These Pretzels Are Making Me Thirsty

AH, not knowing going in could have been difficult. I'd already read somewhere that he raped her, so the movie itself was actually much tamer than I was expecting. No less disturbing, but tamer.

From:

I don't think the rape is what I found disturbing, though. I mean, yes. Rape is always disturbing. What bothered me was the whole presentation of it as "sexual intrigue" and an "indiscretion" instead of what it actually was. Surely a nominee for the Supreme Court would realize that a rape trial is better than...being blackmailed because you got raped, if not immediately after the trauma, then somewhere along the way!

From:

I agree that calling it an 'indiscretion' is just plain stupid. As for the rape trial, actually, that probably would have killed her nomination. At first, the blackmail was only theoretical. We still have an incredibly antiquated view of rape in this culture and no matter how much people claim to understand it's not the victim's fault, it'll still be the victim's fault. I can hear it now...

"What did she expect after letting herself be picked up in a bar like a common whore?"

"Drinking and carousing, that's what this was. If you're going to act like a slut, you've got to pay the price."

I could go on... and yes, these are actual quotes I've heard people say.

From:

Yeah, I get that, and I get that the movie wouldn't have been much of a movie (not that it was anyway) had the victim chosen to go after the guy who did such a horrible thing to her instead of choosing to hide it while she went for her dream job.

Luckily, she ended up getting vindication for the crime AND the great job all in one fell swoop.

From:

Sadly, far too many women DON'T report rape. It's scary how many men get away with it if only because of that.

From:

Yeah, I agree.

I just...the whole meta message of this movie was whacked.

From:

The meta messages of most movies are, near as I can tell. I was about to go ballistic after Jack bought it and she was doing the obligatory "important things in life" spiel. Then she had to be *talked* *into* not dumping the nomination. I would have been much happier had she been questioning her judgment given what she'd just come out of (where she did make what turned out to be some poor decisions, but I can't swear I wouldn't make some of the same ones). That would have been a more logical reason for her to be doubting her suitability.

I think the thing that annoys me most about the movie wasn't on the screen. The writer/director said in an interview that one of the things he wanted to do was show an older woman as a person who could be attractive and alive and all that. Um. Bud? That's not what you did. You showed us that an older woman could be lured into a disasterous relationship with a psycho simply because he was very pretty, paid her some attention and flattered her with it.

And why in the world would she ever trust William B. Davis? Did she NEVER see X-Files? :-)

From:

There are many ways to rewrite this tripe to make it more thought provoking, less insulting, more empowering, less plain old bad...sadly, they chose none of them.

The writer/director said in an interview that one of the things he wanted to do was show an older woman as a person who could be attractive and alive and all that.
If anything, I'm now even more disturbed. I was already squeamish because the juxtaposition of Cancer Man saying that rape wasn't part of the original plan and MS's line, "you are so beautiful," to the lifeless body just before raping her made me squirm that the message here was that rape was a crime of desire. This makes me think that maybe this message wasn't simply accidental but really is a case of Not Getting It. Showing an older person as desirable involves more than hiring a pretty actress who plays Victim so well. If THAT was supposed to be empowering to older women, well, just YUCK.

I really, really hate that entire aspect of Lifetime and its Victim view of women.

From:

Oh, yeah. It's not just Lifetime, though, it's pretty pervasive across most entertainment content, which is nothing more than a reflection of our society. It's just concentrated and focused on in the Lifetime crap. Shoot, we see the same thing in Stargate; Sam as the tragic romantic victim of her job. *GAH*

From:

That's why is particularly offensive, IMO. Because it's marketed and packaged up as being for women, when really it's the opposite.

Just ugh.

From:

This is precisely why my blood boils over Lifetime. Only Michael Shanks could lure me in. I think I'd better retreat to my happy, shallow place where he's taking off his shirt and unbuckling his belt. Where I'm studiously ignoring all of the context of those actions.

From:

Well, one of the biggest problems is that we (generic we) are our worst enemies in this regard. Again, I point to how Carter's character has been nearly destroyed on Stargate. They started out writing her as the grrl, but at least there was potential to grow beyond that. Eventually, though, they took all her strength and honor and in twisting it to suit their own wet dreams perverted the character to the point where I wouldn't want to be in the same *room* with her, let alone interact with her. And what do I keep hearing? How Sam Carter is such a wonderful role model. The only way she's a 'role model' in my home is that I point out her errors in judgment and flaws in character to my 13 year old whenever I see them.

We (again, generic) accept straw women in place of true strength and independence and until we stop doing that, we're going to always be victims-in-waiting.

From:

It's no accident that I have given up on just about every movie and most mainstream television. :(

Funny enough, I don't see Sam as the tragic victim of her job. Mostly, I see her as the Tragic Victim of her writers. If I had to accept her as written, I'd say she's obviously not enough in love with Jack to do anything about it so she's right where she deserves to be -- and there's nothing wrong with being the brainiac who gets to explore new planets and fight the intergalactic Bad Guys. ;-)

From:

Well, I don't see her that way, either, but many do. They sigh and cry over tragic love without realizing there's no basis for it. I'm not even talking about the absence of chemistry. Ignore that or even pretend it's there. There's no reason why Carter couldn't have it all IF SHE WANTED IT. That she (or Jack) hasn't done what would be required to have it, it's obvious her Air Force career (and his) is more important... and y'know what? That's absolutely fine. But what kind of wimpy idiotic moron wouldn't deal with any feelings that they'd decided weren't worth the effort?

From:

There's no reason why Carter couldn't have it all IF SHE WANTED IT. That she (or Jack) hasn't done what would be required to have it, it's obvious her Air Force career (and his) is more important... and y'know what? That's absolutely fine. But what kind of wimpy idiotic moron wouldn't deal with any feelings that they'd decided weren't worth the effort?

I still can't figure out why anyone would root for a romance that would never work in the scope of the show - Jack/Sam could never come to fruition without fundamentally changing things and destroying the show. Of course, by dragging that shit out and making it so in-yer-face just to tease the portion of the audience who for some reason saw chemistry between Male Lead Character and Female Lead Character (because, really, everyone knows MLCs and FLCs belong together no matter what), they fundamentally changed and destroyed the show.

I just don't get it. Who wins in that scenario?

It's kind of like my frustration with the main romantic crap in Smallville. Everyone already KNOWS Clark and Lana do not end up together, so how could anyone actively ship them, as if the outcome would ever somehow change?

From:

*but, of course, that's an entirely different topic.

From:

One of the things that attracts me to j/d is that there *is* no easy option for them. That's the basis of good storytelling right there. Even if they both left the program and Jack retired from the Air Force, they *still* couldn't come out without it negatively impacting Jack (I believe there is still trouble to be made for retirees who come out, but I'd have to check). Given that none of them *should* leave the program, the only option j/d has is skulking in the shadows. Ah, drama! Ah, conflict! Ah, storytelling! J/s is just stupid because there's no reason for drama or conflict, they've got such an easy out and no one would even have to leave. *shrug* I don't get the MLC/FLC crap.

From:

Precisely. If one takes the story as written, then Sam obviously doesn't want Jack enough to do something about it. And this is the woman who is a pilot, has a PhD in astrophysics, and stood up for herself in a masculine environment. Sam has faults but being a milquetoast isn't one of them.

And that is FINE in my book. OK, Jack is sexy and maybe she'd like to jump his ass and shag him until he can't remember his name -- but she doesn't want to as much as she wants her career. And Jack obviously doesn't want to "tap that" as much as he wanted to go sit at a desk in Washington. Yeah, whatever. I'm totally cool with that. Really.

I completely hate that the writers play that coy card about ship to cater to current fans. It undermines Sam's character, it makes her look absolutely pathetic when it comes to personal matters, and it leads to things like the Pete stupidity. *sigh*

I think I'm preaching to the choir, though, so I'll just end my rant here. :D

From:

Amen, Sistah!

It really is all about what it's done to Carter. What she did to Pete was unforgivable. I would *drop* a friend who I discovered pulling crap like that. If she could be that selfish and cruel (first by accepting his proposal when she apparently wasn't committed to him, second by dumping him only to run apparently to another man's house and STILL NOT GET A CLUE WHEN THERE'S ANOTHER WOMAN THERE!!!!) to someone she is supposedly in love with, how the hell would a mere friend have a snowball's chance of remaining unscathed. She's become a toxic character and I miss the Carter that should have been.

From:

Fortunately, Sam is not a real person. Unfortunately, she is subject to the whims and fantasies of geeky little pricks who have the social acumen of the average 7 year old and the maturity of a Terrible Two Toddler.

(Poor SBG only *thought* she'd left the SG-1 fandom behind. ;-) She doesn't know that the fandom knows where she lives in cyberspace and will haunt her forever. Bwahahahahahaha!)

From:

We are Legion. ;-)

From:

(Poor SBG only *thought* she'd left the SG-1 fandom behind. ;-) She doesn't know that the fandom knows where she lives in cyberspace and will haunt her forever. Bwahahahahahaha!)

Hee hee. I don't mind. What the writers did to Sam...and, IMO, what they brought to us with Vala are two huge crimes against women.

From:

O.o

The writer/director said in an interview that one of the things he wanted to do was show an older woman as a person who could be attractive and alive and all that. Um.

Is THAT what they were trying to say in the doctor's office scene when she was saying how dumb she was for daring to think a younger man would have a genuine interest in her? That was the overall message we were supposed to get, that older women can be pretty too?

Well. Uhm. Missed by about a thousand miles.

From:

juliabk.livejournal.com

Yeah, I think it was.

From:

I just...I...

From:

That pretty much says it all.

"Unclear on the concept" says it, too. I will give the guy points for good intentions, but we all know how those paving stones get used.

From:

betacandy.livejournal.com

You know, I've been trying (and failing) to put together an article on how when TV or films think they "need a little sex", rape is apparently acceptable for that requirement. This "indiscretion" language example might help me out a little. I really don't think they get the difference. It's like they don't think it matters how a part B wound up in a slot A, as long as it does.

Makes a helluva lot of difference to me.

Oh, and rated-R movies have "Sexual situations" in the warnings. This can mean married people doing it with the covers up or a gang rape.

*copies and pastes this for later*

From:

Yup, definitely a disturbing movie though I found it to be disturbing for completely different reasons than they wanted me to. Lifetime isa very unhealthy channel, IMO.

Michael needs better representation. :|

From:

Lifetime's claim to be television for women galls me.

MS did all right, considering the horrid material. But the accent made me want to cry.

From:

I think "gall" is an understatement. It makes my blood boil when I think about it.

I suppose he did but the man really needs to get a new agent. He's a much better actor than that.

From:

He should know by now his agent sucks. Maybe it's a loyalty thing, but man...you're so right. He should drop whoever it is, and do it today.

From:

librarianstales.livejournal.com

Yikes!

From:

captain-tiv.livejournal.com

Sexual intrigue??? Who writes this stuff?

From: