Veronica disagrees and divorces herself from the women self-identified as feminists all the way through the season. She thinks they're humorless and unreasoning.

But Veronica never disagreed with or divorced herself from them because they're feminists. She disagreed with and divorced herself from them, because she learned early on that while they talk about equity, and fairness (i.e. feminism) they aren't walking the walk. They aren't interested in truth, justice, or equity, and she learned that early on. Why would she want anything to do with them? They were angry at her because she got the on-campus charges dropped against Chip, who wasn't guilty (since that was for Claire's rape). And let's not forget Nish sacrificing the cancer patient for a story, and using the hell out of Veronica. That's why she holds them in disdain.

And I don't really think the existence of Veronica as a character qualifies as the text challenging the stereotype, not in this context. Veronica's never shown much political awareness.

This is why the stories are hitting us differently, I think. I think Veronica (as character) embodies the life of a woman, the way Sunnydale high embodied the High School is hell metaphor.

Neptune is coded in an extraordinarily male way. It runs on power, money, privilege, and social networks that are crucial to success but nearly impossible to break into. People have their places, and the power elite do what they can to keep the disenfranchised in their places. It's the old boys' network-as-town. Veronica is a woman, living in a "man's world," (and she is truly one of the few female characters; even most of her allies are male). She doesn't have to talk the talk (for me), in order to subvert the stereotype we're seeing in Fern (particularly) and in the actions of Nish and Claire. She's smarter than just about anyone, and has a strong need for the truth, and is generally much more sympathetic to (and identifies with) the underdog.

One thing that's worth mentioning here is that, in addition to increasing community hysteria and raping Chip Diller, the feminists have fucked so badly with the investigation that it's possible they caused some real rapes, because the rapist might have been caught already if they hadn't muddied the waters so badly.

Yes. And in addition to getting Keith Mars unfairly ousted from his job, and causing his family's financial and social downfall, the Kanes probably contributed to other crimes in Neptune, because they supported Don Lamb, who surely let other criminals slip through his fingers, in all his ineptitude. It's all down to the workings of their world, and how people are in that world.

Why should college students espousing a cause be presented more sympathetically than the parents of a murdered child? (cf the Mannings; the Oliveras)

Do you think that Nish, et al. *aren't* feminists? I absolutely think they are; I just think that they suffer from lazy characterization-via-stereotype.

In deed, no they're not feminists, at least not good ones (I don't mean 'good' in the sense of 'nice' but in the sense of working for equality of the sexes). They think they are feminists, call themselves such, and are interested in feminism in a superficial sense, but not in any meaningful way (as far as I can see). They probably were, but got so radicalized, they lost sight of their principles. They're exploiting the ideology for their own personal crusade.

Teppy, think of the famous religious people in this country who are exploiting the words and symbols of their faith for political gain among everyday believers, and maybe you'll understand what I mean, when I say they're not feminists. They're setting people up, exploiting people, and abusing people--exacting vengeance. To me, that's not feminism any more than anything Anyanka and Halfrek did. How are Nish, Fern, and Claire working for equality of the sexes or to right injustice and inequity? How are they feminists, other than that they (continued...)

---

( continues...) co-opt the language of the movement?

Cindy-- I'm sorry if I'm being annoying and difficult. I'm hormonally cranky,

Heh. Have you met me? No worries, Consuela (I'm also hormonally cranky; and have frelled up 3 pies, but let us not speak of it).

I have not been taking the conversation personally, for what that's worth. I'm interested in the concept of how ideas like feminism are represented in different types of fiction, and I (personally) itch against the idea that a storyteller has to represent certain characters who espouse a certain cause, in a certain way, particularly in a place like Neptune where everyone's corrupt. I expect we give different weights to the merit of Veronica's day to day living and that's going to be where our disconnect continues to live. If you feel done with the conversation, that's fine with me. I don't want to annoy you.

and less invested in the show than you are, so I'm kind of spouting off about the one thing that really annoyed me.

It's funny to me that we're having this discussion now, because I thought Nish, Claire, and particularly Fern were more humanized in last night's episode than in any other appearance to date. I saw some reason for some of their actions (closing down the frat to protect other women from going through what their friend suffered made them much more human to me, then when I thought they were just privileged college students on a crusade stemming from hatred of privileged frat boys).

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.

This is how I feel.

---

Sometimes I marvel at your spicy brains, Cindy.

I thought Nish, Claire, and particularly Fern were more humanized in last night's episode than in any other appearance to date. I saw some reason for some of their actions (closing down the frat to protect other women from going through what their friend suffered made them much more human to me, then when I thought they were just privileged college students on a crusade stemming from hatred of privileged frat boys).

I totally agree.

---

For me, it's not just whether the feminists are presented sympathetically, it's realistically. Nothing much this season has rung true for me, from the Greeks to the TA to the feminists to Logan to Piz.

I'm not sure I can really explain what I mean very rationally right now. I've been growing more and more dissatisfied with VM as the season has gone on, and this episode made my cup runneth over.

---

I thought Nish, Claire, and particularly Fern were more humanized in last night's episode than in any other appearance to date.

I agree... I thought last episode the characters were actually, even, like TWO dimensional, especially Fern.

---

Yes. Fern had the furthest to come from the stereotype, and has. Nish has always been put forth smooth and bright. Fern's personality was as hardcore as her appearance, and they made her an actual person this time, instead of a walking screed.

I have been thinking about the point someone (Frank?) made about their lines in their scene with Veronica being interchangeable. I rewatched the scene last night. I disagree, first of all, because Nish made a crack that I couldn't hear the other two making, and because Claire was, as she has been (to my mind, at least), the most willing to engage in dialogue with Veronica. That said, it was an exposition scene. I don't think I have strong expectations for voice, where tertiary characters are concerned, in exposition scenes. There hasn't been enough of them to develop their voices all that well.

---

Do you think that Nish, et al. *aren't* feminists? I absolutely think they are; I just think that they suffer from lazy characterization-via-stereotype.

As opposed to the nuance and balanced presentations RT's known for, like Mexicans and Irish -- two groups I have an affinity for in real life who are, by and large, heavily stereotyped here.

I think that's a lot of why I don't have much of a problem with the stereotypes being applied ot the feminists. Just about every set of characters is used this way, and has been since the beginning of the show. Characters only break out of it over time, like Weevil. These characters aren't here for their stories, they're here to hold Veronica and the other main characters up to the stereotype and see how they fit.

---

As opposed to the nuance and balanced presentations RT's known for, like Mexicans and Irish -- two groups I have an affinity for in real life who are, by and large, heavily stereotyped here.

This is also true.

---

As opposed to the nuance and balanced presentations RT's known for, like Mexicans and Irish -- two groups I have an affinity for in real life who are, by and large, heavily stereotyped here.

You didn't specify the stereotypes, so I'm just guessing here, but this didn't ping me at all, I think for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I feel like with the PCHers we were given a fair amount of complexity in Weevil, Thumper, and Felix (and Weevil's grandma, and cousin, and the girl who dated that jerk) (however, I'd like to point out that Latinos dating white people was a plot point 4 times - just food for thought). Secondly, the stereotypes in my area (which, btw, has one of the fastest-growing Latino population in the country) for Mexicans do not include "biker gang." The Fitzpatricks are pretty two-dimensional, but it never occurred to me that all the Irish in Neptune were gangsters.

I just went on at length in my lj, but for me what it boils down to is that Nish et al feel like "straw feminists," explicitly created to be proven wrong. Which is actually close to this statement of Victor's.

These characters aren't here for their stories, they're here to hold Veronica and the other main characters up to the stereotype and see how they fit.

This is the first time that I feel an entire group has been created for such a purpose on VM. Maybe it's not, maybe I'm overly sensitive due to the way they're handling sexual assault and feminism, two issues which are close to my heart. Regardless of whether it's the first time or the fifth, I don't think it's a great way to run a show.

I don't know. Maybe if one of the "feminists" had had some doubt about what they were doing, and come to Veronica with her concerns, or something. Something to keep them from being a monolithic group.

---

I finally watched the episode today and really enjoyed it; I don't think Nish, Claire and Fern are portrayed as any less complex than the Greeks, where apparently participating in a sorority allies you with a fraternity accused of sexual assault.

It only occurred to me today that RT, et al. may have been influenced by a series of events at my southern california alma mater two years ago, where a series of real racially-divisive occurrences inspired a professor to stage a hate crime by vandalizing her own car: [link] Apologies if this was pointed out elsewhere.

---