Thread: Sarah Jessica Parker thinks lack of interest in her new show is "misogyny"

Of course. Just because there's very little interest in her sequel to Sex And the City, that must mean everyone hates women. Leave it to an entitled actress to misuse the word "misogyny," which is supposed to mean "hatred of women." Her original show caught lightning in a bottle in that it found an audience that liked the show and kept watching it. Good for her, but most people were working normal jobs. Some where mundane jobs. Some were dangerous ones. Some were soul crushing. Meanwhile Ms Parker got to fulfill her life's dream by being on a popular TV show. Now, because she doesn't get to do that again, it must be because the public hates women? Get real. She's lucky her first show did so well. There's even a small chance her new show will catch on with a niche audience. I'd doubt it. Hollywood keeps pushing rehashed and uncreative shows and films on the public, and most people are sick and tired of that. It's surprising that an actress like Parker doesn't realize how hard it is to come up with a show that's a hit. LOTS of shows fail simply because they don't peak the public's interest.

She went online trying to drum up support for her new show, and she's shocked that people have commented on how much she and her former co-stars have aged. Let me get this straight. She went online and expected to be treated with kid gloves? WTF? People are going to notice that she's aged. How could they not? Does she not understand that part of her original show's appeal was that she and her co-stars were good looking? They were attractive, and people found the stories told by that show to be interesting. Maybe she should count her lucky stars. There are actors who struggle for years in Hollywood, only to have their finest role on their resume be something like, "fat bouncer dude" or "hot chick who gets murdered." Parker got to live her creative dream. Now if the public isn't interested enough in having her do that again, everyone must be a bunch of misogynists.

Feminist entitlement is unbelievable.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah...b0ad6f5884886f

There was an audience that supported that show.
The show had a theme ("Liberation means that heterosexual women can have promiscuous sex as if they were homosexual men!")
and that theme resonated with that audience.

But the show came out in the late 1990s and that audience was young women in 20s and 30s.
For those women, the characters were pioneers the audience could relate to.

Fast forward almost 25 years,
and the women who tried to replicate the 'stunts' performed by the characters on the show
were as disappointed as the people who tried to replicate the stunts on the show 'Jackass.'

Except, the dolts who tried replicating Johnny Knoxville's stunts learned instantly why the show was called 'Jackass,'
and they didn't convince themselves that they were on the right path because of their college degrees and urban zip codes.

Women in their 30s who tried to replicate the "post-wall, urban, single, CC-rider" lifestyle are now approaching 60 years of age.

For them, Winter is Coming....soon!

The 'winter" of their lives, because they wasted their 'spring,' and their 'summer,' and partied as if the "Indian Summer" of their lives would last forever.

And there is nothing 'fabulous' about being single, childless, and having to work another 15-20 years to replace the paid-off house/pension/social security benefits/inheritance a husband would have provided.

Candace Bushnell, the author of the book the series is based on, and the person the main character is based on, recently gave interviews where she regretted leading herself and a generation astray.
She is in the winter of her life, alone, and with no children. She is as invisible to men as a stealth bomber on a airport radar screen.

Sarah Jessica Parker, or as I like to call her, Old Horse Face, has lost the original audience for the show because they learned the hard way that lifestyle is a dead end.
She is trying to get a new audience of young women, but that audience is not experiencing the good economy of the late 1990s. It is hard being young, promiscuous, and in the city, when the city is in lock down, the good jobs are scarce, rents are expensive, and all the women with precarious non-essential jobs are trying to lock down a man with a solid job with good benefits.

Sorry, Sarah Jessica Parker. Women know you sell snake oil, and four leathery hags with faces that look like saddlebags with eyes and lead-lined uteruses are not the good saleswomen for that lifestyle.

Originally Posted by McDudeski McGee

There's something really creepy and undignified about Grannies in the City.

Especially when they don't have grandchildren.

You know that 40 year old cougar at the night club? The one that looks weird trying to get the attention of the guys in their 20s?

She looks even weirder when she is 60.

Originally Posted by JustaThought

She was insanely lucky to do so well and reach as high as she did back when she was younger, in her mind she's entitled to the same attention, the same opportunities, everything she had she feels she still deserves, but it was all thanks to her looks, now they're gone. There's no way a modern woman can age gracefully is there, and just accept reality, the reality that looks degrade over time. Instead they scream misogyny and throw a tantrum just so someone might look their way and give her attention and validation. It comes across as desperate and just plain sad and makes them even less attractive.

"The Expendables" premiered in 2010 and featured a cast of action movie actors from the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. It worked and there were a couple of sequels.

But SJP is experiencing the same rejection that a 2032 reboot of the Expendables franchise with the original cast.

Only worse, because men never thought they could beat Apollo Creed in a heavyweight boxing match after watching Rocky,
or free the Nakatomo Building from a platoon of terrorists after watching Die Hard,
but Candace Bushnell and Sarah Jessica Parker convinced gullible women
that they could wait until they were pushing 40 to
ensnare a high value man like Mr. Big to marry her and suffer through nail biting geriatric pregnancies
when he had his pick of women in their mid-20s.

Something you should all bear in mind is that women don't do nostalgia. Nostalgia is a man's game. Remembering when Things Were Better. Women tend to be more forward-thinking. The next big trend, the next major fashion, etc. That's not to say that women can't or don't revisit things. They do. But they don't do so in a way that a man would categorize as "nostalgic". They might gravitate toward something "retro" for hipster points. But they don't really do it from a sense of nostalgia.

The original appeal of S&TS was that a girl from Nowhere Of Importance moves to New York, has successes, has failures, has boyfriends, has break-ups, has a social life, builds a career, has more boyfriends, has a bunch of one-nighters, etc. Rarely do real and lasting consequences land on female characters as a result of their choices. And best of all, Carrie's on/off Chad boyfriend is always waiting for her to get over her hoe phase.

Men have Die Hard. Women have S&TS. ST&S plays into a lot of the success fantasy that most women have lurking around in the back of their mind. Just as almost every guy is semi-convinced he can be John McClane, almost every girl is semi-convinced that she's already Carrie Bradshaw.

Hence, S&TS's success.

Thing is, female audiences can be fickle. Women don't do nostalgia, remember? That original appeal of S&TS that I described above is largely gone now. S&TS isn't part of the pop culture zeitgeist now like it was twenty-however-many years ago. You don't see as many "Carrie girls" moving to New York anymore. Why? Because that's not the trendy thing for women to do anymore.

I'm not saying that women won't watch this new show. I'm sure they will. But the new show just plain won't be the cool thing for women to watch anymore. The new show won't have the same cachet or acclaim that the original S&TS had.

What the new show probably will have, however, is just as many guys hearing the basic concept of it, rolling their eyes and calling bullshit on the entire thing. Don't kid yourself, the original S&TS had that too. But the nay-sayers were usually drowned out by women nationwide going full squee every time a new episode aired.

But like I say, that's gone now. Therefore, the detractors will seem louder this time around. So, Parker might very well be hearing a negative review of her show for the very first time in her entire life.

And to her, that sounds an awful lot like "misogyny".

Originally Posted by OwenWentFullMGTOW

That original appeal of S&TS that I described above is largely gone now. S&TS isn't part of the pop culture zeitgeist now like it was twenty-however-many years ago. You don't see as many "Carrie girls" moving to New York anymore. Why? Because that's not the trendy thing for women to do anymore.

SJP likes to say that New York is fourth or fifth main character in the show.

New York City of the 1990s is not the post-9/11 New York, or the post-COVID19 New York.

A year of lock-downs, hazmat suits, rising rents, declining salaries, inflation, riots, unemployment, crime, and increasingly ineffective policing is not conducive to making New York the safe and prosperous little bubble playground for single women in their 30s.

Then there is the issue of the men. Rich cities mean well off men who are willing to take women on expensive exotic dates.

Women have spent the last 10 years unmasking themselves.

"Foodie calls" was a term that did not exist in the late 1990s. There were more men willing to be suckered into these little wealth transfer schemes, these short term con games.

And a generation ago, before the impact of airline deregulation, the internet, and book-your-own flights, there were fewer men aware of the flesh pots just a short airline flight away.

Given this show is aimed at women there must be a lot of female misogynists. They made the same complaints with the female ghostbusters and oceans 11 or whatever number film it was too. Even the recent Charlie’s Angels film tanked and that has always been female.

Sex and the city has been milked to death and the cast are old now. It’s not fun watching old people try and behave as though they are still in their 20’s.

Originally Posted by McDudeski McGee

There's something really creepy and undignified about Grannies in the City.

I could never stand the original show. I thought it was already creepy the way they encouraged young women to throw caution to the wind by banging around the city with every dude that caught their fancy. I could never stand to watch an episode from start to finish.

Now that they're trying to recapture the same lightning in a bottle, but this time with old women, it seems even creepier. It's like those absurd photo shoots that feminists encourage women in their 50s and 60s to do where they dress in lingerie that would have been sexy when they were younger. They look gross and disgusting, and the feminists are LYING to them by telling them that they're still sexy like they were back then. The truth that feminists will do anything to avoid accepting is this:

You can't be sexy forever.

That's just reality. When you get older, you can't be sexy like you were way back when. It's just biology. It's just the way it is. No human being made it that way. If they have a gripe about that, they should take it up with Mother Nature or God or Evolution. Men didn't make it that way, and in fact the same thing happens to men who don't have a get-out-of-jail-free card. Most men don't have one of those. Most men age, and also become less attractive looking, and become even more harshly judged if they don't make a lot of money. I can 100 percent guarantee you that if Sarah Jessica Parker met a 50-something dude who earns 51K per year as a sewage treatment analyst she would look right through him as if he were invisible. She would not see him as a human being because big money and fame aren't with him. Yet, she demands that he watch and love her new show about aged women in the city trying to relive their 20s, and love it.

Feminists constantly claim that only women lose their attractiveness when they get older when it's obvious that the same thing happens to men, except for men lucky enough to have a get-out-of-jail-free card. It's due to evolution, not men being mean to women.

And, btw a get-out-of-jail-free card is money and fame. Most men don't have that, but women like SJP only consider these particular men because they see any man with no GOOJF card as not even human. Women like her totally dehumanize men, but then they bitch that if they're no longer seen as attractive when their hold that they've been "dehumanized." And this after they've spent an entire life treating most men as less than human.

Originally Posted by TigPlaze

I could never stand the original show. I thought it was already creepy the way they encouraged young women to throw caution to the wind by banging around the city with every dude that caught their fancy. I could never stand to watch an episode from start to finish.

Now that they're trying to recapture the same lightning in a bottle, but this time with old women, it seems even creepier. It's like those absurd photo shoots that feminists encourage women in their 50s and 60s to do where they dress in lingerie that would have been sexy when they were younger. They look gross and disgusting, and the feminists are LYING to them by telling them that they're still sexy like they were back then. The truth that feminists will do anything to avoid accepting is this:

You can't be sexy forever.

That's just reality. When you get older, you can't be sexy like you were way back when. It's just biology. It's just the way it is. No human being made it that way. If they have a gripe about that, they should take it up with Mother Nature or God or Evolution. Men didn't make it that way, and in fact the same thing happens to men who don't have a get-out-of-jail-free card. Most men don't have one of those. Most men age, and also become less attractive looking, and become even more harshly judged if they don't make a lot of money. I can 100 percent guarantee you that if Sarah Jessica Parker met a 50-something dude who earns 51K per year as a sewage treatment analyst she would look right through him as if he were invisible. She would not see him as a human being because big money and fame aren't with him. Yet, she demands that he watch and love her new show about aged women in the city trying to relive their 20s, and love it.

Feminists constantly claim that only women lose their attractiveness when they get older when it's obvious that the same thing happens to men, except for men lucky enough to have a get-out-of-jail-free card. It's due to evolution, not men being mean to women.

