Gender On Television: It's Like Feminism Never Happened

[SmithW6079]

I prefer to use terms like 'rapey' in discussions of actual rape so I will be leaving that alone.

"Rapey" is not a word, and its use makes a mockery of the very real crime of rape. And "actual" rape as opposed what? Is that like that Republican politician a few years ago talking about "real" rape?

[SparedTurkey]

 

 "Rapey" is not a word, and its use makes a mockery of the very real crime of rape. And "actual" rape as opposed what? Is that like that Republican politician a few years ago talking about "real" rape?

Seriously? Yes, if you read my posts, clearly I am just like a republican who only believes in 'real' rape. Whatever that may be.

 

Or perhaps, upon rereading the conversation and what I actually wrote, you'll see I merely declined to engage with the proposition that the 'male gaze' is 'rapey' preferring to use that word (if I have to, considering it is not a real word even though I didn't actually make it up) and all variations thereof when discussing sexual violence.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SparedTurkey

[galax-arena]

And "actual" rape as opposed what? Is that like that Republican politician a few years ago talking about "real" rape?

"I just got raped by that math test!" =/= actual rape. Hope that helps. :)

[proserpina65]

Perhaps it is representative of puritanical American values - you know, like the ones that inspire people to tell Kim Kardashian to put her clothes back on?

 

I don't claim to speak for others, but I'd like Kim K. to put her clothes back on because it's just plain lazy and boring when she puts naked pics on the internet.  Does she have any other skills?

I'll put a hand up on the pro side of male nudity, or at least a lot less female nudity please.  I just hate the stereotype that only women's bodies are considered beautiful.  Men always bring up this argument with me and act like the female body is objectively beautiful and the male body is objectively not.  I know that's not what you're saying.  But it just feels like a really shitty excuse to perpetuate the status quo.  I know there's straight women who aren't dying for male nudity, but I'd just like to go on record that there's a lot of us that enjoy the male form and there's even groups of us who like it better than the female.  We exist.

Add me to the "more male nudity, please" side.

Edited April 25, 2016 by proserpina65

[topanga]

I don't claim to speak for others, but I'd like Kim K. to put her clothes back on because it's just plain lazy and boring when she puts naked pics on the internet.  Does she have any other skills?

Add me to the "more male nudity, please" side.

Ray J thinks Kim K has other skills...

 

And I'm not a fan of the 'dick pick' because I really only want to see one of those when it's connected to a person who means something to me. But the male body itself? Beautiful. I love the ESPN body issue and its pictorial spreads of beautiful male (and female) athletic physiques. Muscles, veins, nice hands, taught and sometimes sweaty skin...now that turns me on. And not bloated, 'roided up, Schwarzenegger physiques, either. I'm talking basketball players, football players, somewhat lanky tennis players, and even slightly out-of-shape baseball players.

 

 

"Rapey" is not a word, and its use makes a mockery of the very real crime of rape. And "actual" rape as opposed what? Is that like that Republican politician a few years ago talking about "real" rape?

IMO, the only time I've heard an appropriate use of 'Rapey" was when someone described the lyrics to Robin Thicke's 'Blurred Lines' as rapey: "You know you want it. You know you want it." Even though Robin wasn't describing a rape, he was dealing with a woman as if he knew she wanted him physically. Hell, maybe he was raping her and simply decided to attach the rape to a catchy dance beat. 

Edited April 25, 2016 by topanga

[qtpye]

I know The Simpsons is a comedy that should be taken with a grain of salt, and the fact that Marge is a "traditional" housewife is supposed to be a joke...but I don't find it funny. It's annoying. Especially how she tends to look down on women that choose not to be wives/mothers.

What bothers me even more is how she tries to force her lifestyle down Lisa's throat. She acts like there's something wrong with Lisa because she's a vegetarian. She's horrified when Lisa once said she isn't sure she'll ever want to get married. And instead of standing up for Lisa when Reverend Lovejoy called her a "devil daughter" for converting to Buddhism, she began a manipulative campaign to convert her back to Christianity. They've basically Flanderized Marge, and it's disgusting.

Another moment that bothered me back in the earlier (and better) seasons was in "A Streetcar Named Marge", when she plays Blanche in the play, and intitially doesn't see whats so wrong about the character of Stanley. You mean other than the fact that he RAPES BLANCHE?! That was just so wrong on so many levels.

The most troubling thing is that even despite all this, Marge is still celebrated as a character. Everyone worships her as this long-suffering Saint, never acknowledging the fact that she's a narrow-minded hypocrite.

 

Good God, I hate the way some people think Marge is the perfect mother.  She was supposed to be a pathetic enabler and now some people look upon her as an ideal.

 

She has unprotected sex with an abusive alcoholic, she allows him to neglect and abuse her children without consequence, she favors her son over her daughter...the list goes on.

 

Not to mention they always make sure that she is drawn fairly slender, while her husband is allowed to be fat and disgusting.  She's even posed for Playboy.

 

I remember one episode she was freaking out because her measurements no longer match Linda Carter's Wonder Woman (rolls eyes).

 

The Simpsons for all of it's progressiveness actually idealizes a 1950's marriage.  This is not because Marge is a home maker.  Plenty of men and women are home makers and are smart and hardworking.  It is because the only thing she lives for is to serve the needs of her husband and yes, she thinks it's odd that Lisa does not feel the same way.

Edited April 25, 2016 by qtpye

[Spartan Girl]

Good God, I hate the way some people think Marge is the perfect mother.  She was supposed to be a pathetic enabler and now some people look upon her as an ideal.

