Jersey Shortie Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Ladies, it seems that some guys on LS have a certain perception about the series Sex And The City and why so many women enjoyed it. So here are my questions for those who enjoyed the series. Lets leave the movies out of it because that's debatable. 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? 2.) What kept you watching? 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like?
BWLoca Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 1. It's like a short rom com... 2. My love for anything analyzing relationships. 3. No, could've done without that, really... 4. I didn't watch it until it was being aired on network tv. 5. No, and I pretty much hate the main character, Carrie. 6. Uh, no... 7. Absolutely love Steve. 8. There were a couple of logical gems on the show but I don't really use that show as an example. Those ladies have very different values from my own.
bayouboi Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I had no idea what your abbreviation stood for so I clicked into the thread. My ex-wife would watch this show & Desperate Housewives & I held the opinion that these trashy shows emboldened women to be more promiscuous & unfaithful to their significant others. My ex-wife ended up cheating on me. Cause & effect? Who knows.
Stung Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Not sure what thread prompted this, but I'll bite. Note: I didn't watch this show regularly although I have caught up with it in reruns here and there, and I never saw the movie. 1. It was one of the very few comedy shows for women at the time. Even if some of the humor fell flat or was kind of highly specialized (New York consumerist fashion) or was only mildly amusing, it was aimed for women, which a lot of women appreciated. 2. The above reason, mostly, and the friendship between the female characters, mostly. Sometimes the fashion stuff. 3. Not at all, although I did sometimes find the character Samantha's sexual joie de vivre refreshing...other times I really thought her character was trying way too hard. 4. Yeah. I mean, they were pretty short clips anyway as I recall and nobody really showed anything, it's not like it was titillating. 5. Of course not. They were two-dimensional characters with a rampant shopping fixation. Plus, come on, how is Carrie affording those shoes and that apartment in New York on a writer's budget, especially in the beginning? 6. What? No. 7. Not particularly. I don't even remember most of them. Aidan's character was closer to my type than most of them personality-wise as far as I remember. I always thought Mr. Big was kind of an ass. I did like it that Charlotte ended up with the sweet bald guy. 8. I'm pretty sure not. Well, it did make me wish my writer's salary was as apparently inflated as Carrie's was.
brainygirl Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I watched myabe three episodes and do not enjoy them. Have no intention of watching the movies. It presents a vision of life in which materialism is equated with success. It suggests that women must be stick thin and torture themselves with rediculous clothing and shoes in order to be attractive or to feel special. I live in the rural midwest. I'd rather go to orcshlen's than to Sax fifth avenue. I work hard an earn a real salary that cannot begin to support the spending showed on clothing, beauty treatments and alcohol.
TaraMaiden Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I have never, ever, EVER watched a single, solitary episode. From what I hear - and it is only hearsay - it's puerile, unintelligent and shallow. But as I said - I can't say whether that's accurate or not. And as I don't intend to ever watch it, it will have to remain hearsay.
Engadget Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Jersey here suffers from confirmation bias. She is posting this to prove porn is bad and sex in the city is essentially fine, because she doesn't understand what male posters are getting at. TaraMaiden does though, that it a show about vapid, materialistic sluts and some women who watch it follow what they do, or idolize them.
Author Jersey Shortie Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 1.) Originally the hype drew me in. 2.) I enjoyed the relationships and insights of the 4 women and the men in their lives and the struggles they encountered which were pretty normal issues that come up sometimes. Minus all the fashion and amazing social events. 3.) Not at all. 4.) Yes I would have enjoyed it just as much. Some of the sex scenes made me cringe. 5.) Nope, I didn't always agree with their actions. I think Carrie was a bit self indulgent but I did like her. Samantha was a bit overt, but I liked her too. Charlotte was a bit too prissy, and Miranda a bit too tough. But they did have real human character flaws and positives that I think women relate to even if they were over the top. 6.) NO. 7.) I liked Steve as well. 8.) SATC had no sway over my personal morals or ideals. It did open my eyes to some interesting things that I never heard about before. I think in the early episodes it was more about disecting issues and relationships between men and women. The later episodes where more about the characters themselves.
