-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
CBS: Roseanne Revival to Include “Gender Creative” Non-Binary Child
- Thread starter Meows
- Start date
It's gonna be framed as "economic anxiety" and nothing more, that's my guess. If they truly wanted to be real with it (which they can't seem to shut up about), the more heinous views that make up a true Trumpster wouldn't be ignored, so Roseanne can be properly judged, instead of sugar-coated.
IIRC w/ gender-non-conforming kids, the largest % of them end up identifying as gay when they're adults. So w/ trans identity off the table, it's the most likely place where they'd eventually go w/ the character if the revival ends up lasting a while, especially given that Gilbert is gay as well.
I agree with you 100% but am also unsurprised at the choice in discription seeing that we have Roseanne and Norm at the helm here. I hold neither as an vanguard on issues around gender (Gilbert is hopefully hands on deck with it though)
Maybe it's my lack of fashion sense talking, but other than the socks, what's wrong with that outfit?
I'd wear it (with different stockings) if i had the body type.
I mean, I know it was flawed, but why does everyone forget House of Lies.
Didn't he identify as a boy?
She is at the least an EP on it, and I expect her input to be the best part. I have always liked her and had a crush on her back in the day.
They live in a fictional town about an hour and a half outside of Chicago. Trust me, it gets red very fast outside of the Chicago suburbs.
As a NB creator, I don't see the genuineness of this. This honestly seems like a way for Roseanne to make fun of "millenials" (remember that vile "transtrender" terminology that assholes were trying to push last year? I have no doubt Barr would love to push that shit), and not an attempt at inclusivity. If I'm looking for awesome representation, I'm going to look elsewhere. Certainly not from a primetime sitcom, and DEFINITELY not from Roseanne Barr.
I'm sure they will have some despicable neighbors or coworkers to set up a contrast and show how the Conners aren't like those people just because they support Trump.
I wouldn't put it past them to really go hard against Trump supporters by the end, considering Roseanne like to be provocative and Sara Gilbert has creative control. Like a Trojan Horse to get the heartland™ to watch and then dress them down. The very special episodes were always the most memorable Roseanne episodes anyway.
I hate diversity done this way. Stop trying to exploit for ratings. Want to have a gender neutral character? Great. Do it. Want to include a gay kiss? Great. Do it. Stop making pronouncements about it in the media as a means of promotion. It is crass and cynical.
Let's hope this isn't the case.
It's great how rapidly things are advancing in pop culture. This could be the next Will and Grace type show, showing millions of young people that trans are human and normal. Transparent got the ball rolling, but I have a feeling a Roseanne show will have farther reach.
I do wonder if there will be some sort of ongoing season arc where Dan and Roseanne come to the realization that they were had by the Trump promises.
Barr has been quoted as saying that they'll try to make us laugh about how divided we are.
Add this news and I'm just left assuming this will be The Big Bang Theory: Trump Edition.
God I hope so. That would be fantastic. Because I honestly do not see how it could be done otherwise.
aaaaaaand there we go.
I'd be willing to check this out for Goodman and if Gilbert is producing. Also aren't both actresses that played the older daughter going to be in this? I'd like to see how that plays out. However Roseanne is wow. I can't deal with her level of bullshit. I knew the Trump supporter thing was going to be a thing as soon as I heard this revival was a possibility. It sucks even more that she dragged Goodman into that. The money has to be good if the others are willing to do this. Or it won't as much of a problem as people fear. I'm curious to see if this fails in the way I expect it to. So I'm going to look out for reports on how it turns out.
If this was the angle they would go in I'd be cool with that. That's not at all happening as Roseanne is true believer.
If this was the angle they would go in I'd be cool with that. That's not at all happening as Roseanne is true believer.
Yeah, I had similar reservations. Roseanne is decidedly antagonistic towards trans people.
Given that Jackie was 95% of the time written as neurotic and the comedic foil to level-headed Roseanne.... I really, really hope this is not just a half hour of trivializing a national crisis every week. I am not going to watch if it's just Jackie saying something that is just brushed off by Roseanne with a pithy one-liner.
We are way past the point where having a Trump sympathetic main character is responsible nor realistic. I have absolutely no idea how they plan on portraying a Trump-affected Midwest family in a positive or even neutral light.
It upsets me because some episodes of Roseanne (like many '90s sitcoms) were really, really fucking good when talking about social issues. Hell, those are the ones I remember the most.
We are way past the point where having a Trump sympathetic main character is responsible nor realistic. I have absolutely no idea how they plan on portraying a Trump-affected Midwest family in a positive or even neutral light.
It upsets me because some episodes of Roseanne (like many '90s sitcoms) were really, really fucking good when talking about social issues. Hell, those are the ones I remember the most.
Yeah... I just don't get why anyone involved in this is involved in it. The main cast and the producers, like Whitney Cummings, aren't exactly hurting for work.
So why is everyone giving a racist, transphobic asshole like Roseanne Barr a pass?
What are we supposed to do, really, though? In a thread about something that hasn't started yet? Not mention Roseanne's transphobia and swing towards far-right nuttery?
I don't think Roseanne would actually let that happen, at least in regards to her character. She still has some say here, and she's in real deep.
Reserve judgments for after the show actually airs and you can see how things are pulled off instead of judging it off dumb tweets? Speculate on potential conflicts that can be featured in the season based off what we know and how you would expect them to be resolved based off the show's history? Think of other commentary that could be included in the season that would make for interesting episode plot points? Go back to watch the original series and realize they weren't always the most progressive and had moments of self-conflict with stuff like racism and homophobia? Like damn you people are ridiculous.
All of that has been done so far in this thread, though. You're exaggerating, simply because you don't like what some people are saying about Roseanne's past.
User warned: Don't downplay bigotry as "dumb tweets". Argue in good faith.
Sure there's some, but there's also a good amount of crybabies just clamoring to call her the worst thing ever sheerly because they don't like her or don't like the topics that will be shown. It's immature.
Yes. Dumb tweets. And there's other dumb stuff. But it's yet to be established that's going to completely dictate the direction of the show, so I think it's stupid that some people just jump to immediate judgment like that. This isn't even just a Roseanne thing, this applies to anything you people cry about just because the creator did or said something you don't particularly care for and get all emotional and spiteful about.
While I'm all for more inclusiveness for minority characters of any kind, this looks very much like it has the potential to backfire very heavily. Given the people involved and how the character is described/depicted seems more like they are going to be the butt end of terrible transphobic jokes.
Are you even vaguely aware of these 'dumb tweets?' If you are, and it's so easy for you to dismiss them as just dumb, nothing really left to say
Yes, it's "ridiculous" to express concern about how gender issues will be tackled in a show both named after and helmed by a person who has been publicly antagonistic and bigoted re: said issues for years. We should have more to work with than years of personal statements by this person, knowledge of her political leanings, and the reality of her creative control of this show before committing the heinous crime of saying things out loud on the internet. On behalf of everyone here who is guilty of caring about these issues in a thread dedicated to this exact topic and are using public information to make informed comments that you don't like, I apologize.
I'll watch it. Maybe it's just Jackie and Darlene calling Roseanne a stupid, hypocritical racist every episode.
God I haven't watched a TV show proper in ages with the exception of the newest season of Curb Your Enthusiasm and the terrific Vice Principles.
I will tune into to the new Roseanne just to see what Norm wrote.