 

She has unprotected sex with an abusive alcoholic, she allows him to neglect and abuse her children without consequence, she favors her son over her daughter...the list goes on.

 

Not to mention they always make sure that she is drawn fairly slender, while her husband is allowed to be fat and disgusting.  She's even posed for Playboy.

 

I remember one episode she was freaking out because her measurements no longer match Linda Carter's Wonder Woman (rolls eyes).

 

The Simpsons for all of it's progressiveness actually idealizes a 1950's marriage.  This is not because Marge is a home maker.  Plenty of men and women are home makers and are smart and hardworking.  It is because the only thing she lives for is to serve the needs of her husband and yes, she thinks it's odd that Lisa does not feel the same way.

Oddly enough, it's her bitter resentful attitude towards Homer that gets on my nerves too. Homer is far from perfect, but lately she bitches at him even when he doesn't do anything that's really horrible. I really hate how this enforces the stereotype that women are entitled to be passive aggressive nags.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I don't think the idea of the 'male-gaze' is necessarily attributed to all forms of female nudity because there are obviously times when nudity exists in a text where people may find it sexy, but that's incidental to the actual intent and there are times when it's pretty clear that a female character is only naked or partially naked because the creators were thinking men needed something nice to look at. But it makes sense that people, women in particular, might be more sensitive to female nudity as opposed to male nudity because there's a long recent history of young female characters especially being used as exactly that kind of eye-candy with relatively little else to counteract that image in comparison to men and that's only slowly begun to change and a long history off screen of men feeling a certain entitlement to women and their bodies not only because of attitudes that are perpetuated off screen, but reinforced on screen which isn't really true in the reverse.

 

"Your father never laid a hand on me until we were married. Then I... I just gave in because a wife has to. A woman doesn't enjoy those things the way a man does. She just lets her husband come near her in order to have children."

 

It's from Splendor in the Grass, which was released in 1961, eight years before I was born. Granted, society has changed quite a lot since then, but the vestiges of that attitude still remain, that "good girls" don't enjoy sex the way men do, and it's the reason Natalie Wood's character lost her marbles for a while there, because her mother had made her so afraid of being "spoiled" that she literally couldn't cope with her urges. Not her father, who had nothing at all to say on the matter, but her mom. Mind you, I don't necessarily think Sex & The City got it right either, although I can see why it could be considered a vast improvement. Then again, when you start out with characters who have a paralyzing fear of sex, the only thing you can do is improve on the situation.

 

Also, as a fanfic writer, I've noticed that, say, eight out of ten times, authors of slash fanfiction tend to be women and girls. More than that, I''d say that six out of ten times, Whump writers also tend to be female. The slash I can understand, although it's not my cuppa, but what's with the Whump? Someone pointed this out in another section of the forums, and I'm sure I'm making it sound worse than I mean it, but.....why? I usually stick to writing Criminal Minds stories, although I do occasionally branch out, but even within that relatively* small fandom, the character of Spencer Reid seems to be the chew toy of choice. Someone called him the Wile E. Coyote of fanfic, because he'd have been dead or at least permanently crippled if he were a real person. But if the chew toy dies, then there wouldn't be all that angst while he struggles to recover. Just as a note, the canon version of the character hasn't fared much better.

 

What's of particular interest to me is that more often than not I really think these writers are fans of the character, and yet they're happy to drag him back and forth through the wringer. Of course he's not real, but does it indicate a real world attitude, and if so, what do we make of it? Because I find it difficult to believe that what seems like a fair percentage of one fandom shares the same "Let's beat the shit out of this one character over and over again" feeling.

 

*I say "relatively" because while the CM crowd isn't minuscule, it's pretty small compared to something like Supernatural.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Oddly enough, it's her bitter resentful attitude towards Homer that gets on my nerves too. Homer is far from perfect, but lately she bitches at him even when he doesn't do anything that's really horrible. I really hate how this enforces the stereotype that women are entitled to be passive aggressive nags.

 

Not just The Simpsons. It's commercials too, where way more often than not the woman is shrewing all over some guy, who is likely to be standing there with a thumb in his ass and a blank look on his face. The second part is fine, of course, because men aren't oppressed and so it's okay to make them look like they can't pour piss out of a boot without instructions from his wife.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Cobalt Stargazer

[proserpina65]

Quote

Whump writers also tend to be female

Whump?  I know what slash fiction is, even if it's not my cuppa, but I've never heard the term "whump" before.

[ABay]

Re: Whump. Is it what we used to call Hurt/Comfort, with emphasis on the Hurt?

[galax-arena]

That's my impression. At least, there seems to be a lot of overlap.

(Never leave me again, p.tv. How could you.) 

[qtpye]

I

Quote

t's from Splendor in the Grass, which was released in 1961, eight years before I was born. Granted, society has changed quite a lot since then, but the vestiges of that attitude still remain, that "good girls" don't enjoy sex the way men do, and it's the reason Natalie Wood's character lost her marbles for a while there, because her mother had made her so afraid of being "spoiled" that she literally couldn't cope with her urges. Not her father, who had nothing at all to say on the matter, but her mom. Mind you, I don't necessarily think Sex & The City got it right either, although I can see why it could be considered a vast improvement. Then again, when you start out with characters who have a paralyzing fear of sex, the only thing you can do is improve on the situation.

I think there is an underlying current that women are supposed to be attractive and desired, but that they should not have any desires themselves.  Females are the passive gender and it is part of your job being a woman, to be wanted, but to remain virginal.

