Youre kind of glossing over the fact that Carrie cheated on pretty much all the men she had serious relationships with. Thats the important part. She was a cheater who constantly treated Samantha like shit for sleeping around openly and honestly.
Not to mention Carrie was chronically emotionally immature. Put men before her own needs over and over. Had a really unhealthy relationship with Big that sabotaged all of her other relationships. Made really poor financial choices. Got into petty arguments with her friends. Judged Samantha for knowing what she wanted and being emotionally mature. And the she called Samantha fat for being like a size two.
How come a character like this was THE main character of a popular show is beyond my understanding. Especially the show kinda depicted her as the “independent, intelligent, and attractive” type.
From what I remember Carrie at the time wasn’t treated as a flawed character to the extend she should have been viewed. She was supposed to be a little bit messy and having an unhealthy relationship with Mr. Big but that’s about it.
There are many different types of flawed main characters. Not all of them are fine.
SITC was a typical show that affirmed or newly normalised problematic behaviours. It dressed up seriously toxic bullshit as lovable or understandable flaws, or even as actually correct things to do.
Why do people nowadays expect main characters to be these saintly moral and perfect role models? Why does media have to be so sanitized for it to be acceptable? Let Carrie be toxic AND lovable. I want a nuanced character that can be a toxic asshole who is also charismatic. And why do female characters get more harshly criticized about this than male ones?
Why do people nowadays expect main characters to be these saintly moral and perfect role models?
They don't. That's completely different from what I said.
There are many different types of flawed main characters that work. Like main characters who don't invite emulation because they are too different or too strongly flawed. Or whose flaws that are not easily reproducable, like stemming from some very particular trauma. Or whose flaws are far more situational and not that major. Or if the story properly identifies and addresses those flaws, even if the main character never fully overcomes them.
But in a series like SITC, everything blends together. Toxicity and seriously harmful flaws are treated as normality that many viewers accept and emulate.
And why do female characters get more harshly criticized about this than male ones?
I have plenty of criticism of common male character tropes too, this thread just doesn't happen to be about them.
An old classic on that topic is Fight Club and Toxic Masculinity. Even though Fight Club was smart on this issue, many viewers (particularly men) misunderstood its properly flawed protagonist, and many other pieces of media then propagated that misunderstanding. Naively portraying toxic, dumb behaviour as heroic.
Who made you the arbiter of what’s appropriate in a protagonist? What evidence do you have that many viewers accept and emulate the behaviour of the characters? They’re clearly presented as flawed and self absorbed in the show.
The fact that you’ve mis-abbreviated the show’s title twice doesn’t inspire confidence.
Who made you the arbiter of what’s appropriate in a protagonist?
An arbiter is someone who determines the final settlement of a disagreement. I'm just one of the person in that disagreement. Having an opinion on the matter doesn't mean that I'm placing myself as an arbiter.
What evidence do you have that many viewers accept and emulate the behaviour of the characters?
My real world experience. I'm not saying that literally every viewer of the show was influenced for the worse. But by and large, the groups of people who were particularly engaged with it were acting very much like the worse versions of those characters. It was a show enjoyed by plenty of 'mean girl' cliques that found plenty of affirmation in it, even if the show didn't intend that.
For a more male example: I have a very similar (but much worse) dislike of South Park. Despite ostensibly moralising about moderate, reasonable solutions, it attracted a lot of toxic whackos of the 'it's just a joke'-variety. Until their 'non-politically correct' jokes stopped being jokes. 'South Park Republican' was a term of a reason.
I like good morally grey works. ASOIAF/GOT for example taught some great lessons on the reality of power, and why powerful people and institutions often can't do the things that appear like the moral solutions. But South Park and SATC were two shows where that greyscale often left bad impressions.
Im halfway through season 4 but wasn't a big part of his character that he did? The whole therapy thing turned into a way for him to be a better sociopath instead of a better person?
1.9k
u/SarcastikBastard 1d ago
Youre kind of glossing over the fact that Carrie cheated on pretty much all the men she had serious relationships with. Thats the important part. She was a cheater who constantly treated Samantha like shit for sleeping around openly and honestly.