Skip to main content

IMDb reviewers believe the nothingness of "Seinfeld" is about something it isn't...

Ever since Seinfeld became available to stream on Netflix, I've been binge-watching it. One of my favorite episodes has to be "The Outing" (season 4, episode 17), where Elaine pranks an eavesdropping journalist (not knowing she's a journalist) by claiming George and Jerry are a couple. Word gets out about the fictional couple; they freak out; and every time they deny the rumor, they add the line, "Not that there's anything wrong with that."

Curious to see what others thought of this episode and the inevitable controversy surrounding, I decided to peruse IMDb reviews. While it appeared most reviewers understood the point of the episode, some anti-LGBT conservatives had quite the take. Their belief is that the episode was satirizing liberalism by contending how ridiculous it is to force acceptance of the LGBT community. Well, I'm sorry to have to tell them this (not really), but they're sorely mistaken, and may want to lay off the hallucinogens. 

This episode was released 28 years ago, in 1993. Societal acceptance of the LGBT community at this time wasn't nearly at the rate that it is today. According to Gallup, gay-marriage approval in 1997 was 27% and increasing, so odds are it was at less than 25% in '93. The line "not that there's anything wrong with that" was actually added late, for fear of potentially offending the LGBT community - which was the last thing they wanted to do. So, in other words, they weren't satirizing liberalism for forcing acceptance of the LGBT community; they were trying to show acceptance of it themselves. Not only that, this was 28 years ago, when roughly only one-quarter of the country approved of gay-marriage. That number is up to 70% today. So, in other words, the contention that society was being forced to accept the LGBT community at this juncture is preposterous. That notion is preposterous today as well, but especially then. Try again, homophobes. Try again...

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more

A closer look at the Scramble With Friends power-ups

I am unashamed to admit that I'm a nerd. My idea of a good time is playing a word game like Boggle or Scrabble. Thankfully, I (and many others) can play such games via Facebook and/or my (our) cell phone(s). While it seems that cheating has become more commonplace in these games (Words With Friends in particular) than San Diego has had nice weather, I've yet to give in to that craze. One element present with the game Scramble With Friends (Boggle) not present in Words With Friends (Scrabble) are legal boosts called "power-ups," which cost a number of tokens from the 15 available. I've now tried all five power-ups, including the latest one which costs money. So, in case anyone's curious about playing the game or giving these power-ups a gander, here's a rundown of them all: Freeze - I think this is probably my favorite of all the power-ups. With the freeze, time stands still for a matter of seconds, which allows you more time to find words and improve...
Post a Comment
Read more