'House' episode offends asexuals

Babbylonian said:
The problem is that nobody - conservative or liberal - cares one bit about people who choose to be asexual (or are born that way - I don't know the claims or the science), so the organization jumped on this for the chance to whine in public about mistreatment. It's likely to be the first and last time most people will ever hear about them.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile, over in Nonamericanmedialand:

BBC News: What is it like to be asexual?

Recent, but pre-dates and is unconnected to the House episode.
 
Babbylonian said:
Obviously, people can choose to be asexual. Just as obviously, asexuality can be thrust upon them (so to speak). The former might be interesting in, say, a legal drama (perhaps a divorce case?); the latter is what works for a medical show.
Click to expand...


Is this really obvious?
Can we choose to be gay or straight?

Obviously people can choose to behave as if they are asexual. But that may have costs.
I can behave as if I'm left handed, but I'll drop a lot of stuff in the process.
 
zooterkin said:
Really? I wouldn't be too sure of that.
Click to expand...

House is a genius who routinely saves people nobody else could. But he is also an arrogant, manipulative, drug-addicted jerk. Not to mention a felon. I can't see how any atheist/skeptic would want him as their posterboy.
 
So these big babies get mad when someone gets their disease treated? Reminds me of these freaks who scream at the fascist government for treating their schizophrenic delusions.
 
anyone who ever complains about a negative portrayal of their demographic group is both whining and a baby, except when I do it about mine.
 
Yeesh, what a pitiful thread. Complaining about Political Correctness and wearing our ignorance as a badge of honour? Who are you people?
 
Last edited:
One of House's basic personality traits is that he never thinks anybody is "just like that". He looks for hidden motives and reasons behind every action everybody takes and every emotion everybody has. This is a guy who tells nuns to their face that they are delusional for being religious, that tells mothers that they don't really love their babies. That once found out a teenage girl was really male, and joked that the father who sexually abused her is technically gay now. To the dad's face... in front of the girl. And this is how he revealed that she was really male.

He routinely pulls apart people's love lives and accuses them of selfish motivations for everything they do. He absolutely would do this for sexual orientation - and indeed has. Just listen to the kinds of things he says to Thirteen about her bisexuality or Wilson about pretty much every relationship he's ever had.

Accusing asexual people of being that way for some reason, or of lying about it? That's not even eyebrow raising when it comes to House.
 
Last edited:
Babbylonian said:
I admit to total ignorance of any asexuality movement, if one exists as such, but I have to ask: Does anyone need to have awareness of asexuality? Are they victims of prejudice and I just haven't heard about it?
Click to expand...

Prejudice of a sort exists. It's not like people go around persecuting you or anything, but those who don't engage in relationships tend to be thought of as rather odd. The fact that you aren't part of a couple can be quite awkward at social events. People tend to assume that you're gay and don't want to admit it, or some such - more so when you've never been married rather than being separated or divorced. It can, in some cases, have work repercussions when you're middle aged and still single.
 
The Dark Lord said:
Nah, he dated Cuddy and hires hookers.

He is an atheist and a skeptic. Though not one people here would want as a posterboy.
Click to expand...

And why? Ambrose Bierce said it best: (A cynic is) A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.

He'd be very welcome here.


As for asexuality, he has a healthy skepticism about it. What's House's favorite saying?


Come on, everybuddy. I know you all know it! What's House's favorite saying?
 
Beerina said:
And why? Ambrose Bierce said it best: (A cynic is) A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.

He'd be very welcome here.


As for asexuality, he has a healthy skepticism about it. What's House's favorite saying?


Come on, everybuddy. I know you all know it! What's House's favorite saying?
Click to expand...

"Everybody lies", I assume.

I don't watch the show religiously (heh), but I've seen enough episodes to know that House is a sarcastic, misogynistic, misanthropic, drug-addicted bastage who will make fun of or ridicule anybody or anything and will regularly be EXTREMELY un-PC simply because he can. The idea that he'd poke fun at asexuals is not all that surprising as a result. Every episode has him poking fun at his patients in one way or another, or Wilson's patients, or the patients in the clinic, or any other doctor's patients he can get a decent look at long enough to decide they're interesting. I would say the asexuals need to grow the heck up and realize that it's a TV SHOW.

My personal opinion though.
 
Sabrina said:
"Everybody lies", I assume.

I don't watch the show religiously (heh), but I've seen enough episodes to know that House is a sarcastic, misogynistic, misanthropic, drug-addicted bastage who will make fun of or ridicule anybody or anything and will regularly be EXTREMELY un-PC simply because he can. The idea that he'd poke fun at asexuals is not all that surprising as a result. Every episode has him poking fun at his patients in one way or another, or Wilson's patients, or the patients in the clinic, or any other doctor's patients he can get a decent look at long enough to decide they're interesting. I would say the asexuals need to grow the heck up and realize that it's a TV SHOW.

My personal opinion though.
Click to expand...

It is also shared by me, and I think it's fair to point out to some here that defending a deliberately disturbing or controversial plotline is not the same as defending that viewpoint. I've watched many gangster movies, and I've never once thought that breaking someone's kneecaps with a baseball bat was acceptable behavior. Similarly, I wouldn't act like House, even though he often makes me laugh. Let's try to put things into perspective.
 
Puppycow said:
If the character had been gay instead, and House found that it was actually a tumor that was causing him to be gay, and his husband/boyfriend was just pretending to be gay, would that be not be offensive?

It's the notion that somewhere inside every asexual or gay person there's really a straight person trying to get out.
Click to expand...

HAve you guys, you know, watched house before?

Its an okay show but very formulaic, i would say if you sat down you could come up with maybe 8 different ways an episode goes. One of the major ones is , " Person is acting in an odd way, house believes this is a medical condition while others believe it is their personality, turns out to be a medical condition as house is seldom, if ever wrong."

This has happened with altruism, bondage, and religious fervor. And that is off of the top of my head, sans episode guide, before i have even had a smoke or coffee in the morning. If i were to comb over the seasons, i could come up with at least a dozen more, enough to fill a season.

What we are seeing is not some societal construct meant to keep the asexual down, but simply a concept that is over used in the series, but keeps getting used due to the fact it is a popular episode format.

Might as well say house is racist because of the way he treated Cuddy, something that one may get the vibe from if they viewed a random episode, but something that is simply untrue when one looks at the series in any other way than looking to be offended.
 
Why would House be racist because of the way he treats Cuddy?

Sexist I could see; but racist?
 
Notice to all special interest groups: Most TV shows and movies are NOT ALLEGORIES!
 
Puppycow said:
If the character had been gay instead, and House found that it was actually a tumor that was causing him to be gay, and his husband/boyfriend was just pretending to be gay, would that be not be offensive?
Click to expand...

Oh man, I smell an awesome sitcom!


"Adam and Stephen have been happily gaymarried for over ten years!

Or so they think!!

'Cause they're about to find out... that they've each been pretending to be gay to keep the other happy... all along!!!

Stay tuned for this week's episode of... Empty Closets!"

Cue themesong - "Macho Man" by The Village People.


Throw in an implausible plot scenario wherein they have to keep pretending to be gay to avoid being disinherented by a rich gay uncle (or whatever), and voila, we've got a hit. Three's Company with two dudes!
 
Last edited:
Hellbound said:
I suspect he meant either sexist or Foreman. Me, I menatally translated to Foreman and went on from there :)
Click to expand...

Heck, you could probably toss Chase in there if it were "racist" to make fun of someone's nationality I guess. I see your point though. :)
 
Babbylonian said:
I admit to total ignorance of any asexuality movement, if one exists as such, but I have to ask: Does anyone need to have awareness of asexuality? Are they victims of prejudice and I just haven't heard about it?

I mean, I can only speak for myself, but if someone identified themselves to me as being asexual, while I might have a few questions about it (including inquiring about their medical status, if I felt comfortable doing so - there are both primary and secondary hormone deficiencies that can be indicative of serious medical problems), at the end of the day I probably wouldn't give it a lot more thought. I don't consider the idea of someone not having sex, or an interest thereof, to be a problem or anything that requires advocacy.

It's weirder to me that an asexual would get upset about this TV show than being asexual in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's not the same kind of active repression that LGBT folks get, that is true. Mostly, it's simply just a case of people refusing to believe there's such a thing as asexuality and using one's description of him or herself as asexual as an excuse to engage in the kind of joking and teasing that would be unquestionably looked down upon as blatant sexual harrassment were it directed at a gay person for instance (and the jokes modified to apply to that context). Or they simply declare you must be gay (nonsensical; wouldn't gay people at least be interested in sex?) and proceed to vent their anti-gay bigotry at you.

Again, it's not so much House being House; it's the episode being the first time the existence of asexuality has ever been given mass media exposure in the US, and it basically turned into a complete invalidation.

See, all the denigration and put-downs may be House's schtick; but you also have to consider that he always turns out to be right about everything he said by the end of the show, no matter how cruel or questionable or even "wrong" he might seem to be initially as the plot unfolds.
 
My only commentary on the asexual thing is the word itself. Not wanting sex does not make one asexual, it makes one have a preference for celibacy. You have genitalia, biologically you are a sexual creature, you simply prefer to not have sex.

If i choose not to eat meat, that does not make me an herbivore, it makes me a vegetarian, two completely different things. To get out of shape because one does not recognize you as asexual, is silly, you arn't, you have a preference for celibacy, the same way some folks have a preference for men or women.
 
People can decide to be celibate in any case. Those who identify as asexual wouldn't simply rather not have sex; it's a matter of not having any sex drive, nor of finding anyone of any gender sexually attractive. A hetero- or homosexual who has chosen to be celibate can look at a photo of a provocatively posed naked person and find them attractive or sexually arousing; they just consciously choose not to act on it. An asexual will look at a photo of a provocatively posed naked person and say "Hey - I ordered a cheeseburger."
 
