Gender On Television: It's Like Feminism Never Happened

[slf]

On 10/26/2017 at 0:51 PM, Jack Shaftoe said:

Angel murdered thousands of people and his punishment is... eternal life? I don't think he is a particularly great example of receiving a comeuppance.

That's something that's always struck me about Angel. Not the eternal life thing but the soul-as-punishment thing. Angel was murdered. Robbed of his soul, his conscience, he began killing people (something that plenty of people with souls do). So to punish Angelus they...didn't. They punished Angel. Gave him back his soul and let him feel crushing guilt for all eternity. That's a raw deal, in my opinion.

[vibeology]

12 hours ago, slf said:

That's something that's always struck me about Angel. Not the eternal life thing but the soul-as-punishment thing. Angel was murdered. Robbed of his soul, his conscience, he began killing people (something that plenty of people with souls do). So to punish Angelus they...didn't. They punished Angel. Gave him back his soul and let him feel crushing guilt for all eternity. That's a raw deal, in my opinion.

As Jenny and her Uncle explain way back on Buffy, the curse wasn't about justice- it was about vengeance. Making Angel suffer and feel the pain of his actions is very much in line with causing the sort of pain and suffering Angelus caused them. It wasn't supposed to be fair.

[Drogo]

Buffy has its own forum on PTV.  Further discussion should be taken there.

[selkie]

Saw this today and thought about this thread:

 

https://gizmodo.com/why-didnt-you-watch-the-best-show-ever-made-about-silic-1821308899

 

Quote

But what’s really extraordinary, and what had me start a rewatch almost as soon as the perfect finale was over (the fourth season is easily one of the best seasons of a television show ever produced) is the epic, if platonic, romance at the center of Halt and Catch Fire. As the first season was winding down the writers realized they’d miscalculated. People weren’t interested in the gangly mystery man that was Joe MacMillian or the tortured genius of Gordon Clark. Instead it was Cameron, the brash kid genius, and Donna, the consistent (and quietly ruthless) working mom that had viewers attention. So the show leaned in, letting Gordon and Joe drift while Donna and Cameron worked together to build a company and take on a wealthy and sexist establishment.

As retoolings go, it was one of the most successful of its kind, and each season just built on that central relationship (and the skyrocketing quality of the second season). It was actually thrilling to watch two wildly different women forge a work romance, than fall apart, and then struggle to reunite, professionally speaking.

[Bastet]

A study of gender and race (behind the camera and on screen) in the 2015-16 TV season (and 2016 theatrical releases), the fifth year the study was done, shows "two steps ahead, one step back. But at the end of five years, we see there's not much progress."

In a brief summary in Variety, it is noted that women, while still underrepresented on every front, posted gains in all the key employment arenas since the previous report, with the exception of four — film directors, broadcast scripted show leads, cable scripted show creators, and broadcast scripted show creators. (And in three of those categories, they fell further behind.) 

With respect to TV, women are only 36% of broadcast scripted leads, 45% of cable scripted leads, 19% of broadcast reality/other leads, 30% of cable reality/other leads, 43% of digital scripted leads, 22% of the creators of broadcast scripted shows, 17% of the creators of cable scripted shows, and 31% of the creators of digital scripted shows.

Looking ahead to the 2017-18 television season, "the prognosis is mixed with respect to the prospects for further advancement on the television diversity front."  While 28 percent of the lead roles for new scripted shows that debuted this season across all platforms went to actors of color, "a figure significantly greater than the shares they posted for either the broadcast, cable or digital arenas in 2015-16," - women lost ground as a percentage of leads in these new shows.  And when it comes to the creators of these new shows, the numbers are worse, for both gender and race, than the 2015-16 season.

(Another article about the report was linked in the Race/Ethnicity thread.)

[Kel Varnsen]

6 hours ago, Bastet said:

22% of the creators of broadcast scripted shows, 17% of the creators of cable scripted shows, and 31% of the creators of digital scripted shows.

