Well ... because it's pop culture
Lepustimidus said:
And why is it seen as appropriate by society to tear men down for laughs, yet it is seen as villianous to do likewise to women?
There are a few points worth considering. First and foremost, it's hard for me to see that the "villainy" of misogyny is taken seriously, given that it persists and even flourishes in American culture.
Secondly, we might consider history and social prejudice. Women have long been second-class citizens in societies around the world; part of our vigilance against misogyny derives from this process. To the other, though, to consider
Orleander's point from another topic, "Men, for some odd reason," often see such complaints as indicative of "being a weenie".
Third, we should pause for a moment to think about ideological transitions. Such flux is typical and to be found throughout history, though modernity brings an increase in the frequency and magnitude of the shifts. For instance, at least into the 1990s, it was an insult to call a woman a slut, and while calling a man a slut was considered insulting, it was the
feminization of the man that was the insult, not the suggestion that he is somehow wrong for getting his rocks off when he can.
Perhaps should some era come in which men are
truly oppressed by women, sex and gender perspectives might transform more dramatically. In the meantime, it's slow progress.
Yet even if we set all that aside, a persuasive element to answer the question is found in your own post:
I was just watching that series 'Two and a half men' ....
While one might chuckle at your summary of the show, the fact that the question derives from
Two and a Half Men speaks much toward the answer. American network sitcoms are among our most intellectually flaccid dregs of art. Good sitcoms over the years are pretty rare in this country. After
M*A*S*H and
Taxi, things have been in steady decline. We'll say the same thing about cartoon series in a few years.
Bottom line is that you're referring to
Two and a Half Men. Charlie Sheen is one of the stars, for heaven's sake. That it is highly-enough rated to gain local syndication says nothing; so was
Charles in Charge. That it is highly-enough rated to get cable syndication (FX) says nothing; so was
Spin City. That it is highly-enough rated to survive the WGA strike and get a sixth season says nothing to its credit; it is an American sitcom in the twenty-first century. You might as well say that it's a good show because it's better than
Dharma & Greg.
All of which suggests that in worrying about the audience of
Two and a Half Men means you're worrying about pop culture idiots; the show is intended to appeal to a lesser intellectual state.