There’s a familiar, almost shameful routine in many homes, and it goes something like this. As the late evening hours creep in, often around 11:30 PM, adults – individuals who are culturally aware and often advocate for social justice – find themselves drawn to the sofa. The remnants of dinner and the day’s work surround them, frequently accompanied by a cold beer. The television screen glows, often tuned to a channel broadcasting Family Guy. It’s a common scene across the English-speaking world; grown-ups with responsibilities, from jobs to bills, secretly indulge in the animated world of Quahog. They are captivated by cartoonish antics, even those that push boundaries with rape jokes and toilet humor. The fatigue of the day makes it hard to move, yet sleep remains elusive. Another Brian and Stewie song begins, and the pull to keep watching is undeniable.
For many, childhood evenings were spent rushing home to watch The Simpsons. Now, adulthood brings a different kind of routine. After a long commute and a quick microwave dinner, there’s a brief moment to consider the day’s stresses – perhaps unopened mail or unanswered emails – before the gravitational pull of Peter Griffin takes over. The nonsensical catchphrases and cartoonish world become an odd comfort.
Recently, there was a shift in the UK’s television landscape as BBC Three transitioned to an online-only platform, temporarily removing Family Guy from terrestrial TV. While it has since returned on ITV2, this brief pause offers an opportunity to consider the enduring question: why do we, as adults, keep watching Family Guy?
Is it genuinely funny? After countless episodes, humor might not be the primary driver. Laughter is often replaced by a groan of disappointment, a reaction akin to changing a diaper – a messy event that’s more unpleasant than amusing.
The watchability of Family Guy seems to stem from a combination of factors:
- Pace
- Recognition
- Bright Colors
Firstly, the show’s pace is relentless. Compared to contemporary British sitcoms known for their drawn-out silences and awkward pauses, Family Guy offers a stark contrast. British comedy often relies on uncomfortable silences and slow-building humor, leaving ample time to dissect the lack of actual jokes. Family Guy, however, bombards the viewer with jokes. Studies suggest Family Guy averages 5.20 jokes per minute. This rapid-fire delivery means jokes, even unfunny ones, don’t linger long enough to be overanalyzed. When subtlety fails, the show resorts to dragging out gags to an absurd length, like Peter’s extended fight with a chicken or endless slapstick falls. It’s humor through sheer persistence.
Secondly, Family Guy is packed with recognizable references. From celebrities like Julia Roberts and Bill Clinton to cultural icons like Star Wars and even Sesame Street’s Count, the show constantly throws out names and pop culture touchstones. The mere act of recognizing these references seems to be part of the comedic appeal.
Thirdly, the visual aspect of Family Guy is undeniably vibrant. The show is awash in bright, saturated colors, creating a visually stimulating experience, regardless of the humor’s quality.
However, the humor that fuels Family Guy is often problematic. A critical examination reveals a pattern of jokes that are less about clever satire and more about shock value. One concerning aspect is the show’s treatment of women. In a self-imposed experiment, viewers counted episodes to find one without violence against women. It took 14 episodes to find a 20-minute segment where Meg, Lois, or another female character wasn’t assaulted, injured, or demeaned. This raises questions about the show’s comedic targets and the normalization of violence against women, even in a cartoonish context. This element, sometimes intertwined with the show’s portrayal of sexuality and family dynamics, can be particularly jarring.
Furthermore, Family Guy relies heavily on stereotypical portrayals of minority groups. Whether it’s the anti-Semitic tropes surrounding Mort Goldman, the stereotypical “sassy black woman” portrayal of Loretta Brown (voiced by a white actor), or the recurring Native American character clichés, the show frequently resorts to offensive caricatures. While some argue this is “boundary-pushing,” it often feels more like a reliance on lazy, hurtful humor aimed at vulnerable and underrepresented groups. It echoes the behavior of someone seeking attention through offensive remarks, rather than genuine comedic insight. In an era where media has evolved, and boundaries have supposedly expanded, Family Guy’s approach feels outdated. The idea that “nothing is off-limits” should not equate to a duty to offend, especially when it comes to perpetuating harmful stereotypes under the guise of comedy.
With a break before Family Guy returns to television, there’s an opportunity for viewers to consider alternatives. Perhaps replacing animated sitcoms with something more enriching is a worthwhile endeavor. Maybe it’s time to step away from jokes about Asian women drivers or musical numbers about serious illnesses. It might be time for a conscious break-up with Family Guy, seeking out entertainment that offers more than just rapid-fire gags and questionable humor.
Follow Angus on Twitter.
