To feel like the character of Jill in It's A Sin was really underdeveloped? ***Spoiler alert - added by MNHQ***

[Draineddraineddrained]

Just binged this show with DP over last couple of evenings and LOVED it (heartbreaking though it was) - but this just got to me...

I mean I don't find it unrealistic that a (presumably?) straight girl would be best friends with a group of gay men and become a huge advocate for them and an AIDS activist - my mum did similar back in the 80s, and I wish like anything she was still alive because she would have thought this show was amazing.

But she was also a full human being with her own life, relationships (mostly dire), failings and priorities - whereas Jill just seems like a sort of motherly cipher, there to hold everyone else together without any normal human feelings beyond extreme empathy and compassion. She feels like a fantasy of what a woman should be to men - completely supportive, undemanding, cares more for them than they do for themselves.

The horrible scene in the last episode where Ritchie's mum rips into her for having no life of her own - it was horrible but I couldn't help but think she had s point and was hoping that some "real" Jill might emerge as a result of this challenge - but no, she just continued to live her life for Ritchie and the other men in the show, even finding strangers to devote her compassion to.

Anyone else just find it really disappointing? I mean the story (clearly) is about gay men and what they went through during the height of the aids crisis. And that is an important story told with beauty and sensitivity. But why include a female character in that, ostensibly as a lead character, just to utterly marginalise and charicature her?

YABU: Jill's a great character/she's not what matters in this show

YANBU: She should have been done right or not at all.

@SarahAndQuack

at burger bun boobs. Never a good look!

@SleepOhHowIMissYou, ooh, I ought to watch that then. I watched the first season and then somehow didn't get around to the rest.

Stranger Things 2nd Season isn't great but the 3rd has a different feel and a brilliant dynamic as they split the group into separate teams. Dustin is part of the Robin and Steve group along with Lucas' younger sister Erica, who is absolutely awesome!

Ok, sounds good, I'll give it a go!

I’m the same age as the characters. There was a huge emphasis on keeping yourself safe from HIV at the time. That it was your own responsibility to have safe sex as you would never know for sure who was infected.

@SarahAndQuack but I dont like ANY explicit sex! Ok in this programme it's not so gratuitous because sex is how the virus spread, specially among this demographic.
I'm.talking in more general terms

I agree the character of Jill was lacking in depth but I think this was deliberate. Jill was a simple plot device which served two purposes:

1. to keep the narrative a pace. The signs that medication and understanding of the illness were changing, the activism and the legal challenges were all her taking the lead and guiding the audience through.
2. to provide a moral compass. The external fear, disgust and shame that some of the characters (in particular Ritchie’s parents) felt had to be countered with purity and goodness, which was her character completely. She served the purpose of keeping the audience on that pathway too. That’s what the ‘beautifully gay’ line was all about.

Loved the series 🥰

No, I understood you saying that, I just mean, explicit sex is already out there. RTD couldn't erase all the programmes that already show straight people having sex, so he had to make the decision based on the situation he had.

No she didn't have good character development I said to OH it was weird that Jill was a unpaid nurse/therapist/activist to a group of gay men without seeming to have any other things going on in her life. I thought Ritchies mum had a point.

He fairly went to it with gusto though - but I see your point, everybody else does too.

Grumble grumble

Oh, absolutely, I don't imagine he was just putting the sex in out of a purely intellectual motivation.

@SleepOhHowIMissYou

I knew a "Jill" quite well in the 90s as we had friends in common. She did feel a little bitter and trapped by her friend group (who all called her 'F@*@Hag*' as an affectionate nickname and she confessed that she felt that she'd wasted her youth by supporting men who offered her nothing in return.

I sometimes shudder and think I could have been a Jill. I was single for most of my late teens and early 20s, went to gay clubs with my gay male friends and was in that world for a few years. I did find great companionship but also a lot of misogyny in the gay community and I can see how some straight women would love the validation from being a mother hen saviour type in the absence of other friends and relationships.

@Nunoftheother

Completely agree with the OP. I thought her part was well written (diaglogue-wise) and well acted, but too saintly. She never had sex, either casually or within a relationship - or even lusted after anyone, she didn't have any female friends, didn't have any friends who weren't gay men (seems pretty unlikely), didn't socialise with anyone from her long-running musical theatre job, never argued with anyone (apart from with Richie's mum at the very end), perfect relationship with her parents, never got angry, was incredibly patient with Valerie when she was being completely unreasonable. She didn't necessarily have to have a partner, but just something in her life that wasn't solely about adoring and supporting her gay male friends.

Plus I also felt Valerie's character turned on a sixpence from being very meek and mumsy to becoming hysterical and vile which I found a bit implausible.

I wasn't sure whether Colin was raped by his landlady's son or whether it was consensual - anyone?

I think Colin had to be the passive partner to get past the shame of "doing something dirty" as he said to his Mum when he was isolated in the first hospital.

