Let’s Talk About The Hijab

We make no pretension of being unbiased here at the CWR. We have our particular axes to grind and banners to wave. Evan, you’ll notice, often covers the place of Asians in culture- in no small part because Evan is a combo of a few Asian people’s himself, and more directly affected by that issue. I, alternatively, grew up in the Middle East, and after having spent pretty much the entirety of my life with Arabs and Muslims (not the same thing, shouldn’t have to explain that), I’m more sensitive to Middle Eastern issues- Islamophobia in particular.

I could spend all day railing on the treatment of the Middle East/Arabs/Occupied Palestine/Muslims/etc. The way Arabs/Muslims are singled out for scrutiny and criticism. Casting Indian actors to play Arabs, since Arabs don’t match their own stereotype. The lack of appreciation for the key role the Middle East played in preserving and advancing science and philosophy.

You get the idea.

So rather than trying to tackle a single issue that could be (should be, and has been) covered by an entire academic book, I’m going to hit up super-specific issue.

The hijab.

This, for the handful of you who might not know, is the head covering often worn by Muslim women. Often, but by no means universally.  Although required by Iran and Saudi Arabia (and the Aceh territory of Indonesia), variations exist in both the prevalence of the hijab and how tightly (that is, how covering) it is worn.

But people don’t seem to get that.

 

Now 2013 has seen women’s issued brought into the spotlight, largely as a result of tragedies, such as the Stubenville Rape Trial (and it’s ridiculous outcome) or Missouri Congressman Todd Akin’s idiotic comments on “Legitimate Rape”. This, combined with other factors, such as the increasingly popular “slut-walks” or the attention centered on Pakistani child-activist Malala Yousafzai have all helped push the subject of women- especially in regards to oppression- to the forefront.

And that’s great.

It’s a shame it had to be as a result of so much atrocity, but at least people are talking about it.

But of course, with any popular issue, there’s inevitably going to be people showing up late and trying to hop onto the bandwagon to demonstrate just how open minded or progressive or humane they are. For the most part, these people are obnoxious but otherwise benign, however, these attempts to demonstrate just how “forward thinking” they are are beginning to become harmful.

See, a few people- more than a few people- have decided that in order to be good feminists, they should attack that evil construct of patriarchal oppression, the hijab.

2004 saw the French enact a ban on the hijab. Others have stated that the hijab is an attack on female sexuality, a sign of ownership, misogyny, or at the very least, places the obligation of avoiding sleaze on women, rather than men.

In all honesty, I was just looking for an excuse to use this gif…

But more than anything else, I hear the term “force”. “Women are ‘forced’ to cover up”. “Girls are ‘forced’ to wear the hijab”. “You would be executed in some countries for being dressed in ________. Or showing skin __________.”

Now there is some truth in that. But only some truth. As I stated above, the hijab is only madated in two countries, and while there is social pressure in others (we’ll talk about that in a minute), there are just as many predominately Muslim or Arab nations where it would be just as acceptable or common to go without. One of my favorite comedians, Christopher Titus, goes off on a rant about the “oppression of women” in such countries as Jordan, Egypt, and my own adopted homeland of Syria.

In reality, Syria has no laws mandating the hijab, has a sizable population of women who don’t cover (both Muslim and non-Muslim), and in fact banned the hijab from being worn in university classrooms on account of it being an interference the country’s secularism.

What that all essentially boils down to is racism. Yes, racism.

This isn’t a case of someone not doing their homework- it was simply assumed that Syrians, being Middle Easterners, must treat women badly by default. In fact, that sentiment is fairly common- if you haven’t heard it at least once, I’d be surprised, but let’s move on.

I mentioned social pressure above. Simple fact of the matter is, while the hijab is not mandated by state, there are countries out there where going out without a hijab would the equivalent of going outside in America without your pants.

And that’s all I really need to say right there. Why is it that we in the west don’t go outside without our pants? Are we oppressed for being expected to adhere to the shirt and shoes mantra?

The horrific oppression!

No, we’re not. So why do we imagine we can get up in another culture’s face about their own standards of modesty or propriety? Would you be happy if some aboriginal tribe became incensed with the West for “forcing” women to wear tops in public?

These women pity you tyrannized Americans and Europeans…

I doubt it.

Heck, we don’t even use the same standards on ourselves. Why is a woman oppressed when she’s wearing burqa, but saintly when she’s wearing a nun’s habbit? Do you go around talking about the poor, suffering women under Mennonite fundamentalist tyranny?

