S10: Critique & Contemplation

[HPMom]

What I said was tongue-in-cheek. I'm essentially debating with all women, am I not? Didn't you guys just have some weird outburst at the thought of... something I might not pick up on?

EDIT: ... because I'm a guy?

I misinterpreted what you said too. But once you clarified I could see what part you were joking about.

[jckfan55]

And when did SG-1 ever get the congressional medal of honor? That was like rubbing salt in a wound to me- not that Sg-1 ever cared about it. That medal of honor stuff was waaaaay over the top. It really did scream "He's a hero because Congress says he is!"

Yes, it came out of nowhere. I mean he was doing his job in Antarctica just like countless other 302 pilots.

MOD NOTE:

Under the new VS, those of you who enjoyed S9/S10 are perfectly welcome to join in the discussion here in the S10 Critique and Contemplation thread. If you do however, you should expect reasonable, civil, well thought out counterarguments from those who play here regularly.

Thanks, Kat. I think we are willing to listen to a different point of view, but would hope for a good argument with examples to back it up. We probably won't be convinced , but you never know.

[KatG]

We probably won't be convinced , but you never know.

I doubt I would be convinced either, but stranger things have happened. Not sure what they are, but I'm sure they have.

[jasminaGo]

I doubt I would be convinced either, but stranger things have happened. Not sure what they are, but I'm sure they have.

Well, there was that time when we all switched bodies, the time you got really old... errrr.... wait... that wasn't us.

[KatG]

Well, there was that time when we all switched bodies, the time you got really old... errrr.... wait... that wasn't us.

Are you sure?

[jasminaGo]

Are you sure?

I'm absolutely 100% certain that... I'm... not sure... I think...

[VSS]

I'm so sorry for being sexist and insinuating that in any way you or anyone else is a fangirl because you had an outburst at the thought of something I didn't pick up on but was very shocking and required brain bleach for everyone involved. (And had something to do with shipping and someone being "very grateful.")

Seriously, it's not hard to guess from looking at you guys' sigs, avatars, etc.

EDIT for specifics:
I see: Flowers, mom, Mandy, Jasmin, "Shipper rewatch," compulsive giggling.

What am I supposed to think?

Well, there are plenty of shippers that are men. But beyond, that, I don't really know what you're supposed to think. Or more specifically, why it would matter what gender anyone on this thread is. It just surprised me that you would even bring that up, that's all.

[Vladius]

So anyway...

Cameron Mitchell. Discuss.

[KatG]

So anyway...

Cameron Mitchell. Discuss.

I'd much rather discuss Jack O'Neill. His hands, his feet, his eyes, his smile... *drifts off*

Ooops, wrong thread.

Seriously though, what do you want to discuss about Cam Mitchell? Pose some questions or state a point for discussion.

[Vladius]

I'd much rather discuss Jack O'Neill. His hands, his feet, his eyes, his smile... *drifts off*

Ooops, wrong thread.

Seriously though, what do you want to discuss about Cam Mitchell? Pose some questions or state a point for discussion.

Weren't we already discussing him?

Here, I'll repost what I said.

I just think everybody is being a little too harsh on the writers. Yes, they needed a male lead, but the way it's portrayed isn't too bad.

Mostly I'm responding to people who say that he should be just a new member, and not the leader. It was his team. You don't get your command usurped by people that you chose to integrate.

[Ashizuri]

I'd much rather discuss Jack O'Neill. His hands, his feet, his eyes, his smile... *drifts off*

Ooops, wrong thread.

It's always the right thread for a bit of Jack/RDA appreciation. Always.

I just think everybody is being a little too harsh on the writers. Yes, they needed a male lead, but the way it's portrayed isn't too bad.

Mostly I'm responding to people who say that he should be just a new member, and not the leader. It was his team. You don't get your command usurped by people that you chose to integrate.

But why did they need a male lead? Why? Sam had proven herself to be a capable leader, and Daniel and Teal'c followed her lead far more often/willingly than they ever followed Mitchell's. The writer's didn't need a male lead, they wanted one because science fiction has an issue with strong women in a leadership role.

I'm not trying to rehash any sexist comments/discussions that were made here ( I missed the entire conversation), but other than TPTB thinking that they would lose the coveted male demographic, what was the reason to give Sam's command away?

People have responded as to why they think he should have been a new member instead of leader, I really do recommend going back and reading our posts to get a clear idea of why we feel that way.

[Vladius]

But why did they need a male lead? Why? Sam had proven herself to be a capable leader, and Daniel and Teal'c followed her lead far more often/willingly than they ever followed Mitchell's. The writer's didn't need a male lead, they wanted one because science fiction has an issue with strong women in a leadership role.

I'm not trying to rehash any sexist comments/discussions that were made here ( I missed the entire conversation), but other than TPTB thinking that they would lose the coveted male demographic, what was the reason to give Sam's command away?

