As Laurie Stone streams some talked-about shows on TV, she notices the women's movement has been cut out of the snapshots of our time, like tedious relatives you'd prefer to consider dead.
This is like a million flashbulbs going off. I thought I was the only one who had this reaction. I think for us--women's studies majors and feminists of all stripes circa late 80s and 90s--daughters of feminists and in my case, granddaughter--this giant hole that feminism has disappeared into is so disheartening and surreal.
I absolutely respect this argument, but I feel compelled to say that—as someone who is the precise age/generation of those depicted in Fleishman—I found it incredibly relatable. I was arguably raised by pop culture of the 1980s, much of which taught me that the ideal woman was "just one of the guys." I had female friends, sure, but we considered our issues to be issues of identity, class, culture, not those of sex. We believed (foolishly) that sexism was over and that second wave feminism was not a movement that had allowed us this ignorance but a dated cultural phenomenon whose markers (the burning of bras, etc) seemed overly...dramatic to us. I didn't acknowledge sexism was still a thing until my early 20s, when I worked in the music industry, almost exclusively with men.
I'm not saying any of this is admirable; frankly I'm embarrassed about it, and I agree that it's pathetic that Libby's character didn't acknowledge Rachel had humanity until the show's second to last episode. However, this is completely believable to me for people of this micro-generation. Does this story need to occupy a coveted space in the world of streaming television? Probably not. But its resonance is no mystery to me.
I think it’s important to recognize the difference between a condition—that of ignorance—and a plight, where people’s rights really are restricted. All that the Libbys of the world have to do is join a group working on behalf of women’s rights, or read a book about feminism or talk to women perhaps older than them. The condition of this kind of ignorance is a room with a door that’s open.
Thanks for the recognition, Sari. I appreciate this great conversation you two had. I have lots more to say on the matter but don't want to clog up these comments! Great, thought-provoking discussion, for sure.
Candace - You comment is so fascinating to me. Thanks. The idea that women in your age (42) group saw "burning bras, etc." as a main marker of the second wave seems to me to be the suppressed history Laurie speaks to. I'm guessing you know by now that burning bras was never our actual practice. (It was a minor and isolated theatrical stunt whose documentation was blown up as part of the anti-feminist campaign at the time.) Your age group's unconscious return to the dream of exceptionalism and the trope that feminism was "drama" puts it in perspective for me. I feel for you. But as I'm sure you now know, facing issues of identity, class and culture (and race too) without identifying the patriarchy meant continuing to play directly into the intertwined systems of oppression; systems so pervasive they seem "true", as they did to you at one time. Without acknowledging the pull of that blind spot, Fleishman and Hacks perpetuate the ongoing amnesia. Appreciate this awesome discussion, All!!!
God, I love you. Thanks, thrilled. I’m glad to know the mushroom zombie apocalypse has not consumed all memory of what we both still care about. XxLaurie
thanks for the thoughtful response, Kate. I totally agree about the importance of acknowledging that blind spot. I actually think there are a lot of shows now about women under 25 that push hard against the patriarchy—and understandably so, as young adults seem way more broadly aware of these issues than they were 20 years ago, for sure.
I guess this leaves me wondering: is there a version of this story that represents the truth of Libby's (and by extension, I think, the author's) experience and also acknowledges this blind spot? Can those two things co-exist? Can the (hopefully) awakened Libbys of my generation see themselves reflected in an authentic way that doesn't perpetuate this oppression? I'm asking rhetorically but also because I still know many women who struggle to break free from what you accurately described above as the "unconscious return to the dream of exceptionalism."
I think it says something that so many people responded so strongly to this show (for better or worse)...I'm theorizing here, but I think that "something" is the fact that many women are still unlearning a lot of patriarchal bullshit. Laurie is absolutely right—this ignorance is not a plight, and any one of these women can go open a book to aid in their own unlearning. But being able to see yourself/your experience reflected is a hugely powerful thing. I think that's what Libby was to a lot of women.
I challenge storytellers of my so-called micro-generation to tell both their truth and their dismantling. That's what I'd like to see.
I'm probably of the same microgeneration and can relate. Perhaps we noticed it more because we worked in male dominated fields where the trope of the cool girl/only woman at the table/etc was definitely a thing. I had a harsh awakening about how sexist my field was when I interviewed for faculty jobs in the mid-90s. Even though I cut my teeth on 70's era feminism and didn't think it was a solved problem, I definitely thought we were further along than that, and the backlash that continued into the 00's didn't help.
Anyway, I'd argue that a show like Fleischman would have hit more usefully in the 80's or 90's than now, and by devoting most of the show to Libby pre-realization it really muddies the message.
Respectfully, you missed the boat on Fleishman. And the Fleishman “in trouble” was not Toby; it was his wife and his friend who was narrating. Their storylines ran parallel while dealing with issues of female identity — motherhood, careers, and middle age. Thankfully feminists paved the way years ago for so many of the opportunities we’re able to take advantage of today, but women are expected to do it all excellently — wife, motherhood, career, friend, caretaker, housekeeper, etc. If you noticed, neither of those women were great at female friendship, which is why Rachel’s overtures and revelations with Toby’s wife were powerful. Not all females feel the power of sisterhood. But they all seem to be perpetually judged, most specifically by other women, yes? Maybe lightening up on that is a start to bringing back cohesion.
I think you got the theme of "Fleishman . . . " without quite getting it. For context, my high school teachers were from Nora Ephron's generation. One gave me copies of Ms. magazine. They taught me about women's rights. None of my peers seemed interested at all. I always felt like an outsider, so I fought for myself. The same is true today because, as in all things, every generation must learn all things anew, and choose to accept or reject prior wisdom. In the profound shift we are currently undergoing, as you know, a lot of prior wisdom is being rejected, and new wisdom -- about equality and individual rights, e.g., -- is being developed and adopted -- by individuals, each in the course of the one life each gets. Not all women were feminists at any point in history, and not all women are feminists now. The battle over rights and wrongs will never be decisively settled (at least in the context of the world as it is) because each of us decides what we believe and how we behave, despite politics or social pressures. "So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past." - Fitzgerald
YES! Thank you for your unsparing, unsentimental critique. As an 84 year old lifelong second wave feminist, the fact that voices like yours are crucial is both a relief and a disappointment.
@Laurie-- I read the book and thanks to you, I am not watching the show. However, I am glad I read the book so I could fully appreciate your hilarious and insightful take on this show and others. I LOVE your writing. It flows like we're at our regular bar with just the right amount of background conversation and some great oldster music playing (but not too loud). In my younger days we called girls (no one said women) who wanted to be the ONE girl at the table--- a Cool Girl. It wasn't a real compliment. It meant, you were sooooo eager to show how you were One of The Guys, you would go along with all the misogynistic crap because you were above the regular females-- you were a Cool Girl-- and it didn't apply to you. I'll tell you what type of "girl" I am. I'm a Laurie Stone Fan Girl!
I have not seen Fleischman, but you have precisely pinpointed a major problem in our culture and in popular culture depictions of our culture. The other day, I was thinking about how young people now are “triggered” by so many things. So university teaching (to use the realm I know best) of certain things becomes perilous. An image of the prophet Mohammed in an art history class? Racist language in a historical novel? What if women called a halt to every image and text that demeaned us? Trivialized us? Belittled us? Slaughtered us? Culture itself would come to a halt. Kate Millet demonstrated this in 1971, but it remains ongoing.
Thank you! I read the first few pages of the book and it was painful. This review of the show confirms my suspicion those first pages planted in my brain. The larger point , the erasure of feminism in the popular media, also spot-on.
A thoughtful essay. But as someone who devoured Nora’s essays as a teenager, and wanted to be her, or at least almost as good as her - I have to note that towards the end of her piece about being the only woman at the table, she notes that that is not a good thing, and not what she wanted anymore. I wish I could find the exact quote, but I know it’s there.
I know that. Absolutely right about Ephron. The issue is the Syme doesn't look at the trope in her piece and also that Libby is exactly that creature made manifest.
As a young woman, one of the things I’d hear sometimes from women was “All my friends are men.” That is one freighted comment. I guess they meant that men were less catty, less silly, more serious. 🙄
I know, Tricia! The main feature of naiveté is that it is invisible to the one who has it. (But I do have to wince over how I talked down to my own mother back in the day.
Wow Laurie. Another perfect post. And by perfect, I don't mean tidy. I mean perfectly detonated, like a landmine you found on the road and detonated for the well-being of the many.
Oh, thanks, love. I feel weird each time I post. I send the pieces out like an overbearing stage mother, and I am also the piece, frozen in the footlights without a script.
In addition to Laurie’s justifiable criticisms of the portrayal of women in TTWF, I was repulsed by Jessie E’s portrayal of a clueless single father in need of rescue by a renegade woman. In the 70’s I was a single father raising 2 young children by myself. Their mother escaped marital and maternal bondage to find herself thousands of miles away, writing a book about the plight of dingle mothers but neglecting to say the children were with me. But I was no victim. I chose single fatherhood despite the court’s checking the “joint custody” box. Though it was challenging, I loved loving and raising my and required no rescue. What helped me most was the love and support of close male friends. Not misogynists, but good men. Eisenberg’s fecklessness repulsed me and I turned it off as soon as I realized why I was turned off.
In May, Koehler is publishing my book entitled “Men as Friends: From Cicero to Svevo to Cataldo” about the importance of male friendship in my life. I’m 85 and a retired academic and health researcher and found myself writing it while my present wife is battling cancer for the fourth time in our life together. Writing the book saved my life. It’s written for men and for women who still like having men around. I would love it if you reviewed it when it is published. My vision is f*clef but I so enjoy yours.
Lo mein, noodles
This is like a million flashbulbs going off. I thought I was the only one who had this reaction. I think for us--women's studies majors and feminists of all stripes circa late 80s and 90s--daughters of feminists and in my case, granddaughter--this giant hole that feminism has disappeared into is so disheartening and surreal.
It's not in a cave. It's everywhere. But it's demeaned and it's hard to be on the team it's easy to beat up.
I absolutely respect this argument, but I feel compelled to say that—as someone who is the precise age/generation of those depicted in Fleishman—I found it incredibly relatable. I was arguably raised by pop culture of the 1980s, much of which taught me that the ideal woman was "just one of the guys." I had female friends, sure, but we considered our issues to be issues of identity, class, culture, not those of sex. We believed (foolishly) that sexism was over and that second wave feminism was not a movement that had allowed us this ignorance but a dated cultural phenomenon whose markers (the burning of bras, etc) seemed overly...dramatic to us. I didn't acknowledge sexism was still a thing until my early 20s, when I worked in the music industry, almost exclusively with men.
I'm not saying any of this is admirable; frankly I'm embarrassed about it, and I agree that it's pathetic that Libby's character didn't acknowledge Rachel had humanity until the show's second to last episode. However, this is completely believable to me for people of this micro-generation. Does this story need to occupy a coveted space in the world of streaming television? Probably not. But its resonance is no mystery to me.
I think it’s important to recognize the difference between a condition—that of ignorance—and a plight, where people’s rights really are restricted. All that the Libbys of the world have to do is join a group working on behalf of women’s rights, or read a book about feminism or talk to women perhaps older than them. The condition of this kind of ignorance is a room with a door that’s open.
Candace, thanks for this comment. I read it aloud here: https://oldster.substack.com/p/a-chat-with-laurie-stone-about-the
Thanks for the recognition, Sari. I appreciate this great conversation you two had. I have lots more to say on the matter but don't want to clog up these comments! Great, thought-provoking discussion, for sure.
...also I'm 42.
Candace - You comment is so fascinating to me. Thanks. The idea that women in your age (42) group saw "burning bras, etc." as a main marker of the second wave seems to me to be the suppressed history Laurie speaks to. I'm guessing you know by now that burning bras was never our actual practice. (It was a minor and isolated theatrical stunt whose documentation was blown up as part of the anti-feminist campaign at the time.) Your age group's unconscious return to the dream of exceptionalism and the trope that feminism was "drama" puts it in perspective for me. I feel for you. But as I'm sure you now know, facing issues of identity, class and culture (and race too) without identifying the patriarchy meant continuing to play directly into the intertwined systems of oppression; systems so pervasive they seem "true", as they did to you at one time. Without acknowledging the pull of that blind spot, Fleishman and Hacks perpetuate the ongoing amnesia. Appreciate this awesome discussion, All!!!
God, I love you. Thanks, thrilled. I’m glad to know the mushroom zombie apocalypse has not consumed all memory of what we both still care about. XxLaurie
thanks for the thoughtful response, Kate. I totally agree about the importance of acknowledging that blind spot. I actually think there are a lot of shows now about women under 25 that push hard against the patriarchy—and understandably so, as young adults seem way more broadly aware of these issues than they were 20 years ago, for sure.
I guess this leaves me wondering: is there a version of this story that represents the truth of Libby's (and by extension, I think, the author's) experience and also acknowledges this blind spot? Can those two things co-exist? Can the (hopefully) awakened Libbys of my generation see themselves reflected in an authentic way that doesn't perpetuate this oppression? I'm asking rhetorically but also because I still know many women who struggle to break free from what you accurately described above as the "unconscious return to the dream of exceptionalism."
I think it says something that so many people responded so strongly to this show (for better or worse)...I'm theorizing here, but I think that "something" is the fact that many women are still unlearning a lot of patriarchal bullshit. Laurie is absolutely right—this ignorance is not a plight, and any one of these women can go open a book to aid in their own unlearning. But being able to see yourself/your experience reflected is a hugely powerful thing. I think that's what Libby was to a lot of women.
I challenge storytellers of my so-called micro-generation to tell both their truth and their dismantling. That's what I'd like to see.
I'm probably of the same microgeneration and can relate. Perhaps we noticed it more because we worked in male dominated fields where the trope of the cool girl/only woman at the table/etc was definitely a thing. I had a harsh awakening about how sexist my field was when I interviewed for faculty jobs in the mid-90s. Even though I cut my teeth on 70's era feminism and didn't think it was a solved problem, I definitely thought we were further along than that, and the backlash that continued into the 00's didn't help.
Anyway, I'd argue that a show like Fleischman would have hit more usefully in the 80's or 90's than now, and by devoting most of the show to Libby pre-realization it really muddies the message.
Fuck every misogynist pig of all genders.
Respectfully, you missed the boat on Fleishman. And the Fleishman “in trouble” was not Toby; it was his wife and his friend who was narrating. Their storylines ran parallel while dealing with issues of female identity — motherhood, careers, and middle age. Thankfully feminists paved the way years ago for so many of the opportunities we’re able to take advantage of today, but women are expected to do it all excellently — wife, motherhood, career, friend, caretaker, housekeeper, etc. If you noticed, neither of those women were great at female friendship, which is why Rachel’s overtures and revelations with Toby’s wife were powerful. Not all females feel the power of sisterhood. But they all seem to be perpetually judged, most specifically by other women, yes? Maybe lightening up on that is a start to bringing back cohesion.
I think you got the theme of "Fleishman . . . " without quite getting it. For context, my high school teachers were from Nora Ephron's generation. One gave me copies of Ms. magazine. They taught me about women's rights. None of my peers seemed interested at all. I always felt like an outsider, so I fought for myself. The same is true today because, as in all things, every generation must learn all things anew, and choose to accept or reject prior wisdom. In the profound shift we are currently undergoing, as you know, a lot of prior wisdom is being rejected, and new wisdom -- about equality and individual rights, e.g., -- is being developed and adopted -- by individuals, each in the course of the one life each gets. Not all women were feminists at any point in history, and not all women are feminists now. The battle over rights and wrongs will never be decisively settled (at least in the context of the world as it is) because each of us decides what we believe and how we behave, despite politics or social pressures. "So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past." - Fitzgerald
Lighten up! Why can't you just smile more? (Where have I heard that before?) Just enjoying the discussion, Laura Lee... no offense taken or meant.
Laurie Stone, you rock. I love when this much anger is this intelligent. Beautiful prose too.
Why, thank you, dear Theresa! Please check out my stack as well, if you like.
YES! Thank you for your unsparing, unsentimental critique. As an 84 year old lifelong second wave feminist, the fact that voices like yours are crucial is both a relief and a disappointment.
I totally understand both emotions. xxLaurie
Yes!
@Laurie-- I read the book and thanks to you, I am not watching the show. However, I am glad I read the book so I could fully appreciate your hilarious and insightful take on this show and others. I LOVE your writing. It flows like we're at our regular bar with just the right amount of background conversation and some great oldster music playing (but not too loud). In my younger days we called girls (no one said women) who wanted to be the ONE girl at the table--- a Cool Girl. It wasn't a real compliment. It meant, you were sooooo eager to show how you were One of The Guys, you would go along with all the misogynistic crap because you were above the regular females-- you were a Cool Girl-- and it didn't apply to you. I'll tell you what type of "girl" I am. I'm a Laurie Stone Fan Girl!
I am with you in the bar, wish we were actually drinking!
I have not seen Fleischman, but you have precisely pinpointed a major problem in our culture and in popular culture depictions of our culture. The other day, I was thinking about how young people now are “triggered” by so many things. So university teaching (to use the realm I know best) of certain things becomes perilous. An image of the prophet Mohammed in an art history class? Racist language in a historical novel? What if women called a halt to every image and text that demeaned us? Trivialized us? Belittled us? Slaughtered us? Culture itself would come to a halt. Kate Millet demonstrated this in 1971, but it remains ongoing.
Kate Millett was my teacher at Barnard and remained a friend until her death.
I would love for you to write a piece about this! 
Thank you! I read the first few pages of the book and it was painful. This review of the show confirms my suspicion those first pages planted in my brain. The larger point , the erasure of feminism in the popular media, also spot-on.
Thanks so much for your comment.
A thoughtful essay. But as someone who devoured Nora’s essays as a teenager, and wanted to be her, or at least almost as good as her - I have to note that towards the end of her piece about being the only woman at the table, she notes that that is not a good thing, and not what she wanted anymore. I wish I could find the exact quote, but I know it’s there.
I know that. Absolutely right about Ephron. The issue is the Syme doesn't look at the trope in her piece and also that Libby is exactly that creature made manifest.
Ick, no thanks on that show.
As a young woman, one of the things I’d hear sometimes from women was “All my friends are men.” That is one freighted comment. I guess they meant that men were less catty, less silly, more serious. 🙄
Hated it then, hate it now.
Dear Annette, with you on that.
I love being lectured by my 19-year-old daughter about feminism, having grown up in the '70's.
And they say motherhood doesn't have its perks! Every time you get a lecture, you get a spa week with it.
I know, Tricia! The main feature of naiveté is that it is invisible to the one who has it. (But I do have to wince over how I talked down to my own mother back in the day.
Wow Laurie. Another perfect post. And by perfect, I don't mean tidy. I mean perfectly detonated, like a landmine you found on the road and detonated for the well-being of the many.
Oh, thanks, love. I feel weird each time I post. I send the pieces out like an overbearing stage mother, and I am also the piece, frozen in the footlights without a script.
Really good, laurie. I’m an ephron fan but you nailed her correctly.
I didn’t make it through 15 minutes of Fleishman (book or series) and the rave reviews are mystifying to me.
In addition to Laurie’s justifiable criticisms of the portrayal of women in TTWF, I was repulsed by Jessie E’s portrayal of a clueless single father in need of rescue by a renegade woman. In the 70’s I was a single father raising 2 young children by myself. Their mother escaped marital and maternal bondage to find herself thousands of miles away, writing a book about the plight of dingle mothers but neglecting to say the children were with me. But I was no victim. I chose single fatherhood despite the court’s checking the “joint custody” box. Though it was challenging, I loved loving and raising my and required no rescue. What helped me most was the love and support of close male friends. Not misogynists, but good men. Eisenberg’s fecklessness repulsed me and I turned it off as soon as I realized why I was turned off.
Great comment.
In May, Koehler is publishing my book entitled “Men as Friends: From Cicero to Svevo to Cataldo” about the importance of male friendship in my life. I’m 85 and a retired academic and health researcher and found myself writing it while my present wife is battling cancer for the fourth time in our life together. Writing the book saved my life. It’s written for men and for women who still like having men around. I would love it if you reviewed it when it is published. My vision is f*clef but I so enjoy yours.