These women dress more conservatively some Muslims I’ve seen…

I’m not going to tell you that every culture is equally good and bad- that’s not the case. And I’m not going to tell you that every standard of modesty is right, or that there’s no such thing as negative social pressure. But people, this really isn’t about that, is it? I’ve been listening (in pain) to attacks on the hijab for a while, and I have yet to hear one that addresses these hypocrisies. I’m not saying such an argument can’t exist- I’m saying I’ve to see it. What we have so far are flimsy, emotionally charged diatribes.

Why?

Because it’s not about religion. Or freedom from oppression. Or feminism. It’s about image.

Hate to break your fantasy (not really), but you are not some sort of feminist crusader for attacking the hijab on message boards or YouTube comment sections. And brace yourselves, because this next bit is really going to hurt.

I also like Kevin Hart

Arab/Muslim women do not need rescuing by the noble, enlightened white Westerners.

Those that do want social change are more than willing and able to achieve this for themselves- again, just look at Malala Yousafzai (who also wears the hijab). This prevalent idea that Muslim women cannot possibly want to wear the hijab is at worst bigoted and at best ignorant. It is, either way, viciously arrogant.

And before I go…

And am I the only one seeing the irony in trying “liberate” women by telling them what they can and can’t wear?

I can’t be- right?

 

Intelligence and Intellectual Property

As luck would have it, just as I was perusing the AV Club’s various articles on the US networks’ fall programming, regular CWR reader/my friend Marilyn brought a certain issue to my attention.

This fall CBS will be bringing the series Intelligence to the small screen [not to be confused with the CBC series of the same name that aired in 2005]. The following is the trailer, which I only saw half a minute of earlier because it failed to grab my attention:


The synopsis on the official CBS preview site reads as follows:

Josh Holloway stars as former Delta Force turned U.S. Cyber Command über-agent in a crime thriller that explores the unlimited possibilities of technology. With a special microchip implanted in his brain, he has become the first super computer with a beating heart.

Now by this point you’re probably wondering where I’m getting at with all this, so let me stop blathering as if CBS pays me [they should, considering all I've gone through reviewing 2 Broke Girls] and get to the point.

Intelligence bears a lot of similarity to A Girl and Her Fed, a webcomic by K. B. Spangler, as well as Digital Divide, a novel she wrote set in the same world. This is fairly suspect, but we’ll get back to that in a sec. First let’s look at what CBS is saying-

The show is apparently based on Dissident, a book by writer John Dixon that has yet to be published. In an interview he posted on his blog Dixon talks about how his novel was optioned by CBS, and even goes into a little detail about what it’s all about. When asked for a single-sentence synopsis he replies:

When a tough sixteen-year-old sentenced to an isolated boot camp for orphans discovers it’s actually a mercenary training facility, he risks everything to save his friends and stop a madman bent on global destruction.

Does that sound familiar? Well, it might, if you’re a prolific reader of YA literature, but let’s pretend all you know is this blog post. If that were the case [and thank the Lord it isn't] there is no possible way you would connect the TV show Intelligence with the novel Dissident.

Now I haven’t personally read Digital Divide, though it comes highly recommended, and is only $5 on Amazon, but I am more than willing to trust an author on her own work and any similarities there might be between her writing and a three minute trailer. In a post put up yesterday Spangler describes her reactions to watching the teaser as follows:

I can overlook the tough-as-nails dusky blond hunk and the sassy brunette “minder” whose job it is to protect him.  Attitude + sexy = win.  I can ignore the whole “we gave a human the kind of power that was previously only seen in a machine” theme.  Been done before.  The shift from accessing the EM spectrum to controlling the EM spectrum (two very different things) is understandable as it makes for better action, and one can lead directly to another.  I can even overlook that they are portraying the agent and what he represents as “this generation’s Manhattan Project,” which is a major theme throughout the seven-plus years of the comic and Digital Divide, even though that trope is less well-established in the general sci-fi & government conspiracy theory literature.

But…. Guys, the uber-elite Secret Agent with the chip in his head makes constructs. He says that an “unexpected” side effect of the implant is that he can project what he sees.  “The intel I have access to… I can see it.  It’s like a virtual evidence wall.”  This is very unique and differs from other projection-type tropes, such as Gary’s in Alphas, where he translated what he perceived into images that only he could see. The Secret Agent in Intelligence can also perceive snipers from a distance, which is straight-up Rachel.  The more information that we get about these projects, the harder it is for me to separate the ideas in them as being unique from my own.

Walls of text aside, what you need to understand is that there are some similarities that result from following the same sorts of tropes [government organizations, pushing the limits of technology, etc.] and others that seems far too specific to fall under that category. Spangler goes on to say in the comments section of that post that she spoke to Dixon, and that their conversation “suggested that his novel has a very different plot than the pilot.”

