slf

I wouldn't agree at all that too many white males die on tv. White males are the vast majority of characters on tv, with many tv shows having majority male casts with only two or three women in the main/supporting cast; most of those characters will be white and straight (lesbians account for less than a percent of tv characters, for example). Few shows deviate from that (Blindspot's okay, Orphan Black is the opposite of most shows). A much smaller percentage of white men die on tv, meanwhile most lesbians get written off/die (many after having begun a relationship/had sex) and a large percentage of black characters die. (And most lgbt and non-white characters aren't major roles, either.) It's not actually equal at all. And I'm sure a lot of these writers would swear that orientation and race don't factor into deciding who dies, and maybe they don't do it consciously, but the thing is: for all that people like to accuse those criticizing this crap of being the ones obsessed with race, it's these totally not racist, not misogynistic writers who create only white/male majority shows. Killing off lesbians or black characters, or female characters of any race and orientation, doesn't have to be controversial but so long as characters that are female, black, and/or lesbian are so underrepresented this is going to be a problem. Just...increase the number of women, increase the number of black men and women, increase the number of gay men and women and this problem goes away. If Hollywood wants to retain it's straight white male majority then it deserves every ounce of criticisms it gets. In the meantime, yeah, if they're going to insist on killing off characters all the time for shock value or tension then kill more white male characters. Frankly, killing Weller would've been more shocking and better for the show. How often does the male lead die? For all that showrunners (mostly white men) like to harp on about how "no one's safe, anyone could die" "anyone" is never the white male lead (meanwhile Castle dumped Stana Katic, Sleepy Hollow just dropped Nicole Beharie, etc.).

Since there's no hard and fast rule around here as to whether it has to be an unpopular opinion on PTV or in general I say keep 'em comin'. Personally I'm not going back through every thread on this forum to see what other people think to know if I should bother posting my opinion or not, you know? As for these unpopular opinions of yours: I rather agree. M+M wasn't my otp but I didn't hate it and thought they had some solid arcs, but overall I can't pretend he wouldn't have been happier with someone with fewer issues. I love Mary, a lot more than most people, but she could be difficult. I think they would have remained happily married had he not died but I think they would have had a lot of problems, a lot of rough patches. Lavinia was more easy-going, gentler in many ways, and I think Matthew might've been happier overall with her. Sybil I always thought was shyer than her sisters; spirited but shy. Fellowes, in my opinion, liked to mix personality traits so everything wasn't so standard; like how Mary remained traditional and very emotionally distant even when swept up in romances which isn't typical for period heroines while Edith as the 'plain' sister should have been the smartest but wasn't any smarter than her sisters. So Sybil was the most progressive but also the softest and shyest, prone to ducking her head and speaking in a gentle voice. Rose always struck me as almost childishly excitable, which could be charming or grated, depending on the situation. I never thought she was meant to be like or replace Sybil as anything other than a young female character; Rose wasn't especially interested in politics or class (as Sybil was) and I think her relationship with Jack rather highlighted that. In fact I thought she had some similarities with the one JF had suss out Rose's motivations: Mary (who I always thought partially went after Pamuk just to sabotage the situation because she resented her father showing more interest in marrying her off than breaking the entail) despite how different their personalities were. Carson! God, almost everywhere else on the internet people love Carson and wanted him and Hughes together but I couldn't stand him after maybe season three. He could be pointlessly rude to his staff and I never understood his attachment to serving in the Crawley household to the point where he resented others who wanted to leave service (like poor Gwen). And poor Hughes! He treated her like a servant once they married. I couldn't bare him by the end of the show.

If they were willing to kill her why not just murder her earlier but make it look like an accident? There are countless ways and you'd think an organization like this one would be capable of it. And I agree, there's no way Mayfair was the big fish they were going after. That makes zero sense. At the end of the day Jane still remembers being abducted and put in a room full of other pajama-clad kids. Whatever this is goes back to when she was a child. Mayfair wouldn't have been a blip on the radar back then.

