Background Noise

Trigger warning: rape mention

Ok, so Buffy fans rightfully talk about how horrific Spike’s assault on Buffy was, but why does  noone talk about Faith?

The scene where she devirginizes Xander made me uncomfortable even at 13 years old, when I first saw it. And the reason is that Xander is clearly uncomfortable. He may have been willing, but, willing or not, she doesn’t give him much of a choice, except where she briefly asks, and he’s hesitantly like “yes, but…”

Then, a couple of episodes later, she assaults him again, though tries to kill him instead of actually raping him.

Then there is the episode where she has sex with Riley while in Buffy’s body, which is a violation (i.e. rape) of both Buffy and Riley.

Now I don’t know if everybody ignores these scenes  because she is a female, because she is popular, because they don’t care about Xander or Riley, or because these scenes were not acknowledged to be the assaults that they were. Maybe some combination of these reasons.

Trigger warning: rape mention

Ok, so Buffy fans rightfully talk about how horrific Spike’s assault on Buffy was, but why does  noone talk about Faith?

The scene where she devirginizes Xander made me uncomfortable even at 13 years old, when I first saw it. And the reason is that Xander is clearly uncomfortable. He may have been willing, but, willing or not, she doesn’t give him much of a choice, except where she briefly asks, and he’s hesitantly like “yes, but…”

Then, a couple of episodes later, she assaults him again, though tries to kill him instead of actually raping him.

Then there is the episode where she has sex with Riley while in Buffy’s body, which is a violation (i.e. rape) of both Buffy and Riley.

Now I don’t know if everybody ignores these scenes  because she is a female, because she is popular, because they don’t care about Xander or Riley, or because these scenes were not acknowledged to be the assaults that they were. Maybe some combination of these reasons.

I’ve seen some mixed feelings about the fifth season online; some like it, some don’t, some see it as a bounce back after Season 4 while others think it was the beginning of the slide in quality. I haven’t seen anyone outright hate it, but it does seem more popular for individual elements within the season than as a whole.

I’m definitely not in the camp that sees Season 5 as a bounce back, because I don’t have any real problems with Season 4. But not having seen it all the way through in a long time, I’m absolutely a fan of Season 5 as a whole, not just the parts.

My understanding is that this was the season where That ‘70s Show changed showrunners for the first time, and I wonder if there was any prep work done as the forth season wrapped up. The transition is pretty smooth, smoother than I think it’s given credit for. There are some shifts, some inconsistencies, and some retcons; how big a nerd Eric is, the scale of Kelso’s past cheating, Jackie and Hyde’s relationship being completely cut off from what happened to them in Seasons 2 and 3 (hence, this blog); but I wouldn’t say those are any more of an issue than past seasons forgetting Donna’s sister or whether Kelso knows anything about electronics. For the most part, I find the dialogue, the plotting, and the overall tone in Season 5 consistent with the past.

I’d say the same for characterization too. There are changes here, but the biggest ones are motivated. Red and Kitty are two good examples. Yes, Red is harsher on Eric in this season than in past ones… because he’s motivated by a specific set of circumstances, that lead him to push too far, Eric and Donna to push back, and Red to back down and gain a new respect for his son. As for Kitty… well, I should say that I am relatively young, male, and can’t recall that any woman I know has ever even said the word “menopause,” so I can’t comment on how fair or accurate Kitty’s storyline is. But setting that aside, and judging it as a bit of character development in a sitcom that’s not quite a live-action cartoon but a few steps away from everyday reality, it gave Kitty a lot of things to play that she hadn’t played in previous seasons, and a reason to do so. And it complicated her marriage to Red in a way that made sense.

Anyone who’s watched a few sitcoms or cartoons has to be familiar with a certain trap they sometimes fall into after a few seasons: for whatever reason, the writers decide that having the characters be nasty to each other makes for an easy laugh, and they milk that until you, as a viewer, can’t understand how these characters can be in the same state, let alone the same room. I know I can’t be the only one who grew up with The Fairly Oddparents and became thoroughly turned-off when they decided that every episode needed multiple “Wanda’s a nag, Cosmo’s an idiot” exchanges. And I think some people take Red and Kitty’s dynamic in Season 5 the same way. But I don’t find that to be the case at all. At the opening of the season, they’re normal (for them). It’s the pregnancy “scare,” the onset of menopause, and the arrival of Kitty’s parents that shift things, and open up a difficult time for them as a couple and Kitty as an individual. And yes, Red does make a few remarks about lunatic wives and how unpleasant marriage is; most of these happen at low points for him. But I don’t find that it ever gets as bad as in Oddparents, or other sitcoms. The show isn’t absent pleasant moments for them once this storyline gets underway. And just having a motive behind it goes a long way to making it work, in my book.

On the other hand, I’ve seen people object to Eric and Donna’s dynamic in Season 5 as a retread, without sufficient follow-up on their problems from Season 4. I don’t agree with the latter issue, because I think the conversations they do have at the end of the forth season (with each other and others) make it clear that they know what went wrong. Perhaps they could have had a scene early on in Season 5 talking about it, but sometimes in life (and in storytelling) it’s best to bury the hatchet when you already know what it’s about. As for the retread issue; to an extent, that’s unavoidable in a sitcom as conventional as That ‘70s Show. A certain amount of formula and repetition is going to come into play here. But Donna having come around to a long-term commitment, and she and Eric mutually planning for a future together and challenging their families about it, is a new element to their relationship. Their more conventional issues still make good comedic fodder without sacrificing character (though I will concede that the SAT fiasco is something of a retread.) Allowing that I still haven’t seen Season 7 - if my memories of Season 6 prove accurate, I think Season 5 is the last time in the show that Eric and Donna, as individuals and as a couple, really shine.

And, of course, you have Jackie and Hyde. Again, allowing for not seeing Season 7 and only having distant memories of 6, I think this was their best season too, in the sense that it covers a time of growth and change for them as a couple. This season also has one of the better sitcom/comedy love triangles I’ve watched, though if Ashton Kutcher wasn’t as skilled a performer, it wouldn’t hold up as well.

I find myself of two minds on it. On one hand, I don’t think it’s necessarily OOC at that point because I don’t think the other girl is anything more than a prop used as a kind of leverage. I wouldn’t call it great writing, but I can see Hyde playing tip for tap at the stage. The problem is the setup for the whole storyline is so weak. Seemingly all of Hyde’s paranoia is brought on by Kelso, not Jackie, so it does not come off as genuine. On the other, I am not sure how we’re supposed to see the whole thing. It’s so baffling to me that the writers try to compare the two screwups. They play at the idea that Jackie didn’t really do anything wrong with Hyde admitting he acted poorly, but the story shows otherwise with Jackie, as you say, having to ‘win’ him back and go first in their makeup. So the power-balance is restored, thus rendering it kinda pointless aside from giving them a cliffhanger aside from Kelso getting over it. He could have done that on his own. The whole thing actually reminded me a little bit of when Kelso tried to blame Jackie for his cheating because she made him feel bad. Like… did I miss something here?

You didn’t miss a thing. It’s simply bad writing.

For me, the almost pathological passive-aggressiveness given to Hyde’s character in season 5 is an OOC element introduced to manufacture conflict. The writers clearly didn’t trust Hyde had enough issues to create conflict organically. That new characterization greatly intensifies his capacity for cruelty and maliciousness, the likes of which we hadn’t witnessed before that season (save during “Ski Trip” [1x13]).

Hyde’s behavior toward Jackie in “The Kids Are Alright” (6x01) – when he kisses her passionately, seemingly accepting her choice of him, only to leave with Raquel – is a prime example of this passive-aggressiveness and cruelty. This characterization makes Hyde less likeable and was totally unnecessary. He’s complex enough without having integrated and passing on the abusive behavior of his parents.

In fact, his characterization prior to season 5 shows him consistently behaving contrary to his mom’s abuse. He’s protective of the vulnerable, to the point of putting his own life in danger. He doesn’t have to like or know a person to give aid; that they need help is enough. But he often disguises his motive for giving help, or that he was helping at all, as a way of protecting himself. He either consciously believes or unconsciously feels in his gut that his compassion could be used against him. His mom and/or dad likely did.

In “Black Dog” (5x09), after Kelso shoots Hyde with a BB gun, Hyde justifies faking a semi-serious injury to Donna and Eric. At the end of this dialogue, he says, “So I’m gonna punish him the way my parents punished me.“

This is the instinct Hyde acts on toward Jackie, too, at the end of season 5 and the beginning of season 6. But when his mom verbally abuses him in “Career Day” (1x18), he doesn’t exact revenge. He walks away from her. In “Eric’s Stash” (2x12), after Eric accuses Hyde of stealing his money, Hyde expresses his anger and feelings of betrayal directly. After Fez accidentally breaks the taillight of Hyde’s car in “Leo Loves Kitty” (4x18), Hyde is angry but doesn’t act out. Instead, he demands Fez pay for a new taillight.

Perhaps most significantly, in “Hyde’s Father” (3x03), Hyde speaks his mind to his reappeared absentee dad, walks away several times, then confronts him angrily (after some prompting from Kitty). If Hyde doesn’t behave passive-aggressively or cruelly toward his dad, I don’t believe for a second he’d to the same to Jackie. He would walk away. He would angrily confront. But he would not do the things he does in “You Shook Me” (5x22) or “The Kids Are Alright”.

That’s why the writers introduced a malicious, vengeful streak into his character during season 5: to set up that Hyde would behave contrary to his previous three-plus years of characterization. They even acknowledge this in “You Shook Me” during Hyde’s exchange with Roy:

Hyde: I told Jackie I don’t want her hanging out with Kelso! I walk in, they’re playing couch-Twister! And I don’t know if something just happened or something was about to happen, but you know what? I don’t care anymore!

Roy: Have you talked to her?

Hyde: No! Come on, man, I’m done talking! I’m just glad I saw them. Now I can be the bigger person and bail before she does.

Roy asks, “Have you talked to her?” because real!Hyde would have. Hyde also indicates that he’s going to walk away from his relationship with Jackie, which would be in-character, too, but he doesn’t. He sleeps with another woman as revenge, as a screw-you! to torpedo his relationship with Jackie and make sure she won’t take him back – in case he’s “too weak” (i.e. too in love) to stay broken up with her.

Hi! I think the following two metas I wrote might answer your question:

Jackie and Hyde’s Sex Life: How the Show Portrays It 

Donna says in 5x23 that they graduate in a week. It doesn’t seem like it could have been more than 2 weeks, probably more like 1.5. Which makes Hyde dating even more absurd but it could be explained that he did it to mess with Jackie. 

I don’t think it was that long at all. Jackie dumps Hyde in “Nobody’s fault but Mine” (5x23). “Immigrant Song” (5x24) probably happens a week later and “Celebration Day” (5x25) a week after that.

In “Celebration Day,” Jackie says:

I’ll figure that out [whom she chooses, Kelso or Hyde] after I spend the summer by the pool. I feel this’ll be a lot clearer when I’m much tanner.

“The Kids Are Alright” (6x01) takes place, from all indications, very shortly after “Celebration Day”. In the second scene, Eric, Kelso, and Hyde learn that Laurie went on her and Fez’s honeymoon without Fez. This likely happened within a day or two of Red’s heart attack. Red is being released from the hospital the first day this episode takes place. Taking all that into consideration, this exchange:

Hyde: So, Jackie, you choose between me and Kelso yet?

Jackie: I’m on my way to the pool right now to think about it. Rest assured, when I’m in my most delicious shade of cocoa brown, you will have your answers.

shows Hyde’s impatience and the writers’ ignoring Jackie’s statement in “Celebration Day” that she was going to take the whole summer to decide. Jackie’s  trip to the pool in “The Kids Are Alright” is probably the first that summer. So she chose Hyde within a day or two after being undecided about him and Kelso.

Hyde rejects her passive-aggressively after she tells him she chooses him (which is such bad form – and writing – and a repeat of the behavior that broke him and Jackie up in the first place). Now Jackie has to prove herself worthy of Hyde (total eye-roll).

Hi!

Jackie is treated terribly by Hyde (her “former” love) and Fez (her eventual “love”) during season 8. Donna, her best friend, questions why she (Donna) is friends with Jackie – in front of Hyde’s wife, Samantha, as a way of putting herself squarely on Samantha’s (and the showrunners’) side. Donna’s also generally more hostile toward Jackie. And the showrunners either dictated or approved of storylines where Jackie would be humiliated episode after episode.

By the end of the series, Jackie is neither in college nor has any of the careers (e.g., professional cheerleader, model, actress, news anchor, etc.) she’d consistently stated she’d hoped for during seasons 1-7. She’s sweeping hair at Fez’s salon. This was the showrunners’ way of “humbling” her – which also suggests what they think of hair-sweepers.

During an interview the new showrunners gave before season 8 (in TV Guide, if I remember correctly), they explicitly stated they didn’t understand Jackie and Hyde’s romantic relationship and didn’t like it, so they were putting Jackie and Hyde back to their season-1 antagonism “as they should’ve always been” during the show.

These statements, at the very least, imply and at most corroborate their dislike of her character, especially when taken in the context of her treatment on the show by the storylines and other characters vs. Hyde’s treatment by the storylines and other characters.