Yes I alluded to that earlier. If the writers are remembering their history, Jimmy should have the biggest issue with it after Andy. In some ways even more so because Andy was in some ways responsible (albeit accidentally) for starting their fued (by starting the fire and then trying to kill him) whereas Jimmy did nothing to him (unless i'm forgetting something) but Robert slept with his wife and caused his brothers death.

That was it They're making out Robert's girl friend is older and so maturer I'd have thought. Therefore wouldn't she have been a bit embarrassed with that carry on

Ah yes, Charity and Marlon, how could I forget!

Sarah did get wed before the transplant though.

Victoria did still have her water phobia when she fell through the ice. I think that was one of the reasons she found it so terrifying!

I don't think they'll mention Walter. I do get annoyed when people moan about head-transplants. Yes they take getting used to but some people don't seem willing to give them a chance. However the one time it doesn't work so well is when they refer back to something specific. So Victoria reminiscing about Walter possibly wouldn't sit quite right, just as it didn't when she reminisced about announcing Diane's cancer at the wedding. When you're using the same actor you know they're genuinely remembering the moment. However when the actor has changed you think 'yeah but you're only pretending to remember that'.

Come on! Everyone, from Betty to Victoria. has had a pop at Katie and her ferocious sexual appetite.
They are poking fun at a character and what is wrong with that?

Yep, Cain the man who called his sister a slag for sleeping with Cameron despite the fact that he slept with Debbie's gf at one point. He loves women that one


Is that a serious question? This show is rife with sexism. I highly doubt every sexist moment is simply poking fun, just like the slams at Katie's expense are not. Where are the "joke" comments about the male characters sleeping around?

Speaking of Victoria, remember when she had a one nighter with Ross and people here called her names? Not Ross though. Hilarious.

Exactly. I guess she's going to be yet another female character that bitches and slags of other women for having a sex life. There isn't one woman in ED that hasn't 'slut shamed' another woman, I know it's realistic to have a few but not ALL of them should be misogynistic and the ones that are should be called out on their outdated double standards.

It's not poking fun though, the remarks thrown at Katie and other female characters aren't harmless, those 'pops' at Katie end up making her look like she's less or that she's wrong or bad or dirty for having had multiple relationships. It also adds to the general attitude in society that it's okay to make snide remarks at girls and judge them and look down at them if they have a sex life or if they've had lots of failed relationships.


Yep, Cain had no right to call Chas anything, at least Chas slept with Cameron because she was in love with him and at least he was a similar age to her. What Cain did was a million times worse, he only slept with Jasmine because he wanted to hurt Debbie, oh also Jasmine was a teenager and he got her pregnant!! It doesn't get much sluttier and dirtier than that.

I noticed the Victoria 'slut shaming' on here after she had the ONS, nothing was said about Ross though when it was established that he was having multiple ONS's whereas Victoria hadn't had sex in ages. The sexism, misogyny and double standards on here is off putting and quite disgusting.
Last edited by ferdybookgeek : 23-10-2014 at 23:58

I stay away from the board on occasion after reading sexist posts/threads. It's sometimes hard to believe women post here, but then I remember that we can be just as bad, which makes it worse

I do basically agree with you and can see the argument that things will never change whilst soaps are like this but sadly, women do tend to get talked about more in these terms in real life so soaps are just reflecting that - even though it isn't fair.

I mean just in our language, it is inherently sexist. Look at all the terms for a woman that has a lot of sexual partners - slag, slut, slapper, loose - they are all derogatory. Look at the terms for men - stud, playboy, sowing his wild oats - much more positive. Even bachelor or spinster. One makes it sound like the person is having a great time enjoying the single life through his own choice - the other conjures up an image of a dried up, bitter, on the shelf woman that no man has ever wanted and it has ruined their life.

There was actually a reference to David Metcalfe having been with virtually every woman in the Village at Priya's hen night a couple of weeks ago.

This reminds me of the people who argue that it's harder for men in general to "score" women and that's why they don't get called names. So basically, because the female gender tends to be more selective and men tend to be "up for it" pretty much most of the time, it's the women who are less selective that need shaming.

I just can't with that logic

I'm not saying that at all. Really can you spell out in my post where I seemed to say that?

I was saying that we still live in a somewhat sexist world and soaps are reflecting that.

