We are being laughed at. A ranty article purely for debating purposes.

[Leviatham]

Sadly, this is the message I'm receiving here. I'm reliably informed that's not the message being sent, so I'm kinda lost at sea.

The message is about format.

My problem with geeks in current sitcoms is not the comedy or that they are geeks. If you knew me you'd know that I laugh at myself with scary frequency.

The problem I have is the way they are portrayed. I don't feel they are treated with enough respect.

I'll draw a parallel and try to illustrate what I am talking about with a different segment of the population that has seen a lot of changes in the last 40 years or so.

Gay men used to be portrayed as "people who read" (last time I saw that was in The Bill, a few years ago when a copper was about to come out and one of the reasons the wife had to suspect he was gay is that he liked to read), or that he likes to cook (can't remember in what movie, but Rock Hudson flirted with a woman in a bar by making her feel he was gay using his love for cookery as a strong hint an putting her at ease because, suddenly, he wasn't a threat), or with similar hobbies and inclinations (we are artists, into interior decoration or fashionistas). They were also portrayed as effeminate people who like to wear female underwear or dress up as drag as alter egos.

That was the vision that society had of homosexuality in the 70s and 80s.

Then things started to change and now we have gay characters a lot more often without the stereotyping nonsense we used to see. Homosexuality is a non-issue. It just is.

I feel with geekdom we are at the stage of being portrayed as the stereotypes, slimming the characters down to a skeleton that everyone can see, but far removed enough that not everyone will feel uncomfortable about.

With that, they are simplifying geekdom to a point that people actually believe that we are the Sheldoms of this world, like they used to think all gays like to wear women's clothes.

Even with geek characters who are heroic (the scientist guy in Alias, or Jake 2.0 for example) still have too much of the bad traits and not enough of the good ones. There is not enough depth to them. And I must admit those two are good attempts.

A series full of geek characters that is actually very decent is Bones. All the scientists at the Jephersonian (or is it Jeffersonian?) are *uber* geek. Yet they're not shown under the light cast on A Town Called Eureka. Heck, most people won't even think about them as geeks!

Does that make sense?

 

[Bagpuss]

So is the 40 year old virgin a bad or good, picture of a geek? Because the central character in it is probably the nicest fella in it. Does that make it part of problem or solution?

Also how you can think Doctor Who isn't geek related is a mystery? The Doctor is a geek.

The characters in sitcoms are exaggerations of the norms of that type, that's what makes them funny. Part of what makes a geek, a geek is a certain level of social awkwardness so that is exaggerated in things like BBT, like Joey's dumbness was exaggerated in Friends.

In other none sitcom scenarios you have geeks that aren't as exaggerated, like Abby in NCSI or Bones (or most of the rest of the staff) in Bones, or David Hodges in CSI, and so are more rounded and less exaggerated so aren't comical figures.

There is no reason why geeks in a sitcom shouldn't be comical characters, we are as much fair game as anyone else.

 

[Morrus]

My problem with geeks in current sitcoms is not the comedy or that they are geeks. If you knew me you'd know that I laugh at myself with scary frequency.

Well, with all due respect, we don't know you. That's not an argument! I met you for roughly 0.5 seconds at Dragonmeet in December. Whether or not we know you is not relevent here, and certainly not to be portrayed as any kind of qualification for validification.

The problem I have is the way they are portrayed. I don't feel they are treated with enough respect.

Abosolutely; I get that. It's clear you feel that way. I don't feel that way. We just seem to be in a "yes it is", "no it isn't" to-and-fro here.

I'll draw a parallel and try to illustrate what I am talking about with a different segment of the population that has seen a lot of changes in the last 40 years or so.

Gay men used to be portrayed as "people who read" (last time I saw that was in The Bill, a few years ago when a copper was about to come out and one of the reasons the wife had to suspect he was gay is that he liked to read), or that he likes to cook (can't remember in what movie, but Rock Hudson flirted with a woman in a bar by making her feel he was gay using his love for cookery as a strong hint an putting her at ease because, suddenly, he wasn't a threat), or with similar hobbies and inclinations (we are artists, into interior decoration or fashionistas). They were also portrayed as effeminate people who like to wear female underwear or dress up as drag as alter egos.

That was the vision that society had of homosexuality in the 70s and 80s.

Then things started to change and now we have gay characters a lot more often without the stereotyping nonsense we used to see. Homosexuality is a non-issue. It just is.

