Author Topic: Is "That's So Gay" Slur Beginning to Lose Popularity?  (Read 6407 times)

Offline David In Indy

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,447
  • You've Got Male
Is "That's So Gay" Slur Beginning to Lose Popularity?
« on: May 19, 2009, 03:22:44 pm »
Did anyone watch "Two and a Half Men" last night?

Alan was working on a novel and he got stuck. Alan decided to run some ideas past Jake (his son) to see what he thought. Alan's novel was to be about a man at the crossroads of his life and finding himself contemplating all the good and bad decisions he's made over the years. Jake (about 14 years old) then said "Yeah, sounds good! You know what you could call it? BORING!" And then he said "And it could be rated G.........AY"

The weird part was the canned laughter (laugh track) was very light and sporadic. It was not the full hearted laughter we usually hear during the show. And I wondered what that meant, and why they chose such a weak laughter track for that particular joke. Is it because "That's So Gay" is not nearly as funny as it was a few years ago? Or is it maybe because CBS was trying to make a point about the slur? Or send some sort of subliminal message to the viewing audience? I've been thinking about this quite a bit and I find it fascinating. They rarely film that show before a live audience, so this particular track was clearly planned ahead of time.

I know Wanda Sykes and others have been featured in PSA's by GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) currently airing on TV in many parts of this country. So, I wonder if "That's So Gay" is beginning to lose popularity now and people are finding it not funny anymore. :-\

 
Dogs have owners. Cats have staff.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Is "That's So Gay" Slur Beginning to Lose Popularity?
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2009, 03:33:11 pm »
The weird part was the canned laughter (laugh track) was very light and sporadic. It was not the full hearted laughter we usually hear during the show. And I wondered what that meant, and why they chose such a weak laughter track for that particular joke. Is it because "That's So Gay" is not nearly as funny as it was a few years ago? Or is it maybe because CBS was trying to make a point about the slur? Or send some sort of subliminal message to the viewing audience? I've been thinking about this quite a bit and I find it fascinating. They rarely film that show before a live audience, so this particular track was clearly planned ahead of time.

I know Wanda Sykes and others have been featured in PSA's by GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) currently airing on TV in many parts of this country. So, I wonder if "That's So Gay" is beginning to lose popularity now and people are finding it not funny anymore. :-\

One can only hope.

But if CBS were employing the weak laugh track as a technique to "un-funny" the joke, I think that's a good thing. Of course what would have been better is if there was no laugh track at all, or if dad or uncle said something to him about it.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline David In Indy

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,447
  • You've Got Male
Re: Is "That's So Gay" Slur Beginning to Lose Popularity?
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2009, 03:55:01 pm »
One can only hope.

But if CBS were employing the weak laugh track as a technique to "un-funny" the joke, I think that's a good thing. Of course what would have been better is if there was no laugh track at all, or if dad or uncle said something to him about it.

Yes, that would have been the ideal situation. Unfortunately that did not happen. Alan did manage to look at Jake with disgust, but it was clearly because Jake was dissing his story and NOT because of the slur. Maybe CBS is going to do this in baby steps. I really don't know. But I found it very interesting and it seemed clear to me they were trying to make a point.
Dogs have owners. Cats have staff.