And, btw a get-out-of-jail-free card is money and fame. Most men don't have that, but women like SJP only consider these particular men because they see any man with no JOOJF card as not even human. Women like her totally dehumanize men, but then they bitch that if they're no longer seen as attractive when their hold that they've been "dehumanized." And this after they've spent an entire life treating most men as less than human.

I think more men tend to manage "sexy" in later years than women do. The fact is men can continue reproducing till death whereas women do have an expiry date. That is nature and nothing to do with society or sexism or whatever crap they come up with.

The only one that was attractive to me on the show the first time around was Kristin Davis and she is looking very ordinary now. SJP and Nixon look like grandmothers. I do wonder what they could do with the show now. How many more handbags can these women buy? Does anyone want to see them go on dates let alone have sex?

More importantly, does anyone want to see old women (or men for that matter) still try and work out their love lives? I would find it quite sad (bit amusing) to see these old women still trying to work out why some guy doesn't call them.

As I mentioned in the other SJP thread. Men are not immune from being judged by their appearance. How many balding men do you see on TV? How many hairy men? How about hairy backed men?

Originally Posted by Kryptic

I think more men tend to manage "sexy" in later years than women do. The fact is men can continue reproducing till death whereas women do have an expiry date. That is nature and nothing to do with society or sexism or whatever crap they come up with.

The only one that was attractive to me on the show the first time around was Kristin Davis and she is looking very ordinary now. SJP and Nixon look like grandmothers. I do wonder what they could do with the show now. How many more handbags can these women buy? Does anyone want to see them go on dates let alone have sex?

More importantly, does anyone want to see old women (or men for that matter) still try and work out their love lives? I would find it quite sad (bit amusing) to see these old women still trying to work out why some guy doesn't call them.

As I mentioned in the other SJP thread. Men are not immune from being judged by their appearance. How many balding men do you see on TV? How many hairy men? How about hairy backed men?

Good points. Men TOTALLY get judged for aging. There's a huge hair replacement industry. Men will pay thousands of dollars for either hair transplant surgery or for non-surgical replacement techniques. Depending on where you live, the Hair Club will keep a beautiful head of hair on your head for something like $3500 per year. And men pay it! No man ever has wanted to become bald. William Shatner could not have played Captain Kirk without using hair replacement systems. I didn't realize it, but he was wearing a hairpiece even way back on the original Star Trek.

To date today's woman, you also have to remove unwanted hair from your back, from the earlobes, and the back of the neck. You can do it cheaply but with a lot of trouble with a man-groomer electric razor that reaches around to your back (and it's hard to find it all and get it all). Or you can get your back waxed, which gets it all, but is costly and not permanent. Or you can go the super expensive laser hair removal route, which is painful.

But the point is, many men go all out of their way to improve their appearance for women. Think there's compassion for men over this. Hah! It's a standard Hollywood trope for a man to use his toupé in a funny scene. There are also tropes about "gross" men with hairy backs. Lots of men go through tremendous trouble to make sure they have hair on top of their heads and no hair on their backs. I've never heard any of them screaming about misandry over this. But the fact that women age and use stuff like botox to try to hide it is constantly seen as misogyny. They refuse to admit that it's no one's fault. This is just the way stuff happens in evolution. No human being set it up this way.

Originally Posted by Kryptic

Given this show is aimed at women there must be a lot of female misogynists.

Yeah. Wasn't SITC watched primarily by women? So why blame men?

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

Yeah. Wasn't SITC watched primarily by women? So why blame men?

They blame men because that's the default. You're totally right that this was a show marketed toward women. Most men didn't watch it. Their audience was women, and now those same women aren't interested in the spinoff. But blame men, of course.

Originally Posted by OwenWentFullMGTOW

S&TS isn't part of the pop culture zeitgeist now like it was twenty-however-many years ago. You don't see as many "Carrie girls" moving to New York anymore. Why? Because that's not the trendy thing for women to do anymore.

That's a nice take. The reason for the failure is that S&TC is - in great part - about New York, and these days New York Sucks.

