Talk:Douche and Turd
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Douche and Turd is part of WikiProject South Park, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles related to South Park. If you wish to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | |
Was Stan's vote for Turd Sandwich a subtle endorsment of Bush?
Was the win for Giant Douche a belief that kerry would win, or merely an ironic twist, or perhaps a reference to California where the show's producers reside?
jucifer 02:59, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
If PBS shows the TV-Y7 rated version of South Park, how much SHOULD they edit? -- Anonymous
I don't think Stan's vote was an endorsement for Bush any more than Kyle backing the douche was an endorsement for Kerry. Stan & Kyle are both generally shown as sensible characters.
The subtle commentary you could infer from the characters' support of candidates (though this is conjecture):
Kyle: Jewish, intelligent. Both Jews and people with higher education tend Democratic.
Cartman: Self-serving, unprincipled. Perhaps a comment at some of the Republicans who look out solely for their own financial interests.
Butters: Naive, innocent, generally moral. Quickly manipulated by Cartman. Represents the masses of Christian voters who are swayed into voting Republican by their churches and/or peers.
Kenny: Poor, trashy. Though many poor whites generally vote Republican, those who would protect their own interests (as well as lower middle class minorities) generally vote Democratic.
Stan: Sensible, everyman. Wishes not to vote for either candidate, but is so pressured by both sides that his refusal leads to his exile from South Park. Eventually votes for Turd, signalling ... who knows? That the Average Joe, when pressured, would vote for Bush?
Jimmy: the Undecided voter contingent, who, even up to the day of the election, were impossible to pin down in the polls, even though they could well have been the deciding factor.
Plus, Kyle & Cartman hate each other, so they were natural rivals.
The ultimate cap to the episode, of course, is that even though Douche wins by a landslide, the election is rendered pointless and neither candidate wins. I think this episode stayed remarkably to the center politically. Both sides were shown as very pushy and manipulative. Even sensible Kyle got caught up enough in his own cause to kick Stan out of town. On the other hand, they definitely bashed PETA, which is generally left-wing, but they were really saying that animals should be valued as dearer than people, even to the point of death. I don't thihk PETA's position is that extreme.
--PGWoody
Contents |
[edit] Banishment
- In the episode Stan is banished from the town because of not voting for a mascot. He is brought out of town by a horse and an angry mob of town people watches. Is there somewhere in America REALLY a law that says someone has to be treated like that for a crime?
Are you asking if there is a place in American that punishes its citizens for not voting or are you asking is there such a punishment as spitting, tying a person to a horse, and then banishing them from the area? I believe either answer is a solid no in the USA. The parody of this episode is that so much emphasize is placed on voting, especially to the younger generation which is generally less informed. Therefore, they are trying to show that it is acceptable to not show an interest in an election when both candidates hold no real interest in your personal opinions or views. However, in the spirit of South Park with its usual "let's make fun of both sides" attitude, it quickly comes back to say that no matter the election, it always comes down to the same two basic candidates (in which case you must vote for the lesser of two evils).
--HumanZoom 07:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Turd = Kerry?
If I were given the option, I would probably agree that the giant douche would represent Kerry and the turd sandwich would be Bush. But the show doesn't make it explicit and the article simply assumes as such. What specifically about Kerry is douche-like and how is Bush a turd? These are things that should be explored in the article rather than glossed over. AEuSoes1 23:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think there is anything explicitly concrete about which mascot represents which Presidential candidate. Seeing how the "Turd Sandwich '04" sign that Cartman and Butters have on their bike is a parody of the "Bush Cheney '04" signs I would have to say Turd = Bush. Furthermore, Cartman has always been portrayed in an ultra-Conservative type stance, so one would be led to believe that again Turd = Bush. However, at the end of the episode, the Giant Douche wins the election by an overwhelming vote which would hint that the douche = Bush (seeing how Bush won the '04 election). I could go on and on however, this is all original research and my opinion so I think none of it should be added to the article. Unless there is a statement from Trey Parker or Matt Stone explicitly saying which mascot represented who, I think it is best to leave the article how it stands. -HumanZoom 15:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stan's t-shirt
When the people of South Park rip of part of Stan's t-shirt, there is a shot of him from the front with two pieces of his shirt missing. Looks like another reference to the 2004 elections, because the left part looks like Texas (where George Bush is from), but what is the other one? It doesn't look like an American state. I can post a picture if needed... -- Sander 20:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possible anti-PETA reference?