Author Jersey Shortie Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 Jersey here suffers from confirmation bias. She is posting this to prove porn is bad and sex in the city is essentially fine, because she doesn't understand what male posters are getting at. No. I don't think porn is comparable to Sex And The City. So there is no such comparison that porn is bad compare to SATC and SATC is good. That's my point. Many men enjoyed The Sopranos. If you want to compare to media's, compare these two. I posted this to have women answer some misconceptions men seem to hold about women and this show. No one ever made the comparison that men that watched The Sopranos was ready to join the mob. ...that it a show about vapid, materialistic sluts and some women who watch it follow what they do, or idolize them. If you think about it, porn is also about vapid materialistic sluts too and men love that! Infact, men encourage that kind of shallowness. So is it just the materialism towards wearing your clothes that gets to you compared to materialism about having implants?
Mr White Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) Ladies, it seems that some guys on LS have a certain perception about the series Sex And The City and why so many women enjoyed it. So here are my questions for those who enjoyed the series. Lets leave the movies out of it because that's debatable. 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? 2.) What kept you watching? 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like? Guys? Here's a beautiful review of the movie written by - let's see - my new hero, Lindy West. A woman! http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/burkas-and-birkins/Content?oid=4132715 Here's the best part: "SATC2 takes everything that I hold dear as a woman and as a human—working hard, contributing to society, not being an entitled cunt like it's my job—and rapes it to death with a stiletto that costs more than my car. It is 146 minutes long, which means that I entered the theater in the bloom of youth and emerged with a family of field mice living in my long, white mustache. This is an entirely inappropriate length for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls." Also: 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? Nothing, it was on TV 2.) What kept you watching? Pretty much like a reality show, these sad human beings make me feel better about myself:confused: 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? Um, what sex????? 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. Who said I enjoyed it? 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? Ha! They are the poster children of all that is wrong with women. 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? I couldn't even if I wanted to - every time it comes on TV my balls attempt to detach my body and run away and hide. 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. No freaking way. See 5). 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like? Yes - it made me lose all hope! Edited June 17, 2010 by Mr White
Crazy Magnet Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I watched it for the fashion ideas, plus I'm a shoe fanatic (although I don't buy $400 shoes every two days!). I was slightly amused at the relationship aspect of things. The only male character I thought was great was Aiden.
txsilkysmoothe Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I have never, ever, EVER watched a single, solitary episode. From what I hear - and it is only hearsay - it's puerile, unintelligent and shallow. But as I said - I can't say whether that's accurate or not. And as I don't intend to ever watch it, it will have to remain hearsay. Ditto - I never watched and from the previews of the movies, don't consider it an "attractive" portrayal of women. Funny, I've had a couple of men, on first dates, ask if I watched this show. I don't know what to make of that but found it odd.
Mr White Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Ditto - I never watched and from the previews of the movies, don't consider it an "attractive" portrayal of women. Funny, I've had a couple of men, on first dates, ask if I watched this show. I don't know what to make of that but found it odd. It's probably a litmus test of whether you're any good . Congrats on passing with flying colors .
TaraMaiden Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I posted this to have women answer some misconceptions men seem to hold about women and this show. Whta misconceptions do they have? Whose aired them? What do the responses tell you? Most of the women find the programme utterly without credit or quality. So what's your point, and what does it prove - given that actually - you've watched it, so you're "one up on me"....? If you think about it, porn is also about vapid materialistic sluts too and men love that! That's a moot point, but at least they serve a purpose. SATC serves.... what, exactly, apart from serving as candyfloss bubblegum for empty minds? ( a point borne out by respected critics, no less). And for a woman defending the female victims of the porn industry, as exploited and manipulated, calling then vapid materialistic sluts is a bit rich.... isn't it? Infact, men encourage that kind of shallowness. So is it just the materialism towards wearing your clothes that gets to you compared to materialism about having implants? When I can work out what the hell you're on about, I'll come back with a suitably eloquent rejoinder. Now all I can say, is 'whatever'.....