I'm not saying that is right (it obviously isn't), or that I like it (I don't - i'm a liberated middle aged woman - why would I like it) or that I don't want it to change (I do).

There is nothing wrong with women being less 'selective' provided they aren't hurting anybody. Likewise men. It is the double standards to that which is being discussed and whether soaps are unfairly depicting them.

At least that is what I thought was being discussed.

I didn't say you said that...

I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

May I ask what you did mean by saying my post reminded you of people that say nature makes men more promiscuous and women less so and therefore women that don't conform should be shamed?

Oops, sorry. I just noticed that I didn't highlight the part of your post about women having a lot of negative slut shaming names, but not men. My post was meant to reflect on how men are excused and even praised for their sex life, but women are called names.

Oh okay. Thanks for clarifying. We're on the same page then.

Sorry if I got overly defensive, it's just it is such an explosive subject sometimes and so easy to be taken the wrong way.

Anyone who's morals are based on what they see in a soap, is in need of help!
Last week, on Celeb Gogglebox. Downtown's, Lady Mary , was slaughtered for being a 'slag' by both males and females on the show. They were all clearly just poking fun at a fictional character.

Yes, I'd agree with that. I don't think they were seriously having a pop at women sleeping around, certainly not in this day and age but they were commenting (correctly) that in the twenties her behaviour would not have been considered 'ladylike'. But whilst also saying that it as fair enough and sensible that she should want to take the man she was thinking of marrying out for a 'test drive' first.

Also, in that particular case, the fact is that the male characters haven't had as many partners as Mary. Tom for example, the other widowed character, hasn't slept with anybody since Sybil's death unless i've missed something so not really double standards.

Thank you for all the replies.................wow, my head is spinning now. looks like i missed some good stuff by not watching earlier than 2012. Although I did used to watch the original 'Emmerdale Farm' when it had the lunchtime spot, but it was pretty sludgy, boring going

Are you sure about that? After Lady Mary slept with whatshisface (I don't watch the show) I saw thread after thread on Imdb from people calling her names. She's slept with what... 3 men in 12 years?

Who's talking about basing morals on soaps? We're talking about the blatant sexism in ED. How are those 2 things related?

You could check out Jack's funeral on youtube. Not only does it feature Robert's last appearance (and that of Annie) but it features quite a few key moments in the Sugden history via audio clips from past scenes. Amongst them you'll hear: Andy being welcomed as part of the family, Jack covering for Andy after the fire, Roberts last regular appearance in 2005 after Max King's death, and the fallout from Dianes affair with Billy.

If you do watch it, it might be worth noting as a matter of interest that although Tony Haygarths character reminisces about Jack, Mick was actually only introduced four months after Clive Hornby's death. Also, it all takes place around 3-4 months after Andy was outed as a wife-beater, which goes some way to explaining his depressed state. Oh, and some of the scenes are based on scenes from the very first episode, so if you haven't seen it, it might be worth watching that first.

Back in the days when women were expected to be virgins on marriage and most were (so we're most men come to that), divorce would destroy your standing in society and if your spouse died a protracted period of mourning was expected and any new lover should be another husband - 3 men in 12 years (is it 12 years - didn't it start 1913 - have they reached 25?) is a lot.

I'm sure a lot of people did it, especially in the aristocracy but it was very much kept secret.

I am a full supporter of equal rights and can't abide sexism but don't think we can really apply today's standards to a century ago. Even my Mother used to talk about how different being a young woman in the 50s was re sex before marriage and various other issues.

Just to give some more on that, the first episode was based round Jacob Sugden's funeral including the return of his oldest, estranged son (Jack) who had a strained relationship with his brother Joe. Swap Jacon for Jack, Jack for Robert, Andy for Joe and you get the idea.

They were not judging her by those standards as in "that's a lot for back then" though. Not one mention was made of it being a lot for the time. They just kept calling her a slut with no self respect for having a one nighter.

1912 - it started with the sinking of the titanic


It's not just about the similarities between the characters though. There are also similar lines of dialogue and shots that visually are very similar to the opening episode.

With respect, I think you're taking a few comments about a few fictional characters a little too seriously.
I don't read all that many thteads on here. But in those that i do read the vast majority of are nothing more than good natured banter with a heavy dose of pee takiing.