Browder's character should OUTRANK Carter

[Madeleine]

We'll never know if gender is an issue because TPTB will never tell us what their decisions would have been if AT had been available for the whole season. They might not even know themselves. I'm sure they'd have still got new actors in, but would they still have 'needed' someone as big as Browder? Would they still hire someone new to play the role of CO, or would they have added someone to the team in another function?

They'll never tell us.

[the dancer of spaz]

We'll never know if gender is an issue because TPTB will never tell us what their decisions would have been if AT had been available for the whole season. They might not even know themselves. I'm sure they'd have still got new actors in, but would they still have 'needed' someone as big as Browder? Would they still hire someone new to play the role of CO, or would they have added someone to the team in another function?

They'll never tell us.

I know. It sucks, but I DEFINITELY don't blame them for not touching that hot topic.

Still... the not knowing, the possibilities... I'll try not to lose any sleep over it.

[binkpmmc]

REad mine. I said arguments, not opinions

It is unfortunate that you view anyone with an opinion that differs from yours as arguing with you.

I may have misunderstood, but it seemed to me you were implying BB wouldn't/couldn't play second fiddle to a woman.

Yup - you did.

You are the only one consistently mentioning that fact currently.
Others have mentioned it, but it's a 38+ page thread.

OHHH currently - let's see I have not posted here in about a month and all of my posts prior to this focused on the issue of whether Carter quit the team or left voluntarily or whether it was disbanded. But currently I made one post expressing my opinions (along with several related posts made as clarification or follow-up to others regarding that same post), which, in your opinion, are really argurments, so everything I say is based on gender. If you read my post in an effort to understand it, as opposed to an opportunity to once again attack someone or claim you are being attacked, you will see that my opinions are based on the current PR campaign and statements made by TPTB to date and those opinions are focused on the reality of TPTB and suits making a decison to have a MALE lead - not on the fiction of whether or not Carter is fit to command or the best for the job - IMO, the decison TPTB and suits have made has, unfortunately, nothing to do with whether the fictional character is capable or whether the character should lead - it is about the reality of the decisonmaking process that feels there has to be a MALE lead on the show.

Yeah, that's it. It's not like they want to promote this new lead actor they've hired, they are just making sure everyone knows a guy is in charge again.

Promote the lead MALE - that is what it is.

Hmm, now they are scared of having a woman leader.
[sarcasm] Good thing too, or those uppirty women folk will want the vote next.[/sarcasm].
I highly , highly doubt TPTB are afraid of showing compentent women.

Sarcasm is never attractive when done poorly. I never said TPTB are afraid of showing competent women - I said they have an irrational fear of letting a woman be the lead of the show - it is what it is, IMO.

Yup read it.

Whereas calling us all stupid, uninformed lemmings was sweetness and light.
I did not attack your opijnions, I attacked your arguments. I am not trying to fight with anyone, but I give as good as I get, if you think I am attacking you, maybe you should read your own stuff and see where I might be feeling attacked and responding???

Good thing you read it - but you still didn't understand it. I won't repeat my reply - it stands on its own in my post to SueS.

Cuase quite frankly, I'm tired of the blanket sexist label you throw over everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Please back this up with something, anything that indicates I made a blanket statement about anyone who disagrees with me being sexist. I actually started my post - the one that seems to have sent you over an edge somewhere, with a disclaimer that stated quite clearly: "this is not a statement as to whether anyone here is anti-Carter or anti-female leader or sexist or anything else - this is my opinion on why mitchell remains in charge IF that turns out to be the case." If you indeed read my original post, and it's follow up replies to others, with any care to understanding it you would have gotten this. Your statement is a complete and total fallacy because you take things too personally when someone deigns to disagree with you. I defy you to point out anywhere that I made a statement labeling anyone who disagrees with me as sexist.

My post was not directed at anyone, least of all you. I tuned you out a long time ago but feel the need to rebut your complete and total misrepresentations on my opinions, misrepresentations that have absolutely no basis in fact except your feeling of being "attacked" yet again. If I had a dime for every time you have accused someone of attacking you on this thread I would not be here as I would have enough money to have run off to Monte Carlo on my nice new 75 foot yacht with its captain and crew of 10. Stop taking everything personally even when posters make statements that they are not directing their opinions towards other posters.

Carter isn't leading the team, so the men are afraid of a woman.

Again, if you cared to read my original post, and its follow-up posts in reply to other posters, with any hope of understanding it you would see that nowhere does it say that men are afraid of women - where do you get this stuff? You have a very fertile imagination I'll say that for you.

[Lightsabre]

Exactly. Actually, this should have been nipped in the bud in season one. What SG-1 does is infantry work, is it not? So why bother having a WOMAN in the MILITARY doing INFANTRY work? I'd say SG-1 pretty "routinely" engaged armed jaffa and aliens.

People, understand this.
Another person raised the feasibilitiy of Daniel being put into the team in real life, saying that an archiologist wouldn't be put in a combat team.
My reply was, to get around that, and the pesky little reg of no women in frontline combat, SG-1 is actually a team of EXPLORERS.
I never said that no women should be on SG teams. I never said that Carter should not be on SG teams.
I merely responded to someone questioning the realism of the show.
I agree with all you wrote dancer.
I just wasn't attacking carter with the argument, just rebutting an argument. Unfortunately, it snowballed.

[Lightsabre]

It is unfortunate that you view anyone with an opinion that differs from yours as arguing with you.

In a debate, facts used to validate your side or invalidate the other side are called 'arguments'. This is what I attacked.
Not your opinion.

OHHH currently - let's see I have not posted here in about a month and all of my posts prior to this focused on the issue of whether Carter quit the team or left voluntarily or whether it was disbanded. But currently I made one post expressing my opinions (along with several related posts made as clarification or follow-up to others regarding that same post), which, in your opinion, are really argurments, so everything I say is based on gender.

All of your current posts have referred to gender. But really, in the post I quoted that got you so worked up, you BLATENTLY, referred to gender.
This what I was talking about.

If you read my post in an effort to understand it, as opposed to an opportunity to once again attack someone or claim you are being attacked, you will see that my opinions are based on the current PR campaign and statements made by TPTB to date and those opinions are focused on the reality of TPTB and suits making a decison to have a MALE lead
- not on the fiction of whether or not Carter is fit to command or the best for the job -IMO, the decison TPTB and suits have made has, unfortunately, nothing to do with whether the fictional character is capable or whether the character should lead - it is about the reality of the decisonmaking process that feels there has to be a MALE lead on the show.

Again, this is bringing gender intot he argument. Can you show one shred of proof that BB only got the job cuase he's a guy?? or that TPTB decided they HAD to have a leading man?

Promote the lead MALE - that is what it is.

SInce BB is a guy, yes it is. But I fully believe they would have promoted a woman just as much in teh same circumstance.

Sarcasm is never attractive when done poorly. I never said TPTB are afraid of showing competent women - I said they have an irrational fear of letting a woman be the lead of the show - it is what it is, IMO.

Ah, thanks for the advice.

Please back this up with something, anything that indicates I made a blanket statement about anyone who disagrees with me being sexist. I actually started my post - the one that seems to have sent you over an edge somewhere, with a disclaimer that stated quite clearly: "this is not a statement as to whether anyone here is anti-Carter or anti-female leader or sexist or anything else - this is my opinion on why mitchell remains in charge IF that turns out to be the case."

You did. But the inference on a lot of your posts is gender oriented.
I can say, "I don't mean to be racist" then slander black people.
That's still racist.
You didn't accuse people of being sexist outright, but the tone is there.

If you indeed read my original post, and it's follow up replies to others, with any care to understanding it you would have gotten this. Your statement is a complete and total fallacy because you take things too personally when someone deigns to disagree with you. I defy you to point out anywhere that I made a statement labeling anyone who disagrees with me as sexist.

See above. And I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. I have a problem when they imply things about me.

Again, if you cared to read my original post, and its follow-up posts in reply to other posters, with any hope of understanding it you would see that nowhere does it say that men are afraid of women - where do you get this stuff? You have a very fertile imagination I'll say that for you.

REally??

I said they have an irrational fear of letting a woman be the lead of the show

Now, if I have a fear of somethign, I'm afraid of it, right??

[binkpmmc]

In a debate, facts used to validate your side or invalidate the other side are called 'arguments'. This is what I attacked.

I stated opinions and in no way shape or form entered a debate with you - unfortunately you take everything that is said as either an attack on you or an argument against you and use it as an excuse to attack that poster - lighten up buddy - not everyone's posts revolve around you and your opinions and not everyone writes their opinions down in an effort to debate you and your opinions. You, in fact were the last thing on my mind when I wrote that post, check that, you never even entered the thought process or the mind or the picture - at all.

Now, if I have a fear of somethign, I'm afraid of it, right??

Are you one of TPTB or a suit at MGM or just a man who personalizes everything said about women as an attack against him because you are a man? The use of the word "I" is what has me questioning this . . . . I never said a word about a fear of competent women which, if you recall, was one of your previous false accusations and I was responding to it - you misinterpret what is written for the sake of argument and attack. Yes - if you have a fear of something you are afraid of it, however, competent women is not what I said (I said, and will stand by having said it, having a woman in the lead role. TPTB and suits are afraid of that and they need to have a male in the lead role) and it had nothing to do with you.