I am sure in modern times we are more progressive and complex then this regarding female sexuality, but it the traditional view and it feels that some writers still want this to be the case.

 

The worst thing that seems to happen to women on film or movies is to be deemed unattractive.  It is worse then being labeled a whore or a prude, because attracting men is seen as the end all for women

 

People talk about the sexism in Game of Thrones fits with the medieval fantasy culture the show is trying to portray.  If that is so, then why are all the women who are shown naked meet the standards of modern beauty.  If this was a truly medieval world, most people would not have all their teeth and be quite unattractive to modern eyes.  This is particularly true to women who work in whorehouses and brothels.

Also, in if a women in t.v. or film is not considered traditionally attractive, she has to make up for it by being amazingly brilliant.  Though tv "not attractive" is usually a pretty girl in glasses and bad clothes.

I love that Lena Dunham is flouting this in her show "Girls", even though the female characters on that show can act horribly.  The main character Hannah, is not a thin supermodel, but she has no problem attracting guys and/or friends. 

[proserpina65]

Quote

I love that Lena Dunham is flouting this in her show "Girls", even though the female characters on that show can act horribly.  The main character Hannah, is not a thin supermodel, but she has no problem attracting guys and/or friends

I find it hard to believe that Hannah could actually attract friends and guys.  Not because of her appearance, but because of her toxic personality.

[izabella]

Quote

Also, in if a women in t.v. or film is not considered traditionally attractive, she has to make up for it by being amazingly brilliant.  Though tv "not attractive" is usually a pretty girl in glasses and bad clothes.

This seems like is a modern day tv development.  It used to be that there were a lot more ordinary looking people on tv shows.  Thinking back to 70's sitcoms...Good Times, Happy Days, All in the Family, The Jeffersons...mostly average people with maybe one or two who might be considered "hot."  I mean, Henry Winkler would never have been cast as the Fonz if that were a new show today.  Edith Bunker would be played by a 40-something who has been nipped and tucked, botoxed, or by a non-facially altered 40-something actress (if there is such an actress) who was supposed to be 55-60 on the show.

These days, actors can't get hired unless they are attractive and never, ever "old" unless they are playing a grandmother (in which case, they will always be a younger woman playing older).

[Irlandesa]

On 4/27/2016 at 1:13 PM, qtpye said:

I love that Lena Dunham is flouting this in her show "Girls", even though the female characters on that show can act horribly.  The main character Hannah, is not a thin supermodel, but she has no problem attracting guys and/or friends. 

I also like what The Americans did with Martha on The Americans.  Her story is rather sad, as many stories on that show are, but in the beginning it was very easy to get the wrong idea about her based on the way she looked/was dressed.  I think the actress is beautiful but certainly not ravishing, especially based on the way they styled Martha.  When we first met her, she seemed like the "frumpy and lonely" secretary.  What we eventually found out is that she had someone else in love with her and she had a very confident sexuality.  She was still a victim but not in the way I initially expected her to be based on the way she looked.

15 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I find it hard to believe that Hannah could actually attract friends and guys.  Not because of her appearance, but because of her toxic personality.

Last I checked, Hannah attracted love interests and friends who were toxic and immature as well.  So very believable to me.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

10 hours ago, izabella said:

This seems like is a modern day tv development.  It used to be that there were a lot more ordinary looking people on tv shows.  Thinking back to 70's sitcoms...Good Times, Happy Days, All in the Family, The Jeffersons...mostly average people with maybe one or two who might be considered "hot."  I mean, Henry Winkler would never have been cast as the Fonz if that were a new show today.  Edith Bunker would be played by a 40-something who has been nipped and tucked, botoxed, or by a non-facially altered 40-something actress (if there is such an actress) who was supposed to be 55-60 on the show.

These days, actors can't get hired unless they are attractive and never, ever "old" unless they are playing a grandmother (in which case, they will always be a younger woman playing older).

I checked IMDB for shits and giggles, and back in 1971 Jean Stapleton (RIP) was forty-eight to Carroll O'Connor's forty-seven. For a more modern show, when Sons of Anarchy started airing in 2008, Katey Sagal was forty-four to Ron Perlman's fifty-eight. Charlie Hunnam, who played Gemma's son Jax, was twenty-one at the time, which would have made her a fairly young mom, but then again Hunnam is also British, so you'd have already been suspending disbelief just believing Jax was American.

And I think that's a big part of it, that viewers aren't as willing to suspend disbelief as they once were. It isn't so much that age ranges have changed, and if they have that's because showrunners and whoever else think "old" people won't be accepted, it's that we, the viewing public, no longer readily accept the idea that a forty-four year old woman can be the mother of someone who is in their early twenties. Back when AITF first aired, people of Archie and Edith Bunker's generation settled down and started families at a younger age, but with time that changed. Career opportunities and going back to school became more common, and I'm not making any kind of comment on whether it's good or bad, just that that's what happened. If AITF was a modern show, Edith would probably be running a catering business and Archie would be in the middle of a midlife crisis.

