The Pitt just announced it’s adding 6 new recurring characters to the cast, which is fantastic for these working actors in an industry that is struggling! However I have some concern, we’re adding all these characters into an already stacked cast that struggled as is to give time for narratives/storylines especially to the ensemble staff and to patients in S2, now we have 6 more characters to introduce and fit in amongst them? Do we know if there are any confirmed characters not returning??
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Could you link or quote where you saw the “creative team” say there was nothing wrong with Robby’s behavior? Who said that? All I found was this interview with NW where he explains it, but even this is acknowledging that there was plenty wrong with it:
Wyle, who also executive produces the series, also dug a bit deeper into Robby’s mindset in the latter half of the season, including why he’s been so hard on characters like Supriya Ganesh’s Dr. Samira Mohan. “It was hard to see weakness in others when you don’t want to see it in yourself,” Wyle suggested. “And I maintain, although it’s not a very popular attitude online I’m told, that Robbie really loves Samira and thinks she’s a rock star doctor and hates that she falls short of her own potential and sabotages her own progress. And yes, his tough love attitude with her is totally inappropriate and unprofessional, but it’s grounded in a desire for her to see herself the way he sees her, which is a lot more talented and a lot more full of potential.”
The GQ article is behind a paywall but here’s some screenshots.
there's only one showrunner on the pitt and that is scott gemmill. i think the pitt is better off focusing on season 3 and waiting for the section of fans to move onto something else. it's not the pitt's fault that fans have devolved into deep parasocial hate and antisemitism. it's actually not normal at all to behave like that, wherein one starts to obsessively harvest every single comment made by the lead. i think it's part of the problem that you're encouraging and excusing that behavior. im not even a fan of noah wyle, i like his acting. but seeing people tag him with antisemitic slurs on the regular? nothing could excuse that. the pitt doesn't owe anyone anything. and yeah, unintentional (? or maybe intentional) racist and misogynistic bias is present on the series. id thought that it's intentional since s1 so ill be interested to see how they write s3. i found the pitt actresses speaking about it good. but it's funny when people online are calling the pitt unwatchable because it's so racist and misogynistic, and meanwhile my actually racist and misogynistic relatives don't want to even hear the series mentioned because it's so woke.
Ok so there’s a lot to unpack in this.
Yes technically Scott Gemmill is the showrunner, and really should’ve been the one addressing these concerns about the show, but NW and JW are executive producers as well, and it’s been stated in many interviews that they collectively are the decision makers of the show. I also agree with the fact that NW needs to stop doing interviews for a while as they are filming and let this all calm down, because it started getting more and more out of control online and the show did not handle it well at all.
The antisemitism I really don’t condone I agree, and unfortunately what gets swallowed in that hatred is the legitimate problematic things NW has said. For the parasociality of it all, I think the way social media has developed post covid is we as fans are exposed to too much and some fans get too invested, but if you think The Pitt is the only show that is dealing with that, I’d suggest you research HOTD, Last of Us, Summer I Turned Pretty and Off Campus because that behaviour is there too.
In terms of people swearing off the show because of the perceived misogynistic and racial bias? I think as a woman seeing that on screen I know I got upset that it was being displayed in the show with no real narrative purpose other than supplementing the storylines of Robby’s poor mental health (if it had had purpose I would’ve found that a very brave topic to explore), and then watching Mohan being belittled and demeaned in front of colleagues only to then have her apologise to him, write her off the show, and then have the creative team say there was nothing wrong with that behaviour? I mean I know I’m upset, and I sincerely hope like as Taylor Dearden said they listen to this public reception of what aired and consider how they want to address it moving into Season 3.
I’m not American so I can’t speak for the political climate in the US at the moment, but the Pitt doesn’t seem like a show that right-leaning people would be particularly interested in anyway given their aversion to addressing topics like universal healthcare, racism in the healthcare system and hospitals dealing with ICE. That doesn’t mean that because the show does touch on those things, that it shouldn’t be criticised for the display of unintentional benevolent sexism, because the normalisation of that behaviour without narrative purpose is why that behaviour goes unaddressed in real life.
