Gender On Television: It's Like Feminism Never Happened

[izabella]

So glad you posted, because I I just saw that scene, too, and marveled at it for the same reasons.  It was shocking in its unadorned simplicity.  I wouldn't expect to see something like that these days, and yeah, it wouldn't go unnoticed and unremarked upon.

[janie jones]

Do you guys remember how the subject came up?  I've never had abortion come up as a topic of light small talk with a coworker I've run into.

[Blergh]

32 minutes ago, janie jones said:

Do you guys remember how the subject came up?  I've never had abortion come up as a topic of light small talk with a coworker I've run into.

I have- and that's all I'm saying at this time! 

[kiddo82]

19 hours ago, janie jones said:

Do you guys remember how the subject came up?  I've never had abortion come up as a topic of light small talk with a coworker I've run into.

One of the women had had a child as a teenager, which both the audience and the other character already knew, so a conversation about careers and wanting to be a spy at 15 took a turn to "that was before I got pregnant."  The nature of the conversation progressed from there.  

[Hiyo]

Does anyone remember who the two characters were?

[Danny Franks]

On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2020 at 6:14 PM, Spartan Girl said:

At least Screech and Lisa never ended up together.

Indeed. Even as a young child, there was something off-putting about Screech and his pursuit of Lisa.

Brooklyn Nine-Nine started off with a similar dynamic between Charles and Rosa - he was crazy about her, and regularly tried to convince her to date him, or invaded her privacy in order to push the narrative that she should give him a shot.

But thankfully, before the first season ended, Charles got over it and they've become really good friends without a threat of there ever being a romantic spark between them. Rosa never reciprocated, and I don't think the show ever tried to present the narrative that she owed him anything at all.

[kiddo82]

1 hour ago, Hiyo said:

Does anyone remember who the two characters were?

Sam was the one who had gotten pregnant at 15 and ultimately carried to term.  Abby was the one who went through with an abortion.  (the audience already knew this as well but Sam didn't.)

 

I just looked for a clip on YouTube but couldn't find anything.  The episode is called Impulse Control and it's from Season 10. (episode 14). I believe ER is streaming on Hulu in case anyone is interested.  The scene I mentioned is towards the end of ep.

Edited January 18, 2020 by kiddo82

[Wiendish Fitch]

1 hour ago, Danny Franks said:

Indeed. Even as a young child, there was something off-putting about Screech and his pursuit of Lisa.

Brooklyn Nine-Nine started off with a similar dynamic between Charles and Rosa - he was crazy about her, and regularly tried to convince her to date him, or invaded her privacy in order to push the narrative that she should give him a shot.

But thankfully, before the first season ended, Charles got over it and they've become really good friends without a threat of there ever being a romantic spark between them. Rosa never reciprocated, and I don't think the show ever tried to present the narrative that she owed him anything at all.

Reason #852 why Brooklyn Nine-Nine is one of the best shows on television.

[janie jones]

7 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

One of the women had had a child as a teenager, which both the audience and the other character already knew, so a conversation about careers and wanting to be a spy at 15 took a turn to "that was before I got pregnant."  The nature of the conversation progressed from there.  

Thanks!

[Lugal]

On 1/18/2020 at 6:37 AM, Danny Franks said:

Indeed. Even as a young child, there was something off-putting about Screech and his pursuit of Lisa.

Brooklyn Nine-Nine started off with a similar dynamic between Charles and Rosa - he was crazy about her, and regularly tried to convince her to date him, or invaded her privacy in order to push the narrative that she should give him a shot.

But thankfully, before the first season ended, Charles got over it and they've become really good friends without a threat of there ever being a romantic spark between them. Rosa never reciprocated, and I don't think the show ever tried to present the narrative that she owed him anything at all.

In some ways it difficult to compare them since they are 20 years apart, although in both cases they made clear that Screech and Charles both were in no way a threat to the woman they were with.

There is the whole "be persistent, wear her down" thing that boys were (and sadly still are) taught about getting girls, which can be problematic.  I think the thing with Screech and Lisa was nerdy Screech going for a girl way out of his league, and he was the only one who didn't see it, which was always kind of sad.

Charles and Rosa was different, in that it was made clear from the beginning that Rosa was never going to be into him, and they seemed to imply that Charles was into as a sort of rebound from his ex-wife.  In his relationship with Vivian, we could see that Charles tends to go all in.  And he did eventually get over it.  Because the Brooklyn writers realized that that joke got stale quickly.

