?

Log in

No account? Create an account
snark

May 2011

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    
Powered by LiveJournal.com
snark

Media propagates traditional relationship roles, no duh right?

So maybe I really should be in Women's Studies. Which I will always believe should be renamed Gender Studies. At this point in the history of feminism we should be embracing gender equality, even though our predecessors fought for many many years to be in college let alone have a recognized College in the Midwest. Anyway I just noticed a media perpetuation of traditional/stereotypical gender and relationship roles.

I was watching this show on Netflix called Day Break. It's about a guy who is reliving a day but he remembers what happened and can change things. On the first day his girlfriend is killed by people trying to frame him for murder.

So the first time he wakes up back in his bed he acts as I would expect. At first you think it's Déjà vu. Then it's overwhelming that almost everything you think you remember is actually happening. Then you try to fix the day, because that's what you feel you should do. But, in my mind at least, you would not expect the day to repeat again.

I was annoyed when the next day it cuts to him sitting in a chair, waiting for his fiancée to wake up so he could run away with her. Normally I think people would accept this storyline. (Please tell me if I am wrong.)


As the second day was ending I was looking forward to the craziness of the next day. I assumed this would take up a large part of the next episode. As you go to sleep you pray that this was just a dream, or some bizarre cosmic fluke, or proof of a higher power. But most of all, you pray (I need a secular replacement for that word) that you will wake up and it will be the next day. But then you wake up for the third time on that same day. Shit just got real yo (yeah, I said it). This could be forever. If there were ever a time for a psychotic break, this would be it! I expected at least some sort of recognition of that human emotion.

Of course in the sanitized and slanted media the man is strong and emotionless. He watches over his helpless lover waiting to run to her rescue and be her knight in shining armor (did I mention he was sitting in front of a window with the sun rising behind him?).

Really? I mean, really???

Comments

I got stuck on the "waiting for her to wake up" so he could escape with her and she wouldn't be killed.

So, lemme get this right...the love of your life is KILLED today if you don't do things right, but you're such a gentleman you let her sleep in?

I'm really tired of women being nothing more than plot points.
Exactly.

Interesting coincidence

So I'm reading this article written by Roseanne Barr at the same time I'm reading your post and she says, "There are no strong women in TV." She was talking mainly about TV producers and mostly network, and how that pretty much means there will never be women on TV worth watching. But it was funny to me to read this and that simultaniously. This is why I don't actually watch TV much.

But from the other side I gotta say, I do get really annoyed with the men in stories like this being basically lauded for the ongoing 'one man against the world' crap. Like we need another plot validating every vigilante moron who just knows he's right.

Re: Interesting coincidence

Exactly... again :)

What if he became the plot point?

So I read this summary and I think to myself: if his girlfriend woke up and heard him explain what was happening and she immediately took him to the psych ward of their local hospital, wouldn't that change their fate and move her away from getting killed just the same as him running away with her?

Oh wait, then he wouldn't be the hero.
Bechdel test anyone?