You did. But the inference on a lot of your posts is gender oriented.
I can say, "I don't mean to be racist" then slander black people.
That's still racist.
You didn't accuse people of being sexist outright, but the tone is there.

Very fertile imagination. A lot? of my posts - please, please quote my posts that are gender oriented - excluding, of course, yesterday's post which I have already said is gender based and logically it's follow-up posts since they are ABOUT the original post in relation to responding to posts from others so it stands to reason that those follow-up posts will be about the same subjects and therefore gender will be mentioned. God forbid anyone here use the term woman or female lest it be an "attack" on you, and all men in the world.

You make it sound as if I have many posts here that are gender based - which is false. I made one post yesterday, the first in about a month, and it was, as I have already acknowledged gender based. It was NOT, however, directed towards you as clearly stated. There are also several follow-up posts that are obviously related to the first post because others engaged me on the post - they are not new posts written to express any new opinions - just discussion with other posters referencing the first post - do you understand that?)

Again I defy you to quote me anywhere, anytime accusing YOU of being sexist (my post expresses my opinion that TPTB and the suits are sexist in their decisionmaking processes for the show). Please do not presume to state what my posts mean by injecting your interpretation of their tone - you are so off base and so out of line with that one it borders on exhibiting paranoid tendencies. BTW - my post had nothing to do with you - you were not even close to my thoughts when I wrote the post - your opinions are not relevant to me and the only reason I am engaging you now is because you consistently misrepresent what I said and make false accusations against me.

I will, from here on in, choose to ignore your outbursts and false accusations in the knowledge that your imagination is fertile and that I have no reason to explain my opinions when they are unfairly attacked, especially to you.

[Tucker Case]

Would they still hire someone new to play the role of CO, or would they have added someone to the team in another function?

Well, the sort of did both, didn't they?

For all the back-and-forth we've been doing in here, TPTB didn't bring in Ben Browder to replace or "fill-in" for Amanda: They brought in Claudia Black to do that.

All declarations and assurances from Browder to the contrary, they brought him in to replace RDA, and then put his character back on the front-line team - where "that character" (i.e., the tough but loveable old-school military action hero) belongs - and brought Beau Bridges in to return us to a more Hammond-esque style of general, and I'm pretty darn certain they'd have done the same whether Amanda was around all season or not: The "RDA-gap" was there, regardless, and they wanted a certain type of actor, and certain type of character, to fill it in.

I'd feel less certain of this if they hadn't brought Claudia Black in, but they did: Amanda's absence necessitated the hiring of a short-term "female character." Enter Vala (and exit Vala when Carter returns to resume her female duties).

If you ask me, that's the only difference we'd have seen had Amanda not been on maternity leave: Browder (or someone like him) would still be there, Black wouldn't. Vala would have returned, yes, and maybe even as a "recurring" character in several episodes over the course of the season, but not for six consecutive episodes off the top.

Thing is, as much as this might or might not say about their unwillingness to have a woman leading the team, I think it also says at least as much about their unwillingness to have a certain type of character - a starry-eyed, pacifist intellectual with a mystical bent (oh, let's not mince words, once a "geek," always a geek) - as their effective leading man, which is what Daniel would have become if Sam had maintained full control of the team and a "lesser name" had been brought in to take up the fourth position.

It seems to me their "leading man" requirements go somewhat beyond the applicant simply being a man. He must also be a particular model of Alpha Male (and the romantic - in the literary, not hearts & flowers, sense - archetype ain't it).

Of course, this leaves me in the peculiar position of possibly (maybe, likely) getting the team dynamic I prefer on the show, but being rather suspicious of how and why this came to be. I should be righteously irked, but I'm more of a mind that, if they can make this work, I'll be quite pleased.

I can soapbox just for the fun of it, right?

Tucker
(Geez, it took me three tries to spell my name right. Where's my coffee?)

[Sum1]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the regulation SueS posted above for the army? It could be different for the airforce.

[Ace]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the regulation SueS posted above for the army? It could be different for the airforce.

It's the same for all the Armed Forces...

Ace

[Ace]

Is Ferretti still around, because it seems to me like he should be next in line for the flagship team - he's been going through the gate longer than anyone except Jack and Daniel.

We haven't seen Ferretti since the first or second season, and haven't heard about him since the third. But assuming he is still around he would certainly be the most experienced person to lead the team. As he has been going through the gate just as long as Jack and even longer than Daniel as Daniel took a year off to do ascended stuff...

Ace

[jckfan55]

We haven't seen Ferretti since the first or second season, and haven't heard about him since the third. But assuming he is still around he would certainly be the most experienced person to lead the team. As he has been going through the gate just as long as Jack and even longer than Daniel as Daniel took a year off to do ascended stuff...

Ace

I like Ferretti & wouldn't mind seeing him again. But I'm sure TPTB didn't see him as leading man material. Now that Baldwin has another job, maybe SG1 will interact with Ferretti's team instead.

[Crichton]

Just curious...can someone explain to me why it's a bad thing to be a fan of Farscape?? I keep reading about the dreaded disease known as "Browder favoritism" and I'm confused. Is it "not loyal to SG-1" to be a fan of MacGyver??

I think they're both great shows (SG-1 & Farscape). Who cares what reason people have for watching SG-1? I was a huge fan of Farscape for years and never found a chance to get into SG-1 since it has such long story arcs and I missed the beginning. Then when Atlantis came out I had to try watching both Atlantis and SG-1. Then after a couple of episodes I broke down and bought all 7 available SG-1 seasons and I'm hooked.

All Sci-Fi shows have actors from other Sci-Fi shows. Have you ever tried to count the # of SG-1 actors that also appear in X-Files? or Battlestar Galactica?

I just don't see a problem with actors who enjoy focusing on Sci-Fi.

[smurf]

Just curious...can someone explain to me why it's a bad thing to be a fan of Farscape?? I keep reading about the dreaded disease known as "Browder favoritism" and I'm confused. Is it "not loyal to SG-1" to be a fan of MacGyver??

I think they're both great shows (SG-1 & Farscape). Who cares what reason people have for watching SG-1? I was a huge fan of Farscape for years and never found a chance to get into SG-1 since it has such long story arcs and I missed the beginning. Then when Atlantis came out I had to try watching both Atlantis and SG-1. Then after a couple of episodes I broke down and bought all 7 available SG-1 seasons and I'm hooked.

All Sci-Fi shows have actors from other Sci-Fi shows. Have you ever tried to count the # of SG-1 actors that also appear in X-Files? or Battlestar Galactica?

I just don't see a problem with actors who enjoy focusing on Sci-Fi.

I don't think anyone said it's a bad thing to be a fan of farscape. Seems like there are plenty of long term SG fans who like Farscape.
It seems to be more a problem of having people appear saying how wonderful a character will be before they've got to know them, getting over-protective of the actors, and sometimes bad-mouthing the original SG-1 characters or actors at the same time.
It's not nice, see.
Too much of it winds people up, especially those of us who've been watching for a very long time.

In context of this thread, it's about who should be in charge. An old friend or the new guy? And whether TPTB have the guts to have a female commander.

[Sum1]

Just curious...can someone explain to me why it's a bad thing to be a fan of Farscape?? I keep reading about the dreaded disease known as "Browder favoritism" and I'm confused. Is it "not loyal to SG-1" to be a fan of MacGyver??

I think they're both great shows (SG-1 & Farscape). Who cares what reason people have for watching SG-1? I was a huge fan of Farscape for years and never found a chance to get into SG-1 since it has such long story arcs and I missed the beginning. Then when Atlantis came out I had to try watching both Atlantis and SG-1. Then after a couple of episodes I broke down and bought all 7 available SG-1 seasons and I'm hooked.

All Sci-Fi shows have actors from other Sci-Fi shows. Have you ever tried to count the # of SG-1 actors that also appear in X-Files? or Battlestar Galactica?

I just don't see a problem with actors who enjoy focusing on Sci-Fi.

It's not a bad thing to be a fan of Farscape, nor is it a bad thing that Ben Browder and Claudia Black will be on Stargate together. What has made some people uncomfortable is that certain people have spoken about how much better Farscape is, how lucky we are to have Ben and Claudia improving Stargate, that RDA is a terrible actor, etc. Essentially, the problem is that a small number of people want to impress their love of Farscape (which in itself is a good thing) on others here and it has left some people a bit upset. Being told that having Ben and Claudia will bring this terrible show that is Stargate up to the great wonderful quality that is Farscape can make some people regret the cast changes.

Personally, I don't want Stargate this season to be based on pulling in fans of Ben and Claudia solely. Stargate has always had great stories and characters that it has used well most of the time. I don't want to see Claudia return to the show continuously if she doesn't have an interesting and entertaining story to contribute. I don't want her to be fit in to please those (however few they may be) fans that want to see her, and that the rest of the show is secondary. I personally wasn't too impressed with Vala in season 8's Prometheus Unbound, so hopefully we'll see more of her character other than the sex angle with Daniel.

As for Ben's character, it's hard to connect with him and to say he should lead the team that has been watched here by some fans for eight years when so little is known about him. It's nothing against him personally, but the new guy has to be brought in and integrated into the group and some feel that making him the leader off the bat is just not appropriate.

[Crichton]

It makes more sense now that you explain it...

I agree with you that Vala's character is a little 2-D. They should either expand her character a bit or severely limit her episodes.