(This is meant to be semi-serious, semi-humorous)

Every woman who's shown any sexual interest in Sylar has either been killed or an attempt was made to kill them.

Those are facts.

Candice. Dead.

Maya. Dead.

Maya then resurrects. True, Sylar forces Mohinder to use Maya as guinea pig to see if she would revive and I'm sure he thinks she owes him a little for it. Sylar kills her and Mohinder revives her with blood and Looovvve. Yeah. Right. That's a date for a Saturday night. "Don't wait up, roomie, I'm going out with the bug guy. Don't worry I've got a small can of RAID hidden in my purse"

But I digress.

Elle. I hope not, but probably--Dead.

I suspect NBC accountants may have had in that as much as Sylar (That's me speculating, I don't have any info.)

I can hear some of you saying: "Well, duh, what do you expect from a super powered serial killer?"

Yeah, but there is a particularly cruel, mean, finger wagging punishment being doled out to the female characters for becoming romantically involved or interested in becoming involved (Candice) with Sylar.

Its as if you writers are saying to the viewers and the female characters: "SUCKERS! See what you get, ya dumb broads for falling for this guy and his good looks."

I've got bad news for the human race. That ain't gonna change.

I've had this feeling of an underlying misogny since Maya was shot. At the time with so many people not liking Maya, (some for good reasons, some for outright racist ones) I just thought it was I and my friends being oversensitive

But now with so many more people experiencing that same emotion with Sylar turning on Elle (illogically too) I feel more embolden to raise the question.

Does Sylar hate women? Do the writers? Does he have some deep rooted anger towards them?

He shows some of that by killing Virgina Gray; Brain raping Clair (while enjoying playing cat and mouse before doing it); smashing a cup against Candice's head as she was going to kiss him; shooting Maya in the chest as she howled in pain over his killing her brother (classic humor, that--no seriously, I don't think it the least funny. I know you guys do); and now skewering Elle.

"Yeah", you writers say, "but he kills plenty of guys too. Look what he did to Mohinder!"

That was two seasons ago. What have you done for me lately?

"What about Bob?" you counter.

"Bob tortured his own daughter! He deserved far worse from Elle and you know it! Banging his murderer is the very least Elle could have done.

Also I haven't noticed Sylar running his fingers through Nathan's brain, or the Haitian's ...makes a nice image though. Peter, as you know, doesn't have one.

For the last 11 episodes the writers were doing a good job of showing us a Gabriel trying to change. Before the Eclipse in "Its Coming" with all of Gabriel's powers in tact (from this season) he took all of Elle's wattage and cured her pain. His skin was blown off. Twice! So what gives?

I imagine you writers saying:

"SUCKERS! YOU FELL FOR IT! Even after what we did to Maya, you fell for it! What? You thought just because she was gorgeous and blonde, witty and had a cool power we weren't gonna pull the rug out from under you guys? For Chrissakes' He's a Serial Killer ya dumb broads!"

I can hear the guffawing echoing out of the writer's room from here.

Is that why you MTFs are saying to us? You do realize if you keep on like that your wife or significant other is going to stab you in your sleep?

There is a kind of mordant humor to each incident and a nasty smirk that goes along with it. And a nastier underlying sense of contempt.

Excuse some of us females if we go WTF!?

And if Elle doesn't get the same blood elixir as Maya I'd hate to be Aron or Joe or Tim Kring. Kristen Dos Santos of E! is hopping mad and so are most of the women who were vested in Sylar changing his evil ways. Think torches, pitchforks and a noose with an angry mob in hot pursuit.

But I'm not mad I'm just mad at the nasty way it was done. (I can hear the nasty laughs of nasty little brothers around the globe). Not that I wouldn't want Elle back.

Speaking of Serial killers and romance, or at least sex: Charles Manson has several hundred granchildren and great grandchildren by now. It just goes to show you charisma counts for a lot and that the drugs were better in the 60s. It made all that hair and dirt look attractive.

So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

As to Sylar and romance. I think female characters on the show should run the other way unless they are delivering him a beating. Otherwise I think the female fans and the female characters need a vacation from any further romantic entanglements withr Moiseur Sylar.

Let Mohinder or whoever it is who Sylar has slung over his shoulder, while he, Sylar wears full SWAT regalia-- take up the slack.