Those execs were so stupid for prioritizing male viewers like that. Female viewership was more than enough so long as they wrote the show well. The first two episodes brought in an impressive 7 million viewers. I firmly believe the more campy aspects were what caused the show to lose a lot of those viewers. (No lie it's what I struggled with. At it's best this show reminded me of Practical Magic, which is one of the three best movies about witches I've seen. At its worst it reminded me of a lot of straight-to-video tween witch movies Disney or Nick Jr. used to churn out.)

To be fair, I can really see Doherty's issue. From what I recall, there was a lot of pressure from the network to sex up the show (one of the reasons for Phoebe's frankly ridiculous wardrobe and bralessness) and Milano was willing to go along with what the big bosses wanted but Doherty called bs. There was also a divide regarding the show's creative direction where Doherty wanted it to be a bit more serious, play it a little straighter, and the execs wanted...what the show eventually became. Combs got caught in the middle because while she agreed with Doherty she didn't have any kind of pull with the network and her career prospects had never been great (even tho she's the most talented out of the three of them)- she wanted to keep her job, which Doherty understood (they're still friends is my understanding), so she pretty much stayed out of it. Milano kind of became the boss' favorite after that. (IIRC something similar happened on Friends, which is why Rachel's nips are visible in 90% of her scenes after a certain point; Cox went along but Kudrow had issues with it.)

Agreed, to your whole post but especially this. Helena has come to really care about the Hendrix family and she doesn't want to be a source of pain for Alison. Such a great moment for the character. Alison's friend! I was so happy to see her again; she seems to genuinely care about Alison and supports her. Them singing in the coffee shop was so cute. I'd love to see her more. And Helena's funeral was both sad but also humorous ("Little science babies, forgive me; I did not know to feed you liquid nitrogens."). Special shout-out to Cosima's "Alison and Donnie are total psychos, but this is a goldmine."

I loved Prue, generally loved Piper (I feel like the actress made this character), never liked Phoebe and grew to almost hate her, and never liked Page because it felt like she was whatever the writers needed her to be at the time. Phoebe behaved like a child. There were times when Alyssa Milano actually understood how to portray a grown woman who was also free-spirited. But the rest of the time? Baby voice. Literal actual pouting. Often baby voice + pouting. Which, when you factor in her braless and erect nipples in 50% of her scenes, is really really disturbing. (Wasn't that one of the things Milano and Doherty fought over?) Everything that happened after Prue's death was badly written and this show was never exactly high-brow. I appreciate that a lot of fans liked how corny the show was but I felt like it would have benefited from playing it straight. (Xena is a good example of a show that really did corny well.) Drop the chiming every time something magic happens, ditch the more cartoony villains and story lines, etc., and I think the show would've done much better in the long run. But it still had a lot going for it in the first few seasons. The tension between the sisters, them learning about their family's history, the time traveling (them having to let Phoebe burn was a great moment), the overall vibe of those seasons just really worked. (When it comes to vibe I mean that they show seemed to use great genre shows as inspiration; like there were bits in the series premiere that were very The Craft, and when the sisters went back and met their mom when she was waitressing some of those scenes were set up like the diner scenes in Terminator.) Though I do agree that Dan and Andy weren't interesting (though I didn't hate them).

Prue was my favorite, easily. There's a lot about the first episode that didn't work but it also had a vibe to it that I preferred and wish the show had kept; but the best part is Prue and Shannen Doherty. She was so emotionally complex and intense (the first few times her powers manifested were awesome) and I related to the way she reacted to learning about magic. Being able to move things and cast spells is great but once you add in homicidal demons and the responsibility of saving strangers (and even the world), suddenly a 9 to 5 looks more appealing. Phoebe's eagerness was understandable, even charming in the beginning, but I was with Prue all the way. I never understood why the fandom struggled with her. (Or I have my suspicions but that's for another thread.)

