Why do Men hate Sex & The City?

WindSock · 14-05-2008 07:17PM

lol@ all the 'they are so shallow and butt ugly' comments :pac:

I think Sarah J Parker is very good looking. And in an unconventional way, etc.
While not many Women here can really identify with the characters, I would say I can and have identified with the many of the situations and topics on the show.

And lol @ at the 'ooh it's nothing like real life' comments.

Ahem..Star Wars? Of course it isn't like real life. Who the hell wants to watch a programme about money worries and babies? ugh.

monkeyfudge · 14-05-2008 07:26PM

WindSock wrote: »

Ahem..Star Wars? Of course it isn't like real life.

I'll have you know my local pub is just like the Mos Eisley Cantina... except the music isn't as good.

WindSock · 14-05-2008 07:39PM

Liz Delaneys?

That looks like one awesome party

monkeyfudge · 14-05-2008 07:41PM

WindSock wrote: »

Liz Delaneys?

That looks like one awesome party

Wow... 40 tonnes of sand in a bar with no windows... nothing says beach party quite like that...

Reku · 14-05-2008 08:06PM

WindSock wrote: »

And lol @ at the 'ooh it's nothing like real life' comments.

Ahem..Star Wars?

Yes, and we all know what happens when folks forget that Star Wars is nothing but fantastical fiction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPPj6viIBmU

If that guy can be the butt of a joke everyone else gets to laugh at I think it's only fair that those who forget what a flight of fancy the SATC world is also be laughed at by the rest of us.:p

DublinWriter · 14-05-2008 08:10PM

WindSock wrote: »

I think Sarah J Parker is very good looking. And in an unconventional way, etc.

Nope. I repeat, ugly man-faced t*t-stand.

Find me one guy who fancies her and I'll award you my annual prize for investigative journalism*.

(* it's a bag of crisps - flavour my choice).

monkeyfudge · 14-05-2008 08:17PM

She did look pretty good in the movie 'Honeymoon in Vegas'

The white dress she wore was pretty outstanding actually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX6vCPBzawE

WindSock · 14-05-2008 09:42PM

Who'dve thunk investigatative journalism is so easy thanks to googles.Here are 8, + monkeyfudge.. thats nine bags of crisps please. What flavour are they? :pac:

Trizo · 14-05-2008 10:00PM

I cannot stand this program it’s just the worst drivel ever to be on TV now replaced by Desperate housewives (Suburban SATC). I mean firstly the show should not be called sex and the city – have you seen the 4 women really …. The show should be called no chance of sex in the city !
I have to laugh when women come up with their assumptions as to why men don’t like it the list usually contains (inferiority , complex , ego , blah blah blah ) its none of that at least not for me its just simply crap.
I mean why don’t women like football , I wouldn’t even hazard a guess why - each women has her own reason and some like it. live and let live….

Everything about it annoys me the fact that you never actually see them doing any real actual work to pay for their ludicrously expensive apartments , shoe fetish and eating/drinking out every night , you never see them sweating over a gas bill or wondering how they are gonna pay for those monolo’s. its simply whip out the plastic and its all paid for. New York is so expensive i just find it all so unrealistic and then this crap is being shown to millions of women who all of a sudden want the SATC lifestyle that is just unattainable for most if not all. Anyway I wont go on and I could easily as I read recently :

Let me sum up EVERY episode of Sex and the City:
- Pretentious woman has self-obsessed issue.
- Pretentious woman discusses self-obsessed issue with equally pretentious
friends (assuming they aren't too busy with their own self-obsessed issue)
-Pretentious woman has experience that either confirms or disproves self-obsessed
issue and writes about it.
- Kim Cattrall gets them out.
And that's pretty much it. Oh, and with lots of shoes.

monkeyfudge · 14-05-2008 10:22PM

WindSock wrote: »

Who'dve thunk investigatative journalism is so easy thanks to googles.Here are 8, + monkeyfudge.. thats nine bags of crisps please. What flavour are they? :pac:

I do have a foot fetish though, it must be said.

Mikel · 14-05-2008 10:31PM

Wibbs wrote: »

I reckon it's because...it's a show about women and how much they go on about and obsess about men, while wittering on about how independent they are.

