Excuse Me, But Your Gender Bias Is Showing.

Please check your privilege here. If you’re not sure what that means – and it’s highly misunderstood and gets a bad press that I don’t think is entirely warranted – it can be summed up as follows:


Elvis checked his privilege before it was cool.

So, it’s That Post You’ve All Been Dreading! I’d been wondering where the end of my tether was and guess what? I found it! On SpoilerTV, of all places:


Here we have eight upcoming guest spots in S4, four women and four men. At first glance, this looks reasonable, but on closer inspection it becomes obvious that there’s no gender parity here. Two of the female roles are ‘wife’ and one is ‘daughter’ (in fairness, the role of Hewitt does appear to be ‘complete idiot’). In contrast, only one of the male roles mentions a personal life, and that’s only because he’s shagging his attractive, flirtatious boss. On top of that, the specified age range of the female characters skews younger:

Female: 18-20s (x2), 30s, 30s-40s.
Male: 20s, 20s-30s, 30s-40s, 40s-50s.

So we already have an imbalance in terms of roles and ages. It gets worse, though. Have a look at how these characters are described:

Female description words

humble yet hip
strongly loyal

Male description words

vacuous and yet charismatic


Firstly, can we please have an indefinite moratorium on the word ‘spunky’? It’s the Manic Pixie Dream Girl ‘strength’ word – the kind of strength women are allowed to have and still be sexy (because that is the most important thing, right?). ‘Spunky’ is as forceful as women are allowed to be without being seen as ball-breakers, and therefore undesirable. It’s a restriction, not a compliment. Would anyone call Michelle Obama ‘spunky’? (Not to her face, I imagine). And quite apart from that, over here ‘spunk’ is slang for ‘semen’, so to say someone is ‘spunky’ is… probably not the effect they were going for. Although with this show, it’s hard to know for sure.

Secondly, ‘manipulative’ and ‘controlling’? God forbid a woman should just be intelligent (instead of ‘sharp-minded’ – she couldn’t be ‘smart’ like the man? ‘Shrewd’ and ‘calculating’ like the man?) and capable. No, if she’s in a position of power, she must have tricked her way into it! “There, there, poor man who is only an assistant. It isn’t because she’s better than you. It’s because she’s a bitch”. GTFO.

Thirdly, I could go on for ages about the difference between these two sets of words – I won’t because it’s so self-evident as to not be worth the effort (although if someone can tell me what on Earth ‘humble yet hip’ is supposed to mean, that would be greatly appreciated) – but what really strikes me about these lists – about these characters – is that they’re boring. That’s the problem with gender stereotypes, they’ve been so overdone that they don’t seem fresh at all. A manipulative woman? They’ve already done that. A kidnapped daughter? Er… they’ve already done that as well. ‘Wife’ characters? Up to their ears in them (and not in a good way). Male characters who are violent criminals or ruthless businessmen? Puh-leaze. The only character here who looks even vaguely interesting is Hewitt, and even that’s only if he’s not as stupid as he sounds.

Why not a shady businesswoman? A quiet, good-natured, sheltered boy who is kidnapped and must be saved by his kick-ass law enforcement mother? Look what happens when we genderswap these characters:

Christopher is an attractive, sharp-minded, spunky and flirtatious man who works at Maxwell Home Design in Honolulu. He also has a manipulative and controlling side, and he is very adept at manipulating women to do what he wants. 

Anthony is a quiet, good-natured, and sheltered young man who is on a trip to Hawaii for the first time. When Anthony is suddenly kidnapped during the trip, his mother Renee is able to get the support of McGarrett to help rescue her son.

Ken is a pretty, sensual, and playful man who is married to a wealthy businesswoman named Laura. 

Simon is a humble yet hip, caring, and strongly loyal man who is happily married and lives in Honolulu. 

Alyssa is a smart, professional-looking, quirky, and yet secretive woman who works at Maxwell Home Design. Alyssa is the loyal personal assistant to the cute and spunky Christopher, with whom she is having an ongoing affair. Alyssa dreams of one day sweeping him off his feet and marrying him.

Henrietta is a snide, vacuous, and yet charismatic rich kid who has an expensive cocaine habit. She has the outward demeanor of a typical laid-back surfer, but there is a slimy quality to her. 

Fiona is an intimidating, sinister, and violent professional criminal who Danny and McGarrett capture after they shoot her in the leg. 