I love Sarah. Not initially, it took me a while to warm up to her, but now I love her. But as much as I love her she needs to learn how to handle stress better. "Carry your weight for once!" Like wtf, Sarah. Alison has financed almost the entire operation, has supplied drugs, guns, urine, has risked exposure and imprisonment to get an implant, has gone undercover, taught Sarah how to shoot, etc. God forbid she also try to keep her life together in the meantime. Sarah's been doing the same to Felix: drop whatever you're doing and do this thing because I say so. And with the snottiest attitude, as well. I get it, she's afraid and exhausted. She's been running since this started. But she's not the only one. Helena, Cosima, Alison, and MK were all doing this long before she showed up. Alison has kids to worry about, too. Cosima and MK have lost people. Helena was impregnated against her will, ffs. Everyone's stressed and dealing with that the best way they know how. And almost everyone is doing that without shitting on the others, except Sarah. The preview for next week shows Felix laying into her and as rough as that's going to be I think she needs to hear it. MK's associate, is he Irish? What is his purpose? I've read a few theories and some are suggesting he might be a new love interest for Sarah. Do not want.

We finally found out about the murder of clones at Helsinki and Ferdinand was almost set on fire and blown up, but easily the most horrifying thing this episode is what we learned about Alison and Donnie's sex life. Merda. I did not need to hear that.

I love Jaimie Alexander and the show's concept but I find it difficult to care about this show or to look forward to it. I think I would've liked it better if it focused exclusively on Jane's past/mission. Anyway, on to this episode: Liked the interactions between Jane and Maia, especially when Jane brought out her own sketch book. I was hoping she'd have something like that. Jane was the most logical choice to connect with the little girl, though the show resisted really digging into the meaty possibilities. Patterson was MVP this episode. Her unfortunate field excursion really toughened her up; she was dropping bad guys, jumping off the roof, and blowing up poor Borden's house. It was cool how the show un-killed the lesbian last week so why they gotta turn around and kill a lesbian this week? C'mon show, that was pointless. Speaking of pointless: 75% of Mayfair's dialogue is just stating the obvious and Marianne Jean-Baptiste's line delivery is weird, like she's explaining something slowly to a really dumb person.

As a Texan I'm offended if they think Adele's accent is what we sound like. There's variation, of course, by region and especially by generation but overall our accent is pretty subdued compared to other southern accents. (Examples of Texans: Beyonce, Angie Harmon, Jim Parsons, Tommy Lee Jones, Selena Gomez; our accent tends to make us sound bored and a little annoyed) I love Tat as Mika but the styling is not my fav. We call her Clone with a Dragon Tattoo. I think they could have gone for something more original.

I wonder if Charlotte really was cloned from Rachel or if her mother just said that to manipulate her. She has to know Rachel is going to try to escape at some point and that Rachel has always wanted a child. If she feels connected to Charlotte, like maybe this is her chance at motherhood, she'll stay. Especially since they had to know Rachel would eventually find out the girl is sick. (I dislike Rachel but that's still messed up.) Wasn't thrilled to see another male clone, so I hope he actually serves a purpose. This phasing out that Kira keeps experiencing, could this be just an extension of her weird little clairvoyant moments from previous seasons or might it be related to the implants?

Dang, this show may actually need Lizzie. She's not the most interesting lead character but the show is worse without her. So it took, what, a whole day for Tom to figure out how to swaddle a baby? That kid is doomed.

Wow, Alison was my MVP this ep. First, she allows herself to be probed which we all know she hates. Then, upon learning about the implants, immediately devises a plan, thinking only of her sisters ('my sister has a robot maggot in her face'). She digs up Leekie, which is a huge risk to herself and her family, and we all know how much she hates to get dirty (props to her pink hairnet). All the while she's having to coach lily-livered Donnie even though he has a damn mask on. My girl. My heart. This is why she's still my fave, no matter how useless other people say she is.

To be fair, we don't know if she lead the horde so much as the horde was attracted to the plane crash and after making it up the sand...hill...thing she saw the walkers coming toward her and beat a hasty retreat. Frankly, I think it was unrealistic that the place wasn't crawling with walkers already all things considered.

If Strand isn't interested in making friends then he maybe needs to stop encouraging people to do things they consider immoral because "that's how the world is now". Because the day's gonna come when people decide that hey, if we can leave a kid to die of horrible burns on the middle of the ocean then we can shoot this prick in the head. I don't think they owe Strand anything. He didn't save them out of the kindness of his heart, he saved them because he needed people. So they're square as far as I'm concerned. I like the actor playing him but honestly the character isn't doing anything for me. I get what they're going for but the writing hasn't improved since season one and his pointless speeches that drove people crazy. (Though I laughed at his condescending remarks to Travis.) He's not mysterious, he's not especially calculating much less smart; he benefits when compared to the idiots surrounding him but that's not saying much. I don't know why they wrote Alex, a woman who's been pretty smart about surviving so far, that way. She could've tried bartering their way on the boat. Unless the point was that she had Strand's number and she figured that if he didn't make the choice to save the boy instead of choosing to bring them on board solely to gain a doctor then he'd likely kill the boy himself later. (If so, then she was right.) I still don't see the appeal of Nick the magic junkie. Junkies that are still alive do not have great survival instincts, despite what Strand says, they're just lucky. This show is weirdly romanticizing addicts. I enjoyed the actress playing Madison in Gone Girl but I think she's only as strong as her material. She can't make Madison interesting and she's not even trying; even a reasonably competent actress would know that making a constipated face isn't going to improve on bad lines and plot. Why am I watching this show?

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I personally don't think romances in fiction always need outside hindrances and I think Western media in particular relies way too much on that; most of the time by the time a book or show is finished I'm so over the flagship couple it's not even funny (Castle, Bones, Gilmore Girls, The Vampire Diaries, etc). When it comes to Mary/Matthew, it wasn't the outside forces/suspension thing that interested me at all. I liked them in spite of what I thought were some pretty stupid plots (Matthew is paralyzed! No he can walk again! But he's still going to marry Lavinia despite being in love with another woman! But lo, flu!) because I thought they had good chemistry and he witnessed some of Mary's less than sterling behavior so he had the whole picture; so when he said he loved her I believed it. Season three was for me the most interesting season for them as a couple (and the least popular among fans) because it gave us what so few shows do: their life. Stop throwing asteroids and affairs and epidemics and sinking ships at your couple- let us see them live their lives, day to day. Especially if you're trying to give us a star-crossed pairing, because the day to day stuff is going to be the toughest and the most fulfilling. And sure enough, tension was created organically. How they differed in their views of the estate and its management, how they dealt with family issues, etc. There's safety in the big outside forces because the audience knows they're just speed bumps on the way to the inevitable hookup. It's easier for writers. It's what happens after a couple is paired that makes or breaks them, that shows how well written and strong the pairing really is.