Let Sylar humiliate them for a while.


So what do you guys think? Am I the only one who feels like this?

Well I probably wouldn't phrase my problems with how Heroes handles female characters exactly like that but you certainly get props from me for this rant. It's a talk that's been a long time coming since almost all of the ******-kicking is done by the men and Elle was for me such a disappointing death because she seriously was the only female character that actually did any of that sort of stuff. Jessica in S1 annoyed me because of all the other issues (like the whole vamp thing that I wasn't so keen on and the really messed up personalities that just came out of the woodworks). Every other female character in Heroes is otherwise a damsel in distress or a schemer. Granted, there are definitely great characters of those stereotypical examples (Angela, anyone?) but it's rather annoying that the diversity of character types found in the male characters is not found in the female characters.

That's an interesting question.

A lot of boys who were being treated badly by their mothers end up being misogynists so mistreating (or killing) women is some kind of an expression of the agression they still feel towards their mommies. I'm not 100% sure if that's the case with Sylar, but it certainly is possible.

I will start by saying that I was in favor of Sylar trying to be a good guy before the retcon that tried to make him and Elle a couple and led to her ultimate demise. I liked S2 and Elle was one of the really bright spots because here was a female character who had a story all her own that didn't make me hate her. Elle was awesome, she was mean and she was a bit crazy. Then they completely shifted her character and all her motivation in S2 in favor of making her Syalr's "love toy". The she doesnt get to be Elle anymore.

there is no way i will ever accept that she and Sylar had shenanigans because she sould have been plotting to kill him. That's what S2 Elle would have been doing. They did a bigger disservice to her by pairing them together. I don't even think its matter of the writers being purposly misogynist I think they just don't know what to do with a female character if she isn't following some man around and making doe eyes at him or doing exactly what he tells her.

I find this rather silly. Like when Harold Perrineau accused the Lost writers of being racist for killing his character, making comments like it's not alright "for a little black boy to be happy" and other crap.

It's just story direction that you're reading too much into.

I don't think the writers are misogynists. Yes, I think there evil male characters on heroes that are misogynists. I don't think the writer aren't trying paint an idealistic world where everyone is treated right and equal, it's not realistic. Not to be hard on my sex but I don't like it in movies and shows when girls who are clearly not supposed to have any training/experience with fighting start kicking a guys(that is bigger, significantly more experienced with fighting) butt in hand to hand combat, because it's not realistic. Now I have no problem with said girl winning the fight because she manages to out smart him or some opportunity shows up that allows her to win, for example Claire hitting Doyle in the back of head with broken chair. I have no with a woman kicking butt in a hand to hand because it's pretty clear she has the training and/or experience to do so.
I don't think I'd call Sylar a misogynist there is nothing to indicate that he more interested in tormenting women over men. I think he likes tormenting both if it gets him what he wants. Yes, he used and lied to Maya to get what he wanted; but he also used and lied to Mohinder to get what he wanted, the only real difference between his manipulation tactics there is Maya had hormones directed at him that he was able to take advantage of, whoopty freakin doo. He didn't seemed hate his mother, it looked like he was desperate for her approval, heck it was accident when he killed her. Elle it looked like she was the victim of hunger pains due his strong desire to know whether or not Noah was lying. Any other victim of his are pretty much hunger for powers or your in my way. So my verdict on Sylar is psychopath, yes, misogynist not really.

In Sylar's case, I don't think he is purposely misogynistic to women who make romantic advances towards him - he is pretty much the same with everyone! You could say anyone Sylar has ever been 'friends' with ends up dead or with some sort of attempt on their life (Chandra and Mohinder for instance). He has also killed a lot of strangers, from a variety of ages and ethnic groups. Sylar is quite a politically correct psychopathic serial murderer.

Slightly more worrying could be the fate befallen by Peter's 'lucky' girls.

Simone - Shot by Issac (who was aiming for invisible Peter)
Caitlin - Likely dead or trapped in a future that doesn't exist

And I suppose you could say Elle, even though he was just manipulting her to escape the Company.


Does that make the writers misogynists?

Ditto, this. It reminds me of a rant I read on someone's Live Journal about how Joss Whedon objectifies women in Firefly and is therefore a misogynist who rapes his wife. Um. WAT.

