Fiends

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
If its not gay, I don't want it.

An explanation:
The werewolf since 2013, has been a character the nurses squealed and fawned over (despite their poor taste in furries. There's so much better out there.) If you change it to a female role, and then completely skip that part, you're just blatantly missing the gay. And y'all are cowards because this show already has that thought put in people's head that they complain about costumes, at this point whats stopping you from taking it a step further. (Which being gay or bi really shouldn't be a step further, u just don't wanna rock the boat even more than 8 scantily clad women and 1 buff guy in a speedo)

I've been waiting for balance in the show for years. Either male nurses, or somebody's implied gay. Like at best I'd figure with the new change it would make out lesbians (and female bisexuals) as a fetish, and at worst it'd be "oh no the gays are Bad", but it changed the whole character so what's the point. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

(I wanna make it abundantly clear that this is nothing against the performers in the show. This is directed at above their level.)
 
Isn't it kind of implied that Igor is at least slightly bisexual? He always seems way into the dancing speedo guy, even slaps his ass after giving him a pep talk. Not saying I disagree with you, but I don't think I'm picking up what you're putting down. LGBT representation in media is awesome; however, I think if it's shoehorned in there just for the sake of being there to fulfill some quota, it just usually feels forced like it's trying too hard to make a statement and, in my opinion, I'd rather leave political statements out of theme park shows. That being said, if they want to include gay characters in a manner that isn't forced (as in your example), have at it! It wouldn't affect my enjoyment of the show; however, I think not liking a show simply because it doesn't have homosexual or (at the very least) bisexual innuendo in it is a little crazy, but to each their own.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luseendesi and Icer
I assume it is still an offensive thinly vailed rip off of RHPC wandering about as a low end near strip show.
 
Oh it's still campy as hell, no doubt, but I still seem to quite enjoy it for some reason. Maybe that says quite a bit about me though ?
 
Honestly, at the end of the day, the last thing Fiends needed was more women being objectified by men. Equal-representation has always been severely lacking in our Fiends (vs Tampa's). The warewolf change just makes it worse in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mamunia
Rhaw757 said:
Isn't it kind of implied that Igor is at least slightly bisexual? He always seems way into the dancing speedo guy, even slaps his ass after giving him a pep talk. Not saying I disagree with you, but I don't think I'm picking up what you're putting down. LGBT representation in media is awesome; however, I think if it's shoehorned in there just for the sake of being there to fulfill some quota, it just usually feels forced like it's trying to hard to make a statement and, in my opinion, I'd rather leave political statements out of theme park shows. That being said, if they want to include gay characters in a manner that isn't forced (as in your example), have at it! It wouldn't affect my enjoyment of the show; however, I think not liking a show simply because it doesn't have homosexual or (at the very least) bisexual innuendo in it is a little crazy, but to each their own.
Click to expand...
I feel like you missed my point.

For one, it was a half joke. Fiends is a show that has been slowly going down my list in terms of quality for years, and it was never about "well it ain't gay." It was more "We're gonna shove more obvious sexual jokes because haha adults should be treated like children who laugh at immature jokes." I've always been on the side of Nurses don't bother me, but I wish there was something else there to equal the playing field as far as eye-candy. (again never gay, just kinda tired of the same old same old.)

As far as the werewolf goes, if you take an established male character, which for a theme park show I'd consider the werewolf one even though he's nameless, and make them female instead, it should not change the dynamic of the rest of the show. If it does change then you're doing something kinda wrong. They can say its to "change things up" but really, you wanted to make a small change and then had to rework part of it to fit that small change. For new comers to HoS and Fiends the changes won't make any difference to the show. They have nothing to look back upon to judge. But for those who attend every year, and watch the show every year, sometimes multiple times a year, it makes a much bigger difference. Saying that it would be shoehorned in is kinda... sour tasting imo. Because it wouldn't be. The only thing they would have done is changed one thing. If that's shoehorned in then the nurses gagging for wolf dick is also shoehorned in, but since that's considered standard as we have the male/female dynamic there was no real questioning. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (And I was never a fan when they changed the nurses from being scared of the werewolf to wanting him. It was a Bad Change. Rip 2012 Fiends I still miss u.)

