Brave Family Guy producers believe 2019 is the time to try and "phase out" gay jokes
Aux Features TVOn Sunday, Fox finally aired the long-dreaded Family Guy episode in which Peter Griffin takes a job working at the White House and Donald Trump sexually assaults Meg. Nobody who worked on that would be blamed for wanting to just move on with their lives and pretend it never happened, but Family Guy executive producers Rich Appel and Alec Sulkin actually sat down with TVLine to discuss the important points from the episode, and virtually every response they gave to TVLine’s questions makes the episode seem even less appealing than it did before (which, in a way, is kind of an achievement).
For one thing, despite the fact that the episode culminates in a minutes-long fistfight between Trump and Peter (naturally), Sulkin and Appel try to play the South Park-style “we have no political angle” card. They point out that the show has made fun of the Clintons and Barack Obama in the past, so they’re only making fun of Trump in the episode because he’s the guy in power. “It would be no different if a Democrat were doing something idiotic,” Sulkin noted, with Appel adding that “hypocrisy, lying, and buffoonery in the public sphere should just be called out.” They also try to placate any angry Republican Family Guy fans by referencing a Reggie Jackson quote about how “they don’t boo nobodies,” so at least Trump isn’t a “nobody.”
The real meaty part of the interview, though, comes when TVLine asks about a line from the episode where Peter tells Trump that he’s been “trying to phase out” gay jokes. Sulkin and Appel admit that this is a real and conscious thing that the show has been doing lately, saying that what they were comfortable with back in 2005 is no longer acceptable and that they’re not doing it because anyone is forcing them to. They just recognized that “the show has to shift and evolve in a lot of different ways” to reflect the way “the culture changes.” The problem here is that nobody deserves credit for “trying to phase out gay jokes.” Not making gay jokes is very easy to do, and that has nothing to do with the fact that it’s 2019 and culture has changed since Family Guy started. Gay jokes aren’t okay now, and they also weren’t okay in 2005 when Family Guy was comfortable making them.
Also, Donald Trump sexually assaulted Meg and it was played as a joke! Family Guy’s take on whether or not gay jokes are okay is one thing, but that’s fucking crazy! How many writers and producers and network executives and animators and voice actors did that plot point have to go through before it made it to air on a network TV cartoon? Of course, this is the same show that had a gag over a decade ago in which Quagmire raped Marge Simpson and then murdered her entire family, so maybe the members of the Family Guy team haven’t matured as much as they think they have.
127 Comments
You can replace most headlines written by the AVClub these days with:
“Failed TV Writer tries to Get Internet Mad at Working TV Writers”
Shut up, Meg.
Lets just get rid of jokes altogether so nobody is ever offended
Get rid of jokes? Great! Let’s start with you.
Okay so it seems jokes are already gone from here
….but you’re still here…
Yes, I understand your ‘joke’, you don’t have to repeat it. I would try another line next time.
…but you’re still here…
And you’ll never be a normal size or be considered attractive by anyone ever.
Lol.
Disregard, this poster always goes full retard by default.
This reminds me of that one time that [noted celebrity] did [weird thing] at [random humourous location].
Those poor manatees…they better have their WGA cards by now.
The funniest part was it happened {specifically humorous time)
Really? It reminds me of that time we [out of nowhere activity] with [ensemble from a 70’s or 80’s television show that I’m too young to know about] at [site of some historically tragic event].
Or when that [racial stereotype] did [that thing you wouldn’t normally expect]. That was crazy!
It also reminds me of that time [someone who was just barely a noted celebrity 35 years ago and is now somewhere below cultural footnote] did [something that would be mildly amusing if you knew enough about them to get the reference, but you don’t and it isn’t] in [absurd situation that you really don’t care about parsing because all the other context of the joke is already confusing enough].
i know meg’s the worst & also not real but that makes my skin crawl.
Seems to me like a lot of people like to bash people trying to improve themselves and be a more considerate person for not getting it all right the first time.
If by first time you mean “three hundred and twentieth time” than yeah sure
That’s retarded.
Yeah, but we’re not talking about someone trying to stop smoking. We’re talking about making homophobic and gay bashing jokes that go through multiple drafts and rewrites to make it onto a show that can easily just not be added from the offset.
There’s “not getting it right the first time” and then there’s “proudly announcing that you’ve been shitting your pants less and less frequently at 23 years old.”