And even Rosa thought Lisa was hot.

[Spartan Girl]

Charles Boyle, for all his faults, has more sense than Screech and Urkel combined. 

So I love Rapunzel's Tangled AdventureAdventure, but  more than a little annoyed with the Cassandra storyline. Up until that point the show did a great job of portraying a female friendship with her and Rapunzel, but the second Cassandra found out she was Gothel's daughter, (and that Gothel abandoned her to kidnap Rapunzel), it brings out all her microagressions about bring a handmaid and taking second place to Rapunzel, and she does a complete 180, blaming her for all her problems and going evil. Granted, she's being manipulated by dark forces, but still, YET ANOTHER show pitting two females against each other and resorting to the trite trope that female friends resent and compete against each other. 

What makes it worse is that Disney Princesses do not have a great track record when it comes to female friends/sidekicks. There's Pocahontas and Nakoma, Charlotte and Tiana, and Lady Cluck and Maid Marion, and the live action Jasmine and Dahlia (and thank God they at least didn't do the evil handmaid trope).

[Danielg342]

On 3/25/2019 at 2:26 PM, Danny Franks said:

So this is off the radar for a lot of people, I'd guess, but I think it bears mentioning:

The WWE will have women main event Wrestlemania for the first time ever

Is it a PR stunt? In part, yes, because they've been angling for good press a lot, with the way they've built the women up on their roster, and the presence of Ronda Rousey is obviously going to draw eyes. But they have legitimately given women the chance to be stars on the same level with the men, over these last two or three years.

Also, Becky Lynch will be the first non-North American to main event since Andre the Giant did, in 1987.

I thought I'd reflect on this, given that this Sunday is the Royal Rumble and that's the beginning of "Wrestlemania season" in the WWE.

(It's also a rare chance to talk wrestling on these forums...I'm not sure why, because they are on TV after all...but anyway)

You know, it's kind of weird...2018 and 2019 were like night and day when it came to the women. When the WWE had Ronda, they seemed to do everything they could to make the women's division seem legitimate, after neglecting it for so long. They booked Ronda Rousey as their centrepiece, they held another edition of the Mae Young Classic to bring in more women into the WWE orbit, and they had the first ever all-women's pay-per-view in Evolution.

Oh...and Becky Lynch happened. Through all this renewed focus on women's wrestling, a new female star was born, and not just one that ascended to the top of the women's division but arguably all the way to the top of the WWE ladder.

Even now, I don't think you can argue there's a bigger star in WWE than Becky Lynch.

...but then, Rousey left and it just seemed like WWE had no idea what to do with the women anymore. They had Lynch, but then they had no one else. Logic would dictate that, in this situation, you'd have Becky face a new challenger at each PPV and see which one catches on but, for some reason, WWE just kept pushing Lacey Evans against Becky for months even though it didn't work. They also tried to pair Becky with her real-life boyfriend Seth Rollins and that didn't work either.

Then All Elite Wrestling picked up steam in the summer of '19 and then the WWE seemed to think in order to compete, they had to "go back to what works" and that meant- to them- the worst of the Attitude Era nonsense and, of course, women not getting anything to do.

(Unless you're competing for a title or, like Lana and Liv Morgan, you're sidekicks to the men as part of a very bad Jerry Springer episode...)

I mean, last year we were told Evolution was going to be a yearly event. 2019 came and went without the second edition, or another edition of the Mae Young Classic...but we did get two shows in Saudi Arabia!

Yay...?

(Though to be fair, one of the Arabian shows did have a women's match)

It's tempting to ask at this stage where it went all wrong for the WWE and its women's division. I think part of that may just have been luck, since when Ronda left it left a huge hole at the top of the card and it seems like no one on the WWE's roster was able to fill it. Maybe in this case it's just a matter of time, since Shayna Baszler seems ready to move on the WWE's main roster from the lower level NXT and become a star in her own right.

...but I also think blame should be placed at the feet of WWE. They had the chance to book Becky as the face of WWE (much like they were doing with Ronda) where Becky would just dominate WWE and wait for that one moment where someone else catches lightning in a bottle and takes the WWE by storm, much like Becky had done and Kofi Kingston on the men's side did early in 2019.

I mean, the situation was right there for the WWE to finally say they came full circle and they really did turn a corner with the women's division, because nothing says that they have faith in the women in their roster than going all in and making a woman- and a woman they developed, no less- the face of their company.

