24 April 2012 1:43PMResponse to tuityfruity, 22 April 2012 5:58PMhey, thanks @tutityfruity, i’m also enjoying Mrs Mousemat’s espousal of all the sexist tropes too!
it’s interesting isn’t it, that all these quirks are not diagnosable as mental conditions in a male Detective?! much like, as i pointed out on the Homeland Blog, the modern equivalent of declaring that since a woman was a bit odd, as in medieval times:she must be a witch!
these days the witch label is a mental disorder-rather Victorian or what?!
yet male Detective hereos can be as affect-less expressionless, dis-robing with abandon, (Troels anybody?) hard of face and action as they like..does anybody ever declare them a bit ‘mental’? nope..
not of course, that i mean any disrespect to anybody with such conditions. It is in fact a bit off surely to declare that those or any of these particular qualities such as single-mindedness and focus on your job or just not being that emotional is necessarily indicative of a recognised condition. Co-opting such conditions and increasingly stereotyping them into the bargain.
Straying off the increasingly narrow gender boundaries of being a woman and proscribed appropriate behaviour is what leads to this labelling-fest..i suggest?
is not being emotional a much worse sin eg. seen as really very odd for a woman? apparently..
You know, i hadn’t thought about that side of it:the mutilated bodies and so forth. That’s how much of a given it has become! how terrible is that? is there anything that hasn’t been done to women victims and their subsequent bodies i wonder? Pretty much everything i suggest:well apart from some murderer making jam or murdered woman marmalade…
As a few people on here have said:they will quite miss Inspector Montalbano, well me too! it took me a while to get into it and ‘get’ it. However in retrospect it was actually a pleasant imaginary trip to sunny Sicily and the murders, now i think of it, were fairly egalitarian and not in your face.
Do women really get murdered more than men? Probably. But must they always be portrayed as victims of such horrific deaths? some might say increasingly imaginative ways of dying..lovely. Wallander was also more egalitarian in victims and murderers too. Ahh, Wallander..
Charlotte as the evil Charlie? i like it..there is something amiss about Charlotte, it might just be her hair i find annoying (oops) but she definitely has it in her i agree. it would make up for her otherwise useless presence in it..
n.b. For anyone doing a media Studies Degree there is a thesis to be written about the as you say “gratuitous” use of mutilated bodies of women turning up in crime dramas. Add to that the prerequisite hot female Detective to deal with it who must henceforth be shown as in many states of undress and preferable shagging too.
All a bit creepy when you put it together like that:especially when it involves said hot and now being perved on Detective (due to the aforesaid scenes) getting up close and personal to said body parts?! hmmm..what is THAT about then?
Thinking about it:this involved close study of chopped up jammy goo (of what was once a woman) being studied in bed by a woman Detective deliberately pantless and just after sex?! err…
Not that long ago, ok well in the forties and even onwards, women like Bette Davis, Joan Crawford & Co. were gloriously mad and evil and strong characters yet nobody went around pathologising their ‘symptoms’. They were respected as strong characters. Nor did they have to engage in obligatory shagging or the requisite half naked states of undress:did they? Blimey, even the original Samantha in Bewitched was more of a strong character than the women these days.
I will never understand how watching this sexually objectifying stuff is in anyway relevant to the plotline? it’s like-yep, we know people shag? so what’s with it? Not only do we have to watch women being objectified in films and dramas in this way then we have to be subjected to reading male pervy comments about this stuff on here:Grrreat..Reader’s wives anyone?..