As for Happy Days and Fonzie, I think The Wedding Singer said it best - "I grew up idolizing guys like Fonzie and Vinnie Barbarino. You know what happened to Fonzie and Vinnie Barbarino? Their shows got cancelled, because no one wants to see fifty year old guys hitting on chicks." ;-)

[qtpye]

Quote

And I think that's a big part of it, that viewers aren't as willing to suspend disbelief as they once were. It isn't so much that age ranges have changed, and if they have that's because showrunners and whoever else think "old" people won't be accepted, it's that we, the viewing public, no longer readily accept the idea that a forty-four year old woman can be the mother of someone who is in their early twenties. Back when AITF first aired, people of Archie and Edith Bunker's generation settled down and started families at a younger age, but with time that changed. Career opportunities and going back to school became more common, and I'm not making any kind of comment on whether it's good or bad, just that that's what happened

That is a good point.  However, even in the eighties on the Cosby Show (a show that now will be forever tainted in my mind), they cast Phylicia Rashad to play the mother and she was only ten years older then the actress they eventually cast to play the oldest daughter (Sondra).

It really did not make any sense, because Claire Huxtable was a career woman who would probably put off having children till she finished law school and had at least a couple of years to establish herself in her career.

[Haleth]

I was shocked to learn that Edith Bunker was only 49 when she died.  I always thought the character was much older.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

2 hours ago, qtpye said:

That is a good point.  However, even in the eighties on the Cosby Show (a show that now will be forever tainted in my mind), they cast Phylicia Rashad to play the mother and she was only ten years older then the actress they eventually cast to play the oldest daughter (Sondra).

True enough, but then again Sondra didn't exist until she just appeared one day, since the Huxtables started out with four kids. Even though everyone behaved as if she'd always been there, the character was a last minute addition to the show.  As for Claire's career, that's part of being willing to suspend disbelief, that a successful lawyer (and wasn't she trying to make partner for most of the series?) could have five kids, no housekeeper, and still put in as many billable hours as she could while magically holding it all together. Hell, even Carol Brady had a housekeeper, and Carol didn't work, although Florence Henderson lobbied hard to get the producers of The Brady Bunch to let her have a job.

[qtpye]

Quote

True enough, but then again Sondra didn't exist until she just appeared one day, since the Huxtables started out with four kids. Even though everyone behaved as if she'd always been there, the character was a last minute addition to the show.

Does anyone know why they cast Sondra?  I have heard rumors that they wanted a more light skinned actress in the family (even lighter then Lisa Bonet), but I have no idea if that is true.  It was not like she was a great talent.

[Chaos Theory]

There was an entire story arc on the Americans lately (I won't spoil in case people haven't watched) involving a female characters looks.  Basically one character asks another if he finds her sexy.  It is interesting because the fact that men didn't "gaze" her that made her a threat in the story.  

I am bring it up because I outright hate the term "male gaze" I think it does more harm then good especially on a show that glories in violence, sex and nudity.  I am all for all three when they make sense.  And yes full fronal of men is great too.  I thought Spartacus was fantastic because nudity of both genders was front and center.  

[Bookish Jen]

9 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I checked IMDB for shits and giggles, and back in 1971 Jean Stapleton (RIP) was forty-eight to Carroll O'Connor's forty-seven. For a more modern show, when Sons of Anarchy started airing in 2008, Katey Sagal was forty-four to Ron Perlman's fifty-eight. Charlie Hunnam, who played Gemma's son Jax, was twenty-one at the time, which would have made her a fairly young mom, but then again Hunnam is also British, so you'd have already been suspending disbelief just believing Jax was American.

And I think that's a big part of it, that viewers aren't as willing to suspend disbelief as they once were. It isn't so much that age ranges have changed, and if they have that's because showrunners and whoever else think "old" people won't be accepted, it's that we, the viewing public, no longer readily accept the idea that a forty-four year old woman can be the mother of someone who is in their early twenties. Back when AITF first aired, people of Archie and Edith Bunker's generation settled down and started families at a younger age, but with time that changed. Career opportunities and going back to school became more common, and I'm not making any kind of comment on whether it's good or bad, just that that's what happened. If AITF was a modern show, Edith would probably be running a catering business and Archie would be in the middle of a midlife crisis.

As for Happy Days and Fonzie, I think The Wedding Singer said it best - "I grew up idolizing guys like Fonzie and Vinnie Barbarino. You know what happened to Fonzie and Vinnie Barbarino? Their shows got cancelled, because no one wants to see fifty year old guys hitting on chicks." ;-)

Good point, CoStar. Many people of older generations got married and had kids fairly young. Now people hold off on getting married and having children due to changing values, but also due to the expansion of options that didn't exist ages ago, especially for women. My maternal grandma never went to high school. She ended her education in the 8th grade because her family was very poor and she had to go to work. Plus, at the time, education was considered a waste on a girl. My mom, my sister and I all went to college, and my sister went to grad school, too.

My sister got married fairly young, but held off having kids until she was in her thirties. Her eldest is about to have his 13th b-day. She has friends who have kids who are still toddlers and others who just became grandparents. It seems generations born after WW2 are all over the place when it comes to what I call the "Life Script" and needless to say this is going to affect pop culture including TV (only with less plastic surgery and Botox-snerk).

Speaking of plastic surgery and Botox. Yes, much of today's TV actors youthful visage is due to those two things. But I bet it also has to do with people avoiding sun exposure and smoking less now than in the past. One of the best decisions I ever made in my teens was to avoid tanning by using sunblock and cosmetics with a high SPF, not laying out in the sun, never using tanning beds and avoiding cigarettes. Plus, I live in the Midwest where it is cold much of the year (today it is a balmy 47 degrees). When it's cold outside you pretty much stay indoors a lot. And if you do go out, you're pretty bundled up. People are shocked when I tell them how old I am. Most people think I'm in my early to mid-thirty tops. I think I have less lines around my eyes than a certain actor we like.