Add to this that their supposed rival, AEW, is having issues of their own with the women's division and the chance was right there for WWE to say "we're not just going to talk about being progressive, we really are progressive".

Instead we get Jerry Springer nonsense...*sigh*

[Spartan Girl]

It is one of the great ironies of life that the best TV speech about consent came from A Different World, which was produced by Bill Cosby.  But it was still a pretty good show and I'm pretty sure he wasn't one of the writers.  This moment, among many others, is why A Different World was one of the best shows ever:

 

[andromeda331]

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

It is one of the great ironies of life that the best TV speech about consent came from A Different World, which was produced by Bill Cosby.  But it was still a pretty good show and I'm pretty sure he wasn't one of the writers.  This moment, among many others, is why A Different World was one of the best shows ever:

 

Yep, it really is that simple. They really did a great job with that.

[Mabinogia]

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

It is one of the great ironies of life that the best TV speech about consent came from A Different World, which was produced by Bill Cosby.  But it was still a pretty good show and I'm pretty sure he wasn't one of the writers.  This moment, among many others, is why A Different World was one of the best shows ever:

Damn! That should be played in every high school and every college everywhere, to boys and girls, men and women. That summed the whole thing up nicely. It is not a guys responsibility to get the girl to give it up. Girls need to hear that and know that it is not their responsibility to pretend they don't want to. That is where this whole mess started. We, as girls, were taught we weren't supposed to want to have sex, but we do, it's human to want to have sex, it's the whole point of being human, to reproduce and make more humans, which requires sex. There is absolutely no shame in a girl who wants to have sex. It's normal and it's healthy. 

I, in my mid 40s, was eating lunch with some work mates, all in their late 20s. IDK how the topic came up but two of the guys were engaged at the time. Both of them, when asked, said they would not be engaged if their girlfriends had slept with them on the first day. So I asked if they wanted to sleep with their girlfriends on that first date? Obviously. So I asked if they tried? Yep. So in their minds it was okay for a guy to want to have sex on the first date but if the person they were trying to sleep with also wanted it, she was no longer worthy of a second date. WHAT THE EVERLOVING FUCK!??!??!!

I fucking hate the society we have built. All our collective power and brains and supposed heart and we come up with a world were about 1% of people have actual freedom and rights. The rest of us have rules we have to follow if we don't want to be labeled or ostracized. 

[Annber03]

11 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I, in my mid 40s, was eating lunch with some work mates, all in their late 20s. IDK how the topic came up but two of the guys were engaged at the time. Both of them, when asked, said they would not be engaged if their girlfriends had slept with them on the first day. So I asked if they wanted to sleep with their girlfriends on that first date? Obviously. So I asked if they tried? Yep. So in their minds it was okay for a guy to want to have sex on the first date but if the person they were trying to sleep with also wanted it, she was no longer worthy of a second date. WHAT THE EVERLOVING FUCK!??!??!!

That is...mind-bogglingly stupid. Wow. How the hell does somebody fail that badly at noticing the gigantic flaw in that "logic"? 

[Mabinogia]

5 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

That is...mind-bogglingly stupid. Wow. How the here does somebody fail that badly at noticing the gigantic flaw in that "logic"? 

In their minds, if she gave in to them pushing for sex, she's obviously a slut and not worthy of them. It was seriously disturbing to me. I did tell them, without any shame, that if I like a guy, I sleep with him on the first date because I don't live in the dark ages, and if the guy doesn't call me because of that then he was not the kind of guy I would want to date so I'm glad I at least got one good night out of him before he showed his true colors. 

The subject changed really fast after that. lol 

The worst part of it is, they are smart, well educated young men. They are both married to their then fiances and are, from everything I can see, good, respectful husbands. So it just gutted me to know that even someone who seems like an intelligent, liberated guy can think that way about women. 

Edited January 29, 2020 by Mabinogia

[Annber03]

Ha, well put. I mean, obviously, if somebody wants to wait, that's entirely their choice, too, but yeah, it shouldn't be expected of women that they can't give in on the first date, lest they be seen in a negative light for doing so or something stupid like that. 

And you can't win either way. If a woman does sleep with a guy right away, she's a slut not worthy of any kind of further relationship. If she holds off, she's a tease/frigid/a bitch/etc. So what exactly are we supposed to do? 

God, people are dumb. 

[Mabinogia]

Part of what annoyed me was that it felt like they were "testing" their dates. Trying to get her to have sex and judging how she reacted to that pressure. If she gives in, she's worth screwing but not dating. The "correct" response is to resist like women were taught to do throughout history when our goods were for sale by our fathers for land, wealth or a title and only really valuable if still in the original packaging. 

It was okay for the guys to want sex, but it wasn't okay for the girl to want it too. GRRRRRR It made me so angry. I expect neanderthal men to act this way, but these were nice, normal, fun guys. Totally changed how I saw them though. Lost a lot of respect for them after that. 

[PaulBMA]

that wave of radicalism of the seventies has long since passed, Never was going to be a permanent thing.

[Spartan Girl]

It all boils down to men feeling entitled to decide when and how women should have sex, doesn't it. If we don't want to, we're prudes and teases. If we want to, we are sluts.

I can't help being reminded of how Whedon used Buffy's sex life in the negative sense. 

Angel loses his soul after they have sex? Buffy should have stayed a virgin, all the death and destruction is on her! Even though Giles (bless him) told her it wasn't true, Xander was more than happy to throw it in her face and make it clear she was too passionate and hormonal to be trusted where Angel was concerned.

Gets wooed and screwed by Parker? Buffy should have been smarter! She should have known he was a dog! She's a needy pathetic idiot for feeling so hurt!

Turns away from Rikey in her sleep post coitus? Buffy is a terrible girlfriend to a nice normal boy!  How dare she not make Riley feel needed and not want to cuddle with him every second? No wonder he has to fool around with vampires!

Has sex with Spike? Oh Buffy is just a trainwreck!

Fuck you, Whedon.

[Danny Franks]

18 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

It all boils down to men feeling entitled to decide when and how women should have sex, doesn't it. If we don't want to, we're prudes and teases. If we want to, we are sluts.

I can't help being reminded of how Whedon used Buffy's sex life in the negative sense. 

Angel loses his soul after they have sex? Buffy should have stayed a virgin, all the death and destruction is on her! Even though Giles (bless him) told her it wasn't true, Xander was more than happy to throw it in her face and make it clear she was too passionate and hormonal to be trusted where Angel was concerned.

Gets wooed and screwed by Parker? Buffy should have been smarter! She should have known he was a dog! She's a needy pathetic idiot for feeling so hurt!

Turns away from Rikey in her sleep post coitus? Buffy is a terrible girlfriend to a nice normal boy!  How dare she not make Riley feel needed and not want to cuddle with him every second? No wonder he has to fool around with vampires!

Has sex with Spike? Oh Buffy is just a trainwreck!

Fuck you, Whedon.

Xander had some real Nice Guy qualities, which he never quite got over. I found his entitlement over Buffy's romantic life to be incredibly off-putting, to the point that I never really liked his character.

Then again, so did Spike. And again, he acted like Buffy owed him something because he had feelings for her. Not a great representation of romance, especially not when the whole physical/emotional abuse cycle ended up being treated as if it was a grand romance.

Edited January 29, 2020 by Danny Franks

[Hiyo]

Quote

it's human to want to have sex, it's the whole point of being human, to reproduce and make more humans, which requires sex.

And because some of us enjoy sex, and don't need procreation as a reason for it.

[andromeda331]

4 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

It all boils down to men feeling entitled to decide when and how women should have sex, doesn't it. If we don't want to, we're prudes and teases. If we want to, we are sluts.

Bingo. That's exactly what it is. Men thinking their entitled to decide when a woman should have sex. Its still about controlling women. Its not as if women are entitled to decide that for themselves. Oh, no that can't happen. Women are still being taught that too. 'Good' girls don't want sex just for sex or have to pretend they don't want to. Oh no of course not. Good women only want have sex with in a marriage. How many times do we see on TV a brother, father, or really man freaking out over finding out his sister, daughter, or so might behaving sex? How many times do we see men cheering, slapping men on the back for having sex or teenager boys the first time they have sex? On the rare times the sister or daughter calls their brother or father for it. They get the their just trying to protect them bull crap. How many times have we seen women and teenage girls have sex for the first time "punished" for it somehow. 

Their not suppose to want sex. Oh no only bad girls do that. Bad girls are sluts. Women who sleep around just as much as men but oh no women aren't suppose to. Those women are sluts. Men of course can. Its the same reason men still want to control women's reproductive rights. Its interesting this topic came up now over in the Annoying Commercials thread is talk over how all pregnancy test commercials end with a woman finding out she's pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Yet we don't see a woman ever finding out she's not pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Because of course not. A woman having sex for sex? Oh no that still can't happen in 2020. 

