(03-17-2019, 12:02 PM)N_grimm Wrote: I find this statement inappropriate and misleading. Firstly, I've rarely seen a show with so many smart, strong and independent women as in Grimm. Even in fighting scenes, they were all equal or superior. Secondly, I don’t like the moral condemnation of Adalind. If she wanted to use sex to get people to do what she wanted, that was her choice. You claimed Juliette’s only motive for sleeping with Kenneth in Nicks bed was because she “wanted him” (which of course, is inconsistent with the storyline), but Adalind is worse than a prostitute? That’s a biased statement that has noting to do with moral. I think hypocrisy is the word I am looking for. I would like to see someone describe Oliver Queen in the (Green) Arrow “a skank”. During the first seasons, he slept with every women that appeared in front of him. He was called a “billionaire playboy”, but Adalind is “a skank”. Why, because she’s a woman? How can you even write something like that?
Spare me the protestations. First of all, this thread is about the moral indifferences of G&K. I don't know why you keep wanting to make this another Juliette versus Adalind thread.
I am merely looking at this from what I see as possible creator perspective. In the case of Adalind, there was no reason at all to make her a skank. It serves no purpose to have her sleep with whatever male happens to happen along.
(03-17-2019, 12:24 PM)brandon Wrote: To say that men would have sex with anything is also chauvinist.
Of brave women would be: Rosalee, Marie, Kelly, Elizabeth, Adalind,..
They were able to overcome their problems and get ahead.
Juliette not.
This is not about the characters' strengths of weaknesses. It's about the moral indifference on the part of the creative team.
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.