And your comment about Fonzie and Vinnie Barbarino made me giggle.

I also wonder how AITF would work today, especially the Obamas in the White House and Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton running for office. Hmmm....

[UYI]

On 4/29/2016 at 10:29 AM, qtpye said:

Does anyone know why they cast Sondra?  I have heard rumors that they wanted a more light skinned actress in the family (even lighter then Lisa Bonet), but I have no idea if that is true.  It was not like she was a great talent.

 

I think part of it was to match up the number of Huxtable kids with the number of Cosby's RL kids. Of course, that doesn't explain why they didn't just do that from the beginning.

It is crazy to think that Carroll O'Connor and Jean Stapleton were in their forties when they began AITF, because by today's standards, they really do look MUCH older. Same for Bea Arthur when she began playing Maude, for that matter. 

On 4/29/2016 at 8:47 AM, Cobalt Stargazer said:

True enough, but then again Sondra didn't exist until she just appeared one day, since the Huxtables started out with four kids. Even though everyone behaved as if she'd always been there, the character was a last minute addition to the show.  As for Claire's career, that's part of being willing to suspend disbelief, that a successful lawyer (and wasn't she trying to make partner for most of the series?) could have five kids, no housekeeper, and still put in as many billable hours as she could while magically holding it all together. Hell, even Carol Brady had a housekeeper, and Carol didn't work, although Florence Henderson lobbied hard to get the producers of The Brady Bunch to let her have a job.

 

It took the Brady reunions for Carol to finally get a job as a real estate agent, and only after/around the time all the kids were out of the house. 

[Princess Sparkle]

I was debating which thread was most appropriate for this article, but I think it goes here: The Cost of Being a Woman in Charge.  It's mainly about Kelly Ripa and Melissa Harris Perry, but I thought it was a pretty good article.

[Archery]

On ‎4‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 9:47 AM, Cobalt Stargazer said:

As for Claire's career, that's part of being willing to suspend disbelief, that a successful lawyer (and wasn't she trying to make partner for most of the series?) could have five kids, no housekeeper, and still put in as many billable hours as she could while magically holding it all together.

Well, I'm a successful (by objective standards) lawyer with three kids (and, at the moment, a spare), and no housekeeper, who works >60 hours a week and has an unrelated job on weekends, and I hold it together (although not "magically), so I don't believe it requires any suspension of disbelief.  And yes, hubby is also a professional who works more than full time. 

[Bastet]

Quote

As for Claire's career, that's part of being willing to suspend disbelief, that a successful lawyer (and wasn't she trying to make partner for most of the series?)

She made partner in the first season. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Archery said:

Well, I'm a successful (by objective standards) lawyer with three kids (and, at the moment, a spare), and no housekeeper, who works >60 hours a week and has an unrelated job on weekends, and I hold it together (although not "magically), so I don't believe it requires any suspension of disbelief.  And yes, hubby is also a professional who works more than full time. 

Well, the "magically" part was mostly facetious, although I suppose that as the series continued and the Huxtable kids got less intelligent, particularly Denise, there was some magic involved. I would imagine that none of your kids would ever run off to Baltimore to have Big Fun, and then have the nerve to ask for their punishment so that they could go to bed.

2 hours ago, Bastet said:

She made partner in the first season. 

Thank you, Bastet. It's been a long time since I've seen the show, and they'll probably never run it again due to the nastiness with Cosby.

[kiddo82]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Well, the "magically" part was mostly facetious, although I suppose that as the series continued and the Huxtable kids got less intelligent, particularly Denise, there was some magic involved. I would imagine that none of your kids would ever run off to Baltimore to have Big Fun, and then have the nerve to ask for their punishment so that they could go to bed.

Off topic:  To this day, I can't hear about Baltimore without thinking "You went to BAL-timore!"  I saw that episode as an impressionable youngster and Phylicia Rashad put the fear of God in me.

[Archery]

3 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I would imagine that none of your kids would ever run off to Baltimore to have Big Fun, and then have the nerve to ask for their punishment so that they could go to bed.

Aw.  Bless.  

[DearEvette]

16 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

Off topic:  To this day, I can't hear about Baltimore without thinking "You went to BAL-timore!"  I saw that episode as an impressionable youngster and Phylicia Rashad put the fear of God in me.

Off topic still:  The Claire Huxtable Fear-of-God speech for me was when Denise wanted her savings account to buy a car.  And she got snitty and asked "Is this America or what?"  To which Claire proceeded to read her ending with "If you ever take that tone with me again, young lady, you can take whatever little money you have in that account and go Discover America."

Back on topic: I have  been trying to think of currently airing shows that really showcase strong female friendships.  Not just lip service but shows that really display it over time.  Off the top of my head the only ones I could think of was Playing House (which I think is woefully underrated) and Rebecca & Paula from Crazy Ex-Girlfriend (a little dysfunctional but still works), Mistresses.  I suppose Girls, but I don't watch that so I couldn't speak to it and possibly Broad City (again I don't watch it, but it feels like it should fit).  I feel like there should be more.

[izabella]

There is Rizzoli and Isles, although a lot of people seemed to want them to be lesbians though they aren't.  Their friendship has been genuine, and supportive, which is one of the reasons I always liked the show.

Call the Midwife also has many female friendships.  Most of the cast is women.

[Princess Sparkle]

Broad City definitely showcases strong female friendships, and might actually be my favorite on-screen depictions of friendship ever.  

You're right about having to think about it to come up with examples though.  To add to your list, I'd put Liv and Peyton from iZombie, and Taystee and Poussey from Orange is the New Black.   

[Cobalt Stargazer]

2 hours ago, izabella said:

There is Rizzoli and Isles, although a lot of people seemed to want them to be lesbians though they aren't.  Their friendship has been genuine, and supportive, which is one of the reasons I always liked the show.

Oh, that's a whole other conversation to have. I've always liked Rizzoli & Isles as well, (and I consider Angie Harmon's previous character Abbie Carmichael the prototype for Jane Rizzoli, which is also another subject for another time) but while I think Harmon and Sasha Alexander have awesome chemistry, I doubt anyone really wants the relationship to become canon. Because relationships ruin characters. Or something.

[Sweet Tee]

I would say Jessica Jones has a really strong female friendship at its core.  It is my favorite thing about the show.

[editorgrrl]

7 hours ago, DearEvette said:

I have  been trying to think of currently airing shows that really showcase strong female friendships.  Not just lip service but shows that really display it over time.  Off the top of my head the only ones I could think of was Playing House (which I think is woefully underrated) and Rebecca & Paula from Crazy Ex-Girlfriend (a little dysfunctional but still works), Mistresses.  I suppose Girls, but I don't watch that so I couldn't speak to it and possibly Broad City (again I don't watch it, but it feels like it should fit).  I feel like there should be more.

 

7 hours ago, izabella said:

There is Rizzoli and Isles, although a lot of people seemed to want them to be lesbians though they aren't.  Their friendship has been genuine, and supportive, which is one of the reasons I always liked the show.

Call the Midwife also has many female friendships.  Most of the cast is women.

 

6 hours ago, Princess Sparkle said:

Broad City definitely showcases strong female friendships, and might actually be my favorite on-screen depictions of friendship ever.  

You're right about having to think about it to come up with examples though.  To add to your list, I'd put Liv and Peyton from iZombie, and Taystee and Poussey from Orange is the New Black.   

 

5 hours ago, Sweet Tee said:

I would say Jessica Jones has a really strong female friendship at its core.  It is my favorite thing about the show.

Shows from the UK are better at depicting strong female friendships:

• The Bletchley Circle
• The Great British Baking Show
• Doll & Em
• Home Fires
• Last Tango in Halifax
• Scott & Bailey

[SmithW6079]

On 4/25/2016 at 4:03 PM, topanga said:

IMO, the only time I've heard an appropriate use of 'Rapey" was when someone described the lyrics to Robin Thicke's 'Blurred Lines' as rapey: "You know you want it. You know you want it." Even though Robin wasn't describing a rape, he was dealing with a woman as if he knew she wanted him physically. Hell, maybe he was raping her and simply decided to attach the rape to a catchy dance beat. 

"Rapey" is still not a word. And maybe the woman Robin Thicke was talking to did want him. Personally, I can never be OK with the trivialization of rape by the use of cutesy "words." 

[Ms Blue Jay]

How do you guys feel about shows where the women are colleagues but also friends (The Catch, Brooklyn 99) or frenemies (UnReal, VEEP)?  Grace and Frankie is an interesting example as well, of two women who are thrown into friendship because of a very strange situation.  I think that any show that boasts 2 women or more as leads is a success.  

Younger is a good clean example of a lot of female friendships.  New Girl is a great example.  Gilmore Girls is soon to be revived and has the Lorelai/Sookie pairing and the Rory/Lane one (hopefully).  Fuller House?  Honey and Jessica on Fresh off the Boat are a good example.  Mom (all of the women in AA are friends with each other.)  

Shows recently cancelled that were great at that are Whitney, Hindsight, Happy Endings. 

Edited May 4, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[DearEvette]

Funny enough it was binge watching old episode of Brooklyn 99 that got me thinking about women friendships in the first place.  I think a lot of my dislike for Gina the first two seasons of the show was because of the way she treated Amy.  The first two seasons all Gina ever did was dis Amy every chance she got.  And while I love Rosa, her whole schtick is that her character is closed off and secretive.  As I am re-watching the eps back-to-back it is more obvious this time around that they aren't really friends.  Their relationships with each other are in contrast with their individual relationships with Jake and even more so with the great friendship the show has established between Jake & Doyle.

i do like the relationship between Rachel and Quinn on UnReal because as dysfunctional as it is, it feels like an authentic friendship.  Or the closest thing resembling friendship that characters like Rachel and Quinn can have.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

Since the quote feature no longer works to transport posts from one thread to another, I'm copying and pasting this from the Criminal Minds section of the forum, relating to the renewal of the show for a twelfth season, Shemar Moore's departure, and the round table discussion about it on a blog focused on the show.

Quote

This is in reference to a comment I just saw on the roundtable blog.First of all I cannot even begin to express how much the term "the boys club" irritates the hell out of me.With all do respect to my gender(female) I found the show to have been way more interesting and far more compelling back in the days when it was more male dominated. I said it before and I will say it again. I find it quite ironic that in the hands of a female show runner I developed such negative feelings towards CM's females.

I wanted to add that I really did not have a problem with this person's comment as a whole even if I disagree with them about Shemar being replaced. I just was wanting to express how much I've grown to despise the term "Boys Club"

I'm sure the above is going to be fairly unpopular, since from what I can tell the general consensus tends to be that A) "boys club" is practically an epithet and B) that female showrunners and writers make everything so much more awesome for female audiences, but what about when the opposite of that happens? Every time I poke my head into the thread, it seems like the vote is unanimous that stories about women would be preferred, as long as the stories center around pretty much anything other than romance, and while that's fine, are women who'd rather watch stories about guys anti X Progressive Thing, because that contingent seldom seems to post here. Discuss.