K. B. is making the wisest decision possible at this point and has contacted legal counsel, and is also withholding judgement in spite of all that she has observed thus far. The most saddening thing about this entire situation, however, is how realistically she’s viewing it all. In an interview with AlterGamer titled “Cross-Medium Copyright Infringement and Intellectual Property Concerns” she admits that there “is really no best-case scenario” and that “ the little guy doesn’t have the money to go up against a multinational corporation.”

At this point in time no one can truly comment on what CBS is doing with Intelligence; if Spangler is refraining from outright accusation I can probably hold back as well. What we can observe, however, is the helplessness of the one who doesn’t have the money or influence that big businesses always will. This has happened in the past with TV shows stealing covers, and it would not surprise me if some exec somewhere made the decision to take the premise of a webcomic with an audience anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand. After all, who would really notice? Even if they did, what would happen?

As I said near the beginning of this post, all of this is fairly suspect. Until Intelligence actually airs I, and fans of K. B. Spangler’s work, will have to wait and see what happens. What’s important is that she’s taken the necessary precautions, and hopefully gets to the bottom of all of this sooner than later.

Fame Day: Hannibal

A while ago, I showcased one of my favorite shows, American Horror Story. One of my key talking points was that AHS‘s success was going to blaze the trail for other, similarly dark and horrific shows.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe the first of those has arrived.

Hannibal, loosely based off of the cannibalistic and ever-charismatic Dr. H. Lecter of Silence of the Lambs fame.

Fun game: Play Silence of the Lambs on one screen and Shadowlands on the other and watch someone’s head explode.

First and foremost among Hannibal‘s qualities is that it’s shocking- and yes, that is a good thing. I’ve talked before on the subject of violence and how we could stand to see more of it.

Or more accurately, how we could stand see more of the right portrayal of violence. Too often, death and destruction is tamed or whitewashed. We rarely, if ever, get a taste of just how truly bad these things are. When was the last time you reacted with (justified) horror at a crime scene on Law & Order, CSI, or any mainstream show? I assure you, you will not watch a death in Hannibal without thinking, “Dang, that’s messed up.

In fact, I’m more than a little surprised with how much the show can get away with. Early on in the series there was one scene (I won’t spoil which, but if you watch the show, you know the one) so gruesome I’m surprised they aired it on national television, let alone with a PG13 rating.

Yep, it was this episode…

This hopefully means the FCC has just thrown in the towel, but that’s a subject for another time- let’s talk about another key quality Hannibal possesses.

Atmosphere.

Atmosphere is what holds everything together. It’s the foundation for a rising arc of action and tension. An inconsistent atmosphere makes the entire show fall flat. You’d imagine that this would be a no brainer, but you’d be amazed at just how many shows- especially ones trying to bill themselves as horror/thriller- neglect this. A perfect example would be The Following (staring Kevin Bacon). The Following is supposed to be about a cult centered on the works of Edgar Allan Poe, committing grisly, Gothic murders. Which makes it hard to understand why the show is pretty tame with the gore and filmed almost exclusively in sunny, open scenes.

Seriously people- how do you screw something like that up?

Again- a simple thing, but constantly forgotten about until it’s too late and the ratings have plunged several miles into the earth.

But let’s get back to what makes Hannibal great.

It’s accurate. Really and truly accurate. This may be a personal grievance of mine, but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen TV psychologists repeatedly breaching basic protocol. The most recent episode of Hannibal had Lecter explain to a patient that he cannot initiate contact with him if he sees him outside of a session. This is a real thing. Any social worker/mental health professional of any kind cannot approach or acknowledge a client outside of work unless the client does so first. Otherwise, it’s essentially “outing” the patient as a patient without consent. Again, this is one of the most basic rules of the profession, but one that’s constantly being ignored- even in otherwise great shows like The Sopranos.

Here’s the thing. They didn’t have to add that detail. Most people don’t know about it, and the writers could’ve easily ignored it. Instead, just for the sake of accuracy, they took the time to add it in. You have to appreciate that.

You also gotta appreciate the little jokes…

And on that note, I probably should commend the show for further keeping up with the really technical dialogue. It’s not some elitist thing where you only understand it if you have a graduate degree in psychology, it just adds the to overall realism. People talk like they’d actually talk, there’s no dumbing it down or interrupting the flow to explain the plot to the audience (which was every line of dialogue in Inception).

Am I the only one who thought this movie sucked?

Even if you don’t appreciate every word (I don’t and I do have a degree in psychology), you’re always able to follow along. That’s just dang good writing.

And of course, we’d be remiss if we didn’t point out that like it’s spiritual predecessor, American Horror Story, Hannibal has a star-studded cast, including Laurence Fishburne (i.e., Morpheus), Mads Mikkelsen in the titular role (i.e. Le Chiffre from Casino Royale), David Bowie (as in David *****ing Bowie), Ginna Torres (the worse Matrix movies, Firefly),  and Gillian Anderson, who played Scully in X-Files.

