Why does Big Bang Theory piss off academics?

[Nautiloid]

Mostly what other people have said about the comedy focusing on stereotypes is true for me as well. Maybe I'm just a naturally snobby hipster academic with no sense of humor though. Also, waaaaaay too much laugh-track. There's a maddening dissonance that happens when I see something that I don't find funny, but the sound of pre-recorded laughter erupts and I feel compelled to laugh with them regardless. 

[MakeYourself]

 

You do know that my opinion does not denote 'right' and 'wrong', don't you?

[MakeYourself]

Bialik has a neuroscience PhD, but is not a practicing scientist. She also holds pretty anti-science views--she's vocally anti-vaccine. Having a PhD doesn't mean that she is an ideal celebrity ambassador for science, and in fact her degree may do more damage than good as it gives perceived weight to an anti-science argument outside her area of expertise. Her arguments on public platforms undercut scientific experts who argue differently but are not in the popular spotlight, and makes people think that some scientists or fields are less legitimate or rigorous than others. Further, the views she advocates have seriously negative public health consequences--consider, eg, the rapid rise of measles in the US over the last decade largely driven by the anti-vaccine movement.

 

From the CDC:

"Ninety percent of all measles cases in the United States were in people who were not vaccinated or whose vaccination status was unknown....Clusters of people with like-minded beliefs (against vaccinations) can be susceptible to outbreaks when the disease is imported, and it's one of the most contagious diseases." (http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/t0529-measeles.html)

 

Moral of the story: if you don't like vaccines, don't go abroad. Also, you are effing up herd immunity and endangering others who can't take a particular vaccine for valid medical reasons (eg infancy, pregnancy, otherwise immunocompromised--here is a handy infographic: http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/).

 

PS I've never watched the show, but someone else complained to me that it is ridiculous that a character would be working as a waitress to pay for graduate work in microbiology--no one is admitted to such a  program without external or departmental funding. I'm not sure that qualifies as pissing anyone off, but it is a complaint by an academic about the show.

 

I wouldn't classify her views as 'anti-science'

[m-ttl]

Because apparently this is how the show is written:

 

Or:

 

• It's not actually funny. The joke is "haha look at these losers". I find that boring. 
• I don't actually see anything related to myself as an "academic" so I think you mean STEM Academics. I could care less -- though I was raised by an original wave D&D player, it incidentally, has little to do with "academia" for me. I was raised in nerd/geek culture but I still find much of it detestable (see: San Diego Comicon refuses to admit there is a sexual harassment problem at Cons)
• We're also expected to laugh when a woman wanders into a comic book shop "is she lost?" instead of realizing this is not weird or unusual and also not a joke. We're expected to laugh when things that look like gay advances are played out between male characters - we're supposed to find "predatory lesbian advances" funny (between Penny and Amy). We're supposed to laugh at "quirky" qualities that remind us of Aspergers. It's not funny. It's sexist, it's ableist, it's homophobic, it's racist. This is old and tired and boring. 

Oh boo hoo.

 

Stereotypes have a purpose, there are many stereotypes that are true and many generalizations that one could make about any group of people. Academics are often geeks and nerds, it's the truth, suck it up. Yes, the show is over-exaggerated but it's a comedy show on cable TV, it's not setting out to be a realistic portrayal of life, it's just playing on common stereotypes which can be funny - it's okay to laugh at yourself once in a while. Also, I think it is one of the better-written sitcoms on cable TV right now (which is not saying much cause sitcoms suck pretty bad nowadays).

 

And I'm not sure how much you've watched the show, but they make the audience laugh at Penny as well. Penny's role is not necessarily to be the 'normal' one, her role is contrasted with the main 'geeky' characters and the show makes just as much fun of her as they do of the geeks.

 

If anything, the 'normal' non-academic people that I know who watch the show love the academic characters and think that the show has made 'geeky' cool. It seems like academics are the only ones angry about being called geeks, but it is what you make it.