Okay, this actually gets to the heart of a couple of issues we disagree on. This is how JF chose to write it; Mary and Edith live in a world full of men (at least before the war) and Edith would've encountered at least a few dozen of them in between her deb ball and the others she would've attended. JF chose to write it as men only visiting Mary, going for Mary, and Edith pursuing them until I think season three. That's not fair, to be certain, but it is canon. I agree about the motivations Edith was given, it was likely a desperation to get away from Mary and Downton, to be the Lady of her own home, which was the closest thing to independence most women got back then. Though I'm not sure how much of Strallan's reaction was "cold feet" so much as "wow she just said I'd be her life's work." That was absolutely the wrong thing to say, and it let Strallan know how she saw him and what she figured their married life would be like, and decided to not go through with it. For me it's a case of I get them both in this situation and while it was a terrible thing for Edith to have to endure, she's of course better off for it. Well, you compared them ("why would Mary have a stronger reaction to Napier leaving than Matthew" basically) so I was responding to that. Matthew feeling rejected and leaving was, at that point in time, very different from Napier doing it. Mary knew Matthew naturally felt thrown over, while with Napier while she had to know it was the same I think for her it was also perhaps a moral rejection of her. There was a judgement there. And that rejection had consequences (especially since until the end of s1, which was one year after Pamuk, she believed he spread the rumors about her.) I don't disagree that Mary showed indifference toward Napier in the aftermath of Pamuk's death, though I do disagree that it meant something. A man had just died in her bed, will having sex with him. She had to expose this fact to two people, one of whom referred to it as Mary's "shame". So it's no surprise to me that she was completely overwhelmed by what had happened. I don't like discussing Pamuk and Mary in the context of romance - though I acknowledge this is how the canon treats what occurred between them - because I saw their encounter as coercive sex, best case scenario. I'm not sure what point you're making/arguing in the rest of your post tbh. Sorry. I agree completely that Napier was wronged and Mary behaved like a badly, and that he was very nice to find the source of the rumors and inform her. I thought he was a great guy and someone JF could've written to be a great partner for her. Their relationship was never deep because it was never explored? That's what I say in my original post was a mistake, in my opinion? Tho I disagree with any idea that there was never any potential. He's known Mary longer than almost any other suitor. She befriended him at least one year before the events of season one, based on what she told Cora, and they were exchanging letters. Which was not a thing available young noblewomen just did back then so it did mean something. She maintained a friendship with him for at least ten years before the series ended (he's the only person outside the family/staff that Mary is friends with throughout the series). I think at any point after Matthew's death he could've been re-introduced and a relationship between them could've been written. I appreciate that we all disagree and this is the Unpopular Opinions thread, but I'm really not going to be talked out of my ship, especially when people keep repeating what I've said back to me, no offense meant. Mary is a character, not a real person. She prefers whomever JF wants her to prefer. I'm saying I wish he'd written her as preferring Napier. Not just in real life, in fiction too. That it's a common formula is my problem though. Sexism and classism still abound in literature, especially romances, and Charles Blake was, as you point out, very classic in that regard. Perhaps JF would've redeemed Charles but for me he didn't. A mother might ponder those things, and a mother's love might ideally be non judgmental, but I don't see the point in pretending that things Mary said and did over the years didn't sway how her parents saw her. Knowing that someone has done awful things doesn't mean we don't love them but it does affect how we see them, what we believe they are capable of, how quick we are to give them the benefit of the doubt, etc. Knowing Edith was willing to throw the entire family under the bus because Mary hurt her feelings would have absolutely colored Cora's view of Edith. Edith was seen as the put-upon daughter, the one forgotten, whose greatest weakness was being seen as dull. She was seen as a victim. Edith was never seen as capable of giving as good as she got and even sucker punching another person. Knowing she authored that letter would have affected how Cora saw Edith, absolutely. Robert did eventually find out, though. And then Mary could have easily let is slip that Edith sold her out. And it definitely would've affected how Robert saw Edith. I think both of her parents would've forgiven her and still loved her, but I do think Edith wouldn't have been looked at the same. Which is fair. Well, Sybil was presented after the Pamuk thing broke. Either that was JF's way of conveying some of the consequences of Edith's letter or he didn't see the point in giving her multiple suitors because he'd already settled on Branson.

The worm thing got my eyebrows up but I've otherwise loved this season so far. It's a great improvement over last season and yes that's because there are no male clones. Sorry, show, they just weren't as interesting. Everything to do with Beth has broken my heart; I was interested in her backstory before but she never meant as much to me as she did to other fans. Now I wish Sarah had watched some other clone kill herself. Tatiana killed it as Beth.