The reporter asked them about that one line about phasing out gay jokes, and they answered it. I don’t see it as them rushing to congratulate themselves for it.
While actively pissing yourself.
I have to say I agree with this. What is the motivation for anyone in our society to try and admit to a mistake or careless comment, be it intentional or otherwise, if they’re simply going to be labeled a pariah for all time and cast down into an endless void of shame?Sure, there have been plenty of people who have proclaimed themselves to be resistant or directly against the assertion that any language that derides someone based on their race, religion, or sexual orientation shouldn’t be tolerated. But we’ve witnessed just as many who have honestly apologized for, and even committed to correct, such an oversight, only to be cast aside and grouped with those who would defend such action.Perhaps it’s faulty perception on my part, but my inference was that we had started bringing this conversation about inclusion and sensitivity in language and action, to the attention of the nation, as a way of working to better society as a whole, by making it inclusive for everyone.Which is why it’s such a slap in the damn face to see so many elements at the forefront of said conversation who seem less interested in advancing that conversation to help improve society, and more interested in using the argument as some petty opportunity to look down on people or endlessly soapbox.If we set the precedent that nobody deserves a second chance, even if they truly realize the error of their ways and wish to change their way of thinking, then what option do these people have other than to accept eternal condemnation, or double-down in defense of their original transgression? Hell, why bother with prison reform, if we obviously don’t agree philosophically with the reasons behind it?Or maybe, just MAYBE, we start acknowledging that the only way the situation will honestly improve is if we’re willing not only to confront bigotry, but also willing to acknowledge that such ignorance is, in many cases something imposed upon many people at a very early age, often from more than one source, and certain forms of this bigotry have been culturally prevalent in many cases.If we’re willing to call people out for such behavior, but then promptly deny them any assistance or understanding when they truthfully seek to change their perspective and actions, then why bother? Such sentiment clearly isn’t bent on fixing the problem.We all agree that being a bigot isn’t cool. But when the bigot comes around and agrees, that’s sort of the whole intent behind calling them out in the first place, right? Continuing the attack beyond this point sort of makes you the asshole now.You’re either part of the solution, or you’re part of the problem. If your belief is that there’s no room for those who have found themselves on the wrong side of the argument, anywhere on the right side of it, then clearly you aren’t part of the solution.
We like for the ‘bigot to come around’ and stop doing the very thing that he/she realizes is bad as soon as possible and not gradually. “Yeah, I’m racist; but I’m not as racist as I was last week. Only called six people n****r today.” It’s easy for these writers to just stop making bad gay jokes. They aren’t, but they want kudos for writing less of them. That’s a different scenario than what you’re talking about.
I didn’t read any implication that anyone was seeking kudos. The writers were asked a question that they in turn answered. Stating that someone is making a conscious effort to do something less is hardly an appeal for validation.Forgive me, it’s not my intent to push the argument here, but isn’t re-inferring the comment’s implication only being used in this instance to further rationalize and prolong the sentiment of vitriol, rather than disprove or counterpoint any statement I previously made, or even contribute any useful input to the discussion as a whole?I mean, isn’t the intent behind simply dismissing the previous argument with a simple “It’s different this time, because these guys just want approval” sort of more a convenient maneuver aimed at remaining angry, and thus proving my point?And while I agree that “cutting back” isn’t quitting altogether, and may not be an adequate enough response, we are seeing the conversation beginning to steer in the right direction, if only gradually. But how do we expect to bring the offenders to the table if we aren’t willing to show a little patience and understanding ourselves?Isn’t identifying and addressing the very elements that make people believe it’s okay to make such comments just as important to the conversation and overall sentiment, as the need to call people out for them?
And it seems like a lot of assholes are coming out of the woodwork looking for adulation for considering being slightly less asshole-ish.
Acting morally superior by feigning offense at Family Guy has got to be the laziest shit I have ever seen, and I once served crushed Top Ramen as an appetizer.
Get back to me when it’s also the entree, dessert, and what you use to treat flesh wounds.
I was watching this video the other day about using dried ramen to patch up holes in furniture/flooring and it was wild.
Sounds like a waste of perfectly good ramen.
No, no, you use packet mac and cheese for flesh wounds. Ramen’s a leukaemia treatment.
