Highlights of South Park's "Redskins" episode

Full episode:

Go Fund Yourself

Video of the highlights:

South Park Trashes The Washington Redskins; Watch The Highlights

Summary of the best moments:

The 11 Best Moments From South Park's Anti-Redskins Season PremiereEternal troublemaker Cartman leads the formation of a company with the express purpose of collecting funds through Kickstarter and otherwise doing absolutely nothing. After failing to come up with anything that isn't already copyrighted, the boys call their business The Washington Redskins, seeing as the name is not protected by law. Absurd scenes and highly ironic lines ensue, these are the 11 moments we found most LOL-worthy:

1. Redskins owner Dan Snyder tells the boys that their use of the team's name "is offensive to us," then asks, "Won't you just [change the name] out of decency?"

2. The company's official greeting when called on the phone: "Washington Redskins, go fuck yourself."

3. Cartman: "Digging in our heels and pissing on public opinion is what the Washington Redskins are all about!"

Recaps

'South Park' recap: Redskins Inc.

‘South Park’s’ epic satire of Dan Snyder, the Washington Redskins, Roger Goodell and the NFL

“South Park” brilliantly satirizes the Washington Redskins name debacle

For more on the subject, see South Park Mocks "Redsksins."

South Park mocks "Redskins"

‘South Park’ mocks DC football team in ad targeting hometown fans: Your name is ‘offensive to us’

By Tom BoggioniComedy Central ordered up a very specific promotional ad for the network’s South Park show, mocking the Washington Redskins nickname controversy, and then running the ad only in the DC market for the hometown fans to see.

According to SBNation, the ad ran during the fourth quarter of the ‘Skin’s game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

The one-minute promo shows team owner Daniel Snyder confronting Eric Cartman over using the Redskins name for his new company.

“In the name of decency I am asking that you please stop using the name Washington Redskins to your company, ” Snyder says, adding ” You have no right to get attention.”Comedy Central Takes on Dan Snyder in South Park’s 18th Season Premiere: Teaser Ran in Commercial during Washington/Philadelphia NFL GameComedy Central weighed in on the Washington NFL’s team name controversy during the Washington vs. Philadelphia game in a commercial aired Sunday afternoon.

FOX aired the one-minute ad promoting the premiere of the 18th season of “South Park” during a fourth-quarter commercial that was seen in the Washington D.C. area only.

The ad was a teaser for the episode that will air Wednesday. The ad is a parody of Washington NFL team owner Dan Snyder’s claim that that his continued usage of the R-word for the Washington football team is to honor American Indians.

In the upcoming episode Cartman is running a business named as the same name as the Washington NFL team. Dan Snyder finds it offensive. Cartman is doing it to “honor” Snyder and the football team.

For more on South Park, see Native Canadians in South Park, "Tardicaca Indians" in South Park, and South Park: "Red Man's Greed."

Stereotyping explained to South Park apologists

My 2010 "Tardicaca Indians" in South Park posting received a slew of comments from South Park devotees. Read the original posting to see what the fuss was about.

I guess these fans expected me to respond right away, because they became increasingly whiny. Too bad, crybabies...I'm approaching 12,000 blog postings and I don't have time to respond to everything.

But I finally felt like addressing these comments, so here they are with my responses:

Two minutes = one line?!

Let's start with a commenter who thought it was silly to criticize "one line" in the episode. By that he presumably meant the juvenile "Tardicaca Indians" name:Even if you ... stick to your view and insist that they are simply plain old, mean spirited racists/sexists/bigots, then how is that ONE LINE the only offensive thing worthy of comment?One line?! Did you witless apologists even watch the clip? It was 1:51 long and all about the Tardicaca Indians and reservation. The scene showed a fake reservation with tipis and "burial grounds" and labeled it dangerous. Half-naked "braves" skewered the "boss" with arrows.

Most important, there was nothing whatsoever telling the viewer that this was a false or "satirical" view of Indians. The satire is entirely in your imagination, because it isn't in the clip. If you disagree, quote me the line that demonstrates to the viewers that this is a put-on.

Most of you anonymous cowards didn't even address the clip's content. Those who did suggested it indeed may have been stereotypical, but for a "good" reason. Namely, that South Park insults and offends everyone, so it's okay to do it to Indians too.

So let's start with the basic question you were too afraid to answer. Did the clip stereotype Indians? Answer yes or no and then we'll discuss whether the "reasons" justify the stereotyping.

South Park didn't mean it?South Park, at its very best, is supposed to make you squirm and it is intended to be facetious, in-your-face, and to contain massive stereotyping.And I noted its massive stereotyping of Indians. So what's the problem?

I'm glad you wrote "intended to be facetious." If Parker and Stone intended the Native stereotypes to be facetious, they didn't put that on the screen. Trying to read their minds is ridiculous compared to the fact of what's on display.South Park is being "racist" towards Native American Indians in order to make people think that they don't like them. It's to highlight racism and equality issues that exist within our society.This episode highlighted the racism against Indians? How did it do that, exactly? Explain how a typical viewer goes from seeing the stereotypes he's seen a million times before to realizing these stereotypes are false.