I reject that parallel. Sorry, man. One isn't born a geek; one isn't legally discriminated against for being a geek; one isn't denied marriage for being a geek; one isn't jailed for practicing geekdom (as was the case here 30 years ago). It's not even remotely comparable.

And also - as I mentioned earlier - this is not an appropriate subject for EN World. You've repeated twice that we don't know you; but you need to know us: for over a decade discussion of real world politics, religion, and - yes - sexuality are absolutely not allowed here. If that's an issue for you, email me, but please be aware of that strict rule. Those subjects inevitably lead to arguments and display sides of other gamers we'd rather not see.

With that, they are simplifying geekdom to a point that people actually believe that we are the Sheldoms of this world, like they used to think all gays like to wear women's clothes.

Nobody thinks Sheldon is real. Like nobody thinks Baldrick is real. C'mon, man, you know this. You have to know this.

Even with geek characters who are heroic (the scientist guy in Alias, or Jake 2.0 for example) still have too much of the bad traits and not enough of the good ones. There is not enough depth to them. And I must admit those two are good attempts.

A series full of geek characters that is actually very decent is Bones. All the scientists at the Jephersonian (or is it Jeffersonian?) are *uber* geek. Yet they're not shown under the light cast on A Town Called Eureka. Heck, most people won't even think about them as geeks!

Plus, y'know, David Tennant as the Doctor running round wearing 1980s 3D glasses and solving problems without violence and familiar to every single living person in the country in which you live. But you've deemed that Doctor Who doesn't count for some odd reason. But Bones does.

Does that make sense?

Honestly, no. Not really. Sorry!

 

[Janx]

Or you could look at it as the silly stereotypes of gay people got people to relax and stop quoting Leviticus.

Where you may see that Hollywood has done some terrible to disservice to gays or geeks, I see it as Hollywood has mainstreamed gays and geeks such that most people don't consider them a social pariah anymore.

Do you know how many girls think Sheldon is hot? More than would have ever claimed so before the show. Which means, right now, some nerd is getting some play, where before he never would have gotten the time of day.

 

[Leviatham]

Well, with all due respect, we don't know you. That's not an argument! I met you for roughly 0.5 seconds at Dragonmeet in December. Whether or not we know you is not relevent here, and certainly not to be portrayed as any kind of qualification for validification.

To tell me that I should learn to laugh at myself is not an argument either, and yet it was said.

If people are going to judge me and my sense of humour, or approach to humour, knowing me is perfectly relevant and valid to give people an understanding that I am not what they assume.

Abosolutely; I get that. It's clear you feel that way. I don't feel that way. We just seem to be in a "yes it is", "no it isn't" to-and-fro here.

And thus the conversation ends. Nowhere to go, really. We are all entitled to our opinions.

I reject that parallel. Sorry, man. One isn't born a geek; one isn't legally discriminated against for being a geek; one isn't denied marriage for being a geek; one isn't jailed for practicing geekdom (as was the case here 30 years ago). It's not even remotely comparable.

And also - as I mentioned earlier - this is not an appropriate subject for EN World. You've repeated twice that we don't know you; but you need to know us: for over a decade discussion of real world politics, religion, and - yes - sexuality are absolutely not allowed here. If that's an issue for you, email me, but please be aware of that strict rule. Those subjects inevitably lead to arguments and display sides of other gamers we'd rather not see.

The parallel was drawn as a means to illustrate how the portrayal of something (in this case homosexuality. I could have chosen another subject) has changed in time from being something stereotypically idiotic, to being a non-issue. I haven't drawn parallels to real life, instigated discussion on sexuality or anything of the like, but to showcase that stereotypes change and what we thought as "normal" in the past is not so today.

I know perfectly well this is indeed not the right place for that sort of discussion, but I do find disappointing that even the mention of homosexuality or sex is a threat to the peace of the forums and warrants warnings, even when there's been not even a start of a discussion about it.

Nobody thinks Sheldon is real. Like nobody thinks Baldrick is real. C'mon, man, you know this. You have to know this.

As a person no. As a model, certainly yes. You have to know that.

Plus, y'know, David Tennant as the Doctor running round wearing 1980s 3D glasses and solving problems without violence and familiar to every single living person in the country in which you live. But you've deemed that Doctor Who doesn't count for some odd reason. But Bones does.

Even if we take the character of The Doctor as a geek with comedic tones, there is no mockery about him and he certainly is not stereotypical. The way he's portrayed is very different from the portrayal of geeks in A Town Called Eureka or BBT.