I think it is so funny that despite Noah Wyle and the showrunners continually trying to shut down the idea of a Night Shift Spin Off (with some CRAZY sexist reasoning on that, also with Shawn Hatosy dropping mention of it every second he can is the icing on the cake) and also trying desperately to move the focus from fans wanting to find out answers about Supriya Ganesh being written off, that every single post any official HBO account make about the show is just littered with Night Shift spin off requests and requests to bring back Samira Mohan.
There’s some type of karmic justice in knowing that HBO social media teams need to report back on social media sentiment to The Pitt’s creative team, delicious keep up the good work fam.
NW fired Supriya himself with John Wells and Scott Gemmill, so why wouldn't he be questioned about it?????
I’m not saying he didn’t or shouldn’t be questioned about it, I’m very much in agreement that ultimately the decisions made in the show come down to the showrunners (and I am also of the belief that Supriya Ganesh was written out for non-creative decisions, but I guess we won’t find out until NDAs expire or something is leaked). I still think both the character and the actress deserved so much better than how they were treated.
I’m saying from a PR/Comms standpoint having the lead actor/face of the show being the one bearing the brunt of the ‘crisis comms’ (in a way) is certainly a choice given his character is also being scrutinised for sexism and racism displayed in the show, which to me then escalated the hate the actor is getting (some criticism I believe is justified (like that GQ article was diabolical) some is turning into death threats and/or antisemitic which is problematic). I think the show itself via socials or statements should’ve reclaimed the narrative and been the source of truth rather than leaving a justifiably upset fanbase to hunt through every interview/PR interaction for answers and flood said actor’s social media with outcries for answers.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
had to put this on here because OP managed to express a lot of the show's criticisms so succinctly and left no crumbs 💅
[text: the pitt's writing continually supports this idea that although robby may be a dick, he's ultimately right about his female colleagues (namely al-hashimi and mohan) being unfit in some way or another, and correct to call them out for it. and though it's possible for this framing to be coherent from a watsonian perspective, it reflects poorly well on the writers that robby remains unchallenged or is always ultimately vindicated, and that the extent to which his behavior is framed as bad in-universe only extends to the unpleasant nature of "how" he operates, which is then attributed to his poor mental health rather than any kind of real moral failing on his end.
noah wyle saying that robby is not abusive (sure man) and not a chauvinist (even bigger Sure Man) indicates at the very least a critical blind spot in how he views his own character, and the fact that there is so much pushback against people pointing this out is frankly baffling. even more so when all the pushback sounds something like "unlike me, unruffled and uninquisitive, you must be a Child or worse a Woman for daring to criticize the tv show we are spending our spare time watching". you are not more rational for blindly running defense on behalf of the pitt showrunners than the people you purport to be better than. we're all insufferable here you just seem to have zero self-awareness about it.]
Honestly it’s so hard being a fan of this show because wdym you have all these phenomenal and talented women of color in the cast, only for their storylines to consistently be truncated, written ooc, or just cut from the show entirely?
I adore the characters we got, they have so much potential, but their storylines continually being an afterthought in service of Robby and his development is so painful. It really gives me such a love hate relationship with the show.
I got an ask about unconscious bias and Robby's sexism that I won't post because it's way long, but I hear you, Anon, and I did have some thoughts. re: Taylor Dearden's point* about unintentional sexism and my point about the show unintentionally revealing the male EPs' unconscious bias, the question is, how is that possible when the writers' room is full of women? To which I would say: TV shows are not a democracy. They're not a commune. They are a dictatorship. Hopefully, a benevolent dictatorship, but the reality is that every woman in that room could object and it doesn't matter because Scott Gemmill can do whatever he wants. Even if the writers disagree, none of them will say so publicly because that is simply not done. It's the showrunner's show, period. (If anyone wants to learn more about how writers' rooms work, check out the Children of Tendu podcast. They talk a lot about the hierarchy.) But I'd also point out, well, women hold sexist views, too. We live under patriarchy, man. Sexism is so baked in that many people simply don't recognize it. It's 'obviously women are more nurturing' or 'of course men are better engineers.' A lot of people hold sexist beliefs and have simply never thought twice about them, women included. That's why it's called unconscious bias.
