|
Irish Joe posted:Just saw this past week's P&R and I have a few questions. Go read season/episode summaries on your own time. Sit on it and rotate. Feel free to yadda yadda yadda
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
Is there one or two episodes left?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Is there one or two episodes left? We get a final hour this coming Thursday. I don't know if it's one hour-long episode or two half-hour long episodes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
This probably belongs here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCa_Xgy_ank
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
GigaPeon posted:This probably belongs here: This is stupendous.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
GigaPeon posted:This probably belongs here: I've never noticed the height disparity before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
GigaPeon posted:This probably belongs here: Worth it for: "She did a voice in Free Birds!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
This article says what's already been said here, ("all of Leslie's accomplishments are suddenly less than something 14 year olds do on accident all the time?") but in a longer form: http://www.avclub.com/article/trouble-triplets-leslie-knopes-babies-and-problema-203697 Maybe they'll salvage the situation but it feels like it flattens Leslie as a character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
wait why can't a feminist have kids again?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
Sam Steele posted:wait why can't a feminist have kids again?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Nah I did read it, the author's narrow definition of what behaviours and life stages being a sitcom-feminist can encompass was really stupid and there sure is a lot of stretching going on to say a line of dialogue, where a character boasts about the many difficult challenges she's overcome that have prepared her to overcome her next challenge, is somehow disempowering and negating all the character's growth and accomplishments. Her line as read in the show was actually pretty bad-rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Sam Steele posted:Nah I did read it, the author's narrow definition of what behaviours and life stages being a sitcom-feminist can encompass was really stupid and there sure is a lot of stretching going on to say a line of dialogue, where a character boasts about the many difficult challenges she's overcome that have prepared her to overcome her next challenge, is somehow disempowering and negating all the character's growth and accomplishments. Her line as read in the show was actually pretty bad-rear end. The author was discussing the tv show in context of tv in general and lamenting that P&R has decided to go down a path so well-worn it's a cliche. A cliche that exists because of general discomfort in society about the idea of a woman finding fulfillment in anything other than childrearing. But you very clearly don't want to consider any perspectives but the one you walked in with, so why post about it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Sam Steele posted:Nah I did read it, the author's narrow definition of what behaviours and life stages being a sitcom-feminist can encompass was really stupid and there sure is a lot of stretching going on to say a line of dialogue, where a character boasts about the many difficult challenges she's overcome that have prepared her to overcome her next challenge, is somehow disempowering and negating all the character's growth and accomplishments. Her line as read in the show was actually pretty bad-rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
I do think it's sort of unfair to jump on Parks and Rec for this trend when (as the article even points out) April and Donna both lead independent, fulfilling lives and don't appear interested in having kids. And for all the failings of this season, using one quote from the show to frame having kids as Leslie's "life goal" is sort of silly.
hcreight fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Apr 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:The author was discussing the tv show in context of tv in general and lamenting that P&R has decided to go down a path so well-worn it's a cliche. A cliche that exists because of general discomfort in society about the idea of a woman finding fulfillment in anything other than childrearing. But you very clearly don't want to consider any perspectives but the one you walked in with, so why post about it? Also, Leslie has quite clearly gained enormous fulfillment already through her career so it's fallacious to suggest that she is finally getting the fulfillment she wants via having kids. And Sam Steele is right in saying that the line about overcoming challenges or whatever doesn't remotely negate what she's already done, Leslie's whole point is that having children is tough but she knows she can do it because of the many seemingly impossible things that she has successfully pulled off against the odds. If anything that's an enforcement of her achievements, not an admission that actually it was all easy compared to farting out three children. It doesn't mean that everything she's done was just leading up to her learning how to be a good wife and mother. The article is absolutely overthinking everything for the sake of it i'm annoyed I wrote so many serious words about a comedy show now
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:i'm annoyed I wrote so many serious words about a comedy show now If it's any consolation you did a better job than the article.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
The mistake was considering Leslie Knope a feminist icon when she is, in fact, a fictional character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
How HIMYM treated Robin in its later seasons and then especially in the finale would have been a much better framing point for that article IMO.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:What's the alternative then? They just ignore the idea of children and family even though it's obviously something both Ben and Leslie would want and they're both pushing 40? It's absolutely normal for them to want children, it's a well worn cliche because that's what happens to people. I think the complaint is that there are no shows where a lead professional woman goes off and has a successful career, but then just doesn't have kids because she chooses not to. Criticizing P&R in particular for not doing this seems a little off the mark - and I don't really think that's their intention - the author is just generally annoyed that nobody is running with that plot line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 00:16
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
hcreight posted:I do think it's sort of unfair to jump on Parks and Rec for this trend when (as the article even points out) April and Donna both lead independent, fulfilling lives and don't appear interested in having kids. And for all the failings of this season, using one quote from the show to frame having kids as Leslie's "life goal" is sort of silly. That's all fine and good, but when you're telling millions of women that kids are the most important thing they could ever do, it's a little hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:She said they were more important than anything she'd ever done. Except she said it was the most important thing she did and after years of being kicked around by retards and assholes that's a kinda understandable statement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Is it me or is this tech company at the same set as the Entertainment 720 office?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:She said they were more important than anything she'd ever done. Well for most people their children ARE more important than anything else. That's reality. And I'm not just saying that for women, it's the same for men too. It's not unreasonable to think that Leslie's own children would be more important to her than a festival or getting a pit filled in, is it? And it's not "telling millions of women that kids are the most important thing they could ever do", it's one fictional woman learning that she is pregnant and reassuring her anxious husband that they can do it, just like they've done everything else thrown their way in the past.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
So uhhh anyone watching tonight's episode or...?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
E the Shaggy posted:So uhhh anyone watching tonight's episode or...? I don't really think this is the place for that, we've got feminism to discuss. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
She's staying in Pawnee, but Ben is moving to Endor. Seriously though, glad to see that Cones of Dunshire has swept the nation. They didn't even fight over who would be the Ledgermaster!
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:Well for most people their children ARE more important than anything else. That's reality. And I'm not just saying that for women, it's the same for men too. It's not unreasonable to think that Leslie's own children would be more important to her than a festival or getting a pit filled in, is it? And it's not "telling millions of women that kids are the most important thing they could ever do", it's one fictional woman learning that she is pregnant and reassuring her anxious husband that they can do it, just like they've done everything else thrown their way in the past. Oh hey look, somebody refusing to factor in context again. In Context, Leslie's pregnancy is presented as "the most important thing" on the same show where a male character's brand new baby was barely more than an afterthought and exists almost entirely offscreen. In Context Parks is merely the latest in a long line of shows to treat childbearing as a mandatory step, invariably the final step, in a female lead's character development (Ann could have left Pawnee for career reasons or personal goals or anything a man might do but nope, baby. Chris got storylines leading up to his departure about his mental issues and friendship with Ben, but Ann's just babyin' it up.) Male characters get to right wrongs and fight enemies and ride off into the sunset. Female characters get babies. In Context, our media does not propagate a message that men are worthless and broken if they don't love and want children.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
LostRook posted:I don't really think this is the place for that, we've got feminism to discuss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Heck yeah. Cones of Dunshire redux! ...and Jean-Ralphio
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:You're the problem. I try my best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
The Decemberists would actually be kind of a coup for Pawnee hah
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
There's a cover band called Cherry Pie, I think we got the bassist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
oh god Ginuwine singing about Lil Sebastian
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
Lucy!  EDIT: TAMMY! Trolling for some Dad D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Trolling for some Dad D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
I will defeat you right in my pants.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Music geek Ben is best geek Ben.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
I love that the Decemberists and Ginuyine open for Bobby Knight Ranger hahaha this is very, very sweet and i'm a nerd but it's really touching 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
holographic lil sebastian. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:39 |
|
|
I think I am going to cry. I still miss you lil Sebastian.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:45
|
|