That's it in a nutshell, it panders to an airheaded type of woman who like to think they are independent, when in fact they are exactly the opposite. They only exist in that they need a man and buy shoes. The message it gives is shallow and materialistic, and reinforces the notion that women only achieve validation through being in a relationship and accumulating more and more clothes.
You meet women like this all the time, the type who think they are 'sassy' and tell you that 'men can't handle their independence'. No, they can't handle your braindead droning and your shallow aspirations. From my experience if a woman likes to watch it, that's a bad sign

Simplicity · 14-05-2008 11:43PM

I don't mind it and I am a bloke. I have watched the odd episode here and there but I am not a fan or have gone out of my way to watch it

I think it is stupid to suggest all men or most men hate it. It is an entertainment TV show.

You will either be entertained or not. I think my name is Earl is quality entertainment. I'd imagine there are plenty who don't

Doctor DooM · 15-05-2008 12:08AM

JackieO wrote: »

You know why men don't like it..............

Because its a show about women, and they're various antics and problems etc. There is no real male leads and the male parts are totally ancillary to the 4 leading females lives whom the show revolves around.

Therefore, men not the centre of the universe in S&TC as its all about the female perspective and THIS is why men don't like it!!

Ps. Wibbs - I really don't think most men are even a fraction as deep as your last post would suggest.

Ironic thing is, from this post it would appear that you are not particularly deep. Generalisation is never good.

i don't like SATC because it makes people (especially women) appear materialistic, vein, and self obsessed.

Dragan · 15-05-2008 12:16AM

monkeyfudge wrote: »

I do have a foot fetish though, it must be said.

Genuine LOL!

Wibbs · 15-05-2008 12:16AM

SDooM wrote: »

Ironic thing is, from this post it would appear that you are not particularly deep. Generalisation is never good.

Even more so, when one considers that talking about the nuances of SATC is hardly deep to start with.

corcaigh07 · 15-05-2008 12:22AM

the sopranos is for the men
Sex and the city is for the women
well done HBO, worked out quite handsomely for ye.

Doctor DooM · 15-05-2008 12:22AM

LivingDeadGirl wrote: »

Interesting how people are saying that the women in it are narrow minded, shallow and obsessive about men and at the same time half the men on here are complaining that the women on the show aren't good looking enough for them to watch the show.

See, SOME men are shallow. Doesn't mean we all are.

I am quite delighted not all women are like the characters in SATC.

Dragan · 15-05-2008 12:28AM

There has to be some form of attraction to like something.

With a tv show it could be the acting, the writing, the score or the look of the actors/actresses. In the same way that some girls will like it because of the dress sense of the characters some men won't like it because of the way they look.

It's just the way it is, if your giving something an honest evaluation you cover that aspect of it , "is this, for whatever reason, attractive to me."

Doctor DooM · 15-05-2008 12:33AM

Wibbs wrote: »

Even more so, when one considers that talking about the nuances of SATC is hardly deep to start with.

Very true, Wibbinator.

Slutmonkey57b · 15-05-2008 08:30AM

I don't know why the show is supposedly held up as a beacon of womanhood and the exploration of female power. It's quite clearly written with lead characters of 4 gay men, but the creators simply didn't think they'd get the greenlight in the US for a show like Queer as Folk, so they changed it.

The lead characters are all totally unappealing to men, in terms of personality, looks, and attitude to life. One looks like an emaciated horse on its way to the knacker's yard and has the dress sense of a blind magpie, one is clearly riddled with every STD going, one looks like she'd cut off your head if you spoke out of turn, and the only attractive one has enough OCD to drive Rain Man to jump out a window. The four horses (that which gets ridden into battle) of the apocalypse - War, Famine, Pestilence and Death. Yet apparantly these women have no trouble attracting mates - in New York? City of a thousand spinsters? Of the moments I've seen, I think only one stands out in my memory as being in any way an interesting reflection on what these characters are: When Horse turns up at Vogue (I think) and the sub-editor (Candice Bergen) just looks at her like she's the lowest form of life imaginable, and proceeds to rip apart her professionalism. A proper beacon of feminism ripping apart the vacuous, mindless young shoe and sex obsessed trollop.