When I talk about the EPs' unconscious bias, I'm not talking about characters being sexist on screen. I'm mostly talking about bias in the storytelling framework of the show. I've said it before, but I find it telling that almost all of the women have stories related to their gender or their families and none of the men do. It's the choice of the stories themselves that reveals the problem. The male EPs in charge can choose to tell any story they want. The fact that they picked the ones they did, and that it fits a pattern, reveals a way of thinking about women and their stories. To be clear, I don't think the show or Robby are misogynistic; they don't fundamentally hate women. I think we're seeing good old-fashioned Gen X benevolent sexism. I'm gonna go into detail on the storytelling, which is long, so now I shall cut.
I want to start with a couple definitions for clarity's sake here. When I talk about plot, I mean the incidents that happen in the show. Story is how a character changes. So "Mr. Green's unknown AAA bursts and he dies" is plot. "After missing Mr. Green's AAA, Ogilvie doubts he's cut out for the ED" is story. One of the odd things about S2 is it failed to give all of its regulars season-long story arcs, which is considered poor TV writing. I think it might be a symptom of S2's shaky writing, but we'll have to see how S3 goes to make a full judgment on it.
If you look at S2, the men's stories are thus: after struggling with suicidal ideation, Robby realizes he still has things to see and people to love. After falling from grace, Langdon realizes he still has what it takes to be an ED doc. Whitaker doesn't really have a story, but if I were BSing it, I'd say it's that he comes into his own and realizes the ED is the place for him. (If you squint it's maybe that he learns to set a boundary with Langdon? But again, it's kinda BS. He doesn't have an emotional change over the season.) Abbot's not a regular, but hey, let's include him: when he realizes how much Robby is struggling, Abbot reveals his own vulnerability to save his friend's life.
What about the women's stories? After her mom's engagement, Mohan abandons her previous life plan and struggles to find a place she belongs, realizing it might not be the ED. Under relentless pressure from her parents, Javadi realizes emergency psychiatry is her passion. Mel learns that her sister is building a life that doesn't always involve her and realizes she must do the same. (Note that Mel's plot is overwhelmingly about the deposition that meant nothing, but her actual story is with her sister.) The catalysts or impediments to their stories are all family members. Quite different from the guys.
Santos is the real exception. Her story is that she confronts the superior who made her question herself and finds a new equilibrium. I would've liked the story where she struggles with self-harm only to find refuge in building a new friendship, but we can't actually say that from what we saw on screen. (All they had to do was show her putting the scalpel back! Sigh.)
I'd argue that our other returning regulars don't really have stories. Broadly, I'd say that McKay's plots deal with her acknowledging how the ED is negatively affecting her life (needs to get laid, can't cry), but she doesn't have an emotional change over the season, so it's not actually a story. Through the course of the season, she's sexually harassed in a way the show treats as cute and then is there to empathize with a dying mother and her children. Most of her material relates to female-coded things - sexual object, mothering, crying, etc. What's frustrating is it would've been so easy to give her an arc. Just show us one shot of her crying at the fireworks at the end. It would still be about a woman being all emotional, which is of course sexist in its own right, but it would've been something.
And then there's Dana. I said a while back that it felt like a final Dana scene in the finale was cut - because her story doesn't have an end, it just kind of stops; her last scene is giving the cops the rape kit, but it's not about an emotional change for her - so I was glad to have Noah confirm that at the terrible FYC panel. Whatever that scene was, I think it was a mistake to cut it because its absence left Dana without a story end. Broadly, her plotline was about taking a trainee under her wing and protecting her, which she does, but it doesn't change her emotionally. She struggled with her own mental health through the season, but that doesn't really have an end, either. I wish they had landed the mentorship story - Dana finds new purpose in being a nurse by seeing it through the eyes of a trainee - but even if they had, it's not treated as a professional mentorship story. It's the story of a mother nurturing and protecting a child. Abbot makes that explicit when he says, "You are the mama bear glue that holds this place together."
Mothers. Daughters. Sisters. Even objects of desire. That's how the show views women, broadly-speaking. Sure, men have relationships (flings, wives, Amys), but they're incidental, whereas the women's relationships are the lens through which the show sees them and the catalysts for their stories. That's what I mean when I say the male EPs' unconscious bias seeps in. I think the three old, privileged men in charge see women as relational, not as ends in themselves like men are.
Again, I wouldn't call this misogyny. It's not hatred of women. Hell, Noah made this explicit when talking about how Robby believes the women are better, so he's harder on them because he expects more. That is benevolent sexism right there.
Just to be clear, I don't think any of these stories are "wrong" or even that they shouldn't do any of them individually. I think most were written poorly, or didn't quite work, but I rather liked Javadi's. The problem is the totality. When all of your stories approach women a certain way, that shows a very limited view of what women are and can be. And it can unintentionally tap into harmful stereotypes of women, as I think it did in S2.
The big example of that is Mohan's story, which I think was bad on pretty much every axis and sexist in a harmful way. As I'm sure many know, there is an age-old stereotype that women are too emotional to hold important jobs. We see this every time a woman runs for president in the US, which is how it plays out on the grandest scale, but it's a still widely-held, harmful belief in everyday life. Historically, it's been an excuse to exclude women from certain jobs, the echoes of which still affect women today. So why The Pitt would choose to deploy this negative stereotype of women is utterly baffling to me.
To recap, Mohan's mom gets engaged and plans to go on a year-long cruise, which (inexplicably) upends Mohan's life, destabilizing her so much that she literally has a panic attack at work, the distraction of which makes her miss a diagnosis, causing a patient's entirely preventable death. To which I say...seriously? In 2026, they thought it was a good idea to show a woman panicking and getting a patient killed because of it...seriously??? Whatever the intention was, they have a responsibility as storytellers not to reinforce harmful negative stereotypes, so what the actual fuck, guys? Why was this story so important to tell that it trumps the reinforcement of what generations of professional women have fought to achieve? Yes, they gave Robby a panic attack in S1, but men don't have the same history of exclusion based on being too emotional; as soon as you give that story to a woman, it becomes a sexist stereotype because of the context. People can say it's just a story, but stories are how we understand the world, and these EPs have talked about the importance of their storytelling.
The sad thing is, if I had to guess, I'd bet it just...never occurred to them. Or if someone brought it up, they didn't think it was a big deal. And that is how unconscious bias and benevolent sexism lead to the reinforcement of harmful stereotypes that can have real effects on people's views. It's a shame and why I do think it matters.
To sum up, there are different ways to analyze sexism in a show. A lot of attention has been paid to X character treating Y character in Z way. That's certainly valid, but I think it's also important to look at it from a wider view of what stories the writers choose to tell and how those stories are approached. That's what I'm talking about when I talk about the EPs' unconscious bias creeping in.
*Just a note on the critique that Taylor has (apparently?) said she doesn't watch the show: I don't think that's relevant. She reads all the scripts, given that she has to act out the scenes, and then she's there when the show is filmed. She knows the show and her opinion is worthy of consideration.
another great ship dynamic is "characters who are deeply traumatized and haunted by nightmares are finally able to get a peaceful night of sleep in each other's arms"
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
there are places in the world today that are experiencing 40°C for the first time in recorded history. of course there's no way to know whether chucking billionaires into volcanos will appease the sun god but i feel we're doing the scientific method a disservice if we don't at least try
"Out of curiosity where does it say it was a leaked news story?"