[editorgrrl]

17 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Are women who'd rather watch stories about guys anti X Progressive Thing?

I've never seen Criminal Minds, but could it simply be a case of people disliking change?

To quote from another board, try the +" tool, rather than ".

Edited May 7, 2016 by editorgrrl
If the multiquote tool doesn't work, at the very least you can use the three-circles one to copy a link to the post.

[editorgrrl]

2 hours ago, smoker said:

It is ironic, but quality isn't a gender question. Sadly Messer's style is soapy, she thinks only a gun can make a woman powerful and only explosions bring shock to the table. She is trying to do something between Alias and 24 with a lot of sugar on it, and I didn't follow any of those shows and it's not the reason I started to follow CM.

This is quoted from from the Criminal Minds board, but I'm unable to type above it, only below.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

6 hours ago, editorgrrl said:

I've never seen Criminal Minds, but could it simply be a case of people disliking change?

To quote from another board, try the +" tool, rather than ".

I suppose it could be, but OTOH there was a whole kerfuffle when AJ Cook and Paget Brewster were fired and then re-hired, and then Brewster left again and Cook stayed. The network decided that their only defense against the claims of sexism generated by the firings was to turn Cook's character into the Uber!Agent, who was the best profiler in the history of ever and was even able to almost single-handedly solve a case while in the throes of what she called "beyond PTSD". The show has also tried to replace Brewster twice - three times if you count Aisha Tyler, who joined the show at the start of last season - with ever-diminishing results. Jeanne Tripplehorn lasted two seasons with almost nothing to do and Brewster's fans dogpiling her on Twitter for not being Paget, and Jennifer Love Hewitt was out the door after only one season after basically the same experience.

So my question is - is it really sexist if there's a female showrunner in charge, and yet she gives fairly short shrift to one woman in favor of another? I suppose fan reaction is a separate issue, since God forbid we should ever just be happy with something, and I'm not just referring to Criminal Minds but any other show. But as I said, I'm pondering the idea that maybe thinking a woman being in charge behind the scenes isn't awesomely wonderful doesn't have any great significance, and that perhaps it can actually be detrimental to some shows. Or maybe CM is just a statistical outlier.

Also, thanks for the tip about quoting, editorgrrrl, I will give that a try if the need for it comes up in the future. :-)

[Irlandesa]

12 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

 that female showrunners and writers make everything so much more awesome for female audiences, but what about when the opposite of that happens? Every time I poke my head into the thread, it seems like the vote is unanimous that stories about women would be preferred, as long as the stories center around pretty much anything other than romance, and while that's fine, are women who'd rather watch stories about guys anti X Progressive Thing, because that contingent seldom seems to post here. Discuss.

There are shitty female showrunners too.  No one is saying there aren't.  I don't think I've ever seen anyone say that having a female showrunner or writer will always automatically make things better.  What this thread is asking for is for more equality and opportunity and that having more women in positions of power and writing will likely lead to better depictions of female characters overall...not always lead to better depicitions  (And this applies to people of color behind the scenes as well.)  But I think one show runner isn't enough to be representative of what female showrunners would be as a whole. 

As for women who'd rather watch stories about guys...I don't know.  I think some might have preferences for stories that are often only told by men for men.  It could also be that male writers tend to write better male characters and there are far more of those. 

But there is the effect of liking what we're comfortable and used to seeing...what we grew up watching. This isn't quite the same but I do know some readers who have tried to break their habits and have chosen to only read books written by women for a year or books only written by AAs for  a year to force themselves out of their comfort zone and experience the diversity in voices that exists.  They loved some, disliked some and learned some.  If they hadn't done that, they would have defaulted to what they usually read which happened to mostly be male voices.  There's nothing wrong with not doing that but sometimes we are put into comfort zones and it takes a bit of effort to break out of them.

But I think the danger is saying "I'd rather watch shows about men" or "women aren't interesting."  I respect what Lena Dunham has done but I can't stand Girls and I eventually gave up. I loved Looking which was paired with it for a while. But I don't look at how much I dislike Girls and loved Looking and think that I don't like shows featuring women and prefer shows featuring men.  I just happened to prefer one show over another.

 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

14 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

But I think the danger is saying "I'd rather watch shows about men" or "women aren't interesting."  I respect what Lena Dunham has done but I can't stand Girls and I eventually gave up. I loved Looking which was paired with it for a while. But I don't look at how much I dislike Girls and loved Looking and think that I don't like shows featuring women and prefer shows featuring men.  I just happened to prefer one show over another.

I don't think saying "I prefer watching shows about men" is the same thing as saying "women aren't interesting", and I've had this discussion re Amy Schumer and the Ghostbusters remake. I would prefer not to have Kristen Wiig trying to fill Bill Murray's shoes, and I suppose that in the age of social media, which has turned hostility into an art form, whoever first posted "This is gonna suck because its about women!" could have either been more circumspect or more specific as to their issues with the reboot.

'Course, I don't necessarily think that narrowing it down to just Wiig would be sufficient to not start a kerfuffle. Look at this recent thing with Madonna. She shows up with her buttocks hanging out, and somehow criticizing it is automatically ageist or sexist? Not so much, IMO. Even in the digital age, where there's always someone somewhere who's dying to be offended because a thought wasn't articulated properly or fully explained, it is possible to say "I don't like it" and mean...just that, without any great social or political import(tm) Janis Joplin.

