![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
damelolaFor those of you who will continue to watch House next season:
WHY?
This is not intended as an attack, I swear. You know I don't pick fights with my friends (random trolls and evil people on the other hand...). But how are you justifying it to yourselves? Is it just a case of 'I've started so I have to finish'? I mean, I know some of y'all would watch snuff for to Hugh Laurie if you had to, and I can't claim I'm any different when it comes to my women.
But I'm genuinely interested to hear what the defence is to the blatant misogyny (and/or casual racism), sharp decline in writing and all-round character assassination (including, most importantly, that of House himself)? What is it that makes you say that's not how it is or it doesn't matter because. Like I say, not picking a fight but I feel like I've only seen one side of this so far and I really don't know how the people not speaking up about this are rationalising the showrunners' decisions.
I'm putting this public and enabling anon so you don't have to feel awkward about it all. Look forward to hearing any and all sides of the arguments outside of the general comm hysteria.
WHY?
This is not intended as an attack, I swear. You know I don't pick fights with my friends (random trolls and evil people on the other hand...). But how are you justifying it to yourselves? Is it just a case of 'I've started so I have to finish'? I mean, I know some of y'all would watch snuff for to Hugh Laurie if you had to, and I can't claim I'm any different when it comes to my women.
But I'm genuinely interested to hear what the defence is to the blatant misogyny (and/or casual racism), sharp decline in writing and all-round character assassination (including, most importantly, that of House himself)? What is it that makes you say that's not how it is or it doesn't matter because. Like I say, not picking a fight but I feel like I've only seen one side of this so far and I really don't know how the people not speaking up about this are rationalising the showrunners' decisions.
I'm putting this public and enabling anon so you don't have to feel awkward about it all. Look forward to hearing any and all sides of the arguments outside of the general comm hysteria.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2011-05-20 01:17 am (UTC)Oh no, I don't think that letting Lisa go is a creative decision. I think it's a personal attack with politics behind it, and misogyny fueling the politics.
I think that JMo was more for creative/possible penny-pinching reasons than because she's a female and they hate her.
It's misogynistic to offer Lisa a paycut and not RSL. It just is. No one can argue she doesn't pull her weight and he does, so what else can it be based on?
I'm sure they base negotiations on tons of stuff that we'd never think of, big and small, important (or self-important) or not. It's like basing a professor's teaching pay based on their publications - but maybe they're a shit teacher. Meanwhile, the good teacher is too busy teaching to publish - so their paycheck suffers.
If it's because of attachment to feminist causes then that's still misogynistic
No, I agree. Absolutely. But in a slightly roundabout way, if that makes sense. It's the politics first (which happen to be misogynistic) rather than direct and personal misogyny. Although it might be worse on her because she's also a girl and outspoken about these views. If it had been one of the guys being *exactly* as outspoken, I'm not sure the consequences would have been quite as dire - though I'm sure 'notes' would still have been passed. You don't 'dis' your employer's medieval politics without a fight.
Never mind that the show is actually about how miserable that makes him. Well, it used to be. Now it's more torture porn about just how fucked up he can get.
Well, and like rosie said, YMMV on this one. So many of the comments I heard after Out of the Chute was how horrible it was to women. But what I think many of them really meant was, 'I don't like that this episode is a huge F U from House to Cuddy'. Because they put themselves in Cuddy's place. And if they were Cuddy, it would a) hurt, and b) be insulting. But hi - that's kind of the whole idea. House is a jerk who *would* do that. And I thought it was quite clear that he was still miserable - even more than he'd been before. He only *looked* like he was partying.
I think House of old was good at puncturing and deflating those views.
It used to be better at it, this is true.
I'd blame some of it on writers phoning it in. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they got network 'notes' as well, no matter how DS denies it. Nets always think they know better than creatives about what, exactly, should go into their shows, and what the audiences want. Sports Night laugh track, anyone? I'm sure it's deadly difficult to keep a vision and original integrity in your show, especially once it's successful enough that the nets think they should take all the credit, and dictate what comes next.
I think for smart and engaged viewers like us, that's fine and we can make the distinction. But if politics in the past century has taught us anything it's that most people can't make that distinction
I mentioned on this tack below, but - then we should program for the lowest/simplest common denominator? Johnny can't figure it out, so let's only make programming that lays everything out for him so he never has to think?