Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:It's not okay to be gay
Why?:It's not okay to be gay[edit source]
Scofield & 1337 08:43, October 9, 2011 (UTC)
| Humour: | 5 | Okay, very good. I see where this is going, certainly. What's there is satirical and sarcastic and that's very nice. The unfortunate thing is that as of yet there's nothing really new here in the realm of making fun of gay-hating Jesus freaks. Yes, it is funny because it's true, but it's been true for a very long time, and people have been making it funny for almost as long. There needs to be something more. Something either less "noticeable" about the issue at hand, or something entirely bizarre altogether. Whatever it may be, there isn't anything here that wasn't already obvious to me when I began reading the article. It has a good structure already set up, that's for certain, and there's nothing inherently wrong with its prose and direction, but the jokes are just stale and old. They need some spicing up for maximum humorous intent.
As far as suggestions go, one would be that maybe instead of having the lead character be male, it be a female. Keep the part about females knowing their place and what-not and then you've got the much funnier joke of a woman preaching to children about how women are beneath men, how she hates the burden of thinking for herself and being expected to vote, and so forth. To go along with that, inserting a picture of a proper looking old-timey schoolteacher with the bun hair and horn-rimmed glasses and everything could probably add to the visual aspect of the reading of the article, and allow the reader to better imagine what's going on. You could leave the sex jokes if you really wanted to, but the idea of the ultra-conservative hypocrite raping children and asking them to be quiet about it is extremely overused. In line with it being a woman, if you should decide to use that suggestion, maybe she's really sexually frustrated because of her beliefs and goes off on a tangent every now and then about her yearning for male companionship, until she snaps back into reality and dismisses her behavior to the children. Could work for the gay women segment too: "Gay women? They're just a myth! ...Like the myth that a woman knows how to love a woman better than a man ever could. It's a lie, girls! They bite, and they use metal objects on you and they're not very feminine at all! ...Er, where were we?" Alternately, or in junction with it, you could always add in some unexpected stuff from the mind of this brainwashed loon. It's not okay to be gay because a gay guy slashed my tires. It's not okay to be gay because if the gays could hold political office, C-SPAN would be pink. Etcetera. The format's all there and ready for a funny injection, it's really a very open-for-editing sort of idea. There's lots of things you could probably come up with to really punch it up. |
| Concept: | 6 | Well, as I've said, the concept is rather overused. But as I also said, it can be liberally (heh) expanded upon to be molded into just about anything, so it's a very flexible idea that I think has a deal of promise. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | Nothing fancy, but the prose is more or less perfect. Readable, understandable, not broken English, and all. |
| Images: | 5 | The images could also use some help. The Queer Eye guys could probably stay, but I don't see what use the vibrator serves. The idea of a lead image of whomever this "teacher" is should probably go in, and then as an idea perhaps (based on that hilarious conservapedia article you linked in the last section) have a ridiculously skewed pie chart showing that gays are the reason for world hunger or the disasters in Japan and Haiti, or something like that. |
| Miscellaneous: | 6 | Averaged other scores together. |
| Final Score: | 30 | So in conclusion, you've got the beginnings of something here for certain, and most of the hard work is pretty much done I'd think. But now to add that spice (I'm partial to cayenne pepper, myself) that pulls everything together. As is, it's an average article, but I'm sure it can be much, much better. Good luck, and feel free to ask on my talk page if you'd like any help with it. |
| Reviewer: | RAHB 23:37, October 19, 2011 (UTC) | |