As for the issue of male voices versus female ones, that ties into something else. Because it depends on the voice. Fifty Shades of Crap Grey allegedly sold 125 million copies, and that doesn't include however many people have seen/are planning to see the movie. Fair enough to say that it's the worst sort of tripey garbage, and that Anastasia Steele's romantic choices make Buffy Summers' look healthy, but somebody's eating it up. Also, observation: years ago a moderately famous newspaper columnist wrote a book called Southern Ladies and Gentlemen under the pen name of Florence King, and one chapter focused on an allegorical story of a young southerner, a guy, who wanted to write books, but he felt discouraged because his father had convinced him that writing was "women's work". I don't think that's ever been true, mind you, but writing is a creative pursuit and unless you get really lucky and land a lucrative book deal or a successful TV show, you're probably never going to have a six-figure income.

Times change. We've become more open-minded about who can do what, but unfortunately we've also become more quick to flip our shit, because our modern sensibilities can't quite keep hold of the thought that not everyone has joined us in the 21st century yet. One of the reasons Mad Men worked is because it was set in an era where things aren't as they are now, and the smoking was the least of it. If something like All in the Family got rebooted, they'd have to modernize it, because no one would laugh at a present-day Archie Bunker. They just wouldn't. He'd be that embarrassing uncle who's had too many beers and is now telling the neighbors what he really thinks of them. And that's a kind assessment of the reaction.

I'm sure the last half of the above sounds like an excuse, but I know I have the tendency to get uber-cranky myself, so I'm not pointing fingers solely at other people. I've just spent so much time on forums like this one that I've gotten really familiar with what's going to go over and what isn't. Learning the parlance of the argument is how the road to something that resembles understanding gets paved.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Cobalt Stargazer

[Irlandesa]

5 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I don't think saying "I prefer watching shows about men" is the same thing as saying "women aren't interesting", and I've had this discussion re Amy Schumer and the Ghostbusters remake. I would prefer not to have Kristen Wiig trying to fill Bill Murray's shoes, and I suppose that in the age of social media, which has turned hostility into an art form, whoever first posted "This is gonna suck because its about women!" could have either been more circumspect or more specific as to their issues with the reboot.

So you think people who point out the undercurrent of sexism/misogyny that exists to the Ghostbusters reboot  are basing it on one  tweet from someone who was less than circumspect in how they voiced their objections?  Really?

It's not one tweet.  And there are plenty of people who mean exactly what they say when they say they're offended that it's an all-female cast.  They express it explicitly and in coded language.  But here's what allies tend to do--people who have no interest in the Ghostbusters reboot for reasons unrelated to the fact that it's an all-female cast can both see that their opinion isn't based in sexism (for instance, I have no interest in it because, even though I like much of the cast, I have little interest in the franchise overall) and can see that the undercurrent exists.  They're not threatened by the fact that people are calling out the misogyny and need validation that they're not sexist. 

Quote

She shows up with her buttocks hanging out, and somehow criticizing it is automatically ageist or sexist?

 

Automatically?  No. 

Quote

Because it depends on the voice.

Right.  That goes back to my point about not letting one female showrunner represent the whole

Quote

. If something like All in the Family got rebooted, they'd have to modernize it, because no one would laugh at a present-day Archie Bunker.

I'm not entirely sure that I agree. Archie was the butt of the joke.  And that would still work today. Isn't that what "Family Guy" or "American Dad" essentially is? 

[kili]

CBS dropped the new Nancy Drew pilot:

'Deadline reports that the pilot tested well with audiences but was deemed “too female” for the network'

They don't want female viewers? What, don't women buy things?

[magicdog]

I'm disappointed.  Too female?  Sex & The City was "too female" (says I, a woman), but no one seemed to have a problem with that show.  Yeah, I know it aired on cable but still.  I was looking forward to seeing this show.

 

On another front, I wonder about when shows have female characters that swing too far the opposite direction of being helpless.  My niece and I were watching a show on Disney XD called, "Penn Zero, Part Time Hero".  It's a likable show and has some genuine laughs.  It's about three friends (age 14) who have part time jobs being zapped into various dimensions and take the hero's place (when they fail) to save the day.  The titular hero, is Penn, and his partner is a classmate named, Sashi.  In one episode, there's a flashback to when they first meet - she's immediate bullies him - bumping him in the hallway on purpose, shoving him out of a chair in class (claiming dibs), and generally isn't a nice person.  She is shown to be competent in her role as "sidekick" (kicking butt and trying to keep the team on track), but I can't see a male character getting away with such behavior and not get called out on being a bully.  Certainly if the Penn character did that to her, there would be cries of abuse by viewers and rightly so.  Why does the Sashi character get a pass?  

.

[izabella]

1 hour ago, magicdog said:

Why does the Sashi character get a pass?  

Probably for the same reason it's still ok for women to slap men, but not vice versa, and no one says anything about it like, "hey, violence is not ok."  Double standards still exist.

[zxy556575]

6 hours ago, kili said:

CBS dropped the new Nancy Drew pilot:

'Deadline reports that the pilot tested well with audiences but was deemed “too female” for the network'

They don't want female viewers? What, don't women buy things?

Is Lifetime still the network for women? Maybe they should pick it up. I'm being contrary now because I had been looking kind of askance at it*, but now I'd definitely watch.

 

* Because as a tween, Nancy was one of my heroes and I figured CBS would screw it up.