Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 63
  1. #46
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Sep 14
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, Germany
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    No, I was teasing about that part (that he wanted her to look at him - but he did drag a tire out of nowhere right in the middle of her work stations and started whaling on it - that kind of screams ďlook at me!Ē, lol) but he did realize there was something bothering her because she wasn't paying any attention to him (and he happened to be working out when he noticed).

    Personally, I think whoever thought it was a good idea to force a lone female and a lone male to work alone overnight had a very crappy idea, setting the company up for potential problems on either side. That said, while any false accusation is wrong, these days way more women still have to worry about actually being raped and not believed then men have to worry about someone falsely accusing them. A huge percentage of victims don't even bother to try to go to the police since waaaaay too often it gets turned around and the victim is blamed.


    I guess where my head is, it seems like good advice to be mindful of potentially compromising situations so I see nothing wrong with your friend speaking up. Nor am I that upset that he felt he needed to speak up. It's a reality every woman has had to deal with so why should it just be something one gender thinks about? Shouldn't it be something everyone tackles and works on fixing?


    Sigh. I'm not going to expend a lot of my time feeling guilty that men now are no longer invulnerable in the work place. So now some are worried about being falsely accused? Again, that would be terrible but I'm still having difficulty with it being considered equal to a woman actually being raped. Both are unfair, but do you see how I might consider one MORE unfair than the other? Especially since the one has been going on through all of recordable history and only in the last century has anyone gave a damn.


    As I repeatedly said in regards to Oliver and Felicity, I agree that no one should be forced to be in a situation that they are uncomfortable in, so if Oliver had any objections or had shown any sign of concern or if Felicity had done or said anything threatening to him, then sure, vilify her, but she didn't and he wasn't upset so no, I'm not going to be upset about how they interacted while he was training. There is no reason to be. And again, he was in a position of power, which meant he could have changed anything at any time. That power makes all the difference. Nobody is feeling vulnerable or powerless.


    In a professional or even a public setting, it should be a moot point for any individual of any gender, that kind of behavior would not be appropriate but right now we are talking about something (the lair) that is outside of a corporate world. The lines are blurred. Itís a gym, itís a headquarters, itís an infirmary, itís outside the law. They are making up their own rules to suit themselves and thatís fine with me. .
    I work in the auto industry and we do have a definite deficit on qualified female employees in certain areas of expertise. The woman was acquired for the job in the name of equal opportunity (our department lacked qualified personnel and had to reach out to other departments), which I'm fine with, and was originally seen as our group's supervisor (she was the only one that had successfully finished her recognized masters) for a task that was planned to be performed across two shifts during the day but due to the workload and deadline it had to be expanded to 3 shifts as well as 4 people to 6 (the additional two were the next best qualified in our own department, not necessarily best qualified for the job) and it was the woman who demanded equal treatment and be allowed to also work nights.

    My point on this subject isn't what is justly seen as violating another person physically and/or mentally but the false idea that it is fine to accept a certain behavior from some people because of a perceived disparity (regardless if it is correct or incorrect) while vilifying that exact same behavior from others and proclaiming it's a fight for equality. I'm just as upset with inequality today as I was 20-30 years ago because I want everyone to have to abide by the same rules regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion, I don't simply want to turn the tables and say "tough luck, we've had to deal with it for thousands of years" and claim a victory or even a step in the right direction towards equality. It's not, it's a shift of acceptance of biased behavior that should be crushed regardless of who does it. By portraying Felicity's continual sexual innuendo as cute, quirky and innocent simply to not vilify what she's doing I find unacceptable, what she does is just as despicable as if it was done by Oliver, Ray (and yes I did not approve of Ray's stalker like depiction when he was introduced) or any other male on the show. To even jokingly accuse Oliver's behavior as more likely to be a form of harassment is wrong, we as viewers already know that Felicity doesn't have a problem with it from her own comments, while her sexual innuendo is assumed acceptable because Oliver doesn't say anything about it. Sure he's the boss but that doesn't mean he can read minds nor does it mean he's not susceptible to being sexually harassed.