He’s not in prison.
You should know that I really wish I had thought of this.
Meh. Some days you just don’t feel like putting in the extra effort.
There’s a strange window of time where it works to get really outraged over a show like Family Guy. Doing it at the start of the show’s run only risks burnishing its reputation as a rebellious bad-boy show for truth tellers. Doing it too late risks getting bored eye rolls in response.Probably right when it returned to Fox from cancellation was the best time.
“has got to be the laziest shit I have ever seen”Clearly you haven’t seen the writing for Family Guy…
You can use some burritos LOL
Put some burritos LOL
The A.V. Club“Acting morally superior by feigning offense”
Yes, we should phase out gay jokes, also Black, Asian, Hispanic, Women, kids and elderly jokes.
Basically the only people we can make fun of are white men aged 20-50, because they NEEEEEVER get offended.(that has to be one of the more reductive things I have heard about comedy censorship in a while.)
Comedy CRITICISM. Not comedy censorship.
I’m talking about what the producers said. (basically, because some gay jokes are dated and stereotypical we are not going to make fun of gay people at all)
You’re conflating ‘gay jokes’ with ‘we are not going to make fun of gay people at all’.That’s going to bite you in the ass at some point.
Right, because the ‘Family Guy’ people are known for their nuance.
Apparently better than you though, so yikes.
Brooklyn Nine-Nine, for example, has lots of gay jokes that do not make fun of gay people. For example, you have Captain Holt, a gay man, who occasionally has to pretend to be straight and does a hilariously poor job of it (he references “heavy breasts” a lot) because he doesn’t understand how to act straight. I would classify that as a gay joke, but not one that treats his sexuality as ridiculous.
That is a great example. It is possible to make jokes about a certain group of people without making it at their expense or purposefully mean-spirited or hurtful. Then again, Brooklyn 99 is way more of a clever show than Family Guy ever was, so I expect that better quality of comedy out of B99. Holt is the greatest character on the show…after Diaz, of course.
Co-signed on Holt and Diaz, especially when they work together.“That got way too personal. No one needs to know you have a sister.”
haha yeah I love how they are the same on the whole efficient, impersonal friendship thing. No need for small talk. Like Tuvok and 7 of 9 from Star Trek.
The producers deciding not to make gay jokes anymore is not censorship. It’s their response to criticism.
My friend, you’re bending yourself into a pretzel in trying to take issue with this. These producers are choosing not to tell jokes they know won’t land- that’s not censorship, that’s reading the room and making the smart decision.It’s possible they’ll even still might write jokes involving gay people or poking fun at aspects of gay culture. The shift here is to no longer portray ‘gay’ as funny in and of itself simply because it’s different. A lot of people think it’s pretty regressive to just throw out ‘gay’ as a joke or an insult. To your other points, the reason it’s considered ok to poke fun at whiteness or maleness as a joke or an insult comes back to the difference between punching up vs. punching down.I’d encourage you to move out of your glass house before you start pitching stones. Your comment was one of the more reductive things I’ve read about comedy or censorship in a while.
So you’re mad that they’re censoring themselves and no one is forcing them to do that?
Why does everyone here think I’m mad about this situation? (I stopped watching ‘Family Guy’ years ago) I just find them taking this overreaction to criticism kinda interesting.
I think I’m just so used to people freaking out over the slightest criticism of comedy that that’s how I read it. Sorry if I misinterpreted it.
Interesting that most of the comedy “criticism” you’re referring to tends to come from people that have never actually made anybody laugh in their lives!
hey man you just got mad at something you made up.
Who said I was mad, I just found what they said ridiculous.
producers believe 2019 is the time to try and “phase out” gay jokes Family Guy
Change that 2019 to 2002 and you might be correct. Oh wait, that actually happened.
Oh for the love of Christ, shut up Barsanti. I hope that as part of their new creative direction, they spend more time making fun of hack bloggers that cram their ideological views down our throats. Maybe Brian Griffin could get a job working for Gizmodo Media Group?“Boy, this is almost as bad as that time I ran a bogus story about Dwayne Johnson, tipped off by a shady British tabloid…” (Cutaway to The Rock and Hulk Hogan body-slamming the current AV Club editorial staff)
Shut the fuck up, you angry edgelord.