I think it's a case of YMMV. Mary's vanity is strong and when it comes to the Pamuk issue it's complicated because of the context. Her flirting with Strallan didn't result in her becoming a social pariah and joke. What happened with Pamuk did, and would have likely been exacerbated by Napier staying away (Robert actually refers to this when he discusses a letter from Rosamund with Cora; something like people were saying that Napier had given up any idea of marrying Mary and that it reflected badly on her character). A proposal from Napier might've done a great deal to mitigate the damage being done to Mary's reputation and it never happened. Matthew left Downton and went back to the house he shared with his mother after Mary acted like a brat, he didn't leave Yorkshire and get engaged to someone else as Napier did. And it's like Michelle Dockery said, season one Mary would've still married Richard Carlisle because it would've saved her while allowing her to get one over (in her mind) on Edith and Matthew. I think JF is a believer in writing women opposite brash and dominant men. I don't think it was lack of charm that worked against Napier so much as it was he was more reserved, more of an introvert. JF wanted someone more like Gillingham and Henry so that's what he wrote. Maybe she didn't chase after him but she did pine for him. Mary didn't want Matthew but Matthew had already begun showing interest in Mary, as had Strallan, which was my point. That's three guys, one of whom was engaged to Mary, that Edith showed interest in and that's season one which covered a two year period. I've read a lot of takes on Charles and none of them clicked for me. He didn't know these people when he made judgements about them, his attitude wasn't professional imo, and him misrepresenting himself might have been a trope but it's a shitty one from a class perspective. Like, I'm trying to imagine Charles pulling that with Tom, the guy who was born poor in Ireland (where Charles, an employee of the English government, was going to inherit an enormous estate) and was a servant at Downton.

Oh, where to begin. Janna: I like the idea of someone having an anxiety disorder on a show about an outbreak. Firstly, there are a lot of people with them and these kinds of shows generally stick to the elderly when it comes to characters with disabilities. Secondly, it's just a little mean- "this woman has to survive an outbreak that makes people go rabid LET'S GIVE HER AN ANXIETY DISORDER." Hee. Lex: Oy. I'll give the show points for making him black but he's such a stock character. The uncompromising, morally-upstanding male lead who trusts his gut - gotta love those guys, especially when they refuse to do their job and cooperate with people who know more/better than they do. "I'm going to need you, someone infinitely superior to me in rank, to explain what you intend to do until I am personally satisfied and only then will I do my job." Also, if you're girlfriend has an anxiety disorder try not taking her anxiety personally (not to be confused with seriously); stress creates anxiety even in people not dealing with anxiety disorders (or having to give up that bitchin' apartment of hers). Being belligerent actually doesn't help. (And did I hear it right and he's already living with someone else? WTF?) Katie: Girl, if you need a badge to get into that section of the hospital I'm pretty sure your kids aren't in there. Also, if you have a medical mask over half your face and you're searching for your missing child during a hospital lockdown and you've just come across dead people covered in blood maybe stop trying to have "a moment" with the hot-tempered and douchey cop. Jake: Little wonder Janna dumped him repeatedly. Random thoughts: loved seeing Claudia Black but oy with the front of her hair when we first meet her. I'm expecting her to be a villain. Syrian Patient Zero is very obviously a misdirection. Would they really put up a fence that quickly? There's no way The Honorable Cop Everyone Trusts could actually keep people from rioting the second that fence went up and o m g ru kidding with that camera crew being in exactly the right place for the heartfelt speech? How young is the pregnant girl that she has to run away from her mom? This show is shot weirdly, almost every show on the CW is; it reminds me of the posters for The 100 where they pretty everyone up, model perfect, and then artfully smudge dirt on their faces while shining really flattering warm light on their faces. I'll give it a few more episodes.