Leia Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 My best friend forced me to watch cos she's a huge fan of SATC. I hate Carrie, Samantha's alright. Charlotte is annoying and I can't stand Miranda. Shoes are nice but Carrie's taste in clothes
Author Jersey Shortie Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 Whta misconceptions do they have? That porn is a fair comparison to SATC. That's women's morals all the sudden change because they liked SATC. Or that a woman is vapid because she liked the show. Or that they approved of everything in the show because they enjoyed the show. That women physically got off to the sex scenes in it. That it's wrong for women to like shoes and fashion. Sorry, it's not wrong at all. The only people that this show ceased being a tv show for are the ones that think it makes all women want to move to the city and spend oodles on shoes. Most of the women find the programme utterly without credit or quality. Maybe you did. But a successful 6 year series and two movies later (although the movies were not that great), says otherwise. Most women found it a nice change of pace to have a show geared to them. Most women didn't think it was TIME Magazine. They took it for what it was worth. So I don't think women thought the show was utterly without credit, neither do I think they thought it was a business model for life. So what's your point, and what does it prove - given that actually - you've watched it, so you're "one up on me"....? My point is that if you want to compare a medium fairly, compare SATC to The Sopranos. Alot of men enjoyed that show alot. Alot of women enjoyed SATC. I see men try to compare this show to porn and I think it's unjust. I posted to and asked certain questions to show guys that it might not be exactly as they think it is. I don't see people standing up in arms over depictions in The Sopranos or telling men it was going to make them cheat on their wives and break people's limbs. I don't see men saying the men in The Sopranos were vapid "cunts"..or other name calling as they like to refer to women who enjoy this series. If you think about it, porn is also about vapid materialistic sluts too and men love that! That's a moot point, but at least they serve a purpose. SATC serves.... what, exactly, apart from serving as candyfloss bubblegum for empty minds? ( a point borne out by respected critics, no less). Back the train up. First, it's a darn good point. It's okay to call women sluts and enjoy their vapidness and shallowness when it comes to their bodies in things like porn where men primary garner alot of enjoyment of it. But these same men condemn women for enjoying these things themselves. The message is women aren't allowed to enjoy things like clothes and shoes outside sex while men are allowed to enjoy women's bodies, or sexy clothes and shoes in porn. That's plain messed up Tara and I am sorry, wrong. The reason men promote the vapideness and shallowness of women in porn and aim to descredit and belittle's women's interest in fashion and sex on their own terms, is to aim to make the situation in the best benefit of the man and what he wishes for. And no, porn doesn't *serve* any purpose. Porn wasn't created to be a beneficial enitity providing costumers with nourishment. It was made to make money. That's it. Best way to make money? Play on something highly responsive and charged to the human species. And for a woman defending the female victims of the porn industry, as exploited and manipulated, calling then vapid materialistic sluts is a bit rich.... isn't it? That's exactly the mentality the industry supports of these women. I didn't say I personally thought these women as vapid, materialisitc sluts. Porn is about showcasing women as vapid, empty, materialistic sluts that only wish in life is to make a man happy. Porn often refers to women in more derogatroy names then just "slut". But you think that serves a purpose. Somehow, men are okay with depicting women this way in their male dominated medium. It's okay to project women as such in popular male media as nothing but empty, vapid, sluts that materialism centers around making their bodies better for men and dressing for men. But showcase women enjoying life, enjoying fashion, being sexual, and men label them in no uncertain terms because they aren't spreading their legs for *them* and spending money on Fredicks of Hollywood outfits and implants. When I can work out what the hell you're on about, I'll come back with a suitably eloquent rejoinder. Now all I can say, is 'whatever'..... LOL. For someone that isn't much interested in the series, you sure do have alot of opinions on it. If you don't know what I am on about, then ask, don't be snarky about it with "whatever".
sally4sara Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Ladies, it seems that some guys on LS have a certain perception about the series Sex And The City and why so many women enjoyed it. So here are my questions for those who enjoyed the series. Lets leave the movies out of it because that's debatable. 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? 2.) What kept you watching? 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like? I watched some of the episodes for two reasons. One of my friends liked to watch it while we hung out and made clothes out of thrift purchases. A few other times, I watched because I had trouble sleeping and it was on late. It isn't interesting enough for me to just watch it for the sake of watching. I've never found the sex acts hot enough to masturbate to; didn't even enter my mind. I thought Big and the prim debutant-like brunette attractive. Sometimes three are cute but not really my preference out of others. It changed nothing for me; its just fluff television. The characters are materialist to the point of irritating. They are all very self absorbed with the promiscuous one being the most obnoxious about it.
TaraMaiden Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 That porn is a fair comparison to SATC. I don't find it is. At all. I think you're grasping at straws, frankly.... That's women's morals all the sudden change because they liked SATC. Or that a woman is vapid because she liked the show. Or that they approved of everything in the show because they enjoyed the show. That women physically got off to the sex scenes in it. That it's wrong for women to like shoes and fashion. I've yet to see, hear or understand where you're getting this from..... I haven't heard or seen any man claiming this. I'd need a link. Sorry, it's not wrong at all. The only people that this show ceased being a tv show for are the ones that think it makes all women want to move to the city and spend oodles on shoes. Know somebody who's done that, do you..? Or who even thinks that? Bring 'em on..... Maybe you did. But a successful 6 year series and two movies later (although the movies were not that great), says otherwise. Most women found it a nice change of pace to have a show geared to them. Most women didn't think it was TIME Magazine. They took it for what it was worth. So I don't think women thought the show was utterly without credit, neither do I think they thought it was a business model for life. so how does this compare to the way most men view porn then? My point is that if you want to compare a medium fairly, compare SATC to The Sopranos. This is the bit I don't get. First you're comparing it to porn, then you think it should be compared to the sopranos..... Where are you going with this, other than moving your own goalposts? Alot of men enjoyed that show alot. (I watched sopranos - and I'm Italian - does that make me a more likely bet to be a Mafiosa assassin?) I see men try to compare this show to porn and I think it's unjust. Where have men made this comparison? On this forum? Which thread? When? Who was it?? I posted to and asked certain questions to show guys that it might not be exactly as they think it is. And I would guess you might have been a bit surprised at the results, no? I don't see people standing up in arms over depictions in The Sopranos or telling men it was going to make them cheat on their wives and break people's limbs. I don't see men saying the men in The Sopranos were vapid "cunts"..or other name calling as they like to refer to women who enjoy this series. That's because according to you, everybody's compared SATC to porn. I really don';t get what you're trying to prove here, at all. You keep flitting between the three, and losing the thread.... Back the train up. First, it's a darn good point. It's okay to call women sluts and enjoy their vapidness and shallowness when it comes to their bodies in things like porn where men primary garner alot of enjoyment of it. But these same men condemn women for enjoying these things themselves. The message is women aren't allowed to enjoy things like clothes and shoes outside sex while men are allowed to enjoy women's bodies, or sexy clothes and shoes in porn. That's plain messed up Tara and I am sorry, wrong. The reason men promote the vapideness and shallowness of women in porn and aim to descredit and belittle's women's interest in fashion and sex on their own terms, is to aim to make the situation in the best benefit of the man and what he wishes for. And no, porn doesn't *serve* any purpose. Porn wasn't created to be a beneficial enitity providing costumers with nourishment. It was made to make money. That's it. Best way to make money? Play on something highly responsive and charged to the human species. That's exactly the mentality the industry supports of these women. ....I didn't say I personally thought these women as vapid, materialisitc sluts. Porn is about showcasing women as vapid, empty, materialistic sluts that only wish in life is to make a man happy. Porn often refers to women in more derogatroy names then just "slut". But you think that serves a purpose. Somehow, men are okay with depicting women this way in their male dominated medium. It's okay to project women as such in popular male media as nothing but empty, vapid, sluts that materialism centers around making their bodies better for men and dressing for men. But showcase women enjoying life, enjoying fashion, being sexual, and men label them in no uncertain terms because they aren't spreading their legs for *them* and spending money on Fredicks of Hollywood outfits and implants. Do you waste a lot of time thinking about these things to such intensity? Why does this matter so much to you? I really don't think that getting all worked up about such stuff is either productive or a good use of time, frankly. LOL. For someone that isn't much interested in the series, you sure do have alot of opinions on it. If you don't know what I am on about, then ask, don't be snarky about it with "whatever". I'm not in the slightest bit interested in the series. I'm interested in how you manage to take something as innocuous as SATC and make a big issue out of it trying to prove a point that actually, you have yet to prove coherently, intelligibly and logically. I'm having difficulty understanding exactly what the heck your point is in all of this, because I don't think you're presenting a good argument at all. Unless you can now come up with solid and factual evidence that men have compared SATC to porn, then I'm afraid you've lost me, completely.
BWLoca Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I had no idea what your abbreviation stood for so I clicked into the thread. My ex-wife would watch this show & Desperate Housewives & I held the opinion that these trashy shows emboldened women to be more promiscuous & unfaithful to their significant others. My ex-wife ended up cheating on me. Cause & effect? Who knows. Nothing against bayouboi but here's one example Also, I don't think Jersey said it was comparable to porn...she answered your question.
threebyfate Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? All my close female friends watched it so I caught the odd episode, never bothering to finish the episode and wandered away in disgust at the sheer stupidity of it all. 2.) What kept you watching? Nothing. 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? See response to Q1. 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. See response to Q1. 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? From what little I saw, the 4 women were embarassing caricatures of ditzy female, fluffy female, sex-starved nympho and butch-dyke career woman. 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? Ummm...WTF? Nope. 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. No. 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like? No, there's no way I would amend my perception of life and relationships based on stupidity. The only part I can relate to, is how close these women were with each other. It's great to have close female friends, one's you can talk to about anything. But then, I have this with my real life friends so why put up with the stupidity of the show to watch similar?
VertexSquared Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I admit to watching much of the series because my first gf was very into the show. The show was entertaining in its stupidity, really, but taking it as anything more than that would be silly.
TaraMaiden Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 ..... Also, I don't think Jersey said it was comparable to porn...she answered your question. No, what she said was that men have said it's comparable to porn. And she hasn't provided any evidence or links or quotations to back that up. Yet. I'd like to know when and where this has happened and by whom it's been said. Then she will have answered my question.
Holding-On Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 1.) What drew you to watch Sex And The City? It was colorful. I had a babe that liked to wake up at all hours of the night so I ended up watching t.v. (don't watch much). 2.) What kept you watching? The comedy - there were a few times I laughed out loud. I cannot understand why anyone took this show seriously. It is supposed to be a farce. Also the fashions and nightlife. I don't want to wear them/live that life but I liked watching the extreme urbanity and its stupidity. I lived in suburban hell at the time. Some of the moments were true to the life of the material girl too, like where Miranda points out to Carrie that she doesn't have the downpayment for an apartment because she has spent over 40 grand on shoes - which again I thought was funny. 3.) Did you watch it because of the sex only? no. 4.) Would you have enjoyed the series just as much without the sex scenes? On network TV it's aired sans sex scenes. no, sex is funny in and of itself. 5.) Did you always agree with the 4 women and their actions and choices in the move? Are you kidding? These women were stupid. It was billed as a comedy. 4.) Did you ever masturbate to an episode of Sex And The City? yuck. No I watch porn for that. 5.) Did you ever want to be with any of the male characters in the show? Not the actors themselves but the characters they played. Sure Aiden and Harry but not Mr. Big. He was an ass and consequently perfect for Carrie. 6.) Did Sex And The City change any of your perceptions or ideals about what life and relationships should be like? No.
Author Jersey Shortie Posted June 17, 2010 Author Posted June 17, 2010 Star Gazer, I like your insights. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Tara, if you don't think I am comparing porn to SATC, what was this comment about then: JS: That porn is a fair comparison to SATC. (In regards to what some men seem to think by using it as an example in the "Is Porn Bad" thread.) Tara: I don't find it is. At all. I think you're grasping at straws, frankly.... As BWLoca pointed out, I am not comparing SATC to porn. I even said as much on the first page. So what exactly am I grasping at straws about? Other then to comment on the gentlemen that called the women in SATC vapid, sluts yet oddly, the strange dichonmy that apparently vapid sluttiness is a positive when it's geared to male entertainment. No, what she said was that men have said it's comparable to porn. And she hasn't provided any evidence or links or quotations to back that up. Yet. I'd like to know when and where this has happened and by whom it's been said. Then she will have answered my question. And I why do I need to provide links and qoutes about how some men have taken to comparing SATC to porn? When someone comes on here and starts post about how some women like "bad boys", do you ask them to back up their opinion with qoutes and facts or do you just discuss the issue? This is what I find so ridiculous about needing "evidence". I started a topic in regards to how *some* guys have taken to comparing SATC to porn in another thread. It's also something I've heard other men say on the boards here and there. I think