You think that’s bad? What about the time they aired sexual content of another person without said person’s consent, were taken to court, lost, and acted like whiny bitches about something that they themselves acknowledged constitutes a sex crime when someone other than themselves does it.
That wasn’t very family guy-esque.
Something something conway twitty.
That was Gawker and happened well before Univision crammed the Onion properties into Kinja but I’m assuming you knew that already.
You poor dear. How dare a blogger say mean things about your favorite cartoon!
Why the fuck would you cape for Family Guy, a show that A) doesn’t need or care about you and B) hasn’t been funny or interesting in a decade?
This is the part I don’t understand. The show clearly paints conservative white men in a bad light more often than not, but they cape for the show relentlessly because it’s one of the few major-network shows that still gives them gay and rape jokes.
Let’s be real: both Family Guy and The AV Club are shells of their former selves. At least Family Guy can still make me laugh every now and then though (also, it “doesn’t care about” me? What a bizarre criticism of a TV show. Especially when this very site has stated in no uncertain terms that it doesn’t care about its commenters). The AV Club in its current state is pretty much an unmitigated failure as a pop culture site. And yet I keep finding myself continually going back to both out of sheer inertia, so clearly I’m part of the problem.
I’m not criticizing the TV show, I’m criticizing YOU. You’re making the choice to come to a dying site and get angry at a blog writer for generating content for a massive multinational media company, a relationship that both sides transparently hate but are trapped in for reasons of money. Meanwhile Family Guy does not need you to stand up for it. Fox is doing fine, MacFarlane is doing fine, all the executive producers are doing fine. This blog is not going to hurt Family Guy in any way. Conversely, it’s entirely possible that you shitting on the writer could actually make their life worse in some small way. Hopefully none of these writers give a damn about us, because they absolutely should not, but there’s a real person on the other side of that screen and you’re flinging invective at them because they said a mean thing about a TV show you claim to not even to like any more. But I doubt any of this carelord stuff is going to land with you, since you view “hey maybe jokes where the entire punchline is ‘this person is a homosexual!’ don’t belong in 2019″ as “cramming ideological views down [your] throat.”
“Carelord”? Buddy, some of these buzzwords you’re tossing around are even lamer than “blast processing”. I guess it’s not just a clever name?You’re right about one thing: yes, obviously this article poses no threat to Family Guy (which by the way, I do still like. I noted that it’s not as good as it once was, but is still able to make me laugh after twenty years on the air, which means it’s doing its job just fine). However, we have a right to use these comment sections to post our opinions about an article that someone was paid money to write. I doubt Sam Barsanti reads the comment sections, but I harbor no ill will towards him as a person. Why would I, I don’t even know him other than what he writes on here! I simply took issue with the sanctimonious, hectoring tone of this article, which is basically attacking the writers of the show when they seem to be making an earnest decision to be somewhat more progressive going forward and adjusting to changing social norms. It’s not like they’re patting themselves on the back for it, it’s just a brief comment they made in an interview, yet this article is oozing with contempt. I’ve been coming to this site for a long time and I think it’s fair to expect better from it, rather than just incessant moral grandstanding such as this.
This scores a 6.5 on the Oberlin Cafeteria Protest Outrage Scale (OCPOS).
Oberlin campus on lockdown after Family Guy DVD spotted in common area
So other than “cafeteria bahn mis are cultural appropriation” what would be a 10 in that scale?
Saying “See you mañana!” to your classmates.
“We’re trying to improve.” “Well why didn’t you improve back before it was cool!? Start OUT perfect. Gah.”
They don’t have to “try” to improve. They don’t have to “phase out” gay jokes. They just have to… not make gay jokes (which were definitely already deeply lame in 2005, btw). That’s all. It’s not so difficult as to require any effort whatsoever, which makes the fact that they took fourteen years to decide that maybe it’s time they start thinking about scaling back on them all the more embarrassing.