I was reading a study recently on PETA and how they tend to use religion, and one of the things they mentioned was that during one campaign claiming that Jesus was a "vegetarian," they tried using one image of Jesus but were sued for copyright infringement. Then they tried using the "South Park" image of Jesus, claiming that Trey and Matt wouldn't mind (although it turned out that Comedy Central had a problem with it and announced plans to sue them over it). It may be an off-chance, but do you think this might be a small reference to that incident? -- ScullyToo
-
- Most likely not. Parker and stone aren't all that protective of intellectual property. -- Anarchy_Balsac
[edit] Puffy
I never understood why he got so angry about it. I mean, given the way they spoof other celebrities, Trey and Matt were downright flattering. They made him look like DA MAN...he lays down the law, and you don't mess with him. Got the entourage, the authorit-ay, the wheels...fine, they made fun of his voting crusade, but they could have done it in a far more insulting way.
[edit] Obvious
This show is obviously about the liberal special interest groups that were were saying "go vote" when clearly they wanted people to vote for Kerry. The only reason that isn't expressed in the article is because of the rampant liberal bias within Wikipedia. Haizum 23:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Seeing how South Park made no explicit distinction between which mascot was which candidate and the fact that Stan was ostracized for not wanting to vote for either candidate, I would have to say it has nothing to do with Wikipedia's "liberal" bias. I'm not even sure where the special interest groups were implying to vote for Kerry in the election anyway. The way I interpreted it was they just wanted the younger generation to think voting was cool. And to make voting seem cool, they came up with all these wacky gimmicks, which was over exaggerated and poked fun at in this episode. Maybe I just missed the point of their campaign. Besides, have you read the George W. Bush talk page? They claim Wikipedia has an ultra-conservative bias. -HumanZoom 15:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Hazium. The show is actually a constant political commentary from a libertarian perspective (that of the creators) and therefore critcizes aspects of both poles. This was clearly a critcism of certain aspects of the leftist alignment, though the bias here would never embrace that. The internet-user demographic in general is absolutely left-biased, and young people, (whom primarily edit Wikipedia) have a heavy left bias. When you intersect the two the bias is pretty obviously implied. 68.38.196.212 18:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Presidential debates
"The Giant Douche thanking everybody before any remarks is a parody of what John Kerry did at the 2004 Presidential Debates."
Don't most American presidential candidates do that at presidential debates? Isn't it a parody of most of these candidates? Or was Kerry's introduction(s) at the 2004 debates exceptional in that way? --Liberlogos 05:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Personal Analysis
"The subtle commentary you could infer from the characters' support of candidates (though this is conjecture):
Kyle: Jewish, intelligent. Both Jews and people with higher education tend Democratic.
Cartman: Self-serving, unprincipled. Perhaps a comment at some of the Republicans who look out solely for their own financial interests.
Butters: Naive, innocent, generally moral. Quickly manipulated by Cartman. Represents the masses of Christian voters who are swayed into voting Republican by their churches and/or peers.
Kenny: Poor, trashy. Though many poor whites generally vote Republican, those who would protect their own interests (as well as lower middle class minorities) generally vote Democratic.
Stan: Sensible, everyman. Wishes not to vote for either candidate, but is so pressured by both sides that his refusal leads to his exile from South Park. Eventually votes for Turd, signalling ... who knows? That the Average Joe, when pressured, would vote for Bush?
Jimmy: the Undecided voter contingent, who, even up to the day of the election, were impossible to pin down in the polls, even though they could well have been the deciding factor."
How come someone can come here and say all that? Jesus! This was totally stupid. And yes, PETA IS THAT EXTREME, filled with hipocrisy and violence. They're just saying that PETA sucksass. Why is it that hard to understand? Just 'cause you like PETA or something?
- Whoever wrote this is an idiot