Well, Mary was seriously considering Charles Blake once she learned he had his own estate so, canon-wise, Mary wasn't that opposed to the idea. I sincerely doubt Charles Blake would've given up his estate so this is the exact scenario Mary would've known she'd be facing, too. I think partially it comes down to what we might do versus what they might do. George wouldn't have school in the traditional sense like we did, he'd have tutors, his playmates would've been the girls and local children, so there wouldn't be as much issue with uprooting him for a few months out of the year like there would be now. And even now there are military families and families that vacation around the world for the summer, etc. I'd be surprised if his dad is that big an influence. We know his mother died a year before the series began and there was no mention of siblings at all, so I got the feeling it was him and his dad (possibly cousins around somewhere). His dad is spoken of in the show as a quiet man more into horse racing than anything else and known for being a boring man (a line many fans mistook as referring to Evelyn). If his dad was going to exert influence I'd think it would've been with the engagement that he called off in season one, which was a huge deal back then. Enormous deal, I was amused they had Mary ignorant of it since there's just about no way there wasn't gossip about it. Maybe his dad was pressuring him, who knows, but Evelyn told Cora in season one that he preferred to marry for love which still seemed to be the case in later seasons. If anyone was pressuring him they weren't successful.

But undesirable for whom? Usually, it would've been the man's family that objected but that wouldn't have been the case here since Evelyn was mad for Mary. George's inheritance couldn't be threatened, nor could the inheritance of any children they had. A marriage between Evelyn and Mary might not have worked for one reason or another, tho I don't think so, but George and the estates wouldn't be that much of an issue. This is what I think would be the biggest concern for both of them. "Can I effectively fulfil my duties to my estate and to the tenants?" Anywhere else this might be an unpopular opinion but: I never saw Edith as a victim of anything other than herself. She spent so much time trying to beat Mary at being Mary, only chasing after men that wanted Mary, etc, and she basically shot herself in the foot. Once she started - and I realize I sound like some 90s life coach here - being the best Edith she could be she was actually kind of cool. But I never saw her as being bullied by Mary; she'd try to hurt Mary verbally but she just didn't have the wit to do it, whereas Mary inherited Violet's sharp tongue. Her intent was always to do as much damage as Mary she just couldn't pull it off. Also, because I liked Sybil and Mary I was okay with the show never fully exploring the fallout of the Pamuk scandal but I do wish Edith had at least realized that, while briefly chasing off Strallan, Mary didn't use the nuclear option (which Edith did). Outing Edith to their parents would've had a very different consequence for her; she was always seen as a victim of Mary's, the forgotten second child. But if they'd known she'd snitched, risking not only Mary's future but her's and Sybil's as well, they wouldn't have looked at her the same.

Usually, but I recall reading about several situations like I'm proposing when I was reading up on Anne Boleyn and the Tudor dynasty (which granted isn't the same period) so I'm pretty sure it did happen. Some noblewomen with male children from a first marriage did remarry to a nobleman. I can't imagine those women were intentionally sought unless they were super rich or highly ranked because of exactly the challenges you describe, but it happened. I'd imagine it be a case of spending part of the year in one home and part of the year in another. With a trustworthy estate manager (etc, though his dad is still alive and running things and would be for likely a few decades), regular contact (phones and visits by car), and a lot of hard work, it's manageable. Again, it'd just come down to wanting it enough. And Mary was more than interested in marrying a nobleman so I think she'd be fine with it so long as it didn't negatively affect Downton. But it doesn't matter, alas. JF didn't go that route. Here's an unpopular opinion: I think JF's original plan of hooking Matthew up with Sybil actually made some sense, so long as they wouldn't have been the same ages they were in the show. Sybil was interested in politics and nursing (like most of the people in Isobel's family), she and Matthew had a spark during a scene in the episode where she gets hit at the rally, and I think they might've been a good fit together and run Downton well. Of course, thinking about it and watching it are two separate things. I might've hated it, lol. I ended up liking Mary and Matthew more than I thought I would, after all.