Leah is a shrewd, calculating, and brazen operations manager for a company called Reliant Aerospace and Defense in Honolulu. She is pushy and a bit shady. She believes that the ends justify the means, and she is willing to break the law if it helps her company.

So, the description of a man as ‘pretty, sensual and playful’ is a little vomworthy, isn’t it? Although it pales in comparison with describing a man as ‘spunky’ *shudder*. I tried making it a same-sex relationship but it didn’t help, if anything it made it worse. He actually sounds like a Ken doll (and naming him Ken wasn’t even intentional!). Simon’s a bit dull, which just goes to show that doormats are yawn-inducing no matter what gender they are. Also, Alyssa comes across as a swooning romance novel heroine (not a good thing) and Christopher sounds like a total douche. In fact, he sounds like Christian Grey (also not a good thing).

Epiphany: oh my GOD!! That’s what they’ve done! They genderswapped Fifty Shades of Grey!! ALL THE NO IN EXISTENCE!!

*breathes into a paper bag*

All the other characters, though, have FAR more potential. The only one who sounds familiar is Fiona, who is pretty much Hillary Chaver from the Season 2 finale (miss you, Hillary!) and really, she could come back anytime. If she weren’t dead, that is. Sigh.

Ah, you say, but these are minor, one-off characters, you can’t judge the show just on this! What about the series regulars and recurring characters? OK – let’s see what we can look forward to in Season 4, shall we?

Characters who exist in their own right:


Characters who exist only as love interests or family members:


Characters who are in China (and no, prefilmed scenes don’t count):


We spent the second half of Season 3 tiptoeing around this subject, but now I’m just going to come straight out and say it: this is not good enough. It’s not as if women are a minority group, we make up fifty-two percent of the world’s population – yeah, if this planet were a company, we would OWN it – so what is the problem here? Writing decent female characters is not hard. Person of Interest, a show made by the same network, manages it just fine so what is it that H50 is having such trouble with? Why could the SWAT team character not be a woman instead of a carbon copy – in gender and ethnicity – of a character the show already has? (Fun fact: seventy-five percent of recurring female characters on this show are white, compared with only thirty percent of male characters. And yes, all of these characters are straight. Show evidently thinks intersectionality can go fuck itself). Instead of McGarrett’s aunt, why not McGarrett’s uncle? (Actually, I know the answer to that one: in H50-land, McGarrett’s uncle would have turned up or at least been mentioned before now. Aunts, however, are irrelevant). Hell, the daughter can stay as a daughter, just make the Ranger her mother instead of her father (preferably played by Simone Kessell because I still miss Wash something fierce). It’s not hard.


The sad thing is, I’m not even sure this is intentional. We say ‘Show hates women’ but I think it’s rather that Show isn’t very interested in women as people so the interesting characters are written as males with a few token stereotypical females thrown in. Maybe it’s just that writing female characters is out of Show’s comfort zone these days and they can’t be bothered anymore (which would explain why the three decent secondary female characters the show had – Governor Jameson, Laura Hills and Jenna Kaye – were killed off in the space of half a season). Or – and this is truly worrying – they genuinely think they are writing good female characters, when what they are actually writing is intelligent women who turn into Surrendered Wives the moment they leave work. Rachel is an economist (per 1.15) but all we see her as is Stan’s wife or Danny’s ex-wife, so presumably she gave up her career to be a mother and now follows wherever her husband’s career leads. Kono put her (abusive criminal) boyfriend ahead of her career to the point where she is no longer able do her job. Cath’s been putting her boyfriend ahead of her career for three years (laughable retconning aside – and it’s a moot point now since she is apparently giving up her amazing Navy job to work for her ex-boyfriend’s security firm. Bye-bye respect-commanding uniform, it’s going to be skinny jeans-a-go-go from here on in). Lori left because her feelings for her boss got in the way of her professionalism. Malia waited with her engagement ring on a chain around her neck (“don’t make a pass at me, I’m keeping myself available for someone else”) for Chin to decide he wanted her again, and then ended up thoroughly fridge-stuffed. Leilani waited for Chin to decide he was ready. Gabby gave up a huge career opportunity (“I don’t know WHAT I was thinking, putting my career ahead of my boyfriend!”) for someone she hasn’t seen in nine months and hadn’t even known a year before that.