Ok, not so much of a celebrity, but X-Files will always be one of my favorite shows...

Ok, not so much of a celebrity, but X-Files will always be one of my favorite shows…

Oh, and one last thing, did I mention that Hannibal is aired on NBC?

Yeah, this network

Not exactly the first (or second, third, fourth, fifth) network you’d think would be airing a dark thriller. This is probably indicative of just how far the genre’s come, and how much more we have to look forward to as it spreads.

So here’s to Hannibal, and things still yet to come.

Evan and Gordon Talk: The N-Word

EVAN: Readers of every gender, young and old, today Gordon and I shall be discussing a somewhat more sensitive topic of our own choosing due to there being no comments on our last post.

Our subject of conversation for the day is, and I cleared my throat before typing this, the word “nigger.”

GORDON: I’d like to talk about just that right off the bat-

Do we have to abbreviate it? I mean, I can’t think of any other word in the English language that we won’t even say. Surely we can all agree, regardless of where we stand on the word itself, that calling it the “n-word” is on par with superstition.

Evan, am I crazy here?

EVAN: I think that comparing it to speaking of ol’ Snake-Face himself [Voldemort] is pretty accurate. People truly are concerned about even typing the word.

GORDON: In fact, not too long ago, it was decided in a moment of truly acute idiocy to take “nigger” out of American classics “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer” and “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”

EVAN: They replaced it with the word “slave” if I remember correctly.

GORDON: Forgetting that (especially in the latter) the whole point of Mark Twain (who was anti-slavery) putting it in there was to make a point about equality and humanity

EVAN: And, I mean, to maintain accuracy. It was the language of the times, after all.

GORDON: But that’s all a discussion for another day. Let’s get right down to it:

Is there an appropriate use of the word “nigger” (other than to demonstrate the language of the times in question, or to demonstrate inhumanity)?

EVAN: Do you mean to ask whether or not either of us could ever use the word outside of discussing one of Twain’s works or the topic of racism against Black people?

I don’t believe so, no. I have trouble envisioning a scenario where that would be the case.

I of course would like to point out, for any possible new readers, that I am Filipino-Chinese and Gordon is White [with some smattering of Native American, as he loves to point out].

GORDON: Only so people will think I can talk to animals.

But yeah, I wouldn’t say just the two of us- I mean anyone. The debate around the word is if there’s ever an acceptable use for it. I’d like to cite an example of what I thought was an appropriate usage.

Famed academic Cornell West, speaking at a rally, used it quite a lot- or at least, a variation on it. Check it out:

EVAN: So Mr. West is using the word to describe a state that Black people find themselves in, equating “being Niggerized” to being marginalized and terrorized, among other things.

I feel like that’s not quite the same as using the word by itself, but I don’t believe his usage is inappropriate.

GORDON: A while ago, I was reading “Wretched of the Earth” by Franz Fanon, who discussed the effects of colonization (and post-colonized) Africa (and to a lesser extent, Asia, and South America).

While I can’t exactly recall if he addressed the word “nigger” directly, he did pretty much cover the justification some use for the term.

People, marginalized and dehumanized, fight back by appropriating the words used to demean them and turn them into marks of pride, rather than shame.

Certainly this has been true with words like “Gay” or “Christian”.

And thus, a time-space paradox was created…

EVAN: Using the term “nigger” as a means of pride. That’s really interesting.

Do you think that’s how it is used today by African-Americans? I mean, it’s certainly present in rap music and so-on, but I feel like describing its usage there as being re-appropriation of a derogatory slur for bigger and better things might be inaccurate.

It’s certainly re-appropriation, but perhaps one that makes it more casual? I’m somewhat unsure.

GORDON: Okay, what about using it not as a label, but as an term to describe the process of dehumanizing people based on race? Reducing them to animals? This isn’t used just against black people, but against ALL non-whites. Arabs get called “Sand-Niggers” or “Dune Coons.” I’ve heard other variations applied to aboriginal peoples and Asians as well.

This seems to be what Dr. West is talking about when he says “niggerized.”

EVAN: I think we’ve touched enough about how West views the word, so let’s try moving forward a little more with its usage today. What are your thoughts about the distinctions between the words “nigger” and “nigga”?

As many people might know, this was an issue in the media when a school teacher used the latter word to interact with his African-American students, thinking it to be far different from the former.

We miss this show so much…

GORDON: I don’t think the teacher was malicious in saying it (having seen both the actual news scandal AND parodies of it), I just think it was colossally stupid.

Your opinion?