    Just so it doesn't look like I don't want to address the topic of actual victims getting blamed for what happened to them, it's nothing new because it's the easiest way to not accept responsibility for ones own actions which is a whole different tangent I could go off on as well.
    Last edited by DoubleDevil; 01-19-2016 at 01:51 AM.

  2. #47
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,687
    My point on this subject isn't what is justly seen as violating another person physically and/or mentally but the false idea that it is fine to accept a certain behavior from some people because of a perceived disparity (regardless if it is correct or incorrect) while vilifying that exact same behavior from others and proclaiming it's a fight for equality. I'm just as upset with inequality today as I was 20-30 years ago because I want everyone to have to abide by the same rules regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or religion, I don't simply want to turn the tables and say "tough luck, we've had to deal with it for thousands of years" and claim a victory or even a step in the right direction towards equality. It's not, it's a shift of acceptance of biased behavior that should be crushed regardless of who does it.
    This could get way too deep and broad of a discussion very easily but I'll try to be brief. I don't believe that the same behavior coming from different genders actually is always the same. Sometimes sure, but when men express "appreciation" for the female form, it is seen as the man wanting to be with that woman. That he desires her.

    When a woman expresses interest, the mere action of being allowed to express that interest was something empowering and liberating because it was previously considered crass or unladylike. Verboten. Making comments and being allowed to feel and share those feelings is more about the woman recognizing and accepting her own sexuality than it is about lusting after the man.

    Again, not always, there are predators in ever gender but yeah, thatís why Iím not concerned by the seeming double standard that no longer lets men ogle women without seeing like a creep, but when women do it, itís treated as comedy. Right now, the action isn't the same because it still is in today's society something relatively new and is motivated and understood differently when a woman does it vs a man.

    That isn't to say that this won't change over time or even to say that maybe it is time to start changing but no, I don't accept that it really is the same right now, not in most situations. But I'll let that drop for now.

    To even jokingly accuse Oliver's behavior as more likely to be a form of harassment is wrong, we as viewers already know that Felicity doesn't have a problem with it from her own comments, while her sexual innuendo is assumed acceptable because Oliver doesn't say anything about it.
    Just to be clear, my original statement about Oliver being closer to sexual harassment with his shirtless all the time comment was meant to illustrate how NOBODY was harassing anyone since clearly there was no problem with him being shirtless all the time, thus underscoring my point that Felicity's actions - unintentional innuendo - should be viewed as even more harmless.

    And that is a topic I wanted to underscore, Felicity never made an innuendo about Oliver intentionally. Her worst offenses were always phrases that she meant in a completely innocent way but had double meanings, but the double meanings were not said with intent. She never hit on him or intentionally made sexual innuendo's.

    The closest thing to an intended statement from Felicity came once in the first season when Oliver said "Hold on to me tight." and Felicity blurted out, "I imagined you saying that under different circumstances" to which she was horribly embarrassed and tried to undo what she said by specifying "platonic circumstances."

    In the opening of season 2 she mentioned that she kept Oliver's Salmon Ladder because she liked watching him do that.

    That is the total of anything she purposefully said to Oliver and I won't vilify her for either of those two things. Again, the really bad stuff was all misconstrued words and embarrassed babbling trying to make it clear she hadn't intended it that way. Like "It feels so good to have you inside me" when she was referring to his voice in her ear. Felicity should IMO not be faulted for that.

    By portraying Felicity's continual sexual innuendo as cute, quirky and innocent simply to not vilify what she's doing I find unacceptable, what she does is just as despicable as if it was done by Oliver, Ray (and yes I did not approve of Ray's stalker like depiction when he was introduced) or any other male on the show.

    Now, IMO, there is an argument to be made on whether the writers should have put the lines in there in the first place since they clearly were intentionally making the comments. Felicity though, was not.



    On a separate subject, I stand by the right to make a joke about Oliver's shirtless all the time being closer to harassment when it is very clear it is a joke. Perhaps if he was a non fictional person I would worry about someone misunderstanding me and unintended repercussions being visited on the poor man but yet again - fiction, so yeah, I see no harm in the comment. If he did what he did in the lair while at QC, he would have been written up by HR no matter how much Felicity was ok with it.


