I wonder how offensive was this show's premise back when it came out. The fact that Jack had to pretend he was gay in order to live with the girls. Seems to me it would be something that would make this show be unable to be played in re runs even..
Just a thought, I came across the show on YouTube.
Yes, anything that offends petulant crybaby SJWs should be banned!!! (The NERVE of them playing reruns of this show).
shareI think it was church types that got really offended just by ANYTHING resembling "gay". THat's what I've always read about the controversy.
shareThe so-called SJWs ARE the modern "church types." Just a different religion.
shareTo be fair, the stuffy mothers groups and church groups have always just tried to ban dirty words and body parts and violence. At least "the so-called SJWs" are trying to get rid of racism, sexism, homophobes, rapists... etc. Like, actual harmful stuff.
shareNone of those things you listed are harmful. The only thing harmful is the intolerance of the SJWs.
shareI doubt you would see that same storyline in a new show, that's for sure. Would it stop re-runs? Probably not. It seemed to me that Mr Roper's homophobia was the real target of the joke.
shareThe show wouldn't make sense being made this way now, it makes sense for the time it was made in. I am not sure there is much to be offended by for the time. The fact that Mr Roper is less bothered by Jack being gay than the prospect of a straight male living with two women is actually somewhat progressive for an older man like him. Mr Roper is generally the only main cast member that makes mostly lite hearted jokes about Jack being gay, however Mr Roper often ends up on the short end of most of the situations. So it all balances out.
I think its one of those shows which if you know little about it and you want to be offended you probably could be, but you have to want to be.
Dukes of Hazzard is another show that if you never watched and only saw the car..yeah you can be offended if you choose to be. But if you watched the show its a different thing entirely. I went to one of the Duke fest shows not to long ago and it seems even though most of the people were white, there was quite a few nonwhite people there. I was glad to see that not everyone allows other people to poison something for them. Of course they seemed to be mostly southern people...so they generally know confederate battle flag does not automatically equal racist.
is actually somewhat progressive for an older man like him
For me, the best part was always the physical comedy. Just seeing Ritter fall over stuff all the time was great.
share they put up w so much implausible stuff bless them. Their grown neighbor is upset that one of them is consensually in another apartment and they are all grown adults? uh excuse me what business is it of yours legally? Show would have done so much better today.
Janet would not be working flower shop she would be something like admin assistant and Chrissy would be a teacher
Chrissy was a moron. In no way would she ever be believable as a teacher.
shareThis show is a prime example of how social mores/taboos can change from generation to generation.
First aired in 1977, the thought of one guy living with two single women in a apartment in a platonic relationship would be outragous to most people over 50 in 1976. Thus Jack had to pretend to be gay.
Fast forward 45 years later, now ummarried cohabiting is the norm, the act of a person PRETENDING to be gay is offensive. Along with the bimbo blonde stereotypes.
Jack Trippers constant half serious half not attempts to get into Chrissy's and Janet's pants would not go over with some women today.
It would have also been outrageous for 2 people to live together like husband and wife without being married. Now you have all sorts of laws and attitudes that would allow someone the right to sue if they felt the landlord was discriminating against them for any reason. Back then it wasn't like that. People in power could do more or less what they wanted to.
The irony with the show is that given the era and age of the landlord it is strange that he is ok with Jack being gay but not ok with a single straight man sharing a place with two single women. A little inconsistent really.
Overall though the problem with this thread is the OP is applying modern morality and standards to a different era.
I guess if you are a certain age (under 35?)you always think that they are the same, because you have seen no or little change.
It is only when you get older and you experience the changes that you know social mores are ever in flux.
Pretty much. I'm 46 and was a kid when I first watched this show. I also grew up watching a lot of old tv shows and movies so I always had a concept of the past plus I love history.
What the OP also has to understand is that a lot of shows like this were about breaking down these ideas. Shows like Love Thy Neighbour, an English show for example was about racism but the jokes in it would make Left wingers of today break down in despair. Yet it was funny and humour actually helps people deal with things when it's allowed.
So you have this show where a straight man has to pretend to be gay to live with two women. Offensive? Well, it allowed the term Gay to be used on a popular show as well as being able to talk about homosexuality, even if just lightly.
Context is everything.
Most of the episodes don't make sense. Surprised it still is shown in reruns. Show comes off like half the people working on this were high.
shareNot many tv sitcoms made sense back then. Even now shows like Big Bang Theory were often about not much at all. And yes, drugs were big in the 70's and 80's lol.
shareIn terms of TV ratings it was in the top 10 for most of it's run, most people liked it, edgy/sexy for the time. Except for the eye candy I find it unwatchable today.
shareit's fun to see what my parents wore before they had me and my brother (like late 1970's) since these people are young professionals....I think wow.
shareTrue some of the shows I really loved as a pre-teen look 'eh' now. I like it for memory lane. But it's not the 'same'---like 'thrilling'
share"It would have also been outrageous for 2 people to live together like husband and wife without being married."
Nope, it was common in the 70s, especially for people in their 20s. Maybe old farts like Roper didn't approve. But he wasn't a Christian conservative, he was pervy!
Probably but TV was always behind the times, so to show that on TV was a big deal.
shareYeah, America has regressed. We used to have a sense of humor. Liberals have done a remarkable job destroying that.
shareAnyone offended by this fun show is an idiot.
shareHe only had to pretend to be gay around Mr. Roper. Mrs. Roper knew he was straight, in fact she wanted his ass.
The show was accepted because it exposed Mr. Roper's shallow prejudices, in much the same way as Archie Bunker. He and Archie were the dummies of their respective shows, so it cancelled out their prejudices. (Well then again, Chrissy was the stereotypical dumb blonde, which would not fly today either).