 

 

I think this just implies you were going to refuse all counter-arguments from the beginning. "stereotypes have a purpose". 

 

Yes! They do serve a purpose in our culture -- for anyone out there studying human behavior, sociology, media studies, humanities & what have you, we know this. Even a quick wikipedia will tell you what that purpose is!:

 

Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are understood as related but different concepts.^{[8][9][10][11]} Stereotypes are regarded as the most cognitive component and often occurs without conscious awareness, whereas prejudice is the affective component of stereotyping and discrimination is the behavioral component of prejudicial reactions.^[8][9][12] In this tripartite view of intergroup attitudes, stereotypes reflect expectations and beliefs about the characteristics of members of groups perceived as different from one's own, prejudice represents the emotional response, and discrimination refers to actions.^[8][9]

Although related, the three concepts can exist independently of each other.^[9][13] According to Daniel Katz and Kenneth Braly, stereotyping leads to racial prejudice when people emotionally react to the name of a group, ascribe characteristics to members of that group, and then evaluate those characteristics.^[10]

Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes^[3] are:

• Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance

• Unwillingness to rethink one's attitudes and behavior towards stereotyped groups

• Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from entering or succeeding in activities or fields^[14]

 

 

 

huh. Who would have thought, right? You mean like how women don't enter STEM fields at the same rates as men do? Weird, right? Our Media and culture couldn't POOOOSSSIBLY affect this phenomenon, right?

 

The audience laughs at Penny because Penny (a woman) is the joke. That's it. The crux of the humor regarding Penny is she's a funny dumb girl who doesn't "get" nerd culture. 

 

And I'm sick and tired of bad, lazy writing which alienates me. It has nothing to do with feeling misrepresented as a nerd and everything to do with a lack of basic human decency and respect towards being a woman in the "nerd" culture. Other sitcoms exist. I pretend TBBT doesn't. 

Edited June 4, 2014 by m-ttl

[GeoDUDE!]

You do know that my opinion does not denote 'right' and 'wrong', don't you?

 

Then what value does your opinion have? If you say you don't think something should happen, then basically say there is no truth value to that opinion, why even give it in the first place. Geeze.

Edited June 4, 2014 by GeoDUDE!

[MakeYourself]

Because apparently this is how the show is written:

 

Or:

 

• It's not actually funny. The joke is "haha look at these losers". I find that boring. 
• I don't actually see anything related to myself as an "academic" so I think you mean STEM Academics. I could care less -- though I was raised by an original wave D&D player, it incidentally, has little to do with "academia" for me. I was raised in nerd/geek culture but I still find much of it detestable (see: San Diego Comicon refuses to admit there is a sexual harassment problem at Cons)
• We're also expected to laugh when a woman wanders into a comic book shop "is she lost?" instead of realizing this is not weird or unusual and also not a joke. We're expected to laugh when things that look like gay advances are played out between male characters - we're supposed to find "predatory lesbian advances" funny (between Penny and Amy). We're supposed to laugh at "quirky" qualities that remind us of Aspergers. It's not funny. It's sexist, it's ableist, it's homophobic, it's racist. This is old and tired and boring. 

 

 

I think this just implies you were going to refuse all counter-arguments from the beginning. "stereotypes have a purpose". 

 

Yes! They do serve a purpose in our culture -- for anyone out there studying human behavior, sociology, media studies, humanities & what have you, we know this. Even a quick wikipedia will tell you what that purpose is!:

 

Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are understood as related but different concepts.^{[8][9][10][11]} Stereotypes are regarded as the most cognitive component and often occurs without conscious awareness, whereas prejudice is the affective component of stereotyping and discrimination is the behavioral component of prejudicial reactions.^[8][9][12] In this tripartite view of intergroup attitudes, stereotypes reflect expectations and beliefs about the characteristics of members of groups perceived as different from one's own, prejudice represents the emotional response, and discrimination refers to actions.^[8][9]

Although related, the three concepts can exist independently of each other.^[9][13] According to Daniel Katz and Kenneth Braly, stereotyping leads to racial prejudice when people emotionally react to the name of a group, ascribe characteristics to members of that group, and then evaluate those characteristics.^[10]

Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes^[3] are:

• Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance

• Unwillingness to rethink one's attitudes and behavior towards stereotyped groups

• Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from entering or succeeding in activities or fields^[14]

 

 

 

huh. Who would have thought, right? You mean like how women don't enter STEM fields at the same rates as men do? Weird, right? Our Media and culture couldn't POOOOSSSIBLY affect this phenomenon, right?

 

The audience laughs at Penny because Penny (a woman) is the joke. That's it. The crux of the humor regarding Penny is she's a funny dumb girl who doesn't "get" nerd culture. 

 

And I'm sick and tired of bad, lazy writing which alienates me. It has nothing to do with feeling misrepresented as a nerd and everything to do with a lack of basic human decency and respect towards being a woman in the "nerd" culture. Other sitcoms exist. I pretend TBBT doesn't. 

 

Dang, this post is a lot of wasted effort.

[MakeYourself]

Then what value does your opinion have? If you say you don't think something should happen, then basically say there is no truth value to that opinion, why even give it in the first place. Geeze.

 

How dare you imply that my opinion is wrong or that it's wrong for me to feel a certain way.

[thedig13]

Because apparently this is how the show is written:

 

Or:

 

• It's not actually funny. The joke is "haha look at these losers". I find that boring. 
• I don't actually see anything related to myself as an "academic" so I think you mean STEM Academics. I could care less -- though I was raised by an original wave D&D player, it incidentally, has little to do with "academia" for me. I was raised in nerd/geek culture but I still find much of it detestable (see: San Diego Comicon refuses to admit there is a sexual harassment problem at Cons)
• We're also expected to laugh when a woman wanders into a comic book shop "is she lost?" instead of realizing this is not weird or unusual and also not a joke. We're expected to laugh when things that look like gay advances are played out between male characters - we're supposed to find "predatory lesbian advances" funny (between Penny and Amy). We're supposed to laugh at "quirky" qualities that remind us of Aspergers. It's not funny. It's sexist, it's ableist, it's homophobic, it's racist. This is old and tired and boring. 

 

 

I think this just implies you were going to refuse all counter-arguments from the beginning. "stereotypes have a purpose". 

 

Yes! They do serve a purpose in our culture -- for anyone out there studying human behavior, sociology, media studies, humanities & what have you, we know this. Even a quick wikipedia will tell you what that purpose is!:

 

Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are understood as related but different concepts.^{[8][9][10][11]} Stereotypes are regarded as the most cognitive component and often occurs without conscious awareness, whereas prejudice is the affective component of stereotyping and discrimination is the behavioral component of prejudicial reactions.^[8][9][12] In this tripartite view of intergroup attitudes, stereotypes reflect expectations and beliefs about the characteristics of members of groups perceived as different from one's own, prejudice represents the emotional response, and discrimination refers to actions.^[8][9]

Although related, the three concepts can exist independently of each other.^[9][13] According to Daniel Katz and Kenneth Braly, stereotyping leads to racial prejudice when people emotionally react to the name of a group, ascribe characteristics to members of that group, and then evaluate those characteristics.^[10]

Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes^[3] are:

• Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance

• Unwillingness to rethink one's attitudes and behavior towards stereotyped groups

• Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from entering or succeeding in activities or fields^[14]

 

 

 

huh. Who would have thought, right? You mean like how women don't enter STEM fields at the same rates as men do? Weird, right? Our Media and culture couldn't POOOOSSSIBLY affect this phenomenon, right?

 

The audience laughs at Penny because Penny (a woman) is the joke. That's it. The crux of the humor regarding Penny is she's a funny dumb girl who doesn't "get" nerd culture. 

 

And I'm sick and tired of bad, lazy writing which alienates me. It has nothing to do with feeling misrepresented as a nerd and everything to do with a lack of basic human decency and respect towards being a woman in the "nerd" culture. Other sitcoms exist. I pretend TBBT doesn't. 

 

You're my new hero. This is pretty much a flawless summary of everything I dislike about TBBT.

 

I was going to write a longer post raising many of the same points, but chickened out and settled for a shorter, two-line post (#24). So, thank you so much for vocalizing your thoughts, which, incidentally, mirror my own.

Edited June 4, 2014 by thedig13

[GeoDUDE!]

How dare you imply that my opinion is wrong or that it's wrong for me to feel a certain way.

 

I don't know how you even derived that, so I'll explain further.

 

You state that that you have an opinion, but this then this opinion has no truth value. These are your words. you say "You do know that my opinion does not denote 'right' and 'wrong', don't you?". So then I asked, what the point of the opinion was. 

 

Anyway, this is proving to be useless. You asked a question of us, probably knowing the answer. I will bow out. 

[Sigaba]

Dang, this post is a lot of wasted effort.

 

Ah, irony.

[ss2player]

You're my new hero. This is pretty much a flawless summary of everything I dislike about TBBT.

 

I was going to write a longer post raising many of the same points, but chickened out and settled for a shorter, two-line post (#24). So, thank you so much for vocalizing your thoughts, which, incidentally, mirror my own.

 

WORD

 

[thedig13]

Dang, this post is a lot of wasted effort.

 

MakeYourself, perhaps you should read your own question: "Why does Big Bang Theory piss off academics?"

 

M-ttl is an academic who dislikes TBBT, and, in Post 29, vocalized his/her problems with the show. By virtue of these facts, Post 29 is an answer to the very question which you used as the title for this thread. When people devote time and energy to answering your questions in a well-thought-out, considerate, and thoughtful fashion, perhaps you should respond with something less rude than "Boo hoo, stereotypes have a purpose" or "This post is a lot of wasted effort."

 

If you didn't want our answers, then you shouldn't have posted the question to begin with.

[m-ttl]

MakeYourself, perhaps you should read your own question: "Why does Big Bang Theory piss off academics?"

 

M-ttl is an academic who dislikes TBBT, and, in Post 29, vocalized his/her problems with the show. By virtue of these facts, Post 29 is an answer to the very question which you used as the title for this thread. When people devote time and energy to answering your questions in a well-thought-out, considerate, and thoughtful fashion, perhaps you should respond with something less rude than "Boo hoo, stereotypes have a purpose" or "This post is a lot of wasted effort."

 

If you didn't want our answers, then you shouldn't have posted the question to begin with.

 

They won't bother. They don't want answers -- especially not from women who object to being dismissed. That's it. That's the crux of it -- I find the show offensive and dismissive and because they don't like my opinions and the fact that I object to marginalization as "humor", they will dismiss my objections. Big Bang Theory pisses me off for this exact reason. I couldn't ask for a more clear illustration of my objection to the show, its writing, and the attitudes that follow it.  

 

They did not want an actual answer to their question, they wanted validation and to feel superior. 

Edited June 4, 2014 by m-ttl

[MakeYourself]

lol you guys know me so well.

[Vene]

How dare you imply that my opinion is wrong or that it's wrong for me to feel a certain way.

Something being your opinion doesn't mean it can't also be wrong.

[MakeYourself]

Something being your opinion doesn't mean it can't also be wrong.

Hey guys, do you know what sarcasm is?

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I went to community college. So I get offended when I see The Wire. It's so real. 

[Usmivka]

I wouldn't classify her views as 'anti-science'

She is a spokeswoman for the Holistic Moms Network, which advocates taking a pass on most of the medical advances of the last two centuries. It certainly isn't a pro-science position. It's great that she speaks about a passion that brought her to science, but her views are dissonant with the best scientific consensus and the extensive body of work conducted by researchers stretching back to Edward Jenner and his vaccine for smallpox in 1798. Without ever having seen this show, I find it problematic as an academic becuase it gives Bialik increased prominence for ascientific (fair alternative to anti-science?) nonsense that endangers lives, as I outlined above.

 

Dang, this post is a lot of wasted effort.

Ah, irony.

Yes indeed. People answered the question you asked, and you immediately started poking holes in their feelings and perceptions. I too was raised on the maxim that "you can't argue with how someone else feels," and I think your response to m-ttl was awfully dismissive. I perceive that as saying that while you expect everyone else to read your posts in detail, you can't be bothered to try and understand the arguments of someone directly responding to the question you posed.

Edited June 4, 2014 by Usmivka

[Usmivka]

Hey guys, do you know what sarcasm is?

Something you aren't very good at expressing in these posts. It is hard in text, which is why I don't even try. Gnome is offering a good primer though. Can someone upvote him for me? I'm out of plusses for the day.

Edited June 4, 2014 by Usmivka

[MakeYourself]

Ah, irony.

 

Lucky for me I put zero effort into my posts!

[MakeYourself]

They won't bother. They don't want answers -- especially not from women who object to being dismissed. That's it. That's the crux of it -- I find the show offensive and dismissive and because they don't like my opinions and the fact that I object to marginalization as "humor", they will dismiss my objections. Big Bang Theory pisses me off for this exact reason. I couldn't ask for a more clear illustration of my objection to the show, its writing, and the attitudes that follow it.  

 

They did not want an actual answer to their question, they wanted validation and to feel superior. 

Yeah screw the man!

[Guest Gnome Chomsky]

I didn't know people could have such a serious opinion about The Big Bang Theory. I don't even feel that strongly about 9/11. 

[MakeYourself]

I didn't know people could have such a serious opinion about The Big Bang Theory. I don't even feel that strongly about 9/11. 

Well, I originally started the thread as a 'fun' thread because I too think it is funny that academics have strong opinions on it, but I think I've offended some people now. Ooops.

[thedig13]

Lucky for me I put zero effort into my posts!

 

... Said the one who wrote this wonderfully delightful short essay less than 24 hours ago:

 

Oh boo hoo.

 

Stereotypes have a purpose, there are many stereotypes that are true and many generalizations that one could make about any group of people. Academics are often geeks and nerds, it's the truth, suck it up. Yes, the show is over-exaggerated but it's a comedy show on cable TV, it's not setting out to be a realistic portrayal of life, it's just playing on common stereotypes which can be funny - it's okay to laugh at yourself once in a while. Also, I think it is one of the better-written sitcoms on cable TV right now (which is not saying much cause sitcoms suck pretty bad nowadays).

 

And I'm not sure how much you've watched the show, but they make the audience laugh at Penny as well. Penny's role is not necessarily to be the 'normal' one, her role is contrasted with the main 'geeky' characters and the show makes just as much fun of her as they do of the geeks.

 

If anything, the 'normal' non-academic people that I know who watch the show love the academic characters and think that the show has made 'geeky' cool. It seems like academics are the only ones angry about being called geeks, but it is what you make it.

 

 

 

 

Yeah screw the man!

 

Wow. Your statements are so damn eloquent. Can you please be my tutor? Between your unmatched skill as a writer and your capacities as a critical thinker, as well as your natural affinity for engaging in stimulating, intellectual conversation without allowing it to devolve into immature mocking, I wouldn't be surprised if you turn out to be the next Noam Chomsky or Edward Said. Seriously.

Edited June 4, 2014 by thedig13

[MakeYourself]

... Said the one who wrote this wonderfully delightful short essay less than 24 hours ago:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow. Your statements are so damn eloquent. Can you please be my tutor? Between your unmatched skill as a writer and your capacities as a critical thinker, as well as your natural affinity for engaging in stimulating, intellectual conversation without allowing it to devolve into immature mocking, I wouldn't be surprised if you turn out to be the next Noam Chomsky or Edward Said. Seriously.

Yeah first I made an outline and then I prepared a draft and had to revise multiple versions to type out 4 sentences on an online forum.

Thanks for the compliment, it was what I was going for.