    Sure he's the boss but that doesn't mean he can read minds nor does it mean he's not susceptible to being sexually harassed.
    The reason rules about sexual harassment have had to be mandated is because the victims - the ones that actually experienced harassment, were in positions without power to stop it. So yeah, since he is the boss and he could say to her "knock it off" does mean that he's not going to be a victim of sexual harassment. Some guy hitting on you doesn't make his actions sexual harassment, it's when he doesn't stop or you feel you can't say anything to get him to stop without fear of reprisal that makes it so.

    In a work setting they've come up with rules for everyone to abide by, rules that may in many cases be draconian and unneeded. Felicity and Oliver were in position where they could mutually decide what worked for them.

  3. #48
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Sep 14
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, Germany
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    Now, IMO, there is an argument to be made on whether the writers should have put the lines in there in the first place since they clearly were intentionally making the comments. Felicity though, was not.
    I guess our difference is how we see Felicity's character. You see her comments as unintentional and her embarrassment when she lets loose a comment laced with sexual innuendo, I find it more telling of what is actually going on in her head since many of her comments would pass off as nothing spectacular if she didn't comment about how they didn't come out as she intended. By drawing clear attention to her sexual innuendo it becomes all the clearer what dual meaning her words actually have. Sure it's intentional by the writers putting those lines in but it's just as intentional her stumbling afterward in an attempt to make it look cute and innocent, the problem is I know people like that and it's not nearly as cute and innocent as the writers are trying to imply. Somebody that is constantly worried that what they say might be construed in a sexual manner is usually heavily focused on sex (at least those that I've had contact with) and the stumbling is merely an attempt to keep their inner most thoughts secret from others which is counterproductive because the continual stumbling actually makes those thoughts quite clear. Do the writers know that what they think is portraying Felicity as cute and innocent actually does quite the opposite? No idea, but those people that do make comments full of sexual innuendo unintentionally usually don't draw attention to it because they don't notice it themselves.
    Last edited by DoubleDevil; 01-26-2016 at 05:19 PM.

  4. #49
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 11
    Posts
    1,876
    Something that just popped in my head regarding that Wendy Mericle has implied Felicity will not be pleased this time around either when it comes to the revelation of Oliver's kid is that there is a high degree of irony in this situation. What do I mean? Allow me to elaborate:

    Something a good many of us have talked about is the fact that Oliver just rolled over with Samantha's demands, and there's been suggestion upon suggestion for how he should have done this differently. The top two suggestions have been that he should have at least told Felicity and that he should have asked a certain lawyer of his acquaintance about what he could do, even knowing that this would dig up some old wounds. Most of the time, these suggestions have been put into place in the same sentence or post. So the question becomes why.

    This leads us to the fact that Oliver and Laurel have a very distant relationship/friendship/whatever right now, despite being teammates and the like. This is a direct result of the fact that the showrunners have focused on the Olicity relationship and heeded to the calls from the Olicity fanbase. This is evident in the distance between Laurel and Oliver that people see, and in the fact that Quentin and Donna are now dating. I vividly remember that directly after 3x05 aired, the hashtag for Smoakin'Lance appeared. And what do you know, the very next season, they got their wish. So Oliver's distance from Laurel, due primarily to the fact that the Olicity fanbase wanted this and got it, can be laid down as the reason why he wouldn't approach Laurel, in combination with opening up old wounds from his days as her cheating boyfriend.

    This leads to Felicity eventually finding out, and more than likely, Laurel will, too. Katie Cassidy's remarks recently suggested she would be meeting someone we wouldn't expect her to embrace, but she will be. If this was not speaking of her meeting with Donna and Quentin in Felicity's hospital room, this likely is directed towards Samantha and/or William. Combine this with the fact that Felicity won't be taking the revelation well this time, either, and we have a recipe for some pretty big relationship drama on the horizon just from the Olicity standpoint.

    My point in all this is that when Oliver and Felicity call it off, the break-up and the possible resurrection of Laurel and Oliver as close friends, possible future love interests, will have in the end been made possible by a fanbase that wanted Laurel out of the way. Laurel was out of the way, so they got what they wanted. But Oliver is keeping his son a secret in part because he doesn't have any options because he can't approach his lawyer friend.