No, I don't think the writers are misogynists.

Edit: Oh, thank you google gods! _allecto_'s anti-Joss Whedon rant. Oh God. And read her userinfo. It's totes full of crazy, too.

Edit 2: Unfortunately since I last read it some time ago, she's deleted most of the comments to it that pretty much call her out for being a crazy old bat looking into Joss Whedon's work too hard. /sigh

Edit 3: Okay, apparently she hasn't deleted any of the replies. They just weren't showing up when I looked at it the first time. Weird.

That read gave me a good laugh, especially since I love Firefly so much. Some people just need to get over themselves.

..How are these two remotely comparable?

Because obviously the writers of the show and Joss Whedon both totally hate women and objectify them and think they're stupid.

Edit: And I didn't say that they were comparable, I said that Rebel's post just reminded me of that particular rant.

Uh, this thread is asking if the writer's are misogynists, and that blog is about the writer of another show being accused of misogyny. That's a lot more than just "remotely comparable," they're nearly the same thing. (Rebel is of course no where near as absurd as that blogger, though. And, OT, the bit about Sylar in SWAT is a spoiler in the OP.)

I don't have time to capture the various quotes so I'm going to randomly answer some of the statements that struck me. (And that slap mark is really red ) ;)

You're not going to have a perfect set-up for every fight a woman wins to convince you in primetime. They don't have the time. Either you accept it or you don't.

And if you need that, what are you doing watching a show were people fly and emit fire? You want to be totally convinced a woman can do these things, no one's going to spend the time to do it. Buffy was totally wonderful and she was a tiny little thing. You want a rationalization you can believe in that being a "slayer" gives her magical abilities? It makes as much sense as I can fly because of my personality--BTW what the Heroes powers are based on.


Okay, how many of you had any kind of emotional investment in any of the characters hooking up? That it touched you emotionally?

Those of you who are taking a superior moral stance are clearly not as emotionally invested with the characters or at least not the ones who got involved with Sylar.

So its very easy to say what I have been saying for some time--that Sylar isn't going to change. But since "Its Coming" the last three episodes plainly showed he was. What happened? Its clear he can't abide any kind of subterfuge or doubt. Clearly it activated his Sylar persona.

The fact the writer's pulled the rug out again on those who became emotionally invested is a kind of mean snag! Which is the very thing that people are complaining about on the E! board and elsewhere. And why Kristen of all people is so mad.

If all you're doing is standing back and saying, "Well, yeah, he's a serial killer. What did you expect?" You're missing the point. And BTW my post was supposed to be silly. It says semi-humorous, semi-serious at the top.

I totally agree with merx about Peter with Simone, Caitlin and Mohinder with Eden. It shows a tendency that's rather apalling in my view.

The writers want the viewers to be emotionally invested with the characters but once you do we're fu up! What kind of abusive relationship are the writers trying to promote here between us, their audience and themselves?

Romance doesn't stand a chance on "Heroes" and who pays the price?

Women. That's a fact.

Its not about a perfect world. Its about a pattern. That seems clear to me.

(About the SWAT I've been reading spoilers else where in non-spoiler threads so I ain't doing anything about it til a Mod points the hand of god at me personally.)

Not me.

I couldn't care less about the characters who decide to involve themselves with. There are some characters I like and some characters I can't stand. Based on gender, it's pretty much split down the middle.

Um, they're not? Hiro and Charlie had a fine relationship. Peter and Caitlin had a fine relationship (while it lasted). Same thing goes with Peter & Simone (until Isaac shot her). I'd say Peter suffered pretty heavily when Simone was gone and Nathan suffered when he and his wife divorced. Same thing goes for Matt with his wife. Needless to say, I'm failing to see your point.

this thread is full of fail.

And who died? Charlie. Caitlin, Simone. You just demonstrated one of the patterns. Women.

The abusive relationship with audience was a semi-joke.

Anyway it isn't about a paticular character suffering. Its about the audience being set-up purposely for a slimey "Gotcha!" "Aren't you guys stupid for believing us for when we we set-up Sylar to change."

Again. I'm not the only one seeing this. Kristin of E! did too. (Can't believe I'm siting her for anything, but she's correct about the emotional effect its had on a large number of people.)

Does anyone BTW remember people getting upset with Eden dying and people then complaining how Sylar was killing all the pretty girls? It got people--Guys mostly-- pretty upset.


They did this three times with Sylar. Candice, Maya and now Elle. Will anyone think there's a trace of misogyny if it happens a forth or fifith time?

Oh, and the SWAT thing. Total lie. Never happens.

IAWTC

I didn't realise that Isaac, Alejandro, Thompson, Zane, or any of the other guys who've died on the series were, well, women. My bad!

If the audience is shallow enough to be set up for that, then they're just stupid.

If it's having that much of an emotional effect on people, I think those people need to seriously check their priorities.

Edit: Add Adam and Linderman to the list of dead guys. It had more of an effect on me when Arthur Petrelli axed Adam, to be honest. Waste of a great character.

Edit 2: Oh, and Kaito Nakamura, DL, Ted Sprague...am I missing anyone?

None of those people were in relationships.

Edit: Whoops, apart from Isaac. And he died after Simone anyway.

Edit 2: Seeing as you've added some more..

most of those weren't in relationships either.

Isaac was with Simone on and off..


Alejandro had his sister...

I know, I wasn't mentioning them for that reason. I mentioned them because it's not only female characters in this show who get knocked off. And Isaac had Simone and Alejandro had his sister -- relationships don't necessarily have to be romantic.

Edit: Doh, yeah, what maxii said. LOL

You're completely missing the point. The point isn't that only woman die, it's that when a relationship starts, you know it's going to end pretty soon. And that when it does the woman will probably be dead or just never mentioned again.

Also to the other bit:

Simone died first, though. Her death was there to affected Isaac, and Peter. Isaac's didn't affect his dead former girlfriend.

You've clearly either didn't actually read all or you misread my post before writing this. I want to makes some things very clear you. I was not implying that a woman can't kick butt, just that I have problems with unskilled and untrained girls beating up on people who are, with no other reason than oh we have to change the tide of the fight. I know that a woman can fight and win with flying colors, you want to how I know this? I am a [i]woman (I'm not a big woman either) and not only that I'm a black belt so I'm fairly confident in my ability to beat the living crap out of your average guy.

prove it.

If the viewers automatically know that the relationship is going to end pretty soon in the show, then that kind of makes the point of this thread completely moot since there would, theoretically, never be a "GOTCHA!" moment when the woman in the relationship gets killed. GOTCHA! moments are supposed to be surprises. If you're expecting something to happen -- it isn't a surprise anymore.

Instead of baaaaawing about how the writers are so misogynistic here (since I'm assuming that not all of them read the boards), write them a letter with your concerns and let them know how you feel. From what I've read on here, they do seem to be pretty open to fan feedback.

You're really missing the point. Its about women dying on the show but in a pattern of women dying in romances.



You're missing the point of the whole thread. Its a rant. To let off steam.

You think people weren't surprised when Gabriel got all Sylaree on Elle and killed her--we think? That wasn't a "Gotcha" moment. You saw that coming. Right.

As Kainee and accurately called it a "rant". I've shown the evidence of a pattern of behavior. If it sounds like wailing to you, its supposed to. This is a self-help thread, if you like.

I'm not writing this to effect the writer's behavior but to vent, but I will be writing them if it continues.

And many people seem to agree with the feeling.

You do realize that women dying romances is also suppose to be a form of cruelty to the man as well, right? But if really is that big of deal to you I'd like to point out that DL died in a romance.

What I find amusing is how quickly people jumped on this thread, reacting like it was some rant being made by a crazy hysterical woman. It's too bad since the OP is rather thoughtful and could have engendered some nice discussion but instead got kneejerk internet trolling.

By the way, Rebel, I agree with what you say about the pattern. Basically on Heroes, the moral of the story is, you want love? Too bad, love sucks! If a relationship is started, chances are, the girl's gonna die within 3 episodes. Having the guy die off is rather rare and the girl's death is always used as a plot device for motivating the guy-- it's actually a rather common phenomenon in comics and is called Women in Refrigerators.

Yes. A woman is used to provide some cruelty to the man. And it's hardly ever done the other way round with this sort of thing.

I was thinking that exactly yesterday. "Sylar is a misogynistic meanie!" And then I got to thinking. Elle is one of the very few female characters who had super buttkicking offensive powers. I mean, look at it. Claire heals. Pretty cool, but even she is getting tired of not being about to open a can of whoop a- on someone. Nikki had super-strength and that was awesome, but woops, she's dead. Maya leaked goo, but it's not like should control it or anything. Molly finds people. Tracy can freeze stuff, but she's not nearly as BA as Nikki could have been. True, Merideth was awesome, but I haven't seen her in a while.

I loved seeing Elle have strictly offensive powers. This was a girl who never, until recently that is, showed any sign of the stereotypical female weakness.

I also think the writers have something against love. Just about every romance in heroes ends badly. It's a;ways kinda ****** me off.

This is my quote:


You clearly mis-read mine. I was talking about the fact you set-up certain criteria for a fight to be believable to you. And I'm saying to expect such a set-up on show like "Heroes" (where their pretty good) or "Smallville" or any other show where things are fantastick, is to set yourself up for disappointment.

I never said anything about your saying a woman's fighting aptitude--"ability to kick butt".

Lets analyze these deaths that your taking so personally.
Charlie, well she was slated to die from the beginning. So yes, she purely is a "woman in the refrigerator."
Simone, I have a sneaking suspicion that the fans in a way kind of killed her. As I recall she was a bit unpopular especially in a who should die kind of thread.
Catlin, well from what understand the writer strike killed her. From what I've read apparently she originally was going to be rescued later on and returned to Ireland.
Elle, oh please she was in a relationship with a psychopathic killer, need I really say more.

However I'd like to point out that in season 2 DL became nothing more than a man "in the refrigerator." And this show is suppose to have a comic book feel.

I'd like DL to come back from the grave and sue. That a guy who can phase is killed by a bullet because he was caught off guard for a moment was the worst kind of bogus death. It was a cheap out.

Yes, its cruel to the man, too but he still gets to live. Which is one of the patterns I'm pointing out.



The point is they died.

I feel pretty strongly, and let me be very clear, this is a rant about my feelings and what I think is a pattern. And I have no problem in people showing me examples of where I'm wrong, or my over generalizing or what have you.

But I will argue it.

Anyway, back to what I was ranting about. I feel with Sylar's three semi romances in particular there was a general sense of finger wagging at women, as I said before.

"Don't fall for him, ladies or this is what will happen to you."

A)You're head will be sliced open,

B) You might be shot

C) You will definitely be humiliated.

Its kind of perverse, don't you think? Here we're gonna dangle this really, hot, sexy, attractive guy for you to drool over. But when we have a girl be normally attracted to him and want to have sex. We're gonna make the character you semi-identify with die.

What d'ya think?

And at this point, for the Mylar's out there, I say write NBC and make them go for it.

Because I'm betting the same crap will happen to them as well. Bye Mo-mo.

I really would like the writers to surprise me by having Sylar romance someone and they manage not to die. Maybe its a one nighter. I'd just like to see the pattern broken.

Go Maya. Run for the hills girl. Become a nun or a priest or a playboy bunny but run away! I'd still want her on the show and it would thrill me if Sylar wondered where'd she got to but no. No more romance. No flirtation or waving from a passing car even. Not for Maya. Not until they promise me that Sylar--or one of his surrogates--gets to kill her. No holding hands even. Let Mo have the whole thing. Or another guy.

I'm all for a guy getting into a Kirk/Spock David/Richard Dean Anderson thing. A young gay man falls for Sylar...Why not? How long will he have to live?

From now on if they get Sylar involved with another female, I'll be writing warnings on all the threads about how dreamy he was, yelling, "Save yourself--run. Run fast. Don't fall for it! He's got baggage like the Titanic. Run Girl Run and in the opposite direction. Not towards!"

Fool me twice...shame on me.

Minus the relationships, a lot of guys have died in this series too. So I'll ask again what the point is that you're trying to make?

I didn't get that feeling at all. Maybe because I just take the show at face value and don't try to read at all into it because it's fluff television that isn't supposed to make me want to question societal gender roles for at least an hour.

Fine by me. I'm a big Mylar supporter, but if the writers want to off Mohinder (or another character, regardless of gender), I'm okay with that.