For this stat it would be helpful to know what the gender make up is of people persuing television writing as a career is. I mean just using my own profession I work i  engineering, probably one of the most male dominated fields there is. If you did a similar survey for my job you would probably get similar results. But I am not sure that would automatically indicate that men were being hired in favour of women, just that a lot more men were going into an engineering program in university. I think my class may have maybe been 20% women. 

[vibeology]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

For this stat it would be helpful to know what the gender make up is of people persuing television writing as a career is. I mean just using my own profession I work i  engineering, probably one of the most male dominated fields there is. If you did a similar survey for my job you would probably get similar results. But I am not sure that would automatically indicate that men were being hired in favour of women, just that a lot more men were going into an engineering program in university. I think my class may have maybe been 20% women. 

Sure, but that happens because of sexism and the patriarchy. Women are socialized away from STEM even at a young age. Women are not inherently worse at engineering; they just don't receive the same encouragement and attention in school and don't want to deal with the sexism from their peers, again even in junior high and high school. 

Writing has, historically, been a more woman friendly space than STEM. Novels were long considered a woman's genre because it was "lesser" than poetry. I can't imagine why there would be fewer women trying to write today. It's that women are funnelled out of the business because of sexism from their peers, the fact that higher ups in film and television tend to be men and are drawn to writers who create stories they can relate to, typically men. Writers rooms are not known to be kind to women. The problem isn't women not trying or not being interested. It's men and the shitty society they're created that protects their power and positions with very little effort. 

[slf]

There's a phenomenally misogynistic trope I despise that I just realized a show I liked used: the man lies about having had a vasectomy. On the show in question, the husband wanted "four in four" (four kids in four years) but the wife didn't want any more pregnancies and instead wanted her husband to have a vasectomy. He didn't go through with it and hid it from her and she became pregnant again. That is reproductive coercion, which is abuse, yet he wasn't treated as the bad guy and of course she eventually comes around about the pregnancy. Several shows over the past couple of years have done this story line. It's disgusting.

[Luckylyn]

6 hours ago, slf said:

There's a phenomenally misogynistic trope I despise that I just realized a show I liked used: the man lies about having had a vasectomy. On the show in question, the husband wanted "four in four" (four kids in four years) but the wife didn't want any more pregnancies and instead wanted her husband to have a vasectomy. He didn't go through with it and hid it from her and she became pregnant again. That is reproductive coercion, which is abuse, yet he wasn't treated as the bad guy and of course she eventually comes around about the pregnancy. Several shows over the past couple of years have done this story line. It's disgusting.

That happened on Gilmore Girls but I felt some sympathy for the guy since his wife used coercion to get him to have a vasectomy.  There was no discussion and she decided unilaterally.  She had two big guys show up to basically drag him to get the vasectomy immediately after she gave birth.  I kinda get him refusing and not tellng her since it was clear she’d use force no matter how he felt about it.  Still he should have told her rather than have unprotected sex which led to another pregancy.  They both came off horribly.  I think if a woman doesn’t want more kids and the guy isn’t on the same wavelength than it’s up to her to take steps to get her tubes tied.  I get that it’s harder for the woman to get her tubes tied than a guy to get a vasectamy but if one person really wants it then they should take on that responsibility.  

Mad About You did the same thing in the finale.  Jaime decided Paul should have a vasectomy which he did and then she decided it should be reversed which he did.  Then she changed her mind again and insisted on another vasectomy and that time he didn’t but didn’t inform her.  Then she got pregnant again but the baby miscarried.   

I have no problem with a guy refusing a vasectamy if he doesn’t want it but agree that not informing your spouse and pretending to have the precedure is wrong.  It’s also wrong to pressure your spouse to have a medical procedure to prevent future pregnancies if they don’t want it.

[slf]

1 hour ago, Luckylyn said:

That happened on Gilmore Girls but I felt some sympathy for the guy since his wife used coercion to get him to have a vasectomy.  There was no discussion and she decided unilaterally.  She had two big guys show up to basically drag him to get the vasectomy immediately after she gave birth.  I kinda get him refusing and not tellng her since it was clear she’d use force no matter how he felt about it.  Still he should have told her rather than have unprotected sex which led to another pregancy.  They both came off horribly.

Yeah, Sookie shouldn't have scheduled the thing, interview or whatever, that should've been Jackson. I think that whole setup was some idiotic writing, exaggerated for comedic effect and it wasn't funny. But lying about a vasectomy that results in an unplanned pregnancy for a woman who never wanted another one is just beyond.

1 hour ago, Luckylyn said:

I think if a woman doesn’t want more kids and the guy isn’t on the same wavelength than it’s up to her to take steps to get her tubes tied.  I get that it’s harder for the woman to get her tubes tied than a guy to get a vasectamy but if one person really wants it then they should take on that responsibility. 

I don't disagree but that wasn't on the table because instead of telling her he didn't have it done and discussing her getting her tubes tied, or some other form of birth control, he just lied.

I really don't find it funny or even a "well they were both in the wrong" kind of thing, which is what these shows always wants when it's a guy lying about a vasectomy.

[HunterHunted]

15 minutes ago, slf said:

Yeah, Sookie shouldn't have scheduled the thing, interview or whatever, that should've been Jackson. I think that whole setup was some idiotic writing, exaggerated for comedic effect and it wasn't funny. But lying about a vasectomy that results in an unplanned pregnancy for a woman who never wanted another one is just beyond.

I don't disagree but that wasn't on the table because instead of telling her he didn't have it done and discussing her getting her tubes tied, or some other form of birth control, he just lied.

I really don't find it funny or even a "well they were both in the wrong" kind of thing, which is what these shows always wants when it's a guy lying about a vasectomy.

There are also real reasons why a couple would decide to go with a vasectomy over a tubal ligation. A vasectomy is cheaper, by a lot, less invasive, and an outpatient surgery. It's the difference between $500 and $6,000. Outpatient surgery and inpatient surgery and general anesthesia. And if a man can't be honest to his partner that he doesn't want a vasectomy, he's an asshole. There is nothing funny about it.

[Dee]

The 2018 Network Pilot Season Shows Considerable Gains for Women Directors

Quote

From Los Angeles to New York City and Miami to Vancouver, there are 75 broadcast pilots in various stages of production right now, all vying for primetime slots for the next TV season. Their fates will be known in May when the networks present their new schedules to Madison Avenue advertisers.

But, for now, there are some discernible gains for women in the TV industry. Vulture compiled data on the number of women and people of color who have directed TV pilots for the past five years. This year, 19 women are directing 24 out of 75 pilots across the five broadcast networks; by comparison, last year, women directed six of 70 pilots. Of the 19 female directors this year, three are black and three are Latina, as compared to 2017, when all six women who directed pilots were white. Between 2013 and 2016, women directed 42 pilots out of 348 — three were black and the rest were white.

Another notable detail among those 19 women – nine have never directed a pilot before: Uta Briesewitz, Regina King, Rosemary Rodriguez, Zetna Fuentes, Sanaa Hamri, Kate Dennis, Julie Plec, Lake Bell, and Kat Coiro. (Three others — Victoria Mahoney, Charlotte Sieling, and Rachel Lee Goldenberg — have directed cable pilots, but are now directing their first broadcast pilots.) While many of these women already have careers directing or producing in the industry, getting the opportunity to do a TV pilot can be an important step to gaining legitimacy and authority. It allows you to set the visual template for a show, which requires more trust from the network, the studio, the creator, and other producers.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Dee

[Wiendish Fitch]

I am so in love with the YouTube channel ScreenPrism, because they just uploaded a truly thoughtful analysis/defense of Skyler White from Breaking Bad, and the disproportionate hate the character (and the actress) got. 

Edited March 31, 2018 by Wiendish Fitch

[possibilities]

I never even realized Skyler wasn't popular until I came to the forums after the fact and discovered it.  I'm glad there are at least a few who are sympathetic to her.

[callie lee 29]

After reading some boards, I'm not even sure who Skylar is and I'm sympathetic towards her!!

[possibilities]

Hee. Skyler White is the wife of Walter White on Breaking Bad.

[Spartan Girl]

On 3/31/2018 at 3:43 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

I am so in love with the YouTube channel ScreenPrism, because they just uploaded a truly thoughtful analysis/defense of Skyler White from Breaking Bad, and the disproportionate hate the character (and the actress) got. 

 *claps and throws roses*

Bravo, ScreenPrism!  I was always on Team Skyler and never really got the hate, and that video summed it up perfectly!  Vince Gilligan tapped into viewer's ideals of male and female roles and ingrained misogyny to play the viewers.  And I loved how they pointed out how Walt's actions were more or less about bolstering his fragile ego under the guise of "providing for his family", while Skyler was the one that really WAS trying to protect the family. 

You know what I loved about Skyler?  Unlike Andrea and Lori on The Walking Dead -- two other reviled AMC female characters that actually did justify the hate -- Skyler never played the victim.  Sure, Walt did it all the time, but not Skyler.  She at least was willing to own up to her actions and her choices. 

[possibilities]

I loved that she was tough as nails, and they never made her pregnancy an excuse to make her irrational or weepy and vulnerable. She was the real "gangster" personality on the show-- she never lost her cool and she never really made an unforced error, all of which Walt did constantly.

[supposebly]

On 4/3/2018 at 10:21 AM, Spartan Girl said:

because they just uploaded a truly thoughtful analysis/defense of Skyler White from Breaking Bad, and the disproportionate hate the character (and the actress) got. 

I watched this analysis, it is very interesting. I never watched Breaking Bad since basically after the first episode, I thought I knew where this would be going and I didn't think I would like to see that. And I was a little worried that it would not actually end in disaster for him. And I just thought Walter's idea was just too stupid for me. But that's not the point. I'm not surprised by the analysis, it's very common for female characters that aren't the main antihero. I find it's often the case that as soon as they step out of their "female" box in one way or another, the backlash is immense while the main antihero gets very little of that. Justified had some of that too, probably not as much as the clip noted, but some.

And now I think I might have liked to watch the show for her.

Edited April 5, 2018 by supposebly

[possibilities]

Netflix has it, if you do decide you want to see it.

[HunterHunted]

16 hours ago, supposebly said:

I'm not surprised by the analysis, it's very common for female characters that aren't the main antihero. I find it's often the case that as soon as they step out of their "female" box in one way or another, the backlash is immense while the main antihero gets very little of that. Justified had some of that too, probably not as much as the clip noted, but some.

I'm curious who you think got that treatment on Justified. The only character that I could think of was Winona. I thought Justified made a point to show that the women could screw up, but they often were more together than the men.

[supposebly]

Oh, I wasn't talking about how the show presented them, but how viewers reacted to her and her screw-ups. I mean, her ex-husband went around killing people with the more and more flimsy getting excuse of it being 'justified' while she got such a backlash about the whole stealing money from evidence lock-up.

Edited April 5, 2018 by supposebly

[slf]

On 4/3/2018 at 11:21 AM, Spartan Girl said:

 You know what I loved about Skyler?  Unlike Andrea and Lori on The Walking Dead -- two other reviled AMC female characters that actually did justify the hate -- Skyler never played the victim. 

While I could understand people not liking Lori (no character is perfect, after all) I never got the hate for her w/r/t the situation between her, Shane, and Rick. Sometimes I felt like I was one of maybe three people in the fandom who remembered that Shane tried to rape her at the CDC so of course she had difficulty dealing with him and ultimately supported him being killed. 

Unpopular opinion: I not only don't believe in the idea of Mary Sues but even if they did exist I'm perfectly fine with them. Tv and movies have been so terrible to female characters I say let some of them be as smart, funny, intelligent, and capable as possible with dozens of hot love interests and let them always win in the end. Why not?

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, slf said:

While I could understand people not liking Lori (no character is perfect, after all) I never got the hate for her w/r/t the situation between her, Shane, and Rick. Sometimes I felt like I was one of maybe three people in the fandom who remembered that Shane tried to rape her at the CDC so of course she had difficulty dealing with him and ultimately supported him being killed. 

That wasn't my problem with her. My problem with her was when she turned on Rick for killing on Shane, acting like she never even suggested it. 

And then she played the victim when Rick was mad at her over it.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Spartan Girl

[slf]

43 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

That wasn't my problem with her. My problem with her was when she turned on Rick for killing on Shane, acting like she never even suggested it. 

And then she played the victim when Rick was mad at her over it.

I don't remember her turning on Rick for that? I remember her being stunned it had actually happened and even more so, and upset, when she found out that Carl had been there and was the one who had to put Shane down.

[Spartan Girl]

9 hours ago, slf said:

I don't remember her turning on Rick for that? I remember her being stunned it had actually happened and even more so, and upset, when she found out that Carl had been there and was the one who had to put Shane down.

You don't remember her lashing out at Rick and storming off after his confession? Here's a refresher:

[slf]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

You don't remember her lashing out at Rick and storming off after his confession? Here's a refresher:

I'm still not seeing what you're seeing, lol. We just have two different interpretations of that scene and probably Lori's character. She's stunned that Rick actually did it - Rick who kept stopping people from attacking each other, "we kill the dead not the living" - and him admitting that why was because, ultimately, he'd grown tired of Shane's combativeness and possessiveness. She doesn't react more strongly until he says that it was Carl, their child, that put down Shane, the man Carl saw as an uncle and who had protected him during the outbreak. I still don't see her lashing out at him.

I do wish the show had let her have a more peaceful response to Shane's death but tv almost never lets a woman find satisfaction in the death of her (attempted) rapist.

Edited April 6, 2018 by slf

[Spartan Girl]

3 hours ago, slf said:

She doesn't react more strongly until he says that it was Carl, their child, that put down Shane, the man Carl saw as an uncle and who had protected him during the outbreak. I still don't see her lashing out at him.

I think slapping him away and glaring hate at him before storming out constitutes as lashing out, albeit in a nonverbal way.

And what did she expect, for Carl to just stand there like an idiot while Zombie Shane ate his dad?!

I really don't get why she insisted that Shane stay when he was going to leave the group before Carl got shot.  This was after he tried to rape her, btw, and at first she was all for it, but when Carl got shot, it was all, "No, please stay, I need you, etc."  I get that she'd known Shane a long time and before they hooked up they were friends and all that, but after the rape, she could see the writing on the wall where Shane was concerned.  And she begged him to stay anyway.  So why was it a shock that he was still obsessing about her?

[slf]

4 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

And what did she expect, for Carl to just stand there like an idiot while Zombie Shane ate his dad?!

I really don't get why she insisted that Shane stay when he was going to leave the group before Carl got shot.  This was after he tried to rape her, btw, and at first she was all for it, but when Carl got shot, it was all, "No, please stay, I need you, etc."  I get that she'd known Shane a long time and before they hooked up they were friends and all that, but after the rape, she could see the writing on the wall where Shane was concerned.  And she begged him to stay anyway.  So why was it a shock that he was still obsessing about her?

Lori wasn't yet prepared to accept what living in that world would require of Carl. She'd kept him as sheltered as she could - as did Rick and Shane - believing that was what was best for him. IIRC Shane was Carl's first kill, which is pretty heavy considering the previous relationship between the two of them. 

Lori recognized the value of Shane - physically capable former cop - to their group (including her son) which had only a few competent fighters. So she buried her issues. Not to mention that some victims of rape/attempted rape pretend like it didn't happen as a coping mechanism. (Also why I never got the Lady Macbeth accusations against Lori. Shane was given a lot of latitude by everyone but there came a point in late season two when even the most naive had to recognize what a threat he'd become to the group. If Lori had just been all about Macbething the situation she could've simply told Rick about Shane attacking her at the CDC. Rick would've killed Shane in a heartbeat.)

I think realizing someone's obsessed with you is always a shock, even if you already think they're unhinged.

Edited April 6, 2018 by slf

[UYI]

I brought this up in celebrity thread, but because of its history on television and the complicated history it has in terms of women's rights, I wanted to bring it up here, too.

The Miss America Organization will no longer be including either a swimsuit competition or an evening gown competition:

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/miss-america-scrapping-swimsuit-competition-longer-judge-based/story?id=55638426

Now, trust me. I KNOW how terribly outdated the long time model of this contest is, and I definitely understand the feeling by many to want to just leave it to history and move on. However, I can also understand why Gretchen Carlson (who won the title in 1989, and now runs the organization altogether) and others connected to it would want to see it continue and try to redeem it, even if it seems pointless or ultimately like a set-up for failure or embarrassment.

And it IS important to note that, in other parts of the world, contests like this are still seen as capital letter SERIOUS BUSINESS, especially in parts of Latin America and South America. Do you remember in 2015, when Steve Harvey got the winner of Miss Universe wrong? The two women involved were from Colombia and the Philippines, two countries who actually give a shit about these contests, and they were understandably PISSED when that mix-up occurred (as in, to the point where fist fights broke out in the hotel lobby where the competition took place among people from those countries--yes, really).

Anyway, I'm curious to see what others feel about these changes, including the idea that it will now be called a "competition", as opposed to a "pageant". I will say that scholarship money absolutely should be made easier to attain by young women, and I would hate to see women from poorer areas of the United States--be it from the South, Midwest, or anywhere else--lose a means in which to get it. 

[WarnerCL45]

Yes, “beauty contests” are outdated, but if Miss America wants to carry on, it’s certainly a step in the right direction.  I always found prancing around in bikinis very demeaning.

[Jacqs]

" I always found prancing around in bikinis very demeaning."

If a girl or woman wants to prance around in a bikini, they should be free to.

I hate the legacy of the extremists of the 1970s  As i said in my submission to the School Uniforms inquiry a few years ago here in Oz: the school dress and tights should remain an option for those female students that want to wear them. Most of the schoolgirls speaking at the inquiry were quite blatantly parroting the 1970s second-wave views of their mothers. Trousers cannot be "just as feminine" because they are shared with boys and men.

[WarnerCL45]

Yeah, you can certainly prance in a bikini, but don’t expect anyone to appreciate your mind.

[UYI]

I posted this in the Hollywood's Dirty (Open) Secrets thread, but in many ways it's probably more relevant in this one:

I wanted to post this video of the E! True Hollywood Story on Three's Company from 1998 here, because while it technically doesn't include any stories about sexual harassment, it is a MASTER CLASS in how women in Hollywood are disadvantaged in comparison to men*...and I'm not talking about Suzanne Somers' story, either (although I'm sure she went through that sort of behavior in her own way). I am talking about the treatment of Joyce DeWitt (seen here with her watch firmly set to Zero Fucks O'Clock) and Priscilla Barnes (who seems terrified half the time about even talking about her bad experiences with the show's producers, though I certainly don't blame her for any nervousness she may have had about it).

DEFINITELY worth watching (and not just because it's--IMO--the greatest E! True Hollywood Story of all time), especially when you consider how people probably reacted to stories like this 20 years ago, compared to how most would likely react to them now.

[Dee]

Female TV Directors Talk Navigating a Male-Dominated Trade

Quote

Recruiting more women behind the camera was a major topic of conversation at Variety‘s 2018 Directors Roundtable. During their chat, Foster, Pamela Adlon (“Better Things”), Lesli Linka Glatter (“Homeland”), Mary Harron (“Alias Grace”), Helen Hunt (“Feud,” “Splitting Up Together”), Melina Matsoukas (“Insecure”), and Tracee Ellis Ross (“Black-ish”) discussed the lack of parity between men and women behind the scenes as well as ways in which female directors can correct the issues.

“For me, it’s about the conversation, and when a door opens for you, opening it for somebody else,” Matsoukas said. “I think it’s just about bringing the next generation up, and also crewing, and being very conscious of that and making sure everybody that you bring into this family has a priority to bring in other women and other people of color.”

Adlon recalled making a conscious decision to hire more women on the set of “Better Things,” while Glatter said the even split between genders on “Homeland” drastically affects the perspective on set because equal female representation on crews is so rare.

“In Season 3 of my show, I said, ‘I need a female key grip.’ There is no f—ing way that this doesn’t exist,'” Adlon said. “There are so many jobs that young women don’t know about.”

“When I started directing at BBC, there were no women,” Harron added. “It was a lot of talented but grumpy guys, and you would have to deal with an entrenched perspective.”

In order for changes to happen on an institutional level, Ross suggested altering girls’ mindsets at an early developmental stage.

“We are still fighting against a system that makes little girls grow up to dream of their wedding and not of the many, many things that they could do in the world, and how they’re going to shape their lives,” Ross said.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Dee

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

A woman prancing around in a bikini is fine, a group of women prancing around in bikinis for no other reason then to be judged which is the prettiest is gross. On the part of the judges, not the women who are trying to get ahead. 

[Jacqs]

A lot of feminism still sounds too "1970s far-left" for comfort. The second wavers should not be honored or revered in any way. They were heavily anti-trans and anti-those with mental illness. This was visible even at the time - Germaine Greer's supposed classic "The Female Eunuch" is full of anti-trans bile. The idolization of the tomboy was also a mistake - it'is latent sexism as we shouldn't teach our female children to follow masculine ideals.

[praeceptrix]

Radio (NPR), not television, but relevant and infuriating:

https://work.qz.com/1326146/nprs-all-things-considered-made-a-sexist-mistake-that-proves-womens-work-isnt-just-overlooked-its-erased/

[Bastet]

14 minutes ago, praeceptrix said:

Radio (NPR), not television, but relevant and infuriating:

Indeed.  It reminds me of media coverage of the documentaries co-directed by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick, in which somehow (hint: penis) Burns consistently winds up the focus, which, of course, impacts public discussion of said films.  This is particularly egregious with their most-recent project, The Vietnam War, which would have been a far different - and inferior - film without her.  Here is a good opinion piece in The Washington Post on that issue.

[Neko]

On 6/27/2018 at 5:37 PM, JacquelineAppleton said:

A lot of feminism still sounds too "1970s far-left" for comfort. The second wavers should not be honored or revered in any way. They were heavily anti-trans and anti-those with mental illness. This was visible even at the time - Germaine Greer's supposed classic "The Female Eunuch" is full of anti-trans bile. The idolization of the tomboy was also a mistake - it'is latent sexism as we shouldn't teach our female children to follow masculine ideals.

How so?  I've never heard this, before.

[scrb]

Soooo ... in an article about a new Joss Whedon show that HBO just bought, there's this paragraph:

 

Quote

The Nevers is Whedon's first announced project since ex-wife and former co-producer Kai Cole alleged in August 2017 that Whedon had carried out multiple affairs during their 16-year marriage. Cole emphasized the discrepancies she saw between Whedon's loud emphasis of strong female characters in his sci-fi and fantasy projects and his affairs with "beautiful, needy, aggressive young women." At the time, Whedon declined to comment on Cole's essay, other than to say through a publicist that her account included "inaccuracies and misrepresentations."

 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/07/joss-whedon-will-return-to-sci-fi-tv-with-hbos-the-nevers/

 

Does Whedon still have credibility when it comes to "strong female characters?"

Because this new show apparently centers on female characters.

[selkie]

On 6/27/2018 at 7:37 PM, JacquelineAppleton said:

The idolization of the tomboy was also a mistake - it'is latent sexism as we shouldn't teach our female children to follow masculine ideals.

As a self-described tomboy and not overly feminine CIS straight woman, I'm actually grateful that I grew up in an era when the assumptions about gender and sexuality for someone like me were not so very rigid as they were a generation earlier. 

[Jacqs]

2 hours ago, selkie said:

As a self-described tomboy and not overly feminine CIS straight woman, I'm actually grateful that I grew up in an era when the assumptions about gender and sexuality for someone like me were not so very rigid as they were a generation earlier. 

A lot of women only realize as adults that they can wear all the dresses and jewelry and perfume they want and still have adventures and beat the bad guys. By then it's far too late as you don't get to be a child or teen again. Far, far, too late.

[selkie]

7 hours ago, JacquelineAppleton said:

A lot of women only realize as adults that they can wear all the dresses and jewelry and perfume they want and still have adventures and beat the bad guys. By then it's far too late as you don't get to be a child or teen again. Far, far, too late.

 

But why would I want to wear dresses when a nice pantsuit works better on my body type, make myself stink, and wear I find jewelry beyond a watch, my wedding ring, and a few small earrings to be a distraction and often uncomfortable? 

I'm glad to see greater trans acceptance in recent years. But I also find it troubling that there seems to be this tendency to push trans women into this narrow box of what a woman is supposed to look like, or how they're supposed to behave or feel and it's troubling. I'll see something like a notice for a class for trans women on 'how you should apply make-up' and if the first rule stated isn't 'wear make-up because it pleases you do to so, not because you feel like you have to' then it's just the same old gender stereotype BS that so many other women have been fighting for decades. 

[Jacqs]

59 minutes ago, selkie said:

 

But why would I want to wear dresses when a nice pantsuit works better on my body type, make myself stink, and wear I find jewelry beyond a watch, my wedding ring, and a few small earrings to be a distraction and often uncomfortable? 

I'm glad to see greater trans acceptance in recent years. But I also find it troubling that there seems to be this tendency to push trans women into this narrow box of what a woman is supposed to look like, or how they're supposed to behave or feel and it's troubling. I'll see something like a notice for a class for trans women on 'how you should apply make-up' and if the first rule stated isn't 'wear make-up because it pleases you do to so, not because you feel like you have to' then it's just the same old gender stereotype BS that so many other women have been fighting for decades. 

trans women were born physically male, raised male, socialized as male and have the physical advantages of a bio-male body... none of these realities change because of mental identification.

I also strongly disagree with attempts by adult trans activists to claim very young children as trans. Very young children don't understand two feet in front of them, let alone what gender they are.

[selkie]

Bringing this back to television, I still remain pissed at NBC for forcing Melissa Leo out 'Homicide:LOTS' in the 90s for not being conventionally pretty enough or feminine enough for the network suits. I so loved her Kay Howard of the crazy hair and ability to close every murder case she was assigned. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

13 minutes ago, selkie said:

Bringing this back to television, I still remain pissed at NBC for forcing Melissa Leo out 'Homicide:LOTS' in the 90s for not being conventionally pretty enough or feminine enough for the network suits. I so loved her Kay Howard of the crazy hair and ability to close every murder case she was assigned. 

She was one of the best things about that show! Pembleton, Howard and GiarDello were my favorite characters.

[MaryMitch]

52 minutes ago, selkie said:

Bringing this back to television, I still remain pissed at NBC for forcing Melissa Leo out 'Homicide:LOTS' in the 90s for not being conventionally pretty enough or feminine enough for the network suits. I so loved her Kay Howard of the crazy hair and ability to close every murder case she was assigned. 

Wow- I don't watch "Homicide:LOTS", but the same thing happened to Melissa Leo in 1990 when she was replaced on "The Young Riders" by Clare Wren.

[proserpina65]

On ‎07‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 9:34 PM, scrb said:

Soooo ... in an article about a new Joss Whedon show that HBO just bought, there's this paragraph:

 

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/07/joss-whedon-will-return-to-sci-fi-tv-with-hbos-the-nevers/

 

Does Whedon still have credibility when it comes to "strong female characters?"

Because this new show apparently centers on female characters.

What, based on his ex-wife's allegations about affairs?

 

On ‎07‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 2:30 AM, JacquelineAppleton said:

A lot of women only realize as adults that they can wear all the dresses and jewelry and perfume they want and still have adventures and beat the bad guys. By then it's far too late as you don't get to be a child or teen again. Far, far, too late.

Many of us who grew up in the seventies and who were heavily influenced by feminism in that decade never had this problem.

[selkie]

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

 

Many of us who grew up in the seventies and who were heavily influenced by feminism in that decade never had this problem.

The seventies also gave us Charlie's Angels, and from what I remember of that show the costuming went pretty much anywhere from casual to glam. I know it's easy to mock the show in a number of ways, but the Angels were damn awesome- they were out there having adventures and solving mysteries front and center with the guys limited to supporting roles.