This is following on from Dan's
rant on Sex & the City. My comment was getting too wordy, so I'm making a post out of it. You probably already knew it was about S&TC, just from the subject heading of this post. I mean, who wouldn't be able to tell that it was the theme to the show, typed out?
Okay, so Sex and the City:
First of all, I really like Sarah Jessica Parker, and I don't know why. Maybe because she was the first (and only) guest on the episode of David Letterman that I was in the audience for. Maybe because I went through a period as a kid where I thought
Hocus Pocus was the bestest movie ever (shut up, it filled the hole that Bewitched left behind when I'd finally seen all the episodes). Also, the first movie that mum ever rented from the video store just for me was
Flight of the Navigator, so maybe it goes even further back? Anyway, that's not the point. I'm just inexplicably fond of SJP.
And yet...
I hate that Sex & the City is held up as the epitome of female empowerment. It may have been a great vehicle for female
actress empowerment, simply because it was a TV show with an all female cast. But not for the entire female population.
For a start, having women who say "f
uck" and have casual sex is not empowering. And it certainly wasn't groundbreaking - even when it first started in 1998. If anything, it merely reflected what many women were already doing. One could even say it was a bit slow on the uptake (didn't Ally McBeal tell a joke about cunnilingus and have a one night stand with a guy simply because he had a big dick a whole twelve months earlier?).
Secondly, any message of female empowerment the show's creators may or may not have intended to send was quickly muffled, if not drowned out completely, by the shallowness of everything that followed. The women loved shopping. The men were commitment-phobes. The gays were faaaaaaaaaaaaaabulous (and F
UCKING annoying). Then it devolved even further to being an unintentional parody of fashion. The legend of Carrie's shoes really bugged me, but not for the reasons you might think. I can totally deal with the fact that she had a shoe collection that no "real writer" could ever afford, just like I could deal with the size of Monica's apartment. I quite like suspending disbelief, it's what I do. But it became such a part of the show's landscape that it all became a bit meta for me.
Wink wink, nudge nudge, how could she ever afford these? Isn't Carrie fabulous, oh ha ha ha ha ha ha. Vomit.
Thirdly, and most importantly: From what I know about feminism (so, Tori Amos albums), one of the biggest problems for women was/is being able to be a whole person, and not just an archetype. For so long women couldn't be funny, or aggressive, or overtly sexual - at least not without being pigeon-holed into that particular two dimensional...er, pigeon hole. Women were either Virgins or Whores. Occasionally they were Bit
ches, and in the case of female comediennes (or, say, the not terribly attractive), they were completely asexual Kooks.
But then Sex & the City came along and showed us that was all WRONG! That women can do ANYTHING, and are strong and independent and so, so DIVERSE - with their four main characters: The Kook, the Whore, the Virgin, and the B
itch. Was Carrie ever not kooky? Was Samantha ever anything more than a whore? Was Miranda ever not a bi
tch? And did Charlotte ever stop being a cloying, virginal pain in the hymen? No.
The very worst part of all this hypocrisy is that I don't think it's the fault of the people who made the show. I doubt that Darren Star, or Candace Bushnell, or Michael Patrick
Queen King sat down with a plan to Change The World. They just wanted to make a show that people would watch. And a sitcom at that. Sitcoms are allowed to be full of stereotypes, and unbelievable circumstances, and paper thin characterisations - that's what makes them sitcommy. But somewhere along the line people forgot that this was simply a sitcom and turn it into a Feminist Movement. And that's what's so bloody annoying about the hype surrounding the movie.
Sex and the City did not reshape feminism. The fact that it was a sitcom with not one, but four main female characters (none of whom were wifey foils to a male comedian) should have been acknowledged and respected - but the female empowerment ended there. The show did not change the way women think, or date, or dress (at least, it shouldn't have). That would be like expecting Scrubs to change healthcare.
And I guess that's my point. Sex & the City is not a societal revolution - it's a sitcom. Like Scrubs. That's all. If you found the show funny, then the movie will be exciting for you. I know I'd hit the roof if they made a Scrubs movie.
But that's all.