Apparently you all haven't watched a thousand stereotypical movies, TV shows, and cartoons like I have. Apparently you're clueless about the difference between presenting stereotypes and challenging them. South Park hasn't challenged the stereotypes it presented about Indians. Its "satirical" presentation is indistinguishable from straightforward stereotyping.

Commenters prove their ignorance

Two of you geniuses helped prove my point when you wrote:People like me living in Australia don't know much about native Americans, and i assumed they would attack you if you trespassed, guess i was wrong.And:Many South American Indian tribes are rather savage so it is still fine to portray Injuns in that light. It's all in good humor.Wow. South American Indians are savage, so that justifies portraying Indians 10,000 miles away as savage also. Because all Indians are the same, I guess, in your little pea-brains.

And Indians would attack you if you trespassed? What, while you were driving on one of the many roads through their reservations? Perhaps to visit their casinos, resorts, or cultural centers? Do you really think reservations are tiny patches of land and Indians stand guard at their borders? With bows and arrows?

Alas, you're apparently unaware that "Injun" is considered an insult too. Thanks for demonstrating that you're ignorant if not racist, bright boy.

To everyone else, explain to your fellow morons that Indians aren't savage and violent as portrayed in South Park. Because they haven't gotten the message yet. Somehow they failed to understand that the Tardicaca bit was a "satire."

Why doesn't Rob criticize everyoneWhat about when they poke fun at Catholics, Muslims, Jews, the handicapped, redheads, Scientology, Mexicans, Canadians, etc etc etc.???What about it? You're an idiot if you think I have time to criticize all the stereotyping of all these groups. I barely have time to criticize most of the stereotyping of Native Americans. This blog has a narrow focus and there's nothing wrong with that.

When a posting touches upon other groups--e.g., women, blacks, Latinos, Muslims, or gays--I'll often support those groups and attack their critics. If you haven't seen these postings, you haven't been reading long. Since I believe most of you came from a South Park forum, spare me your ignorance of my long history of criticism."Guesses don't interest me; facts do."

Bullshit. Hardly a post goes by without guesses and assumptions on your part about the people you criticize. Now, I don't expect you to do a thorough content analysis of 201 episodes of South Park, but most of the time about 30 seconds of googling would make your articles more factual and thus, more impactful.When I wrote, "Guesses don't interest me; facts do," that was a reference to your guesses about South Park. Specifically about whether you can prove it's a genuine equal-opportunity offender or you just "believe" it is. Guesses in general often interest me; I encourage people to speculate if they're not trying to prove a case.

"Offending everyone" still a guess

A few of you repeated the "equal-opportunity offender" defense without any attempt to justify it. So I'll simply repeat what I said before:

Don't bother telling me South Park is an equal-opportunity offender who insults every political, racial, and religious group equally. Unless you've done a study in which you tallied all the insults and compared them to US and world demographics, you're just guessing that South Park is evenhanded. Guesses [on this subject] don't interest me; facts do.

As for making my postings more factual, go ahead and give one example of an obvious and important fact I missed in any posting. I'm betting you can't, and this "criticism" of yours is nothing but childish chest-beating.If this show offends you that much don't watch it. No one is holding you down forcing you watch the hilarity of South Park.If my criticism bothers you, don't read it. Apply your own dumbass "thinking" to yourself, hypocrite.

Clueless about video-sharingOh, and if you don't support them, then why are you linking their videos off their site... You complain about it, but use their servers to stream your crap... Real nice...Like every other video-sharing site on the Web, the South Park site includes an "embed" option so you can post their videos. If they didn't want us to share it, they wouldn't let us share it. Duhhh.

In short, better luck next time, losers. When you have a question I can't answer, it'll be a red-letter day. Unfortunately for you, that hasn't happened yet.

For more on South Park, see Native Canadians in South Park and "Tardicaca Indians" in South Park

Below:  An image from South Park's previous racist "satire" about Indians.

Native Canadians in South Park

Here's a brief clip from a recent episode of South Park (airdate: 5/11/11):

Season 15:  Royal Pudding

Mr. Mackey loses it, while Scott the Dick leads Ike to the Native Canadians.Comment:  As with past South Park episodes, this clip is a mixed bag at best.

On the one hand, the "Native Canadians" are rendered with slanted eyes, which is patently offensive. They're all wearing fur-lined parkas, which are apparently some kind of tribal uniform. (The non-Natives aren't wearing fur-lined parkas, so the clothing must not be necessary for the climate.) And they're not using anything more modern than a harpoon. No high-powered rifles, radios, or snowmobiles--nothing like that.

On the other hand, they're speaking some sort of Native language(s), not gibberish. The non-Natives' stupid comments are designed to make the non-Natives look bad. And the show is sensitive enough to label the Natives "Native Canadians" rather than "Eskimos" or something less pleasant.

The Native language(s)

I asked a friend if she knew what language the Natives were speaking. This led to the following discussion:They are speaking two languages--Athabaskan dialect (the female speaker) and a Plains language (Blood? Or the plains languages spoken in Canada) by the male speaker respectively. (Which means the two conversation topics may be divergent.)Does Athabaskan include Navajo? Does the Plains language include Lakota? I'd guess producers Stone and Parker, who live in the LA area, found two local Native speakers and recorded them separately.

On the one hand, it's kind of lame that they didn't find two Inuktitut speakers. On the other, at least the "Native Canadians" weren't speaking gibberish. Stone and Parker probably did more than many producers would have.I would say the upshot was they did not speak gibberish. My money is on Navajo really, as the cadence and pronunciation leans more that way. As for the male's speech, I do not thing it was Siouxan nor Slavey. Even though I say "Plains" I would guess Blood.I'd also guess the producers recorded the Natives without telling them about the episode. They may have asked the Natives to say something about fishing, or to say anything. If they were carrying on a real conversation in two different languages, I'd be surprised.

The rest of the episode

Royal Pudding's plot involves the kidnapping of a "Canadian princess." The Inuit play a bigger role than the scene above indicates:When it turns out that Scott has been wrongly accused of taking the princess, most other Canadians go home, but Scott persuades Ike and Ugly Bob to follow him as he accuses the Inuit of kidnapping the princess out of his racial prejudice towards the "Native Canadians." However, while admitting that his people do have a grudge against the Canadians for taking their land, the Inuit tribe leader reveals that the princess' abduction was foretold, and that the true kidnapper is one who attacks people of all nationalities. With an Inuit mother leading the three, they find a large dark castle, where the princess is held captive by the abductor: Tooth Decay. Eventually, after the monster hurls Scott and the Inuit woman across the room, Ike turns Tooth Decay to stone by exposing Ugly Bob's face to him.That doesn't sound too bad. It could be a decent role for these cartoon Natives. Except for their slanty eyes and nonstop parka wearing, of course.

For more on South Park, see "Tardicaca Indians" in South Park and "Indians" in Cannibal! The Musical.

"Tardicaca Indians" in South Park

Tardicaca Indians
Episode 1407:  Crippled Summer
Original Air Date:  Apr. 28, 2010

Season 14:  The Red Team's scavenger hunt doesn't go as planned.Comment:  The stereotyping and racism in this clip are obvious. The insulting tribal name...the tipis and burial ground...and the Plains-style warriors on horseback with bows and arrows.

Even worse is the presumption that Indians would kill anyone who trespasses on their reservation. This is false; only a few tribes don't allow visitors, and they'd merely escort you off the reservation if you trespassed. And worst of all is the Indians acting on this presumption by shooting an intruder on sight. Showing Indians as vicious savages from 150 years ago is pure racism without any redeeming quality.

And don't bother telling me South Park is an equal-opportunity offender who insults every political, racial, and religious group equally. Unless you've done a study in which you tallied all the insults and compared them to US and world demographics, you're just guessing that South Park is evenhanded. Guesses don't interest me; facts do.

Besides, who cares if South Park is racist or bigoted toward every group? Do two, 20, or 200 wrongs make a right? Unless you can demonstrate that this clip isn't racist, it doesn't matter what else South Park's creators have done. Racism toward one group doesn't excuse racism toward another.

I'd say the evidence from Cannibal! The Musical and Red Man's Greed is more or less conclusive. Trey Parker and Matt Stone are prejudiced against Indians. If you disagree, show me something they've said or created that isn't prejudiced against Indians. Until then, my claim stands.

For more on the subject, see TV Shows Featuring Indians.

"Indians" in Cannibal! The Musical

Cannibal! The MusicalCannibal! The Musical, also known as Alferd Packer: The Musical, is an independent film directed by co-creator of South Park, Trey Parker, while studying at the University of Colorado at Boulder. A black comedy, it is loosely based on the true story of Alferd Packer and the sordid details of the trip from Utah to Colorado that left his five fellow travellers dead and partially eaten. Trey Parker stars as Alferd Packer, with Parker's frequent collaborators Matt Stone and Dian Bachar and others playing the supporting roles.

Plot

The film begins with a reenactment of the gruesome events of cannibalism as described by the prosecuting attorney during Alferd Packer's trial in 1883. Packer insists that things happened differently than what has been recounted, and begins to tell his story to journalist Polly Pry (Toddy Walters) through flashback.

Eventually, the Packer party is spotted by two “Nihonjin” Indians (obviously played by Asians and speaking Japanese). They are taken back to the tribe where they learn the trappers are waiting for the winter storm to pass as recommended by the chief.

Casting

The Japanese "Indians" were really Japanese foreign exchange students from Trey Parker's college. The Indian chief was played by the owner and operator of "Sushi Zanmai" in downtown Boulder, CO.

Cultural References

Said Indians are referred to as the Nihonjin tribe. "Nihonjin" is Japanese for "Japanese people."

Comment:  I guess this is supposed to be funny? Maybe this is the dramatic, unfunny, part of the movie.

So Trey Parker used the standard chief and teepee stereotypes for Utah's Ute Indians. And he compounded the problem by using Japanese people to play the Indians.

This fits nicely with the anti-Indian prejudice shown in the South Park episode Red Man's Greed. The evidence mounts that Parker has a racist attitude toward Indians.

For more on the subject, see The Best Indian Movies.