Skip to content

The douching-down of American women continues

January 8, 2010

Some people consider “douche” to be a gendered insult and therefore out of gameplay because, like “cunt,” it has that “only women” aspect to it.  I don’t because, unlike the word “cunt,” douching is a BAD THING and therefore it gets a pass.  You also have the argument that it’s a term for/about women that’s being used for/against men, but think about it for a second: there’s nothing weak about “douche.”  At least, not as we would use “Dude, stop being a girl,” or “Dude, stop being a bitch.”  The connotations of a douche, or douchebag, are actually pretty strong, at least personality-wise.  No weakness.  And, to go back to my first point, douches are bad for women.

See where I’m going with this?

When you set up a female character with a douchebag character, you’re insulting us all.  I have been watching the new season of Scrubs.  Why? you ask.  The show only has half its original cast, and Lucy’s just Elliot 2.0 and not very funny to boot.  Yes, you’re right.  And even the future Mr. Alana, John “Johnny C” McGinley, can’t pull off some of the lines they’re putting in his mouth.  The show feels forced, but I think it’s growing into itself.  Then again, in my world, any Scrubs is good Scrubs, right?  Especially with Denise.  I love Denise, and I love Drew now too.  The security guys in the cart are growing on me–I just wish they’d give the Caucasian guard more of a distinct personality.  I think Lucy proved that she’s not exactly like a retread of Elliot when they had scenes together (last week?–I’ve been catching up on Hulu), and she’s sort of growing on me too.  I’m glad JD is gone; he was just annoying me, and I always felt he was the weakest link in the show anyway.

But yeah, then you have Cole.  Cole is actually pretty damn funny most of the time.  He’s unapologetically the bad guy, the douche.  And I actually dig the character, and the actor’s doing a great job balancing Cole’s jackass side with a little tiny bit of a good side.

However, I don’t think that means he should be dating Lucy.

Here’s the thing: I think it’s good that guys can be guys in the media now instead of Perfect Heroes.  I like that shift, I do.  But I don’t think bad people should be a reward for good people, especially when we’re talking about a bad guy and a good girl.

Because Lucy is good.  She’s nutty, but she’s a good person.  Why would she deserve to be with someone who’s backstabbing and insensitive?  Because she’s obsessed with ponies?  Because she’s quirky?  Because occasionally he’ll prove he has a feeling?  These traits don’t balance out.  And I feel like this is just another example of “He’s not all bad, and at least you’re not alone.”

Drew said to Lucy that she likes Cole because she’s insecure and needy and whatnot.  If they don’t go ahead with this, and make Lucy get to the point where she doesn’t need to be with Cole–rather than making Cole slightly less douchey to prove that it’s okay–I’m going to be even more disappointed than I have been with the show.  Yeah, I think that’s the thing that’ll stop me watching this, and anything really.  Nice girls can get with jerky guys, but when they stay with them, you’re putting that out there, that message to compromise beyond what makes sense, what’s good and right for you, so long as you aren’t alone and he doesn’t, I dunno, HIT you.  And I hate that this is what it seems like the message is to the next generation of young women.

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: