MovieChat Forums > Home Improvement (1991) Discussion > Jill's Hypocrisy/Criticism

Jill's Hypocrisy/Criticism

posted 10 years ago by SeamusWiles
19 replies | jump to latest

I saw another thread about this, but I want to actually have a calm and rational discussion about this subject, because while I've seen some irrationally freaking out on here about it, I think there is some truth to it. I love this show as it was one of my favorite comedies growing up and I still occasionally watch through the series and it's as funny as ever. Unfortunately though, there were many hypocritical/critical things about Jill that really bothered me.

I know someone is going to accuse me of being sexist for pointing them out, but I think in many cases sexism was the very problem, but it was actually just the other side of the coin that the feminists don't consider even though they are quick to point out the sexism that treats men as being superior.

Jill always acted like she was right, and it was extremely rare that she admitted she was wrong. I was proud of the fact that this show did have the episode "Workshop 'Til You Drop" in season 6 where they had Jill actually come to the realization that she quite often is far too critical of Tim, but that was one of only a very few cases where she ever admitted to a fault, and I honestly suspect that the episode was inspired by fans who wrote in and pointed this out to the writers. While Tim no doubt did a lot of stupid things, at the same time Jill often just couldn't wait to jump down his throat about something no matter what he did.

So let's go over some of the specific situations where we saw some of that hypocrisy/criticism:

In season 3 the episode "Maybe, Baby" focused on Jill wanting to try for a baby girl and Tim not being interested. Wilson ultimately made Tim realize that he should at least be willing to consider the possibility so Jill could have a Jill Jr. so to speak whom she could pass down girly things to. Okay, nothing wrong so far. It's not that Tim had to agree to have another child. It was just that he should at least be willing to consider it. They could weigh the option together and ultimately decide what's best for them like a married couple should. But then the kicker is in season 7 "Say Goodnight, Gracie" Tim spends some time with his niece, and upon realizing some of the joys of having a daughter he decides he'd like to consider trying for a girl. He even suggests the very logical option of adopting to ensure they actually have a girl (something Jill never considered). Then we see the roles reversed, and suddenly Jill is completely closed-minded to the situation. She practically mocks Tim for considering it and doesn't even talk to him about it like she would say yes in a million years, with her only real basis being that they were too old and that it might affect her career. This is pure hypocrisy in every way. For one they were only a few years older so that argument hardly holds water. Had they tried for a fourth baby he or she would only be about 3 years old by the time this episode came up, so that would have hardly mattered. And while she hadn't started school yet when she originally considered it, having another child would have affected Tim's career as well, but of course she didn't care about that. And again, the biggest part of the hypocrisy is the mere fact that Jill wasn't even willing to discuss it as an option. Not that they had to for sure go along with it, but if Tim should be willing to consider it for Jill's sake, then she should be willing to consider it for his.

And on that subject, I can't help but think of "The Vasectomy One" in season 5 where Jill wants Tim to have a vasectomy and he is not interested. Now again, this is another case where Tim should have at least been willing to consider it as an option. I wasn't bothered that Jill simply wanted to talk about it and Tim shouldn't have been completely closed off to it either, but of course Jill basically insisted upon it. I found it downright sickening when she was yelling at him about how she had children "ripped from her loins" and how she was the only one taking responsibility for preventing pregnancy. For one, I'm going to say something many are too afraid to say: it is equally sexist for a woman to act like her having the right equipment to carry a child makes her more entitled to have a say in the topic of having children. That's just your biology. You didn't do anything to earn it, so you're being sexist if you think that makes you above the guy in those decisions. Either way it takes both partners to create the child, so regardless of who carries the child both should get an equal say. And as far as her being the one who dealt with birth control, well it's not Tim's fault science has yet to figure out much for male birth control. If they had and he had refused to take it she may have had a point, but that was not in his control, so it wasn't his fault. More importantly, what really disgusted me about that moment was how she was yelling at him while earlier talking about the vasectomy as though Tim even had a choice. Based off the way she was reacting it was incredibly obvious that to her Tim only got a choice if he made the right one, which was to do what she thought. Permanent birth control whether done to the man or woman I don't believe should ever be forced by either party for various reasons. Yes, they should both be willing to discuss it and not close the door on their options, but I don't believe completely forcing it is ever right, and that's exactly what Jill was trying to do.