It looked consensual but very much an assertive top/compliant bottom relationship rather than any flip-flopping.

I really identified with Jill. I am the female centre of a huge group of gay friends and I am bi myself. I think she represents some of the worry that was felt by those women who were seeing their friends and acquaintances getting ill and disappearing. I also really felt her heartache more acutely than any of the other characters.

I was not born until the early 90s, so although I have a couple of friends with HIV I never experienced the true horror of the AIDs epidemic but I do hope that had I been alive at the time my actions would not have differed too greatly from Jill's.

I would absolutely love an episode where we learn more about the real Jill and her life though.

I thought the series was brilliant

I don't see this discussion as any kind of criticism or questioning of the real Jillor her motivations. I see it as a dramatic problem: the character doesn't come to life on screen.
I think that, if you have to justify something in a drama by arguing it happens in real life, then it's a sign that something isn't working.

I also think it reflects badly on Ritchie's character. He's supposed to be her best friend but I can't recall him ever doing any favours for her or even talking to her about any aspect of her own life. It makes him look very self absorbed.

@Floisme

I don't see this discussion as any kind of criticism or questioning of the real Jillor her motivations. I see it as a dramatic problem: the character doesn't come to life on screen. I think that, if you have to justify something in a drama by arguing it happens in real life, then it's a sign that something isn't working.

I also think it reflects badly on Ritchie's character. He's supposed to be her best friend but I can't recall him ever doing any favours for her or even talking to her about any aspect of her own life. It makes him look very self absorbed.

This- it’s also interesting that RTD wanted to make a longer series. Probably at storyboard stage there’d have been more development of characters.

Years and Years was only one episode more and covered a longer period of time with more central characters. I don't remember feeling there were character development issues in that show though.

I think if we had had 6 episodes would have been better .8 episodes really had a chance to have more exploration of characters in general .I think we only scratched upon Colin and Roscoe as well .Jill came over as a lovely girl who may /may not have been sweet on Ritchie .Maybe she was happy in a supporting role of the boys maybe not .So many questions and no answers! She could have been recovering from a broken RL and taken sanctuary with the gay guys .I heard somewhere that the series was supposed to be longer ,but had trouble getting it on air .

I am the female centre of a huge group of gay friends...

Sorry, but that sounds a bit narcissistic to me. I find it very odd that someone would want to be friends exclusively with people who are different to you.

I thought they would have taken the series another 5 years to 1996, and have one of them diagnosed and survive.

Anywho, I asked on the other thread but did anyone else notice that Valerie was trying to get ritchie to come home for Xmas in November 1991, yet they didn't mention that Freddie Mercury died in November 1991. I thought that was weird, like it had been cut in the editing - that they specifically chose to set that scene in that particular month, had ritchies dad sat watching tv in the background (iirc?) while they were on the phone. Like in an uncut version, he commented on it being on the news?

Maybe they didn't have the time to include Freddie Mercury as the show was cut down from 8 episodes to 5 (as everyone has already mentioned ).

RTD has also spoken about when Princess Di went to visit AIDS patients and was shown hugging them and shaking hands. He said it was a real game changer in the public's perception of people with AIDS and how many people don't realise how momentous that was. He said he didn't include it in It's A Sin because all people would talk about would be the casting of the actress who played Diana (although I suppose maybe it could've been as a news clip instead) but he wanted the focus to be on the boys. So maybe he didn't include Freddie Mercury for the same reason.

Yes, I thought it was odd, not mentioning Freddie Mercury or any other celeb (I think Rock Hudson was referred to briefly.) They mentioned Diana, briefly, didn't they? It might have been cut for time. I find it hard to believe no one discussed things like that, or the first gay kiss on Eastenders and stuff. Some of that popular culture must have had an effect on some people taking it more seriously, maybe prompting them to get tested.

But they did have Freddie singing "Who Wants To Live Forever" over the end titles, which was very sad.

They kept the sly little references to previously closeted celebrities instead - Philip Schofield, Barrymore...

Yes, I did notice the Schofield reference.

I found #bemorejill on Twitter a bit uncomfortable. I wanted to respond #bemorelizbeth but wasn't brave enough (which suggests I need to be more Lizbeth!)

Apparently the schofield reference was “a coincidence” 🤔

I don't know if I agree about Jill. I think we did see a bit of her life as we saw her in acting classes and also performing roles on stage, so she obviously did have more going on outside of her work to support the AIDs fight. I'd say what we saw about her life outside of her circle of friends was equal to what we saw of Ash's life outside the group, but not as much as any of the others.

The main focus in the show is Richie isn't it so everything really comes back to how it relates to him. I feel like even what happens with Colin and his work colleague is there to show how catastrophe is heading closer to Richie. So I can sort of see why most of the characters are portrayed mainly using the way they interact with him and his life.