Checkmite said:
See, all the denigration and put-downs may be House's schtick; but you also have to consider that he always turns out to be right about everything he said by the end of the show, no matter how cruel or questionable or even "wrong" he might seem to be initially as the plot unfolds.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So why get upset about schtick? Again, he's an objectionable human being in many ways, and one of them is that even when he turns out to be right it's often (in fact, almost always) for the wrong reason. In this case, he happened to be right and, as was pointed out earlier, the organization itself acknowledges that potential medical causes should be considered when someone is "asexual."

Again, this organization wanted publicity and they got some. In fact, call me a cynic but I'd be willing to bet they're not upset about the episode at all (except perhaps in the sense that the show has seen better days) and are instead happy to have an excuse to get attention. Good for them.
 
Babbylonian said:
Exactly. So why get upset about schtick? Again, he's an objectionable human being in many ways, and one of them is that even when he turns out to be right it's often (in fact, almost always) for the wrong reason. In this case, he happened to be right and, as was pointed out earlier, the organization itself acknowledges that potential medical causes should be considered when someone is "asexual."

Again, this organization wanted publicity and they got some. In fact, call me a cynic but I'd be willing to bet they're not upset about the episode at all (except perhaps in the sense that the show has seen better days) and are instead happy to have an excuse to get attention. Good for them.
Click to expand...

You've posted that before I could - I agree that this is way more publicity than they could have dreamed for. Good on them for using our outraged primed media to their advantage.
 
Checkmite said:
People can decide to be celibate in any case. Those who identify as asexual wouldn't simply rather not have sex; it's a matter of not having any sex drive, nor of finding anyone of any gender sexually attractive. A hetero- or homosexual who has chosen to be celibate can look at a photo of a provocatively posed naked person and find them attractive or sexually arousing; they just consciously choose not to act on it. An asexual will look at a photo of a provocatively posed naked person and say "Hey - I ordered a cheeseburger."
Click to expand...
For my own curiosity, would I be correctly described as asexual? Let me explain:

I generally self-identify as gay because I'm physically attracted to women, it doesn't take much explanation for other people to "get" it. Strictly speaking, however, I have no want or need to have a romantic relationship with anyone. Its weird to say that because I've actually dated before, did not like it, I'm not sure if I've just never met the right person, but in any case I'm pretty much indifferent to being single for the rest of my life. I have a libido and sexual fantasies involving other people, but unnerved by the idea of actually having sex with someone, totally indifferent to never having sex with anyone for the rest of my life.

Can you be gay, with a libido, and asexual at the same time? Would I be better described as aromantic?
 
Last edited:
I seem to recall some similar criticism among cutters when the movie Secretary came out, over the implication that cutting could be mitigated by (gasp) D&S.
 
Dessi said:
For my own curiosity, would I be correctly described as asexual? Let me explain:

I generally self-identify as gay because I'm physically attracted to women, it doesn't take much explanation for other people to "get" it. Strictly speaking, however, I have no want or need to have a romantic relationship with anyone. Its weird to say that because I've actually dated before, did not like it, I'm not sure if I've just never met the right person, but in any case I'm pretty much indifferent to being single for the rest of my life. I have a libido and sexual fantasies involving other people, but unnerved by the idea of actually having sex with someone, totally indifferent to never having sex with anyone for the rest of my life.

Can you be gay, with a libido, and asexual at the same time? Would I be better described as aromantic?
Click to expand...

I've highlighted the part that shows you're not 'asexual'. No, what you describe is celibate.
 
Neither the show nor the protest bothers me. Seems to me like everyone's just doing their jobs. As has been pointed out repeatedly, this plotline was pretty much in line with how House has handled many other issues. As for AVEN, well, this is what advocacy groups do. The show started a conversation, and AVEN wants to keep it alive and present another point of view that they feel was underrepresented on the show (basically, Wilson's few lines).

It's sort of like how frustrating it can be for atheists when the only time a fictional character's atheism is mentioned is (a) to identify him or her as a bad guy; or (b) to provide "character development" by revealing that the character is really just angry at God about something ("my spouse [or child, or younger sibling] died!"), and then having that anger be "cured." See TV Tropes for other stereotypical portrayals. (That seems to be changing a bit now.)

And in each case, the show's writers and fans could defend the characterization because, hey, some self-described atheists are bad guys, or angry at God, or convert to a religion, and we never said they all do, so your complaints are just political correctness, etc.

So sure, it's naive to think that a televised work of fiction should always present every nuance of every issue fairly and evenly. But it's also naive to think that only people who hold that naive belief would complain.
 
tyr_13 said:
I've highlighted the part that shows you're not 'asexual'. No, what you describe is celibate.
Click to expand...

I don't know. It is not odd for asexuals to masturbate. I suspect that this is a case like sexuality in general that you can get too caught in extremes.

But I have heard of asexual romantics vs asexual aromantics. I just think that you can only expect such terms to describe someone to a first approximation. At that level lesbian asexual aromantic works given how she described herself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom