The Complete Trans Failure of The Simpsons - Video Essay - Lily Simpson - May 18, 2023

Apparently Bud Light partnered with a trans TikTok star and people got angry and stopped buying the beer. Not very nice and unfortunately not very surprising either.
 
I’m bi sexual and I have gay/trans friends. I said everything I wanted to say. I’m not censoring myself at all. I’ve been very open on this site with everyone here. I’ve admitted to being an opiate dependent drug user. Ive faced some pretty horrible stigmas in my life and I’ve been through a lot. The only thing that upset me was the video that was posted on here when he said that the simpsons have no relevance because they haven’t made an episode about trans values. I didn’t watch the whole video but that’s the feel I got from it. I could have worded my post differently but it was hastily made when I was on break at work. I would never censor myself I’m going to say what I want to say.
 
Ah, you're checking all the classic boxes there:

A) "I can't be transphobic, I have trans friends!"

B) Some unrelated pity sympathetic thing to distract people from dogging on you.

C) Dancing around the issue but not actually apologising because you're not sorry at all.

Do elaborate on the mindset that went into typing out and posting "shoving trans values down our throats" and what possible way that could've been worded differently where you don't come off as a backwards asshole.
 
I'm just glad this thread wasn't permanently closed. It deserves to be open for the sake of this subject (and I hope we can move on with some actual discussions and debates & away from any contentious or poorly explained opinions that some may have).
 
pax said:
Ah, you're checking all the classic boxes there:

A) "I can't be transphobic, I have trans friends!"

B) Some unrelated pity sympathetic thing to distract people from dogging on you.

C) Dancing around the issue but not actually apologising because you're not sorry at all.
Click to expand...
and dont forget the classic lie:
getyarn.io

Three simple worlds: ''I am gay.''

The Simpsons (1989) - S03E16 Comedy clip with quote Three simple worlds: ''I am gay.'' Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote. Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share. Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.
getyarn.io getyarn.io
 
CousinMerl said:
I'm just glad this thread wasn't permanently closed. It deserves to be open for the sake of this subject (and I hope we can move on with some actual discussions and debates & away from any contentious opinions that some have).
Click to expand...
yeah lets move on from this incident and discuss what's really important

TAXES!!!
 
I don’t want pity from anyone I was only proving a point when I said that I’ve been really open here. Also i mentioned that because I believe that I should be able to live my life the way I want to especially because I’m not hurting anyone. My body, my choice. I already said I didn’t mean any disrespect. I am sorry if that comment offended anyone. I’m going to remove it right now because I don’t even know what I meant by that.
 
I wonder what you mean by "everyone has the right to live their life as they want" ummm, are you referring to trans people, or are you referring to yourself? The way you word it sounds like you don't want to be called out for that, especially when "letting people live how they want" is a double-edged sword, but not especially respectable if discriminating against minorities is your way of life, much less do you expect people not to be activated by it.

Idk, first the "gay pop" comment and now this one, boy, I don't know if you're just bad at writing, but it's not the first time you've run afoul of these issues. Also, I just wanted to advise against using "shove trans values down our throats." It sounds like the same justification that those types of people use to justify their shitty attitudes and it's not especially a good look to use that.

Also, you still haven't deleted the comment, huh.
 
Sandboy said:
I wonder what you mean by "everyone has the right to live their life as they want" ummm, are you referring to trans people, or are you referring to yourself? The way you word it sounds like you don't want to be called out for that, especially when "letting people live how they want" is a double-edged sword, but not especially respectable if discriminating against minorities is your way of life, much less do you expect people not to be activated by it.
Click to expand...
yeah that phrasing was really weird lol

''allow me to hate on people for existing, i deserve to do it''
 
Honestly I’d like to give Stonecutter #7 the benefit of the doubt, even if I disagree with some of what they’ve said. They have the right to share their thoughts on here, just like we have the right to passionately disagree. I’d be more curious to hear an elaboration on why they don’t think a trans-themed episode would be a good one.

Because frankly, I actually kinda agree: I don’t know that it would be a very good episode either. I likely feel that way for different reasons, but I can’t say for sure because Stonecutter 7 didn’t articulate a lot of reasons in the comment.

My feeling is, would The Simpsons really having anything new to say about this issue that other (more socially up-to-date) shows haven’t already said? I don’t know that they would, even with the younger writers on staff. And if they did simply cover the same territory as shows like Big Mouth, that would probably be the best case scenario; they instead might bungle it entirely and only make things worse.

I certainly think they’re in better hands under Selman than Jean, but not by much. Selman does have a better track record in handing more modern stories, and stories that need emotional depth. But I actually think that he specifically has kind of a spotty record on this issue in particular. He wrote the episode Boys Just Want To Have Sums with the infamous tr*nny line, as well as Flaming Moe which had some questionable depictions of gender non-conforming people, and he showran/wrote Gorgeous Grampa with the Stanlerina bit. It actually seems like a bit of a bugbear for him.

HOWEVER: not to overly praise Selman like some are excused of doing around here, I do think he learns from his mistakes, and is always looking for ways to make the show better and more interesting. I think Drew Mackie (the guy who made the Every Simpsons Gay Joke Ever video) said on his podcast Gayest Episode Ever that Selman reached out to him about that video, saying it was eye-opening to see how cringe-inducing some of those old jokes were. And ultimately, that outreach helped lead to Mackie’s friend Tony Rodriquez being recast as Julio. After hearing that story, and knowing that the most cringe-inducing jokes in that video were the trans ones, I was pretty convinced that Selman would quickly get to work on a trans-themed episode, but clearly that hasn’t materialized.

And at the end of the day, I have long wanted them to do a trans themed episode, even if I’m unsure of how it would turn out. I think they would be best served to (at the very least) get a trans freelancer to write the script, but ideally they’d instead use it as an opportunity to diversify the writers room rather than making it a one-and-done freelance gig.

So all that is to say, while part of me agrees with Stonecutter 7 in feeling like such an episode might not be very good, another part of me really does want them to make amends for some pretty crappy representation in the show thus far.

Also, not that I speak for ANYONE on this board other than myself, personally, I forgive you Stonecutter 7 for your poorly worded original comment and subsequent arguing (of course the arguing wasn’t directed at me, so I understand if others here don’t feel as forgiving at this point). If your original comment was at all motivated by distain in your heart for trans people, I hope you can work through that. I’m happy to talk to you about my experiences as a genderqueer Simpsons fan. And heck, maybe Matt Selman will surprise me and come up with a great Simpsons episode that could give you a new perspective.
 
coramarie said:
HOWEVER: not to overly praise Selman like some are excused of doing around here, I do think he learns from his mistakes, and is always looking for ways to make the show better and more interesting. I think Drew Mackie (the guy who made the Every Simpsons Gay Joke Ever video) said on his podcast Gayest Episode Ever that Selman reached out to him about that video, saying it was eye-opening to see how cringe-inducing some of those old jokes were. And ultimately, that outreach helped lead to Mackie’s friend Tony Rodriquez being recast as Julio. After hearing that story, and knowing that the most cringe-inducing jokes in that video were the trans ones, I was pretty convinced that Selman would quickly get to work on a trans-themed episode, but clearly that hasn’t materialized.
Click to expand...
Will check out the video tomorrow, but it is interesting how the video is the reason Tony Rodriguez was recast as Julio.

I will say regarding Stonecutter #7, I am still wary of you. Your a cool person and one of the first people I remember interacting with on the site, and I read your apology as genuine. However, the main reason why I have lost a lot of trust in you is that, this isn't the first time something like this has happened, and I just know it won't be the last. Sorry, but its just how I feel.
 
Nitsy said:
That's the problem, though. The show's response to the Apu controversy and pulling the Michael Jackson episode show that The Simpsons staff prefer to take the cowardly way out if given the chance. Which tells me they're not going to do a "trans episode".

Their latest "PSA" episodes tend to target uncontroversial topics: charities that don't actually help people are bad, scamming is bad and is getting worse, the middle class is being screwed over, etc. Those are things "we all" can agree on. Doing an episode with a message that "trans women are women" (as an example) would be way more controversial, and I don't think The Simpsons is up to it.
Click to expand...
I'll concur that I don't think anyone presently writing for The Simpsons is "up to it". I said as much in the post that kicked off this thread. They waited until Season 34 to properly tackle an episode on black heritage and Carl's latent insecurities about finding his place within that community because they didn't have a black writer on staff that would be able to effectively speak to those values until Sosthand wrote one.

Is it good that they finally did? Sure is... although it's also kind of a valid indictment against one of the most culturally impactful animated series ever made that they've welcomed such little diversity into the room before now. Yes, a good part of that extends to the late Sam Simon restricting representation within the room right out of the gates by turning it into a 100% Caucasian boys club and keeping the Mimi Ponds of the world out of it... but you can't put all of the blame on his shoulders. After all, he's been dead for 8 years and not actively involved with the show for even longer.

But this thread (and Lily's video) weren't made to direct blame. They were made to prompt action. And even if the show's existing writers aren't "up to it" - and I'm trying to be considerate of not directing too much ire their way while they're presently on a work stoppage that the vast majority of us support - there's still no reason why they can't invite someone into their room (even via a freelance script) that IS up to it. A suggestion that @coramarie just echoed as I was typing up this post.

And the rationale for doing so shouldn't be to simply "check the hey we did an episode on this topic now never speak of it again" box as was the case for Season 27's Much Apu About Something (although they DID try to have the last word two seasons later and were rightfully put on blast for it). The rationale for doing so is because The Simpsons is looked towards AS a pioneer in the industry even now and this is a very clear blind spot that they have when it comes to properly reflecting Americana (and its values) to the global community as a whole.

Because that's the one thing The Simpsons has in its toolbelt that all of those "other (more socially up-to-date) shows" do not... and why it's not okay for the show to simply leave it up to them to be better advocates for trans representation and acceptance. It's because The Simpsons IS still culturally relevant. It just finished out its 34th season effectively tied for 2nd place in broadcast ratings for scripted sitcoms (which I believe is the best the show has ever done). It remains the #6 most streamed series of any kind globally and the most watched animated series of the lot. Yes, it's cool for the Craigs of the Creek of the world to be better examples even in the kids' animation space but they lack the outreach that The Simpsons does.

For as much as The Simpsons as an institution prides itself on being disruptors back in the 1990s and prompting George Bush to remark that he'd like to see American families be "a lot more like the Waltons and a lot less like The Simpsons", we're not all that far removed from a future Republican president remarking they'd like to see American families be "a lot more like The Simpsons and a lot less like another show"... one that prominently features trans/non-binary actors and characters. We had Ted Cruz openly championing his admiration for The Simpsons (along with some terrible impressions) back during his last presidential campaign, after all.

Countless shows have done better... animated or otherwise... without facing stiff repercussions. Even popular ones. Modern Family - the #7 most streamed series of any kind globally - once garnered headlines for casting an 8-year-old trans actor for an episode ("he's only 8, people").

The Simpsons can and should do better. It's just what responsible allyship is all about. Had they taken the lead in this space instead of falling by the wayside it might have proven more difficult for poisonous and harmful anti-LGBTQIA+ mindsets from taking root as they have across much of the United States as Republican administrations proudly "other" them in their campaign to impose control, fear and cruelty against their constituents. The show putting its collective fingers in its ears and tuning out the very legitimate points that Lily raised in her video essay is not the correct course of action - nor is it one that will reflect kindly on the show as an institution as the rights and freedoms of the trans community are prominently stripped away from them.
 
Last edited:
Oh, don't even remind me of that. It's still so embarrassing the fuss they made over 'You Won't Believe What This Episode Is About' for having the "honor" of being the first episode composed and directed primarily by female staff. Seriously, that was actually quite a sad indictment against the show. Shit, it says a lot too and from his Mimi Pond statement, when it took 33 years for us to start getting an increase in female staff. That they are not only spokespersons for male writers-co-writers rather, or are the wife of some showrunner (even as a sign of her nepotism as her husbands are also the ones who directed their episodes). In fact, I'm deeply baffled by the rise of female directors as well… Mahan and Moeller had been working on the show for decades, the fact that they've never even had a shot at the director's chair is deeply baffling.

In fact, I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt, to do a trans-themed episode. But after thinking about the treatment of female staff and black representation, I really think we're barely making any headway on that. Like someone else already said, what else could the simpsons add to this topic? Other series have done it and much better, we even know the case of The Owl House and the accusations it received at the time for dealing with LGBT issues in a children's series. I really don't know how the show can approach it now, especially when you don't have a tie-in for a character that deals with that theme, guest stars doesn't work either because that would be a gimmick, so it has to be an established character.

Come on... There was even a joke made about Helen being a trans person, whether that was disrespectful or not, sadly it's still the best example of that kind of representation in this series. Maybe they could do something about it? Yeah, I'm very much reading through a joke that's just a "lol Tim married a man" joke to piss off Reverend Lovejoy. In fact, I would almost say that the only minority group that is usually well represented (emphasis on "usually") has been gays and lesbians, like Smithers, Patty or Mr. Largo. And I say "usually" since they are also often accompanied by a lot of stale and stereotypical jokes, frankly even sometimes insulting and obnoxious (like Smithers and the "what's a fisting" line).

In fact, I almost thought 'Portrait of a Lackey on Fire' was a good step up from the show's LGBT representation, oh well at least the gay one. He surely treated her with more sensitivity and tact, even the examination of Smithers's character and her sexual orientation, is not tainted by those kinds of jokes. So I thought it was a shame that they didn't sink their teeth into the other communities, frankly this was something I expected when they took it upon themselves to promote it as the "gayest episode of the entire series", which was a wasted opportunity having for first time a queer writer on staff. And even if that was just a link for LaZebnik to deliver a positive and accepting message to his son, but it's already even a small step in further exploring these themes.
 
In a poetic bit of timing, let's have a look at what the show that airs one hour after The Simpsons - on the same network, on the same streaming service, owned by the same company and directed towards the same target demographic - recently announced...

