Unpopular Opinions Thread

[ShadowFacts]

In Jack and Rebecca's case, no matter what age they were or how long they were married, it was Rebecca's stated preference that she liked things as they were and didn't want kids then.  Which of course turned on a dime right there at the bar after the Super Bowl game. 

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, ClareWalks said:

My current unpopular opinion is that a lot of the speculation on the threads seems to be unnecessary because they have basically been resolved. For example, I think it is patently OBVIOUS that Jack died when the triplets were 15. It has been obvious since that funeral Kevin crashed where the woman said her son was 15 and Kevin got emotional and said "that's a rough age."

I don't care when he died but the articles in the press about this last episode said this was some major reveal from the funeral scene-- that the kids were still teens at the time.  I did think it was said or implied that the kids were either 15 or that he'd been dead 15 years, but I think I read that somewhere here and it may have been speculation or

Spoiler

possibly a spoiler from some original pilot script, correct or not I don't know.  

[chocolatine]

5 hours ago, talktoomuch said:

But whether or not Kate was receptive is an opinion not a fact, thus not "obvious." In my opinion, she was at least a little receptive because she sought him out to thank him after he was a dick the first time; she appeared to give him a once-over while he was being a dick the second time; and she stayed and continued a discourse with him while he was being a dick the second time.

Actually, it is quite obvious from the dialogue:

Horse Guy: "I'm glad that you're staying, you see, 'cause I happen to think that you are sexy as hell. I'm in cabin 13 when you're ready."

Kate (shaking head): "No, thanks."

Horse Guy: "You don't see it yet, but this, this is happening."

Kate: "Oh, but it's not."

Horse Guy: "Oh, but it is."

Kate (looking disgusted and walking away): "No, it's not!"

[Guest]

But the showrunner even said Kate's reply hinted it was a possibility.  That kind of removes the need to speculate on which interpretation is the one they intended, I think.

[chocolatine]

3 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

But the showrunner even said Kate's reply hinted it was a possibility.  That kind of removes the need to speculate on which interpretation is the one they intended, I think.

I never read or listen to what the show runners are saying, I just take what they're showing at face value. What they showed in that scene was a man sexually harassing a woman. If that was not the show runners' intent, they should have done a better job of showing that Kate was potentially interested. What they showed was her saying no three times, shaking her head, looking disgusted, and walking away.

[Guest]

Yeah, they also said we were supposed to be a little creeped out or appalled by Duke, I think, so kind of a fine line to walk.  I did see the signs of her being interested, and like I said-- the fact she approached him again and never did report him also suggested to me she wasn't as creeped out as she might've been.  I'm assuming we'll see her get more interested to drum up (ha) more tension between her and Toby.  

[ClareWalks]

11 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

I never read or listen to what the show runners are saying, I just take what they're showing at face value. What they showed in that scene was a man sexually harassing a woman. If that was not the show runners' intent, they should have done a better job of showing that Kate was potentially interested. What they showed was her saying no three times, shaking her head, looking disgusted, and walking away.

Agree, and I actually think it is very irresponsible to portray this with ANY "potential" for Kate being interested. Yet another example of a woman's "no" not being good enough? Just keep pushing, keep trying, keep demanding, keep invading her personal space until she gives in, because "no" means "I secretly want it, keep going?" Hard pass. 

[ShadowFacts]

Someone above or in another thread mentioned that this was an example of "negging" and I had to look that up.  It's a trick pick-up artists do, do a mild insult or backhanded compliment so that the target's confidence is undermined and they want to seek approval.  I think Duke (perfect name) did that and it worked.  He went way over the line with her phone.  I took it all as very predatory.  I don't know why they're going this route, regular friendly flirtation would have probably done the trick with Kate if she isn't really totally ready to get married.  I know Toby's probably going to take matters into his own hands, but this ass better get fired, too.  Please let there not be a twist where he's the owner's son or something. 

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

Please let there not be a twist where he's the owner's son or something. 

On this show I feel like he'd be the owner, probably of a nationwide chain.  He's the Elon Musk of fat camps.  

[SlackerInc]

3 hours ago, chocolatine said:

Actually, it is quite obvious from the dialogue:

It's really not, though--it depends on the woman, but there are many who say ostensibly negative things as part of flirtation.  Princess Leia with Han Solo comes to mind, after the sad recent death of Carrie Fisher.  Or did you see the "Friend Zone" sketch on SNL last week?  In that one, the Cecily Strong character has been taking her nice-guy friend for granted, but when bad boy Michael Che shows up, he starts negging her right off.  Her response is to say he's a "jerk" and then subsequently "trouble", so if you took them at face value you'd say just the same thing as here: that she's totally uninterested.  But the whole point of the sketch was just the opposite: she's into him, and the more he "negs" her, the more interested she gets.

[HeyThere83]

We see this time and time again. All the time. Since TIU claims to be soooooo different from allllll the others, why can't they take a different approach?

[chocolatine]

54 minutes ago, SlackerInc said:

It's really not, though--it depends on the woman, but there are many who say ostensibly negative things as part of flirtation.  Princess Leia with Han Solo comes to mind, after the sad recent death of Carrie Fisher.  Or did you see the "Friend Zone" sketch on SNL last week?  In that one, the Cecily Strong character has been taking her nice-guy friend for granted, but when bad boy Michael Che shows up, he starts negging her right off.  Her response is to say he's a "jerk" and then subsequently "trouble", so if you took them at face value you'd say just the same thing as here: that she's totally uninterested.  But the whole point of the sketch was just the opposite: she's into him, and the more he "negs" her, the more interested she gets.

Case in @ClareWalks's point.

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, HeyThere83 said:

We see this time and time again. All the time. Since TIU claims to be soooooo different from allllll the others, why can't they take a different approach?

Do they claim to be different?  I feel like it's presenting itself as Parenthood meets Shondaland.  

[HeyThere83]

I feel like that's every other comment out of Dan Fogelman's mouth. But I don't see it, myself.

Ok So I'm not the only one that sees the Shondaland similarities? I think Shondaland is one of the main group of shows Fogelman is referencing when he talks about what's not good about television.

[ClareWalks]

Taking more about the negging issue to the Social Issues thread :)

[PRgal]

9 hours ago, ClareWalks said:

My grandparents (extremely Catholic, at that) had their first kids in their early 30s, starting in the early 1950s. They had their last child when my grandma was in her mid 40s. I'm not sure if being 30 at first child was as unusual in the late 1970s as we might think. I guess it may also depend on what part of the country you live in - maybe the bible belt South would be much younger when they started.

Mid to late 20s would have probably been more "typical" for a first child back then.  I went to school with some girls who were legacies, so I know their moms' grad year.  We graduated in 1998 and the moms' typically had grad years ranging from the late 60s to early 70s, depending on whether my classmates were the oldest or had older siblings.

Edited January 29, 2017 by PRgal

[kieyra]

2 hours ago, HeyThere83 said:

I feel like that's every other comment out of Dan Fogelman's mouth. But I don't see it, myself.

Ok So I'm not the only one that sees the Shondaland similarities? I think Shondaland is one of the main group of shows Fogelman is referencing when he talks about what's not good about television.

I called out the Shondaland thing with the reveal of William's bisexuality. I can't remember if it was on this forum or somewhere else. It didn't go over very well. :)

The show tries very hard to pretend it's more meaningful than a nighttime soap, but it reaches for the nighttime soap buttons on a weekly basis. It just dresses them up with its flashback storytelling device and "mysteries", and its superficial examination of social issues.

But it's working for them--definitely a water-cooler show.

(Much like Shondaland shows.)

[Guest]

I've called out a few Shonda-like things, too-- the dramatic monologues, the emergency/inappropriate quickies, the trying-to-be-shocking twists.

[NutMeg]

On 1/29/2017 at 2:14 AM, SlackerInc said:

It's definitely highly unusual for a non-college educated Midwestern married couple in the 1970s to be that old as new parents, absent infertility issues.

Luckily, shows and movies are not based on the laws of average, at least when they want to surprise us :) 

22 hours ago, ClareWalks said:

Agree, and I actually think it is very irresponsible to portray this with ANY "potential" for Kate being interested. Yet another example of a woman's "no" not being good enough? Just keep pushing, keep trying, keep demanding, keep invading her personal space until she gives in, because "no" means "I secretly want it, keep going?" Hard pass. 

Well, they already used that successfully with Toby, so who knows? Hopefully they just try to highlight that Kate currently has low boundaries...