People have responded as to why they think he should have been a new member instead of leader, I really do recommend going back and reading our posts to get a clear idea of why we feel that way.

No, they have zero problems with women in a leadership role. Stop seeing sexism where there is none. (Why would Elizabeth Weir and Samantha Carter be in charge of the lost city of Atlantis if that were true?)

It's clear she didn't want a command. There wasn't one to "give away."

Most of the viewers of the show are male, and they need someone to relate to to enjoy the show. It wouldn't be fun for anyone to see Sam or any woman get consistently beaten almost to death, but for an "average" guy like Mitchell it's expected.

I think you guys are looking at it a different way than I am. What I'm examining are the in-universe reasons for his leadership, and what you're examining are the writers' reasons for it.

[suse]

Weren't we already discussing him?

Here, I'll repost what I said.

I just think everybody is being a little too harsh on the writers. Yes, they needed a male lead, but the way it's portrayed isn't too bad.

Mostly I'm responding to people who say that he should be just a new member, and not the leader. It was his team. You don't get your command usurped by people that you chose to integrate.

Okay, I'll bite..

WHY
in Hades
did they need MALE lead?

Why was it 'his team'?

I recognize they had all the main characters back but O'Neill. (And honestly, by the time S8 rolled to the end, I was fine with RDA being gone, I thought it would improve the stories to not have to work around his crazy schedule. Geez, was I EVER wrong...) And wanted to use them in some capacity. I understand having 2 teams (your "SG-3") to follow would have made writing the stories harder. However...

There was no reason to put the character *as written* in charge of anything, much less SG-1, especially when SG-1 turned in to a team of veterans - one of whom had lead *that same team* for a year. He. Did. Not. Have. The. Proper. Training. As. Established. In. Canon.

Please explain, with examples taken from the show, how his leading improved their team function.

suse

[VSS]

No, they have zero problems with women in a leadership role. Stop seeing sexism where there is none. (Why would Elizabeth Weir and Samantha Carter be in charge of the lost city of Atlantis if that were true?)

None of us are privy to the thoughts or feelings of the writers. Some of us have suggested sexism because there is not a logical, in-universe reason to give the command to Lt. Colonel with no off-world experience when there is a Lt. Colonel with years of off-world experience available. Cam may have admired Sam, but he doesn't own that leadership role. He should not have assumed that she wouldn't want it back had she returned.

It's clear she didn't want a command. There wasn't one to "give away."

How was it clear that she didn't want a command? She was out at Area 51, but that has nothing to do with how she would look at her role at the SGC. And, does it matter what Sam wants? This is the military. After all, she was ordered to return. And the command was given away- by General Landry. Logically, it should have gone to Sam.

Most of the viewers of the show are male, and they need someone to relate to to enjoy the show.

This strikes me as sexist. But, I could be seeing some where there is none.

I think you guys are looking at it a different way than I am. What I'm examining are the in-universe reasons for his leadership, and what you're examining are the writers' reasons for it.

Again, it might behoove you to go back and read the actual posts.

[suse]

No, they have zero problems with women in a leadership role. Stop seeing sexism where there is none. (Why would Elizabeth Weir and Samantha Carter be in charge of the lost city of Atlantis if that were true?)

It's clear she didn't want a command. There wasn't one to "give away."

And yet Mitchell tried to do just that (give it away) when he was trying to entice her to come back.

She didn't want a command? Why was she so pleased when she got SG-1 in S8? Why did she take a command at Area 51?

She came back because she was ordered back to Stargate Command.

Note she wasn't ordered on to SG-1. That came later. And came over as false (to me).

Most of the viewers of the show are male, and they need someone to relate to to enjoy the show. It wouldn't be fun for anyone to see Sam or any woman get consistently beaten almost to death, but for an "average" guy like Mitchell it's expected.

Men can't relate to a man on the show *that isn't in a leadership role*.
Right.

I think you guys are looking at it a different way than I am. What I'm examining are the in-universe reasons for his leadership, and what you're examining are the writers' reasons for it.

And yet look at your reasoning as to why "most of the viewers" need Mitchell. Hardly in-universe.

SGA off-topic:

Spoiler:

The women who lead SGA didn't do much leading. They administrated. In Weir's case she was allowed to be -and was- over-ruled by Shep any time he decided it was a safety issue. Face it. The show was about energy-sucking aliens trying to eat humans. When *wasn't* it about safety? Sam was slightly better. But in an effort to integrate her they made to bend to Shep's knowledge too much. She listened to him, agreed with him and send him on his way. Whoop-de-do. Woolsey.. well at least they didn't allow him to lead either. But by that point imo they were just following the template set in earlier seasons. You know, the one where the Read Male Action Hero leads. At least on SG-1 Hammond was effective.

suse