into shredder.
You won't hear Bill O'Reilly rail on this show, though. (He had a great special in 2002 about how the media corrupts children... he wouldn't mention FOX for some reason... oh, wait, he works for them, that's a good reason I suppose...)
I think "Allen Gregory" is trying to be sarcastic and warped, but there's a level of quality that needs to be met to make it work. I'm not seeing that.
Carroll O'Connor and Laurie Metcalf knew how to take controversial characters and make those work. If "Allen Gregory" is attempting to do the same, then they have no clue as to HOW to make controversial character types work.
As the reproductive systems in both male and female humans hasn't developed by age 7, to sexualize them like this is not just creepy, it's grossly inaccurat as well.
And it is creepy that a 7 year old boy hits on the geriatric principal.
Maybe a later, "very special episode" reveals AG was molested by a teenager and taught to believe doing that is okay... I don't know, I don't care, the show is unmitigated garbage.
I don't see this corrupting children. Either they wouldn't be watching this, or they wouldn't understand it enough to get corrupted by it.
Carroll O'Connor made a controversial character work, because he and the liberal writers thought that he was controversial. The reason why Archie Bunker is considered to be the #1 television character of all time is because 80% of what he said was actually true, even when he was made out to be a buffoon. Liberals would watch and make fun of him and conservatives would stand up and cheer for telling it like it is.
it's fine to be edgy, it's fine to push the bar. but if the show just isn't funny WHATSOEVER, *beep* cancel it. there is just too much garbage on TV nowadays. I hope FOX has it in their right mind not to EVER produce another episode of this rubbish.
He isn't more mature than his peers. He just eats brie instead of macaroni and cheese and he imitates his horndog father, but he is not more mature than his classmates.
Q. "Why is it okay to portray small boys as sex-crazed horndogs who are desperate for sex?" A. what makes you think it's okay? because you saw it on fox? seth m. makes a torrent of rape jokes on his shows, but i don't assume it's okay-- i change the f%&@ing channel.
Imagine this same show where a precocious seven year old GIRL hits on her geriatric male school principal.
Oh the housewife brigade would be up in arms about that.
Somehow it's okay for a kid to be a really horny weirdo as long as the kid's a boy.
It's really weird that a group of writers and producers would sit down and make entire pages of dialog about a seven year old kid's sexuality. It's not edgy any more. It's just plain creepy.
no $#!t. but you aren't seeing the body of work that caters to male pedophiles that comes before this: Lolita to Calvin Klein to Hounddog... you don't see it because it is ingrained in our culture that little girls being blamed for seducing grown men is normal. but i am glad this pissed you off, so you can have a raised consciousness about every image of sexualized boys AND girls. check out the ads for so-called girls' toys and how focused they are on appearance-- what is that really all about, and why does a pony need to look sexy/pretty?
"Ugh! I don't like this." --Ambrose Bierce
reply share