Is this the kind of woman sexists fantasise about now that they know the Fifties housewife is no more? Women who can earn their own money and take care of themselves, but still do what they’re told by their men? This is their idea of a modern woman?


It’s easy to say ‘oh come on, this is only a TV show’ but of course TV shows don’t exist in a vacuum and the portrayal of women in popular culture is a huge problem. The lack of decent female characters in film and TV – to the point where we celebrate the few films and shows that have them, and when did you last hear anyone say “oh, I love that show, it has such great male characters”? – is part of a blanket lack of respect for women that also includes street harassment, workplace discrimination, victim-blaming, rape apology, and Miley Cyrus being slut-shamed in the media while the married-and-old-enough-to-be-her-father rape fantasist grinding against her tailbone gets off scot-free. Or Kristen Stewart being slut-shamed in the media while her married-and-old-enough-to-be-her-father boss who was every bit as unfaithful as she was gets off scot-free. You only need to spend five minutes on everydaysexism.com to see the effect it has on male behaviour. TV shows might be the thin end of the wedge, but it’s still the same wedge.

I am really hoping that this will improve over the season because my love for this show does not extend to tolerating sexist bullshit on this kind of scale. I don’t want to watch a show that I don’t respect, and I can’t respect a show that doesn’t respect me. And I know I’m not the only person who feels this way.


So please, Show, for God’s sake. Tuck that back in.


  1. Well done. I almost never see anything on gender discrimination done this well. Almost every one else that talks of gender inequality in TV/Movies relies on assumed or imaginary sexism. They talk about how women are portrayed and how women are treated, but entirely fail to compare these treatments to men in a meaningful way. You talked about the characteristics of Men and women. You talked about the ages of men and women. You talked about how the show also belittles men in a truthful way. With a fair and truthful point of contrast, how the show treats men, you actually made a very strong point about gender bias. Good job.

    1. Thank you for reading and commenting, it;s greatly appreciated.

      The effect this show’s treatment of women has on the male characters is an interesting angle to consider; I wouldn’t call any of them sexist and certainly not misogynist, they are all decent men with the exception of Adam (as Sage said in her comment, these are great male characters, the fact that the female characters are lacking doesn’t do anything to change that). They don’t expect the women in the show to act in the way that they do. In a way I suppose they are the kind of men who think that equality has been achieved and therefore benefit from patriarchy without really being aware that it still exists.

  2. BRAVA!!!! Thank you, Alicia, for saying what needed (and still needs) to be said!

    1. *fistbump* Well, it was inevitable, really. It’s been bugging me for a while but the casting announcements over this summer have just been compounding it. The new high-profile male cast members are a SWAT commander and a Texas Ranger but the female ones are someone’s mum and someone’s aunt?? And with this as well… I’m afraid I snapped. 🙂

  3. Well said!!! It is a sad state of affairs when we need to keep repeating this, but you made very intelligent and well ballanced observations. Thank you

    1. Thank you Nance! It’s a shame because season 1 had great female characters, but it’s just… dropped off a bit.

      1. Dropped off a bit…that is a very kind choice of words ;). I just shake my head at the misuse of Christine Lahti. She is far too fine an actress to be subjected to such terrible characterization. I guess the same can be said for poor Lauren German- I was not a Lori fan, but I adore her on Chicago Fire.
        Good writers should be able to write a s good character regardless of their gender.

        1. I love Shay! She’s one of the best characters on the show :-).

          1. 100 % Agree!!!

  4. Love this. Love it!

    But in particular I like the reminder that in addition to being sexist on its face it is also so boring. We look to our stories–especially our police and crime stories-to give us heroes and these women are, generally speaking, not mine. I wish for rounder, more interesting female characters here, and in all my stories (TV, books, movies).

    And the thing is, I *do* continue to watch because I like the male characters-they’re great! Most shows, however, don’t get my attention if they treat women this badly. I guess I still believe in the potential; that if you can make male characters I care about so much, can’t you do the same with the girls? C’mon show, you can do it!

    Thanks, Alicia, luv.

    1. Yes! Excellent point that the male characters are good. Maybe they should write all the new characters as gender-neutral and then pick names out of a hat to see who gets to be male and who gets to be female (not that this should be necessary, but whatever works, I guess). I think Ripley in the Alien films was written as a gender-neutral character – it was only decided that she would be female quite late on, I think. And Angelina Jolie’s character in Salt was originally male.

  5. Hear me roaaaaarrrrrrrr! This is beyond awesome. Well done you for having the guts to say it *applauds*.

    As you know, I had a huge problem with the portrayal of female characters in season 3, for all the reasons you outlined. “Show isn’t very interested in women as people” just about sums it up. And it’s not just a TV show, as you say, as all forms of popular culture reflect society’s values and if this how women are viewed, then we’ve got a serious problem (as we know we have). Just as sad for me was the impact the writing of Cath had on my beloved McG. Not only was Cath the very opposite of a good female character in my mind, she brought out some qualities in McG I absolutely do not admire (the roller derby ep being case in point).

    Here’s hoping S4 is better. As Sage said, “c’mon on Show, you can do it!”


      Well, it shouldn’t be news to anyone that there is still a problem, should it? But apparently it is *sigh*.

      “Just as sad for me was the impact the writing of Cath had on my beloved McG.” not to mention the impact it had on my beloved Cath! I adored her until well over halfway through S3, but… I don’t really know what happened. Her finding it cute that Kamekona was practically cleaning his shoes with his tongue at the sight of her in a bikini, probably. And now she’s leaving the Navy, which was the thing I loved most about her (I love a woman in uniform). Pray to God it’s not because they want to deploy her overseas and she wants to stay with her boyfriend pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease because I don’t think my love for her would ever recover from that.

      1. Seeing as I did the rcap for the ‘bikini ep’, I think my feelings on this are well known and of course they match yours :). My love for her waned quite early on, I think, as the favour- doing thing ceased to be amusing very quickly (was that what it was meant to be? Or cute?). And then I started to see McG treat her at times in a way that I didn’t like much. And, as you say, her leaving the Navy for her boyfriend is something I hope the writers are not going to introduce. It is indeed a shame as it seems like a lost opportunity with a female character that could be really awesome.

  6. The description of a man as “pretty, sensual and playful” is somewhat vom-worthy and it should be just as vom-worthy of a female character as well. Those are bedroom descriptions, not the face any real person shows to the world unless they, I don’t know, dance burlesque professionally. And even then, that’s an act, not how you behave in the job interview.

    CBS television studios does produce H50, but PoI is made by Bad Robot studios (which is actually owned by Warner Brothers, it just airs on CBS because it is a show for grownups) and by now you already realize Bad Robot = JJ Abrahms. Fringe? Alias? Revolution? All shows with great female characters.

    1. Oh, I didn’t know that about PoI. Thanks for the info! And of course it explains in part why the female characters are good. “A show for grown ups” – >>> this!

      I agree about the description you mention. That’s a really good point about it not being the face any real person shows to the world. Who writes these descriptions? I mean, really.

      1. 😆 what I specifically meant by “it is a show for grown ups” is that Warner Brothers’ TV station is the CW (you know, Supernatural, Arrow, Vampire Diaries, etc.) great shows, but ones aimed at the teen set – PoI probably wouldn’t have found an audience with “Smallville” as a lead in. 😉 If Warner produces a “show for grown ups” they usually arrange to have it aired on another channel, and CBS is their partner on the CW, so CBS gets first dibs on Warner-produced TV shows.

        1. Really interesting for me because things don’t really work like that in Australia and half the time I don’t even notice the network that makes American shows we have on our screens (most of which I don’t watch on my actual television these days anyway). I get what you mean about the teen set, too. I have two of those in my house and I sit through Arrow every week because they love that show. It’s not really my thing but I don’t mind it so much. I love Felicity! I kind of watch it for her. And Diggle 🙂 .

    2. I love EVERYTHING about this comment! ‘Bedroom descriptions’ yes! ACA!!

      And I didn’t know that about POI either! And you’d think I would have noticed the little red robot at the end of every ep, but apparently not! That explains a lot then… although Star Trek Into Darkness (which I otherwise loved) wasn’t that great for female characters, which is odd.

      1. Surprising STID was not good for female characters because Abrams? *shrug* I think the whole Carol Marcus thing was a clusterf/ck. All the interviews I’ve read, all the writers/producers are blaming each other for her undressing scene, lots of different excuses. It was just poorly executed.

        1. I’ve read somewhere that it was her idea! Riiiiiiiiiiight…

          I also read that Abrams said it was to balance out Kirk’s shirtless scene earlier in the film, but those scenes are the same, not opposites. Alien space babes with tails are there for Kirk to have threesomes with. Hot female scientists are there for Kirk to leer at. They seem genuinely baffled that anyone had a problem with this!