Worse than its portrayal of women, though, is what it's done to New York. I die a little every time I listen in work to some pathetic woman prattling on about hopping on a plane for a few days across the atlantic, and when you ask them what they did? "Oh we shopped <here> and <there> and I din't think much of <that shop> and bought <this and this and this and this> and my cousin told me to check in an empty suitcase and she was right it saved me buying one over there". Jesus ****ing wept they went all that way, ended up in New York, and ****ing shopped. And come home and say "I'm just like Carrie Bradshaw, me! Shoes! Mental!" (cue rattling harrradin laugh heralding the end of civilisation).

There are plenty of shows aimed at men that are equally pointless, shallow, brainless, and potentially offensive. But apart from Baddiel and Skinner, I can't think of a single one that sucks all the soul out of life til the straw rattles the bottom of the glass like SATC does.

Reku · 15-05-2008 08:42AM

Dragan wrote: »

There has to be some form of attraction to like something.

With a tv show it could be the acting, the writing, the score or the look of the actors/actresses. In the same way that some girls will like it because of the dress sense of the characters some men won't like it because of the way they look.

It's just the way it is, if your giving something an honest evaluation you cover that aspect of it , "is this, for whatever reason, attractive to me."

Was talking to a female friend who is also baffled as to what so many girls see in it and the only answer we could come up with is that the four characters:
The prude: the "try-sexual", the serial dater:the mom, pretty much a character there for every woman to relate to in some way.

Then we went on to discuss more worthwhile things like the lisbon treaty and how it'll affect us.:D

yummymummy97 · 15-05-2008 08:50AM

I don't know any guys that watch it...they just think it's about shopping,though you would think the word sex would draw them in!

LCPL SWOFFORD · 15-05-2008 01:44PM

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

I don't know why the show is supposedly held up as a beacon of womanhood and the exploration of female power. It's quite clearly written with lead characters of 4 gay men, but the creators simply didn't think they'd get the greenlight in the US for a show like Queer as Folk, so they changed it.

The lead characters are all totally unappealing to men, in terms of personality, looks, and attitude to life. One looks like an emaciated horse on its way to the knacker's yard and has the dress sense of a blind magpie, one is clearly riddled with every STD going, one looks like she'd cut off your head if you spoke out of turn, and the only attractive one has enough OCD to drive Rain Man to jump out a window. The four horses (that which gets ridden into battle) of the apocalypse - War, Famine, Pestilence and Death. Yet apparantly these women have no trouble attracting mates - in New York? City of a thousand spinsters? Of the moments I've seen, I think only one stands out in my memory as being in any way an interesting reflection on what these characters are: When Horse turns up at Vogue (I think) and the sub-editor (Candice Bergen) just looks at her like she's the lowest form of life imaginable, and proceeds to rip apart her professionalism. A proper beacon of feminism ripping apart the vacuous, mindless young shoe and sex obsessed trollop.

Worse than its portrayal of women, though, is what it's done to New York. I die a little every time I listen in work to some pathetic woman prattling on about hopping on a plane for a few days across the atlantic, and when you ask them what they did? "Oh we shopped <here> and <there> and I din't think much of <that shop> and bought <this and this and this and this> and my cousin told me to check in an empty suitcase and she was right it saved me buying one over there". Jesus ****ing wept they went all that way, ended up in New York, and ****ing shopped. And come home and say "I'm just like Carrie Bradshaw, me! Shoes! Mental!" (cue rattling harrradin laugh heralding the end of civilisation).

There are plenty of shows aimed at men that are equally pointless, shallow, brainless, and potentially offensive. But apart from Baddiel and Skinner, I can't think of a single one that sucks all the soul out of life til the straw rattles the bottom of the glass like SATC does.

couldnt have put it better myself, well id have been far too offensive..

frank skinner is a legend tho, read his book

Faerie · 15-05-2008 02:06PM

Dudess wrote: »

I wouldn't mind if it was just treated as what it is: a piece of mindless, and to be fair, entertaining piece of escapism (and I emphasise that word - there is very little, if anything, realistic about it).