EVAN: My brother mentioned this when he saw what we were going to be blogging about, that the way the last syllable is said really changes the word.

“Nigger” sounds worlds harsher than “nigga.” As far as the way it’s used among African-Americans, I would say it’s probably rarely ever the case that they use the former to refer to each other.

GORDON: I’ve heard it used both ways without much difference. I’m struggling to imagine a situation in which anyone could say “Actually, I said ‘niggAH’” and people would be cool with it.

EVAN: I really do think that the latter is used in a much more casual colloquial manner, at least among African-Americans and those who choose to emulate and live out a particular subculture.

The teacher should not have used any iteration of the word at all, but I think he was tapping into something when he said there is a difference between the two words.

GORDON: Again, I wouldn’t put too much stock in the perceptions of a man who called a black pupil a “nigga”- or anything other than his name, for that matter.

But let’s change things up here- this is something I’ve truly been curious about. What about the word “wigger”?

EVAN: In that it’s a disparaging term used to describe a White person whose behaviour mirrors that of a particular African-American subculture?

GORDON: More or less, yeah. Is it as equally disparaging? Is it more directed against whites or blacks or what?

EVAN: I’ve always seen it as a term that looks down on White people in that it’s not so much that they’re emulating certain Black people [and that they are lessening themselves by doing so], but that they’re emulating something they’re not to begin with.

There’s this appropriation of a subculture that came about due to struggle and hardship, and most of these people have never experienced such things.

GORDON: So? Is it somehow pro-equality as a term? When I’ve seen it used, it just always seemed plain mean-spirited

EVAN: Pro-equality?

GORDON: Poor choice of words. I mean “good” in that it mocks a group for trying to appropriate a culture stemming from centuries of brutal oppression.

EVAN: I’ve never had to think about the term as far as being “good” or “bad.” I stated that in my opinion it mocks people who are, in essence, posers.

I’m not sure what you mean about mean-spirited.

GORDON: When I’ve heard it used, it’s been used not in a “You guys suck for pretending to have lived through poverty and oppression”, it’s been used in “You guys are as bad as niggers”. Again, mean-spirited, if not downright malicious.

EVAN: I think it’s just a difference between how we’ve heard it used. I’ve personally never witnessed it being used in that manner.

GORDON: Well, folks, we’re overtime…

…and no closer to any answer than when we started, though certainly we’ve presented some food for thought.

How about you leave us some comments so we can discuss something next time of your choosing?

EVAN: We look forward to reading any suggestions you leave, and arguing which one would ultimately be easiest to discuss [because they're usually pretty challenging].

GORDON: Seriously, be specific with your suggestions. Vague leaves us with no direction.

EVAN: Or more accurately leaves us to twist your prompt in whatever direction we want.

Thanks, as usual, for tuning in! We will be here all week, every week, for the unforeseeable future.

Shame Day: Spoilers

Today’s post is going to be a little shorter than most, primarily because I am, well, not writing this from home. Take from that what you will.

spoilersspoilersspoilersspoilers

I write this because last night, while perusing Facebook, the page for CBS’ How I Met Your Mother posted an image of a certain someone [seen on the right]. The caption for the image was as follows:

A secret 8 years in the making! You just met… wait for it… the mother! Like this post if you were surprised!
http://bit.ly/10K4e18

But here’s the thing, I hadn’t seen the episode. I was busy talking about short stories with my writing group, which was swiftly followed up by reviewing the season finale of the other CBS sitcom. As the description of the image reads, this was a reveal “8 years in the making.” I may not have started the year the show came out, but I  have seen every episode. That’s 183 episodes; that comes out to something like 3660 minutes, or 61 hours, or 2.5 full days of television.

All of my hours of watching and waiting boiled down to the HIMYM Facebook page revealing the mother’s face online. And I wasn’t the first one upset about it, either.

I’m honestly surprised how composed these two were in wording their complaints.

Raffe and Josh were none too thrilled by the reveal, and they had thousands of other fans agreeing with them. The whole premise of How I Met Your Mother revolves around viewers waiting to finally get a glimpse of her face, and that moment was robbed by a lot of people.

Spoilers are nothing new, of course.

While you all know my opinion of DC comics and how they’ve been running things, what you may not know is how terrible they have been about spoilers. Back in February they okayed an article by The New York Post titled “DC killing off Batman’s ‘Boy Wonder’ Damian Wayne in new comic book.” This was published a day before the comic in question came out in stores. What spiraled out of that was prospectors buying up every issue they could get their hands on in hopes that the issue would one day increase in value, add insult to injury to the tens of thousands who, having had the ending spoiled, would now be unable to read the comic as well.

