R&R Homer's Phobia

[Stevie V. Scrivello]

Man, anyone else watch this episode and get all mushy and nostalgic for the days when The Simpsons could tackle "current issues" and not be all preachy and unfunny a la "The Monkey Suit"? (Then again, back in the day, they didn't really feel the need to tackle "current issues)

Well, I did, anyway. Funny episode, nice plotting, and John Waters! Go John Waters!

The ending did feel a bit contrived, though, I have to admit. Still as far as gay-themed episodes go, "There's Something About Marrying" has nothing on this one. So:

4.5/5

[Jens. E]

5/5
An Awsome episode, pretty god plot but a little bit wierd that homer thinks bart is gay. Anyway i still thinks this is one of season 8's best episode with the funny character John.

[DaRick]

(just addressing a controversial episode by bumping this thread)

Homer's Phobia. Ah yes. An episode which has been somewhat divisive since its airing (just look at the SNPP reviews). Obviously, this is because it's about homosexuals. Incidentally, I just saw this and...well...I thought it was great. It is true that the third act wasn't quite as strong as the first two acts. But then again, the first two acts were terrific, with no boring or pointless bits to be found. Indeed, I found little in the way of a subplot - there was only one central theme. However, that is probably a good thing in this case, as any subplot would have detracted from the episode's focus on homosexuality.

The best part of the episode is that it focus on homosexuality without deriding it to an extreme.

If this aired during the Scully Era, I'm almost positive there would be criticism.

To rebut the commentator who said this very episode would've been criticised (more, I assume) in the Scully era...Scully would have incorporated more outlandish elements and he would've likely focused less on Bart and more on Homer. With this in mind, the episode would have been derided simply becuase it would look like an all out anti-homosexual rant, as opposed to a father protecting his son (and family) from what he sees as adversity.

I admit that the reindeer part does see Homer promote animal cruelty, but Homer has threatened to do worse things in non-Scully episodes. For instance, do you remember Whacking Day? In that episode, he threatened to brutually beat a whole pile of snakes to death for no discernible reason. At least here, he had a reason, as pathetic as it was. Now I realise that I haven't really countered you, so here goes: if Scully left this episode unadultered and produced it, I doubt it would be subject to any more criticism than it is now (unless Scully's name is enough to inspire hatred). As it is, it already attracts criticism, as I pointed out earlier, so I don't really see your point.

On to the episode then. The first act is very good. It is a nice setup for the outburst of prejudice by Homer that sees the episode kick into the second act. There are a whole lot of funny moments, for instance, so it rarely seems like an unneccessarily slow buildup a la Mountain Madness. For instance, the dead midget, the liquor bottle, the pogo stick incident and Homer's vinyl collection. I also found the mannerisms of John pretty funny, as he toed the line without quite looking like a stereotype.

The second act is arguably the best, surpassing a stellar first act. This act deals with Homer's prejudiced reaction to John's, uh, lifestyle choices. Although some people hated Homer's reaction, I found it quite hilarious. Admittedly, he does appear to be a stereotypical homophobe initially. However, Homer's naivete and penchant for humorous one-liners ("He didn't give you gay? Did he? Did he?) allow me to brush over this. The element that saves him from conforming to this stereotype is Homer's relationship with Bart and his desire to protect him. I've already discussed this earlier, so I see no point in discussing it any more. Their experiences at the gay steel mill ("Has the whole world gone gay?") are truly memorable and really funny.

I admit that the third act sags. It's not bad by normal standards, however, next to the first two, it does represent a dissappointment. The good one-liners seem to dry up almost completely, while the premise (hunting) takes too long to reach its conclusion. Luckily, the ending fires in a few humourous stabs at gays (To the steelworks of America: Keep reaching for that rainbow!) without seemingly overly offensive. Although many people hated Homer's reconciliation with John, I found it slightly humorous ("Well, Homer, I won your respect, and all I had to do was save your life."). It serves to prove my point that Homer wasn't an extreme paradigm of a homophobic, more a man protecting his family from forces he was afraid of.

After a lengthy consideration of what to give this episode, I award it an A. I do this partially because of the excellent way in which the episode deals with homosexuality, plus the last-gasp salvaging of the third act. John's manner also gave the episode a boost, plus the quality animation. The characterisation was naturally unorthodox due to the episode's subject matter, so I will not degrade the episode for any quirks which would otherwise be seen as inaccuracies in a Simpsons character. In short, I highly recommend the episode.

