Caught up on Wandavision. I have no idea what’s going on but I am into it

Has anyone watched Bridgerton? Can I spoil it with a question about people’s response to a plot point that I seemed to have read completely differently than anyone who makes a podcast about it? (Perhaps not Tom Lenk and Felicia Day, they haven’t gotten there yet)

I can talk Bridgerton. I just read the first book and am thinking about the differences made for the show (I mostly like the show better)

We’re more than two weeks from the initial drop, as far as spoilers go.

First, I realized after finishing the series that I had actually read the book. But almost everyone I listen to or read seems to have the interpretation that Simon specifically told her he was infertile and lied, when I interpreted it that he said “I can’t give you children” thinking she would understand what he meant (although I think he should have had a more pointed conversation after they were, you know, actually getting married). They also think that Daphne took over things so that he would not pull out because she wanted a baby, when I thought she was testing her theory that he had lied to her. I believe that Daphne thinks he lied to her. I think that Simon thought she was trying to get pregnant. But I think both of those things are part of their greater miscommunication, but not necessarily their motivation. I am confused that I haven’t heard one podcast yet that thought of it that way. Am I naive? Or perhaps semi remembering the book from 10 years ago?

I'm not sure I am following what distinctions you are making.

I didn't think Simon was trying imply he was infertile as much as he considered having children so unequivocally not an option that "I can't" was the natural expression. I actually think he was more deliberately misleading in the book, although there may have been more said on screen than I remember.

Daphne's motivation, well, I don't think it can be boiled down to just she wanted a baby.

Both of them big murky messes.

I guess you probably have to be listening to the podcasts, but they seem to explain the plot as “Simon lies to her saying he is infertile and when she figures it out, she rapes him so she can have a baby.”

Well, I’d call that oversimplified but I suppose one could make a case for it.

Yeah, I don’t think he was lying. I think he expected her to have slightly more understanding of reproduction than she did. Even by the standards of the time her mom’s version of “the talk” was vague and unhelpful—part of the expectations for women in that time and class was to provide heirs. And this as also pre-Victoria, so I think some of the prudishness was a tad ahistorical. Yes, women were expected to be virgins on their wedding night, but that didn’t mean they didn’t know where babies came from.

they seem to explain the plot as “Simon lies to her saying he is infertile and when she figures it out, she rapes him so she can have a baby.”

I haven't read the books, and I more or less hated everything about Daphne/Simon (normally I am ALL ABOUT the pretend partner trope but this level of contrived miscommunication makes my skin crawl) but my interpretation is he just didn't think she was owed any explanation.

I think some of the prudishness was a tad ahistorical. Yes, women were expected to be virgins on their wedding night, but that didn’t mean they didn’t know where babies came from.

Ugggggh, this bothered me so much. People didn't talk about sex in public in the 1800s but that doesn't mean nobody knew how it worked!

A lot of women were kept ignorant, on the theory that ignorance would keep them "innocent." When I was in school, 1960s, all we got was that sex was bad (for girls) and not to have sex (for girls) and the repercussions (for girls) were harsh.