    As for the fact that Oliver is keeping it secret anyways because of what Barry said: first, Barry's impression was accurate, that Felicity broke it off with Oliver because he kept William secret from her (even though he'd only just found out himself) and that Oliver's head wasn't in the game as a result. Barry then tried to tell Oliver not to keep it a secret from Felicity once they'd dealt with Savage. So Barry is blameless except in the fact that he told Oliver the truth, which he did because he has a great deal of respect for Oliver.

  5. #50
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,687
    The top two suggestions have been that he should have at least told Felicity and that he should have asked a certain lawyer of his acquaintance about what he could do, even knowing that this would dig up some old wounds
    I agree he should have told Felicity, not only should Oliver not lie to her, but she also had a right to know about any future step son. That said, I would disagree with the suggestion of approaching ANY lawyer if Oliver has any concerns about William's safety. If Oliver was actually interested in going public with William as his kid, then yes, he should seek out a lawyer and take the control away from Samantha. Samantha's condition of secrecy were ridiculous with what she knew but with what WE knew, they weren't completely outlandish (She's still wrong in making them since SHE didn't know about the GA). So if all Oliver wanted was the occasional chance to interact with him and MAYBE someday in the future have claim to William as his son, no, there would be no reason to talk to a lawyer. Especially one that wouldn't know family law.
    This leads to Felicity eventually finding out, and more than likely, Laurel will, too. Katie Cassidy's remarks recently suggested she would be meeting someone we wouldn't expect her to embrace, but she will be
    Yeah I expect it to be Samantha as well, but honestly, why shouldn't she be nice to a poor woman that's going through trauma? What happened with Baby Mama and Oliver happened eleven years ago. Laurel and Oliver are SOOO not together. Why should she give a hoot about the past at this point? Side eye Oliver, sure, but there wouldn't be any good reason to heap her issues with Oliver on Samantha.
    As for the fact that Oliver is keeping it secret anyways because of what Barry said: first, Barry's impression was accurate, that Felicity broke it off with Oliver because he kept William secret from her (even though he'd only just found out himself) and that Oliver's head wasn't in the game as a result.
    Couple things. First, yes, his head wasn't on straight but the device the techie people designed to defeat Savage didn't work. Everything could have gone perfectly to plan and they still all would have died. Barry fixing the big tech solution made the biggest difference in their survival.

    The other thing is Barry only assumed they broke up. We saw them have a fight and Felicity get mad, say things and storm away hurt. Why would anyone assume they weren't going to talk about it more? Barry jumped to conclusions that really isn't supported by how Oliver and Felicity have argued in the past. She leaves, needing space to collect her thoughts and then they talk again. THat's her pattern. Barry IMO over read the situation. Plus what he told Oliver was wrong. It wasn't the kid she was mad about, it was the lie and Oliver not having any plans on ever telling her.

    So Barry is blameless except in the fact that he told Oliver the truth, which he did because he has a great deal of respect for Oliver.
    Barry has a very odd relationship with the truth. If you are a guy, you get to know. If you are a woman, NOPE!!!!!! Oh, he'll claim he wants to tell, but he'll find excuse after excuse. Unless he need to use you as bait, then maybe you get to know, but while you are dating him or he is "in love" with you? NOPE!! Yes, this weeks episode of the Flash bugs me.

    Barry is not responsible for fixing this secret between Oliver and Felicity but his knowledge is frustrating because it feels like he chose sides. And surprise, surprise, the guy's side.

  6. #51
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleDevil View Post
    I guess our difference is how we see Felicity's character. You see her comments as unintentional and her embarrassment when she lets loose a comment laced with sexual innuendo, I find it more telling of what is actually going on in her head since many of her comments would pass off as nothing spectacular if she didn't comment about how they didn't come out as she intended. By drawing clear attention to her sexual innuendo it becomes all the clearer what dual meaning her words actually have. Sure it's intentional by the writers putting those lines in but it's just as intentional her stumbling afterward in an attempt to make it look cute and innocent, the problem is I know people like that and it's not nearly as cute and innocent as the writers are trying to imply. Somebody that is constantly worried that what they say might be construed in a sexual manner is usually heavily focused on sex (at least those that I've had contact with) and the stumbling is merely an attempt to keep their inner most thoughts secret from others which is counterproductive because the continual stumbling actually makes those thoughts quite clear. Do the writers know that what they think is portraying Felicity as cute and innocent actually does quite the opposite? No idea, but those people that do make comments full of sexual innuendo unintentionally usually don't draw attention to it because they don't notice it themselves.
    I've put my foot in my mouth often enough to completely disagree. When it happens, you know. Boy oh boy do you know.