Thanks for this thread Rebel! I do see the pattern and it is something to worry about, especially if the trend continues. (I just sent a long rant to BTE about the treatment of Maya. I doubt they’ll post but I hope they do read it)

Dude it’s like Maya attracts the nut jobs, I swear.

That the women bare most of the fallout in the relationships and die whenever they have sex with a single male on the show.



Then why are you taking part in the discussion?



YOU'RE A MYLAR SHIPPER and you wouldn't feel cheated and upset if after a big build up of how Sylar took all of Mohinder's anger and absorbed his pain and let himself get beat up--BTW which he did do--and then they make orgasmic love and then Sylar kills him out of insecurity?

You wouldn't feel ripped off? REALLY? I'm sorry, BG. I don't believe you. People get royally flamed for fan fiction that ends like that.



Thank you, Albion. I mean totally. What's the deal?

Because I disagree with your opinion and think that you're looking into things too much.

Nope. Because I understand that people get killed off in this show. Yeah, I was a little irritated when Isaac bit the dust, but I was over it by the time the credits were rolling since I have better things to emotionally invest myself in than a TV show. That's just something I do for fun.

Nope.

Doesn't make a difference whether you believe me or not. Would I be irritated if the writers decided to permanently kill off one of the major characters like HRG or Nathan or Peter? Probably, but I'd get over it by the time the 10 o'clock news started rolling.

Not everyone is going to come into the thread and pat your back.

My was that their deaths aren't as nefarious as you seem to think they are, at-least from a writing stand point.

I agree with this comment, too. And at the risk of being facetious, if the roles were reversed and all the people who died in the relationships were men, would the reaction still be the same? (Not yours, I just mean in general)

I don't necessarily think that Sylar is a misogynist. As others have pointed out, he manipulates both men and women when the opportunities present themselves. And I think we were supposed to believe, before he flipped out, that he truly cared for Elle. I think his killing of her was more related to the return of his powers and his parentage being called into question once again. Not that him killing her makes a lick of sense, seeing as though he had his powers when he first developed feelings for her and when he forgave her and took away her pain and all that stuff, but I've quit trying to make heads or tails out of anything that happens on this show.

As for the writers, however, while I doubt they actually sit around thinking "Wow, I really hate women! Let's figure out how many ways we can malign them, humiliate them, and kill them off!" I do absolutely agree with Rebel that misogynistic tendencies are at work in the show. I tried to ignore them for a while, but this latest incident--Elle's entire character being shafted and shoved into a refrigerator for no reason other than to further Sylar's plotline--is the last straw, and I'm no longer watching the show. I would never say that no female character should ever be killed off, of course, and obviously male characters have been killed off too. But the fact that virtually every romantic relationship on the show has ended in either the death or disappearance of the female character is an incredibly disturbing trend, and I just can't support a show that implies--even indirectly or unintentionally--that females are somehow evil or at fault whenever they enter a romantic relationship.

Well, it is a rant as you've noted before, Kainee. But I hope for the most part I'm being reasonable.

Its just another, way of looking at the subject. I say it all half in humor because its more of a feeling about a pattern and how the deaths of two characters made me feel. Like a Chump essentially. And I'm trying to circle around what I think what it was that upset me.

I can say this. I'm listening to Season 1 when in the car and the characters see so much more grounded in their lives then in the last two seasons. I'm hoping Bryan Fuller will help with that now that he's signed a deal with "Heroes" for two years--does that mean we can depend on "Heroes" being around for another 2 years? YEAH!!!

The objectives for the characters were clear and what they were doing and why. I really miss Claude the invisible man and his ascerbic manner. Another actor in high demand. Christopher Eccleston.

I've been reading comics for years (I also read a lot of political non-fiction. The Bush administration reads like a Tolkien novel and or the Tale of Dr. Doom except, sadly were all caught in it as characters.)

And have heard the term and didn't know what it meant. Thank you for the info.

The fact that you have to keep repeating how you're saying it to be humourous is making me wonder whether you meant it humourously or not. Usually when people start repeating something like that ad infinitum, it means they're trying to find a way of backpedaling out of a debate, or that they didn't mean what they initially said to be humourous at all. As one of my wise friends has told me quite often, "a lot of truth is said in jest."

Are there misogynistic tendencies on the show? Yes. There are misogynistic tendencies everywhere. Do I think the writers sit there in a back room and think up ways to hate women? Of course not.

Why is this coming as such a surprise now? I agree that misogyny is a horrible thing. Am I surprised that there are misogynistic tendencies showing up in the show? No. Maybe that makes me desensitised or callous, but it's a TV show, fer cryin' out loud. It's role isn't to wave a magic wand and make all of the ills and hatred vanish from the world or make people question their worldviews or gender roles. It's there to be fluffy entertainment, not a moralistic scolding.

You made one of the points everyone who had difficulty with his sudden turn of events has. He goes through the gauntlet with Elle and then suddenly because she is not entirely straight with him reverts to his Sylar persona? In that is how he dealt with her initial betrayal. I suppose it makes a certain sense. But it was just a little radical for people to swallow readily.



Its what we're trying to do here and on most threads. With help, try to figure out what's going on if we can.

I think you're right the writers aren't consciously trying to denigrate women but it just comes out to us looking and feeling that way. At least to some of us.




I don't know what you mean? When something is unclear. Only by studying the patterns can you discern a truth.



Everyone realizes its just a TV show, but we get invested in certain characters. Some of us identify them more than others. That's what makes us fans. And you certainly don't sound like your'e much invested in your "Mylar" ship if you substitute Mohinder for Elle in the last episode and you would only feel a tiny bit annoyed.

I watch "Heroes" because the characters involve me emotionally from week to week, not because its great science fiction. Though it occasionally raises interesting questions.



Well, good for you.

If you're not so invested why are you hanging around this thread?



Nor do I expect them too.



Why do I keep reminding some this is meant to be somewhat humorous? Because you're not getting the humor. Maybe if you kept in mind a little bit of Jerry Seinfeld's voice when you read my posts, that might help.



Well, I'm sorry for being naive and surprised about discovering a streak of misogyny which I hadn't been truly clear about until now. It wasn't until Elle bit it that the patterns began to emerge for me.

When the same thing happens many times on a show, you begin to wonder about whether if there isn't a moralistic scolding going on.

i.e. "This is what happens to you women if pick the wrong guy and just go for the lust and beauty." That Candice, Elle and Maya bought it seems like a clear pattern of punishment to me.

BTW, I also watch "Heroes" because of how they use metaphors. Which I find fascinating.

Uggh.
I hate it when people think everything is Anti-Feminist. xP

Though I must agree there is an odd pattern of women dying once they hook up with someone in the show.
But I think it sucks for the guys too.
Poor Pete can't hold a relationship for his life.

So I must agree women get the short end of the stick sometimes but guys get killed and beat up about an equal amount or at least close to equal.

The difference from most of the female deaths is that the female deaths are sort-of caused by or related to a romantic relationship with a male hero.
Coinscidence, repetative oppsie or plot device?

I'm going with repetative oppsie.

How did I make "everything anti-feminist"?

What's a repetative oppsie? Give me an example.

People can find misogyny anywhere if they want to. I can look at a property problem and go, "Gee, since George isn't devising his fee simple absolute to Jane and is divesting it to Charlie instead, George must hate women and think that they have no business owning property!" Or I can look at a contract issue and go, "Even though the court effectively reasoned that Mildred breached her contract with George, well, the court just ruled against her because she's a woman and it's a historical fact that courts are biased against women." Problem is I don't, because I'm not that sensitive. You can find misogyny in anything if you look for it. You can find misandry or racism anywhere if you look for it or twist it around as such.

I can go up to my professors tomorrow who are offering multiple choice questions on their tests and tell them that, statistically-speaking, since women do worse on multiple choice tests than men, that my professors are obviously misogynists. Or I can go up to my profs who only offer essay questions and tell them that, statistically-speaking, because women do better on essay exams than men do because women are able to better express their thoughts through writing, that my profs are being misanthropic.

Point being, if you look hard enough anywhere, you'll find misogyny or misandry or what have you.

I'm a fan of Mylar, but I don't emotionally vest myself in TV characters because they're completely ephemeral, and if this show is any guide, they can be offed at any point.

Because I'm just here for the lulz and I like debate.

Misogyny =/= moralistic scolding

Yes, if you interpret it that way. I interpreted it as, "Wow, Sylar is a really bad guy." No misogyny involved. That's what I mean about looking too deeply into things. I doubt there were a lot of women out there who automatically made the jump in logic from Sylar killing Candice/Elle/whoever to "Sylar and the Heroes writers sure do have a lot of underlying misogyny laying around!" Sylar kills people. It's what he does. Candice, Elle, and Maya all happened to be attracted to him. I don't think the writers had some subconscious, underlying global theme of trying to show us women what happens when we're attracted to the wrong guy just for lust and beauty.

It's easier to spell than misogynists. ^^;
And it's basically the same thing. xP

Errm.
Can't really give an example but I can give a loose definition of my made-up term.

Oppsie - When the Writers find themselves at a block, unable to do anything with the character or find the decision they made with the character was wrong.

Repatitive Oppsie -An oppsie that is mde alot. I.E: The Female charries relationships always go wrong. Eitheir it's due to a strike, not enough fan support or they make a charrie that's supposed to get killed off yet she gets more fans than suspected and the following death ticks people off.

Did that make any sense? =.
I think it's this kind-of mistake by the writers since I find myself being stupidly repetative like this alot.

First of all, I, for one, find it difficult to enjoy the so-called "fluffy entertainment" when it's continuously laced with such blatant disrespect for women. Buuuut maybe that's just me.

Second, I don't really buy the "it's just entertainment, so who cares?" attitude. Sure, I know it's not really real, nor is it a life or death situation, but why should I just sit back and twiddle my thumbs when confronted with something so a) disturbing and b) completely unnecessary in a show that I used to love?

I'll say it again: If it's really that much of an issue, instead of just whinging about it on an internet forum, actively do something about it. Take the time you've been spending here replying to me and reading this thread and write a letter to the NBC execs or Tim Kring himself telling them what you think and how you're so offended by their treatment of women on the show.

You're not going to change my opinion since the way I interpret the show is entirely different from your interpretation of it. You may as well put your opinion to better use and show it to the people whose minds it might change. Who knows? You might actually get a response out of them and they might actually listen to you.

I don't think the writers are misogynists but I think they have a problem with writing, developing, and keeping good compelling female characters. The lack of female central characters on the show is sad.

We only have Claire and Angela and one of those two characters story lines is not that compelling anymore. Meredith and Daphne are good, but they don't get nearly enough development. What they are doing with Tracy is just a travesty. Why bring Ali Larter back only to give her a even more minimal part then the past two seasons?

Wow...this topic seems to be hot button material. I can understand the OP's thoughts and concerns. Maya + Sylar = DEAD... Elle + Sylar = DEAD.... Simone + Peter/Issac = DEAD....Catlin + Peter = MIA. Not a good track record. Now with Candice, I personally feel that their interaction was not even close to being a romantic relationship. Flirting does not equate to romance. To be honest, I respect everyone's opinion about women on this show, but I just don't see it. Maybe as a male I don't understand, but in each of the above cases, it seems that the end result was inevitable. A killer kills. It is his/her nature to do so. I would have been disappointed if Sylar said:

"You know what...Maya is cool. I really feeling her and this relationship could work. Yeah, I've got this issue with THE HUNGER and wanting to gain powers to make myself the man, but I think I will make an exception for her. And Elle..man do we have a connection. We are 2 crazy kids that are having a good ole' time. I know that I was just told that she knew what was up with my parents, as well as finding out that she set me up when we first met back in the day, but what the heck. I guess I can turn the other cheek."

Now that would have completely floored me. Would we be having a different conversation if he decided to "take it easy" on the women? Would we have a thread discussing, "Why does Sylar not treat the women the same as the men? Are women too lowly for Sylar to kill? Why can't we be victims instead love interests only?



I feel where you are coming from, but I think this line of thinking is a slippery slope. We can look at almost anything and say that somebody is implying something (indirectly or unintentionally). Examples: Male politicians are cheaters that are easily manipulated. I can't watch heroes. Male nurses tend to be whinny dudes that are momma boys. I can't watch heroes. Black men always get in trouble when dealing with white women. I can't watch heroes. Now let me say this right now..I don't agree with a single example that I gave. However, if one wanted to view it that way, I guess they could. My whole point is that at times, we find whatever it is that we are looking for. It just depends on how hard you look.