As a straight white guy (non-millennial), I always get a chuckle out of the inevitable parade of white guys, commenting on stories like these, with their undies all twisted up over the idea that maybe non-straight white guys should not be used as punchlines. I don’t know what the producers mean by “phasing out gay jokes,” but I would submit that there is a difference between making jokes involving gay people, and making jokes at gay peoples’ expense. Likewise any other non-straight white guy group. These arguments about “let’s just not make jokes at all so no one is ever offended” always strike me as the intellectual equivalent of “why do black people get to use the N-word, but white people don’t?” Personally, I don’t see the problem in a person or group of people making the choice to not be intentionally offensive to other people or groups of people. But I also don’t buy into all that fragile white guy stuff about how the “PC police” don’t allow you to say anything anymore. You get to say whatever you want to say. It’s just that society doesn’t demand people keep their objections to it quiet anymore. So-called “political correctness” is really just not intentionally being a dick. It’s pretty easy to do. That said, Family Guy is just the worst. Gay jokes or not. Just my $.02. Keep the change.
It’s hysterical watching “anti-PC snowflake-haters” being politely asked to change their language (like, say, use a different pronoun) and then have a complete meltdown equating that to censorship.
I mean, what was the definition of “snowflake” again?
Whatif we make jokes about everyone? We’ll call it… Equality!!
We’ll still have lazy pop-culture references though, right?
*Kool-aid Man bursts through Jonestown complex wall and fills Peter’s glass*“Oh yeah”
I’m honestly shocked by the number of Family Guy stans on AV Club, of all places. In 2019!
I mean its been years since family guy was actually funny so then might as well take more jokes out of the show.
Remember those early Rifftrax where they seemed to think simply pointing out that an actor was gay was the funniest thing ever? Those guys managed to cut it out years and years ago, so this looks even more pathetic.
I remember they were really hard on Downey about the drugs when they riffed Iron Man.That isn’t fun.
When you say they were hard on him, did they just make a lot of drug jokes or were they actively mean-spirited.
It still took way too long for Mike to stop making jokes about Lana Wachowski though.
He’s always been far right-wing. Doesn’t surprise me.
It’s so insane to me that Mike is far right and Bill is far left and they’ve worked together successfully for like 25 years.
Yeah, that is some hard-fuckin’-core Midwestern feeling-stuffing going on there. You wouldn’t even have to know they’re from Minneapolis.
It’s really not difficult to do when you don’t allow your politics to consume, aand consequently become, your identity. Give it a try sometime.
And Kevin has always just kind of kept his politics to himself from what I’ve gleaned so he’s the center of the bunch, I guess? (But Bill is wonderful, his apology for make a transphobic joke brought me to tears.)
I don’t know if Mike’s far-right. I think he’s more of a David Frum/Bill Kristol type.Or at least that’s what I tell myself because Mike is my favorite MST3K cast member.
It’s a bummer. MST3K, which was surprisingly advanced for its time (though it’s not hard to distance yourself, via savage riffing, from the insanely racist and sexist media of the 50’s/60’s), dipped into a few very unfortunate riffs of its own. Namely, the whole sequence in (the otherwise fantastic) Incredibly Strange Creatures… where they make highly uncomfortable trans jokes during a dancer’s routine.
Oh god, I just cannot watch that episode. It’s so harsh and disgusting with those “jokes”.
As a person who loved this show at one point, it is now a big piece of shit.Like shut it down and cancel it for the final time…
So basically Family Guy will be sucking even worse. Giving up humor and taking on a more politically correct approach. Thanks leftards, you’ve done it again and spoiled something great…
… If the show never backs off gay jokes, they’re the bad guys.
… When they make an attempt to do so, they’re called “brave”.
Sardonically.
Mice and their cookies.
When are they gonna tackle their racist jokes?
I mean, it’s a better stance than what Al Jean had to say about the legacy of Apu.
There is nothing like Family Guy news on the Av Club. The jealousy, bitterness and self-satisfaction. It is glorious.
oh honey…
‘Family Guy’ is part of the Sarah Silverman generation of well-intentioned ‘ironic bigot’ comedy meant as satire putting down bigoted ideas. Except the bigots didn’t get the memo. They see such comedy unironically the same way they saw Archie Bunker unironically in the ‘70s. 2019 is not 1998, Bigotry today is too blatant and in-your-face for the subject to be fodder for ‘ironic’jokes. Early 2000s ‘ironic bigotry’ in 2019 has devolved into Louis CK.
Hey I do that kind of thing in my routines! Thanks for the words of encouragement.