Side note - Shewolf. Wow I haven't heard that song in ages. I'm interested kinda???
 
Zachary said:
Honestly, at the end of the day, the last thing Fiends needed was more women being objectified by men. Equal-representation has always been severely lacking in our Fiends (vs Tampa's). The warewolf change just makes it worse in my opinion.
Click to expand...

The female werewolf is objectified very VERY minimally if at all from my memory of the show. Igor hits on her to an extent, but is quickly shot down. It wasn't distasteful in my opinion. I'd definitely agree with you that the nurses are objectified quite a bit and I'm not a fan of that aspect of the show. I just enjoy the stupid humor and campiness of it all to be honest.

Also, I think the problem with trying to get equal representation in to everything is that there's just so many different groups out there that can complain that they want representation so where do you draw the line? Like how far do we have to go to make sure everyone is represented? Do we have to insert LGBT characters in every show? Can we just not enjoy things for what they are rather than having to dissect and overly assess every little detail to make sure every box is checked off and everybody is happy? I mean, sheesh, it's just a theme park show, can we just hate it or love it for it's quality, not for what it does (or doesn't) represent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mushroom
We are at the point where we are discussing something pertaining a hot and controversial societal topic that can be applied to the park shows but really has no business being debated over something like a theme park show. The only thing that can come out of this is seeing one another's political viewpoints.

Edit: I didn't mean to agree or disagree with either @Rhaw757 or @Zachary , I just wanted to plant the seed to possibly not continue this debate since it could only end badly
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Diamond Dave and Rhaw757
Applesauce said:
I feel like you missed my point.

For one, it was a half joke. Fiends is a show that has been slowly going down my list in terms of quality for years, and it was never about "well it ain't gay." It was more "We're gonna shove more obvious sexual jokes because haha adults should be treated like children who laugh at immature jokes." I've always been on the side of Nurses don't bother me, but I wish there was something else there to equal the playing field as far as eye-candy. (again never gay, just kinda tired of the same old same old.)

As far as the werewolf goes, if you take an established male character, which for a theme park show I'd consider the werewolf one even though he's nameless, and make them female instead, it should not change the dynamic of the rest of the show. If it does change then you're doing something kinda wrong. They can say its to "change things up" but really, you wanted to make a small change and then had to rework part of it to fit that small change. For new comers to HoS and Fiends the changes won't make any difference to the show. They have nothing to look back upon to judge. But for those who attend every year, and watch the show every year, sometimes multiple times a year, it makes a much bigger difference. Saying that it would be shoehorned in is kinda... sour tasting imo. Because it wouldn't be. The only thing they would have done is changed one thing. If that's shoehorned in then the nurses gagging for wolf dick is also shoehorned in, but since that's considered standard as we have the male/female dynamic there was no real questioning. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (And I was never a fan when they changed the nurses from being scared of the werewolf to wanting him. It was a Bad Change. Rip 2012 Fiends I still miss u.)

Side note - Shewolf. Wow I haven't heard that song in ages. I'm interested kinda???
Click to expand...

Oh no, I get it. Your point is valid. You're saying they changed it more to avoid homosexual innuendo than they would have if they just kept it in and you would've preferred that. I get it. It just gets exhausting to me when, at every turn, it seems like there's always people who refuse to enjoy something simply because they feel like a certain group isn't fairly represented. Part of me gets that, but the other part of me just misses being a kid when the world was much simpler. I'm a cisgender, straight, white male though so I guess I have the privilege in a way of not having to think about things like representation and such.
 
lce729 said:
We are at the point where we are discussing something pertaining a hot and controversial societal topic that can be applied to the park shows but really has no business being debated over something like a theme park show. The only thing that can come out of this is seeing one another's political viewpoints.
Click to expand...

Agreed, you're 100% right. I go to Busch Gardens to have a good time, which means politics and social issues completely leave my mind because thinking about either of those things immediately make me NOT have a good time.
 
Shoving our heads in the sand and not looking at park show content within the frame of the current cultural climate (read: #MeToo) seems like the wrong path to me.

