<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[Sliders.tv — 2016 "Hillary" article on The Weaker Sex]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="https://sliders.tv/bboard/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=365&amp;type=atom" />
	<updated>2020-04-23T23:51:05Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?id=365</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: 2016 "Hillary" article on The Weaker Sex]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9623#p9623" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>I agree that Weaker Sex was more focused on the male perspective, but I get the impression that the original idea teased in that article may have been a little too much on the female side.&nbsp; To capture both perspectives and draw in viewers, I would try looking at a more common ground.&nbsp; What do men and women argue about?&nbsp; Give something both can relate to so that viewers are engaged; and then take the opportunity to maybe get them to see things from a different perspective.</p><p>One example would be from an article I read years ago - the argument over what to eat.&nbsp; The woman usually asks the man, and then the man often says it doesn’t matter to him and defers to the woman to try to please her.&nbsp; This instead has the opposite effect and angers the woman.&nbsp; And if the man does present a decision, the woman starts giving other options which angers the man because he thought the problem was solved but she wouldn’t seem to accept it.</p><p>Why does this happen?&nbsp; The article presented that what the woman is looking for is options to choose from - not to be told what to do or have it thrown back to her to decide alone, but instead be given options she can pick from.</p><p>So how do you use this to present a different way of looking at things through an alternate reality where women dominate?&nbsp; Maybe you could have a world where everything is polled.&nbsp; Arturo goes to buy an ice cream; he makes his decision; but the clerk presents three other options before allowing him to buy. This starts to annoy Arturo who demands his ice cream; and then the clerk says he needs to fill out a satisfaction survey.&nbsp; Arturo loses his cool.</p><p>The theme would be “How Arturo learned to love and loathe the poll”.&nbsp; Keeping the election plot line, we could see that primaries aren’t used on this world - for instance, you could have 3 Democrats to choose from on general Election Day.&nbsp; Arturo would be the unusual sole candidate for his party; polls showing that people like his solitary strength as one, clear choice that cuts through what many voters have come to see as a muddy process of uncertainty.&nbsp; This then leads to the crying stunt to throw the election and shatter what people perceived Arturo to be.&nbsp; Arturo would no longer be an easy, quantifiable certainty.</p><p>It’s not much different than what we got, but it opens a door for discussion of why primaries are not used on this world.&nbsp; Then we can explore what women want and how Arturo’s decision to cry ultimately didn’t give him what he wanted (losing the election).&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because after the crying, women were given their multiple options to choose from in one man - the ability to choose drew them in where they were previously repulsed by his one dimension.</p><p>Anyway, one rough idea of how the differing viewpoints could be presented.&nbsp; There’s a lot to mine there in the differences between how men and women think; and better avenues than just plugging a woman into the bully mentality or sexual predator stereotype.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[TemporalFlux]]></name>
				<uri>https://sliders.tv/bboard/profile.php?id=4</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2020-04-23T23:51:05Z</updated>
			<id>https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9623#p9623</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: 2016 "Hillary" article on The Weaker Sex]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9614#p9614" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Interesting.&nbsp; I do feel like more could&#039;ve been done to think through some of these worlds.&nbsp; I don&#039;t think there was ever really any thought that was (allowed to be) put into what really would&#039;ve happened.&nbsp; It really was &quot;change one thing&quot; and then redress the sets and guess stars.&nbsp; </p><p>It&#039;s one reason I like the idea (which I didn&#039;t come up with) of doing episode pods in a reboot of Sliders.&nbsp; Do one world for 3-4 episodes and really dig into that world.&nbsp; It gives a chance for storylines to develop on each world, gives the writers a chance to really show the Sliders adapting to and improving the process, and it would allow writers the chance to build 4-6 deep worlds instead of having to come up with 15-20 per year.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Slider_Quinn21]]></name>
				<uri>https://sliders.tv/bboard/profile.php?id=9</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2020-04-22T16:30:00Z</updated>
			<id>https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9614#p9614</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[2016 "Hillary" article on The Weaker Sex]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9613#p9613" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p><a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/7/13553516/sliders-hillary-clinton">https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/7/1 … ry-clinton</a></p><p>Very interesting article from 2016, which I think we must have missed on this board.&nbsp; Author speaks to the co-writers of the draft script, Dawn Prestwich &amp; Nicole Yorkin, and their disappoint over the final script.&nbsp; They decided not to work on Sliders again.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Grizzlor]]></name>
				<uri>https://sliders.tv/bboard/profile.php?id=23</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2020-04-22T15:53:26Z</updated>
			<id>https://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=9613#p9613</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