[banana plantation]

compared to other simpsons episodes, 4/5, otherwise 5/5

[tom cody]

4/5, terrific episode

[-Bart-]

awesome episode
4/5 or 5/5 i'll decide later

[TheForbiddenDonut]

To rebut the commentator who said this very episode would've been criticised (more, I assume) in the Scully era...Scully would have incorporated more outlandish elements and he would've likely focused less on Bart and more on Homer. With this in mind, the episode would have been derided simply becuase it would look like an all out anti-homosexual rant, as opposed to a father protecting his son (and family) from what he sees as adversity.

I'm fully aware that Scully would have made it far worse, and come to think of it, my reasoning there didn't make much sense (i.e. if it aired in the Scully era it would probably be seen as a beacon of greatness amid all of the garbage he produced, given how much praise 'Homer's Phobia' gets as a classic era episode). So yeah, I would probably repeal that statement as of now. I still think it's one of the most overrated episodes of all time, but that Scully statement was definitely pushing it.

I admit that the reindeer part does see Homer promote animal cruelty, but Homer has threatened to do worse things in non-Scully episodes. For instance, do you remember Whacking Day? In that episode, he threatened to brutually beat a whole pile of snakes to death for no discernible reason. At least here, he had a reason, as pathetic as it was.

Well, I find there to be quite a difference. First of all, Whacking Day was an episode that didn't take itself seriously; the snakes were as cartoony as could be and the entire episode was a ridiculous farce, and I think both these elements downplay the animal cruelty aspect. Homer's willingness to whack snakes definitely came with reason: it's tradition for one thing, and it's entirely in character for Homer to follow the majority, who were entirely behind the whacking. In 'Homer's Phobia', Homer definitely has a reason, but the episode definitely comes with a more serious tone. The act of shooting a deer automatically seems a bit more cruel than beating a snakes, in that, not only are the deer played up to be more realistic than the snakes, but it also involves actual killing, as opposed to beating. Second, in 'Whacking Day', Homer was doing what he wanted to do and wasn't trying to force himself on anyone. Here, Homer is commanding his own son to commit an act of killing, which is complete parental abuse. Thirdly, one must note Bart's tearing up as he protests that he doesn't wish to kill the deer, which makes Homer all the more cruel-hearted for making him do so. All of these reasons make Homer far more unlikeable in 'Homer's Phobia' than in 'Whacking Day', and perhaps any episode up to that point, for that matter.

Now I realise that I haven't really countered you, so here goes: if Scully left this episode unadultered and produced it, I doubt it would be subject to any more criticism than it is now (unless Scully's name is enough to inspire hatred). As it is, it already attracts criticism, as I pointed out earlier, so I don't really see your point.

Yeah, again, I fully acknowledge how ridiculous that statement was. Point taken.

[DaRick]

I'm fully aware that Scully would have made it far worse, and come to think of it, my reasoning there didn't make much sense (i.e. if it aired in the Scully era it would probably be seen as a beacon of greatness amid all of the garbage he produced, given how much praise 'Homer's Phobia' gets as a classic era episode). So yeah, I would probably repeal that statement as of now. I still think it's one of the most overrated episodes of all time, but that Scully statement was definitely pushing it.

I'm glad that you see my point, although I never said that it would be seen as a diamond among the crap if it was made in the Scully era. I just said that it wouldn't be subject to any more criticism in its current form. However, given the sub-par nature of many Scully episodes, your reasoning is probably valid anyway.

First of all, Whacking Day was an episode that didn't take itself seriously; the snakes were as cartoony as could be and the entire episode was a ridiculous farce, and I think both these elements downplay the animal cruelty aspect.

Yes, the episode was meant to be laughably stupid. In that regard, it works very well, which is why I think of it as an unsung classic. However, stating that "the snakes were as cartoony as could be" in order to justify animal cruelty is kind of lame, to be honest. Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. The reindeer scene depicted in Homer's Phobia was undeniably a promotion of animal cruelty, but so is this.

Homer's willingness to whack snakes definitely came with reason: it's tradition for one thing, and it's entirely in character for Homer to follow the majority, who were entirely behind the whacking.

I agree. A key aspect of Homer's personality throughout the series has been his naivete. In Homer's Phobia, I also believe that Homer thought he was following the views of the majority (certainly of Barney and Moe) by fearing homosexuality. This would therefore lead him to ask Bart to shoot the deer, in the hope that Bart would become 'straight'. His reasoning is obviously unacceptable, but to me, it demonstrates the correlation between Homer's Phobia and Whacking Day with regard to his actions.

In 'Homer's Phobia', Homer definitely has a reason, but the episode definitely comes with a more serious tone. The act of shooting a deer automatically seems a bit more cruel than beating a snakes (sic), in that, not only are the deer played up to be more realistic than the snakes, but it also involves actual killing, as opposed to beating.

I have already conveyed my thoughts on the so-called cartoonish nature of the snakes on Whacking Day. Now, I haven't seen Whacking Day for over a year, so I could be wrong. However, some of the imagery in Whacking Day suggested that the townspeople looked to beat the snakes to death (i.e - Homer whacking the heads off cardboard snakes). Again, the correlation between both episodes comes into vogue.

Second, in 'Whacking Day', Homer was doing what he wanted to do and wasn't trying to force himself on anyone. Here, Homer is commanding his own son to commit an act of killing, which is complete parental abuse.

Mostly correct. From what I recall, Lisa was the one convincing Homer not to whack the snakes. However, in Homer's Phobia, Homer was also doing what he wanted to do - get Bart to shoot a deer and keep away the 'evil' forces of homosexuality. All of your other points are valid, though.

Thirdly, one must note Bart's tearing up as he protests that he doesn't wish to kill the deer, which makes Homer all the more cruel-hearted for making him do so. All of these reasons make Homer far more unlikeable in 'Homer's Phobia' than in 'Whacking Day', and perhaps any episode up to that point, for that matter.

Lisa was also tearing up in Whacking Day as she tried to get Homer to stop beating the snakes - to no avail. Your statements are correct though, except possibly the last one. In Whacking Day, he doesn't come across as likeable, not with his blind ambition to beat a whole pile of benign snakes to death. Also, even at this point (before the Scully era), Homer has been loathsome so many times that you cannot possibly verify that he is at his most unlikeable here.

Well, there's my defence.

[TheForbiddenDonut]

Ooh, can't wait to respond to this. I'm too preoccupied at the moment, but expect this post to be edited sometime tomorrow with my reply.

Edit: with Jimmy C's comments and all that I just made a new post, oh well.

[Dr. Strangelove]

An all-time great episode. John Waters was fantastic. 5/5

[Nebuchanezzar]

Um...

The act of shooting a deer automatically seems a bit more cruel than beating a snakes, in that, not only are the deer played up to be more realistic than the snakes, but it also involves actual killing, as opposed to beating.

Everything else

What? Whacking Day was based off a tradition, Reindeer hunting is based off chauvanistic conventions. They're both equally as understandable/deplorable as one another, and I fail to see any. Whereas Homer was appealing to town culture in whacking day, he was appealing to accepted behaviour in homer's phobia. I feel that his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in whacking day given how engrained the behaviour was. I feel his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in Homer's Phobia given how scared he was for his son.

Yes, that's my opinion on the exciting world of snakes v reindeers.

[DaRick]

What? Whacking Day was based off a tradition, Reindeer hunting is based off chauvanistic conventions. They're both equally as understandable/deplorable as one another, and I fail to see any.

You're right, but I don't see your point. Plus, The Forbidden Donut and I did not even discuss the chauvinistic nature of reindeer hunting.

Whereas Homer was appealing to town culture in whacking day, he was appealing to accepted behaviour in homer's phobia. I feel that his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in whacking day given how engrained the behaviour was. I feel his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in Homer's Phobia given how scared he was for his son.

Your opinion appears to be a combination of mine and The Forbidden Donut's. But that doesn't make his behaviour acceptable. In no way can animal cruelty be condoned. It does, however, make his behaviour explicable, if you like.

[Nebuchanezzar]

You're right, but I don't see your point. Plus, The Forbidden Donut and I did not even discuss the chauvinistic nature of reindeer hunting.

You were both jousting with one another, debating the usefulness and heinousness of the reindeer scene. I was merely giving my opinion on the matter, as I found the discussion mildly interesting. My point, is that I believe that both of the scenes are as good as each other, and I was providing points to back up that view.

Your opinion appears to be a combination of mine and The Forbidden Donut's. But that doesn't make his behaviour acceptable. In no way can animal cruelty be condoned. It does, however, make his behaviour explicable, if you like.

This is taking mindless political sensitivity a bit too far don't you think? Homer was a concerned parent and went with one of the engrained features of the stereotypical man. I'm not saying I'm a fan of killing animals (although I do eat meat, so I'm a hypocrite), but I think that Homer's actions are justified and reasonable (probably moreso than whacking day, now that i think about it), and a debate centered around the reason and justification behind such actions is always going to be more interesting than one which is centered around an unwinnable debate about how morally corrupt beating snakes is, compared to how morally corrupt shooting a deer is.

For the record, the deer would likely have suffered comparatively little pain, so it's a much less harsh action that bludgeoning a snake to death. IMO.

[DaRick]

You were both jousting with one another, debating the usefulness and heinousness of the reindeer scene. I was merely giving my opinion on the matter, as I found the discussion mildly interesting. My point, is that I believe that both of the scenes are as good as each other, and I was providing points to back up that view.

Finally, I understand what you mean! No rebuttal necessary, then.

This is taking mindless political sensitivity a bit too far don't you think? Homer was a concerned parent and went with one of the engrained features of the stereotypical man. I'm not saying I'm a fan of killing animals (although I do eat meat, so I'm a hypocrite), but I think that Homer's actions are justified and reasonable (probably moreso than whacking day, now that i think about it), and a debate centered around the reason and justification behind such actions is always going to be more interesting than one which is centered around an unwinnable debate about how morally corrupt beating snakes is, compared to how morally corrupt shooting a deer is.

When we say killing animals in this instance, we shall just refer to the direct killing of an animal, otherwise I'm also a hypocrite. However, as disgustingly politically correct as I am being, I still don't feel that Homer's actions are actually reasonable. I never said that they were, I was just saying that The Forbidden Donut was wrong for singling out this episode for having these overtones, especially when considering the nature of classic-era episodes like Whacking Day - that was the initial basis for the debate. I will agree that they are explainable. But no more. As for your comments about our little debate, I do not even know whether to agree or disagree with you, because neither represented the initial basis of the debate. I also do not know whether this debate will head towards the justifying of the actions of Homer in both episodes or a relatively subjective snakes.vs.reindeers debate. It all depends on his response, which he promised me that he would deliver tommorow.

For the record, the deer would likely have suffered comparatively little pain, so it's a much less harsh action that bludgeoning a snake to death. IMO.

You're right, although you're kind of taking my side for making that comment (tacitly defending Homer's Phobia). That also wasn't what the debate between him and I was meant to be about.

[TheForbiddenDonut]

Yes, the episode was meant to be laughably stupid. In that regard, it works very well, which is why I think of it as an unsung classic. However, stating that "the snakes were as cartoony as could be" in order to justify animal cruelty is kind of lame, to be honest. Animal cruelty is animal cruelty. The reindeer scene depicted in Homer's Phobia was undeniably a promotion of animal cruelty, but so is this.

But I do think that over-the-top cartooniness can definitely underplay the notion of animal cruelty. Let's be honest: does 'animal cruelty' ever enter your mind when you watch Elmer Fudd hunting for Bugs Bunny?

I agree. A key aspect of Homer's personality throughout the series has been his naivete. In Homer's Phobia, I also believe that Homer thought he was following the views of the majority (certainly of Barney and Moe) by fearing homosexuality. This would therefore lead him to ask Bart to shoot the deer, in the hope that Bart would become 'straight'. His reasoning is obviously unacceptable, but to me, it demonstrates the correlation between Homer's Phobia and Whacking Day with regard to his actions.

Meh, I find keeping up with the same town tradition you have been participating in for years despite your daughter's views on animal cruelty to be much less deplorable than 'I'm going to force my reluctant teary-eyed son to illegally shoot a deer because Barney and Moe says so'. Even though in either case it's animal cruelty, the circumstances in the case of the latter make Homer's actions in 'Homer's Phobia' seem far worse than those in 'Whacking Day'.

I have already conveyed my thoughts on the so-called cartoonish nature of the snakes on Whacking Day. Now, I haven't seen Whacking Day for over a year, so I could be wrong. However, some of the imagery in Whacking Day suggested that the townspeople looked to beat the snakes to death (i.e - Homer whacking the heads off cardboard snakes). Again, the correlation between both episodes comes into vogue.

I don't think the episode ever made it clear whether the aim was to kill the snakes. Homer's training session, I think, doesn't imply anything about actually killing the snakes. Say you knock the head off a dummy while training for a martial arts fight or something. That doesn't mean you're actually going to kick your opponent's head off.

Mostly correct. From what I recall, Lisa was the one convincing Homer not to whack the snakes. However, in Homer's Phobia, Homer was also doing what he wanted to do - get Bart to shoot a deer and keep away the 'evil' forces of homosexuality. All of your other points are valid, though.

He was obviously doing what he wanted to do in both cases; my point was that in 'Homer's Phobia', what he wants requires parental abuse, which is yet another reason I find his actions to be worse in 'Homer's Phobia'.