    Trying to fix it does draw more attention to the problem - whatever it is, but when it happens and suddenly you hear what you said, trying to correct yourself is near impossible to not do.

    My issue is less innuendo than accidently insulting people. (Innuendo sometimes happens too, it just doesn't embarrass me enough to get flustered, I'm more likely to point it out and share the joke if I'm not at work) I say something that I think is completely harmless and then I see the expression on someone's face and I replay back what I said and commence desperately trying to call it back and explain.

    It's nearly NEVER intentional but the second you see a flicker of reaction in someone's eye, you start scrambling fast.
    Last edited by BkWurm1; 01-27-2016 at 03:30 PM.

  7. #52
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Sep 14
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, Germany
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    I've put my foot in my mouth often enough to completely disagree. When it happens, you know. Boy oh boy do you know.

    Trying to fix it does draw more attention to the problem - whatever it is, but when it happens and suddenly you hear what you said, trying to correct yourself is near impossible to not do.

    My issue is less innuendo than accidently insulting people. (Innuendo sometimes happens too, it just doesn't embarrass me enough to get flustered, I'm more likely to point it out and share the joke if I'm not at work) I say something that I think is completely harmless and then I see the expression on someone's face and I replay back what I said and commence desperately trying to call it back and explain.

    It's nearly NEVER intentional but the second you see a flicker of reaction in someone's eye, you start scrambling fast.
    I drag out discussions for much to long because I feel people misunderstand me so I understand wanting to correct what one says, it's when those missteps are continually of a sexual nature that I no longer share the idea that they aren't subconscious or flat out intentional. When I meet somebody that makes a few of those slip ups then it's cute, when it continues after I start getting to know the person it's no longer cute but more accepted as a character flaw but very quickly becomes nothing more than cringeworthy whenever that person opens their mouth. Felicity's "glad to have you in me" or whatever the comment was was exactly that and I don't see how ANYBODY could have ever thought those could've been appropriate words in any circumstance aside from a sexual context (EDIT: maybe appropriate for a body snatcher or similar type of situation). "In my ear" I mean then I'd be saying just about anything along the lines of "hearing you" "have you back" or tons of other phrases but not "have you in me".

    Sure we all stumble and try to catch ourselves when we recognize saying something wrong but those people that are truly innocent rarely recognize WHAT they said wrong, something like speaking in a foreign language and wanting to wish somebody a nice day and instead telling them their dog just pooped in the doorway. We notice a reaction from the person we're talking to but we're not sure why. That's not Felicity, she knows exactly when she says something wrong and corrects herself immediately even if she doesn't have any means of receiving a reaction from anybody such as with the "in me" comment.
    Last edited by DoubleDevil; 01-28-2016 at 02:59 AM.

  8. #53
    Forum Whiz
    Join Date
    Sep 14
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen, Germany
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    I've put my foot in my mouth often enough to completely disagree. When it happens, you know. Boy oh boy do you know.

    Trying to fix it does draw more attention to the problem - whatever it is, but when it happens and suddenly you hear what you said, trying to correct yourself is near impossible to not do.

    My issue is less innuendo than accidently insulting people. (Innuendo sometimes happens too, it just doesn't embarrass me enough to get flustered, I'm more likely to point it out and share the joke if I'm not at work) I say something that I think is completely harmless and then I see the expression on someone's face and I replay back what I said and commence desperately trying to call it back and explain.

