TV: American Forgers and Billie Jean Fraud

A director asked us Monday, "Why do you think so many lesbians in show business lie now?  Are they jealous of Ellen?  Do they hate her?"  We had no easy answer but it is true that Ellen DeGeneres did a very brave thing  by coming out while she was starring in her self-titled sitcom.  And it is true that a number of famous lesbians have since attempted to act as though they came out before Ellen when, in fact, they did not.  

We offered, "Maybe they're just full of s**t?" 

If they are, they're far from alone.

Putting the BS into the Public Broadcasting System these days?

A little show called American Masters.  PBS describes it as follows:

Created and launched in 1986 by Susan Lacy, the series set the standard for documentary film profiles, accruing widespread critical acclaim. Awards include 67 Emmy nominations and 26 awards — nine for Outstanding Non-Fiction Series since 1999 and five for Outstanding Non-Fiction Special — 12 Peabody Awards; three Grammys; an Oscar; two Producers Guild Awards for Outstanding Producer of Non-Fiction Television; and the 2012 IDA Award for Best Continuing Series.

It's time to melt all those down to scrap metal.  This is the season when American Masters made The Lifetime Intimate Portrait look hard hitting.

Though many have complained about the Alice Walker episode this season, we're not talking about that.  We haven't seen it.

We're talking about one that aired earlier this season and then started showing up again this month for Women's History Month.  History, not hagiography.

PBS breathlessly noted of this one, "For the first time, American Masters profiles a sports figure!"  Be still our hearts.  It was Billie Jean King.

And had the documentary stuck to just sports, it would have been excessively fawning but not as offensive.

Billie Jean King did do her part -- as did other women -- to create the women's tennis circuit.

We'll give her that.

We're hard pressed to give her much more.

The special offered no critical analysis unless you think Valerie Jarrett and Hillary Clinton breathlessly panting that Billie Jean changed the world is critical analysis.


Neither woman should have been speaking.  They both had a flashcard understanding of King -- if they had even that.

But the strangest thing about this 'documentary' was discovering that Billie Jean King came out as gay in 1981.

The second strangest thing was hearing of how she was "outed."

Billie Jean King has re-sculpted the facts, to the point that they no longer resemble reality.  She's a one-woman informational cascade.

And somehow PBS thinks this makes for a documentary.

For those who don't know, Billie Jean King, a tennis player of note, got married in 1965 to a man -- Larry King.  She likes to say she didn't know she was interested in women until 1968 and that, in 1971, she had some form of a sexual relationship with Marilyn Barnett which lasted some brief length of time.

It's hard story to tell because there are so many lies.

Marilyn Barnett was not Billie Jean's first female lover.  Nor was she the only female lover Billie Jean had when she and Barnett were together.

Billie Jean King created a lie in 1981 and she's never stopped lying.

Like American Masters, we're not doing an actual biography on Billie Jean King so we'll set aside all the women prior to 1981 except for Barnett.  Unlike American Masters, we'll tell the damn truth.

The 'documentary' told you that Marilyn Barnett "outed" Billie Jean King and so Billie was out in 1981.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

She remained in the closet.  She not only continued her 'marriage' to Larry King for six more years, she
repeatedly stated that her relationship with Barnett was a one time thing.

And let's not forget her classic -- and, yes, manly politician in a scandal -- pose when she went public after being sued.  The news of her former lover filing a law suit broke May 1st and AP reported, "Mrs. King, 37, on a tennis tour in Florida, said the allegations were untrue and unfounded."  After she told that lie, she learned Barnett had kept at least 100 love letters. Exposed as a liar, Billie Jean King had to face the press.  May 3, 1981, the Associated Press reported on Billie Jean King's press conference:


Sitting next to her husband, Larry King, and her tearful parents, Mrs. King said she called the news conference [. . .]
She described Miss Barnett, a former hairdresser, as "unstable," and said of their love affair: "I made a mistake.  I will assume that responsibility."
Then, turning to her husband who sat beside her, she said, "It's very important to me to thank Larry.  I love him.  He's my husband, my lover and my best friend.  He's been that for 19 years."

That's Billie Jean King coming out?

What?

But the 'documentary' told us that she was outed and came out as gay.  In fact, they didn't include her line about it being a "mistake" in the clip of the press conference they did show.

No, Billie Jean didn't come out.  She pretended that she had only been with one woman -- what a liar -- and she's continued to pretend that to this day.

Let's move over to the interview she did with a friend for People magazine in May 1981 ("The Trailblazing Kings," Cheryl McCall, May 25, 1981) , "I hate being called a homosexual because I don't feel that way.  It really upsets me. [. . .] If you have one gay experience, does that mean you're gay?  If you have one heterosexual experience, does that mean you're straight?"

It gets better -- as she gets worse.  "You can say or do something in a moment that you don't mean at any other moment in your life -- like in a fit of anger or depression or if you're trying to make somebody feel better about themselves."

Pay attention, Billie Jean just made history at that moment becoming the first celebrity to publicly address the pity f**k.

King wasn't gay, you understand, it was just one woman and King was just "trying to make somebody feel better about themselves."  Wow.  The Girl Scouts just sell cookies.

It was a joint-interview of Billy Jean and Larry and they couldn't stop talking about how wonderful their marriage was now and, as Larry explained, "Billie Jean doesn't feel that she's gay, and she'd like to have a child if she can work it out for time."


A year later, in November of 1982, the Associated Press' Linda Deutsch would file "Billie Jean King wins 'palimony' suit" and note, "Her husband was at her side throughout the trial, and both said the ordeal brought them closer."

No, boys and girls, that's not coming out.

Ann Barach (Miami News) noted in November of 1981, Barnett stated the affair "lasted from 1972 to 1979."  Barnett told the truth.

She told the truth in the face of a smear campaign that Billie Jean King engaged in which included putting Marilyn's barely known aunt out to the public to smear her (going so far as accusing Marilyn of murdering her own mother) in an attempt to deny her money.

The court?

The court wasn't gay friendly to put it mildly.

The letters, which Billie Jean had the court agree to keep from the press, were very clear about the relationship including responsibilities.

As a female musician who is an out lesbian and was friends with Billie Jean back in the day put it, "Billie Jean wanted to be the big swinging dick, wanted to care for Marilyn, wanted to take care of her and then when Billie's got a new lover, she wants to walk away from Marilyn and play it like she never made promises.  If she'd been a man, she'd been have crucified."

Exactly.

Like Melissa Ehteridge, Billie Jean wants to be the 'provider' up until she loses interest.  Then she wants to be able to discard her ex-lover and not have any responsibilities.

When men do that, women are outraged.  They should be outraged by the actions of Billie Jean King.

When men do that, we have a word for them: Pig.  That word applies to Billie Jean King as well.

Along with using an aunt to call Marilyn a murderer, Billie Jean also felt the need to share what Marilyn's psychiatrist allegedly told her.  But no functional psychiatrist would have made those statements about their patient to anyone.

Billie Jean lied and lied and then lied some more.

And she got away with it because gay was 'bad' and gay was 'evil.'

B-b-but, she was gay!

Not publicly.

Yes, in the documentary, after the press conference you get statements.  Valerie Jarrett insists, "For Billie Jean King to come out and be open about being gay really sent a message to young people that it was okay.  And I think because she was an athlete it added to the importance of it."

