OK, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Two and a Half Men qualifies for the dictionary definition of “filth”, as it’s been branded by its resident “half man”, 19 year-old star Angus T Jones (Jake). But if you heard the young actor’s rambling quasi-religious rant, and dire warning that TV as he knows it “rots your brain’‘, you may think he a bit of a point.

Three Half Men might be a better name…

Jones’ impressionable young mind has marinated for more than half his life on the set of a show about a sexually-opportunistic, cynical, self-satisfied lothario who uses women like tissues - playing himself - and the experience appears to have turned the earnest young guy to God.

It’s no wonder he sounds a bit confused, given the life lessons his character, Jake, took in with his Twinkies while in the care of randy Uncle Charlie (Charlie Sheen) and his “hen-pecked” divorcee dad, Alan (Jon Cryer). Here are a few examples:

A good woman is an ignorant woman (if you can’t find a dumb young one to play with, keep the one you can find in the dark):

Jake: “How come it’s a secret that dad is on a date?”
Charlie: “Eh, it’s not a secret, it’s just never a good idea to tell a woman more than they need to know.”
Jake: “How come?”
Charlie: “Because we love them and want to protect them. A clueless woman is a happy woman.”

Even better than a dumb woman, is a crazy woman:

Charlie: “Yeah, so, sex with crazy chicks is great. Just make sure you pick positions where you can see what her hands are doing.”
Alan: “No, no, that would be taking advantage of a mentally unbalanced person.”
Charlie: “Oh, Alan, that boat has sailed, may as well hop on board for a farewell cruise.”

Get your young, dumb woman drunk and you’re on a winner:

Charlie: “Alan, let me give you a piece of advice. Alcohol impairs your ability to make good decisions. We don’t want you to lose that ability… we want her to.”

Commitment should never get in the way of a quickie:

Charlie [to Norman]: “I am—I am, I am so sorry. I had no idea that she was married. Believe me, I have a firm rule when it comes to sleeping with married women.”
Berta: “Yeah, if she’s firm enough, he’ll do her.”

A woman is just a vagina with a life-support system (this quote is from the new series, starring Ashton Kutcher in the Sheen role):

Alan: “Lyndsey has been pushing me to make a commitment because some other guy asked her out.”
Walden: “Who asked her out?”
Alan: “Her gynecologist.”
Walden: “At least he knows what he is getting into.”

If you are clever enough to find a dumb, young woman, fidelity is not required.

Charlie: “You’re already doing a hot 22-year-old (described in the same epsiode as being so unsophisticated she is “two marbles rolling around in a tin can, correction one marble“) and you’re cheating on her?
Alan: “Yes”
Charlie: “I am so proud of you!”

An easy way to tell apart the women you are trying to get into bed is by their eating disorders:

Charlie: “Which one’s Amy?”. Alan: “Amy is the one who overcame the eating disorder.” Charlie: “Starving herself or throwing up?” Alan: “Does it make a difference?” Charlie: “It does if you’re paying for dinner.” Alan: “Amy is the brunette.”
Charlie: “Got it. So I have Jennifer.” Alan: “You mean Beth.” Charlie: “Oh right, right, B for blonde.” Alan: “B can also be for brunette.” Charlie: “But Amy is the brunette, you could do A for anorexic.” Alan: “Unless its B for bulimic.” Charlie: “Good point, we’re gonna need a new system.”

A wife is an inanimate object:

Jake: “Have you seen my Game Boy?”
Norman: “No. Have you seen my wife?”
Jake: “No. Well, if you see it, let me know.”
Norman: “Ditto.”

A wife is an inanimate object #2:

Evelyn [to Norman]: “Did my son… polish your trophy wife?”

If you are wealthy, watch out for dispicable women:

Walden: “I am tired of dating crazy, cheating, greedy, gold-digging bitches.”
Alan: “Sigh, without them, I would not have gotten laid. “
Walden: “And there will be no reality TV stars.”

Be very, very wary of those gold-digging bitches you once had sex with - in fact, avoid:

Charlie: “I got a little e-mail this morning from an old girlfriend who says she needs to ‘see me.’
Berta: “No kidding? I wonder if she’s ‘knocked up.’
Charlie: “Nobody’s knocked up. I haven’t heard from her in three years.”
Berta: “So she’s bringing you a four-year-old.”

Women you’ve previously had sex with can’t be trusted #2:

Walden: “She says she wants to meet for coffee.”
Alan: “Oh, be careful. In my experience, when an ex wants to meet for coffee, it is either they want to borrow money or tell you that they gave you crabs.”

But on the up-side, women can do trades:

Charlie: “Well I’ve always said a 22-year-old girl is like a good carpenter, no wood gets wasted.”

And also, having children is not entirely bad:

Charlie: “Hey, if you listened to me in the first place, you wouldn’t be in this mess. I’m the one who told you not to marry her.”
Alan: “If I hadn’t married Judith, there would be no Jake.”
Charlie: I didn’t say you couldn’t knock her up!

And even despite all the fun and games, childhood is still a little bit sacred:

Alan: “I happen to believe that childhood should be a time of innocence.”
Charlie: “I agree: childhood should be a time of innocence, and Bambi’s mother shouldn’t die, and lap dances should be complementary after the fifth cocktail, but that’s not the world we live in.”

Given all this side-splitting, but pithy, life wisdom, it’s a wonder, really, how they even needed a laugh track…

Wendy blogs daily at The Perch at heraldsun.com.au

Comments on this post close at 8pm AEST

Most commented

140 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • J. Keats says:

      04:01pm | 30/11/12

      ‘Beauty is truth, and truth is beauty,’ - that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

    • Bruno says:

      12:56pm | 30/11/12

      Imagine being married to this person. Every f**ken day the same sh*t. You want something, then go and earn it I won’t stop you but you’re not entitled to anything.

    • luke says:

      11:47am | 30/11/12

      Have you seen two broke girls ??? no that is some crazy bs right there.

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:50pm | 30/11/12

      I did…for about 20 seconds - by accident….they make Dave Hughes look not only hilarious but entertaining

    • P. Darvio says:

      11:43am | 30/11/12

      I’ve been watching instead “Two and a Half Politicians” – its been on this week Monday to Thursday at 2PM - seems to cover the same short of issues…….

    • TheRealDave says:

      11:41am | 30/11/12

      I look forward to the article from Ant or Dan - or even better - Joe Hildebrand, cherry picking lets say 15 lines from Sex in the City where the main characters are denigrating men, treating them as sexual objects, objects of humour, derisevely etc

      But its great to see the Punch get in one last ‘Men are Arseholes’ article in during Movember….instead of actually publishing any Mens Health articles and information.

    • ByStealth says:

      02:11pm | 30/11/12

      At least there wasn’t a big White Ribbon song and dance this year.

      Baby steps..

    • Sam says:

      01:53pm | 30/11/12

      Samantha: Men aren’t that complicated. They’re kind of like plants.

      Carrie: Men in their forties are like the New York Times Sunday crossword puzzle: tricky, complicated, and you’re never really sure you got the right answer.

      Samantha: Ladies! Seamen, twelve o’clock!
      Miranda: I pray when I turn around there are sailors, because with her, you never know.

      Carrie: You broke up with James because he was too small. This guy’s too big. Who are you, Goldicocks?

      Samantha: Here’s what I think. Round up all the divorced men and keep them in a pound.

    • Kika says:

      01:15pm | 30/11/12

      Have you ever seen the show?

    • Stephen says:

      11:23am | 30/11/12

      Personally, I’m not the least offended by this show.

      I’ve never watched it.

      You should try it, dear…by your peurile lamentation, it seems you’re a regular viewer.

    • yawn says:

      11:06am | 30/11/12

      sigh… look this is just a silly show with silly humor. it is not meant to be taken seriously. this column represents exactly what is wrong with people being overly pc or people who see sexism or racism or whatever in everything.
      and this is coming from a person who despises it when people say what i’ve just said; they try to belittle it when someone really is in distress or being abused / victimised / prejudiced against… but THIS IS NOT SUCH A CASE! the show is a comedy, those lines listed in this article are used as a joke. the whole joke is how Charlie is such a womaniser / sleazebag / alcoholic etc. it’s outrageous.
      its just like those women in Sex and the City… its not to be taken seriously. ive seen episodes where those women talk disparagingly about short men, bald men, men with small genitals etc.
      are men getting up in arms about that? are articles being written about how terrible it is (in terms of sexism, not in terms of quality)???

    • marley says:

      10:26am | 30/11/12

      Mehh, mountains out of molehills. I watched 2 1/2 men in the early days, and found it just another lightweight comedy.  I thought Charlie was pretty sleezy, Alan hopeless, and the kid the only one who had any grip on reality.  Not very funny, and not a role model to be seen. I don’t get the outrage, either for or against it.  It wasn’t, and presumably still isn’t, worth the bother.

    • porkpants says:

      10:24am | 30/11/12

      no god.

    • fml says:

      01:59pm | 30/11/12

      Man wrote the bible.

      God - 0 (Amendment)
      Atheists - 0
      fml - 1

      Bow down to a poster thats greater than you. Bow down.

    • Baloo says:

      12:31pm | 30/11/12

      If no god then how come the bible?

      God - 1
      Atheists - 0

    • HC says:

      10:07am | 30/11/12

      Ah so many men calling women names and vice versa.  It’s a wonder anyone has sex anymore let alone breeds in such an adversorial environment.  Or is that the problem with all the whingers here today?  Complete. Lack. Of. Sex. Life.  tongue laugh

      It’s a tv show, designed to be as mind-numbingly boring as possible so as to lull people in to a semi-comatose state so they won’t change the channels during the ads.  Who cares what it says about men, women or in between?

    • HC says:

      01:04pm | 30/11/12

      Really Philosopher?  What pays for these shows?  It’s mostly ad money, if people don’t watch the ads then ad executives don’t place their ads with the network and the network can’t create new shows.  Even subscription TV has ads these days and as a result the shows created are slowly but surely compromised in order to keep people watching the ads.

      I’m not saying it’s wrong, just that you can’t place too much stock in the social commentary of tv shows when their main purpose is to prevent people from switching channels during the ad breaks.

    • Philosopher says:

      11:49am | 30/11/12

      HC - I read your reply to Kika.
      You. Are. Talking. Out. Of. Your. Behind.

    • HC says:

      11:14am | 30/11/12

      Umm no, what’s on TV is advertising, what’s in between is just mildly inoffensive filler designed to keep people watching the ads.  There’s no reflection of society, no substance or morality in TV shows nor does there need to be unless people stop watching the ads.

    • Kika says:

      10:37am | 30/11/12

      Because what’s on TV mirrors the culture of the people. If the culture finds something funny or entertaining, you will find it replicated in the media and in entertainment. The point is not whether the show is funny or not, the topic is about whether the show is ‘filth’.

    • Jaqui says:

      09:32am | 30/11/12

      The polar opposite to the sitcom Two and a Half Men would be the Today’s shows Georgie Gardner on their “Girls on the Grill” segment.
      The difference being that one is comedy, the other is actual misandry in action.
      I personally find this segment on the Today show more offensive than Two and a half men. Neither will I watch again.

    • subotic says:

      10:28am | 30/11/12

      Oh, that says Girls on the Grill.

      Was so hoping for a bit of chick on chick action there….

    • Kika says:

      09:16am | 30/11/12

      HAhah - So all you men who come here complaining of being continually stereotyped in the media have no problem as long as it’s a show that’s degrading towards women. Ever thought that the characters on this show do nothing to change women’s perception of men? I’ve heard men - my dad, uncle, their friends, my friends, colleagues say similar things about women all the time. And you wonder why we call you misogynists?

    • sami says:

      03:49pm | 30/11/12

      @
      “people have mentioned sex and the city. perfect example. those women make fun / belittle men who are short, fat, bald, have small ‘equipment’ etc.”
      I watched every episode of SATC and cannot recall them making fun of men. In fact Charlotte marries a bald guy, whom everyone adores.

    • James1 says:

      02:14pm | 30/11/12

      Kika, I have no problem with anyone being made to look stupid in anything.  Indeed, Homer Simpson and Phillip J Fry are my two favourite characters from anything ever.  Further, I don’t feel that either are a comment on men more generally.

    • hammy says:

      01:36pm | 30/11/12

      Kika

      I said that to demonstrate your peculiar thought process, it’s not what I believe (though yet again we see you twist logic to advance your strange perception of the world), but I understand why you have to live in denial.  Reality doesn’t accord with your distorted view of the world and to accept life isn’t how you imagine it to be…is to you…unthinkable.

    • Kika says:

      12:55pm | 30/11/12

      Pffft - And I know that! That’s what I’m saying! ANY show that makes a mockery out of men and women in a degrading way should have some level of cricticsm. One is no better than the other. 2 and a half men make just as much of a mockery out of the men as it does the women.

      Jumping to conclusions, are we? Stop being an idiot. Read

      @Hammy “Women are feminist nutcases with an over-inflated opinion of self-entitlement without making any effort.  That they are somehow ‘deserving’ of this princess status and have to make no effort themselves.  Well not all women are like that. A lot are, but not all.  See how that works?”

      Hahaha issues and you are the one who said my family was dysfunctional. Hahahaha.

    • Slothy says:

      12:15pm | 30/11/12

      Tim - honestly, I have no idea, although given Hollywood’s addiction to reviving worn-out franchises (just kidding Hollywood! I can haz Serenity 2 now?) it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.

    • pffft says:

      11:40am | 30/11/12

      Kika… just be quiet please.
      there are plenty of shows on tv that cater to women and frequently make fun of men.
      people have mentioned sex and the city. perfect example. those women make fun / belittle men who are short, fat, bald, have small ‘equipment’ etc.
      yet the funny thing is there are more articles written about how good that show is for women and empowerment and freedom and all that, rather than how poorly it treats men. its just like two and a half men. people laugh at the outrageousness of it. no one is sitting at home taking notes from the show and saying oh right all women are dumb because that woman on that show is dumb / men should be womanisers because Charlie is etc.
      please just get a grip. you can see sexism in everything if you want. there are many examples of women being sexist and acting disgusting as well, but it seems you don’t see any of that.
      i saw a chat show where women were laughing that a woman cut her husband’s penis off and put it down the garbage disposal. no joke. it was sharon osbourne, and the audience were all laughing along that she was being so outrageous and saying how funny it was something like this happened. can u imagine a chat show of men laughing if some guy cut out his wife’s vagina and put it down the insinkerator? no… there would be an enormous uproar.

    • hammy says:

      11:08am | 30/11/12

      @Kika

      Women are feminist nutcases with an over-inflated opinion of self-entitlement without making any effort.  That they are somehow ‘deserving’ of this princess status and have to make no effort themselves.  Well not all women are like that. A lot are, but not all.  See how that works?

      “Why aren’t people saying that they are sick of this show making men out to be such stupid, sexist predatory buffoons?”

      Probably because men are able to determine what’s real in the world and what’s not.  Feminists apparently are unable to make that distinction.

    • Kika says:

      10:56am | 30/11/12

      James1 - Would you say the same if there was an advertisement making men out to be stupid? Wasn’t there a discussion here on the punch a few weeks back talking about how the media always make men out to be stupid?

      The media (and entertainment) is a mirror for our culture. It mirrors what people find funny. You aren’t going to make a successful TV show on things people don’t find funny. And if people find it funny making fun of bimbos, sleeping around, cheating on wives and girlfriends and making men out to misogynists then that says something about our culture. Of course not ALL people are like that. Who would? I know a few! But not all men are like that. Not all women are like that. But for some reason it makes us laugh.

    • Tim says:

      10:43am | 30/11/12

      Slothy,
      aren’t they making another movie?

      Sex and the City 5: Dentures and Dementia.

    • James1 says:

      10:37am | 30/11/12

      Well said Tim.  My thoughts exactly.  The “jokes” listed in the article speak more about a particular type of person - male or female - than they do about men and women generally.

    • Kika says:

      10:35am | 30/11/12

      Tim - Said maid is also fat and ugly because beautiful women aren’t smart and witty are they? And I have watched the show from time to time and have laughed but the topic of this thread is whether or not the show is ‘filth’, and there is no doubt the show plays upon stereotypes of both men and women.

      @K2 & Hammy - Sex and the City doesn’t laugh at the expense of males. It looks at women and are relationships with men. In fact if you have ever watched the show the men are the most sanest people in the entire series - Aidan and Steve were prime examples of this.

      @Hammy - So you are saying that not all men are like that? Yeah they aren’t. A lot are, but not all.  Why aren’t people saying that they are sick of this show making men out to be such stupid, sexist predatory buffoons?

    • hammy says:

      10:31am | 30/11/12

      Slothy, it’s still shown on Australian television.  There was a movie in 2008 and a sequel in 2010 (according to wikipedia) and there’s talk of a third, but don’t let facts get in the way of you cheap troll effort.

    • Slothy says:

      10:07am | 30/11/12

      Yeah hammy, I can’t figure out why The Punch isn’t writing articles about a show that went of the air in 2004 either.

    • Tim says:

      09:56am | 30/11/12

      How is the show degrading towards women?

      It shows weak and stupid men trying to pick up weak and stupid women. People freely choosing to live their lives how they want to.

      The only dominant and intelligent character is the female maid.

      It’s only offensive or degrading if you’re a simpering fool who can’t seperate a comedy tv show from reality.

    • hammy says:

      09:45am | 30/11/12

      Pretty sure that’s not what anyone said, what they point out is how women only find it offensive when it’s directed at them and that undermines their whole equal rights tirade.  How many Punch articles have you seen picking apart the sexist nature of Sex in the City - ahhhh none.

      I was waiting for a feminist to come on and twist the facts to suit themselves and their agenda.  Just because your family is dysfunctional, doesn’t mean the rest of us are.

    • K^2 says:

      09:39am | 30/11/12

      But I suppose that Sex in the City, Desperate Housewives, or The Good Wife, or Homeland are perfectly ok?

      Women with power just exercising their right, right?  Women of high fashion in a modern world being sexually liberated, or a powerful female lawyer that cheats on her (also cheating) husband and engages in all kinds of illegal, unethical ‘stuff’, or a CIA agent that uses her feminine wiles to “work an asset”, sure lets show women how sex can be used as yet another weapon. 

      Either you can see them all as entertainment, or none.
      And, to be honest, I never really enjoyed 2.5 Men, it was always average with a chuckle here or there, but mostly just vacuous entertainment, much like the other shows I listed at the top.  You know how it didn’t bother me?  I changed the channel.

      And you wonder why you’re earning the label misandrist?

    • Ohcomeon says:

      08:38am | 30/11/12

      The show is completely inoffensive and bland to the point of being wallpaper. Youd have to be raised in a convent to find this show offensive.

    • James1 says:

      08:59am | 30/11/12

      Exactly.  In today’s terms, this show is as PC as they come.  I think that is why it rates so highly in the US - because it contains jokes that only a fundamentalist Christian (or some feminists, apparently) could find edgy and offensive.

    • gobsmack says:

      08:29am | 30/11/12

      It’s a comedy about a couple of misogynists.

      Like “Till Death Us Do Part”, “All in the Family” and “Kingswood Country” were comedies featuring racists.  Just because we laughed at the antiquated attitudes of Alf Garnett, Archie Bunker and Ted Bullpitt, doesn’t mean we embraced those views.

      Currently my favourite comedy featuring a misogynist is the brilliant “Archer”.

    • SimpleSimon says:

      02:35pm | 30/11/12

      +1 million. Archer is excellent. Trying to track down season 3 at the moment.

    • Steve says:

      08:27am | 30/11/12

      This article is really just a continuation of a meme that the time of the world being ruled by old white males is over.  The headline is the clue.

      The meme started up after the PM ‘misogeny and sexism’ speech, and has been taken up by most of the progressive left..

    • Robert says:

      08:14am | 30/11/12

      Two and a Half Men is badly written fiction and I have no idea how it has lasted as long as it has. The bigger issue is that this poor confused teen is now claiming all these things about it based on an even worse work of fiction, that unfortunately some people insist is the truth that has caused more damage and ruined more lives than any sit com ever could

    • Robert says:

      08:14am | 30/11/12

      Two and a Half Men is badly written fiction and I have no idea how it has lasted as long as it has. The bigger issue is that this poor confused teen is now claiming all these things about it based on an even worse work of fiction, that unfortunately some people insist is the truth that has caused more damage and ruined more lives than any sit com ever could

    • Anna says:

      08:01am | 30/11/12

      Actually, two and a half men is filmed in front of a live audience (not just a single ostrich) at Warner Bros studios - not a laugh track. I had the option of seeing it or some other horrible sitcom that only lasted a season - I chose the latter. I find two and half men pretty atrocious, and I find it amazing it’s lasted so long. It’s not the show that’s so bad, it’s that people are actually watching it enough to keep it on television!

      It was pretty bad to sit through, having to laugh at every pause so they didn’t have to reshoot. But they reshoot each scene about 3 times anyway as they change the script each time. It’s amazing the jokes they decided to keep - mostly the ones I thought were racist or sexist were chosen over things that could be considered funny on their own merit.
      It took 4-5 hours to film a <30 minute show. It was excruciating - but good to see William Shatner in action!

    • Tel says:

      07:58am | 30/11/12

      Two and a Half Men buttered Angus T Jones’ bread rather lavishly for xx years - now he bites the hand .......?

      Any talk of him returning the cash?

    • Troy Flynn says:

      02:58pm | 30/11/12

      I’ll bet Chuck Lorre is trying to find a way to do that.

    • Toby says:

      07:33am | 30/11/12

      Why is it when this kid says the show is no good & he talks about God that we all refer to it as a rant? ...or he’s gone off the deep end?

      weird.. i thought it was when child actors snort drugs and drink drive etc.

      I personally liked the few seasons that I have seen, but there defintitely is better things you can do with your time.  Like watch Dexter perhaps.. now there’s a show! grin

      - tork
      dad blog

    • Markus says:

      08:43am | 30/11/12

      It’s a rant because he is continuing to do the show, and get paid extremely handsomely for it, in spite of his supposed deep moral objection to the content.

    • Mahhrat says:

      07:29am | 30/11/12

      “Three Half Men might be a better name…”

      And yet, in spite of the obvious quality of the article, once again we try to define men by how they treat women.

      I am utterly sick of this.  I am not “more” of a man because of how and with who I seek to have sex.  That is a 1950s view of masculinity and is as out of date as the 1950s housewife meme.  Stop it.

      *sigh*

      Apart from that, it’s a great article and absolutely correct.

    • Robin says:

      07:18am | 30/11/12

      So many knockers.  Simple, if you don’t like then don’t watch.  My partner and I tune in occasionally if we happen to be doing nothing.  Good for a laugh or two.  There are many things on the tube we don’t like, so we don’t watch, but don’t force our views on others.  Why is it that so many people these days seem to feel the need to show they are so educated, sophisticated and - of course - politically correct?  And of course, anyone who glances at two and a half men, or drinks a glass of VB, or tunes into the cricket must be a complete ‘bogan’.  Right?  Sad, narrow minded view of the world.

    • James1 says:

      11:14am | 30/11/12

      No, you made your point quite clearly, and I was agreeing with your central point in a roundabout way.  Some of us like things to be offensive and verging on unacceptable, some of us like things more middle of the road.  Some of us don’t want to have to think about why something is funny, some of us do, and some even like both.  My intention was to present one of the different perspectives you allude to.

      For the record, my favourite unsophisticated sitcom is Workaholics.

      I do disagree on the PC stuff though, however I think that is drawn from my different perspective.  I like my comedy to be particularly offensive - if I cringe and feel bad at the same time as laughing, that (to me) is the pinnacle of comedy.  To my mind, Two and a Half Men is quite tame, and deals with some pretty low-key social taboos (drug use, alcohol consumption, the equivalence of male and female promiscuity and being fat) in a way that I find it hard to find offensive.

    • robin says:

      10:41am | 30/11/12

      @James1 Good points there James.  However, what I find funny is exactly those three themes.  I have come across people like that and that is where the humour lies.  Of course, it is over the top parody, just like the drag queens parading at the Mardis Gras.  Anyway, as you said, we all know what makes us laugh. I actually think both Yes Minister and To The Manor Born are much funnier, but I don’t watch a lot of TV.  The point I was trying to make (and not too well I fear)  is that we should all just enjoy what we feel like without being labeled as somehow less than.  Hmmmm, I fear I am still not making my point.  Dammit, off for a cup of tea instead.  Have a great day James

    • James1 says:

      08:57am | 30/11/12

      Humour can be sophisticated and politically incorrect.  Angry Boys and Life’s Too Short come to mind for me.  In any case, Two and a Half Men, to my mind, is positively politically correct compared to some of the edgier comedy out there, especially the sort being produced by Louis CK, Ricky Gervais and the like.

      My problem with Two and a Half Men is that, to me, it isn’t funny. Charlie Sheen’s character is an alcoholic and a drug addict with little sense of dignity or self respect, the other guy is an absolutely weak spineless bastard similarly lacking in self respect and dignity, albeit for different reasons, and the kid was fat.  The only episode I watched, several years ago, only had jokes revolving around these three themes.  That is why I prefer Gervais or Louis CK - give me a good midget or rape joke (Louis CK does a killer one in his sitcom Louie - check it out on YouTube) any day over the sanitised, PC jokes offered by Two and a Half Men.

      I’m not saying other people shouldn’t watch it, or that they shouldn’t find it funny.  After all, people find Funniest Home Videos funny so it doesn’t surprise me that people like this show as well.  I’m just saying that it’s not for everyone, and our various criticisms are as valid as the praise from those who enjoy this show, and the other old fashioned, canned laugh track, US style, formulaic sitcoms.

    • fml says:

      07:16am | 30/11/12

      I don’t get it. How come what is essentially a male dream considered to be ‘filth’, a description you seemingly agree with but yet. A film about 4 middle aged women gallavanting around new york using men like “tissues” is considered to be symbolic of the feminist movement of the late 90’s?

      A concept such as mr right now, not mr right. Is considered an acceptable validation of women’s rights, yet if charlie does it, it is considered filth.. Why is that? I assume it must be in the delivery, right? The delivery being him and his noodley appendage.

    • marley says:

      03:28pm | 30/11/12

      @fml - actually, one of my favourite depictions of women was the feisty, sexy, capable Major Houlihan in MASH.  Emotional, hot-headed, but able to hold her own with the boys.

    • fml says:

      02:04pm | 30/11/12

      Marley,

      I suppose I was being somewhat literal, Charlies angel differs greatly from the subservient domestic house wife stereotype. As does SATC, and I don’t agree with either of the representations of women..

    • marley says:

      01:33pm | 30/11/12

      @fml - oh come on now.  Charlies’ Angels was designed purely for guys who wanted to fantasise about hot chicks with guns.  It wasn’t about rewriting the book on the female image.  Not that I disagree with your point, I just wouldn’t use that particular series to prove it.

    • fml says:

      12:25pm | 30/11/12

      Hc,

      “it was talking about how the show influenced the way females are portrayed on TV today and how this has changed from the prim, proper and subservient wife of the 1950’s, of which SATC has been influential for “

      You’re kidding me right? so shows like Charlies angels did nothing to change that percepetption, decades earlier? all SATC does is say that its ok to sleep around (which it is), two and a half men is exactly the same thing. What gets my goat is that SATC is seen as a fantastic piece of social commentary when it is nothing of the sort.

    • hammy says:

      11:54am | 30/11/12

      Kika,

      Not true,

      Charlie does want commitment to one woman, if you watched the show you would know this…he was nearly married on a few occasions and   strangely one he let go after she demanded he turn his back on his family.  The cad!

    • HC says:

      11:06am | 30/11/12

      @DF

      Funny how you conveniently forgot to mention how the Horseface and the creator also openly acknowledged how sexist the show was and how it would never fly on TV if the genders were reversed.

      And it wasn’t talking about Sex and the City being a great leap forward for feminism, it was talking about how the show influenced the way females are portrayed on TV today and how this has changed from the prim, proper and subservient wife of the 1950’s, of which SATC has been influential for good or ill.  Your definition of feminism is either very wrong or very stupid or your comprehension skills suck.

    • fml says:

      10:59am | 30/11/12

      Too right fred,

      I couldn’t think of anything worse than dating a SATC lady.

      Tim,

      I think we finally agree on something, I’ll bring the champers and the tipping dollars.

      Slothy,

      As misguided as it is, yes people are. I have even read some articles where some women (other feminists) are complaining that imitating the SATC lifestyle has lead them to be lonely and unhappy, much for the same reason fred proposes, which is most men do not want to be with women like that.

    • Kika says:

      10:48am | 30/11/12

      FML - what has Sex and the City got to do with it? Have you ever seen the show? I doubt it. If you did then you would be able to pass a valid comment.  They aren’t even in the same category. SATC doesn’t laugh at the expense of men. It’s a show about 4 friends and their lives and the way they deal with the world. The men in the show are some of the smartest, sanest ones amongst them. Like I said below, Aidan and Steve were brilliant yet the stupid women they were with took them for granted.  Mr Big was an ego driven millionaire who wouldn’t commit (which Carrie was ok with in the beginning) and after finally realising this and dropping him, moving to Paris with a really wonderful yet busy new guy who would have taken care of her she falls back for the alpha male and gets hurt again. She’s the idiot. Not the men. Carrie Bradshaw is the most frustrating and annoying character in the whole show.

      The point is Charlie never wants a Mrs right and wants to sample the entire 41 flavours without committing to a single one. The only one on SATC who didn’t want commitment was Samantha yet the men she was with at the time wanted the same thing.

    • DF says:

      10:43am | 30/11/12

      I was watching a doco on SBS about American Television during the week where SATC was being celebrated as a great leap forward in feminist television. With quotes from Sarah Jessica Horseface. So yes, Slothy, SATC is being held up as a fine representative of the feminist movement

    • Slothy says:

      09:51am | 30/11/12

      Huh? In what world is Sex and the City a feminist symbol? Yeah, some have tried to argue that you can enjoy Sex and the City as a feminist, but just as many have argued that it’s about as feminist as Zoo Weekly. Whichever interpretation you take (while I don’t like SATC I think you can enjoy problematic things while recognising their failings – see every Whedon show ever – but trying to rationalise them as actually feminist is ridiculous), it certainly can’t be seen to be representative of the feminist movement.

    • fred says:

      08:32am | 30/11/12

      FML as i have said to many female fans of sex and city in my office, if you think the 4 low life characters portrayed in sex and the city are to be aspired to, you will be single and lonely for a long long time. No man with a hint of intelligence will go near you.
      Meanwhile, 2.5 men is possibly the best of the worst tv shows on at the moment.

    • Tim says:

      08:27am | 30/11/12

      Simple,
      because any expression of female sexuality should be celebrated and revered whereas any expression of male sexuality should be demonised and reviled.

      It’s pretty much stock standard feminist logic.

    • BJ says:

      07:14am | 30/11/12

      It always amuses me that the people who hate Two and a Half Men like Sex in the City. In fact, there are many shows on TV where women hold all of the power in relationships.Shows where female characters win all arguments and end all relationships. Surely we can have one show where the men have the upper hand.