Lisa was also tearing up in Whacking Day as she tried to get Homer to stop beating the snakes - to no avail. Your statements are correct though, except possibly the last one. In Whacking Day, he doesn't come across as likeable, not with his blind ambition to beat a whole pile of benign snakes to death. Also, even at this point (before the Scully era), Homer has been loathsome so many times that you cannot possibly verify that he is at his most unlikeable here.

Okay, I don't think Lisa was tearing up in 'Whacking Day'. She just asked him not to whack them, but to no avail. It hardly comparable to Bart's tears. And if Homer has been this bad during the classic era, it was most likely in episodes I tend to dislike ('Homer Loves Flanders' for instance).

What? Whacking Day was based off a tradition, Reindeer hunting is based off chauvanistic conventions. They're both equally as understandable/deplorable as one another, and I fail to see any. Whereas Homer was appealing to town culture in whacking day, he was appealing to accepted behaviour in homer's phobia. I feel that his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in whacking day given how engrained the behaviour was. I feel his behaviour was acceptable (kind of) in Homer's Phobia given how scared he was for his son.

Yes, that's my opinion on the exciting world of snakes v reindeers.

I've already offered my reasoning on why I find forcing someone to shoot a reindeer worse than beating snakes, so whatever, to each his own.

We need to have more debates like this.

[DaRick]

But I do think that over-the-top cartooniness can definitely underplay the notion of animal cruelty. Let's be honest: does 'animal cruelty' ever enter your mind when you watch Elmer Fudd hunting for Bugs Bunny?

Well, I haven't watched Elmer Fudd hunting for Bugs Bunny in a long time, not since I was a 5-yr old, so I cannot honestly say. I don't wish to create a debate out of nothing, but how do we know Elmer wasn't hunting Bugs just to feed himself? He wasn't exactly well-off, from memory. Thus, I don't know whether Whacking Day and 'Elmer and Bugs' are comparable with each other, as Homer is just whacking snakes for the hell of it, which is still wrong.

Meh, I find keeping up with the same town tradition you have been participating in for years despite your daughter's views on animal cruelty to be much less deplorable than 'I'm going to force my reluctant teary-eyed son to illegally shoot a deer because Barney and Moe says so'. Even though in either case it's animal cruelty, the circumstances in the case of the latter make Homer's actions in 'Homer's Phobia' seem far worse than those in 'Whacking Day'.

Yes, but how do we know that Lisa hasn't felt this way about Whacking Day in previous years (she is an extraordinarily bright 8-yr old, after all)? If she has always felt this way, then Whacking Day would traumatise her constantly, which I feel represents a dereliction of duty of Homer as a father. Let's face it, she does take opposition to her views pretty badly (i.e - Lisa The Vegetarian, She Of Little Faith). That would at least be as deplorable as getting a tearful Bart to shoot a deer.

I don't think the episode ever made it clear whether the aim was to kill the snakes. Homer's training session, I think, doesn't imply anything about actually killing the snakes. Say you knock the head off a dummy while training for a martial arts fight or something. That doesn't mean you're actually going to kick your opponent's head off.

In order to prove that the aim of Whacking Day was to kill the snakes, as sung by a choir:
"O Whacking Day, O Whacking Day/Our hallowed snake-skull cracking day/We'll break their backs/Gouge out their eyes/Their evil hearts we'll pulverize."

That's pretty bloodthirsty stuff. If a snakes back is broken, it naturally dies. Admittedly, Homer's training session acts as dubious evidence to this end, so I rescind what I said about that. I really need to see the episode again.

He was obviously doing what he wanted to do in both cases; my point was that in 'Homer's Phobia', what he wants requires parental abuse, which is yet another reason I find his actions to be worse in 'Homer's Phobia'.

Yes, whereas what Homer wants in Whacking Day requires constant torture of the snakes until they die. Having their backs broken, their eyes gouged out...it seems like a pretty slow and painful death to me. Although I cannot defend his actions in Homer's Phobia, at least (as Jimmy C has pointed out) the deer would've died quickly. This explains why Homer's actions in Whacking Day are at least comparable to those in Homer's Phobia, if not worse.

Okay, I don't think Lisa was tearing up in 'Whacking Day'. She just asked him not to whack them, but to no avail. It hardly comparable to Bart's tears. And if Homer has been this bad during the classic era, it was most likely in episodes I tend to dislike ('Homer Loves Flanders' for instance).

Like I said, I haven't seen the episode in a year, so my memory could be deceiving me. However, I recall Lisa pleading desperately with Homer not to kill the snakes. Although she may not have been crying, I'm sure she was pretty close to it. Incidentally, I liked Homer Loves Flanders. I felt it was a nice change of pace and I don't think Homer acted as irresponsibly in that episode as he did in Whacking Day.

We need to have more debates like this.

Indeed. I've actually enjoyed having this debate myself.

[TheForbiddenDonut]

Well, I haven't watched Elmer Fudd hunting for Bugs Bunny in a long time, not since I was a 5-yr old, so I cannot honestly say. I don't wish to create a debate out of nothing, but how do we know Elmer wasn't hunting Bugs just to feed himself? He wasn't exactly well-off, from memory. Thus, I don't know whether Whacking Day and 'Elmer and Bugs' are comparable with each other, as Homer is just whacking snakes for the hell of it, which is still wrong.

Elmer may very well have been shooting rabbits for the hell of it too. If he was so badly off, why keep hunting the same rabbit over and over again when going after another, less intelligent animal would have probably been easier and more helpful. It also raises the question: if he was hunting for food and was obviously never able to kill Bugs, how had he survived throughout the run of Looney Toons? In any case, Fudd was definitely out to kill for no reason provided, but the fact that Looney Toons was so over-the-top and exaggerated, the animal cruelty is far less apparent than in 'Homer's Phobia' and 'Whacking Day', despite the fact that all of the three concern killing animals.

Yes, but how do we know that Lisa hasn't felt this way about Whacking Day in previous years (she is an extraordinarily bright 8-yr old, after all)? If she has always felt this way, then Whacking Day would traumatise her constantly, which I feel represents a dereliction of duty of Homer as a father. Let's face it, she does take opposition to her views pretty badly (i.e - Lisa The Vegetarian, She Of Little Faith). That would at least be as deplorable as getting a tearful Bart to shoot a deer.

If Lisa was so traumatized, I would think her emotions would have been a bit more played up than the way the episode portrayed them. Trauma, I think, would no doubt bring tears to her. And also, some evidence that could oppose that she's been affected by Whacking Day for several years is that it's only on this Whacking Day that she seeks the guidance of others (Lovejoy and I think a few others), and the way she questions Homer makes it seem as if she's never questioned him in such a manner before. And at least Homer did try to comfort her a bit ("remember when Daddy hit the referee with the bottle? Remember honey?"). As well, I don't think Homer was aware of how much Whacking Day was really affecting Lisa, as he tends to be blind to others emotions. Bart's tears probably did far more to get across how he felt about killing the reindeer than anything Lisa said.

In order to prove that the aim of Whacking Day was to kill the snakes, as sung by a choir:
"O Whacking Day, O Whacking Day/Our hallowed snake-skull cracking day/We'll break their backs/Gouge out their eyes/Their evil hearts we'll pulverize."

That's pretty bloodthirsty stuff. If a snakes back is broken, it naturally dies. Admittedly, Homer's training session acts as dubious evidence to this end, so I rescind what I said about that. I really need to see the episode again.

Okay, point taken. Whacking Day was no doubt meant to kill snakes.

Yes, whereas what Homer wants in Whacking Day requires constant torture of the snakes until they die. Having their backs broken, their eyes gouged out...it seems like a pretty slow and painful death to me. Although I cannot defend his actions in Homer's Phobia, at least (as Jimmy C has pointed out) the deer would've died quickly. This explains why Homer's actions in Whacking Day are at least comparable to those in Homer's Phobia, if not worse.

I don't think they're worse. I think I'll go ahead and agree on each case being equal in terms of animal cruelty. What would probably determine the moral weight of Homer's actions is the question: how does Homer's actions in each affect his son/daughter, and how aware of his/her feelings is he? In that respect, I think there's no contest. Homer's actions in 'Homer's Phobia' are bringing his son to tears, and he is clearly aware of that. In 'Whacking Day', Homer seems pretty oblivious to Lisa's emotional reaction to the whole ordeal, and she herself, as opinionated as she is, seems far less emotionally reactive to Homer's actions than Bart is to being forced to killing a deer.

Like I said, I haven't seen the episode in a year, so my memory could be deceiving me. However, I recall Lisa pleading desperately with Homer not to kill the snakes. Although she may not have been crying, I'm sure she was pretty close to it. Incidentally, I liked Homer Loves Flanders. I felt it was a nice change of pace and I don't think Homer acted as irresponsibly in that episode as he did in Whacking Day.

