To not find Sex and the City actually that 'problematic'?

[whyorwellmatters]

It seems to be in vogue to take shows like Friends and SATC, and decide they're problematic by today's standards.

Currently rewatching season 1 of SATC, and have noticed nothing especially bad.

What's all the fuss about?

Ally McBeal was just awful. Carrie was at least good at her job

What job? Carrie jotted down a few inane ramblings about shoes and sex once a week, which she apparently got paid thousands for. And eventually got a book deal out of.

SATC is problematic by modern standards because it presents the image that to be happy and successful one should be wealth, white and attractive. It's a simple as that really. Where are the headline minority characters, where are the headline LGBTQIAPK+ characters.

I find it "problematic" that 90s TV programmes are seen as problematic (and I agree with a PP that I find it very consciously woke and I too say that as someone who's pretty left wing).

SATC was first aired over 20 years ago and of course attitudes have changed since then. It was always intended to be glamorous in a rather unrealistic way; it wouldn't have been anywhere near as interesting if it was about real lives. It was making some - for the time - fairly strong points about female independence; as someone in their late teens/early 20s when it was first on, it was a revelation to see women talking openly about sex. Having sex, good sex, bad sex, unapologetically seeking and enjoying sex...that was kind of new, or certainly on mainstream TV. As Miranda found, it wasn't THAT long ago that a woman buying a house on her own, independently and with her own money, was an anomaly and it highlighted old-fashioned attitudes that still existed around such things.

Similarly, and I say this as someone who has recently watched the entire boxset recently, I don't find the vast majority of Friends have an issue other than being a bit dated. There ARE a few jokes that haven't aged well but that's the intervening quarter of a century for you. I tried to explain recently to someone who is currently in their early 20s that, in the 90s, seeing gay people being treated equally enough to see them being joked with (as opposed to being joked about, or only being referred in hushed terms as if they were a dirty secret/ignored completely) was actually quite progressive. She absolutely could not understand that there was a time when you just didn't see gay people at all on TV, or not in a positive/accepted light anyway.

Back to SATC, I find today's influencers with their fake-it-till-you-make-it lifestyles and fake images have a far more toxic effect on women.

@LemonDrizzles

I watched a critique of the show not that long ago. One critique was that the two gay best friends marry. But this happens in most shows that they hook up people we met before. Like when the heads of house hooked up in the final season of downtown Abbey. I could be wrong though...

I did hate this to be fair, because Anthony and Stanford always hated each other in the series.

@TakeTheCuntOutOfScunthorpe

SATC is problematic by modern standards because it presents the image that to be happy and successful one should be wealth, white and attractive. It's a simple as that really. Where are the headline minority characters, where are the headline LGBTQIAPK+ characters.

I don't think this is true, if anything everybody in the show is unrealistically very well off, regardless of race, sexuality etc.

All of the gay characters seem to enjoy an incredible lifestyle - what about Stanford & Marcus's house in the Hamptons?? Samantha's successful artist gf Maria?

There is a lack of racial diversity, granted - but where other races are included they are still rich and successful, like Adeena who was a trailblazing chef and her brother who was a music producer. Harry is Jewish and is a top lawyer with a very nice life.

Every character seems to live the lifestyle of the rich and famous, no matter what their actual job.

It was making some - for the time - fairly strong points about female independence; as someone in their late teens/early 20s when it was first on, it was a revelation to see women talking openly about sex. Having sex, good sex, bad sex, unapologetically seeking and enjoying sex...that was kind of new, or certainly on mainstream TV. As Miranda found, it wasn't THAT long ago that a woman buying a house on her own, independently and with her own money, was an anomaly and it highlighted old-fashioned attitudes that still existed around such things.

Agree with this. SATC is focused on women and female empowerment, the barriers and dilemmas women face. It wasn't meant to be all things to all people.

@whyorwellmatters

*They should have had much more diversity of colour from the start especially in a multi cultural city like New York.

I feel uncomfortable with people telling people what to write and who to cast.

There are PLENTY of diverse shows from that era. Some shows featured only black people too. Fresh Prince, Keenan and Kel, and so many others

Nobody is telling them what to write and who to cast. It’s a massive elephant in the room, a huge part of the show which is missing and could only have enhanced it. It doesn’t have to be either / or virtually an all white or all black cast. You are mistaken if you think there were PLENTY of diverse shows from that era. That statement makes me feel ‘uncomfortable’ because it’s simply not true.

Wasn’t there an episode where Carrie punched Big and then it resulted in her getting her own way on some things she wanted ? So violence worked ?

I thought it was shite at the time, but I was definitely in a minority among my friends. I didn't mind Samantha and Miranda but I had a dislike of Carrie and the rich dark haired one whose name escapes me that bordered on the extreme.