    • BJ says:

      06:45pm | 30/11/12

      @Sami

      I can listen to an episode of Neighbours, Grey’s Anatomy or Home and Away and tell if a female character is talking to a male or female character, just by the tone of her voice.

      There is hypergamy everywhere, but Winners and Losers is the most blatant example.

      There is also a long line of shows where females characters end all relationships and male characters didn’t engineer that result. Packed to the Rafters is one example.

      I cannot believe that people are shocked by having a TV character who is a pickup artist. A huge number of men in the real world act this way. The truly scary thing is the lack of sleazy men on other tv programs.

    • sami says:

      03:08pm | 30/11/12

      @BJ you must not have watched SATC at all then because I can assure you that it is not the case.
      “women hold all of the power in relationships”
      The main relationship in that show was between Big and Carrie, and Big was a jerk and dumped her/used her and she still kept running back to him like an idiot. How did she have the power there? She didn’t. The only woman in that show who had any ‘power’ was Samantha. But really all she was doing was being equal to the men- having sex with people and not being in relationships most of the time. The men were equal participants. None of them were getting hurt.

      If you reckon you can name a show where women legitimately ‘have the upper hand’, then I will show you an insight into what it’s like to live as a woman.

      @Cheeso1
      Those ads give me the poops also. They manage to insult men and women at the same time. Double whammy! I deliberately would never buy anything advertised in that way.

    • Slothy says:

      09:38am | 30/11/12

      Where do you get the idea that people who hate Two and a Half Men like Sex in the City?

    • Cheeso1 says:

      09:20am | 30/11/12

      +1 Also how many adverts denigrate men with the line ” It’s so simple even my husband can use it!”

    • ronny jonny says:

      09:06am | 30/11/12

      Me either. Two and a Half Men would be one of the lamest, dumbest shows on TV, made for morons. I don’t care that it’s sexist, I find it’s stupidity offensive.
      At least Sex in the City was well written and witty, quite clever actually. Sexist? Maybe, I don’t know but it certainly wasn’t dumb.

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      08:24am | 30/11/12

      I don’t like either of them.

    • Tubesteak says:

      07:06am | 30/11/12

      “sexually-opportunistic, cynical, self-satisfied lothario who uses women like tissues”

      This is precisely how a smart man lives life

      Even though the show is now a shadow of its former self - the only decent episode being when Walden was set up with different women - Charlie Harper was the paragon of modern man in the post-feminist relationship landscape

      The quotes you’ve used clearly demonstrate this. One of his best essentially said that if you’ve hot someone to clean your house, make you dinner and many women to have sex with then you’ve got it made

      Your offense at the show completely fails to see the other side of the equation because your mind is clouded by the over-inflated sense of entitlement and self-worth women have been fed by feminism

      The other side of the equation is what marriage has to offer men represented by Allan Harper: a completely emasculated financial mess of a man ruined by divorce at the hands of a woman that knew that once she had her claws in a man there was nothing compelling her to offer anything to the relationship. And she didn’t. A man would be a fool to shackle himself to a ball and chain that loses its value with age and doesn’t commensurately bring an equal value to the table these days when there’s so much on offer out there and so little on offer in a marriage

      Lets just hope young Angus doesn’t turn out to be another Kirk Cameron. Even though the show has been renewed for another season it should be laid to rest. Walden should have been an older version of Kelso but instead he was just another whiny clueless biatch. Could have been so much better

    • sami says:

      03:00pm | 30/11/12

      Wow. I don’t even know where to start with your comment…

      Okay let’s start with the definition of feminism, because somehow everyone seems to think it’s about women cutting your junk off. No. Here it is: equality for women and men (and, actually, anyone on the sex/gender spectrum).
      That’s all. Equality. Not a sudden takeover of everything by people with vaginas. Just equality. That may be scary because you’re used to having first dibs (or only dibs) at everything but it just means learning to share. Kids get taught that. You should be able to manage.

      “your mind is clouded by the over-inflated sense of entitlement and self-worth women have been fed by feminism”
      You mean what so many men (including you) currently have? How dare women want to have equal self worth as men. How dare they desire equal entitlements. Don’t they know they’re just boobs and a vagina? Get back in the kitchen!

      Jesus H. CHRIST! I know you’re trolling but I am so very very glad the men I know are not like you.

    • marley says:

      02:13pm | 30/11/12

      I think perhaps Benjamin Franklin’s advice to a young man who was thinking of taking a mistress bears repeating:

      “I repeat my former Advice, that in all your Amours you should prefer old Women to young ones. You call this a Paradox, and demand my Reasons. They are these:

      1. Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor’d with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreeable.

      2. Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman.

      3. Because there is no hazard of Children, which irregularly produc’d may be attended with much Inconvenience.

      4. Because thro’ more Experience, they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your Reputation. And with regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be rather inclin’d to excuse an old Woman who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his Manners by her good Counsels, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes.

      5. Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding2 only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement.

      6. Because the Sin is less. The debauching a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her for Life unhappy.

      7. Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend the making an old Woman happy.

      8thly and Lastly They are so grateful!!”

    • egg says:

      01:58pm | 30/11/12

      Tubesteak, you’ve got some real emotional issues going on. Seriously. I don’t even understand where an attitude like yours comes from.

      Weird.

    • Mr GG says:

      01:53pm | 30/11/12

      @Peanuts
      So you delay the Inevitable????
      Serisously women get older too, plenty of Widows and Divorcees sure 40 year olds are not desirable when young but when your 50+.
      And Most women turn into tyrants after the honeymoon so your Fat Bald Guy still got an extra decade or more of uncommitted sex with different women before he suffered that fate. atleast he was happy for a long time as opposed to the married man that surrenders all happiness.

      Men are not looking for fairytales, we know there are down sides but it still seems to be the lesser of 2 evils.

    • Peanuts says:

      01:12pm | 30/11/12

      And the happy man grows older, fatter, balder and loses his choice of women to sleep with. If he isn’t rich (as Charlie was) then he has even less chance. So he grows older, balder, fatter and more lonely until he settles for a mail-order bride who acts sweet and lovely in the first years and then turns into a tyrant once she realises that she, in fact, settled for the old, boring, fat, ugly man who must rely on Viagra to remain interesting - if she can wake him.

    • The Free says:

      10:35am | 30/11/12

      Exactamundo.

      A man who makes money, pays someone to do the chores and has regular sex is entitled to be happy.  This claptrap that men must commit to a relationship is perpetuated by those who somehow think seeing a man divorced, not seeing his kids and broke is a better deal.

      Who would (feminists) that be (feminists)?

      Feminists

    • Antifeminist One says:

      08:34am | 30/11/12

      Tearful, standing ovation.  Well said young man.

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      07:06am | 30/11/12

      And people say rape culture doesn’t exist…

    • PsychoHyena says:

      02:43pm | 30/11/12

      @Kika, but by saying that someone is incapable of providing consent while drunk you are saying that any consent they give is therefore illegitimate, and because that consent is illegitimate then rape has been committed. Now by the legal definition of rape, men are the most likely to be charged, unless women digitally or otherwise penetrate someone.

    • Mr GG says:

      01:41pm | 30/11/12

      @Kika
      NOT a single person but you has said anything about someone that doesn’t want to have sex.
      She wants to have sex because she is drunk (tipsy) when she was sober she was more uptight.

    • Kika says:

      12:46pm | 30/11/12

      God you fools love to jump to conclusions. 1) I’m not a feminist and 2) I never said drunken sex was wrong. It is when the other person doesn’t want to have sex!

    • Tubesteak says:

      12:30pm | 30/11/12

      Women are the biggest contributors to “rape culture” by holding themselves up on pedestals that have to be wooed into bed. In doing so they objectify themselves and hold themselves out to be prizes to be won.

      Not that I condone a term such as “rape culture”. It’s part of the Feminist Victimhood Entitlement Reinforcement Brigade Manual.

    • Tim says:

      11:25am | 30/11/12

      Kika,
      “It may surprise you that you have the right to say no even if you are drunk”

      Of course, I don’t think anyone’s ever argued that you couldn’t. Nice strawman.

      ” if you are intoxicated you are unable to give consent.”

      That’s the point, what if they’re both drunk? How is it that the man can still legally consent but the woman can’t?

      “taking advantage of her in trying to lure her into sex “

      How is two drunk people having sex, “taking advantage of her”? Do you automatically think all women are victims of men?

      I have a real problem with allowing the intoxication of someone to determine whether a crime has been committed. It’s an extremely tricky and grey area.

    • pffft says:

      11:16am | 30/11/12

      @nathan explosion…
      are you one of those people who think women should not be held accountable for their decisions / actions?
      women are just as capable as men as deciding to drink or not. in fact there are signs that young women today drink MORE than young men. anyway that’s neither here nor there, my point is that just because a young women gets drunk, makes loose decisions and has sex with a guy and then regrets it in the morning, that DOES NOT equal rape. there is a big difference between that and some girl who drinks herself to the point of being unconcious and then gets taken advantage of.
      please try and live in the real world and not some crazy hate filled fantasy world where all men are predators and all women are victims.

    • The Free says:

      11:12am | 30/11/12

      Hi Kika and welcome back to the conversation.

      Words are fun and easy to use.  As I can see from your comment, you love to use them too.  Perhaps even to stray a point from a premise or to exact a premise and extrapolate a slippery ole’ point from there.

      Weeeee!

      Are you saying that someone who gets drunk and has sex is raped?

      See how that works?

      Either you are responsible for your actions or not, ergo I believe that if you get drunk you are still responsible by law for your actions.  Consenting to do something whilst drunk is the same as taking willful action whilst intoxicated.

      You can try and murk the waters but you’ll get no cigar.

    • hammy says:

      11:01am | 30/11/12

      Well thanks for proving your dysfunctionality in such a vivid light Kika.

      Despite your twisted and warped feminist view of the world.  Let me break it to you…the rest of the world has sex after having consumed alcohol.  The rest of the world has sex sometimes having had too much alcohol.  The rest of the world is able to provide consent in those circumstances.  The courts look at unconscious or near unconscious as being impaired and unable to provide proper consent.  I have seen this explanation from a Judge in court.

      If drunken sex equated to rape according to your demented definition, a lot of women would be in jail right now.

      No one mentioned someone not having the right to say no…that was a weak strawman on your behalf, but I am not surprised given the lack of logical thought you demonstrate.  I feel sorry for the males in your life.

    • Kika says:

      10:58am | 30/11/12

      The Free - well maybe the tree would be able to have a claim against the women as it didn’t consent to being wiped out by her. Comparing the wilful actions of drunk who hurts nobody but herself (and anyone sitting in the car) with that of taking advantage of her in trying to lure her into sex is completely wrong.

      You can’t see that you are talking about different things? Or are you saying that if the woman gets drunk it’s ‘her fault’ she gets raped?

    • Kika says:

      10:40am | 30/11/12

      Hammy - I find it disturbing that you don’t think it does. It may surprise you that you have the right to say no even if you are drunk and if you are intoxicated you are unable to give consent.  My word… Who’s the dysfunctional one now?

    • The Free says:

      10:31am | 30/11/12

      So Nath, If a woman gets drunk and wraps her car around a tree is the man to blame?

    • Markus says:

      10:22am | 30/11/12

      @hammy, under current laws it actually does.
      Intoxicated = unable to provide unimpaired consent = rape.
      It only works one way though.

    • hammy says:

      10:03am | 30/11/12

      In addition, having sex while drunk doesn’t equate to rape.

    • Tim says:

      09:47am | 30/11/12

      Nathan,
      one joke equates a culture?

      And you’re reading that comment as if it means Alan should get her drunk to have sex with her. It doesn’t.

      Normalising massive overreactions to innocuous comments is exactly why we have a victim industry in this country.

    • Nathan Explosion says:

      09:01am | 30/11/12

      @Tim and @Antifeminist One

      There’s this line:

      Charlie: “Alan, let me give you a piece of advice. Alcohol impairs your ability to make good decisions. We don’t want you to lose that ability… we want her to.”

      Yeah, let’s get girls drunk and have sex with them! Normalising that sort of behavious is *exactly* what rape culture is.

    • Antifeminist One says:

      08:30am | 30/11/12

      If by rape culture, you mean Rape Hysteria Inustry, then sure!

    • Tim says:

      08:25am | 30/11/12

      And people are correct.

      Can you please explain who’s ever been raped or promoted rape on that show?

    • K says:

      06:57am | 30/11/12

      *canned laughter*

    • hammy says:

      06:47am | 30/11/12

      Outrage fail.

    • Tim says:

      06:39am | 30/11/12

      Wow,
      Some people really do see what they want to see don’t they.

    • Cheeso1 says:

      06:35am | 30/11/12

      Great show. Thanks for making me laugh with some fine old lines.

    • macca says:

      01:23pm | 30/11/12

      Agreed, that eating disorder bit is classic!

    • John says:

      06:21am | 30/11/12

      Two and a Half Men is Tony Abbott’s favorite TV show. There is no mystery as to why. The only mystery is whether Abbott draws inspiration from the show’s writers or whether they draw inspiration from him.

    • Len says:

      07:15am | 30/11/12

      Lame lame lame….John really needs to buy the Dummies Guide to Trolling.

    • Fred says:

      07:01am | 30/11/12

      John is up early this morning trying to somehow make a link to Tony Abbott on every punch article. Let me guess, when the punch does a story on the dinosaur extinction John will be on here linking that to Tony Abbott…John you rusted on labor stooge!

    • waynevan says:

      06:06am | 30/11/12

      Ok, so he’s grown up and developed a world-view that the d-grade smutfest he’s been a part of for half his life doesn’t sit well with. I hope he leaves it to drown in its own vomit and goes on to do something worthwhile with his talent.

    • gobsmack says:

      08:22am | 30/11/12

      What talent?

      He got the part years ago because he was a cute little fat kid who could feed lines to the grown-ups.

    • BJ says:

      07:08am | 30/11/12

      He may well be idealistic now, but a few relationships will cure him of that.

    • Hobart hero says:

      05:56am | 30/11/12

      I have often wondered what Charlie Sheen acted in. Now i know. Surely with a script like that the series could not be broadcast on public television in America?

    • medium ted says:

      11:35am | 30/11/12

      Crocoduck = platapus

    • subotic says:

      09:11am | 30/11/12

      @Bertrand, another wasted talent on this site, I swear…

    • Mr. Jordon says:

      09:03am | 30/11/12

      Bertrand

      You just did it too well.

    • Bertrand says:

      08:44am | 30/11/12

      It appears some people don’t get:
      a. Sarcasm
      b. Kirk Cameron references.

    • Markus says:

      08:36am | 30/11/12

      @Timinane, Buffy ran for seven seasons, and some would say that was four seasons too long.
      Sure Firefly got canned after one season, but so did a laundry list of other Fox shows around that time. It was a financially precarious time and the show just wasn’t rating at all.

      And Dollhouse sucked.

    • Darwin's monkeyboy says:

      07:20am | 30/11/12

      Bertrand, the evolutionary lines diverged so long ago, and mutated so many times over millions of generations (yes, mutations are part of the process, albeit a small one), that those species are incompatible on so many levels, the important one being a genetic difference.

      For the same reason a mule is sterile, any crossing of species just one step too far removed results in a discontinuation of that genetic line.  So you would never get a crocogator, let alone a crocoduck.

      Have a happy Friday, read some Richard Dawkins…it isn’t as heavy as it first appears.

    • freethrow says:

      07:14am | 30/11/12

      Checkmate Bertrand!

    • Timinane says:

      06:54am | 30/11/12

      Funny thing is we actually breed the wild banana to have those traits.

      Anyway onto actual topic the majority of writers in America are male, very few female and one of the few male writers who write strong female characters tends to get screwed over by networks who cancel his series. But he directed the avengers so now Nick Fury is on the side of Joss Whedon.

    • Bertrand says:

      06:10am | 30/11/12

      Mr. Jordon, if evolution is real, please explain why I’ve never seen a crocoduck?

    • acotrel says:

      05:28am | 30/11/12

      ‘dire warning that TV as he knows it “rots your brain’‘, you may think he a bit of a point.’

      If it is not the Australian Broadcasting Corporation he is talking about - have you seen ‘Redfern Now’ ?
      It will be difficult for the commercial channels to top that !

    • Anubis says:

      08:58am | 30/11/12

      I would have thought that this would have been one of your favourite shows acotrel. I can picture you reading this Punch piece and nodding in agreement to all those points. As a confirmed misogynist it would be right in your ball field.

    • TracyH says:

      05:59am | 30/11/12

      It’s great, acotel! Same with the excellent docos on SBS such as the current Why Poverty. The ABC and SBS channels are chokers full of good viewing. And I’m a Liberal voter, so I can’t be accused of being brainwashed ‘by the Leftie ABC’.

    • James D says:

      05:15am | 30/11/12

      So don’t watch it. Don’t get all high and mighty and tell people what to do. Just ignore the show. Watch something you like. Simple.

    • Chris L says:

      03:12pm | 30/11/12

      It’s not only fair to criticize, James1, it’s also fun!

    • Sam says:

      11:11am | 30/11/12

      “Since the show is still running I would think it’s safe to say there are a lot of people who enjoy it.”

      It was the 8th highest ranked show for ratings in the US last year. Out of the 10 seasons, it has only dropped out of being on of the 20 highest rating shows for 1 year (it was 21). That is an impressive track record.

    • James1 says:

      10:41am | 30/11/12

      To be fair, she doesn’t say people should not watch it, nor does she tell anyone what to do.  She simply criticises the show.

      It’s still okay for us to criticise things we don’t like, right?

    • subotic says:

      10:27am | 30/11/12

      If only stupidity actually hurt.....

    • Big Jobs says:

      09:17am | 30/11/12

      Gotta love a quasi feminist…..

    • James D says:

      09:05am | 30/11/12

      Ahh Colin. Your troll is denied. Try harder next time.

    • Chris L says:

      08:52am | 30/11/12

      Agreed. If nobody was enjoying the show it would have no ratings and would be taken off the air.

      Since the show is still running I would think it’s safe to say there are a lot of people who enjoy it.

      There is no law saying we have to watch it if we don’t want to.

    • Colin says:

      08:41am | 30/11/12

      James D, If you don’t like Angus Jones’ advice, don’t listen to him. Don’t get all high and mighty and tell people what to do. Just ignore what he says. Listen to someone you like. Simple.

    • Woodsy says:

      07:19am | 30/11/12

      Exactly! Now the shrill brigade are just deliberately going out and finding something to get hysterical about.

    • Trevor says:

      07:04am | 30/11/12

      Real housewives of Orange County is much more wholesome viewing.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter