https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/10/the-impact-of-metoo-and-female-rage-on-tv-shows-and-hollywood

Friday was the one-year anniversary (https://twitter.com/jodikantor/status/1048202799060865025) of The New York Times publishing its Harvey Weinstein bombshell story (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html) that led to the take down of many powerful men accused of sexual misconduct. In the past year, TV shows from GLOW to Jessica Jones to BoJack Horseman have added #MeToo subplots. Even Brooklyn Nine-Nine has a #MeToo-themed episode in the works. "So why haven’t we seen a flood of new #MeToo and Time’s Up-inspired series unfurling across the TV landscape yet?" wonders Joy Press. "One reason is that shows take a long time to incubate; another might be that TV executives were slow to absorb the enormity of the tectonic shift the country was undergoing, and quick to assume that it would not be a lasting phenomenon." She adds: "Ironically, a handful of shows fueled by female rage and trauma appeared just before #MeToo got rolling—and then disappeared. I’m thinking of series like MTV’s Sweet/Vicious, a short-lived black comedy about two college students who become vigilantes avenging campus rapes, and Amazon’s One Mississippi with Tig Notaro as a comedian who has returned to her childhood home to sift through the sexual trauma of her youth. Both series were canceled too soon." A similar fate befell I Love Dick and the recently canceled Dietland. Sweet/Vicious creator Jennifer Kaytin Robinson creator, who is resurrecting her MTV show as a comic book, says she pitched a show about women taking down a toxic boss right around the time of the Louis CK scandal. But a male executive told her, “this won’t be on the air for another 12 to 18 months; do you still think it’s going to be relevant? Because it seems like it’s getting so much better now.” There are some #MeToo-inspired shows in the pipeline, including Netflix's Unbelievable, based on the Pulitzer-winning article An Unbelievable Story of Rape, as well as Hulu's Shrill, starring Aidy Bryant. One unnamed female showrunner tells Press that many TV executives still feel uncomfortable giving female creators too much room to expand portraits of women. “Women’s anger could make for good television, but it means the industry is going to have to shift and trust a woman to articulate that anger,” says the anonymous showrunner. “It still feels like the definition of relatability for female characters is (that) you have to be a perfect martyr, like Elisabeth Moss’ character in The Handmaid’s Tale.”

ALSO:

Read a timeline of the #MeToo movement (https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/10/212801/me-too-movement-history-timeline-year-weinstein)
Five ways the Harvey Weinstein sexual misconduct scandal shook up the entertainment industry (https://www.indiewire.com/2018/10/entertainment-industry-changes-harvey-weinstein-1202009466/)

The current season of Bojack Horseman... The whole arc is #Me too themed.

Because it would be too depressing?

Ed.

Call me crazy but why in the world would you want a metoo show when you can watch it on the news and basically everywhere else. Shows are meant to be used as escapisms.

...and it seems everyone is calling this a "movement"...I don't see it that way. Sorry 'bout it....I just see it as a bunch of hypocrites crying foul because Trump won.

Because men control the networks.

Because men control the networks.

Isn't the head of ABC a woman?

Call me crazy but why in the world would you want a metoo show when you can watch it on the news and basically everywhere else. Shows are meant to be used as escapisms.

...and it seems everyone is calling this a "movement"...I don't see it that way. Sorry 'bout it....I just see it as a bunch of hypocrites crying foul because Trump won.

Amen to that. But I do think they're trying to take sexual harassment more seriously, but there's a ways to go yet.

Ed.

Call me crazy but why in the world would you want a metoo show when you can watch it on the news and basically everywhere else. Shows are meant to be used as escapisms.

...and it seems everyone is calling this a "movement"...I don't see it that way. Sorry 'bout it....I just see it as a bunch of hypocrites crying foul because Trump won.

Sorry, but the Me Too movement isn't a Democratic or Republican thing. That's why you've seen Hollywood figures, conservative commentators, main stream media anchors, etc. all taken down.

Sorry, but the Me Too movement isn't a Democratic or Republican thing. That's why you've seen Hollywood figures, conservative commentators, main stream media anchors, etc. all taken down.

Not a Democrat or Republican thing?

What planet do you live on?

Look what the Democrats did to Kavanaugh and by extension, the Republicans.

Just because they take down a few public liberals like Harvey Weinstein means nothing.

They still love Bill Clinton.

This is a complete power grab by ultra liberal feminists.

Anybody else browse 4chan's politically incorrect board

Not a Democrat or Republican thing?

What planet do you live on?

Look what the Democrats did to Kavanaugh and by extension, the Republicans.

Just because they take down a few public liberals like Harvey Weinstein means nothing.

They still love Bill Clinton.

This is a complete power grab by ultra liberal feminists.

Harvey Weinstein
Kevin Spacey
Matt Lauer
Charlie Rose
Al Franken
Louis CK
Bill Cosby
Les Moonves
Garrison Keillor
Jeremy Piven

and those are just ones who have essentially have had careers destroyed. There are many more liberals/stars who have been accused. Although many still like Bill Clinton, he has certainly gotten his share of flak since this movement started. Can you name that many prominent conservatives who have been accused?

Murphy Brown did a #MeToo themed episode last week.

Isn't the head of ABC a woman?

Good point. But we all know Les Moonves was never going to do a #MeToo show. :lol:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/designing-women-creator-les-moonves-not-all-harassment-is-sexual-1142448

Not a Democrat or Republican thing?

What planet do you live on?

Look what the Democrats did to Kavanaugh and by extension, the Republicans.

Just because they take down a few public liberals like Harvey Weinstein means nothing.

They still love Bill Clinton.

This is a complete power grab by ultra liberal feminists.

God forbid for powerful men to be taken down for sexually assaulting women. I don't care what party they're from, how powerful they are or if they are a priest. Take them all down.

Call me crazy but why in the world would you want a metoo show when you can watch it on the news and basically everywhere else. Shows are meant to be used as escapisms.

...and it seems everyone is calling this a "movement"...I don't see it that way. Sorry 'bout it....I just see it as a bunch of hypocrites crying foul because Trump won.
You are 1000% correct, but this forum just isn't the place where those who should hear your message - can.

I recall that a lot of TV shows back in the 1960s and 1970s had episodes that were themed around the Women's Liberation Movement. Usually or at least often it was done in a way that showed how women ended up being defeated or proven wrong about wanting to do things like engage in sports or go int traditionally-male occupations.

I recall an episode of Bat Man ( of course , not a sit com) in which the Mayor's wife nagged him into allowing women to take men's jobs and the Mayor said he had to give in to her demands because he had lived without
a good meal or having his clothes laundered and ironed by his wife for a
long time, and it was depicted that the women who took over men's jobs
were ruining the city, and one woman officer was depicted as being concerned with manicuring her nails while a man was trying to tell her that he had been robbed.
By the end of the episode the women of the city went back to the kitchen and the home and therefore all was well again.

I think a few episodes of The Partridge Family had plots in which The Women's Liberation Movement was depicted somehow. In one episode Keith's girlfriend did not want the family to sing at a Women's rally because
the song "I think I Love You" infantalized women, and put them in a context of being dumb things who need to be flirted with, but Keith found a way to sing the song at the rally because , as he told his girlfriend, he will not have his song censored and Keith's girlfriend was made to look like a political fanatic who was defeated and should have been for being too sensitive and prideful about being a woman.
The show of course did not get into the tough issue of how a lack of censorship will also mean that then ,say, minstrel shows at school cannot be censored just because it offends people of certain races, and how it would mean that you have to give equal time to Natzi sympathizers and the NRA as to environmentalists and war protesters.

In another episode Laurie's female friend, who was a basketball player, could not join the boy's team at school.
I am not sure if this is the exact same episode in which there was a Homecoming Queen contest in which Keith talked his male friend into running for Homecoming Queen. It seems that the episode was designed to show how dumb it is for men and women to switch social roles. Somehow though the 1970s were really modern times as no time before, there were still some strong remnants of older society that died hard.
In another episode, Keith Danny and Chris along with their grandfather
got together to oppose Shirley, Laurie and Tracy and Shirley's mother because the males of the household believed that women were inferior and the females did not want to be thought of that way.
It was a silly episode regarding that.

In either an I Love Lucy, or Here's Lucy or The Lucy Show episode Lucy made friends with a construction worker ( a male of course) who she wanted to be her boyfriend and I am not sure of the exact course of the plot but it had something to do with Lucy thinking she can follow her boyfriend to his workplace and she did not think that being female would make her unfit to be at a construction site but her boyfriend decides not to argue with her but let her learn for herself and he takes her up to where there are construction beans and he has her have lunch with him on a construction beam many stories up from the ground and Lucy is trying to act nonchalant but eventually she learns her lesson that a woman does not belong up on a construction site.
This is a general explanation of the plot. I cannot recall it precisely, but it seemed to be meant to teach a lesson about where women belong and don't belong.

I think there were other sitcoms or TV shows of the 60s and 70s that had plots depicting the mood of the times with the Women's Liberation Movement but I think usually the depiction was that it was a dumb cause and that women are happier having men be their knight-in-shining-armor anyway.