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1658978539754979328
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1658991902941761538

bobs-burgers-marshmallow-is-here.gif


And, of course, this follows in the footsteps of Bouchard's earlier correct call re: Central Park...

image.png


So if you're making the case that The Simpsons can't do better on this issue - you're wrong.

If you're making the argument that FOX, FOX's advertisers, Disney or the people that are currently engaged in an active harrassment campaign against Target are keeping The Simpsons from doing better on this issue - you're wrong.

If you're even making the case that a show that has cast 8-year-old trans actors (Modern Family - 7th most popular streaming show globally) or incorporated LGBTQIA+ storylines involving 8-year-old characters focused towards children (which The Simpsons is not) but Craig and the Creek most certainly is and has proven that it works because kids don't inherently have anti-LGBTQIA+ leanings... no, those values are indoctrinated into them by their parents... means that The Simpsons can't do better on this issue - you're wrong.

And now there's a show that airs in the same programming block that is learning, listening and actively striving to do better - which shows that, yes, it IS possible to do better. And will further make The Simpsons - a show that we all passionately love and support and advocate for because we wouldn't be on this forum otherwise - look all the worse by comparison for not making the same leap.

So... once again, as I said last Sunday and I further echo now, the show can... and should... do better here. And I implore to anyone that is listening that is in a position to make that creative choice to follow in the footsteps of Loren Bouchard, Matt Burnett, Ben Levin, Rebecca Rea Sugar (who is awesome, btw... hell, let them write a script) on this issue.

It's time to stop marginalizing the trans voices in your audience. They are not the butt of a joke. They are human beings... just like you or I or anyone else.
 
Last edited:
Well, I think all of the recent posts really do boil down to one simple fact: 'The Simpsons' should try their damndest at writing stories with and/or about trans characters (and LGBTQ+ characters in general) and do so by bringing in new younger scriptwriters who can surely tackle these plots better and more creatively and tactfully than almost all the "old" people in the current writers' room (and maybe bring in some guest writers from other shows; for instance, I'd really like to see writers of 'Craig Of The Creek' get to write an episode or two). I know, the show has some younger voices (like Broti Gupta, previous mentioned) and it'd be nice to see them also making their voices heard.

They should definitely make the leap of faith and go full-hearted into such a project and not be worried what critics and other naysayers will respond with. Would be neat to see them at least do something about it rather than avoid doing so (even considering the issues that have been in the past). They really can do a lot better than they have done, I'd say even with the writers' they have now.
 
Last edited:
I'm not feeling so cynical that I'm thinking they absolutely cannot at all do better in regards of this. They have some younger writers like Broti and do hire some freelancers every now and then (even some in their thirties), but as things are with the producers and so forth, it will be a challenge but one I would like to see them tackle and do what they can. It'd at least be a step in the right direction (and even if it is just an OK episode in the end it'd at least something. Better to have that and not do anything, plus I don't think we should cross our arms, sulk and decide that "The show won't do better as there's too many freakin' Boomers and Gen-Xers on the team". Fans are better off trying to inspire change).
 
quit pattin yourself on the back loren that character was not well intentioned, she hinged on the audience expectation that a trans character will automatically gross you out and subverted that by making her the 'exception' despite still being in the show's universe a gross transvestite. cool that you learned and built positive rep out of something that was the opposite but don't rewrite that for extra brownie points! i'm watchin you..
 
Not to mention they made fun of one of the trans girls having facial hair and one identified as a married man making that one unclear if she was trans in universe or a drag queen.
There's also the fact that all the trans characters take hard drugs (the cab girls introduce Bob to crack and marshmallow when disappointed in the family said "to think I gave you drugs.") Portraying an entire community as addicts is not a good look.

Sorry I've seen a lot of early bobs burgers and am just not a fan of the show. Some episodes really look bad on reflection.
 
Kinda reminds me of this https://hard-drive.net/hd/entertain...g-both-a-serial-killer-and-a-dead-sex-worker/

Seriously though that's so wearily common. See it all the time with people that backpat over autism rep too when they're always either magic savants or purely a burden and everyone else is so brave for putting up with them.

... Oh dear god we're gonna get a Stanlerina ep where they pretend she's always meant to have been progressive.
 
Last edited:
Yeah...while "Sheesh-Cab Bob" is my fave Season 1 episode, it certainly hasn't aged well when it comes to the representation of the Transgender community. Pretty sure Linda calls them a slur (although I might be wrong on it been a slur, but it does feel like it would be considered one).
 
I don't think anyone is going out there and saying that Loren Bouchard and the Bob's Burgers team has always been perfect on this issue. I'm not even sure they'd say that themselves - and, if they did, they'd be wrong for doing so.

We shouldn't be looking towards that show as an example that has always handled every issue well. We should be looking towards them as an example that has shown that it is willing to learn from their mistakes, grow, strive to be better and to make decisive changes that reflect well on the communities they're trying to represent once pointed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top