Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Show writers concoct fantasies all the time. For sitcoms and for cartoons, it has traditionally been male writers creating fat, goofy, not very attentive husbands coupled with beautiful wives who are entirely satisfied (at least by the end of the show, when everybody is hugging and the happy wife is kissing her unattractive husband with utter ardor), for example (yeah, fantasy...IRL she's over the idiocy by Year 15 or so and asking for a divorce).
In the example you're giving it's the high-profile daughter of an extremely influential woman who aggressively jumps on her man (fantasy, could be either a male or female one).
It is ALL just fantasy, though. Such things happen, sure, women are aggressive at times, why not, but PROBABLY the style, everybody being gorgeous, everybody saying the perfect things in banter, etc. (I've never seen the show but this is all pretty easy to guess) is just writers catering to people wishing their own lives were more exciting.
This is as old as time, you see exaggerated fantasy interaction even in Greek tragedies. People don't usually pay to see the ordinary. Even reality TV, for example, is largely scripted and represents extremes, not the norm.
As for "norms" changing - the one thing that's constant is that norms are never quite that. NOBODY has "the norm," or...a tiny percentage of the population might kind of appear to be middle of the road "real America" but even that has a totally fluid definition, no two people will agree on that.
Do gorgeous TV-worthy Julliard-achieving actresses with exquisite perfect pouts which must be lipstick touched-up every 4.5 minutes really jump on exotic Russian men...probably. Somewhere, some time. Not sure this is representative of changing norms or anything.
Show writers concoct fantasies all the time. For sitcoms and for cartoons, it has traditionally been male writers creating fat, goofy, not very attentive husbands coupled with beautiful wives who are entirely satisfied (at least by the end of the show, when everybody is hugging and the happy wife is kissing her unattractive husband with utter ardor), for example (yeah, fantasy...IRL she's over the idiocy by Year 15 or so and asking for a divorce).
In the example you're giving it's the high-profile daughter of an extremely influential woman who aggressively jumps on her man (fantasy, could be either a male or female one).
It is ALL just fantasy, though. Such things happen, sure, women are aggressive at times, why not, but PROBABLY the style, everybody being gorgeous, everybody saying the perfect things in banter, etc. (I've never seen the show but this is all pretty easy to guess) is just writers catering to people wishing their own lives were more exciting.
This is as old as time, you see exaggerated fantasy interaction even in Greek tragedies. People don't usually pay to see the ordinary. Even reality TV, for example, is largely scripted and represents extremes, not the norm.
As for "norms" changing - the one thing that's constant is that norms are never quite that. NOBODY has "the norm," or...a tiny percentage of the population might kind of appear to be middle of the road "real America" but even that has a totally fluid definition, no two people will agree on that.
Do gorgeous TV-worthy Julliard-achieving actresses with exquisite perfect pouts which must be lipstick touched-up every 4.5 minutes really jump on exotic Russian men...probably. Somewhere, some time. Not sure this is representative of changing norms or anything.
Yes but. .successful programming is that, frequently, because it explores some underlying dynamic bubbling under the surface of the culture. Think of Norman Lear's Archie Bunker character in the 60's. Successful and prophetic of upcoming events. Artists frequently sense cultural changes before the events occur.
It's not just all pointless fantasy created aimlessly for entertainment purposes; it's art.
Yes but. .successful programming is that, frequently, because it explores some underlying dynamic bubbling under the surface of the culture. Think of Norman Lear's Archie Bunker character in the 60's. Successful and prophetic of upcoming events. Artists frequently sense cultural changes before the events occur.
It's not just all pointless fantasy created aimlessly for entertainment purposes; it's art.
Those events were already in motion in the 70s when that show was created (debut was 1971). In fact we thought of Archie as a throwback, that was the whole point.
Yes, more women are asking men out than before in a more obvious way and that itself really isn't new. It has been growing form probably 40 years now as women have become more independent. The hyper aggressiveness and high powered motif...meh, Hollywood.
Even in the past, I think some women who were interested in introverted and/or socially clueless men have “made the first move” in order to get the romantic ball rolling. The guy was not picking up cues, so she invites him, or kisses him, or makes some other move that shows she really likes him.
I don't own a tv but I do watch MSNBC and CBS on my lap (and HBO on my Kindle). And my favorite show is Madame Secretary. I think it's cool how competent she is, how she stands up to men. The show presents a role model for female behavior and I love it.
However, what I'm posting about is her daughter in the show (played by someone with a degree in violin from Juilliard!). Her daughter has a fling with this Russian guy, and it's interesting because the daughter is the aggressive one in the relationship; she breaks up with someone to pursue him, asks him out via text, and in the last scene, kisses him passionately.
I'm the most ardent feminist you'll ever encounter but always felt that in romantic relationships it was hard wired in human behavior that the male was the persuer.
Has this changed?
I don’t think any given behavior is hard-wired in only one sex versus the other. Males and females are both capable of the whole gamut of emotions and behaviors. At various times it may be socially acceptable for one sex or the other to express certain behaviors while that same behavior is repressed in the other sex. Most of behavior, IMHO, is cultural and depends on nurture.
I'm still struggling with this. The latest season of Madam Secretary has her literally saving the world. And now she's talking about running for president. They added a trans person to the cast, which is cool, and other developments.
It is probably naive of me to even bother to speculate, but one wonders how many of these popular shows are not propoganda. Not necessarily to control the public in a negative way, but to shape peoples' thinking. SEAL puts you at the ready to accept war indefinitely, and humanizes it; NCIS and all its offshoots support established authorities, and so on. Even my beloved Animal Rights/veganism stance may be supported or initiated by the powers that be, since our populations may require it to survive.
I don't own a tv but I do watch MSNBC and CBS on my lap (and HBO on my Kindle). And my favorite show is Madame Secretary. I think it's cool how competent she is, how she stands up to men. The show presents a role model for female behavior and I love it.
However, what I'm posting about is her daughter in the show (played by someone with a degree in violin from Juilliard!). Her daughter has a fling with this Russian guy, and it's interesting because the daughter is the aggressive one in the relationship; she breaks up with someone to pursue him, asks him out via text, and in the last scene, kisses him passionately.
I'm the most ardent feminist you'll ever encounter but always felt that in romantic relationships it was hard wired in human behavior that the male was the persuer.
Has this changed?
Id call it typical liberal media fantasy.
The dove does not pursue the griffin.
It was no accident Roseanne was so wildly popular and decapitated by the media. They despised it because it doesnt fit the left's cultural narrative.
It was no accident Roseanne was so wildly popular and decapitated by the media. They despised it because it doesnt fit the left's cultural narrative.
"Roseanne" was an awesome show! I really liked her character. Roseanne isn't exactly a nice person, but she knows where to draw the line and remain likable. That is, how to be a strong woman and take charge of the home, without turning into a shrieking, castrating shrew (like most other sitcom wives). As well as knowing how to give respect (including to Dan), not just demand it. Come to think of it, Dan and Roseanne are the only sitcom couple I can watch without cringing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