Let's hope so.  Because other than an athlete what was she doing.

Ellen had already come out.

In 1981?

Billie Jean King was 'outed' in 1981 but did not admit she was gay to the public until 1998.  That's when Billie Jean came out.

Ellen DeGeneres came out the year before that.

In the special, Hillary Clinton declares, "So now, she's not only viewed as an icon of women's rights but of gay rights."

Politicians -- they never stop lying.

There is nothing feminist about the way King treated Barnett.  There is nothing pro-LGBT about the way King portrayed and used Barnett.

King sometimes notes that she and Martina Navratilova had a falling out (for five years) due to the 'outing.'  King tells the story in such a way to make it seem as if Martina was in a panic, afraid she might be outed as well.  Nope.  Martina was already out by then.

Martina, like many other lesbians, was grossly offended by what Billie Jean King did.

Bad enough that she wouldn't pay the alimony she owed Marilyn, worse was how Billie Jean won by playing the straight card.

She'd made a "mistake," a brief one she insisted, and look her parents and her husband forgave her and Larry was her rock and she loved him.


And Marilyn, well she was unbalanced, and she did drugs, and she tried to kill herself and . . .

But Billie Jean King, Billie explained, (childless Billie) wanted to work with children and hoped her mistake wouldn't prevent that.

Cheap ass Billie Jean King could have solved everything by honoring her promise.  She chose not to.

Marilyn did not 'out' Billie Jean.  Marilyn sued her lover who promised to support her after her lover refused to do so and tried to kick Marilyn out of the home which was bought for her.

This was not 'outing.'

It's an issue that came up as 2013 came to a close.  Supposedly, NFL quarterback Aaron Brown was gay and his friend, roommate and assistant Kevin Lanflisi was his lover.

Lanflisi never said a word publicly so it may or may not have been true.

But if they were lovers and Lanflisi took it public?

That's not outing.

When you put your tongue on someone's penis or pudenda and/or vice versa, they aren't you outer, they're your lover and they have every right to share whatever they want to share.  Because you choose to live in silence and in shame does not mean they have to.

For the first years of their marriage, Randi Oakes and Gregory Harrison kept it on the down low.  That was due to the money Harrison was pulling in (which was increasing) and the belief of his manager that it would suffer if it was known Harrison was married.

If at any time during the first years of their marriage, Randi had let it slip or had wanted to share it, no one in their right mind would have slammed her for doing so.

If their marriage had not turned out to be a happy and lasting one and Greg had chosen to leave her two years after he married her and Randi had held a press conference to say, "America, we are married!"?

People would not have faulted her.

Of course she could expose her personal life.  It was her personal life.  Even if her partner didn't want it exposed, it was her personal life too.

It's no different with Marilyn.

She was promised that house.  Today, she'd be given the house and alimony.

But in 1981, Billie Jean King used homophobia to avoid alimony.

She actively painted Marilyn and gay people as 'the other.'  She actively stood apart, presented herself as a poor defenseless straight person preyed on by a deviant, tricked into a 'mistake.'

There's nothing iconic about that.

And that's what Martina's problem with Billie Jean was.

King was outed and instead of owning up to it, she played it as a mistake and repeated some of the most harmful stereotypes to avoid paying her ex-lover what she promised.

Billie Jean was whining about how it cost her in the special.  Sponsors dropped her in letters and called her nasty names.

That damn Marilyn!

Well, no.

That damn Billie Jean.

First off, she would have been dropped by those who dropped regardless of who she had an affair with -- man or woman.

She was supposed to be a sports hero and role model and she slept around outside her marriage.

In 1981, that was a huge deal but we'd argue -- and point to Tiger Woods -- that doing so today would still lead to loss of sponsorship contracts.

If she lost "millions," there are two lessons here: (1) don't cheat and (2) don't be so damn cheap.

By the way, millions?  It's amazing how the figure grows each year she tells it -- it was a few hundred thousand when she first started telling the story in 1982.  Farrah Fawcett, beautiful and famous, didn't get "millions" for her Wella Balsam commercials and Farrah was a hell of a lot more popular than Billie Jean King ever was.  No one went to the stylist and said, "Give me the Billie Jean!"

Her biggest contract, we're told, was with a vitamin product (Theragram-M) and would have netted her less than $25,000 that year.  She doesn't reach that "I lost millions!" claim even if you include her husband's business which, for the record, in the fall of 1981 she publicly was.  His tennis tours lost some sponsors -- and this was being counted, by her, as part of her millions she lost.

She's no hero for the LGBTQ community.

In the documentary, there's a clip of a British woman interviewing King and King deflects from LFBTQ to note she supports "individuals rights."  There's another clip of a modern day Billie Jean King saying she's always happy anytime she can help the LGBT community.

Both clips speak to how she was and is apart from that community because she chooses not to embrace it. The filmmakers seem unaware of that.  They also seem to fail to notice that Billie's more than eager to brag about this 'hot' guy she danced with or how she married Larry because, "that's true, we wanted to have sex."  But Billie Jean King today, in a long term relationship, apparently lives on a higher plane than the other members of the animal kingdom, one where sex is never thought or mentioned.

It took the woman 17 years after she admitted to sex with another woman to stop pretending it was a one-time thing and admit she was gay.

You sort of get the feeling if she were required to stand in a semi-crowded room and declare, "I'm Billie Jean and I eat p**sy," her head would explode.

She did real damage and the documentary hides that and paints her as a hero.


We wouldn't have to be talking about this if PBS had stuck to the facts or, barring that, just stuck to sports.


To claim that Billie Jean King left the closet in 1981 is to falsify, to lie.  She came out, finally, in 1998.  Prior to her coming out, she publicly repeated every disgusting stereotype and smear about and against gay people possible in order to attack the credibility of Marilyn -- a woman she once claimed to have loved.  But any feelings for Marilyn took a second seat to her convincing the world that she made a 'mistake' and would never again stain her purity by engaging in sexual congress with a woman.


Each season, the PBS staple gets further and further from the truth.  We think it's high time they changed the show names to American Forgers.

Her balls got sweaty

Notice the photo.



See something odd?

All but one person can sit with their legs closed.



Poor Susan Rice.  Her balls got sweaty and she needed to air them out.

TV roundtable

Dona:  The history of television goes back to at least 1878 with the telephonoscope.  10,000 is the number of television sets in the United States in 1945.  By 1960, the number was 52 million, by 2007, the number was 219,000,000.  96.7% of US households own a TV set today.  At this site, Ava and C.I. cover TV.  Throughout the community, you have multiple sites covering TV.  Participating in our TV roundtable are  Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man; Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills); Mike of Mikey Likes It!; Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen;  Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ; Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends;  and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub. Some of this month's TV coverage in the community includes:  "scandal - the worst," "TV thoughts," "Arrow underwhelms," "Good for Jimmy Fallon," "Another show bites the dust,"  "The 100," "A ginger? For a ginger?," "does shonda rhimes have a thing for bad boys?," "revenge - the good,"  "The Following continues to sink," "Alicia and Peter are in the clear (The Good Wife)," "The Tomorrow People," "revenge - the bad and also the fiery," "Star-Crossed," "A sitcom is coming," "scandal - cyrus kills james," "The 'news' ratings battle," "community's all time awful episode," "Arrow and the CW don't like Black couples," "Revolution, just awful," "Fonda and Tomlin," "Nightline and other things,"
"Unforgettable, Mistress, Under The Dome, Extant, Rookie Blue, etc.," "Oprah's a big embarrassment," "revenge - the good," "The Originals," "revenge: the bad," "The Good Wife meets Crossing Jordan" and "The 100 is off to a sucky start."  I hope that gives you an idea of the scope of coverage.  Trina, you're not big on TV coverage -- you're mainly covering the economy and cooking but you do have a favorite show on the air, correct?