          Mind you, they seem equally baffled that people objected to Khan being white, so…

  7. I have been thinking about this more today. Perhaps Kono *is* my hero: she’s smart, badass, and loyal. And really, we all know women who have dated awful guys. Guys that everyone can see are useless tools. So, OK, if show were showing her being in love with a bad guy, but making it clear that it was bad news, maybe I would feel better about it all. But instead, the hogtieing (How the hell do you spell that?)incident is swept away, not to mention the lying, and he is made to be a great boyfriend. OK, not great, but worth loving, I guess. I am still struck by both how out of character it seems to be for Kono to keep loving Adam and by how poorly they are writing him and their relationship.

    Phew. I still love Kono!

    1. So true! God knows I have (which is why this is a somewhat touchy subject for me). But then I came to my senses and I wish Kono would do the same. Throwing her career away because she thinks she can reform a bad boy? Yeah, no woman’s ever made THAT mistake before *eyeroll*.

      Although the one saving grace of that storyline is that Adam’s too incompetent to find a hideout on his own and needs two women with him to make sure he doesn’t get himself killed. So there’s that. 🙂

      1. ACA, it does seem out of character for Kono to keep loving Adam. Again, a lost opportunity with a potentially good female character who at the moment is putting her career on the line to reform a bad boy.

        LOL, a bad boy with a penchant for candles who needs two women to protect him!

        1. I keep forgetting about the candles…

          1. How could you forget? That’s how we know is is a good man, at heart.

            1. I know! I must have had duct tape over my eyes for that bit. Or something.

  8. Sarcasm. (Doesn’t always come across in comments.) So, to clarify, that’s sarcasm.

    1. Never doubted it for a second :-).

  9. cvc-eve · · Reply

    Somehow I missed this one in my inbox till today. I appreciate how much thought you put into it, and i do see your point. Really, until you literally laid out in the grid of characters in their own right versus family etc I can’t say that it was that obvious to me. Kudos for a very well done explanation of your thought process. In my own little pea brain I will say that the Cath favors grew old kinda quick. Like, can’t H50 team get their own work done with all their means and immunity? And if Show wanted to give her more of an excuse to be there than just being a girlfriend, good for them but perhaps a better thought out way. I wondered if she should have been doing her own job from time to time. And while I was reading and thinking ‘why isn’t Kono in the top box’ and ‘hey you forgot Kono,’ when I got to the part where she gave up her job for her Mob boyfriend I slunk a little lower in my chair. Now, what is the target market of show? For all of us….we watch for AOL and potential shirtless ness and even though we joke about it, him being in a towel soon is something certain fans will be looking forward to. So, assuming they want to get men to watch the show for the explosions and car chases of which there are plenty, I don’t see a problem with a woman whether she be walking by or a regular showing the guys what they want to see, too. We aren’t they only one watching, and by an article I saw today about the show being on the bubble, more women in bikinis may be necessary to bring more eyes to the show. The leering is not one sided.
    I’m not trying to be disagreeable, just adding one more aspect to it. Over all, I totally understand your point and you have given me a new perspective, did any of you see or remember Designing

  10. cvc-eve · · Reply

    (Stupid iPad) anyway, of course, that’s where the Designing Governor came from. And that show with Jean Smart and the other ladies, 4 women the show was based round, running a business and their boyfriends husbands etc were the accessories on it. it seems like a good example of your point. Julia Sugarbaker was a strong forceful woman but classy and not a b/tch. (Ok I’m done)

    1. Thanks for your comment! I completely agree, I have no problem with shirtlessness or bikinis – I mean, come on! I’m a FUCUP, it’s practically in the job description – so long as there’s an equal division of labour, but increasingly the men are characters and the women are fanservice. You see it even in the beach montage shots; usually the women are walking around or sunbathing (moving nice and slowly so their bodies can be seen properly – and in one episode towards the end of last season the camera gave us a lingering glance right up between a woman’s legs as she lay on her front on the beach. Classy) while the men do sports. And the opening scene of this week’s episode was an absolute case in point: man, wearing suit, gets home from work to find wife, wearing lingerie, erotically chopping fruit. A man’s role is to work; a woman’s role is to be sexually available to him. All these things are nothing in isolation, but when you add them all, up it doesn’t give a good overall picture.

      I hadn’t really noticed it either until the casting announcements for S4 started coming out and they were so segregated along gender lines. When I started to think about it a little more, I realised how bad it really is. Even the female characters that started out well have either been killed off or had some of their agency removed. The people who make the show seem to think that strength = kicking butt, but there is so much more to it than that (as we’ve been saying about Skye in Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.) so you can’t just give a female character martial arts skills and think that’s all you have to do.

      ACA about Cath, too, I loved seeing her in uniform. I wish they could have found a way to keep the uniform :-(.

      I don’t think we ever got Designing Women here, so I was mystified about the Governor’s nickname until now! Thanks for enlightening me :-).

      1. Well said! I know I struggled at first with my reaction to the Victoria Secret episode last season when I’m up for Alex with his shirt off just as much as the next girl. Often the shirtlessness actually does have a plot purpose and we see it less than the bikinis anyway (more’s the pity, I hear you all say.) But then generally the male characters’ wardrobes match with their characters and they are characters in their own right anyway, as you say, so it doesn’t bother me so much. I just can’t buy Cath as a strong female character because, as we’ve said (and in relation to our discussion about Skye on Agents), it’s not just about kicking butt. It actually jars with me that in one moment we have Cath kicking butt and then in the next moment she’s being treated like a doormat by her BF or being spoken about as if she doesn’t have an independent thought of her own. It just doesn’t work for me.

        ACA about the good female characters either being killed off of having had some of their agency removed. It’s sad really. The direction that Kono has been taken in just doesn’t bear thinking about, after so much promise in the earlier seasons.

        And yes, I didn’t want to roar too much on Westy’s recap about the opening scene of last week’s episode but the man coming home from work (in a suit, as you say) to find his wife cutting up a mango wearing sexy lingerie made me want to scream at my computer screen. Really, Show?

  11. cvc-eve · · Reply

    I have started watching MadMen (Netflix) and it is much more obvious to me in how the men and women interact and are of course, purposely portrayed for the time. And the smoking, oh the smoking and drinking! But i digress; your thoughts on this topic have carried over to that when I watch it. I’ve had some Friday activities so have missed last weeks H50 ep and will miss tomorrows, but when I see mango woman I will probably LOL. If you can ever watch them, and it was a late 1980’s series, a comedy and a hoot. Yep- that is why she was called the Designing Gov. that Maha – always thinking. I kinda miss her.


    1. Oh my word, that’s some big hair! I’ll have to see if I can find it somewhere :-).

      I don’t watch Mad Men, how are you finding it? (in case I ever get a chance to watch it *sigh*)

  12. cvc-eve · · Reply

    It is addictive, so good, purposely slow moving in ways different from car crash and stolen children debacles. Good characters, well, bad characters really, good at being bad. No stand up guys like Steve McG for sure.

  13. Thank you for this.

    ( BTW I watched several seasons of MM but could not stomach what my namesake Joan did for the company – you’ll know it when you see it – and quit watching. At least I don’t have to watch any more of Sally Draper’s disturbing childhood and adolescence revealed.)

  14. […] no worth! The system reinforced by the portrayal of women in popular culture such as, say… a TV show that has almost no recurring female characters at all and writes the few it does have as … Just to take a totally random […]

  15. Leslie · · Reply

    Can I just say thank you on behalf of all women out there. This by far the best piece out there that describes H50’s use of women. Govener Jameson was dirty, Kono lies and breaks laws for her criminal boyfriend, Catherine they don’t know what to do with one minite she’s only for sex, the next she has the same ability as Steve the Navy Seal for kicking ass, and the next she’s forgetting how to fight so Peter can throw in a boyfriend to the rescue. Mary Steve’s sister is shown to never be able to hold a job and its hinted she’s involved in drugs and the next time we see her she’s adopting a baby. Not to mention Steves mother was given the most cliché soap opera role return from the dead mother. Dannys next girlfriend is such a young actress that its almost ridiclous, and Rachael was okay with cheating with Danny then runninng back to Stan. Not to mention every woman they have joined to 5-0 has wanted to or is sleeping with Steve. I do not understand how one show can be so absolutely horrible at writhing female characters. Its downright insulting for women, not to mention hoe navy women must feel being represented by Catherines character who uses intel that would probably get her kicked out of the Navy. I think already into season 4 my hope for this show writing better is completely gone, they obviously do not know what they are doing and half the time most of the plots are just downright silly.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: