What did you like about it, P-C?

This is one of the main offenders against a couple of groups I have membership in, so I'm curious as to whatever redeeming qualities it may have.

I enjoyed the plotting of it, the way we were led to believe we knew who the villain was, and then she died, so then we thought it was the book club, and then Ruby said there was someone bigger, so then we thought it was that one lady, and then it turned out to be that other one. Plus, there were some interesting Ruby scenes, especially her confrontations with Dean and the hint of her backstory with the other demon.

Also, I thought the book club = coven idea was really amusing. Especially because it took me a couple scenes to completely get the joke.

Okay, I appreciate your telling me. Thank you.

You know, if it weren't for the omg BLATANT misogyny, I might have liked the episode, too. I mean, it did have a sneaky plot, and there was some interesting stuff revealed about Ruby.

But I can't get past the idea that the showrunners don't want me watching the show. Based mostly on that episode (okay, and a few others).

And Dean stabbing the demon over and over and over? Not attractive.

I agree on that one. That was...uncalled for. But I think it was supposed to be a character point. Kind of like Sam beheading Gordon with his bare hands.

But I can't get past the idea that the showrunners don't want me watching the show. Based mostly on that episode (okay, and a few others).

I *wish* you'd been able to get up here last weekend! I could have had someone other than Jillian to discuss my whole notion about what happens when publisher/network agendas and authorial misanthropy collide, with nods to Killing Joke and MM!

I don't think Moore or Edlund are the world's worst misogynists. I think, however, that the two of them have some of the stronger misanthropic streaks* I've seen from writers who are capable of producing amazingly humanist, touching pieces. And I think that when that's combined with a desire on the part of, say, DC editorial or the CW to attract a specific, masculine fanbase, the effect is in many ways worse than, say, watching an hour of James Cameron or Chris Carter's Unresolved Issues With The Women or reading something by Frank Miller.

* See: much of Edlund's early comics work and/or Hollywood Babylon.

I *wish* you'd been able to get up here last weekend! I could have had someone other than Jillian to discuss my whole notion about what happens when publisher/network agendas and authorial misanthropy collide, with nods to Killing Joke and MM!

We really need to develop some sort of shorthand for that conversation, because we keep coming back to it. Maybe hand gestures of some sort, I dunno.

I *wish* you'd been able to get up here last weekend!

Me too! ::whines:: I love my family and I had a lot of fun, but if I'm going to eat that much and end up that exhausted, it would have been more fun with fangirls. ::sigh::

And yeah, I don't think there's active intentional misogyny there: nobody's sitting around the writers' room bitching about feminazis. (I hope.) But they're not seeing what they're saying when they say it.

If they are seeing it, and they're going forward anyway... erg.

And yeah, I don't think there's active intentional misogyny there: nobody's sitting around the writers' room bitching about feminazis. (I hope.) But they're not seeing what they're saying when they say it.

I totally don't think they're seeing it. I think they're sitting around in a feedback loop of OOO! That'd RULE!!!!11!. (I'm starting to suspect Rayelle Tucker was the one who'd bop them on the nose and rein in the excess, though. I miss her.)

We really need to develop some sort of shorthand for that conversation, because we keep coming back to it. Maybe hand gestures of some sort, I dunno.

We can expand on it as our next trick! I think the thing you get when the root issue with the writing is misanthropy instead of misogyny is a hell of a lot less in the way of filtering out the bile and nasty. So when that's combined with a genre or form that's already problematic (such as horror or comics), it magnifies both the nasty in the text, and the inherent problematic aspects of the form.

That could be the PBR talking.

I think the thing you get when the root issue with the writing is misanthropy instead of misogyny is a hell of a lot less in the way of filtering out the bile and nasty.

Yep. The writers probably aren't looking at it from a specifically (or even vaguely!) feminist studies viewpoint, but from a "Humans suck, rocks fall, everyone dies, hey let's ramp up the evil and destroy everything! That'd be funny!" one. Not to mention I don't think they're that interested in, oh, subverting horror genre tropes, but are just playing around with them They're not trying to do anything new. Which is fine, but like you said, there are some inherent problems with the genre.

I think the biggest problem the writers have is that they don't stop to think how things might be interpreted outside of their group brain. So when someone (okay, fandom) goes "OMGWTF do you not see what you just did there?!", the writers would probably all look confused and go "But that's not what we meant! Dude, what are you talking about?"