other women have heard the same. Ladies? Anyone want to back me up? If you don't believe it, you don't believe it. No worries. I've yet to see, hear or understand where you're getting this from.....I haven't heard or seen any man claiming this. I'd need a link. Refer to the "Porn is Bad thread. After page 3 or so, a few men mention Sex And The City. It's not an uncommon thing for men to compare SATC to porn. Do a little hunting there yourself since it's that important to you. JS: Sorry, it's not wrong at all. The only people that this show ceased being a tv show for are the ones that think it makes all women want to move to the city and spend oodles on shoes. Tara: Know somebody who's done that, do you..? Or who even thinks that? Bring 'em on..... I think you misunderstood. My point was to illustrate that the only people that thought this show held more sway and value then it did were people who thought women would be shaped by it enough to run to the city and buy shoes. No one is that silly. This is the bit I don't get. First you're comparing it to porn, then you think it should be compared to the sopranos..... QUOTE] I never compared porn to SATC "first". I don't think porn and SATC are comparable. My first post is to prove why I don't find the two comparable and how women view SATC. Hence the question about if women masturbate to the sex scenes because in the "Is Porn Bad" thread a man made a comment about the sex scenes and women being titilated by them like men are by porn. If you are going to compare something, The Sopranos is a much more equal comparision then SATC. So I think it's silly to condemn SATC as silly and shallow and not say the same for something like The Sopranos. But if men *are* going to compare the two in it's expression, and call the women in SATC vapid and shallow derogatory, yet defend porn which represents women far more vapidly and shallowly in my opinion, it's scewed. Overall, I don't think the comparison is an equal one. But if they are going to compare the two, then don't defend vapid/shallow depictions for one medium and critize it in another. Me personally, while the show was over-the-top, I don't see it as being vapid and shallow. (I watched sopranos - and I'm Italian - does that make me a more likely bet to be a Mafiosa assassin?) Did I say it did? Sopranos was no more "intelligent" then SATC. Yet, less critized interestly enough. Do you waste a lot of time thinking about these things to such intensity? Why does this matter so much to you? I really don't think that getting all worked up about such stuff is either productive or a good use of time, frankly. I don't consider thinking about a host of topics as wasting time. The great thing about thinking is you can do it anywhere. Even while you do other tasks. Don't be so bain as to underhandly try to put me down based on what I choose to post about/think about all the while making time to comment in it despite your huge prostations about wasting time. What I do consider wasting time is proclaiming no interest in a show, or saying you never saw it, but spending time trying to discern the topic. You either find me incredibly fascinating or like to waste your own amount of time. You seem more concerned with how I choose to spend my time and less concerned about how you choose to spend yours. I don't consider it a good use of time to debate with someone on a subject you don't consider very worthy. Yet here you are. And no two people are going to always agree what topics are worth discussing and which aren't. That's what makes LS great. The host of topics you can choose to discuss or not discuss. Some topics don't interest me and I don't waste my time in those threads. I don't come in and critize the OP of the tread just because I consider the topic a "waste of time". You're being a bit hypocritical. I'm not in the slightest bit interested in the series. I'm interested in how you manage to take something as innocuous as SATC and make a big issue out of it trying to prove a point that actually, you have yet to prove coherently, intelligibly and logically. But you are interested in the series a bit. Enough to make the comments you have so far about even if they aren't flattering ones. LS is a place to discuss a host of topics. I started a thread to discuss this topic. It clearly interested you enough to click in and read through it. You seem less interested in discussing the actual topic, and more interested on a useless attack for something you never even seen or have an interest in seeing! Enough people get what I am putting down to know that it's coherent, intelligent and logical enough for others ot understand even if you can't. I'm having difficulty understanding exactly what the heck your point is in all of this, because I don't think you're presenting a good argument at all. Unless you can now come up with solid and factual evidence that men have compared SATC to porn, then I'm afraid you've lost me, completely. Redunant and trite. Maybe you don't understand because you haven't seen the series or the other topic where it got me to thinking how some men like to compare SATC to porn. And I would guess you might have been a bit surprised at the results, no? Not at all. They are what I expected actually.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 The difference is that men don't run their lives based on porn while many women run their lives based on SATC. Porn is something that men wack off to and that is it. It has no deeper meaning while SATC is damn near a religion to some women.
Recommended Posts