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.

We had something like that happen at my alma mater too--a kid sent himself hate mail, to point out some ohter stuff that had been going on on campus. But hate mail != rape. And one kid != conspiracy.

I've been thinking about the fakery and the assault on Chip. don't think Nish, Claire, Fern, (or combination thereof) raped Chip. I think the rapist raped Chip. I think Claire's rape may be the only faked one. I still think the rapist is Moe.

There's only one thing bothering me: Mercer's alibi. I'm pretty sure his show ran 'til 11, and Parker was raped around 11:45, right? Are we just taking this as a continuity error?