Another situation that comes to mind about Jill being hypocritical was where she was upset with Tim for spending time with the young female mechanic in season 8 "Young At Heart". Now this may have been understandable as it was obvious Tim was attracted to the lady, but while I forget the exact episode, I remember in an earlier season Tim very specifically asked Jill if she would have a problem with him hanging out with a gorgeous woman who knew everything about cars, and Jill says no without hesitance claiming she wouldn't be jealous and would trust him. And this was said to justify her spending time with another man that she had a lot in common with, acting like Tim was ridiculous to be concerned. But of course when that situation actually comes to play, she immediately has an issue with it as soon as she discovers it's a woman. Now okay, I'll admit her suspicions were understandable at first due to the fact that she saw the speeding ticket where Tim had his hand on the woman's breast, but even after Tim explained that it was nothing more than an awkward mistake on his part, she still is mad that he is spending time with the woman. Sure at the end she tries to act like she didn't care, but based off everything else it's obvious she did. She only stopped caring when Tim was obviously not going to be seeing the mechanic again. So basically it's okay for her to do it and Tim is just supposed to deal with it and not assume things, but as soon as the roles are reversed she immediately does the very things she criticized Tim for doing.

Speaking specifically along the lines of her criticism now I am reminded of the episode "Talk To Me" in season 4. Tim is a little irritated that he's been so busy lately helping out since Jill's been in school and he's had to do more work. However, as much as he is irritated he seems to understand the situation and is content to keep his mouth shut, but of course Jill insists on probing him. She won't leave him alone so he finally admits that he's been feeling that way and wishes she'd say thank you once or twice, and she just freaks out on him. Now I understood where she was coming from in that he wasn't always appreciative of the things she did either, but what really pissed me off about this was that she demanded he tell her how he was feeling, and then as soon as he did exactly what she asked, she starts criticizing him. So had he refused to answer her questions she would have yelled at him for not being willing to be honest, but when he was honest she yelled at him for that as well. In her world though, Tim was going to be wrong no matter what. Tim was completely wrong to then complain about it on Tool Time as openly criticizing your spouse on television in front of thousands of viewers is obviously inappropriate, but his general rant was understandable. Done in the wrong context no doubt, but he wasn't wrong to point out how ridiculous it is when a wife forces her husband to be honest, but then tears him down for actually saying how he really feels.

This also makes me think of the episode "Whitewater" in the beginning of season 8. Jill decides to plan a big surprise trip for Tim's birthday while Tim had wanted to watch NASCAR instead. When Jill later realizes this she criticizes Tim for not being willing to be honest with her after being married almost 20 years, and insists that had he simply said that he would rather watch NASCAR she would have been okay with that in spite of the work she put in because it was HIS birthday. Bull crap! EVERYTHING about her character over the eight years this show was on would suggest the complete opposite. No had he actually said this at the beginning of the episode when she first announced the trip I 100%, betting on my life guarantee that she would have immediately starting screaming in his face about how hard she worked to plan this special trip, how he never appreciates anything she does for him, how he should actually try something new for once in his life, and so on and so forth. Her simply saying "Well all right Tim. I guess I should have made sure you didn't already want to do something else for your birthday. You can go watch your race." would completely contradict the character we've seen in the entirety of the show otherwise. It never would have happened.

Are there any other situations I'm forgetting? Those are the biggest ones that come to mind for me.

If you don't want to be spoiled, you shouldn't be here in the first place.

[–] Ashaod43 10 years ago

This in my opinion, as popular as the show was, was the real start of every show making men look stupid and the woman being right all the time. Some stupid formula for sitcom's that was adopted it seems for every married couple in a show. Sure it was done before but not to this extreme because of how the show was written. Seemed to me this show's formula was basically tim has an idea, tim screws up, then talk with Wilson, then apologize to Jill. I hated Jill and this is probably why, not really her fault I guess but with that writing 95 percent of the time Tim got a speech from Jill.

[–] SeamusWiles 10 years ago

Sadly you're probably right. Like you said it wasn't the first time it was ever done, but it did take that formula to the extreme. This show was one of my favorites growing up and still holds a special place for me, but yeah now that I'm older I see more of this upon re-watches. It wasn't really Jill's fault as the writers did just use that as the formula for the vast majority of the episodes, but that doesn't make it any better.

I hate the formula that is so often seen in sitcoms where like you said it's basically just the guy always screws up and the woman is always having to deal with his stupidity. Yeah guys screw up, but so do women. Sometimes they both screw up together. Some of these shows that were pretty darn hilarious could have been so much more had they tried to go against the grain more often.

If you don't want to be spoiled, you shouldn't be here in the first place.

[–] Chaophim 10 years ago

Granted, her opinion on his handyman abilities is well-founded, but take note of how many other things that she critisizes him about beyond that, saying stuff along the lines of "You better let me do it. You can't handle it.", basking in smugness when she 'proves herself right'.

-YET-

She gets butthurt each and every time when he does the same thing.

Not saying that either are right, but she certainly does bear a double-edged sword that never seems to cut her direction.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tigerlily_86 10 years ago

But then the kicker is in season 7 "Say Goodnight, Gracie" Tim spends some time with his niece, and upon realizing some of the joys of having a daughter he decides he'd like to consider trying for a girl. He even suggests the very logical option of adopting to ensure they actually have a girl (something Jill never considered). Then we see the roles reversed, and suddenly Jill is completely closed-minded to the situation. She practically mocks Tim for considering it and doesn't even talk to him about it like she would say yes in a million years, with her only real basis being that they were too old and that it might affect her career. This is pure hypocrisy in every way. For one they were only a few years older so that argument hardly holds water. Had they tried for a fourth baby he or she would only be about 3 years old by the time this episode came up, so that would have hardly mattered. And while she hadn't started school yet when she originally considered it, having another child would have affected Tim's career as well, but of course she didn't care about that.

I do not agree with this at all. Unless the man is the one who's going to take the parental leave from work, having a baby affects the woman in the relationship far more than it affects the man - that's just reality. When Jill wanted to have another baby, she was willing to take the mat leave, and stay home to raise the baby, at least for a little while. When Tim wanted to have a baby, the expectation would again be that Jill would be the one to stay home and raise the baby for the first while. Not the same thing, especially not when the decision had already been made several years ago to not have any more children. How exactly would having a baby impact Tim's career, other than the fact that waking up in the middle of the night might make him a little tired the next day? Tim would not give up working at Tool Time or take a significant amount of time off so he could have a daughter. Wouldn't happen. The expectation would fall to Jill to put her career on hold, after it had already been decided that she could safely, and without interruption, move forward with her career because her motherly duties had diminished since her kids were older.

I get the argument for equality in parenting and everything, and "it takes two people to make a baby" blah, blah, blah, and that is true, but it's also true that the interruption to one's life is much greater for the woman than the man. The woman goes through the physical changes, the woman delivers the baby, and the majority of the time, the woman is the one to take the leave of absence from work to stay home with the baby ... at least for the first year if not longer. I realize nowadays, there are less "traditional" families, and more fathers are the ones staying home, and good for them ... but everything we saw on Home Improvement suggested that that arrangement would not happen with this particular family.

[–] austin_sod 10 years ago

Dude, it's a sitcom. You're reading way too much into it. Everything is done for laughs.

[–] terryc316 10 years ago

I TOTALLY agree. People need to get a grip. It's done for laughs, which is the point of COMEDY.

Sure, she came off as a domineering wife sometimes, but it was FUNNY.
Guys who are bothered by it either don't know what good comedy is, are self-conscious because she might be right about some things, or they are narcissistic and just don't have a lot of respect for women. I hope it's the first one.

[–] tralycr_c-1 10 years ago

Guys who are bothered by it either don't know what good comedy is, are self-conscious because she might be right about some things, or they are narcissistic and just don't have a lot of respect for women. I hope it's the first one.

How about the fourth option: they don't like bad writing and/or characterization?

There is a man...he travels fast...he has purpose...he brings violence and destruction.

[–] rbf08 10 years ago

I know what good comedy is, and this show has quite a bit. However, her character never came off as funny. She seems to be more of a stick in the mud foil to the humor of Tim Allen. Then again, everybody in the show played a foil to somebody else.

Jill- Tim
Tim- Al
Brad/Randy- Mark
Teenaged Randy-Tim
Teenaged Mark- Jill
Teenaged Brad- Tim/Jill

While not every aspect of their being a foil was explored, it did provide interesting humor. What I think the OP was upset about was that story lines constantly get reversed on that show.

[–] darkavenger77 8 years ago

Dude, it's a sitcom. You're reading way too much into it. Everything is done for laughs.

Best post in this entire thread. 

Ignoring politics doesn't mean politics will ignore you.
-Pericles paraphrased in <100 characters

[–] Jupiter555555 10 years ago

For one, I'm going to say something many are too afraid to say: it is equally sexist for a woman to act like her having the right equipment to carry a child makes her more entitled to have a say in the topic of having children. That's just your biology. You didn't do anything to earn it, so you're being sexist if you think that makes you above the guy in those decisions.

Oh boy. Your views on gender politics when it comes to the reproductive system are alarming and disappointing. The biological condition of women enduring pregnancy and labor is not lessened by the fact that she did nothing to "earn" it. It's still a fact that must be dealt with and accommodated. You're being sexist to ignore it, thereby saddling her with more burdens than the man and never mitigating that fact. It's not that many are too afraid to say what you said...It's that what you said is unreasonable and many don't hold your view.