[OtterMommy]

1 hour ago, NutMeg said:

Luckily, shows and movies are not based on the laws of average, at least when they want to surprise us :) 

Well, they already used that successfully with Toby, so who knows? Hopefully they just try to highlight that Kate currently has low boundaries...

I'm not a huge Toby fan, but I do think there is a difference between what Toby did and what Horse Dick did.  If you think back to when Toby first met Kate, he was forward, but his language was not predatory.  He made no secret of his interest, but the only push back Kate gave him was "I can't date a fat person right now," to which he replied, "Then I'll lose the weight"...NOT..."Oh yes you will...just you wait!"  And, yeah, Toby definitely pushed through some of Kate's boundaries and there isn't an excuse for that (and I've readily called him out for it) and I know I sound like I'm "blaming the victim" here and I hate to do it, but the truth is that Kate did let her boundaries crumble around Toby quite often.  With Horse Dick, it was completely different.  She was far more clear and forceful than she ever was with Toby and he still ignored it.  When these issues came up with Toby, Kate did waffle a bit, giving Toby an in (this is not to excuse Toby, but rather ONLY to create a contrast with her interaction with Horse Dick), but she did not with Horse Dick.

I'm not going to get into the nuances of "rapey-ness" or "sexual harassment," but what Horse Dick did WAS clearly negging which, even with all his flaws, Toby never did.

Again, I'm not excusing Toby--he and his behavior drives me crazy.  I'm also not blaming Kate--yes, she has some problems with putting and keeping up boundaries, but *this* was not that.  The interaction between Kate and Horse Dick was something completely different.

[MaryPatShelby]

On 1/26/2017 at 1:36 PM, talktoomuch said:

Right?! What difference does it make really?

My thoughts exactly; we are eventually going to find out, and I don't have the energy or inclination to analyze every scene and every scrap of dialogue to try to figure out.  More power to those that do, but it's not me.

Yes, I know not everyone goes gray or has saggy skin or shows their age in any way, but if the show would like me to know and believe that Jack is 46, he should look somewhat different than he did pre-kids, or even at 36.

[JudyObscure]

I went back and watched the Kate and HorseDick scene, because Chocolatine said that Kate said no over and over and Chocolatine is almost never wrong.  This was a few pages ago, before she posted the dialogue.  The thing was, I could not remember Kate actually saying the word, "No," at all, and I know that word is vitally important in sexual harassment cases.  Chocolatine was right, she says, "No," three times.  Yet, I hadn't remembered a single no.  Why?  Because every look back over her shoulder, every glance up and down his form, every slight smile said something else.  What ever else happened, we have to hand it Chrissy Metz for doing a truly fabulous bit of acting so that her face says something opposite from her words and prompted this big debate here. 

[chocolatine]

6 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

I went back and watched the Kate and HorseDick scene, because Chocolatine said that Kate said no over and over and Chocolatine is almost never wrong.  This was a few pages ago, before she posted the dialogue.  The thing was, I could not remember Kate actually saying the word, "No," at all, and I know that word is vitally important in sexual harassment cases.  Chocolatine was right, she says, "No," three times.  Yet, I hadn't remembered a single no.  Why?  Because every look back over her shoulder, every glance up and down his form, every slight smile said something else.  What ever else happened, we have to hand it Chrissy Metz for doing a truly fabulous bit of acting so that her face says something opposite from her words and prompted this big debate here. 

Thank you, @JudyObscure!

Since you and others referred to Kate's facial expressions, I focused on that when I rewatched the scene for the second time (first rewatch was to transcribe the dialogue). It must be a very subjective thing, because I attributed her expressions to "did he really just say that" incredulousness. Mouth agape, head shaking, eyebrows wrinkling. She did give him a look over her shoulder as she was walking away, but that still looked like a "is this guy for real" look to me. She did look him up and down and smile when they first met, but I didn't see anything flirtatious in her expressions during that last scene, when he kept insisting that "this is happening" and she said "no" three times.

[ShadowFacts]

I just watched the scenes in question, and I had forgotten he said "I'm not being a dick, I am a dick."  I'm glad he's self-aware.  I agree with his assessment.  Even if I had it on mute and no closed captioning, he was crossing the boundaries of "flirtation".  You don't grab somebody's phone and cut off a call.  Horses being disturbed or not.  Which was bull because horses used for riding can stand human voices, and she wasn't screeching or anything.  That was more about domination.  And as he said, being a dick.

[ClareWalks]

26 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

It must be a very subjective thing, because I attributed her expressions to "did he really just say that" incredulousness. Mouth agape, head shaking, eyebrows wrinkling. She did give him a look over her shoulder as she was walking away, but that still looked like a "is this guy for real" look to me.

That was my interpretation as well. I can see how some folks would disagree, especially since she went back and talked to him AGAIN (major ugh moment for me).

[SlackerInc]

1 hour ago, chocolatine said:

Thank you, @JudyObscure!

Since you and others referred to Kate's facial expressions, I focused on that when I rewatched the scene for the second time (first rewatch was to transcribe the dialogue). It must be a very subjective thing, because I attributed her expressions to "did he really just say that" incredulousness. Mouth agape, head shaking, eyebrows wrinkling. She did give him a look over her shoulder as she was walking away, but that still looked like a "is this guy for real" look to me. She did look him up and down and smile when they first met, but I didn't see anything flirtatious in her expressions during that last scene, when he kept insisting that "this is happening" and she said "no" three times.

The next episode or two should make it clear whose interpretation is right.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

The next episode or two should make it clear whose interpretation is right.

True.  Or read what Dan Fogelman says now.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/01/23/this-is-us-creator-teases-emotional-wallop/

" ...she encounters a bold man named Duke — played by Longmire star Adam Bartley — who works in a horse stable. “One of the things that we haven’t quite had in the show for awhile — except for those who don’t like Miguel (Jon Huertas) — is a bad guy, or kind of a foil,” says Fogelman. “Somebody comes into Kate’s life who becomes a little bit of an antagonist, or somebody who could throw a couple of wrinkles into her storyline with Toby.” Romantic-wise? “Romantic-wise — and otherwise.”

[ShadowFacts]

14 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

True.  Or read what Dan Fogelman says now.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/01/23/this-is-us-creator-teases-emotional-wallop/

" ...she encounters a bold man named Duke — played by Longmire star Adam Bartley — who works in a horse stable. “One of the things that we haven’t quite had in the show for awhile — except for those who don’t like Miguel (Jon Huertas) — is a bad guy, or kind of a foil,” says Fogelman. “Somebody comes into Kate’s life who becomes a little bit of an antagonist, or somebody who could throw a couple of wrinkles into her storyline with Toby.” Romantic-wise? “Romantic-wise — and otherwise.”

Romantic is an interesting word choice, lol.  What that bold man named Duke is up to isn't romance.  Hookup, brief sexual relationship, something else but he 's not looking for romance.  No small talk, no attempt at charm or humor, no getting to know the person (does he even know her name?), that has not even a whiff of romance.  Creative use of euphemism I suppose, but at least he says "bad guy" and "foil" and "antagonist." 

My perhaps unpopular opinion is that now that Kate has begun to have a breakthrough regarding her father, she would be even less apt than she might formerly have been to fall for the disrespectful attentions of Duke the dick. 

[SlackerInc]

 I think Toby is going to catch her in the sack with him, or maybe just kissing him, and then there's going to be several episodes of drama from the fallout. 

[ProudMary]

On 1/28/2017 at 8:04 PM, HeyThere83 said:

I feel like that's every other comment out of Dan Fogelman's mouth. But I don't see it, myself.

Ok So I'm not the only one that sees the Shondaland similarities? I think Shondaland is one of the main group of shows Fogelman is referencing when he talks about what's not good about television.

 

On 1/28/2017 at 10:35 PM, kieyra said:

I called out the Shondaland thing with the reveal of William's bisexuality. I can't remember if it was on this forum or somewhere else. It didn't go over very well. :)

The show tries very hard to pretend it's more meaningful than a nighttime soap, but it reaches for the nighttime soap buttons on a weekly basis. It just dresses them up with its flashback storytelling device and "mysteries", and its superficial examination of social issues.

But it's working for them--definitely a water-cooler show.

(Much like Shondaland shows.)

Oh my goodness, yes!  I thought I was the only one who was feeling this way.  Two to three seasons in has been the point where I've thrown in the Shondaland towel and I've already been starting to feel this way about This is Us also.  I guess that's just the point where I tire of being manipulated.  I'm still in but I can feel the tide turning.

[OtterMommy]

1 hour ago, ProudMary said:

 

Oh my goodness, yes!  I thought I was the only one who was feeling this way.  Two to three seasons in has been the point where I've thrown in the Shondaland towel and I've already been starting to feel this way about This is Us also.  I guess that's just the point where I tire of being manipulated.  I'm still in but I can feel the tide turning.

And your quote from the Speculation thread...

Quote

I'm sorry to say this because I am presently enjoying This is Us but the way it's all playing out is starting to bug me.  I'm betting I'll be in for about two seasons at which point I'll be thinking, "Yeah, this just jumped the shark and I'm out."  

I'm starting to feel the same way about this show.  It's just that there are these things that stick out to me as just not right.  I was slightly bothered by the Olivia/Sloane (well, Olivia--but I guess that's moot now) thing and I'm really, really bothered by the possibility that Horse Dick's actions are supposed to be construed as romantic.  We'll have to see how it turns out BUT if it does come to that, it would be a major issue with me and this show.  I'm one of those people who becomes entirely to emotionally involved in shows and (okay, I'm going to sound like a freak, I know), I feel betrayed when the show does something I feel is just wrong.  Not wrong in that I didn't like it, not wrong in that I wish the plot had gone a different way, but wrong in that it should not have happened, and I'm starting to get that feeling with the whole Horse Dick thing.  I recently "broke up" with a show for something similar (but far more stupid, honestly) and this overly-emotional person would rather not go through that again.

Okay, end of true confessions.  Here's the somewhat related issue:  I'm starting to think that the writers of this show have no clue about women.  This recent development with Kate and Horse Dick--if it ends up taking the romantic road--really sends that home.  Even still, Kate seems to be interesting because of her weight issue.  I don't think Rebecca, on her own, is very interesting--to me, the interest in her character comes from the interactions other characters have with her.  Sloane was interesting, but in a rather (and I hate to say this) nerdy-girl stereotypical way.  Olivia was.....

I don't know about the writing staff on this show, but I have a feeling it might be completely or predominately male--which might not be the smartest thing as I think this is a show that caters more to a female audience.

[Court]

Three Sentences was co-written by  a woman and a man. While I think HorseDick was gross and I'd walk away, other posters are correct that some women do respond to that. It does happen. That doesn't make his actions right.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt6142662/fullcredits/writers?ref_=m_tt_cl_wr

It appears the writing staff is a fairly even mix.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Court

[OtterMommy]

8 minutes ago, Court said:

Three Sentences was co-written by  a woman and a man. While I think HorseDick was gross and I'd walk away, other posters are correct that some women do respond to that. It does happen. That doesn't make his actions right.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt6142662/fullcredits/writers?ref_=m_tt_cl_wr

It appears the writing staff is a fairly even mix.

Honestly, that is surprising, given how the female characters are written.  But thanks for the info!

[SlackerInc]

29 minutes ago, Court said:

Three Sentences was co-written by  a woman and a man. While I think HorseDick was gross and I'd walk away, other posters are correct that some women do respond to that. It does happen.

And the thing about that approach that makes it insidious, and even more obnoxious, is that it doesn't have to work on every woman he tries it on, or even a majority of them.  As long as that type of guy is willing to keep putting it out there again and again, he only has to get the occasional "bite on the line" to make it "worth it" for him, as long as he can shrug off rejection from many others, even getting cursed out, etc.  Although it surely has to be a lot riskier when doing it on the job!

[kieyra]

4 hours ago, ProudMary said:

 

Oh my goodness, yes!  I thought I was the only one who was feeling this way.  Two to three seasons in has been the point where I've thrown in the Shondaland towel and I've already been starting to feel this way about This is Us also.  I guess that's just the point where I tire of being manipulated.  I'm still in but I can feel the tide turning.

I made it through 1.5 seasons of HTGAWM and only because of the lead actress. Well, and the actress from Gilmore Girls. Jeez, drawing a blank on both names. I suck. But generally I have a no-Shondaland rule. Empire is in a similar vein. OMGWTF! moments and plot twists drive the stories, not the characters. The characters behave in whatever way is necessary to set up the OMGWTF! moments. This Is Us is a little more subtle about it, or at least started out that way, right up until Toby did a patented Grey's Anatomy post-coital death-crash into an anvil coffee table full of food. And the reveal of William's bisexuality. (I always feel weird typing this, because obviously there's nothing wrong with being bisexual, I just object to the way they saved it up as a 'gotcha!' twist. It felt unearned, and like something they just decided to do the week before as a ... wait for it ... OMGWTF! moment.) 

Unrelated, but at this point I have a pet theory that the show started out, on paper at least, as mostly being about Randall, and they worked backwards from there to create the other characters. I know Jack is theoretically the 'heart' of the show (god knows they're not going to give Rebecca that honor), but Randall's modern-day life seems the most detailed and developed, what with William and all. In a way, him finding William was the show's 'inciting incident'. (There's nothing wrong with the show being about Randall, I just think it may be why some of the other characters (the females, in particular) don't get to have as many layers--they were added on later.) Anyway, just a theory. 

[CleoCaesar]

On 1/28/2017 at 8:04 PM, HeyThere83 said:

Ok So I'm not the only one that sees the Shondaland similarities?

 

The sappy, excruciatingly saccharine speeches. The shoehorned in diversity characters (William's out of nowhere bisexuality being the prime example). The unrealistic way the characters talk to each other in monologues. The neat theme/motif of the week. The perfect dreamboat main male character (McDreamy -> Jack). The "troubled" main female character (Meredith Grey -> Rebecca Pearson). The nonstop emotional manipulation.

Yeah, I see some similarities...

[SlackerInc]

I made it through one episode of Scandal before I was like "hard pass".  So if this is in that vein, it's definitely more subtle (most of the time--I did complain bitterly about the mercifully brief love triangle scene with Kevin, Olivia, and the playwright whose name I'm blanking on).  But it will absolutely lose me if it becomes more like one of those shows.

[kieyra]

I'd just like Kate to have a storyline that isn't about her weight or the creepers who pursue her. 

And I love Beth, but posts here have made me realize she's basically just there to prop up Randall and William.

Don't get me started on "Evil Mom" Rebecca. 

[Aloeonatable]

I guess my UO is that I love this show and don't see it as the "Randall Show." Nor do I think that Rebecca is evil or that there is a problem with the fact that Kate's story is primarily about her weight. I don't know if it was this thread or another, but a poster mentioned that when you have a life-long issue with your weight that everything is about your weight. Also, many shows have supporting characters, like Beth. After all, this series has only been on for 13 episodes. We have many more (at least two more years worth) episodes to get to know these characters and to flesh out some of the supporting ones. 

[kieyra]

6 hours ago, Aloeonatable said:

I guess my UO is that I love this show and don't see it as the "Randall Show." Nor do I think that Rebecca is evil or that there is a problem with the fact that Kate's story is primarily about her weight. I don't know if it was this thread or another, but a poster mentioned that when you have a life-long issue with your weight that everything is about your weight. Also, many shows have supporting characters, like Beth. After all, this series has only been on for 13 episodes. We have many more (at least two more years worth) episodes to get to know these characters and to flesh out some of the supporting ones. 

Eh, as a formerly obese person (ages 8-37, I assume that qualifies as close enough to lifelong), there was plenty of other stuff going on in my life and brain besides the requisite self-hatred. 

(And I do mean obese.) 

[chocolatine]

12 minutes ago, kieyra said:

Eh, as a formerly obese person (ages 8-37, I assume that qualifies as close enough to lifelong), there was plenty of other stuff going on in my life and brain besides the requisite self-hatred. 

(And I do mean obese.) 

I can see both sides of this. I think it depends how your parents and others close to you treat your weight. If they make it into a major issue, you're more likely to make it into a major issue. We've seen Rebecca make Kate's weight an issue in many different ways - making her eat grapefruit when her brothers got cereal, obsessing about how Kate looks in a bathing suit, making her wear "the only sweater that fits", accusing her of eating too many cookies when she complains about a stomach ache, etc. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, chocolatine said:

I can see both sides of this. I think it depends how your parents and others close to you treat your weight. If they make it into a major issue, you're more likely to make it into a major issue. We've seen Rebecca make Kate's weight an issue in many different ways - making her eat grapefruit when her brothers got cereal, obsessing about how Kate looks in a bathing suit, making her wear "the only sweater that fits", accusing her of eating too many cookies when she complains about a stomach ache, etc. 

I see both sides, too.  Once I lost 50 lbs. pretty quickly, from barely obese to an ideal weight, and I recall telling people that EVERYthing is easier without the excess weight.  Getting out of bed in the morning, getting dressed, etc., etc.  It felt beforehand that everything was about my weight.  And I can imagine at 400 lbs. it's a tough issue to escape.  And I don't think the writers could treat Kate as if it's not a major issue.  And I like seeing the issue portrayed, because it is a real issue for a lot of people.

But then again it'd be nice if once they beat on it for a season or so, we got some other stories for Kate.  If the show tells us it's her whole life, it's the media perpetuating how we women already tend to make it our whole lives (even when it's not that big a deal).  

[kieyra]

5 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I see both sides, too.  Once I lost 50 lbs. pretty quickly, from barely obese to an ideal weight, and I recall telling people that EVERYthing is easier without the excess weight.  Getting out of bed in the morning, getting dressed, etc., etc.  It felt beforehand that everything was about my weight.  And I can imagine at 400 lbs. it's a tough issue to escape.  And I don't think the writers could treat Kate as if it's not a major issue.  And I like seeing the issue portrayed, because it is a real issue for a lot of people.

But then again it'd be nice if once they beat on it for a season or so, we got some other stories for Kate.  If the show tells us it's her whole life, it's the media perpetuating how we women already tend to make it our whole lives (even when it's not that big a deal).  

Your last paragraph sums it up for. We're not just our bodies. Even at the times I couldn't stand myself, and I was just starting to be exposed to television and the uber thin actresses (cue more self disgust), I had hobbies and boyfriends (and husbands) and careers and fandoms I was involved in, and things I was interested that made me very very happy.

Things that defined me as a person. 

[topanga]

On 1/20/2017 at 0:16 AM, pennben said:

HA!!  That was spectacular!!  This is the "unpopular opinions" thread.  It feels like folks shouldn't have to justify what they are saying beyond that here.

I wasn't asking anyone to justify anything. Just clarifying. The original poster asked why generations feel the need to name themselves. I simply pointed out that generations don't name themselves. Older generations name the younger. 

Similar to the poster correcting my spelling error. Which I appreciated, BTW. No one was asking me to justify why I made a spelling/grammar error, and I didn't interpret it that way.

 

On 1/22/2017 at 7:09 PM, Neurochick said:

Don't get this at all.  Maybe you are out of your lane?  I never can understand what "boring" in TV means.  I am just glad Beth and Randall aren't dysfunctional.  

I understand why some people might consider Beth and Randall "too perfect"--meaning, lacking in conflict or drama. I love conflict and drama, and I hope they eventually will have their own obstacles to overcome, but I'm happy that Randall's nuclear family so far hasn't displayed any of the stereotypical "All Black Families Must Deal With This" TV drama like alcoholism, domestic violence, gang violence, poverty, teen pregnancy, and drug abuse (although Beth does dabble a little). I don't want a see a story about Beth being a reformed stripper or Randall having spent time in prison for drug possession. Yes, these things happen, but they don't happen to every person of color. But if your only point of reference is the media or the government, you might think that ALL black people live in inner cities, ALL black people are criminals or victims or crime, ALL black families are headed by single mothers, ALL black children underachieve in school, and ALL black people talk using hip-hop slang. 

That's why shows like this and Black-ish are important (and *sigh* The Cosby Show). 

 

Quote

Quote

But then again it'd be nice if once they beat on it for a season or so, we got some other stories for Kate.  If the show tells us it's her whole life, it's the media perpetuating how we women already tend to make it our whole lives (even when it's not that big a deal).  

Your last paragraph sums it up for. We're not just our bodies. Even at the times I couldn't stand myself, and I was just starting to be exposed to television and the uber thin actresses (cue more self disgust), I had hobbies and boyfriends (and husbands) and careers and fandoms I was involved in, and things I was interested that made me very very happy.

Things that defined me as a person. 

I think Kate seems one note to some viewers partly because she doesn't have hobbies and friends and a fulfilling career.  I was encouraged by the episode where she started working for Jami Gertz, but then she moved to NY (which I'm OK with, story-wise) and is now career-less.  Maybe the point is that Kate isn't happy at all. She doesn't have friends or interests outside of her weight and her family because she's depressed, or she's depressed because she doesn't have those friends or outside interests. And it becomes a vicious cycle.  Or is she still grieving her father?   I hope her month at the horse ranch will help her explore these issues. 

Edited February 2, 2017 by topanga

[OtterMommy]

2 hours ago, topanga said:

I think Kate seems one note to some viewers partly because she doesn't have hobbies and friends and a fulfilling career.  I was encouraged by the episode where she started working for Jami Gertz, but then she moved to NY (which I'm OK with, story-wise) and is now career-less.  Maybe the point is that Kate isn't happy at all. She doesn't have friends or interests outside of her weight and her family because she's depressed, or she's depressed because she doesn't have those friends or outside interests. And it becomes a vicious cycle.  Or is she still grieving her father?   I hope her month at the horse ranch will help her explore these issues. 

I think you have put your finger on what is bothering me (I was never able to articulate it...).  I am not bothered by Kate's weight issues being the foremost thing in her life, but she doesn't have anything past that.  We know that Kevin likes to go running and seek female bedmates.  Randall likes to go running, spend time with his family, and be neurotic.  As far as I can tell, Kate's interests are keeping tabs on Kevin, watching football with her dad's ashes, and, apparently, staring at the food in her fridge.  We know at one point she liked to sing, but now just reserves that for the shower.  

The weight thing isn't an off and on switch.  We had a glimpse into the inner Kate when Toby discovered that she liked to sing--while that whole thing was completely over the top and all, I appreciated that we saw another side of Kate AND how her weight impacted that.  I wish the show did more of that and less of her fighting off the advances of overly pushy men.

[ClareWalks]

Yeah, Kate also got that assistant job (WTF happened to that, by the way?), but even THAT turned out that she was hired because she is fat and can relate to the chubby daughter.

[Neurochick]

3 hours ago, topanga said:

I understand why some people might consider Beth and Randall "too perfect"--meaning, lacking in conflict or drama. I love conflict and drama, and I hope they eventually will have their own obstacles to overcome, but I'm happy that Randall's nuclear family so far hasn't displayed any of the stereotypical "All Black Families Must Deal With This" TV drama like alcoholism, domestic violence, gang violence, poverty, teen pregnancy, and drug abuse (although Beth does dabble a little). I don't want a see a story about Beth being a reformed stripper or Randall having spent time in prison for drug possession. Yes, these things happen, but they don't happen to every person of color. But if your only point of reference is the media or the government, you might think that ALL black people live in inner cities, ALL black people are criminals or victims or crime, ALL black families are headed by single mothers, ALL black children underachieve in school, and ALL black people talk using hip-hop slang. 

That's why shows like this and Black-ish are important (and *sigh* The Cosby Show). 

I agree with this.  At one point on TV, if there was a black person on a show they had to be involved in:  gangs, drugs, poverty, teen pregnancy, prison.  It was as if the writers spent their time watching the local news and that was what they knew of black people. 

[izabella]

Remember The Jeffersons?  As a white kid, that is the first show I can now remember that didn't feature any of those tropes, though they did address social issues between blacks and whites all the time, with humor.  Back then, I had no idea how unusual it was that a black family would be shown as business owners, educated, and not involved with drugs, crime, etc.  In some ways, tv has regressed!

[topanga]

2 minutes ago, izabella said:

Remember The Jeffersons?  As a white kid, that is the first show I can now remember that didn't feature any of those tropes, though they did address social issues between blacks and whites all the time, with humor.  Back then, I had no idea how unusual it was that a black family would be shown as business owners, educated, and not involved with drugs, crime, etc.  In some ways, tv has regressed!

Good ol' Norman Lear may he rest in peace. He was ahead of his time.  (I can't believe I just killed a man).  

 

On 1/31/2017 at 11:35 PM, kieyra said:

And I love Beth, but posts here have made me realize she's basically just there to prop up Randall and William.

And that's okay, I guess, since she's a supporting character. But don't give me Olivia's back story and have me go to Sloane's house for Hanukkah dinner and without giving me backstory on Beth. I'm much more interested in what makes Beth tick.  

[kieyra]

16 minutes ago, topanga said:

Good ol' Norman Lear may he rest in peace. He was ahead of his time.  (I can't believe I just killed a man).  

 

And that's okay, I guess, since she's a supporting character. But don't give me Olivia's back story and have me go to Sloane's house for Hanukkah dinner and without giving me backstory on Beth. I'm much more interested in what makes Beth tick.  

We legit got more backstory on rando firefighter than Beth.

(I think Norman Lear has a new show out ... with Rita Moreno.)