tabaqui: (Default)
tabaqui ([personal profile] tabaqui) wrote in [personal profile] vaznetti 2006-08-31 07:12 pm (UTC)

Because we're talking *television*, here. And catering to the lowest common denominator. And *executives* who live on planet Hollywood. So, yeah, i think any long-term woman introduced at this point who wasn't Missouri would be a love-interest or another demon. Sorry to say, that's the way *television* people think.

That's what we *get*. Perfectly good shows ruined because 'they' feel they *have* to throw together *somebody* and have UST and love-gone-wrong and blah blah blah to make the show have *drama*. They haven't learned that love and death are *not* the only dramatic plot elements out there.

A sister, at this point, would be as forced as a love-interest. Unless s/he meant a sister-like figure? *haven't read all the comments since i posted* A 'real' sister - no. Just...a plot contrivance. A 'sister-like' person...eh. I don't, frankly, trust the writers that far. Some of the fanfic writers? In a heartbeat. But not people who're getting paid to get the biggest slice of the demographic pie.

This show is about a father and his two sons or - really - about two brothers and their father. I *like* it. I enjoy the dynamic. I don't see the need to insert a female character in there just because there isn't one, and i don't feel like i'm 'losing' something because there isn't a female character. There are *plenty* of shows with strong female leads i enjoy - the 'Bones' show springs to mind, as does the SVU law and order show, SGA, hell, even House.

Spn *not* having a female lead or main/recurring character doesn't make it bad, or sexist, or anything else. It makes it what it is.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org