It's not going to be confirmed as a leaked story. You can TELL it was leaked because of the ill-timing and the fact that there was no official statement at the time from Noah & co. Variety credited "sources." I don't know how else to explain it. This is not how cast exits are usually handled and yes, it does suggest there is a major issue within their pr/marketing teams. I agree with that and all I'm saying is the announcement was not planned to come out that way. They would have waited until after the season like with Tracy Ifeachor. I hate NW just as much as anyone, but people just need to get their facts straight.
To me I guess we’ll never know for certain, but honestly I think the PR/Comms team could’ve handled it wayyyy better, like the show needed to reclaim the narrative because it truly ran away from them but they didn’t. So regardless if it was a leak or not, because they didn’t handle it then that’s why we’re in the mess were in now, because I don’t like NW but man he got burdened with being the spokesperson for all the decisions.
Also it was very confusing having them decide that knowing they had Supriya Ganesh booked for various panels and interviews to promote the show, i dont know it’s just all very disappointing. I was also very disappointed in the show for leaving SG to handle the absolute media circus that followed with very little support or acknowledgment, like the absolute vitriol I saw online towards her, and it’s still happening is crazy.
can the robby defenders/apologists please stop writing endless essays about how the female characters act around him to desperately prove "he’s not a bad guy, you don't understand" as if this were a documentary ?
1) the core issue has never been whether he’s the worst monster alive or not. but the way they decided to narratively frame certain topics.
2) but more importantly… the executive producers of the pitt are WHITE MEN. they decide the narrative outcome of the show. they decide the direction it takes. they decide the characters’ behavior. they therefore decide how the women act toward robby.
even if you repeat 15 times "i know he has biases and we shouldn’t ignore them, he’s socially conditioned as…" blah blah blah. your analyses fall apart the moment you choose to still base your conclusions on "the women in this fictional show produced by men act like this, therefore it proves that–" that doesn’t prove a thing.
and i’m not saying there are zero women contributing to the final product of the pitt, whether in the production team or among the actresses. but no matter what, these people have infinitely less weight than the showrunners in the end.
(and once agaiiiiin, acknowledging that doesn’t mean hating robby or saying he should die)
when did characters in this show become so okay with other characters publicly berating and swearing at conscious/aware patients and colleagues in front of conscious/aware patients and colleagues??
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
no because that post i just reblogged made it all so much clearer. the writers have such an awareness of the violence and discrimination that women face. but the one thing that is holding them back to portray it in the interactions robby has with his coworkers, is allowing him to be wrong. they can't let robby be wrong, because he's the chief, he's the protagonist. they can't outright portray him to perpetrate the patriarchy and misogyny and the hierarchal structures in a way that matters. because robby can never be wrong. the man can never be wrong, or else he will lose his power. he can make mistakes, he can be flawed, but never be a bad person. that's why his mistakes are called out, but are framed from his pov and get trauma-based explanations. there always seems to be a reason why he acts in this way, and that reason is never misogyny.
because misogynistic men are not supposed to be liked, and the showrunners can't have anyone dislike robby. in order for people to keep liking robby they can't condemn the nastiness that is misogyny in the workplace, something that is incredibly common and what many viewers recognise in a heartbeat. so they uphold it, loud and proud. people see it happen, and because they see the show condemn misogyny on patient level, they expect the text to disagree with robby. but it doesn't. and what happens is that it makes him seem misogynistic without the text outwardly disagreeing with it. and it makes for a very skewed image of a show that is so woke about other marginalisations. and the people who face the consequences of that are women of colour, on and off screen.
To me it is crazy that the women of the Pitt season 2 came together to talk about the sexism on the show not being acknowledged, because even THEY are unclear if it is intentional or not is insane