    It's nearly NEVER intentional but the second you see a flicker of reaction in someone's eye, you start scrambling fast.
    Please don't take this as a personal attack but could it be that you have a slight superiority complex? Subconsciously insulting people that you want to demean happens to me occasionally so that afterward when I sit down and really think the situation over I actually recognize that it wasn't really a slip of the tongue, I actually did want to insult the person on a subconscious level whether it was due to a superiority complex, a simple dislike of that particular person or simply frustration to their stubborn fixation of a stance/idea that I know from experience is wrong. Often we say things we don't mean simply because it's not politically correct or we don't want to offend somebody but on a much more subconscious level we do want to say exactly what came out of our mouths. I am usually a very kind and courteous person towards others so that people that know me find any aggressive or demeaning attitude on my part to be out of character but it does happen and it is very much part of my character, a subconscious part that I usually have very good control over.
    Last edited by DoubleDevil; 01-28-2016 at 03:43 AM.

  9. #54
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,687
    Please don't take this as a personal attack but could it be that you have a slight superiority complex?
    I'm sure I have a very...let's say "healthy" appreciation for myself but no, I do no believe in the slightest that I have a unconscious desire to insult people in order to feel superior. Especially since when it happens, it makes me always feel vastly inferior.

    Sure we all stumble and try to catch ourselves when we recognize saying something wrong but those people that are truly innocent rarely recognize WHAT they said wrong, something like speaking in a foreign language and wanting to wish somebody a nice day and instead telling them their dog just pooped in the doorway. We notice a reaction from the person we're talking to but we're not sure why. That's not Felicity, she knows exactly when she says something wrong and corrects herself immediately even if she doesn't have any means of receiving a reaction from anybody such as with the "in me" comment.

    We will have to agree to disagree. Yes, a reaction that something is off certainly helps but there are plenty of times when words come out of my mouth that don't match up with what I meant to say and thus I'm hearing them at the same time as other people so. I can start talking really fast to the point where my mouth if racing to keep up with what's flashing through my mind and I'll grab words from different thoughts and mash them together or leave out crucial terms as I skip ahead, so eager to get the idea or thought out.

    It's not always a think, then speak kind of situation where there is any conscious or unconscious thought in choosing the words that are spoken. There's a reason why WAY too often I called my Grampa Ted and Grandma Betty, Bed and Tetty. Sometimes wires cross. Sometimes overthinking about what I'm going to say gets in the way too and what comes is a piecemeal of my thoughts as I try to figure out what I want to say, how I want to say it and what I am going to say next. It's like my mouth is taking shorthand, a couple words from each considered idea and it all comes together like some wacky Mad Libs that I too am hearing for the first time as I say it.

    Felicity has two issues. A filter problem and a word choice problem.

    We know that sometimes stuff she doesn't intend to say is said aloud and I'd say her comment "I'd imagined you saying that to me under different circumstances." falls into that category. I'm hearing that you don't believe in unintentional slips or rather you believe that they are a product of the subconscious wanting to say something and seem to feel that it's something that should be controlled or rather could be controlled if she really wanted to. I disagree with that. I don't blame people for stuff that pops out that they don't want to pop out. It's a real thing and not done with calculation or malice and therefore IMO should not be viewed as such.


    Her word choice problem I see as a side product of a few situations all revolving around a mind that is too full of thoughts. Nerves and stress only add to the problem like with the "It feels so good to have you inside me" comment she made when she was going undercover. No one rationally would say a sentence like that on purpose. But they might say "It feels good to hear your voice inside my head." But as that thought forms, so does another more encompassing one, "I'm glad to have you with me." and they both fight to get out and it becomes "It feels so good to have you inside me."

    Maybe it sounds like I'm making stuff up, but I swear, I'm not. I've mashed up multiple thoughts into one cringe worthy sentence enough times to know when the brain is agitated or tired or distracted or zipping along too fast, then yeah, just about anything can come out and often I can very specifically see what words I took from what thought so I know there was no subconscious evil intent, just a cluttered mind dithering between thoughts.
    Last edited by BkWurm1; 01-28-2016 at 11:37 AM.

  10. #55
    Settling In
    Join Date
    Oct 16
    Posts
    55
    What I don't understand is, what was the problem to write Olicity in season 4 like they are writing them now.
    Why just because they were in relationship we have to endure the teenage drama crisis they had in ep 4x06, the multiple merry me propositions, the conversations about what is marriage in the middle of a gas chamber story line and the horrendous secret son stupidity.
    If they thought that the couple is so interesting to put it in the center and write so much about it, why they separated them, or if they thought that being happy is not interesting why they brought them together in the first place. So many contradictions with the decisions with this pairing.
    And they brought them to a point of a marriage proposal off screen, which for me was so unbelievable. Normal people do not propose to someone after only 6 months traveling around the world. And Oliver Queen is not the usual Joe, husband material type of guy. When they left in the end of s3, he was just about to kill himself, he sold his soul to the devil, and decided to work alone to defeat the enemy. He was definitely in a very dark place.
    Any way, now they seem back on the start, just co-workers. Oliver seems ignorant to anything that happens with Felicity and she is not sharing with him. But as a whole they look more mature and grounded people and more true to themselves. So this prove the couple was not meant to be, story wise the writers didn't have the inspiration to take them to really interesting compelling place.

  11. #56
    Forum Regular Aquahyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 11
    Location
    Bayside
    Posts
    306
    What I don't understand is, what was the problem to write Olicity in season 4 like they are writing them now.
    Why just because they were in relationship we have to endure the teenage drama crisis they had in ep 4x06, the multiple merry me propositions, the conversations about what is marriage in the middle of a gas chamber story line and the horrendous secret son stupidity.
    There is still plenty of problems with the Olicity dynamic, with or without the romance. And the way they write Felicity is still a problem. Romance or drama is not the main problem with Olicity, its how high and mighty Felicity is written as and how much focus Felicity/Olicity takes from the other stories/characters. Olicity is not a equal or healthy relationship, platonic or romance.

    Oliver seems ignorant to anything that happens with Felicity and she is not sharing with him. But as a whole they look more mature and grounded people and more true to themselves. So this prove the couple was not meant to be
    true story
    Last edited by Aquahyde; 10-27-2016 at 12:22 PM.

  12. #57
    Settling In
    Join Date
    Oct 16
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquahyde View Post
    There is still plenty of problems with the Olicity dynamic, with or without the romance. And the way they write Felicity is still a problem. Romance or drama is not the main problem with Olicity, its how high and mighty Felicity is written as and how much focus Felicity/Olicity takes from the other stories/characters. Olicity is not a equal or healthy relationship, platonic or romance.



    true story
    Why is it a problem that Felicity has a heroic moments. What bothers you, is that, she is mighty? Why not?
    I guess you prefer someone else to have more story lines and more screen time and more heroic moments but that is subjective opinion, not a problem.
    She can be the hero she is and have the screen time she has and still the story to be good, if the writing focuses more on the interesting aspects of the show and created more complicated deep characters.

  13. #58
    New In Town SwingingSpidey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 14
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    7
    Olicity has been the downfall of Arrow. I liked their friendship when it was just a one-sided crush but it never should have gone beyond that. It ruined Felicity as a character and dragged the whole show down with it.

  14. #59
    Chlark Addict BkWurm1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 08
    Location
    Land of 10,000 Lakes
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by SwingingSpidey View Post
    Olicity has been the downfall of Arrow. I liked their friendship when it was just a one-sided crush but it never should have gone beyond that. It ruined Felicity as a character and dragged the whole show down with it.
    Or Olicity still has the potential to be the brightest shining legacy of the whole series. The relationship was only a problem when the show runners tried to insert manufactured drama. But when it's genuine, like the conflict that was had in "Who are You?", it deeply resonated and was compelling to watch.

  15. #60
    Posting Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,127
    Quote Originally Posted by BkWurm1 View Post
    Or Olicity still has the potential to be the brightest shining legacy of the whole series. The relationship was only a problem when the show runners tried to insert manufactured drama. But when it's genuine, like the conflict that was had in "Who are You?", it deeply resonated and was compelling to watch.
    Whether Olicity is "Arrow's" brightest shining legacy or not is clearly in the eyes of the beholder. I mean, I have never seen any Felicity/Oliver interaction that has really resonated with me, or that I've found compelling to watch. In my eyes their scenes are either too saccharine and "cutesy" (e.g. "Felicity Smoak, you have failed this omelet"!) or overly (melo) dramatic and forced. As far as acting goes, I find many of Amell's and Rickard's romantic or emotional scenes pretty stilted. Stephen Amell is handsome and an adequate CW actor, but he is IMHO one of the least sensuous leading men on current television. As for Emily, I find that she has a pretty limited range, at least for a de facto female lead. All of this is my opinion of course, but since I feel this way it's hard to me to become engaged in their love story or view it as "Arrow's" crowning achievement.

    Furthermore, there is nothing original or groundbreaking about the Olicity romance, as many Olicity fans like to believe. What the writers have done is basically to transplant some very common Young Adult novel romance tropes onto a superhero action show, and give this romance arc so much importance that it actually overtakes the narrative sometimes. And I'm not referring to the amount of screen time devoted to Felicity/Olicity, or about the overt scenes and references to their love affair. I'm talking about that fact that so many characters and storylines are ultimately there to further the O/F romance. One good example is Felicity's season five boyfriend, who hardly appeared on screen and whose relationship with Felicity was given zero backstory. He was clearly just a prop to drive a wedge between Felicity and Oliver and stall their inevitable re-union further down the line.

    Since this is a forum where all opinions are welcome, I'll finish with paraphrasing a buddy of mine who expresses my feelings about the legacy of Olicity better than I could have done myself:

    The problem with Olicity was how the show lost its crime-fighting and mystery-past and how-is-he-going-to-carry-out-dad's-commission focus and started spending every episode on "What will they do now? Where will their relationship take us? Will they ever be able to work it all out?" while many of us were shouting, "DOWN IN FRONT, GREG, MOVE YOUR HEAD" because we wanted to see the REAL show that the writers were burying behind all the relationship drama.
    Opinions such as the above are often denounced as sexist and misogynist by Olicity fans (some of whom have no problems whatsoever talking about REAL people, e.g. ďArrowĒ actors and spouses in a most vile and misogynistic manner), or as a sign of comic book fanboyism, because it downgrades romance and human relationships. The season one Oliver/Laurel/Tommy love triangle or the season two Lance sister drama are also often adduced as proof that soapy romance and melodrama have been prominent features of ďArrowĒ (and CW) storytelling since day one. Hence it is not romance per se, but the fact that Oliver and Felicity are non-canon that is the problem....if Oliver's partner had been Laurel/BC the "comic boy fanboys" would have had no problems. This invalidates any criticism against Olicity, at least according to some shipper fans, who view ANY criticism against Felicity as a character or Olicity as a relationship as a sign of some poorly defined sexism against "strong female characters" or romance per se.


    First of all, many of the online fans who donít care especially for Olicity (or who view the emphasis on this relationship as detrimental to the show) are women, who might enjoy a dose of romance in the series they watch. Itís just that they donít enjoy/like the type of romance that Olicity represents. Furthermore, not liking a female character or a fictional relationship is not sexism or misogyny, and the best proof of this is that many Olicity fans disliked/dislike both Laurel and the Laurel/Oliver relationship with a passion, and made/make their dislike widely known all over ďArrowĒ social media. It's as if parts of the "Arrow" fandom only discovered poor treatment of female characters or fandom misogyny when Felicity ceased being a "fan favourite" and was given the same treatment as Laurel and Thea before her.....

    Secondly, itís a question of genre: when I follow and police procedural or an action/adventure/vigilante/redemption story, I expect the main story arcs and plot points to deal with solving the crime/hunting down the bad guy and all the other themes that are central to the genre. I donít expect whole episodes to be built around IMHO too flowery "fake-true" marriage vows/love declarations (as in ďBroken HeartsĒ), or that major DC villains like Raís al Ghul are used for promoting a fictional ship. Itís jarring and irritating and it gives you the impression that Guggenheim and company are writing for a specific shipper subculture rather than for a general audience. I know that many Felicity/Olicity/OTA fans feel that Felicity as a character and her romantic relationship with Oliver is the center of the show, and hence that the writers should put more emphasis on these aspects. However, when the romance focus becomes so dominant that you start clamoring for Olicity babies, I think youíre unaware of what kind of show youíre watching and the conventions of the genre.
    Last edited by evaba; 01-31-2017 at 04:27 AM.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •