I’m idly curious as to whether or not there’s a more offensive show on television than Two and a Half Men. (At least on free-too-air Australian TV – but then, we have plenty of our own crap.) It offends many groups – men, women, ex-wives, their new husbands, fathers, mothers, their offspring, oh, and alcoholics. I ended up watching an episode yesterday thanks to my brother, and it actually seems to have gotten worse from the last time I caught it.
So younger brother Alan – who, don’t forget, was so screwed over by his ex-wife Judith and her crippling alimony payments that he’s had to move in with his brother Charlie and has spent the last however many years leeching off him – is involved with the much-younger Candy. I could overlook the fact that Candy appears young enough to be Alan’s daughter – after all, Modern Family tackled that same issue with intelligence and maturity – if she had anything going for her as a person. But she appears to have chosen a life of willful ignorance and her sole purpose in life seems to be to get Alan to pay for stuff – a new car when hers breaks, extensive dental work, and finally moving in with him when her housemate moves out and she can’t afford to pay the rent on her own. Does she not have her own job? Is her sole purpose in life to get men to pay for her stuff? It didn’t bother me so much that Alan paid for all that stuff – I’ve taken a short-term loan from my own partner to pay for tuition and paid him back in installments – but that Candy seemed to expect that the man in her life, well, fund her life, and Alan, while reluctant, acquiesced.
Anyway, Alan’s bankrolled all these expenses by exhausting his savings and selling his brother’s things on e-bay. (Charlie hasn’t kicked him out by now… why?) Meanwhile, Charlie’s rolling his eyes and making wisecracks at what a loser Alan is for going even deeper into debt for a woman who has nothing to recommend for her other than a young body.
I’m not sure what the Powers That Be behind TaaHM thought they were saying. I suspect it was that haha, isn’t it funny, women are money-grubbing bitches who use sex, the law and whatever other underhanded means they can get their filthy mits on to castrate men and bleed them dry. The thing is, while I had zero respect for Candy for apparently relying on sex to get men to fund her lifestyle (and seriously, how often does that happen in real life? I’ll wait for y’all to find an example. A real example that you have personally witnessed, not a friend-of-a-friend story or something you saw on TV) I had even less for Alan, an apparently intelligent guy, for thinking with his penis to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. This is the patriarchy that’s all-superior to women?
*And just for extra laughs, Charlie, after one too many blackouts, decides to give up drinking. Excluding beer, which apparantly beer isn’t alcoholic. Because, heehee, isn’t Charlie-the-alcoholic just so funny. At this point, though, Charlie was the only one in the show I came even close to respecting. At least the guy has some grasp of the fact he’s an alcoholic who uses women and he doesn’t leech off anyone. Yeah, that’s the kind of caliber show this is, that the lead male is a misogynistic, womanising alcoholic but at least he can fund his own lifestyle.
So here with have a man whose steretyped bitch of an ex-wife bled him dry in the divorce and continues to bleed him dry in the form of alimony payments (aren’t they supposed to stop when the spouse remarries?) to a point he has to leech of his brother for seven years. Then he hooks up with a woman young enough to be his daughter and sinks even further into debt to pay for stuff that any self-respecting person, man or woman, would rather pay for it themselves by working – honest day’s work and all that. I realise that sometimes, people aren’t in a position to pay their own way, but the impression I got from Candy was that she wasn’t willing, and that she expected the man in her life to do it. It’s the old, ugly stereotype of ‘airhead exchanges sex for stuff’, and one that I have never known to exist in real life. I’m sure such women do exist, but certainly not to the extent film and television would have us believe.
I’m flabbergasted to know that TaaHM is so popular, and that it’s lasted as long as it has. It offends so many groups on so many levels. Oh, I forgot to add Americans to my initial list. Because as much badly-written, stereotyped claptrap that Australia had churned out over the years, at least we don’t have an equivalent to Two and a Half Men.
*Bro was watching a three-ep marathon so may not have been the same episode. The offensiveness tends to roll together.