Menu Bar
Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
Needs Plugin: Flash |
Not Working?
Peabody and his boy Sherman use the wayback machine to visit Mexico in 1910.
Nov 27, 2008 2:11 PM
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
Wow. That was horribly racist, but it was good pun at the end.
By: boyblunders
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
God, how was that racist? There were no slurs, the accents were embellished, the portrayal of a downtrodden Mexican town wasn't offensive, so what was it that was so bad? I'm so sick of people playing the PC card. THIS IS WHY COOKIE MONSTER EATS CABBAGE, PEOPLE!
By: Chronobrain
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
Because what kind of fucking moron eats jumping beans? oh obviously Mexicans do because everyone knows Mexicans love to eat those beans even when they have moth larvae inside of them and they have no history of being consumed by any civilized human being under non-starvation conditions. That's why they're called beaners. Oh wait, was it just racist without actually stating any racial slur? Of course not, that's why it's OK to depict Black people as wholly captivated by the idea of eating fried chicken and worshipping bubble butts.
And Pancho Villa wasn't even some kind of bandit, what the fuck? He was a revolutionary and he did take money to fuel his war efforts, but he wasn't some kind of brute who had a penchant for firing guns into the air as a form of punctuation - another stereotype. He was a talented strategist who won the admiration of President Woodrow Wilson and General John J. Pershing. The whole bit culminated in a pun about siestas, which, admittedly, was funny and every segment did that, but overall it was an exercise in Mexican stereotypes. A kid leaves this with no concept of who Pancho Villa was, but also a profoundly flawed understanding of Mexican mannerisms and human nutrition. I understand that the segment was deliberately historically inaccurate, but what kind of bullshit were they feeding these gullible little temporary retards we call children?
And Pancho Villa wasn't even some kind of bandit, what the fuck? He was a revolutionary and he did take money to fuel his war efforts, but he wasn't some kind of brute who had a penchant for firing guns into the air as a form of punctuation - another stereotype. He was a talented strategist who won the admiration of President Woodrow Wilson and General John J. Pershing. The whole bit culminated in a pun about siestas, which, admittedly, was funny and every segment did that, but overall it was an exercise in Mexican stereotypes. A kid leaves this with no concept of who Pancho Villa was, but also a profoundly flawed understanding of Mexican mannerisms and human nutrition. I understand that the segment was deliberately historically inaccurate, but what kind of bullshit were they feeding these gullible little temporary retards we call children?
By: boyblunders
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
I find it so very hard to believe that anyone would take offense by a freakin' cartoon. This is an admitted distortion of history, yet you portray it as if it was a factual presentation.
Please keep in mind that this was the early 60's when first aired and quite a different environment. True, it was targeted to white-bread America but there was no hostile negativity projected upon Mexicans in so doing. A true stretch on your part.
Please keep in mind that this was the early 60's when first aired and quite a different environment. True, it was targeted to white-bread America but there was no hostile negativity projected upon Mexicans in so doing. A true stretch on your part.
By: spam_vigilante
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
Did you ever watch the other episodes of this? Because if you had, you'd be well aware that they always portray the historical figures as morons.
As for the beans diatribe, jumping beans were used as humor in way more than Mexican stereotypes back in the day. I can't remember how many AMERICAN-BASED characters ate jumping beans in old cartoons for whatever reasons. And like it or not, in poverty-stricken Mexico, circa 1900s, I would just hazard a guess that beans and rice pretty much WERE a large part of their diet. Admittedly, a lot of old cartoons did make blatant racial slurs. But this was after the worst of it. And to be quite honest, Rocky & Bullwinkle was one of my favorite shows growing up, so it pisses me off that people would get so bent out of shape over something that was intended as a laugh and not an insult. Hell, several Hispanics comprised the opposition to ban Speedy Gonzales cartoons, and those things were horribly racist.
From now on, I'm using "he who smelt it" logic on people who call racism on stupid shit. No one else saw the racism except the person trying to prove by any means necessary that he's not racist. Ass.
As for the beans diatribe, jumping beans were used as humor in way more than Mexican stereotypes back in the day. I can't remember how many AMERICAN-BASED characters ate jumping beans in old cartoons for whatever reasons. And like it or not, in poverty-stricken Mexico, circa 1900s, I would just hazard a guess that beans and rice pretty much WERE a large part of their diet. Admittedly, a lot of old cartoons did make blatant racial slurs. But this was after the worst of it. And to be quite honest, Rocky & Bullwinkle was one of my favorite shows growing up, so it pisses me off that people would get so bent out of shape over something that was intended as a laugh and not an insult. Hell, several Hispanics comprised the opposition to ban Speedy Gonzales cartoons, and those things were horribly racist.
From now on, I'm using "he who smelt it" logic on people who call racism on stupid shit. No one else saw the racism except the person trying to prove by any means necessary that he's not racist. Ass.
By: Chronobrain
Re: Peabody's Improbable History: Pancho Villa
Erm, not "embellished". A better word would be "exaggerated".
By: Chronobrain
