Through an examination of narrative developments in South Park and a deeper textual analysis of two of the television show's episodes in particular, this article discusses the ramifications of anarchic and aggressive critiques of reified gender identity in popular culture. It draws primarily on Haraway and Butler, engaging gender precisely through its performative or blasphemous potential for oppositional culture. The episodes discussed demonstrate the possibility for a fluid conception of gender and a highly inter-textual approach to gender development. Rather than asserting a coherent political position, South Park examines and disrupts gender norms precisely through multiplicity and fragmentation, demonstrating an emergent paradigm for social activism.
Alberti, J. (2004). Leaving Springfield: The Simpsons and the possibility of oppositional culture. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
2.
Anderson, B.C. (2005). South Park conservatives. Washington, DC: Regnery.
3.
Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations (P. Foss, P. Patton, & P. Beitchman , Trans.). New York: Semiotext(e) .
4.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production (R. Johnson, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press .
6.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble. New York: Routledge.
7.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.
8.
Bynum, A. (2006). The boys are back. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from http://www.animationinsider.net/article.php?article?ID=1119
9.
Cantor, P. (2007). The invisible gnomes and the invisible hand: South Park and libertarian philosophy. In R. Arp (Ed.), South Park and philosophy (pp. 97-111). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
10.
Chaney, M.A. (2004). Representations of race and place in Static Shock, King of the Hill, and South Park. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 31(4), 167-175.
11.
de Lauretis, T. (1987). Technologies of gender: Essays on theory, film, and fiction. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
12.
Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision and dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
Fiske, J. (1987). Television culture. New York : Routledge.
14.
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality (Vol. 1; R. Hurley, Trans.) . New York: Vintage Books.
15.
Gardiner, J.K. (2000). South Park, blue men, anality, and market masculinity . Men and Masculinities, 2(3), 251-271.
16.
Gardiner, J.K. (2005). Why Saddam is gay: Masculinity politics in South Park. Bigger, longer, and uncut. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 22, 51-62.
17.
Gournelos, T. (2008). The Tao of South Park: Dissonant visual culture and the future of politics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
18.
Gray, J. (2006). Watching with The Simpsons. New York: Routledge.
19.
Halbfinger, D.M. (2007, August 27). South Park creators win ad sharing in deal. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/business/media/27south.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/S/Stone,%20Matt&pagewanted=all#
20.
Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. In S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe, & P. Willis (Eds.), Culture, media and language (pp. 128-138). London: Hutchinson.
21.
Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
22.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Milles, J. (Eds.). (1999). Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23.
Hendershot, H. (2005, November 18). Comedy is a woman in trouble. Flow TV, 3(6).
24.
hooks, b. (1998). Postmodern blackness. In J. Storey (Ed.), Cultural theory and popular culture: A reader (2nd ed., pp. 48-56). Athens: University of Georgia Press.
25.
Hutcheon, L. (1985). A theory of parody. New York : Menthuen.
26.
Hutcheon, L. (1989). The politics of postmodernism. New York: Routledge.
27.
Johnson-Woods, T. (2007). Blame Canada! South Park and contemporary culture . New York: Continuum.
28.
Leonard, D. (2006, October 30). South Park creators haven't lost their edge. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/10/30/8391792/index.htm
29.
Lynch, O.H. (2002). Humorous communication: Finding a place for humor in communication research. Communication Theory, 12(4), 423-445.
30.
Massey, D. (1994). Space, place, and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
31.
McRobbie, A. (1997). Back to reality? Social experience and cultural studies. New York: St. Martin's.
32.
Meyer, J.C. (2000). Humor as a double-edged sword: Four functions of humor in communication. Communication Theory, 10(3), 10-33.
33.
Modleski, T. (Ed.). (1986). Studies in entertainment: Critical approaches to mass culture. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
34.
National Annenberg Election Survey. (2004). Daily Show viewers knowledgeable about presidential campaigns, National Annenberg Election Survey shows. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from http://www.naes04.org
35.
Rage over virgin mirth. (2005, December 31). http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-140340206.html
36.
Rose, C. (2005, September 26). A conversation with Trey Parker and Matt Stone, co-creators of "South Park." New York: Charlie Rose Inc.
37.
Ross, C. (1998, January 12). Advertisers flock to Comedy Central's racy "South Park": Phenomenal viewership numbers cool the concerns about content . Advertising Age, 69(2), 37-38.
38.
Rushkoff, D. (1996). Media virus (2nd ed.). New York: Ballantine.
39.
Sandoval, C. (2000). The methodology of the oppressed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
40.
Slade, C. (2002). The real thing: Doing philosophy with media (Vol. 4). New York: Peter Lang.
41.
Stabile, C. A., & Harrison, M. (Eds.). (2003). Prime time animation: Television animation and American culture. New York: Routledge.
42.
Stallybrass, P., & White, A. (1986). The poetics and politics of transgression. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
43.
Wells, P. (2002). Animation and America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