Its the same reason why men continuedly get away with rape. Its all the woman's fault due to what she wore, said, did, didn't do, lead him on, etc. Its never the man's fault. Everyone flocks to defend him. From the "hussy", the "liar" or "tramp" who obviously is lying for some reason. She's out for money, she took rejection badly, she after something. Or the even if he did well its still no big deal and no reason he's life should be ruined by one "mistake". No one ever asks him how he could do such a thing or thinks that he ruined his like or that he ruined her life. 

That clip from A Different World should be shown in ever high school and on TV repeatedly because it so easily explains consent. Something that's so shockingly not understood. 

[Spartan Girl]

Another entitled Nice Guy who should have respected boundaries was Urkel. It wasn't as bad in the first season or so of Family Matters because he was a child and while his attempts were just annoying they weren't too bad. But as he got older, he got a little more aggressive: getting in Laura's personal space, trying to kiss her every chance he got, and making it clear he'd keep chasing her whether she liked it or not. For God's sake, he once growled and barked at one of her dates like a dog! It was disgusting -- and an insult to real dogs, because unlike Urkel, they could at least be trained to mind manners!

It's the kind of shit we saw from the likes of Gaston and Biff Tannen, except they were the bad guys while Urkel was the "underdog hero". Like that makes it okay! 

[vibeology]

That A Different World clip is pretty good but I do think it could be better. Anything but an enthusiastic Yes means No and it could have done a bit more to clarify that it's not just something that men have to abide by. But considering when it was made, it's still pretty great.

[Blergh]

5 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Another entitled Nice Guy who should have respected boundaries was Urkel. It wasn't as bad in the first season or so of Family Matters because he was a child and while his attempts were just annoying they weren't too bad. But as he got older, he got a little more aggressive: getting in Laura's personal space, trying to kiss her every chance he got, and making it clear he'd keep chasing her whether she liked it or not. For God's sake, he once growled and barked at one of her dates like a dog! It was disgusting -- and an insult to real dogs, because unlike Urkel, they could at least be trained to mind manners!

It's the kind of shit we saw from the likes of Gaston and Biff Tannen, except they were the bad guys while Urkel was the "underdog hero". Like that makes it okay! 

Of course, it should be noted that on many occasions, Urkel DID show he was capable of  using good manners. Therefore, he CHOSE to disregard the  good manners he possessed rather than  having been incapable of having any. Too bad they didn't put send Urkel to the pound (NEVER to be seen or heard from again) after that  and so many similar stunts. Yes, I know it was a comedy but  I mean it! 

[proserpina65]

20 hours ago, Annber03 said:

That is...mind-bogglingly stupid. Wow. How the hell does somebody fail that badly at noticing the gigantic flaw in that "logic"? 

They do have centuries of societal opinion on the matter backing them up.  I want to put all the blame on religion, but even before organized religions took over, the idea of people, especially women, being able to have sex because they wanted to without being judged for it was far from universal, unfortunately.  And also unfortunate is that for much of our society, not a lot has changed.  (And by "unfortunate", I mean really, really awful.)

[Mabinogia]

16 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Its interesting this topic came up now over in the Annoying Commercials thread is talk over how all pregnancy test commercials end with a woman finding out she's pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Yet we don't see a woman ever finding out she's not pregnant and excited. That's happy news!

The two times I've taken a pregnancy test it was because I was terrified I might be and praying it was negative. Fortunately, it was, and I was excited that I was NOT pregnant. That was happy news! haha

[ABay]

There was a March of Dimes (I think) commercial many years ago with a stork walking through an office. One of the women was hiding under her desk. I loved that.

[GingerPudding]

It's the The Rules of Misogyny

1. Women are responsible for what men do.

2. Women saying no to men is a hate crime.

3. Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish.

4. Women’s opinions are violence against men, thus male violence against women is justified.

5. Women and Feminism must be useful to men or they are worthless.

6. Women who go around being female AT men by menstruating and breastfeeding babies deserve punishment.

7. Women should always be grateful to men for everything.

8. Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

9. Men always know the “real reasons” for everything women do and say.

10. The worst thing about male violence is that it makes men look bad.

11. Whatever women suffer from, it is worse when it happens to men.

12. Women’s ability to recognize male behavior patterns is misandry.

13. Angry women are crazy. Angry men have trouble expressing themselves.

14. Women have all the rights they need: The right to remain silent.

15. Men are the default human. Women are strange subhuman others.

16. Everyone owns and controls women’s bodies except the women themselves.

[Blergh]

 One odd footnote re Gender on Television  that needs to be mentioned has to   be the Fun Girls from Mount Pilot on The Andy Griffith Show.  Called Daphne and Skippy (played by the late Jean Carson and Joyce Jameson), these two women defied convention by not only  being unmarried but also in that they  seemed uninterested in actually ever getting married but were quite enthralled with flirting- especially with Andy and Barney. Daphne would always greet Andy with a 'Hello, Doll!' No, neither of them were homely spinsters as Ann B. Davis 'Shultzy'    Love That Bob , Nancy Culp 'Jane Hathaway' on Beverly Hillbillies or Rose Marie 'Sally Rogers' Dick Van Dyke were supposed to be nor desperate husband hunters like Lucy and Viv had been on The Lucy Show but were actually quite conventionally attractive. The main two flaws these women supposedly had was their voices (Daphne's deep foghorn and Skippy's screeching) and that they refused to take polite hints from the men protagonists that the men weren't interested in flirting back! It was kind of funny that these two lawmen seemed like putty in their hands and when their steady girlfriends Helen and Thelma Lou would get wind of the Fun Girls being anywhere near, it always landed the Mayberry law force in hot water with the men unable to either rid themselves of the flirts or pacify their actual girlfriends by the end of the episodes they appeared.  They seemed rather oblivious to the problems they appeared to cause in their wake but for all their 'fun' were each other's best friends who never had the slightest disagreement with each other but always had each other's back.  It should be clear that there was nothing to indicate that these women were prostitutes but instead were dedicated flirts!

      Sadly, Miss Jameson had a troubled life plagued  with insomnia, according to her longtime beau Robert Vaughn, with her ending up  taking her own life at age 54. Miss Carson thankfully was able to  make peace with her earlier demons becoming sober in her later years and enjoying the accolades of TAGS fans where she often was a favorite guest at their conventions and happily kept in touch until suffering a devastating stroke at age 82 which would take her life two months later.

Edited January 30, 2020 by Blergh

[Spartan Girl]

On 1/29/2020 at 1:43 AM, andromeda331 said:

Its interesting this topic came up now over in the Annoying Commercials thread is talk over how all pregnancy test commercials end with a woman finding out she's pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Yet we don't see a woman ever finding out she's not pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Because of course not. A woman having sex for sex? Oh no that still can't happen in 2020. 

The closest we ever got to something like that was when Robin and Barney thought that she was pregnant from one of their tysts, and when the doctor told them she wasn't pregnant, they put on dance music from his phone to party.  Of course then it turned into Robin's depression over finding out that she couldn't ever have kids.  Ugh...

[Hiyo]

Most women on TV who don't want kids and/or get or want an abortion usually end up getting "punished" for it in some way.

[MargeGunderson]

There was an episode of Blackish (season 4, episode 14, R-E-S-P-E-C-T) in which the parents find out with their daughter and son having sex with their respective partners, and they had very different reactions based on the gender. By the end they recognized that they needed to view both the same, but there were a lot of wacky sitcom hijinks to get there.

Edited January 30, 2020 by MargeGunderson

[DearEvette]

On 1/29/2020 at 1:43 AM, andromeda331 said:

Its interesting this topic came up now over in the Annoying Commercials thread is talk over how all pregnancy test commercials end with a woman finding out she's pregnant and excited. That's happy news! Yet we don't see a woman ever finding out she's not pregnant and excited. That's happy news!

To be fair, a commercial is supposed to sell you on the benefits of the product they are selling.  So I could see why a pharma company who wants to tout their test as the best would put a happy spin on it.

Now, if it was a condom commercial (which sadly, our puritanical overloads somehow think will promote sex instead of, you know, promoting safer sex because nobody needs a commercial to want sex) then I'd love for them to show the 'oh shit... NOOOO' reaction to a positive pregnancy test.

Actually an ad company who had a sense of humor would be able to spin a negative reaction as a selling point.  Something like... 'Whether it is what you wanted to hear or didn't want to hear... the result is always accurate.  LOL.

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, DearEvette said:

So I could see why a pharma company who wants to tout their test as the best would put a happy spin on it.

I'd think a woman who didn't want to be pregnant would want the best and easiest to use pregnancy test available.  I know I would.  Just think of the untapped market share.