As for the rest of your Jill rant I'd remind you of two facts:

1. Writers feel they must create a conflict. It is easy to write marital conflicts, so many of Tim's conflicts arise with his wife.

2. Tim was the lead. We were supposed to sympathize with him.

[–] SeamusWiles 10 years ago

Spoken like a true and ignorant feminist misandrist. To realize that the sexual organs you have are nothing you earned is to simply understand basic biology. Of course women have to deal with challenges in things like pregnancy that men never will (again, basic biology tells us this), but to suggest that men and women should be treated as equal but then turn around and suggest women are guaranteed the trump card in any decisions regarding pregnancy is ludicrous and hypocritical.

The concept feminists like yourself are too stubborn to recognize and accept is that true equality is a two-way street. It is not just about giving both sides equal opportunity. It also means you do not get special treatment on either side either. So if you think a woman must be treated differently due to her biology while also insisting a woman must be given identical treatment as men are you completely self-contradict immediately. The truth is that you do not actually want female equality. You want superiority, because you want to be treated differently but simply on your terms. If being treated differently means it's harder for you to find a job than a man you insist that is wrong (and for the record I do agree that for the most part is unfair), but if being treated differently means you get to make all the calls with things like having a child while your husband/male partner just goes along then you're suddenly all for that.

And you saying that I suggested the woman should be saddled with more burdens than the man is ridiculous as I never once said that but simply realized that due to biology and limitations science has in terms of male birth control it is neither partner's fault that the woman generally does carry more of a burden in that particular sense. All I did recognize is that if permanent birth control is being considered it shouldn't be forced but rather carefully discussed and weighed as it is such a big move. But you're just using the typical weak debate tactic of trying to twist something I said into something entirely different, but unfortunately for you I see right through it.

If you don't want to be spoiled, you shouldn't be here in the first place.

[–] Jupiter555555 10 years ago

Of course women have to deal with challenges in things like pregnancy that men never will (again, basic biology tells us this), but to suggest that men and women should be treated as equal but then turn around and suggest women are guaranteed the trump card in any decisions regarding pregnancy is ludicrous and hypocritical.

It's not a "trump" card. It's just logic. Why should men be as involved in the "rights" that come along with pregnancy and child birth when they don't have to be involved in the pain, risk, danger, etc?
In fact, your theory is trying to pull a trump card of sorts. Thinking men should get equal rights just to be fair or even things out, not on merit.

It also means you do not get special treatment on either side

Right exactly. So just because men want to be as involved in the rights and decisions that come along with pregnancy and child birth doesn't mean they have a right to be. They are exempt from the burdens; they are exempt from the rights as well. Your proposal is actually special treatment.

So if you think a woman must be treated differently due to her biology while also insisting a woman must be given identical treatment as men are you completely self-contradict immediately.

Different circumstances call for separate analysis. In essence you're saying that if women want the right to vote, the right to pursue an education and equal pay for equal job titles, then somehow men should be as involved in child birth and pregnancy. There is no line to be drawn there. The problem with you meninists is that you try to draw parallels where none exist. "Well if you want that, then...." (insert something completely unrelated.)

in terms of male birth control it is neither partner's fault that the woman generally does carry more of a burden in that particular sense.

Fault has nothing to do with it. Men are not being punished by being excluded from certain things; as you pointed out it's a circumstance of biology. You're a little too wrapped up in fairness just for the sake of fairness. This isn't preschool, Jimmy. Fair is good but it has to make sense too.

All I did recognize is that if permanent birth control is being considered it shouldn't be forced but rather carefully discussed and weighed as it is such a big move.

Wait a minute, let's back up. I remember the episode you're referring to. Jill brought up excellent points as to why Tim should be the one to undergo the medical procedure instead of her.

a) It's a much more minor procedure for a man. It's a trip to the doctor's office. For the woman, it's cut-you-open serious surgery to have a hysterectomy.

b) Jill assumed responsibility for the birth control for the first 20 years of their life together. It was his turn...

c) It may not be man's "fault" that woman has to carry and give birth to the children, but that doesn't' mean he shouldn't or can't do something to mitigate that burden. Another good point on her part.

As for the decision to reproduce, clearly both parties have equal say in that. Jill didn't want another child. At another point in the series, she wanted one and he didn't...so they didn't have one then either.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Juaqino 9 years ago

It's not a "trump" card. It's just logic. Why should men be as involved in the "rights" that come along with pregnancy and child birth when they don't have to be involved in the pain, risk, danger, etc?
In fact, your theory is trying to pull a trump card of sorts. Thinking men should get equal rights just to be fair or even things out, not on merit.

Are you kidding? Men, generally, have to take on the financial responsibility for another child(sometimes even when the child turns out not to be theirs!), raising the child, providing for both the child and the mother if the wife divorces him, etc. That's not to mention the risks involved in child birth, which the man also has to risk dealing with indirectly. Sure, the woman takes a greater risk to her own body if she decides to have a child, but it should ultimately be up to both the man and the woman to decide to have a child. If the woman simply doesn't want to consider it, neither should she expect the man to discuss having a vasectomy. If she's willing to at least consider it, it would be congruent for the man to consider a vasectomy. Both keys need to be turned to activate the pregnancy machine; it really isn't more complicated than that. What you're saying is the woman should have a bigger key than the man for... reasons.

No wonder fewer men are getting married than ever. Women in the west all seem to want this one-way street "egalitarianism", which is really "I don't need a man" in disguise.

[–] Jupiter555555 9 years ago

Men, generally, have to take on the financial responsibility for another child

Psh, only because men tend to date outside of their financial class. Ie they think with the wrong head.

(sometimes even when the child turns out not to be theirs!)

haha bullSh. I don't know what it's like in your country, but in the USA a failed paternity test shuts down any request for money.

raising the child, providing for both the child and the mother if the wife divorces him, etc.

Only when that man chooses youth and beauty over other merits a woman might possess.

That's not to mention the risks involved in child birth, which the man also has to risk dealing with indirectly.

Care to specify? I really have no idea what you're alluding to.

No wonder fewer men are getting married than ever. Women in the west all seem to want this one-way street "egalitarianism", which is really "I don't need a man" in disguise.

Well...women don't need men. That's a fact. More women are graduating college recently than men and getting high paying jobs. It's easy for women to recreate the male experience in bed with toys (good luck trying to make it feel like you're with a woman, artificially...), and it's a heck of a lot easier for a woman to get pregnant without a man (sperm donations fill warehouses to the brinks,) than it is for a man to find a woman willing to carry his child. The truth hurts, but the truth is... women don't need men.

[–] KingGaius 9 years ago

Well...women don't need men

And the truth comes out. That's what it comes down to: feminazis are just women who love to hate on men and claim we're useless, but of course that changes when you want our money.

I'll tell you what: you say you can do everything without us? You can even potentially grow your own sperm from bone marrow if science will allow? Okay go ahead. But remember, you said you don't need men, so for starters you need to go create your own country. Find a remote place where you can secede from other countries (oh and you will pay all moving expenses out of pocket). Form your own government of all women, build all of your own homes, create all of your own jobs. Oh and to procreate get on that research about making sperm from your own bodies. Oh but you'll have to start from scratch because odds are some of those men you don't need were part of the research already done. In fact the same goes for all types of medicine, electronics, and all modern sciences. The development of them no doubt involved men at some point, and remember: you don't need us. You'll have to start everything from scratch.

Don't like that proposal? Could it be because with all that in mind suddenly the benefits men provide you don't seem so bad? Well then shut up and accept that men do serve a purpose and men and women working together is the best way. There are things in society that are unfair in terms of gender, but working together is what will improve that. Not hating on each other. All that does is divides people, which only makes things worse.

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 5 years ago

"Well...women don't need men. That's a fact. More women are graduating college recently than men"

At colleges founded by, and primarily run by, men.

"and getting high paying jobs."

At companies founded by, owned by, and primarily run by men.

"It's easy for women to recreate the male experience in bed with toys"

"Toys" that were designed by, and primarily manufactured by, men, in factories owned by, and primarily run by, men.

"and it's a heck of a lot easier for a woman to get pregnant without a man (sperm donations fill warehouses to the brinks,)"

Sperm from men, airhead. It wasn't synthesized in a lab.

"The truth hurts, but the truth is... women don't need men."

You're a moron. Remove men from existence and as soon as all the stuff that was designed, built, and brought to market by men (which is pretty much everything) breaks down, women would be back to living in the stone age. Most of them would starve to death, and they certainly wouldn't be getting pregnant anymore.

If a woman had to go a week without using anything that exists because of men (house, car, phone, toilet... basically everything), she'd be naked in the wilderness for a week. On the other hand, if I had to go a week without using anything that exists because of women, I wouldn't have to change my routine at all.

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

Standard Sitcom stuff really. Mad About You was even worse, the wife seemed to hate her husband at times. Then you also had Everybody Loves Raymond where there wasn't any love at all.