Trina:  Yes, 2 Broke Girls.

Trina (Con't): I think it's a very funny show and, honestly, I would have missed it if hadn't been noted here at this site.  My TV is pretty much just The NewsHour on PBS.  And I think coverage can highlight a show and match you up with something you'll enjoy.  It also lets you take a look at what others like, how they see a show.  With 2 Broke Girls, I love the chemistry of roommates Max (Kat Dennings)  and Caroline  (Beth Behrs) and Sophie (Jennifer Coolidge) is a classic TV sitcom character like Jim on Taxi, Karen on Will & Grace, Janice on Friends, etc.

Wally: I just want to note that I agree with Trina and that's actually a show -- it's a show for adults -- but it's a show that my mother and my grandather actually love as well so when I'm visiting, we can all watch that together and laugh our heads off.

Dona: That's Wally of The Daily Jot;.  I was going to note him and Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix; at the end.  They're taking notes in the place of Ava and C.I.  They are more than welcome to participate -- as Wally just did -- throughout.  And we thank them for taking notes.  It is awful to type up a transcript piece via an audio recording.  You have to stop and start and sometimes go back because you're not sure of  the word or what was said.  So thank you to Wally and Cedric.  One show that we covered at this site and that was covered on many other community sites was The New Adventures of Old Christine.

Dona (Con't): When CBS cancelled it, it pissed off a number of people, including participants in this roundtable.

Ruth: Betty and I were among the pissed off.  We weren't the only ones but it led us to stop covering TV for at least a year.  

Betty: That was a hilarious show.  Julia, Wanda Sykes, the whole cast.  I looked forward to it every week and Christine and Barb were a great comedy team.  It really depressed me when CBS killed this show.  

Dona: Have you ever watched Veep.

Betty: No interest in it.  It's a bunch of men mocking women -- male directors, male writers.  Julia's basically a token in her own show.  

Dona:  Wally and Cedric wanted to note a scene from Will & Grace's "No Sex 'n' the City" which was written by Steve Gabriel.  Karen is played by Megan Mullally and Jack is played by Sean Hayes.  This is from a transcript of the episode that Rob Durfee did at his Durfee.net:

SCENE II: Grace Adler Designs
[KAREN IS STANDING AT THE WATER COOLER LOOKING AT HER WATCH WHEN JACK ENTERS FROM THE ELEVATOR.]

KAREN: Oh, honey, where have you been? I've been waiting here at the water cooler for us to have our water cooler chat.
JACK: So did you start talking about "Sex and the City" yet?
KAREN: We just started. Oh. Honey, I am so glad that Carrie ended up with Big instead of that 70-year-old ballerina.
JACK: I know. [SIGHS] And when she walked into that coffee shop at the end and the other girl started screaming, I'm not ashamed to say I was crying like a little girl. Well, of course, I was piercing my ears too.
KAREN: [SIGHS] Oh, honey, I'm gonna miss my "Sex and the City."
JACK: Oh. Me too, Karen.
KAREN: But at least I've still got my "Frasier" and my "Friends."
JACK: Well, wait, didn't you hear? "Frasier" and "Friends" are going off the air too.
[KAREN HAULS BACK AND SLAPS JACK ACROSS THE FACE--HARD.]
KAREN: Don't tell me that, Jackie! Not now. Not today.
JACK: Believe me, Karen, I know. It's tragic.
[KAREN SIGHS.]
JACK: I went through some of the biggest changes of my life with those shows. Cargo pants came in, went out, came back in again.
[KAREN NODS.]
JACK: I don't know whether they're in or out, but I bought 32 pairs of them with Will's money so I'm gonna wear 'em.
KAREN: You wanna talk about changes? I went through perhaps the most important milestone of my life: the tiny knapsack.
JACK: Oh, the tiny knapsack. How could a knapsack so tiny hold all my dreams?
KAREN: Oh, Jackie, what are we gonna do? What are we gonna talk about around this water cooler every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday morning?
JACK: I don't know, Karen. I mean, you hear about when other people lose their shows, but you never think it's gonna happen to you. It makes me sick to think how cruel I was to my own mother when "Barnaby Jones" got cancelled.

Marcia: That's perfect.  It's funny but it really does address the issue of your favorite show getting cancelled.  And I miss Will & Grace.

Mike: It really was a great show and it's hard to believe no sitcom has matched it or even come close since it left the air.

Dona: Why do you think that is?

Mike: Because so many sitcoms suck.  2 Broke Girls doesn't suck.  Why?  Because it's a real sitcom.  I watch Modern Family out of habit.  I've only laughed out loud once the entire time.  It was something a few seasons back that Cam said.  When they go single camera and no studio audience, they lose the funny, they start trying to moralize.  Whenever it's voice over time on Modern Family, I stop streaming.  I hate that part of the show.  Give me the funny, I don't need your crappy life lesson, I'm an adult thank you.

Marcia: I agree.  And Ava and C.I. somewhere made the point that Modern Family and the rest owe a huge debt, which the shows never acknowledge, to Christopher Guest and his mockumentary films.  I think it works for his films because he knows funny.  But the idea that's it going to be used for Parks and Rec and all these other shows, it's overdone and they don't have the skill to pull it off.  Give me funny.  And that means a studio audience because these cowards doing single camera 'sitcoms' wouldn't dare throw that crap onstage in front of an audience.  Michael J. Fox's show would never have aired as it was if it had to face a studio audience.  They would have been underwhelmed and made clear that the show lacked humor and a point of view.  

Dona: For many years, it was a given that if Marcia, Stan or Rebecca covered something, the show ended up cancelled.  The Cape, The Event, No Ordinary Family, Brothers & Sisters -- which Rebecca only covered in what ended up the show's last season -- are just some of the examples.  Rebecca, explain how that stopped to be true for you.  A lot of people don't know this story.

Rebecca:  Sure.  Every show I was covering got the axe.  I hated Community.  As I announced at my site, I started covering Community in the hopes that my curse would continue and the show would be cancelled.  That didn't happen, sadly.  Season four was actually funny.  Dan Harmon was gone and the show finally worked.  Then he came back and the result is the all time worst season.  No one watches this show.  And no one watches because it's not funny.  A tiny group of pathetic people who hate sitcoms and think they're hipsters watch this show.  They hate sitcoms and see the lack of actual stories and anything anyone could relate to as 'hip' and 'deconstructive.'  No, it's just awful television and now with Danny Glover gone, the show has lost even more that it couldn't afford to lose. Season four had actual stories.  It would be one thing if Dan Harmon's way delivered an audience but it doesn't.  It fails to.  The show needs to be cancelled.  

Dona: You cover two shows you love right now: Scandal and Revenge.

Rebecca:  Revenge is the big improvement this year.  Scanadl, with its shortened schedule and other issues, including shooting around Kerry Washington when Olivia is the main character, is losing its way this season.  When you have Olivia laughing at the deaths of Daniel Douglas and Supreme Court Justice Verna, both of whom were murdered, you may even have jumped the shark.  She was in shock?  Yeah, so what.  And the gladiators become the bad guys.

Dona: Stan, you cover Arrow on The CW.

Dona (Con't):  Ava and C.I. asked me to note your "Arrow and the CW don't like Black couples."  As they pointed out, you made an important observation that no one else has noted.

Stan: I don't see any Black couples on The CW.  I see interracial couples.  As I pointed out, I have no problem with interracial couples.  But I do have a problem with White couples on The CW when every person of color is paired with a White person.  There's a reason for it and it's not 'social engineering.'  The reason is that there are two few African-American actors on The CW.  White couples and White characters with person of color characters are possible because they're mainly hiring White actors.  Now I'm not asking for very much here.  I'm not demanding that X number of actors be Black, for example.  But as an African-American male, I don't think I'm wrong to expect that a network with multiple couples on nearly every show should be able to provide one couple where both characters are Black.

Dona: It is strange and it does need to be addressed.  Anyone else want to comment?

Mike: I'm not planning on covering The 100 but I have covered the first two episodes.  For those who haven't seen the show, it's post-nuclear, set in the future.  To survive the nuclear war, a number of people are in space on an arc.  It can't support the population.  So 100 young adults are sent down to earth to see if the radiation has reduced or gone away and if it's capable to live there.  The landing kills 2 so you've got 98 people.  Why is it that only one, out of 98, is African-American?  The son of the president.  It's a real problem with The CW and Stan was right to note it.

Dona: Along with race, there are also issues of gender.  Marcia, would you like to talk about that?

Marcia: Sure.  I love science fiction.  I love it because it can take us to places we might not see.  It can imagine different worlds.  Revolution airs on NBC and it repeatedly reduces women to nothing.  Nora was a fighter.  Not only is she dead at the end of season one, they've failed to find anyone to replace her.  Because of criticism of the lack of women in roles of power in season one, they brought on a woman president briefly at the end of season one.  She's gone.  Charlie is too often damsel in distress.  Currently, the main characters are Miles, Monroe, Charlie -- who is female, Rachel, Aaron, Tom, his son Jason, Gene Porter, Monroe's son Connor, Truman and, I'll be generous, Priscilla.   Priscilla does nothing and she's probably the character they are going to kill off this Wednesday.  I won't include Julia.  She's been on too few episodes.  She hasn't even been on half the episodes this season.  So what you've got is eleven main characters and only three are women.  Only one really qualifies as a fighter, Charlie.  It's shameful.  And you've got dialogue about "men" when there are fights even if, due to criticism, they've remembered to hire a woman as an extra in the battle scenes.  It's disgusting.  In this sci fi, women can and do sell their bodies over and are victimized over and over.  Why the f**k is this s**t on TV?  They should be ashamed of themselves.

Dona: Ann, Kat and Elaine haven't spoken.  Everyone should feel free to comment but I want to toss to them.  Let's start with Elaine.  You covered Smash for both seasons.  That's really it besides Alpha in the second season.  

Elaine: I would have covered a third season of Smash but the show was awful in the second season.  In both seasons, it deserves credit for being unlike anything else on TV.  But season one was about adults and season two discarded adult characterizations and went for tweeners.  I have no idea why you'd do that.  It's as though The Golden Girls ends one season and returns with Lindsay Lohan and David Franco living with Blanche, Rose and Dorothy and the focus is on Lohan and Franco every episode while Blanche, Rose and Dorothy are treated like extras.  They knew nothing in season two, Anjelica Huston's character had no real storyline.  With Debra Messing, they tried one storyline after another.  She was with her husband, then she was with a script doctor and then she was with an old friend and . . .  Each one of these was portrayed as a serious relationship but they lost interest in all of them.  Maybe if they'd paired her with an 18-year-old they would have had interest.  If there's something I'm going to cover, it's going to have to be different than everything else on TV.  That's why I liked Alphas.  

Dona: Kat, when you write about TV, you tend to go with older shows that are out of production.  Examples would include The Rockford Files and McMillian and Wife.

Kat: Like Elaine, I just am not someone with the time to commit to watching a show every week, sorry.  If there was a Saturday night block of programming -- new shows -- I'd be covering the first hour of TV.  Why?  Because that's the hour I do my make up and dress for the evening.  I do enjoy a lot of 70s television and, when we're on the road, it's easy to find something I used to love and watch that.

Dona:  Ann, you cover The Mindy Project.

Ann: Right.  I wanted to cover a show with a woman of color and I like sitcoms so the choice was obvious.  I was watching the show from the start and should have covered it then.  But I started with season two.  It's a funny show and I am glad that Fox has announced there will be a third season.  Mindy Kaling is funny and it's great to see a person of color in the lead.  I love all the characters and Xoha Roquemore plays nurse Tamra who is African-American. 

Dona: And, the big question, you want Mindy to be with who?

Ann: Danny.  I think most people want that.  That doesn't mean it has to happen but I think we all enjoy the anticipation and the hope that it might happen. 

Dona: Betty, you're not covering anything right now.  You dabble with Revenge but not really.

Betty: I love Revenge but I'm just burnt out on liking shows and having them cancelled.  The New Adventures of Old Christine, Whitney and 666 Park Avenue.  It's a lot of work to write about a show.  And I'm just not into putting in that kind of effort for a show I love only to see it get the axe.

Dona: Rebecca's had to do two posts each week on Revenge -- Monday and Tuesday -- because there are so many developments.  

Stan: And that's a plot based show with twists and turns.  So she has to note that.  I used to with Arrow which really isn't that complex of a show.  Then I really paid attention to Elaine's great posts on Smash and I don't worry about every detail and try to offer analysis.  Rebecca does that too, by the way, but she's got to cover so many events that you may not notice her analysis.  Elaine, more than any of us -- maybe because she does analysis professionally,  would sacrifice plot point coverage in order to offer analysis of what she did cover.

Dona: Interesting.  I've noted something similar with Mike in his posts this year.  Mike, is that for the same reason?  And you've covered Chuck, Fringe, Nikita and now Elementary.  You prefer action shows.

Mike: I do.  With Elementary, it's less complex plots so that helps. But, yes, you want to offer something more than "and then . . ."  It can be hard with a show like Fringe or Nikita because you have to cover the twists and turns because they're not just effecting that episode, they're effecting future episodes as well.  One show you left out is Dracula.  And I bring that up because I really hope NBC gives it a second season.  I really loved the first season.  And in terms of what I used to cover, I still haven't dealt with the end of Nikita.  To me it's still like it just wrapped up a season and will be back next fall.  Fringe?  That show haunts me.

Dona: Interesting.  Ruth, Betty was noting how she doesn't want to invest and I believe you feel similar?

Ruth:  The New Adventures of Old Christine was a great show that delivered an audience even when moved to a new night.  If it had been ratings, I could have lived with it, not been happy, but lived with it.  Instead, it just became why even bother?  

Dona: And then you finally found a show to cover.

Ruth: The Client List.  I covered season one and it was a great show with a great cast.  But season two?  Suddenly, just because Jennifer Love Hewitt fell in love with the actor, she demanded that this slime of a character the actor played be made a focus.  It ruined the show and it led to it getting the axe.  So there, the problem wasn't a network -- Lifetime -- the problem was an actress who couldn't be true to her character because her panties got damp over an actor.  Hope it lasts.  Hate to think that in 15 years when Jennifer Love Hewitt cannot get an acting job she is no longer with the actor and kicking herself for letting hormones dictate her show.

Dona: Cedric, we're winding down, do you want to say anything?

Cedric:  Sure.  I agree 100% with the need for sitcoms to be recorded before live audiences.  The timing is off without it.  It's like watching a film where the sound is out of sync. Like Mike, I loved Dracula and hope it gets a second season.  If I were covering TV, I probably would have written about Dracula and about Almost Human.

Dona: Okay.  Wally, anything to add?  And he's shaking his head "no."  Alright, thank you to everyone for participating, thank you to Cedric and Wally for taking notes.  This is a rush transcript.  Our e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.  

Meow! Vatican Cat Fight!

Barack gets into with the Pope after the Pope observes he's more popular than Barack.  "Yeah, well I was popular first!" Barack hollers back.

Ty's Corner

So an e-mail comes in listing all these photos of shirtless (or more) men that Ava and C.I. have used in their TV reports and the guy who wrote the e-mail, Robert, is disgusted by it.  And they are treating men like meat and so much worse, Robert insists.





They used that illustration in "TV: Rules Of TV" and while Oliver Hudson is a sexy man, I'm not really sure his Rules of Engagement character with a bad sunburn qualifies as sexy.







The above ran with "TV: Persons Unknown, Plots Pretty Standard" and since you can see Jason Wiles' knob (and that it leans to the right, this probably qualifies as sexy to many.

Those two were used in "TV: Cougar Town Roars" to illustrate what had some prudes so angry at Cougar Town (the actor is David Clayton Rogers). 

The used the one above for "Week in TV recap (Ava and C.I.)" and did so to promote the show Lone Star and Wolk who is an actor they've long applauded.

Which is why they used the above of Wolk when they covered Political Animals in "TV: Eating off his what?"

In "TV: Women and sitcoms," Ava and C.I. also used this:

Robert missed that one so I'm kindly including it.


That said . . .




Robert must be a pit man because he finds this photo to be an attempt at sexy as well.  David Lyons appeared not in an Ava and C.I. piece but in "5 Best Super Hero Shows (Live Action) of All Time" which we all wrote.

Again, Robert must be a pit man.




That's Collin Farrell and Robert's right that it appeared here -- but for a piece we all wrote entitled "Something doesn't smell right!"  And I remember I was the one who did the screen snap of that and said we should use it for the article.

Robert never misses an exposed pit and objected to Ava and C.I. using this photo for a TV article they wrote.




That was used in a group piece, "Editorial: The wrong things grab the attention" -- read the editorial -- worked on by all of us and not about TV -- and you should grasp why that was used.





Robert notes that.  It's from "The Bionic Woman Season 2" and that was a group piece, not an Ava and C.I. one.

Robert decries this photo as well.

That's Conner Habib and it ran in the group piece "Columbia Journalism Ridiculous."  Ava and C.I. actually wrote the section that the Habib photo appears in and they chose the photo to run because they think Conner is a nice person as well as a good looking one.  So Robert can blame Ava and C.I. for that one but it's not in one of their TV reports.

There are a series of photos in "Porn Site Flickr -- Vaginas, Cocks and Kidde Porn" that we used to illustrate that Flickr is perfectly happy with some no-holds-barred images while opposed to political ones.  Robert didn't mention that -- either he missed it or there were too many women pictured in it to interest him.  I get it, Robert, I like the guys too.




Like Victor Rios.

That ran in "Jim's World" and I especially remember because Jim bought me the magazine and then, years later when he wrote his column, he asked if I still had it so he could scan the cover.  Ava and C.I. had nothing to do with Jim's column.


Tom Hardy and Ben Cohen's images below appeared here . . .








but not in an Ava and C.I. TV report.   They were in the group piece "Who's left? The top 5 UK progressives" -- and there was a cheesecake photo in the piece as well.


But from there, things just get worse.

That's Jake Johnson from New Girl but it didn't run here until now.  That screen snap and this one of Michael Landes:

both appeared in Rebecca's "tv eye candy" at her site.

As for Oliver Hudson's heinie?

This is it's first appearance here.  Rebecca used it in "10 most f**kable men of 2013."


Robert cites the three following images as Ava and C.I. objectifying the male body.











Problem here is that these ran in Ann's "2012 Best in Film (Ann and Stan)" and Stan's  "2012 Best in Film (Ann and Stan)" (joint post).

And this one that Robert objects to (even though the man is fully clothed)?




That's from Ann's "2011 best in film (Ann and Stan)" and Stan's "2011 in films (Ann and Stan)."


We did run this . . .




. . . when we reposted Betty's "What was Justin Bieber trying to say?"






That's Robert Buckley and it's from Betty's "Mommy, he's my boyfriend!" -- which we never reposted.

And these images?

















They're from "Kat's Korner: Adam Levine itches for one on the flip side" -- which we didn't repost.

And Robert even includes this illustration in his complaints.





At least we're back to something that appears here at The Third Estate Sunday Review.  However, it's never been used by Ava and C.I. in a TV article.  Kat and I created the illustration for the piece "Mailbag" where we go through the e-mails.  I believe we created it in 2007 but it may have been 2006. At any rate, it has nothing to do with Ava and C.I. or their TV articles.

We're not ashamed of the human body here and we do run sexy photos -- of men and women -- when we feel the need.

But you probably shouldn't accuse us of stuff, Robert, when you're as lazy as you are.

As I read through your e-mail complaining about this and that photo, I finally realized you were using an image search and typing in The Third Estate Sunday Review and who knows what else.  That will not let you know which ones appeared in Ava and C.I.'s TV reports.  It won't even let you know which ones appeared here because you'll be getting results not just for our site but for all the community sites (true in Google as well as Bing -- I tried both).

For someone so bothered by the images, you sure spent a lot of time with them.

This edition's playlist

1)  Pretenders' The Isle Of View.

2)  Melanie's Ever Since You Never Heard of Me.


3) Beatles' Rubber Soul.

4) Carly Simon's Never Been Gone.


5) Love's Forever Changes.

6) Jefferson Airplane's Volunteers.

7) Minnie Riperton's Perfect Angel.

8) The Mamas and the Papas' The Papas and the Mamas.

9) Pretenders' Packed.

10) Phil Ochs' All The News That's Fit To Sing.

A reflective TV conversation

Jim:  In last week's "Mailbag," the following appeared:


Kim Plunk e-mails to ask if we "could do an article where one of you interviews Ava and C.I.?  They've been doing TV coverage since 2005.  I would really like to see a piece where they were asked about it and that included questions from readers.  Mine would be: What was your personal favorite TV show of all you reviewed?"

That sounds like an interesting feature.  Jim says he'll try it next weekend and if you've got a question you want him to ask, e-mail us to let us know.

Jim (Con't): Thanks to Kim, we're doing this piece and we got a lot of e-mails.  I'll start with one from Jay, "Why do you bother?  Does it even make a difference?  I'll admit, I'm not a fan of your work."

Ava: Just to be clear, actual readers who want to ask real questions were put on hold for that?  Why do we bother?  We didn't want to write about TV.  Everyone else did want to.  Then we were told it was now our beat.  We never sought it out or asked for it.  Why do we bother?  We've had impact on readers, we got a second season for an ABC show -- actually for two.  Wish they had gotten third seasons but we did what we could.  We have made it clear to NBC that they will not get away with sidelining women.  They're all over us not to even raise the topic again because every time we have this season, they get tons of angry e-mails and phone calls. C.I.?

C.I.: We bother because we're asked to each week.  We've never had a week off.  We're the only two in Third who can say that.  We've been told if we need a week off, that Jim will do a cutting, assemble a best-of.  That's actually rather frightening.  So since January 2005, the two of us who didn't want to write about TV, have had to write about TV every week.  Of my online writing, I'm closer to happy with the TV pieces because it's Ava and me bouncing off one another and working together.  I would not have lasted this long without a great partner like Ava.  We manage to laugh and get through it and that includes when we had food poisoning and when we had the flu.

Jim: Elliot writes to ask what show has gone off the air since you started reviewing that you miss the most?

Ava: We're sitcom people.  We've often talked about writing another Will & Grace piece.  We think that was one of the important shows and it's largely vanished today -- and the DVD sets were edited, not full, episodes.  Then, last season, Happy Endings got the axe.  That was a show ABC needed.  It didn't have a lot of smart shows and now it really doesn't.  Both of those sitcoms were amazing.  You could toss in The New Adventures of Old Christine.

Jim: But?

Ava: Well we spent two years telling you CBS was trying to get rid of it before they finally axed it.  We documented it in piece after piece.  So, no, it wasn't surprising.  We do miss it.  More importantly, comedy misses it.  C.I.?

C.I.:  The three Ava noted would be first and foremost.  I miss ER now that it's gone and now that NBC has been unable to do anything with the hour.  As bad as the last season or two was, it was better than anything they're airing now.  I thought Fox was wrong to end Fringe, I thought it had another season to it.  The CW was wrong to kill off Nikita.  That show brought them an audience different from their usual demographics.  They're now moving even more towards action and Nikita would have helped with that.  The demise of The WB meant the demise of Charmed and I felt that show could have gone on forever.  For The WB, it was a ratings blockbuster and the refusal of The CW to pick up that show -- UPN and The WB merged into The CW -- was a big mistake. They tried repeatedly to program for Sunday and had one bomb after another.  Then they gave up.  That's really pathetic.  And goes to how important Charmed was and how Holly Marie Combs, Alyssa Milano and Rose McGowan delivered a loyal audience.

Jim: You were talking earlier about how it's 9 years and you've never had a week off.  Tamra wants to know about that, specifically, "In all that you've written, do you have any regrets."

Ava: I can think of two.  I'll grab an actress and let C.I. grab an actor.  In a piece, and I'm not saying which one, we had insider gossip.  It was actually two pieces, from the same set.  And the show runner figured out who it was and the actress who'd been a repeat guest star lost her part on the show.  She was fine with it and thought the man was an ass anyway -- and after he dumped her, the show only lasted one more season.  But he's an ass.  And we felt very badly about it.

Jim: Has she worked since?

Ava: Yes, she had a regular role on a TV show and she has a film coming out this year -- among other things.  She's the main woman in the film.

Jim: And the actor?

C.I.: I'll be vague here as well but, once I start telling this story, longterm readers will know who he is.  This was a show that just didn't work.  It had some pieces that worked but it flopped overall.  We praised the actor and an actress with the show because they were doing outstanding work but the show itself?  We panned it.  It was awful.  We happened to do that review, days ahead of the network deciding what to keep and what to cancel.  Two or three days after our piece ran, the show was cancelled.  Our friend, who starred in the show, blamed us.  He was furious.  We stand by our opinion.  But that's why we try to avoid weighing in on a show we don't like when we know the suits are making the decision to keep or kill.

Jim: He was furious, I remember this.

C.I.: He was.  He yelled at me on the phone for two days in a row and when I came back home that weekend, he came over to yell some more.  And that's fine.  I'm not slamming him for it.  I dish it out, I can certainly take it.  I have apologized in terms of when we ran the piece but I don't retract what I said about the shows.

Jim: And I'll tell this story on that.  C.I. doesn't retract the opinion she and Ava shared.  She was sincerely sorry.  But here's the thing, they went on to trash two other shows he was in.  I couldn't believe that.

Ava: To his credit, he laughed about those two reviews.

C.I.: In one, he didn't think our review mattered because we did it early and it was a 'buzz' show -- The Water Cooler Set was all over it.  But the problems we pointed to just got worse and the show got the axe.  On the next one, we panned early and some of our complaints were in the process of being addressed but they didn't have time to film those scripts.  He has a movie due out this year and he's good looking and talented -- he was never the problem in any of the three shows we reviewed.  I see him as Patrick Dempsey.  Patrick was very talented but needed some age on him before he really got traction and recognzied.

Jim: Wendell wants to know, "Can shows improve if they start off bad?"

Ava: Sure.  A lot of great shows started off shaky.  Will & Grace?  Karen is nothing in that first episode.  The Mary Tyler Moore Show?  Ted Knight doesn't know who Ted Baxter is in the first episode and, worse, he's off putting, the actor, not the character.  You can add an element -- think Happy Days adding the Fonz -- and make a show better but then there are the fixes that destroy the show.

Jim: Such as?

Ava: I don't think a struggling show has ever been saved by giving the lead character a job change.  Rhoda?  The problem wasn't she was a window designer and then the yucks weren't coming with the ridiculous decision to have her go to work for a costume company.  Stockard Channing had a sitcom on CBS -- two names to it, in the second season they basically revamped everything.  Didn't work.  Jay Mohr's Gary Unmarried was worth watching in season one but then the house painter Gary instantly became a radio sports talk show host.  The new setting didn't work, the new characters didn't work and no one watched.  There are many more examples of this.  It just doesn't work.

Jim: Janie had a similar question.  She wanted to know which returning show this season that you two thought was the most improved?

C.I.: Revenge.  Until the last two episodes of season two, the show was pretty much unwatchable.  That's why you don't let a show runner's hormones dictate changes.  Suddenly, this tale of Emily seeking to avenge her father's false conviction for terrorism and death in prison became the Aiden Who story.  He dominated every episode with his nonsense and his missing sister and Victoria and Emily were little more than extras. It drove away the viewers.  With the show runner fired -- and he was fired -- Revenge has regained its footing and is probably ABC's strongest drama currently in terms of story satisfaction.

Jim: And Scandal?

Ava: Shonda Rhimes has tried very hard to deal with Kerry Washington's pregnancy.  But it has thrown the show for a loop -- not just by making the season shorter but also she's not Olivia.  She's trying really hard but she's not Olivia.  In part that's due to the no-work around for a passionate scene with Fitz.  But the smart thing might have been to have stopped this season at episode eight, let Washington have the baby and take the time she needs and then come back with season four in the fall of 2014.

Jim: Someone will ask, "A pregnant woman can't play the part?"

Ava: Olivia's a special type of character and Kerry's made her that by living in and inhabiting the character.  That includes body language.  When you're basically filming her from the top of the chest up, you're divorcing the actress from her physicality.  Were it me?  If I were Shonda, I would have said, "Find a disease or condition where weight piles on."  And I would have written weight gain into the storyline so that Kerry could use her body.  Kerry is a physical actor and when you take that from her, you're reducing her to a daytime soap opera actress who must remain stationary.  It's not fair to her and it's not fair to the viewers.


Jim: Lorenzo e-mails, "One thing I love about them is that they aren't predictable.  If X does a show, I know The New York Times will praise it just because X is in it.  Take that awful Michael J. Fox show.  It is awful.  The first two episodes were awful and the show only got worse.  But the critics praised it and even now some praise it.  I like that Ava and C.I. are not afraid to be lone voices and that they don't run with the pack."

Ava: Thank you, Lorenzo.  And I agree.  The Michael J. Fox was one of the worst efforts at a sitcom NBC has attempted.  Ever.  Maybe only Paul Reiser's big flop was worse.  We don't do pity reviews.  If Michael J. Fox wants to work on TV, we'll evaluate it honestly.  He and the show were awful.

Jim: Simone notes that "Mission Impossible from the 60s returned in the 80s with the same scripts and do you think that this is something networks should consider doing with other shows?"

C.I.: I believe that took place because there was a writers strike.  To do a reshoot of a script verbatim?  I don't know that would work.  Even as a period piece, you'd have problems if it was an older shows because times have changed so.  If you were to do it, a show like Mission Impossible, where there's no real interactions, just a puzzle each week, would probably be the best way to go.  I think, for example, if you tried to remake something like Hart to Hart which depended so much on the chemistry between the leads -- Stefanie Powers and Robert Wagner -- you'd be risking more of a backlash. And, honestly, I think they'd be best, if they were to do this, to do something like Maverick or Big Valley, remake a western.  I think the audience would be more accepting of such an effort.

Jim: Alice wonders if you ever regretted a review "because after it posted you felt the show was great and that you somehow had missed it?"

Ava: That's never happened, no.  There are shows we've panned that have gotten better as the series went along.  But when we do our review we're watching at least three episode and reading scripts.  Unless it's public affairs, I'm talking about entertainment television.  So we have a sense of the show.  We usually know at least one person connected with the show that we'll call.  Our questions and comments during the call we'll let him or her know where we're standing -- most of the time.  There are times where we only realize the show as we're talking about it and writing it.

Jim: Jason Price writes to use his full name and also states, "I love the work you do.  It's really the highlight of my week.  If the site did go dark, as some people threaten from time to time, is there anyway that you two could just keep posting TV reviews?"

C.I.: Not a chance, sorry.  The only reason we're still doing it -- we're both ready to quit -- is because we hope that it helps a little to get attention to Iraq, that our TV pieces bring in a few more people who otherwise wouldn't hear about Iraq but do as they navigate the site.

Jim: Alright.  On Iraq, Darva e-mailed to say, "I like how, in your body of work, you've managed to address so many serious issues.  You've done TV pieces and worked in war resisters and protests, and Iraq, and autism, and sexism and so much more.  You've really expanded what the review can be and that's before I even mention that you also do fictional reviews where you make yourselves characters on the shows.  I just really want to note your body of work and I know it's not a question but I hope this e-mail gets passed on."

Ava: That's really sweet of you, Darva.  Thank you for being part of the process.

Jim: Fenelli e-mailed, "I appreciate the openess that Ava and C.I. strive for but it's a given that JJ Abrahams is going to get praised and there are times when I feel like their friends get treated better than others."

C.I.: I don't know that we reviewed Alias proper.  But we hated that show.  We noted that in pieces we wrote.  But the show was in season four, I think, when we started.  That's a JJ show and we didn't praise it.  We praised Rosanna Arquette's incredible performance in What About Brian but didn't feel it had much else to offer.  We panned Six Degrees. We panned Undercovers.  We panned Alcatraz.  We were asked not to review Person of Interest because we had panned so many other shows -- thing there is, it's actually a good show, Ava and I got hooked on it around November of last year.  But, no, he doesn't get an automatic pass.

Ava: On Fringe, we had serious problems and we agreed to hold off on our review.  We do that for a lot of people.  We generally know someone on every show we review -- entertainment television -- and if someone says, "Hey, we don't have it together yet or we're reworking something," we will wait.  In the end, we're just one review.  But it's a cop out to imply that it has no impact.  When we addressed Sorkin's sexism, The Water Cooler Set had a fit.  Something like six years later, they can notice it.  My own personal opinion?  I don't think we've had a lot of effect in terms of shows being cancelled.  I do think that shows that deserved a rave and got one?  We helped a number of those.  Now we're not just writing, we're also working friends at the network but I'm sure that's true in the Water Cooler Set, right?

Jim: Matt e-mailed to ask about influences?

Ava: On our writing?

Jim: Yes.

Ava: Pauline Kael.  I read her writing in high school and even did a paper on her senior year.  C.I. knew her and I assume read her.  I know I've read a few of the letters the two exchanged.  They're scattered in various books.  You'll be leafing through one of C.I.'s books and find a Kael letter.

Jim: Really?

C.I.: Yeah.  I organize my letters, they're often with a journal from the same time period.  However, after Pauline retired from The New Yorker for health reasons I think I just gave up on the organization there because I was so expecting her to pass away.  So I'd have her letter out to write a reply and then, after I did, I'd usually put in an open book I was reading.  So the Kael letters from that period are in various books.

Jim: Anyone else?

C.I.: Actually, my biggest influence is Ava.  We're writing partners that means we are each other's biggest influence.

Jim: Related, Marjorie e-mailed, "I think you do try to be fair.  Take Maureen Dowd.  You will hold her accountable on facts but you will also praise her and you don't act like she's the devil.  Bob Somerby acts like she's the devil."

C.I.: Bob Somerby's sexism harms his writing.  At the root of his critique is that Dowd has brought something untoward to the paper, The New York Times.  Dowd's not approaching anything in a strange way for that paper.  No one wants to note it but Dowd is the natural descendant of columnist Russell Baker.  Their cultural references are different but they are similar columnists.  Dowd has immense writing talent.  Sometimes she uses it well, sometimes she uses it poorly.  That's a career, highs and lows, peaks and valleys.  I don't think Dowd's been an influence on me.  I don't mean that in a mean way.  I know her influences -- personally know a few, know one who passed away recently.  So if someone sees some sort of link, that would be why.  But Dowd's a very gifted columnist.  Working with Ava, I'm better than I am solo but I don't presume to be on Dowd's level.   If there's anyone since 1990 that's influenced me, honestly, other than Ava, it's Susan Faludi.  She is a wonderful writer.

Ava: Agreed.

C.I.: And, for me, personally, Backlash is one of the all time great books.  And The Terror Dream is a classic as well.

Jim: Still related, Ava -- not our Ava -- e-mailed to ask "what women writers you have found nourishing?"

Ava: Too many to list.  I'll grab ten quick off the top of my head and then let C.I. note ten more ones.  And that'll give you 21 answers since we've already mentioned Susan Faludi.  Isabel Allende, Arundhati Roy, Anne Sexton, Jane Austen, Sandra Cisneros, Dorothy West, Daina Chaviano, Edna O'Brien, bell hooks and Sue Grafton.

C.I.: Edith Wharton, Blanca Castellon, Anais Nin, Maxine Hong Kingston, Judith N. Shklar, Bebe Moore Campbell, Margaret Atwood, Gish Jen, Kate Chopin, Jean Rhys and Octavia Butler.

Jim: Ava, one more, C.I. gave eleven.

Ava: Okay.  Let's go with Agatha Christie.


Jim: So that's 23 women writers they have found nourishing and I'm sure they could 100 more each off the top of their heads in about five minutes.  But let's move to another e-mail.  This is from Penny, "I'm a big fan and probably one of your younger fans if not youngest.  I'm 14 and I'm having the worst time trying to write a paper that is due April 3rd.  It's about the things that matter to me in this country.  I was hoping you might be able to offer some advice for how to write it because for two weeks I stare at blank paper or write something and toss it.  It's a creative paper not a research paper, my teacher says, like that makes it any easier."

Ava: Well you could try talking it.  Record on your computer or with your cell phone -- just record yourself talking about the topic.  A lot of what we type up is directly from us talking to each other as we write the piece.  You might try talking to a classmate and seeing how they're handling the process, not to copy from them but to get a few tips.

C.I.: Those are good suggestions.  Ann Wilson of Heart had one of the smartest suggestions I've ever heard.  Write down something.  Anything.  It can even end up being the stupidest thing in the world, but don't throw it away or wad it up, continue from there.  Once you've got something started, it's easier to continue because it's less intimidating than a blank page.  Our own Kat, when she writes reviews, she writes a paragraph here, a paragraph there and assembles it in various ways.  So if something grabs you, skip to the part and worry about transitions later.  This is basically a think piece, what you think and feel.  So possibly you can sit down somewhere private and talk out loud?  Pretend Oprah, or whomever you want, is asking you, "What matters to you in the United States?"  But it really does come back to what Ann Wilson was saying.  Get something on paper to get started and you'll find that the next words come much easier.  Ava?

Ava: If you're working yourself up over this and it's frightening you, I do understand.  C.I. and I just focus on the work this week.  If we get ahead of ourselves, it's too much.  It's like someone walking three miles.  You start off one foot, then the next.  Just focus on the work.

Jim: This is going to be the last one.  By the way, the ground rules for this were I had to record the piece and type it up myself.  Ava and C.I. did not want to take notes and they did not want to type this piece.  But Katie e-mailed, "I'm a college freshman and I can't stress enough how much Ava and C.I.'s work has meant to me.  In my junior year of high school, my friend Bonita turned me on to their writing.  It's amazing.  I've read most of the archives by now.  They've given a voice to women that was missing and they've made a lasting impression.  The Progressive tried to copy but didn't have the talent or point of view to pull it off and Sady Doyle's been more successful at imitation over at In These Times."

Ava: Let me grab Sady and leave the rest for C.I.  Thank you, Katie for your kind words and, yeah, I think The Progressive thought they could copy us.  I think that's also why they failed.  Sady is not a copy of us.  Sady's a gifted writer and very talented.  The reason she is succeeding -- and she is, she's laying the groundwork for a long career right now -- is because she's not trying to write like anyone else.  She's using and enlarging her voice.  She's a very important voice.  We're lucky to have her.  C.I.?

C.I.: Also, let me say thank you to Katie and to anyone else that offered kind words.  I'm not good with thank you because with receiving praise, I can dispense it, I just struggle with accepting it.  What we do was missing?  I don't know that that's true.  And the reason I say that is that both historically and presently women's work gets very little attention.  Shonda Rhimes, for example, is a show runner and people know her name but she's probably less covered and less noted than many men whose shows have never found the following that her shows have.  So I would be hesitant to say that no one was doing what we do with TV.  That said, a lot of feminist TV coverage before we came along was insipid.  It wasn't critical coverage, it was p.r.  It was pet favorites getting noted but not analyzed.  That wasn't true of music.  In the 70s especially, you had feminists weighing in on music in columns and reviews.  That wasn't true of movies where you had a feminist critique as early as the late 60s and that has continued to this day.  But for whatever reason, people did not take TV seriously enough for a feminist critique, not a weekly one.  I was surprised by that and pointing out how many women watched TV and how, as feminists, we weren't reaching them.  And then Backlash came out and Susan didn't avoid any topic.

Jim: Can I interrupt?

C.I.: Sure, didn't you just now, and I was getting to a point.

Jim: Sorry.  But TV's important, blah blah blah, but when we wanted to cover TV here you and Ava were both against it.

C.I.: And I stated why that first Sunday.  I had too many friends and I wasn't sure I could be objective.  That was reason one but the main reason was I was on the road speaking out against the Iraq War, I didn't have time to watch TV going hotel to hotel.  To do this, I've had to make the time, so has Ava.  Ava?

Ava: We watch so much more than we ever write about.  Bonnie Erbe had a great special of To The Contrary on religion and we thought that was worth noting but didn't have the time or space.  She and her panelists, on another recent show, discussed women politicians and missed the entire point and we wanted to write about that, but didn't.  There are three ABC shows we spent this week watching and reading scripts.  None of them is either interesting enough or awful enough for us to waste our time on. There is so much work that has to be done each week before we can even arrive at, "So, what are we going to cover?"

C.I.: Exactly.  Now, if I can try to pick up where I was?  'Yea, girls!'  We don't write that.  It is the nonsense that passed for a feminist critique at many print outlets before Ava and I started.  We are not the feminist voice, we are a feminist voice.  People are not copying us but I do believe we took a path and widened it.  We didn't make it but we made it wider and said, "Yeah, this is worth taking seriously and that will mean holding people accountable -- even holding women accountable."  We hear all the time, "Oh, you're not being supportive to the movement."  I mentioned that to Nora Ephron once and she referred me to a piece she wrote about movement books and she also pointed out that the role of the critic is not to cheer through the game because a movement last forever.  She said, "If you're expected to cheer everything, you're going to be doing nothing but cheering until you stop writing.  Your pom poms will drop to your feet because your arms will fall off from all the use"  And that's correct.  And, again, we do a feminist voice, not the feminist voice.  And what we do was already done in music, movie and book coverage but no one wanted to take TV seriously from a feminist viewpoint.  They just wanted to applaud.

Ava: And that's so stupid.  I've got a mind, I can use it, that's much more about feminism than blindly cheering.  As C.I. pointed out, we are a feminist voice.  Not 'the.'  And we wish we were being copied non-stop in that we wish every site was offering a feminist critique.  If you're reading this and don't have a website yet, think about getting one.  If that's not your style, take a feminist critique of TV to your own circle of friends.  And --

Jim: What if they're not interested in TV?

Ava: I guess it wouldn't be equal if Jim didn't cut me off in the middle of a sentence as well.  "What if they're not interested in TV?"  I can't image that they would make it this far into the article if they weren't interested in TV.  But the point I'm making is -- woman or man -- be a feminist voice in your own world.  Don't be afraid to disagree and don't be embarrassed to have an opinion.  Find your voice and use it.



Jim: If I weren't the one stuck with typing this, we'd continue forever.  Kim Plunk, thank you again for your e-mail.  This feature happened because of your e-mail.  Thank you to everyone who wrote in with questions.  I tried to include as many as possible.  This is a rush transcript.  Our e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.