Can we not talk about how AWFUL the episode was, though? I’m all for well-done satire (especially with Trump, which is rare but some shows like The President Show have taken it in great directions), though arguably Family Guy has sailed that ship years ago. But this was lazy even by modern FG standards. A couple of good lines (I liked the Brian ‘writer’ cutaway), but most of it was such old/tired humour that’s already been done months ago and so much better on a ton of other shows. If you’re going to air a “highly anticipated” Trump episode, you need to bring something more to the table than a chicken fight redux. Even his character design is simultaneously too ugly and not ugly enough. And then they throw in Peter’s “this episode will have changed absolutely nobody’s minds” line at the end, and I’m wondering if the episode was _supposed_ to change anyone’s mind, because it was just a half hour waste of time that didn’t even try to put in any kind of moral.
what the fuck was the point of this shitty article?
If a joke is funny, the audience’s level of offense dissolves. If a joke falls flat, people will only remember the offensive part. Case in point: Kathy Griffin. Her Trump severed-head photo wasn’t funny. There was no joke there. Nobody laughed. Therefore, all we were left was the image of a person holding a mocked-up bloody severed head of a President. As a gay man, I have laughed hysterically at many of Family Guy’s gay jokes. Because they were damn funny. And that’s all that matters to me.
I like how the writers had no idea what to do with either of the girl main characters, so that after enough seasons passed they made one a housewife who’s actually a drug-loving sexual deviant and the other a victim of her own family’s and indeed the world’s persistent abuse; be it psychological, physical, or apparently now, sexual.Did I say “like”? I meant, “that’s horrifying that THAT’S where they ended up given carte blanche.”
So you’re phasing out gay jokes, but sexually assaulting a female teenager is still a-okay. Glad we got that cleared up, Family Guy writers. I’m not a Trump fan, but the Cheeto Benito has given us a wealth of things to make fun of. Most of which don’t involve an R. Kelly kind of move.
Did you see the episode? They made it perfectly clear that that was NOT okay.
So brave. Like if giving 3rd tier clickbait websites premium handies you’d be 5th in line max.Meanwhile Stewie so gay and we work for a company that once said in a deposition child porn is super newsie.
For a moment, I thought I was reading a press release from the Parents Television Council.
Oh well. Less competition in the realm of gay jokes!
Every time someone asks me if I like Family Guy, I age by six months.
Actually watched this based on this article and it wasn’t nearly as terrible as this article makes it sound like. And I linked to that Quagmire bit and I thought that was funny too.
Everyone who’s angry over this needs to take a long goddamn look at their life and the poor decisions they made to bring them to this moment.
Like fingering your sister?
I liked that last episode of family guy. I didn’t love it, and I agree that the whole meg being touched thing was horribly uncomfortable and offensive, and I don’t know why they thought they could pull it off, but they didn’t. But the rest of the episode was fine, and what I think is most improved this season are their cutaway jokes and their meta humour. I thought the line about “to be fair we’re phasing out the gay stuff” was hilarious, I laughed and quoted it. I didn’t see it as them boasting about it, but instead acknowledging that they used to be bad and are trying to be better, and they did it in a meta sort of way that went along with all the other great meta jokes they’ve been telling lately. They’ve been less hesitant to just drop the fourth wall completely this season, and is felt somewhat more fresh than the past few seasons. I think I started noticing the changes last seasonish, but It might have started this season and I’m just bad with time.
I watched this episode and remembered why I quit watching Family Guy… its just not funny anymore.Also a bar in Dallas is doing a “Drunken Clam” popup for a month which sounds like an idea 15 years past its prime.
The fact that The A.V. Club is even reporting about this is an even bigger joke than anything Family Guy could ever pull out of its festering ass.
The problem here is that nobody deserves credit for “trying to phase out
gay jokes.” Not making gay jokes is very easy to do, and that has
nothing to do with the fact that it’s 2019 and culture has changed since
Family Guy started. Gay jokes aren’t okay now, and they also weren’t okay in 2005 when Family Guy was comfortable making them.
They weren’t asking for “credit”. All they said was that they recognized they’d done something wrong and were trying to make it right. This site pulls no punches when it’s Louis CK or Kevin Hart who aren’t apologizing for their stupid shit, but this site also pulls no punches when somebody does actually apologize for their stupid shit. It’s a ludicrous double standard, and I say that as somebody who loathes Family Guy.
The wave of “protect me, I’m offended” doesn’t end, does it?
Well that’s unfortunate, as a gay man, I thought the gay jokes were funny.