Taylor Sheridan is a good writer who has written and produced some very good series. So therefore I have to ask--what's with the sexual sadism and gratuitous nudity in the series 1923? What's the point of it? And why do we need to see this? There are enough viewers so that it's not necessary to justify showing this to audiences in order to drag them in and keep them hooked. Or is that the motivation? I really don't know.
We're done watching 1923, and while I think it's a good series overall, I have major problems with Sheridan's treatment of women. They get battered and pushed around an awful lot, a little too often. There is sadism, rape and sexual abuse; there is the threat of rape and sexual abuse, as well as sexual perversions that are graphically portrayed. Do we need this in a world that is already overly-violent to women? No. In 1923, we've been witness to lesbian rape scenes, sadism toward prostitutes, and unnecessary nudity. It's cringeworthy and gratuitous. These types of scenes make me wonder about the motivation of the writer. What is he trying to impart? What is the point of these scenes? To titillate? To show cruelty in all its grotesqueness? Isn't that what horror films are for? Perhaps Sheridan would defend this by saying that the wild west was a brutal place, and that men ruled it. Sure it was, and sure they did (and still do rule the world, despite the advances that women have made during the past fifty years). We all know that. It was survival of the fittest, dog eat dog, every man for himself. Women had to be tough in order to survive. Women had to know how to shoot to kill. But still, they were abused at the hands of physically stronger, evil, cruel, sadistic men, and in some cases, sadistic women. Many didn't survive. Many men didn't survive either. You carried a gun at all times. Out in the wilderness, on the plains, you were subject to the elements--weather, droughts, locust plagues, animal attacks, and attacks by cruel human beings. And many women died in childbirth. But still, you don't need to show it all. If you do, then why stop at the savagery of men? Why not show wolves, bears and mountain lions ripping men and women apart and eating them? Why is that off limits? Why not show rotting corpses, beheadings and close-ups of scalping? Because there are limits and Sheridan knows that. But when it comes to sexual scenes, he can push the limits. Why push them?
I sometimes wonder how average ordinary men would feel if the majority of television programming showed men being raped or sexually abused in graphic detail. I doubt that most men would find it entertaining. Yet the depiction of women being raped or sexually abused passes for entertainment. Why? Because men run the show in nearly every arena, and defend this by saying that this is the way it was at those times in history. If the women in Sheridan's series aren't being battered and abused, then they are often portrayed as temptresses or harridans, with some exceptions. I think Dutton Ranch is the show I like the best, mostly because the main female character, Beth, played by Kelly Reilly, is one tough lady with a strong sense of justice who can hold her own. Helen Mirren and Michele Pfeiffer also play strong women in 1923 and The Madison, respectively. I don't want to see men and women being raped, being scalped, being tortured, being eaten by wild animals. You can very well insinuate that those things will happen, but you do not need to show them in gory detail. If viewers want that, they can go to see any number of horror films that will show them exactly that.