Even more recently they spoiled their own big Green Lantern crossover event by featuring an epilogue in a comic in spite of the fact that it wasn’t to end for another two weeks. On the Marvel side of things, the publisher announced that Angela, a character from the Todd McFarlane’s Spawn universe, would be featured in the Age of Ultron event, before it had even begun.

It’s not just companies shooting themselves in the foot, though. io9 has a feature called Morning Spoilers, and Bleeding Cool has broken more than its fair share of comic book related news stories.

To get out into the real world, away from the internet, I present this video [the comments section is rife with spoilers to other books, movies, etc.]:


This guy has literally nothing better to do but sneak up to people standing outside of a Barnes and Noble ruin the big reveal for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. It’s the reason that when my cousin bought the 7th book he holed himself up in his room, away from the internet and everything else, and read it cover to cover.

I write this Shame Day against anyone, and this includes the creators of the media in question, who feels the need to spoil an ending, or any aspect, of any sort of work. This doesn’t even have to be a twist, it can just as easily be done through an incessant amount of special extended previews, à la The Avengers.

Even knowing that there will be a twist in a movie spoils it, and I must disagree with the assessment that blogger John Seavey makes  [spoilers for Saw within] when he says “I have always been greatly of the opinion that if your twist is any good, you’d enjoy the story even if you knew it, and if it’s not, then hiding it won’t make it any better.” Knowing that there’s a twist means that you’re constantly looking out for it, an activity best reserved for one’s second viewing/reading.

I have never ever seen an M. Night Shyamalan movie without knowing what the big twist was, and that includes such films as The Sixth SenseThe Village, and The Happening. Knowing does not make watching any more enjoyable, though at least one of the aforementioned flicks was not very great to begin with.

It is not a secret to me that there are people who love finding out spoilers, and that this somehow is enjoyable to them and affects their full viewing or reading of the final product not at all. I am not one of them. Through writing this article alone I became privy to a pretty significant upcoming event in Game of Thrones, and I am none too pleased. That’s simply the state of the internet nowadays, and it is upsetting.

I am unhappy that I saw what the mother was going to look like via Facebook. I am equally sorry that I have let my curiosity get away from me in the past when it came to wanting to find out too much, too early. Normally Shame Days take a tone of admonishment, but this is more a plea than anything else. Please don’t spoil things, anyone. Don’t do it. Be considerate.

2 Broke Girls, S2E24 “And the Window of Opportunity”: A TV Review

lastepisodelastepisodeI don’t think I can put into words how excited I was for this episode. Not only does my opinion about starting this all again this fall hinge on how this turns out, it also means a months-long hiatus from doing weekly TV reviews. On many nights, like tonight, I’ve had to double up on 2BG reviews and Shame Days, and it has not been fun.

Forewarning, a ridiculous amount happens in this episode, so much that my order of events probably gets really, really messed up. Please bear with me.

Anyway, we start out with Han wanting to get an A from the health inspector, which is reasonable because he owns a business which serves food, all of which Oleg cooks, from my understanding. Seriously though, he is a fry cook and really the only one in the kitchen, I don’t understand how they feed the customers I constantly see quietly chatting with one another around the diner.

To get back to the action, the cold open ends on a really great note with the aforementioned Ukrainian decked out in starchy white chef’s garb, complete with three hairnets [two of which are visible on his head and beard]. His delivery of “I don’t wanna talk about it” is flawlessly done.

There are a whole bunch of shenanigans, but generally what you need to know is that Han plans to use Caroline ["my show pony"] to get the health inspector on his side but is surprised when she is a woman. He ends up flirting with her and it is really gross and uncomfortable. Han also pays Max an exorbitant amount of money [$85!] to not be around; it is not added to their Current Total.

All of his scheming aside, he still gets a B, though. Caroline quips that “Asians don’t do well with B’s,” and that once at Wharton a Japanese student sitting next to her committed harakiri when she got one. I honestly can’t tell whether or not that’s supposed to be a joke, since Beth Behrs delivers her line like it actually happened. Ultimately not impressed by it, however the case.

I feel like I need to speed this up, so let me quickly introduce the fact that there’s some kind of “window of opportunity” seminar that Caroline thinks is just what her and Caroline need to get their cupcake business back on the right track. It’s $600, though, so they hold a yard sale.

Some guy named Dennis Endicott III shows up, the self-proclaimed Thrift Shop Scout and Brooklyn’s Crazy Kitsch Genius. His wife, Miss Trudy, and bird, Scott, are also there. Most of Caroline’s old belongings, in spite of costing her thousands are worth nothing to the guy. Luckily he comes across a set of Max’s Nugget Buddies, which are apparently some sort of McDonald’s Happy Meal toy I’ve never heard of. He wants to buy them for [you guessed it!] $600.

