- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
In Three's Company, why was Mr. Roper okay with Jack being gay...
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:12 pm
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:12 pm
...but not him being a heterosexual living in a platonic relationship with two females?
11
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:14 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
quote:
in a platonic relationship with two females?
because unicorns aren't real.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:14 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
With all respect to Mr. Roper, Mr. Furley was wayyy cooler.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:17 pm to OldHickory
NOOO WAY!!!!
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:17 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Because Mr Roper was a jealous bastard.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:27 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Man I would have lived in Chrissy's room while Janet made sandwiches in the kitchen. 
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:34 pm to OldHickory
quote:
With all respect to Mr. Roper, Mr. Furley was wayyy cooler.
Shut your whore mouth.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:37 pm to LuckySo-n-So
Because back in the 70’s it was not standard or really acceptable for 2 woman and a guy to live together. So to get around it, they stated he was gay. Roper had a belief that only men and woman married should live together.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:39 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Priscilla Barnes for the win...
Then, not now.
Then, not now.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:39 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Mr. Roper was an interesting character. His acceptance of Jack being gay is in stark contrast to his old school ideas about men and women living together out of marriage.
Mr. Roper's old school ideas on some things and the snide jokes he'd make at Jack's expense were a way of being able to have an "gay" main character while not completely alienating all of middle America. You have to remember the show in the context of its times. It was the late seventies and early 80s. Being gay wasn't the strict taboo it was in the past, but you definitely weren't seeing anything as open as "Will and Grace" or Cam and Mitch from "Modern Family", either. If Jack really were gay, that show never makes it out of the VERY short pitch meeting, but broaching the idea of a character that acts gay to please his old school landlord while not really being gay was okay for the times. That whole show was VERY much pushing the boundaries of what was acceptable on TV at the time. Plus, the social dynamics of the show made for writing fodder.
Contrast that with "All in the Family", which was a contemporary (though a bit earlier) that also had big things to say about the America of its time, but NEVER would be able to be aired in today's hyper-sensitive climate. That show's character was an outright in-your-face bigot, yet the show skewered his world view. Many people who watched the show because they agreed with Archie never realized what the show really was trying to say about and to America of the 70's. It didn't try to pussyfoot around the commentary it was trying to make on society. It tackled them straight on because it was allowed to in its day.
Also, Chrissie had big titties, wore skimpy clothes, and wasn't afraid to go braless, so that was nice.
Mr. Roper's old school ideas on some things and the snide jokes he'd make at Jack's expense were a way of being able to have an "gay" main character while not completely alienating all of middle America. You have to remember the show in the context of its times. It was the late seventies and early 80s. Being gay wasn't the strict taboo it was in the past, but you definitely weren't seeing anything as open as "Will and Grace" or Cam and Mitch from "Modern Family", either. If Jack really were gay, that show never makes it out of the VERY short pitch meeting, but broaching the idea of a character that acts gay to please his old school landlord while not really being gay was okay for the times. That whole show was VERY much pushing the boundaries of what was acceptable on TV at the time. Plus, the social dynamics of the show made for writing fodder.
Contrast that with "All in the Family", which was a contemporary (though a bit earlier) that also had big things to say about the America of its time, but NEVER would be able to be aired in today's hyper-sensitive climate. That show's character was an outright in-your-face bigot, yet the show skewered his world view. Many people who watched the show because they agreed with Archie never realized what the show really was trying to say about and to America of the 70's. It didn't try to pussyfoot around the commentary it was trying to make on society. It tackled them straight on because it was allowed to in its day.
Also, Chrissie had big titties, wore skimpy clothes, and wasn't afraid to go braless, so that was nice.
This post was edited on 1/27/19 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:41 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:42 pm to FLBooGoTigs1
Chrissy 
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:43 pm to BowDownToLSU
She had a rack on her too.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:43 pm to BowDownToLSU
quote:
Chrissy
never got the rage over her, as meh as meh gets, just a bottle of peroxide and a big old ugly set of boobs
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:44 pm to AlwaysPutsSeatDown
Morality mattered in the 70's.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:45 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Morality mattered in the 70's.
not so much, but the façade of it did
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:46 pm to 777Tiger
So you liked jack? It's ok I get it.
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:47 pm to FLBooGoTigs1
quote:
So you liked jack? It's ok I get it.
got to admit he was pretty hawt!
Posted on 1/27/19 at 3:47 pm to 777Tiger
It was in santa Monica.
Seems like in Los Angeles at that time..being the subject was gaining steam along the west coast..you were either really accepting of gays, or really opposed.
Seems like in Los Angeles at that time..being the subject was gaining steam along the west coast..you were either really accepting of gays, or really opposed.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News