Pointless feminism ruined the entire show.

While I don't agree with some of the specifics of your argument, I will admit that the show occasionally seemed to portray the subject in a heavy-handed way. It didn't even come close to ruining the show for me, but I found it to be an unnecessarily recurring theme. The fact that Stella was portrayed as having a chip on her shoulder about men over and over again as the natural counterpart to Paul's deep-seated resentment towards women made a certain kind of sense, but the way that this was accomplished through the dialog was just a little too obvious for my tastes at times. There is one scene where Burns asks if she thinks Paul would have attacked her in the hotel room if he weren't there and she says something to the effect of "is that really how you see yourself? As my protector?" when that wasn't really what he was saying at all. The question of "which is the stronger sex, men or women?" literally and explicitly comes up at least twice in the show. In just about every other respect, the show had superb writing but I had to wonder why they felt like they had to bring this up so many times.

I really don't have a problem with women being portrayed as being strong and in fact usually like it, so this isn't what my complaint is about at all. I shouldn't have to be defensive about this, but unfortunately experience seems to have taught me that I do, to some extent. It was really more about how little subtlety was used in the way they redundantly tossed the theme around.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Agree. WOuldn't go as far as saying it ruined the show, but it wass annoying. Enough with the silliness of thinking that to be pro-women you have to be anti-men... it's just nonsense.

It did ruin Top of the Lake though imo. Couldn't get past the second episode of that one. Hated the lead character... she wasn't a strong woman, she was just a b*tch.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

...one after another male character was portrayed either as a incompetent loser or a corrupt wife beating cheater, there's no middle ground for males in this series and on the other hand almost all female characters are hardworking and successful smart women, even the cheating wife of that dead cop was portrayed as a victim.

...this show could've been better without feminism's victim complex and whining, it destroyed the police work and the drama it's all about feminism and somehow the writer think a promiscuous female cop is going to help women

I don't feel like reading this entire thread so I'm just quoting OP. I do agree they went a bit over the top in how they portrayed men. Especially assistant chief constable Jim Burns crying in the car when he leaves the scene of Paul beating Stella. He's this alcoholic guy hitting on Stella who has to retire in the end ... his retirement made no sense to me since it was not his fault the psychiatric unit didn't have enough security to prevent Spector killing himself.

I didn't mind the portrayal of Stella as a promiscuous man-izer. How many years have we watched tv shows where men are the womanizers? So tit for tat, on that front. Where I agree with you is how men were portrayed.

Last thought, I don't like the terms victim complex or whining since they imply these people were somehow not really victims. Paul Spector's marks were very much victims. If he was running around killing boys or men, we would consider them victims also. And it's not whining to speak out against crimes committed against children, women, or men. It's appropriately seeking justice.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Nah, the show just wasn't very good.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

that's cause men are evil pigs

reply share

add reply

formatting help