Why do we laugh at eight-year-old Butters Stotch when he sings about sodomy in South Park? How does the dominant audience understand Michael Scott to be heterosexual following his announcement that he would have sex with a male employee in the American version of The Office? What are the implications of laughing at Bobby Hill when his father expresses embarrassment over Bobby’s plus size modeling career in King of the Hill? I argue that the above characters are versions of the disruptive male character type common in sitcom satires. The sitcom satire is a hybrid genre that follows the sitcom format and contains satirical content. Using tools from queer theory and cultural studies, this thesis examines how particular examples of disruptive characters function in sitcom satires to reinforce cultural codes regarding gender and sexuality. In the first chapter, I suggest that when the male character disrupts normative gender and sexuality the audience laughs at the surprise and incongruity. I argue that the key feature of this character type is that he consistently disrupts cultural codes in ways that would normally mark him as homosexual yet he is not read as a gay character in the shows examined. I suggest that he is queer insofar as he does not fit neatly into the heterosexual/homosexual binary. Following this, in the second chapter, I explain how techniques used in the narrative; such as other characters' reactions, awkward silences, music selection, and scene changes, provide commentary on the disruption. I argue that characters that disrupt expectations of nonnative gender presentation and heterosexuality create anxiety for a dominant audience; the narrative commentary acknowledges that anxiety. Recognizing a character's disruption of cultural codes allows the dominant audience to relieve the anxiety and to reconcile the character's disruption with his heteronormative identity. Finally, in the third chapter I argue that the disruptive character often displays shame or pride in unexpected circumstances and is represented as ignorant I argue that by comparing normative behavior with disruptive or ignorant behavior, the narratives create the preferred or dominant meaning of the desirability of normative behavior. I conclude that the process of disruption, recuperation, and reinforcement reveals two perspectives. First, if disruptions confirm the desirability of the codes they attempt to subvert, then resisting these codes is difficult. Second. disruptions can reveal the construction of these codes; if these cultural codes were as natural as we are to believe, then our culture would not need to work as diligently to uphold them.

This dissertation puts into historical context allegations of farm labour abuse during the period 1948 to 1960 on the eastern Transvaal Highveld. It not only gives an exposition of these events, but importantly analyses these allegations of abuse in the context of the South African government’s intervention into farm labour for this period. The dissertation, however, first gives an overview of the government’s policies of regulating and providing farmers with black labour in the period 1910 to 1948. It deals specifically with the dubious measures introduced and coercive actions taken by the National Party government after 1948 to provide farmers with “cheap and plentiful labour”. The reactions to the accusations of abuse by the South African government, the farmers, the conservative, liberal and leftist press, and other independent bodies, such as the churches, Black Sash and the South African Institute of Race Relations, are also explored. The reaction of the African National Congress and the Potato Boycott launched in 1959 by this organisation in response to the mistreatment of farm labourers, also receives specific attention. It concludes with a discussion of how the farm labour scandals and the reaction during the 1950s and more specifically the Potato Boycott of 1959 are still relevant today by considering the contested nature of the commemoration of this event in 2009 AFRIKAANS : Hierdie verhandeling plaas bewerings van die misbruik van plaasarbeid gedurende die periode 1948 tot 1960 op die oostelike Transvaalse Hoëveld in historiese konteks. Dit bied nie net ‘n uiteensetting van hierdie gebeure nie, maar ontleed dié bewerings van mishandeling teen die agtergrond van die Suid-Afrikaanse regering se ingryping ten opsigte van plaasarbeid vir dié tydperk. Die verhandeling bied ten eerste ‘n oorsig van die regering se beleid van die regulering en voorsiening van swart arbeid aan boere gedurende die periode 1910 tot 1948. Dit handel spesifiek oor die twyfelagtige dwangmaatreëls wat deur die Nasionale Partyregering na 1948 geïmplementeer is om boere van “goedkoop en voldoende arbeid” te voorsien. Die reaksies op die bewerings van mishandeling deur die Suid-Afrikaanse regering, die boere, die konserwatiewe, liberale en linkse pers, as ook ander selfstandige instansies, soos die kerke, Black Sash en die Suid-Afrikaanse Instituut van Rasseverhoudinge word ook ondersoek. Die reaksie van die African National Congress en die aartappelboikot wat deur die organisasie in 1959 van stapel gestuur is in reaksie op die mishandeling van plaaswerkers, work ook ontleed. Die studie sluit af met ‘n bespreking van hoe die plaasarbeidskandale, die reaksie in die 1950s en meer spesifiek die aartappelboikot van 1959, steeds vandag relevant is teen die agtergrond van die omstrede herdenking van die gebeurtenis in 2009. / Dissertation (MHCS)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Historical and Heritage Studies / unrestricted