I think it's a misnomer to refer to Nish, Claire and co. as feminists. Not that they're not or that they might not have some of that going on, but that's not what they've been acting on. Their target has never been men in general.

I disagree that it's a misnomer. Nish, Claire, et al., have been coded as feminists since the first episode. And yes, while lots of discerning viewers might understand that a stereotype does NOT, actually, define someone as a feminist, I think that Rob Thomas was absolutely using the unfortunate (and unfortunately widely accepted) stereotype of the angry, humorless feminist, particularly the *college* angry, humorless feminist.

Their actions so far have been actions that fall in line with that stereotype. They go on the radio to talk about a violent crime against women, and nobody is going to say "Oh, there's that group of anti-Greek-life protesters who happen to be all women." They hold a rally about the rapes that's very similar to Take Back the Night, which is associated with feminists, and even though they loudly decry the Greek system at the rally, they still come across as stereotypical angry feminists.

(And, honestly, had those rapes actually occurred, I'd say they have every right to be angry. Rape pisses me the hell off.)

When you have rape as the central issue -- and until last night, we didn't have any proof that some (most?) were faked, so I'd call it a very real issue -- the response to it is invariably going to be coded as feminism.

And even though the feminists in question (on VM) *are* humorless and angry, being opposed to rape is, most people can agree, a good thing. Then RT turns around and takes this group that purports to be pro-women and makes them responsible for faking -- and then committing -- the very act which they've been decrying.

The resulting hypocrisy (of the characters) is not, unfortunately, the hypocrisy of an actual 3-dimensional character (or characters). Like Consuela said, all the angry feminists were interchangeable, and instead of indicting a *character* who's clearly fucked-up (Aaron Echolls, Woody Goodman), this reveal simply serves to indict an amorphous group which they're meant to represent (feminists).

And THAT is what I have a problem with.

Nods as much as my neck will allow.

Who wrote it? The dialogue was possibly the funniest I've ever heard, in any episode, yet the episode was heavy.

Diane Ruggiero.

I'll say I resent the idea that any cause I support has to be treated with kid gloves, and that all fictional characters who are written as identifying with that cause must be upright characters.

Well put.

But if the first instance (a real rapist mimicking the fakes) is true, wouldn't the girls have stopped faking them?

The first rape was Dawn, the Hawaiian girl, and there was nothing that suggested she wasn't real, especially considering, you know, she didn't publicize it at all. So I think only the most recent one, Claire, was fake. (Someone pointed out that Nancy helped point Veronica to the ATM photo with Claire's boyfriend in it, which she wouldn't have done had she been in on it.)

and until last night, we didn't have any proof that some (most?) were faked, so I'd call it a very real issue

But we already knew Claire's rape was fake.

Look at it this way--all of the dialogue in that scene could have been spoken by any one of the three women, and it wouldn't have made any difference at all.

That is true.

let's be honest here for a second. RT isn't exactly known for not succumbing to cliches. especially for tertiary characters. Marcos and Peter anyone? with that being said, i'm not at all surprised by the way he's been portraying the feminists.

RT isn't exactly known for not succumbing to cliches. especially for tertiary characters. Marcos and Peter anyone?

Although with Peter, if I recall, he deliberately poked fun at Veronica's cliché representation of him. VM is known for turning clichés on their head most of the time. That's not exactly happening with the feminists, though.

For the record, I told him that all feminists aren't man-hating bitches a few weeks ago, and he responded thusly:

Agreed. By and large, feminists aren't this mean-spirited, but then, by and large, frat boys aren't this morally bankrupt either. It's noir. We deal with the shady characters. The genial ones don't make for great suspects.

We deal with the shady characters. The genial ones don't make for great suspects.

Eh. Weak rationalization. You can have a shady, noir character that's fully realized and fleshed-out without resorting to stereotypes.

Oh, I agree.

Someone on my flist linked this analysis, which I like.

I think that article mischaracterizes the complaints against Veronica though. People aren't so much asking "Why is Veronica acting so nastily?" than they are stating "Veronica is acting nastily and I don't like it." Suicide, clinical depression and hard-heartedness aren't the only reactions one can have to trauma, as the article quietly suggests, and while God knows Veronica has been victimized terribly in her young life, that victimization doesn't licence her current behaviour; it just explains it. To paraphrase a sentiment I recently came across "If you allow your problems to make you bitter and hard-hearted, then YOU become the problem."

My annoyance with the depiction of feminists wasn't piqued in this episode but in previous ones. Nothing of what we learned about them in this episode struck me as perpetuating a particularly feminist stereotype; that dodgy means will be used for a political end is a stereotype shared by every politcized group.

Also, number of jokes this show has allowed its characters to make about female sexual assault: Zero. Number of jokes this show has allowed its characters to make about male sexual assault: Eight billion. (If I get hit with a barrage of instances that prove me wrong, I deserve it. But that is kind of how it feel.)

The idea of dividing the rapes between two separate but intertwined groups is so clever, it should go get a Phd in rocket science. The execution may not have exploited it to the full but it's still a whip-smart idea.

The idea of dividing the rapes between two separate but intertwined groups is so clever, it should go get a Phd in rocket science.

Well, we still don't know that the frats are responsible for the real rapes.

It's a classic stereotype of feminism, and it's not challenged in the text in any way (even while their cause is acknowledged as just).

When you have rape as the central issue -- and until last night, we didn't have any proof that some (most?) were faked, so I'd call it a very real issue -- the response to it is invariably going to be coded as feminism.

How, when Veronica's the actual feminist in the mix?