Really, is it that difficult to see the difference between the way the Doctor is treated and the way the geeks at A Town Called Eureka or BBT are treated?

Honestly, no. Not really. Sorry!

Then I wonder where communication is failing...

 

[frankthedm]

Why does the world have to be able to laugh at us more than at anyone else?

Because there is a dwindling supply of groups that can be laughed at without people getting their knickers in a twist. Tell one ethnic joke and some folks assume you want to start issuing yellow armbands. We are not a religion or a race. We are not indigenous to any one area. We are fair game.

Why laugh at anyone at all?

Because people want to be entertained!

 

[Morrus]

To tell me that I should learn to laugh at myself is not an argument either, and yet it was said.

If people are going to judge me and my sense of humour, or approach to humour, knowing me is perfectly relevant and valid to give people an understanding that I am not what they assume.

How well do we have to know you to participate in this discussion? You get evaluated on what you present, and you choose how much or how little you do so. You don't get to require that posters in your thread get to know you first.

I know perfectly well this is indeed not the right place for that sort of discussion, but I do find disappointing that even the mention of homosexuality or sex is a threat to the peace of the forums and warrants warnings, even when there's been not even a start of a discussion about it.

I'm available by email if you need to talk to me about moderation policies.

As a person no. As a model, certainly yes. You have to know that.

I dispute that. I do not believe that anybody real actually believes that somebody like that exists - even conceptually - any more than they believe Basil Fawlty, Arnold Rimmer, or Baldric do.

Even if we take the character of The Doctor as a geek with comedic tones, there is no mockery about him

Exactly! That was precisely my point! Geeks have very positive role models. The Doctor is the ultimate geek, and he's a practically a national icon.

Really, is it that difficult to see the difference between the way the Doctor is treated and the way the geeks at A Town Called Eureka or BBT are treated?

I've never seen Eureka, and have never commented on it. I've commented on BBT because I have seen it, and still don't agree with you. Yes, it's different to Doctor Who (otherwise it'd be the same show). No, I still don't think it mocks geeks, however many times you ask me.

Then I wonder where communication is failing...

Because it's not communication. We're both just repeating ourselves over and over.

 

[TMRose]

Well , its been many years since I was in High School (Im 54 now) but I was the biggest geek in School then.
And yes life was tough back then and I could not get a Date and was laughed at alot.
But today I well respected at work , have what I think is a beautiful wife of 22 years and three kids that , although some what geeky like their old man, are doing well.
One thing I have notice is that although we geeks might not get dates in High school, around our late twenties we become hot commodities as then a man who in non violent and has a good job is suddenly superior to an overweight ex jock sweeping floors for a living or a unemployed wannabe Rock God who has trouble getting a gig at the local Bar., My best friend marrying a pretty lady from South America, another friend marrying a Polish woman he met at Church while living in England and I marrying Filipina who was the niece of one of my co workers.
We Geeks might not start the race in the front, but its who in front at the finish line and as I grow older , I feel I continue to do better.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I don't know you, but I was only commenting on what you provided directly in this thread. I could not imagine you laugh at yourself when your entire premise (and thread title) is that we should not be laughed at. Sorry if I misrepresented your true views. The breakdown in communications is because you say geeks are not respected in one breath, then laud Black Adder for its disrespect of the rich, the elite, the poor, the peasants, the French, the military, etc. You take umbrage to the perceived disrespect of one show, while your favorite insults others. Then you ask why laugh at anyone, but you laugh at yourself. It's all been quite confusing.

You've explained your position a bit better by focusing on stereotype portrayal. I can see that, but any comedy is going to use well-known stereotypes to draw a laugh. I see that as a requirement for mainstream comedy. Shows that do not follow this time-tested formula can be great, but they usually have limited appeal.

Like the Young Ones. One the surface it's a show about four stereotypes: the hippie, the cool guy who's not cool, the violent punk, and the hypocritical activist. But the stereotypical roles those characters fill are, respectively, Bedraggled Mother, Disaffected Father, Quarreling Brother and Sister. The surface stereotype vs. the role fulfillment turned many people off the show.

 

[haakon1]

<<They are all mega smart but socially awkward. Most of them have problems interacting with women, they are clumsy, have a poor sense of etiquette, have even poorer social skills.>>

Dude, the geek stereotypes exist for a reason. I'm not Sheldon Cooper, but at one point or another, each of these things has been said about me, and not without some justification.

Heck, your first sentence was pretty much every report card I got in Elementary School.