Then Max refuses, oh well.

And see, now I feel like I need to mention the B plot, which I was going to save until the end but which intersects with this one. Basically Caroline tells Oleg that Sophie told her that she needs space [in spite of Max's repeated warnings not to]. This causes Oleg to strip down to his skivvies in frustration, stating ”I’m done changing. I’m back, baby. Spread the word.” This was done in such a way that I actually felt like cheering along with the crowd.

Back in the apartment Sophie enters and begins screaming like a dang banshee [because of Oleg, etc.]; it’s really shrill and irritating and made me want to punch my laptop screen. This is offset by the fact that she is at their place because she doesn’t want to break her own stuff, and starts picking up fragile, shatter-able things and throwing them on the floor. I found this particularly entertaining. It all somehow leads to her proclaiming ”Sophie’s back, spread the word” again leading to much cheering. Oh, and she smashed Max’s Happy Meal toys in the process.

 Oh, okay, so the B apparently resulted from some back room being dirty, but this back room is obscured by a big ol’ shelf that poor Han can’t get out of the way ["P90X don't fail me now!"]. It doesn’t really make sense that they got marked down because of it. Max volunteers that they clean it to make the money for the seminar because her toys are smashed.

Fastforward to the actual cleaning, because it is where important stuff happens. The two girls are wearing plastic coveralls and hosing down the walls, and eventually they get to sniping at one another because Max is kind of tired and pissy. She actually makes some comment about water and electricity not being “the best combo” when they start spraying each other, so consider it a bad omen.

This scene was particularly strange, because the jabs they make at one another are not particularly funny. Max blames Caroline for the collapse of their business, which prompts a response about how she was a terrible worker and didn’t aid their cupcake shop in the least. All the while the audience is going crazy. It’s sort of like if a couple began arguing in a food court and everyone around them started laughing and cheering.

Then Max begins to leave in a huff, slips on the wet floor, and grabs a live wire.

Caroline is understandably worried that Max is dead, since she is sprawled out on the floor unconscious. As she is about to attempt mouth-to-mouth boys and men all across North America hold their collective breaths. Honestly, though, it was pretty decidedly unsexy, at least in my opinion. Max wakes up, not dead, and all is well.

Bringing her to get fresh air, Caroline drags Max forward and, by pushing out a pair of shutters, reveals a window onto the street. A guy walking by asks them “Is that like a store or something?” and the play on words in this episode’s title is revealed. “Holler.”

Untitled-2

And so Season 2 ends with the two girls starting out of what will obviously be their new storefront next season, conveniently diner-adjacent so that their work is closer to their work. It’ll also be helpful in giving the secondary cast members more screentime. Since they don’t end up using the money Han pays them to clean the back room, we end up going from $940 to our brand new current total of $1,540.

 So let me recap, even though it’s almost 1 AM and I have work tomorrow and yet another blog post to write up. I mean, it is the season finale.

Max and Caroline will be moving forward, yet again, with their cupcake business. They will not have crazy overheads like before, and will be right next to the diner as well. On the other side of things, both Oleg and Sophie are “back,” which means something, I suppose. They were the only really significant couple [no offense, Candy Andy and Caroline] and it’s a little surprising that they’ve broken up. It seems pretty permanent, as well [Sophie smashes in his windshield with a hammer].

All in all, the status quo has not shifted much. The girls are back where they started, even after a pretty vicious verbal throwdown. Really the only change that occurred are the two heavily accented Europeans and their highly sexual relationship.

Yes, I will be covering this show when it starts up again in the fall, but until then I’ll hopefully get some other reviews in [maybe even of books!]. It hasn’t always been fun, but I really did thoroughly enjoy last week’s episode, and this one didn’t do too badly for a finale. It’s at the very least showed us what to look forward to in the next season [with just a hint of the usual racist humour], and that’s as much as I thought to expect out of a show like 2 Broke Girls.

To the people who tuned in specifically for these reviews, come back around in a couple of months and these should be back up when the show starts. Feel free to take a look around the sites, there’re some pretty decent articles around. Feel free to skip back a week, though, things’ve been a little rough recently.

Stray Observations:

  • Earl on cleaning the diner: “It’s like puttin’ a pretty church hat on a whore.”
  • He also believes that napkins were the old Twitter.
  • “C’mon! Harder! Faster! Do it faster and harder!”
  •  ”When we get home you’d better put on the punishment pillow.”
  • When asked where her junk is Sophie answers: “Where it always is. In my trunk.” Max’s vaguely amused closed-lipped smile is downright murderous. As is her next look. Maybe Kat Dennings wasn’t too amused on set that day?
  • “Why did they cancel Suite Life of Zac and Cody?” I know that Max likes to point out how Han is a child, but this is a really dated reference. I mean, everyone knows that the show transitioned to Suite Life on Deck, and that that show ended back in 2011.
  • 2 Broke Girls Cheesecake Menu: Before Max and Caroline lock lips the latter tears open the former’s plastic coverall. 
  • 2 Broke Girls Beefcake Menu: Oleg stripping down to his tiger print [?] undies. A little something for you ladies [and men interested in hairy Eastern Europeans].

What Do You Want From Me?

As this Sunday draws to a close, I’m bracing myself for the inevitable chorus of “So… what did you do over the weekend?” I’ll be encountering at work. I’ll be giving the same answer I always give:

“Nothing.”

Well, that’s not entirely true. I slept in, did a little reading, cleaned up my house, shopped for groceries, and surfed the web a bit. Barring the occasional oil change on my car, that’s pretty much all I do.

And for some reason, people take issue with that. I really and truly can’t count the number of times I’ve been called “old.” “You’re the oldest 22 year old I know.” “Your idea of fun… it’s like a 50 year old’s.” “You’re like an old man.”

Now anyone who knows me can probably tell you that’s not entirely without cause. I’m bitter and grouchy cynic with an antisocial streak the size of Montana. Back when I was a child, these traits got me called “mature”- I’m not exactly sure when the switchover took place. But that’s a rant for another time.

Even with my personality as a factor, I feel pretty confident in saying that my weekend is more or less the same for all of my friends. Heck, I think my situation is pretty analogous to anyone of my generation.

Ok, a clarification: Any westerner of my generation. Obviously I can’t make sweeping generalizations about other cultures.

Especially our strange and barbarous neighbors in the frozen northern wastes…

Now I’m guessing that I’m not alone in having received a “when I was your age” speech. I’m bombarded with people telling me of the crazy, stupid stuff (their words) they did when they were in their twenties. “I was in the club all the time!”  ”I was out partying on the weekends!” “I did a lot of drinking!”

Ok, I actually do that- but what they mean is “drinking in bars.” Apparently you’re supposed to pay 7 bucks for a half-decent beer instead of doing the smart thing and buying a whole bottle of vodka from a discount liquor store.

Now I wouldn’t say that I am (or we are, since I’m assuming the role of my generation’s spokesperson) getting real flak for my/our more quiet lifestyle- the sentiment I’ve come up against feels a lot more like a mixture of surprise, puzzlement, and pity for not being as wild as they (allegedly) were.

Now this in and of itself doesn’t frustrate me. We can debate whether or not it’s smart/good to be wild, but I can respect you having a different position than my own. No, what drives me nuts is that I’m being told this by the same generation who are railing on my generation for being lazy, entitled, and shallow.

Note entirely without reason…

Seeing as how my generation is fighting two wars we didn’t start and paying for a financial meltdown we also didn’t start (those of us who managed to even get jobs, that is), I would take issue with the idea that we’re all a bunch of privileged kids with no sense of reality, but it can’t be denied there are some of us out there who do fit that description.

So are we supposed to be stomping the whole yolo-swag-crap or rallying around it? On one hand we’re getting told to loosen up and enjoy our youth while we have it, on the other, we’re being told that this exact thing is downright juvenile. But it’s not just our free time where my generation is getting hit with this double message- I have the same complaint with protest.

Back during the occupy protests, I repeatedly heard that “These are a bunch of social deviants and kooks” when people dressed like Mr. Monopoly. Alternatively, we got “These are a bunch of spoiled, middle-class brats” when the protesters dressed in oxfords and ties. Again, are we supposed to be clean-cut or are we supposed to be hippies?

Look, I’m not trying to be hostile here- I’m really not. I’m just trying to figure out what on earth are the expectations placed upon us. And no, I don’t think you can spew out some thought-cancelling faux-folksy truism like “Well, this happens with every generation. You just gotta be you!”

There are clear expectations placed on people. Kids in the 30s were expected to be industrious. You work, eat, sleep, and die quietly.

Or not so quietly…

After times of war, you get generations who are expected to live life to the fullest. Experiment-question-explore-adventure-”discover yourself”-baby-boomers. Or how about the stereotypical 1950s impossibly wholesome youngsters, who always did their civic duty, turned in gays and Commies, and always stayed away from weed and black people?

Ok, that was a little aggressive…

But the point remains.

I’m just trying figure out what on earth is expected from us. Are we supposed to be gritting our teeth and fighting through these (undeniably) rough times, or are we supposed to live like there’s no tomorrow?

Are we supposed to be saving money, or should we be spending? Are we supposed to get into trouble, or do we need to “grow up”?

You gotta get your message straight, people.