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, DearEvette said:

To be fair, a commercial is supposed to sell you on the benefits of the product they are selling.  So I could see why a pharma company who wants to tout their test as the best would put a happy spin on it.

But that's just it -- there are plenty of women just as happy to have that test come out negative as the ones hoping it's positive are upon finding out they're pregnant.  As I said in the commercials thread, I understand them wanting to show only happy consumers to advertise their product, rather than showing it being thrown in the trash while the user bursts into tears because the result is the opposite of what she wanted.  But it's wrong that 99% of those happy scenarios are of women finding out they are pregnant. 

The big selling points - the low level at which HCG can be detected in the urine, the wait time, the ease of reading the results - apply equally to those hoping for a negative result.  But showing women - especially women without wedding rings - happy with a negative result would just ask a vocal segment of the viewing public to throw a fit, so they stick with pregnancies; they're catering to sexism in what they choose not to use in their advertising, even though a lot of the women actually using their product are in that excluded category.

 

[Picture It. Sicily]

In the 90s there was a series of commercials for a home pregnancy test of what was said to be real people awaiting the results of their tests. There were at least three versions. One had a young woman who didn't want to be pregnant and her relief at the negative test was palpable. There would be such outrage if it aired today.

[Ohiopirate02]

32 minutes ago, Bastet said:

But that's just it -- there are plenty of women just as happy to have that test come out negative as the ones hoping it's positive are upon finding out they're pregnant.  As I said in the commercials thread, I understand them wanting to show only happy consumers to advertise their product, rather than showing it being thrown in the trash while the user bursts into tears because the result is the opposite of what she wanted.  But it's wrong that 99% of those happy scenarios are of women finding out they are pregnant. 

The big selling points - the low level at which HCG can be detected in the urine, the wait time, the ease of reading the results - apply equally to those hoping for a negative result.  But showing women - especially women without wedding rings - happy with a negative result would just ask a vocal segment of the viewing public to throw a fit, so they stick with pregnancies; they're catering to sexism in what they choose not to use in their advertising, even though a lot of the women actually using their product are in that excluded category.

 

This reminds me of a scene in Sex and the City where Carrie has a pregnancy scare.  Miranda accompanies her to the drugstore to pick up a pregnancy test and she remarks that a particular brand was good because it gave her the negative result she wanted.  

[PennyPlain]

37 minutes ago, Picture It. Sicily said:

One had a young woman who didn't want to be pregnant and her relief at the negative test was palpable. There would be such outrage if it aired today.

Why do you think that would be the case?  I agree with you BTW but I'm just not sure why people would be outraged - other than people seem to thrive on outrage lately!  My guess would be that someone being happy a test is negative would be someone who would have an abortion if the test was positive -- which is the reason I think they never show someone being upset about a positive result. 

[Picture It. Sicily]

2 minutes ago, PennyPlain said:

Why do you think that would be the case?  I agree with you BTW but I'm just not sure why people would be outraged - other than people seem to thrive on outrage lately!  My guess would be that someone being happy a test is negative would be someone who would have an abortion if the test was positive -- which is the reason I think they never show someone being upset about a positive result. 

I'm sure if there were outrage it would be a loud minority. Like million moms (or "few thousand moms" in reality). They don't like women having sex without consequences. They seem to labor under the delusion that commercials give people ideas, rather than the reality that some commercials reflect the experiences people are actually having.

[izabella]

Maybe they could hire the Duggar woman to be relieved at her "not pregnant" test, lol.  No one could say SHE didn't do her womanly duty to have plenty of kids, nor does she use birth control, so no one can feign outrage over anything.

[Mabinogia]

5 hours ago, DearEvette said:

Now, if it was a condom commercial (which sadly, our puritanical overloads somehow think will promote sex instead of, you know, promoting safer sex because nobody needs a commercial to want sex)

haha, I would love to meet the person who never had any interest in having sex until they saw a condom commercial and thought it sounds like fun to cover their junk in a fitted wrapper and stick it in someone else. Like, "OMG I didn't know I could wrap it up first! That sounds awesome!" 

I think it is more likely that human nature, constant sexualization of models, actors, singers, etc, and porn make most people interested in having sex. Condom commericals just show them how to do it without also making an unwanted baby that will end up in foster care. 

[janie jones]

They don't even actually have to show the result.  Just show the person looking at the test and smiling a big ol' shit-eating grin.  And we at home can draw our own conclusions.

5 hours ago, Bastet said:

But that's just it -- there are plenty of women just as happy to have that test come out negative as the ones hoping it's positive are upon finding out they're pregnant.  As I said in the commercials thread, I understand them wanting to show only happy consumers to advertise their product, rather than showing it being thrown in the trash while the user bursts into tears because the result is the opposite of what she wanted.  But it's wrong that 99% of those happy scenarios are of women finding out they are pregnant. 

Exactly.  I've purchased more than one pregnancy test, and exactly 0 of those times did I want to be pregnant.  The negative result was the best possible outcome as far as I was concerned.  A positive result isn't the only "happy" option, and it isn't necessarily a happy option at all.

 

[meep.meep]

Oddly enough, on last night's episode of The Unicorn, a married woman with 4 kids took a pregnancy test, got a negative result, and celebrated wildly with her husband.

So, it happens on TV.

[Spartan Girl]

 

[Danielg342]

I mentioned this in the TV Trope thread but it bears repeating here: the idea that a man and a woman could have interactions with each other where the endgame isn't boinking is foreign to Hollywood. Especially if you're a dude- whenever you talk to a woman, you must always want sex with her, and if you don't, you're either gay or "there must be something wrong with you".

(With the woman also wondering, if a guy doesn't want sex with her, if she's still "pretty enough"...because why else would a guy not be interested in sex? It's got to be about looks, right? RIGHT?)

I'll never understand it. The thought that a man and a woman could just want to be friends and nothing more than friends, doesn't ever resonate with Hollywood writers. Or that sexual attraction and chemistry isn't always about looks (in fact, there are times when looks don't play that big a factor at all). Or that a man and a woman can't have a normal conversation or compliment or even just say "hello" to each other without there being "ulterior motives".

Nope- every male-female interaction has to be about sex in some way. No way around it.

I could rant about all the negative experiences in life that I've had because someone read way too much into something I said or did (some of which have been kind of traumatizing, if I'm being honest) but I'd rather close with a somewhat positive story in this regard.

So, last Hallowe'en I went to a warehouse party. Along the way, I meet this woman. Good looking woman. Good conversation too. However, I knew right away that there wasn't any sexual attraction between us and there likely wasn't going to be- and I was completely fine with that.

Inevitably, she turns to me and tells me, "this is the point where I have to tell you I have a boyfriend."

I look at her and nonchalantly and without hesitation tell her, "OK."

I further explain to her that, in my experience, it's way better just to worry about making friends and not worry about getting laid or falling in love because, truthfully, that stuff has a way of working itself out- you can't force it. Plus you leave a lot of good relationships and interactions on the table if all you do is think about sex- and, of course, if you want to meet someone worth their salt, you gotta make sure there's actually a connection first.

Her relief was palpable and, truth be told, I wound up meeting her boyfriend and I became good friends with the couple. Still, it saddens me that she felt the need to tell me, "no, we're not having sex" even though I made no such overtures and there was not even a hint of sexual tension.

...and while I don't put the blame entirely on Hollywood (after all, men do have brains they can use), they have to shoulder some of the blame for that because they're the ones influencing our culture and telling this narrative that men and women have only one purpose and that's boinking. It's sad that we're in 2020 and we still have writers and producers with this thought process, without it even hinting at abating despite how "progressive" Hollywood claims it is.

Don't get me wrong- I love a good love story or a good romance like the next person, but it's time Hollywood understands that men and women can interact with each other without wanting sex.

'Cause I'm tired of people thinking I have some "motive" for simply saying "hello".

[Hiyo]

So When Harry Met Sally... was wrong? 😉

I will say, I do find it funny when a woman and man do finally cross that line, and then after The Sex, they're both like "Ok, that was it? Moving on now", like with Sydney and Will on Alias (even though the friendship of theirs was kind of problematic to begin with, and by the time they did the deed, he was long gone and only guest starring on the show by that point).

[Anduin]

There have been a few movies recently where people end up single. The new Star Wars, there's Han/Leia for a bit, before they both died. Han/Qi'ra for another bit, but didn't last the movie. Rey kissed Ben, but then he died. Jyn and Cassian could have gone there, but they both died. Fury Road had Nux/Capable for 24 hours until he died. Maybe Max and Furiosa could have hooked up, but he walked away from civilisation. Quantum of Solace, James Bond doesn't sleep with Camille. But his last three girlfriends died, so maybe he was finally learning.

Come to think of it, the biggest obstacle for couples is death. That's a depressing thought.