But the fact that it's received as so "pioneering" and "inspirational" for women - it has even been considered a breakthrough for feminism - is really perplexing... and not good.

I agree, I think it's empty and shallow. It's not very well written, the acting can be cringeworthy at times and it's very repetitive. The worst part is definitely the idea that it represents modern women and is 'inspirational'. Their lives seem so empty and depressing and they're bitchy and contemptuous of women who choose a more traditional life. Feminism is supposed to be about choice.
If they just concentrated on the humour, the sex anecdotes and the fashion and didn't try to be something it's not, then I think it would be much better.

Zombrex · 15-05-2008 02:45PM

WindSock wrote: »

I know it's a show aimed at a largely female audience, but what is it about the programme you dislike so much?
I enjoy watching it every now and again, but I find it impossible to watch when himself is around, which is crap because I compromise for his manly man shows.

Firstly a lot of guys (i imagine) "hate" sex and the city because that is simply the done thing. There is so much "guys hate that show" that a guy will say they hate it even if they like it or simply don't give a crap.

Secondly, there are plenty of reasons to actually hate the show.

It is basically a show about women trying to find happiness with men. The reason women like the show so much is that they relate to hopes and trials these characters face and they get invested in how things turn out for them. They continue to watch because they want to see what happens to the characters.

To put it mildly men don't care.

(I say "men", I obviously mean some men, I am generalising on purpose)

These women appear to have no friends outside of their small click of the show. They appear to have completely uninteresting jobs as so little time is spent on their jobs (or heaven forbid their actual careers or long term goals) you would swear they all had massive trust funds. They appear to have no interests beyond shopping and men, no hobbies, activities, sports. Any activity they do is introduced simply as a plot device that you never see again after that episode. They appear to have no relations apart from when the odd relative who you have never seen before dies (again a plot device). They have no family, none of them have kids till the very end of the show.

There is nothing in this show that men can in anyway relate to, or care about. As such they don't find any investment in how the characters are or how they will be, the consequence being they see no reason to continue to watch.

The only story is if any of them "find happiness", and men really don't think that is important enough to watch a show like this for.

While some women criticise men for their disinterest in this show pointing to it as a sign of a lack of willingness on the part of men to engage in the complexity of the lives of normal working women, it is actually the exact opposite.

There is no complexity in this show. It is a shallow vacuous show with one theme and characters that are either unrealistically two dimensional or realistically shallow and uninteresting.

Dudess · 15-05-2008 03:11PM

I actually did my final year sociology of the media dissertation on Sex & the City - to disprove the hypothesis that this programme is a positive, enlightened representation of women. I had no problem whatsoever finding 12,000 words worth of arguments to the contrary.

Doctor DooM · 15-05-2008 03:17PM

Dudess wrote: »

I actually did my final year sociology of the media dissertation on Sex & the City - to disprove the hypothesis that this programme is a positive, enlightened representation of women. I had no problem whatsoever finding 12,000 words worth of arguments to the contrary.

I'd quite like to read that?

Dragan · 15-05-2008 03:26PM

Dudess wrote: »

I actually did my final year sociology of the media dissertation on Sex & the City - to disprove the hypothesis that this programme is a positive, enlightened representation of women. I had no problem whatsoever finding 12,000 words worth of arguments to the contrary.

Hardly fair Dudess, a clever lass like yourself sticking it to some screen-writers. I'd say it would make a very interesting read alright!

Dudess · 15-05-2008 03:34PM

*giggles* Oh you!

"Clever" - I don't know about that. Moderately so maybe, but some posters on Boards make me feel downright stoopid (e.g. Wicknight).

So for a bit of ego-salving, I'll try and upload that dissertation...

Dragan · 15-05-2008 03:44PM

Dudess wrote: »

*giggles* Oh you!

"Clever" - I don't know about that. Moderately so maybe, but some posters on Boards make me feel downright stoopid (e.g. Wicknight).

So for a bit of ego-salving, I'll try and upload that dissertation...

The day you can look around the place and think "i'm the smartest person in the room" is the day you need to change rooms.

If you could i would very much appreciate it.

Why do Men hate Sex & The City?

Comments