I still don't think she was on the verge of tears, though. I think everything I would have used to reply to this portion of your argument has already been summed up in the paragraph before this one. On the topic of 'Homer Loves Flanders', I found Homer's oblivious behavior to be completely exaggerated to the point of annoyance, not to mention his stalking syndrome got to the point of unlikeable creepiness.

Indeed. I've actually enjoyed having this debate myself.

I wonder how long we can keep it up.

[Nebuchanezzar]

I wonder how long we can keep it up.

It's a pity Channel Surfer isn't active anymore these days, as we could sure do with some new entries to the essay dork krew (perhaps a new administrator of that group even).

[DaRick]

Elmer may very well have been shooting rabbits for the hell of it too. If he was so badly off, why keep hunting the same rabbit over and over again when going after another, less intelligent animal would have probably been easier and more helpful. It also raises the question: if he was hunting for food and was obviously never able to kill Bugs, how had he survived throughout the run of Looney Toons? In any case, Fudd was definitely out to kill for no reason provided, but the fact that Looney Toons was so over-the-top and exaggerated, the animal cruelty is far less apparent than in 'Homer's Phobia' and 'Whacking Day', despite the fact that all of the three concern killing animals.

Indeed, what you say about Elmer's motives may be true. We just don't know. However, we must also take into account the time period between each altercation between him and Bugs. In between these clashes, how can we oppose the notion that he may have caught other rabbits? This may have allowed him to survive, although not lavishly. Besides, how do we know that Elmer was aware that he frequently came across the same sly, witty rabbit during his hunting travails. Seriously though, we should really end this 'Elmer and Bugs' debate. All we're doing is throwing a bunch of theories out there, with little or no resemblance to the main debate.

If Lisa was so traumatized, I would think her emotions would have been a bit more played up than the way the episode portrayed them. Trauma, I think, would no doubt bring tears to her. And also, some evidence that could oppose that she's been affected by Whacking Day for several years is that it's only on this Whacking Day that she seeks the guidance of others (Lovejoy and I think a few others), and the way she questions Homer makes it seem as if she's never questioned him in such a manner before. And at least Homer did try to comfort her a bit ("remember when Daddy hit the referee with the bottle? Remember honey?"). As well, I don't think Homer was aware of how much Whacking Day was really affecting Lisa, as he tends to be blind to others emotions. Bart's tears probably did far more to get across how he felt about killing the reindeer than anything Lisa said.

Yes, maybe I was overstretching with regards to Lisa's trauma. But how do we know that she hasn't been aware of Whacking Day for several years? Remember - Lisa may be exceptionally bright and somewhat individualistic, but she has always expressed a desire to fit in, leading to her being quite insecure with regards to popularity (often justifiably). So, she may simply have sought guidance because she felt that her actions could be worthless. She may have also received inadequate guidance in earlier years. Besides, Homer's attempts to comfort Lisa have usually exacerbated her feelings of despair. Like you say, Homer is blind to the emotions of others. To this end, I think he grasped Bart's reluctance to shoot the reindeer about as well as he realised how upset Lisa was about Whacking Day. Not very. Remember - Homer is never very quick to ascertain the feelings of others, no matter how dramatic those feelings are.

I don't think they're worse. I think I'll go ahead and agree on each case being equal in terms of animal cruelty. What would probably determine the moral weight of Homer's actions is the question: how does Homer's actions in each affect his son/daughter, and how aware of his/her feelings is he? In that respect, I think there's no contest. Homer's actions in 'Homer's Phobia' are bringing his son to tears, and he is clearly aware of that. In 'Whacking Day', Homer seems pretty oblivious to Lisa's emotional reaction to the whole ordeal, and she herself, as opinionated as she is, seems far less emotionally reactive to Homer's actions than Bart is to being forced to killing a deer.

Yeah, there is no contest...for me. Seriously though, Homer's fallouts with family members or friends often begin with Homer acting self-righteous before realising the folly of his actions. I really don't think Homer knew how much his actions affected Bart, because he was still in a cloud of stubborn self-righteousness. Trust me, that is possible, as I too have offended others in that manner on occassion. Thus, Homer is as oblivious to Bart's true feelings as he is to Lisa's emotions. Besides, as upset as Bart was, Lisa too was desperate to stop Homer in Whacking Day, almost to the point of despair. So stating that Lisa was far less emotionally reactive to Whacking Day, which leads to the deaths of thousands of snakes per year, than Bart, who was meant to kill a single reindeer, is probably not appropriate. By the way, I still think that slowly bashing a group of snakes to death is more worthy of contempt than quickly killing one reindeer, but we're never going to agree on the point. Ah well.

I still don't think she was on the verge of tears, though. I think everything I would have used to reply to this portion of your argument has already been summed up in the paragraph before this one. On the topic of 'Homer Loves Flanders', I found Homer's oblivious behavior to be completely exaggerated to the point of annoyance, not to mention his stalking syndrome got to the point of unlikeable creepiness.

Hmm...I really need to watch the episode again to be sure. I find your views on Homer's behaviour in 'Homer Loves Flanders' perplexing. Although Homer became predatory as the episode progressed, I found his obliviousness to Ned's hatred of him hilarious. I felt that his monologue on Ned's virtues in church was in good faith, as was his attempt to improve the relationship between the Simpson and Flanders families (albeit unsuccessfully). So I found it more difficult to see him as an obnoxious prick like you did. I certainly felt his behaviour in that episode was better than that in Whacking Day, where he acted as nothing more than an irritating, spineless conformist to a brutal act.

I wonder how long we can keep it up.

It depends on how much time I have on my hands.

[Jeff Vader]

5/5 - John Waters was one of the best guest stars ever. There are so many great moments from this episode, too.
"Why did you bring me to a gay steel mill?"
"Iiii don't knoooow!?!?!"

[CousinMerl]

One of the best ever according to me - 5/5

The episode has many hilarious and funny parts, like the steel mill scene, and much memorable quotes. The story itself is very interesting and the part of the episode when Homer tried to keep Bart from becoming gay had several great parts. It felt right that Homer learned a lesson in the end, after he was saved from the angry reindeers by John and his robotic annual gift man.

[TheFlandersMan]

You guys are nuts. Way to turn a funny episode into a morality issue. ;-/

Homer wasn't trying to be cruel to animals. His reasoning was that he wanted to have Bart shoot a deer so he can be a man. That's what men do. Homer thinks of Hunting as an outwardly heterosexual sport and that's what he aimed to do. When he couldn't find any deer, someone suggested reindeer in place of deer as the next best thing. It's not like the Homer was out on a mission to kill reindeer for god sakes. The bottom line is that he's a stupid asshole.

Of course this is a place for discussion, that's the whole point of a forum, regardless of how ridiculous the discussion is. So feel free to carry on.

[Nebuchanezzar]

Straight from Captain Authority himself. I mean, I agree with what you're saying and all, but really...

The bottom line is that he's a stupid asshole.

[You Bent My Wookiee]

4/5! Very funny

[TheFlandersMan]

Straight from Captain Authority himself. I mean, I agree with what you're saying and all, but really...

The bottom line is that he's a stupid asshole.

Okay alright, harsh generalization. At the time that I said that I was a little perturbed. Still, Homer is often an ass from time to time, and not just in the Scully years.

[Imperciph]

I don't see how shooting a reindeer was ever meant to be viewed in even a slightly positive light : it was merely illustrating the silliness and hypocrisy of stereotypical macho fantasies and conventions and how over-the-top, silly and hypocritical the beliefs of homophobes can often unintentionally be. Homer, being a satire of everyman, is always quite the impressionable guy, and due to various circumstances and emotional manipulation by folks with prominent mob mentality like Moe, had become obsessed with curing Bart's homosexuality (something which he even blamed himself for). It's in line with the usual accepted boundaries of Homer's characterization : essentially well-meaning, even though insensitive and foolish.

[TheFlandersMan]

I don't see how shooting a reindeer was ever meant to be viewed in even a slightly positive light : it was merely illustrating the silliness and hypocrisy of stereotypical macho fantasies and conventions and how over-the-top, silly and hypocritical the beliefs of homophobes can often unintentionally be. Homer, being a satire of everyman, is always quite the impressionable guy, and due to various circumstances and emotional manipulation by folks with prominent mob mentality like Moe, had become obsessed with curing Bart's homosexuality (something which he even blamed himself for). It's in line with the usual accepted boundaries of Homer's characterization : essentially well-meaning, even though insensitive and foolish.

Well said.

[Jolly Bengali]

I actually found myself giggling a couple of days ago thinking about the steel mill scene. Hadn't seen the episode in about three years, conservatively.

5/5.

[Ryou]

One of my absolute favorite episodes. In fact, this along with the episode "There's Something About Marrying" changed the prejudice I had against homosexuals. I think that The Simpsons took a step up by supporting homosexuality (and amazingly, still satirizing it along the way). I used to be against anything gay, but The Simpsons has changed my whole perspective on the subject. And if any episode can do that, it must be good.

[Matt B.]

Very funny episode 5/5