The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. S&TC is about going to New York and making it big. That's the theme, that's the thing, that's the vibe. The Big Apple. It's that Frank Sinatra song repackaged. The only way to make it big is to actually go there, get a place, get a job, and make it in The City That Never Sleeps.

But these days, everyone is working from home and New York is a rat-infested garbage dump. I mean - it has been for a long time, but woking from home is new. Massive internet connectivity is new. Applying for jobs and working entirely online is new.

Maybe S&TC is just another one of a long list of things made irrelevant by The Internet.

Originally Posted by Unboxxed

Yeah. Wasn't SITC watched primarily by women? So why blame men?

After the TV series mined all the material out of the source book, the series was mostly written by gay men.

That was the joke. You could take the scripts and swap out the four female characters with four gay men, and they would still make sense.

Gay men can sleep around and not have to worry about biological clocks and getting too old to get married.
Hypergamy and promiscuity without consequences.


Heck, even the actress who played the high powered attorney was a lesbian in real life, which gave her portrayal of an "alpha" straight woman for whom no man was 'good enough,' an ironic twist - whether it was 'regular dude' Bartender Steve, successful businessman bar owner Steve, or platoon of almost nameless/faceless executives that passed through her bed.

Sometimes reality crept into a storyline.

The main character and the attorney dump their boyfriends. The carpenter gets dumped by the main character because she cheats on him with her emotionally unavailable high value male, Mr. Big Bucks. The bartender gets dumped because he is too beta, especially after he has to sleep on the attorney's couch after losing his job.

Fast forward a few months. The girls are stunned to find out that carpenter and bartender meet, join forces. They become partners, renovate a bar, and the bar becomes a big success. The girls suddenly find these men interesting again.

But they are sad to find out that the two of them are now in relationships....with women who are 10-15 years younger than the women who dumped them.

This was too close to reality for the audience, so in follow on seasons, the writers had to have Successful Bar Owner Steve lose the young hottie and undergo a gradual beta-ization process. They would have to make him enough of a beta that he would want to marry the attorney, without taking away his business success that the attorney requires. You see, no high earning woman attorney, knowing how Family Courts sometimes apply alimony laws equally to men, would marry a househusband and risk getting divorce raped.

Originally Posted by Mr Wombat

Maybe S&TC is just another one of a long list of things made irrelevant by The Internet.

The internet, COVID, Biden-omics, social media.

Originally Posted by Mr Wombat

woking from home is new.

Haha!! Everybody is WOKING from home! Typo or not, that's comedy gold!

If Sarah Jessica parker wants a new hit show, she should do one about a girl from rural America who went to New York trying to chase the Big Dream in 2018... just to have her dreams being shattered by COVID restrictions and doing a job that is quickly going out of business.

If you ask me, the next TV shows might be similar to the ones we had in the '70s when New York was rotten and people were struggling to survive. Maybe Starsky & Hutch might have a reboot?

I think a good reboot would have been "Sex in the City, the Aftermath" or something like that. A new group of women, younger of course. They are struggling to get through college studying things they have no interest in, performing in strip clubs and doing online porn to help make ends meet. Trying to work out what their mothers and grandmothers saw in this Feminism nonsense and why they can't find men who want to get married etc

Further to my post:

The dream of every slut in the 20th century was go to the Las Vagas movie industry or the New York Fashion industry, smile at the camera, flash hooters, and make a million bucks.

The dream hasn't changed, but these days it's online. An instagram, an onlyfans. A new S&TC has to cope with that, and a person making slutty videos in their bedroom in front of an internet cam doesn't make good TV.

Even SJP's character: she wanted to be in magazines, she wanted to be in the media. Because magazines were where ideas got discussed, they were where pseudo intellectuals hung out, they were the modern salon. Heck - one of the magazines was even called "Salon".

These days, everything that print magazines used to do, all the journalism and reporting is on the 'net.

It's not just that SJP is 56. S&SC is just so, so 20th century. Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Mr Wombat

It's not just that SJP is 56. S&SC is just so, so 20th century. Irrelevant.

I like this. But I would say it's specifically Nineties. It's a Gen X thot's success fantasy.