I'm not sitting here demanding changes to the show as it was previously performed. My issue is that year after year, they keep making it worse. Considering where we are as a collective society right now, that seems like very poor form.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ilovebg, Mamunia, Mushroom and 2 others
I feel like I need to repeat the fact that I did in fact like this show at one point, and it has gone down hill because of the jokes they decided to play up more in favor of others. Rather than anything else. You're baiting for an argument I won't give. Fiends has always been a controversial show since they brought it back in 2011 because of the nurse outfits. What's stopping it now from being something else?

And it also bares repeating that its a half joke. Chances are when I see the show it won't make a massive difference to me unless its just that much worse than last year. Again not based off of actor performances but rather the jokes they want to amplify. Show has been going down hill imo for years. It had nothing to do with what I brought up tonight. It will continue to not really have anything to do with what I brought up tonight. Because I'll still end up with Doctor make implied sexual joke. Simplicity drops to the ground ready for sex "NOT NOW SIMPLICITY"" like 5 times through the show anyways. because that was the joke that needed to be repeated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nicole, Lord Robert and Rhaw757
For the record through out history one of the only places it has been safe to make important statements about society and politics has been in theater and stage. I think it is perfectly right to discuss this as it applies. FURTHER it is entirely reasonable to assume that potentially offensive or arguably insulting topics and or stereotypes could impact a persons enjoyment of a show. Asking a person to muzzle such discussions or even dog whistle implying it is akin to telling a person, "your opinion is not valid."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nicole
Applesauce said:
Because I'll still end up with Doctor make implied sexual joke. Simplicity drops to the ground ready for sex "NOT NOW SIMPLICITY"" like 5 times through the show anyways. because that was the joke that needed to be repeated.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I feel like sexual jokes make up at least less than half of the jokes now. It's mostly lousy, awful pop-culture references to the point where the entire show can be posted on reddit under r/FellowKids which again, what does it say about me that I enjoy this show for some reason? ?
 
Also, I'm not saying anyone shouldn't look at the potentially offensive issues in these theme park shows. By all means, if that's your motif, and you can't stand a show simply for the fact that there's no LGBT characters or you feel like women are objectified too much, that's your prerogative, and I do applaud you for wanting to do what you can to help influence change. It just kind of feels a little bad when you enjoy something and someone says "this show is bad because it doesn't offer equal representation and it's offensive!" and you're like "well damn, I enjoy that show, does that make a terrible person for not noticing or thinking about that kind of thing while enjoying the show?" Like shoot, I just want to enjoy a fictional performance without having to be reminded of how shitty the real world can be.
 
The same could be said about just about anything...
"well damn I was just trying to get an eye full of her boobs, why does she have to get upset and make me feel bad about it?"
"well damn I was just cracking a joke about him jewing me down on the price, we all know they are like that why does he have to make such a big deal about it?"
"well damn I was just using an old fashioned name, my grandmother called her housekeeper that all the time, why is everyone making a federal case about it?"
"well damn I just want them to keep their sexual preferences to themselves. My kids should not have to be confused by their bad choices"
"well damn ... ... ..."

See where I am going? And yes, it is the same thing.
 
Haha no, they're not the same thing. Your examples are people actually actively being shitty people. Enjoying Fiends doesn't make someone a shitty person. I hope that's not what you're implying and I'm just misunderstanding your post.
 
Rhaw757 said:
Haha no, they're not the same thing. Your examples are people actually actively being shitty people. Enjoying Fiends doesn't make someone a shitty person. I hope that's not what you're implying and I'm just misunderstanding your post.
Click to expand...
No, I have issue with someone enjoying the show, I take issue with someone saying that
"well damn, I enjoy that show, does that make a terrible person for not noticing or thinking about that kind of thing while enjoying the show?" Like shoot, I just want to enjoy a fictional performance without having to be reminded of how shitty the real world can be.
Click to expand...

since just prior the topic of the hypersexualization of the women of the show was being discussed your "kind of thing," can be inferred. The rest follows, you are always free to think, say, and to a lesser extent do what you want, you are not free from consequences and to expect or demand such is no better than any of the items I mentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad