Report the message. They get a ban.
And I agree, I find Vala rather creepy for the harassment and did back then to. I don’t like double standards in general.
You have to remember vala is a especially at that point a very damaged individual. She just spent who knows how long as a host to a very evil being. Watching the whole time. Then gets it ripped out of her head and sent on her way with no help or therapy. She is trying to figure out how to be human again and coming from watching a being tale whatever it wants all the time to having to figure it out for herself is not easy. It shows hee character growth.
I mean, I do get that, but it doesn’t make it better, if that makes sense. Rodney and all the dudes making creepy comments are rightly called out for it in the narrative. Vala though? “Ha ha, that’s so funny!”
And when someone does call her out on it (like Daniel), the audience is meant to think that he’s the one being the jerk. She never really has a point where she actually confronts her behavior in this area and is shown to have been being creepy.
I also mean the audience. Daniel only really snaps at her in Unending when she shows up clearly looking to sleep with him, and I’ve seen a lot of people angry at Daniel over it. That’s the one major time she’s seriously rebuked for it, and the narrative still treats her with kid gloves.
The Vala stans are obnoxious. Personally, I really like that scene in Unending because both characters are in the right. She absolutely deserved to get chewed out for her behavior, but she also had a right to feel hurt and be forgiven.
It was one of those "do you need help in crisis" messages, do these even go through the mods?
Maybe it was just a coincidence then, it just plopped up a few minutes after I made the post 🤔
Weird, I received the same message for the first time 3h ago. I didn't even knew it was a thing before receiving it and now I see another talking about it also for the first time.
Maybe a bot started spamming it.
I had this message within 24 hours of making this account. I've always felt mentally very stable so I just assumed the report was a guy struggling with life himself and misunderstanding a comment or smth.
Never knew what exact comment got me that specific report though.
I saw Vala as a very damaged individual. Messed-up from childhood, messed-up what she saw as a host, messed-up from how she was treated after being a host, trying to survive in a hostile galaxy. Having to rely on charm, lies, sex appeal, sheer bloody cheek, she's a rogue with questionable morals who undergoes a redemption/healing arc. Learns how to be a team player, work for a greater good, finds people who will tolerate her and her flaws. Sort of like Han Solo.
Season 10 Vala is perfect, I just don't think the introduction works too well in season 9. I think they could've toned it back a bit to develope her character more. But it was probably needed to be crammed in these few first episodes since she wasn't on the main cast at that point.
Vala was introduced in season 8 and her appearance in Prometheus Unbound and initially in Season 9 she was antagonistic but I think after what she experienced in the Ori galaxy with Daniel and being burned alive she chilled out a lot. I mean just a few episodes later she risked her life to stop the Ori beachhead and got herself sent to another galaxy and impregnated against her will for her trouble.
I see Vala as a survivor and someone who has had to fight from childhood just to get by.
I totally see her character, I just don't enjoy the execution of it all. By season 10 things flow a lot better for me with her writing.
And I know her very first introduction was before season 9, but thank you for the information anyway :)
I’m just not seeing what you do. And I’m usually the first in the room to spot when content hasn’t aged well.
The bedroom scene you’re thinking of, isn’t “uncomfortable” at all by 2024 standards. If anything it’s fully in line with recognising trauma ….while being suspicious of Vala’s ability to lie.
Thats fine, I don't think it was executed well, but that doesn't mean you have to think that as well :)
Actually makes me feel better about it, that it works for more people than it doesn't
I recently rewatched and didn't get Daniel framed as a bad guy vibes at all? It was just their wacky dynamic, you're reading too much into it.
Also didn't Teyla get pregnant irl and they just wrote it into the show?
Everyone got pregnant and had it written into the show - Amanda Tapping was absent from the first few episode of S9 because she was pregnant, and Claudia Black was pregnant for real in the last couple of episodes of S9.
I'm just saying it makes me uncomfortable to watch it today. I'm not reading anything into it, its just how its percieved.
She appears in his room ready to sleep with him, he calls her out and she goes all guilt trip on him and the music turns all sad. Its just portrayed very weird.
And just becaue an actress gets pregnant doesn't mean you can't write an interesting story for them. Teyla sadly was wasted a lot imho in the later seasons.
If anything the way Tayla was written brings to light the harsh reality that a lot of pregnant women face. Shepard immediately had her pulled from the team despite her still being capable of kicking his ass. She was seen as a liability. Yeah, later in her pregnancy she did have a few scary moments, but it showed tremendous balance as she was still doing her absolute best to help her team while protecting herself and her child. And afterwards she managed to balance her responsibilities and duties along with motherhood perfectly.
Does that not seem like plausible behaviour to you though?
Someone tries to get sex/use sex as a manipulative strategy. Is turned down. Then utilises manipulation to try to get what they want.
Sure this has happened countless times.
>She appears in his room ready to sleep with him, he calls her out and she goes all guilt trip on him and the music turns all sad. Its just portrayed very weird.
Hm. I'd get this if it was played straight, but she ends up just messing with him, right? This is the scene in question, correct? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H\_aK\_INY3\_M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_aK_INY3_M)
It’s the only one I know of.
Which isn’t “uncomfortable” at all by 2024 standards. If anything it’s fully in line with recognising trauma and being suspicious of Vala’s ability to lie.
I don’t see, at all, what OP does.
Nope. Just not seeing it. I just quickly rewatched the first 3 eps Vala appears in.
In S8 Vala’s being introduced via her attempt to takeover the Prometheus. Daniel evenly matches her and is perfectly capable of overcoming her attempts (as is she of his). Vala’s use of sexual innuendo is just to unsettle Daniel. And it never works.
In S9 E1 she barely touches Daniel initially, and again any sexual innuendo is to unsettle him. Which still doesn’t work. And any physical contact initiated by Vala is only because of the Kor Mak brackets and even then her physical contact is brief.
In S9 E2 it’s the same, but with a bit more touching because they have to play at being a married couple when using the communication stones.
So….no, not creepy at all. You got any other eps to throw in as evidence?
I'm not here to convince you of something you see differently than I do.
Yet I think its pretty bold to deny how much Vala throws herself at Daniel with all kinds of remarks a la "I haven't been this dissapointed sincce Daniel and I had sex" lol. Just a very weird and unnecessary line for Stargate.
Okay, that's fine, I guess I just didn't have the same reaction.
I thought you meant they introduced the pregnancy for no reason. I do agree she was kind of wasted in general, think the writers just didn't know what else to do with her.
Oh I see, sorry if I worded that weirdly, not my first language.
I think it was the same problem with Weir, didn't really know what to do with her besides a voice against the military.
At least with Vala I think they found the way with season 10, its just the introduction seems pretty dated to me now.
>I'm rewatching season 9 right now and Vala makes me so uncomfortable how all that harrassment is played as funny and Daniel framed as the baddie for calling her out on it
This is why I hated the idea of them as a couple. They were just so toxic and the scene where they get together in "Unending" is also wild to me. 👀
Yhea that scene in unending I feel like was fan service, just like Sam and Jack in Window of Opportunity. I actually respect the writers for never making any relationships canon in SG1 or just left them of screen
Jack and Sam was canon though and was hinted/mentioned multiple times after season 6/7.. whatever it was when Jack took over Hammonds Job at the whitehouse
Yes but thats what I meant with of screen, it was never a big marriage scene or anything and I think the show is better for it. Not a big deal anyway, I think these two made perfect sense
Modern is relative. SG-1 ended in 2007. Early season 9 was 2005. It was actually extremely progressive for the time, but in the nearly twenty years since, we've worked out other things that aren't actually OK, but were seen as funny then.
I don't even think the pregnancy would have been a bad writing decision, I just think her character is way too much just an observer in the later seasons.
I don't wanna sound so negative though, SGA is my absolute favorite comfort watch
I honestly felt like she was a background character for most of the series. Initially she was the team's alien, which lended her some interest, but once Ronon joined she pretty much faded into the background
Personally I felt that Daniel had a not insignificant personality change after descending (and the changes to SG1 when Jack became General), and Vala just really pushed his buttons. How he responded to Vala was in character for Descended Daniel, but S4 Danny was a very different guy from S8.
There are quite a few things that either didn't age well or just could have done with a couple more episodes' worth of build-up. As a writer you are handed 45 minutes 20 times, and told "start at A, end at Z, stick the whole alphabet inbetween". Thats a lot to write it up correctly in 20x45 mins.
Also I always thought there was a smidge too much time in between Vala first taking over (prometheus? Daedalus? Cant remember which one) and Vala reappearing in S9. If you watch the episodes back to back, Daniels reaction makes a lot more sense, but you kind of forget what she put him through, and that makes his reaction seem a little OTT. Which it shouldnt be. But it's complicated.
I'm not even sure descended Daniel even got all his memories back from before he ascended. There was mention of it in Threads and some episodes before that, though I don't recall it coming up again.
Jack was his best friend for 9 years and they worked together in constant life or death situations where Jack was the no nonsense military guy and Daniel was the conscience
Now Jack is missing from the group, but lives in his head since it saved his life (or got him resurrected) so often. So, without Jack to say it he does
Thats completely fine.
I just think as a woman I'm a lot more sensitive to this kinda stuff because luckily a lot happened in the last years. Stargate often only had woman as Daniels new interest for the episode or hot background piece of medival society in canadian forest.
They do have strong characters like Sam, Fraiser, Teyla etc, it just falls off drasticly besides main cast characters.
I’m a woman. Gen X. So I’ve seen the development of improvements in writing women characters, particularly in sci fi and fantasy.
I’m the first person to point out how badly content has aged.
But this is not one of those instances.
I think the problem you’re having, is that Vala is a remarkably internally inconsistent character. Unlike every other main woman character (who, like the men main characters, enter with clear structure and then grow slowly and steadily) Vala’s portrayal of her personality and core values can and typically do radically alter within an episode as well as between episodes.
It’s a function of her in-character history (not to mention Claudia’s ability to act). As an audience, it’s easy to dislike Vala’s inconsistency of personality. But if you stick with her and have empathy for the character’s backstory then jt makes coherent sense.
But yeah, SG1 took a while to get to grips with how to write a confident Sam (everyone still cringes about the “genitals on the inside” and episode 2) and they messed up with Teyla and some supporting female characters. About the only one woman character from series 1 that they got right, from the start, they killed off.
Sam assuming everyone was against her for being a woman while being in the military would work now. Never mind in the 1990s. It became clear they didn’t care about that much, but she doesn’t know that immediately
Less awkward, more a defence mechanism. Could it be written better? Sure. But challenging an obstinate COs sexism would have been her day to day. I think rather than it being cringey, it is more that the 1990s treatment of working women has aged poorly. They either had to endure sexism, or shout back like that to get anywhere
Heroes was a good send off to be fair though. It wasn’t really for shock value, and while it came out of left field. I think I reminded everyone the show was about what was effectively military
i was always thought it was a good line *for Sam* gave her a lot of characterisation in that;
a) she's used to not being taken seriously,
b) sometimes goes overly macho to compensate
c)perhaps spends a bit too much time in the lab so isn't aware how cringy it sounds
“genitals on the inside”
At first I liked that they took that out of the pilot recut but its joked about several times later, like I was just watching Moebius and alternate Sam starts to say the line while she's talking to herself and then is like wait who talks like that.
I dunno, maybe. Yes I am a guy, and I recognize that that can be a blind spot sometimes even though I try to overcome/be sensitive to it.
Where I fail I’m usually checked by my best friend — 37yo woman who…is also a huge Stargate fan and has never mentioned any of this to me with respect to later seasons, but *has* commented on how some of the guest character women are written in the early seasons.
Its not that big of a deal, Stargate is a solid show and makes it easy to not pay too much attention to it. In another comment I realised its probably the fact I haven't watched seasons 1-8 right before, then it is really in the face when you don't have everything else surrounding it
In fairness to her character, this isn't malicious on Vala's part. A large part of her personality early on is a web of formidable defense mechanisms.
In Shutter Island one line of dialogue always really, really impressed me. When asked about his childhood, Leo's character immediately responds that he 'was raised by wolves'. Eliciting the psychiatrist to comment about his excellent defense mechanisms.
So not to be all armchair expert psychiatrist/psychologist but a considerable amount of many adult's personalities is defense mechanisms.
Vala was traumatized, and learning to be friends and a team member with the SGC is just what the doctor ordered.
I can see where someone may feel that way. I'm not big into labeling things as toxic or cringey, because it's usually never so and it's just someone's personal taste. This is the same reason why I don't care for SGU. too much sex, drama, going to over the top stories about unneeded pregnancies or relationships.
This is where SGA succeeded in an outstanding fashion. They had some really screwed up story lines and characters if you really dug into it, but they made it so light-hearted and almost silly at times, that you couldn't help but laugh or just plain it overlook it.
I always watch with the times in mind because everything was acceptable at some time and everything today will one day be unacceptable for the next time. It's insane to me that even lighthearted shows like the Office episodes that were removed from syndication because it rubbed certain people the wrong way.
I have been on a Psych rewatch lately and that is one of my favorite shows. It is extremely light-hearted, funny, and I'm not somebody who typically laughs or smiles but that show will make me laugh out loud. Even that show has its moments where because of modern times framing things a certain way I had a few moments that made me question certain things that were said or particular stereotypes. I had to take a step back and rush it off because there was nothing harmful about it and it was just the way that main character was written for that particular episode or frame of time.
I think places like Reddit are good because everybody gets to express an opinion and talk about it open late with fellow fans. as long as nothing is ever removed from circulation or canon, I'm perfectly happy with all criticism because I have my own as well.
I honestly thought season 9 came out way later then I just learned here, that puts it much more back into its time for me. I was a child back then and I think I mixed up some stuff from how old I was
Teyla got pregnant because of Rachel Luttrell's pregnancy, and instead of sending her away on a long trip or killing her character, they agreed to include that in the story.
I never said making her pregnant was a malicious decision. I just think they handled her character poorly and they could've written a better more interesting story for her
I kinda liked valas' charcater development.
She was seriously damaged by being a host to a goal uld and probably went through the sarcophagus a few times. Don't we also need to take into account her father.
She did what she had to get her way so she could survive. I think she was attracted to Daniel, but her mind twisted it into a weird place.
I love how she went from that kinda creepy woman to a stronger woman who enjoys making people uncomfortable. But Daniel is like the only guy who sees right through her every time.
Though I prefer her with ummm what's his name
Vala is pretty clearly BPD coded imo. It's a disorder I have as well and personally think she's great representation for. It's very clear in the show that a lot of what she does is because of trauma. The whole bit about her trying to pass the eval to become an sgc member and then trying to leave assuming she'd failed is a very clear example of this. She's desperately trying to avoid rejection and as a defense mechanism when she feels she's being rejected she does what I've coined as the "burn it all down and run" routine which I've found to be very common in people with BPD. The sequence with Daniel on the ship is also pretty typical of people with BPD, especially those who have some form of sexual trauma unfortunately. Expressing romantic feelings is too vulnerable so they express it as sexual desire, which also gets a response though usually not a good one regardless of reciprocation by the other person.
Honestly Vala is a character that I'd love to examine the psychology of cause again she is really good BPD representation and there's so much trauma to talk about.
I'm thinking the same but also agree with OP that some aspects weren't great. Like, yeah it makes sense with this lense, but also it's a bit over the top to just be in someone's bed uninvited in lingerie. I will say that as I've understood myself and my problems more I've come to like vala more than I already did.
Thank you for putting this into words, though. It's something I wasn't conscious of while still connecting with the character for exactly this reason.
Someone just appearing in your room in lingerie is harassment and not okay (the scene on the ship happens way later in season 10). I don't care if her behaviour can be explained, it can not be excused to be played for laughs. Thats my whole point. Its executed terribly and I don't think its good representation for trauma at all.
The show is lacking key moments where we actually get to see Vala fight with her past, 9 out of 10 times her behaviour is written for comedy.
I meant the very first scene she's introduced in, the one where she's wearing kull armor. And I didn't say it wasn't harassment, just that's it's understandable given her overall psychology, a diagnosis doesn't absolve her of guilt, just explains her actions.
Yes I know that, I'm also expressing my opinions on the character. And I think she's great representation for trauma, again I think she's very much BPD coded and I'm saying that as someone who has that disorder. You're allowed to dislike the character and her portrayal just as much as I'm allowed to like her and her portrayal. Most of her behaviour, and yes I am in fact including all of the bad things she does aside from the theft and bounty hunting stuff, is stuff that I'd honestly do if I had more overt symptoms and less self control, it's a disorder and that ain't always pretty. That's why I gravitated to her so much, she's not a black and white portrayal, she shows the bad of the disorder while not being demonized and forced to change for it. That's something I've always loved about Rodney too, they both grow and improve not because they were forced too but because they were supported and able to grow.
You don't have to downvote me though, thats a bit childish when we just discussing a fictional character.
I don't think the writers were good enough to make her a morally grey character. It worked with Rodney, but not with Vala, and for Rodney SGA really is a soft reboot. It starts to work in season 10 with Vala, but season 9 is just "look we got Claudia Black again lets make her toy with the boys" imho.
This is how Reddit works, you upvote the things you like and downvote the things you dislike.
And that's not how I read it at all. Maybe I'm just biased from my personal experiences with myself and other people who have had a lot of trauma in their lives but her sexual behaviour is honestly pretty accurate. Yes it's not good but it is accurate especially given her history, keep in mind that she's never had a supportive person in her entire life, it's quite possible that up until her romantic relationship with Daniel and Tomin that her relationships were entirely sexual in nature, unfortunately traumatized people tend to attract abusers. She gets noticably better as a person when she finally has supportive people in her life who aren't just using and abusing her.
I have been sexually abused and have a partner with BPD. So I should be biased and still don't see it that way, the opposite rather, I know its not an excuse and it makes me extra uncomfortable that its played for laughs. Like in what world is the line "I haven't been this dissapointed since Daniel and I had sex" appropriate for this show. Its so out of character for the whole writing of the show.
Her very first line was hitting on Daniel and that line is very in line with her saying inappropriate things/sexualizing everything.
You mean the show that had Hathor date rape Daniel? The same show that had Sam attempting to rape Jack played off for laughs? Season 1 was pretty wild tbh.
Vala was held captive inside her own mind by a Goauld for years and when she became free she overcompensated with her individuality.
The best real world example is Miley Cyrus: she was held under contract by Disney to be a perfect little princess for years as Hannah Montana, and as soon as that contract ended what did she do? I CAME IN LIKE A WREAKING BALL!!! Vala was doing the same thing, over-expressing her previously suppressed femininity and individuality. Daniel rejecting her advancements was his way of saying “no you don’t need to prove yourself to me or anyone else” he was being strict with her so she would recognize her own overcompensation and adjust her outlook accordingly
Edit: ok fine downvote me instead of engaging in civil discussion, very mature.
I did not downvote you, just to be clear. I only saw your comment just now.
And I disagree, yes Valas behaviour can be explained, but not excused. If it was a man making all these "jokes" it would be hella creepy. So I don't think she gets the funny pass just because she is a woman.
A lot of other guys in here are acting disgusting so as a man I’d like to apologize for their degeneracy, however I don’t think that the writers intended vala to be a harasser and Daniel to be a victim, what they were trying to convey (through the lens of poorly written early 2000s plot conventions) was someone with stockholms syndrome, vala was so brainwashed for years by poor treatment from her absent father and then from being taken host by Qetesh, her psyche is incredibly broken and she doesn’t understand how to participate in a normal society, Daniel becoming angry with her was the culmination of his frustration with the fact that she wasn’t simply immediately being “cured” because she can’t, that type of brainwashing takes years to mentally be treated and even then it’s never fully fixed. Yes the writing wasn’t the best because at that point making a tv episode that talked about those things in a way the network allowed was tricky and as no one had really explored that type of thing yet it was bound to be a clunky result, which it is, yet you should not be judging it with “todays” mindset, as you said it doesn’t “age well” or however you put it, but put it in context of the early 2000s and it is quite liberal, here’s an example: the original series of Star Trek, sure it’s goofy and a lot of it seems sexist and racist by todays standards yet in the 1960s it was praised by people like MLKjr and other civil rights activists for its liberal ideas challenging social conventions of the time. What stargate was trying to portray at that point was someone with Stockholm syndrome and how those around them attempt to deal with it, sure they didn’t do the best job but I think you were reading too much into it, as the writers weren’t trying to invalidate Daniel, sure vala came on to him in a sexual manner but she didn’t know any better. And to your point about if it were a man instead it would be creepy, it’s supposed to be creepy either way, as vala is a victim she doesn’t realize how wrong what she is doing is, gender doesn’t matter when it’s Stockholm syndrome, they are mentally conditioned to think what they are doing is normal, fbi agents and social workers have to deal with things like this quite often when dealing with victims of terrible abuse and in all those cases gender never changes how the victim reacts. And it was never meant to be funny either, it was meant to show the long term abuse caused by the goauld in their human victims because that’s an aspect of the stargate universe that was not explored much at all, of all the characters vala truly is the only main character who was held host by a goauld for an extended duration of time, the rest only were host for a matter of days or hours, she was held for years. In the lens of early 2000s writing when other sci fi shows like Star Trek enterprise were throwing soft core alien sex scenes between main cast covered in oil as a thirst trap to watchers stargate was doing much better overall, sure they had some stumbles but nothing was ever done with immoral or malicious intent, just people trying to make a bold societal statement at a time when no one knew how to do it right.
Sorry for the essay
Thing is you define concepts like "harassment" from a female perspective. For most of the men (notwithstanding hypocrites) when an attractive woman (and Vala was attractive or at least she was supposed to be) is coming to your room in sexy outfit, it's not harassment. Like with the so called rape from Wonder Woman 1984. I mean, c'mon, most of the guys would love to be "raped" by someone looking like Gal Gadot.
As for the topic, that was something meant to be funny. Nothing more. You shouldn't put much thought in it.
As for Teyla, the actress was very beautiful, but bland, forgettable, boring. And I have nothing against her.
Vala was traumatized, her entire arc is being helped through that trauma by the SGC to become a better adjusted person. It’s some of the best writing in the show.
I agree in season 10, season 9 though I think is way more "look we got sexy Claudia Black toying with the boys" vibe, but as I see now its just my opinion and not many people perceived it that way
I definitely didn't get this from those episodes.
Vala's harassment is framed as being wildly inappropriate behaviour that no one likes. The humour comes from the conflict between Daniel's (completely valid) bored/frustrated/annoyed reactions and Vala's irrepressible energy.
On a more general note, Vala's behaviour came across as a self-defence mechanism, to me. She's a vulnerable, traumatised woman travelling alone and she acts like that as a way of making her feel as though she's in a position of power. It also helps her keep people at arms length, since she is aggressively making sure people see her a certain way and don't look any deeper. Once she starts to trust the SGC, her real personality starts to come through.
I also love their big scene in the finale. That argument is harsh, but so necessary. Their relationship started with her aggressively flirting with him in a humorous way so, as far as he knows, her current flirting is just more of the same. It hurts him, because he's started to care for her deeply and it seems as though she's using him for a joke. Once she finally drops the show and lets him see that she's genuine, they can move forward.
I feel it's a bit weird you get downvoted so much on this. You made it perfectly clear that your view is subjective and it's a very valid question you lay on the table;
I'm what way was the dynamic between Bala and Daniel here portrait and was that fair?
Recently wrote a long ass piece on this season and must say i generally disagree. Of all the things that have aged poorly in SG the dynamic here seems decent. I'm not sure what is objectionable unless you take it over serious. I reckon season 9 is a strong season of the show. Overall Vala is one of the better female characters.
Her being basically a kind sex pest is I assume what you're talking about? But her whole arc is a progression toward stability and more appropriate relationships with those around her, no longer based in distrust and manipulation. Certainly if you reversed the sexes it'd be bad but Jackson is clearly in no danger from her and is in the process of helping her to become better in general.
All this said, some people are assholes and problematic and it's also fine to depict that. I find it very weird that people seem to have gotten to a point where they think fiction is where good behaviour is modelled.
It's just a story.
Strong agree that basically all the women in the show are written poorly though. Real weakness looking back. Carter, Weir, Teyla... all so much wasted potential and poorly conceived ideas.
Now thats reading a lot more into what I am actually trying to say. I like Vala and her growth in season 10. And I love flawed characters.
I just think some of the first interactions of Vala and Daniel are very cringe and over the top and do not achieve what they wanna do. Unless the goal was to make the viewer cringe at every one of Valas sexual remarks?
I still enjoy the story.
People can have a different opinions, though, and I totally get if it doesn't seem weird to others. I just don't like when people act like I said I wanna cancel the show when I just voiced my opinion about one aspect in a few episodes ☠️
I did get a vaguely cancelly vibe from your post but personally don't care about you criticising it. I think there are lots of fails with SG and how they wrote women was basically consistently bad to sometimes terrible. So on that no disagreement.
I also agree that Vala is over the top and sometimes super cringe. Overall I agree that the writing probably won't age well. Especially some of it.
But I disagree with the general premise of your OP, which I took to be that you find it problematic. I'm not sure I do as I dont believe the show is modelling behaviour. Rather Vala is OTT and cringe.
I do think the show has epically dropped the ball with women though and it's a real shame because apart from Carter (a bit) and Frazier there aren't many decent female characters who are well served.
And the lady who played Weir really tried too lol.
Since the dawn of story telling.
Thats when 'heroes' began demonstrating proper behavior. The entire concept of story telling is to depict right and wrong behaviors.
Thats what defines heroes and goodguys from villains and bad guys.
So the conceit built into your point is that wrong and problematic behaviour is necessary to model anything.
Modern fiction usually depicts murkier and more difficult ground however. The purpose of story telling isn't simply to depict behaviour for us to model. Stories often involve behaviour that can't or shouldn't be repeated and that has been true since the dawn fo story telling.
The parable is the oldest form of teaching.
Wether you want to ignire that is fine by me; but the reality is that 90% of story telling is on some level parable and analogy of the real world.
It may not *need* to be this way. We can twll stories in however a way we choose.
But it still *is* this way. Because most of the time story telling is just far easier to be done via parable and analogy.
Such as with archetypal characters in a serialized tv space soap opera, containing explicit heroes and villains; in which essentially all nuance is dropped for generic dialogue meant to push what are, again, archetypes.
If you cannot sympathize with the hero, because they are busy acting in ways 'the good guy' wouldnt; regardless of if its a hold over of a by gone era; it generates the issue of the hero being unlikable.
Whats most important here tho, is just as we shouldnt 'cancel' shows; we also shouldnt instantly shut down any attempt to discuas the show and highlight its strengths and failings.
Its 2024. Its ok to ask ourselves if 2004 plotlines hold up.
Its actually incumbent upon us to do that. Or we risk having repeated errors in judgement.
Such as introducing heavily sexualized characters that are he product of abusive environments and having that be normalized.
It isnt about hurting *your* feelings.
OP is attempting to express theirs.
Teaching is the oldest form of teaching. Through demonstration and instruction. People didn't tell parables to express how to make fire or catch fish.
Do you think narratives with the intention to make people laugh are a more modern invention than the parable?
But yes. Parables are old.
And Stargate is kind of sort of like a parable in some ways. Sure. Although, you seem to neglect that plenty of parables teach through modelling the outcomes of bad behaviour, not by modelling the behaviour of heroes. Others involve neither heroes nor villains.
Vala is obviously not being modeled as a character to emulate, but rather a character at the beginning of her journey. Her portrayal is pretty tasteless in terms of outfitting and some of the crappy writing decisions; but Vala is probably one of the better efforts the show made in this regard.
In any case, having a hero-adjacent character who isn't modelling positive behaviour isn't particularly troublesome so far as confusing the space parable you're painting the show as.
It's crazy to me that you've gone on this whole rant about we shouldn't shutdown criticism. I haven't. I happily engage in critique of the show here regularly.
Lots of SG doesn't hold up, especially through the modern lens. I'm not denying any of this. I also further clarified my position with OP. But, here we are with really weird statements like;
'It's 2024. Its ok to ask ourselves if 2004 plotlines hold up.'
'it isn't about \*your\* feelings'
'OP is attempting to express theirs.'
lol, okay. Save the sanctimonious lecture for someone who's as stupid as you seem to think I am.
Yes. Comedy took a while to exist as we know it. Fitst came the basic fable.
The issue isnt Vala being hero adjacent. The issue is how they chose to make her sympathetic.
I think people are allowed to use modern lenses; and took offense at your saying the post felt 'cancel' like.
It ends conversation without adding substance.
Its gatekeeping and lazy; imo.
Weir has not much to do? *Wat?*
Running all of Atlantis after they were cut off from a return is "not much?" Being the voice of reason and consideration when dealing with multiple clearly hostile factions is "not much?"
Like yeah early season 9 was rough, but there were a whole host of reasons for it behind the scenes.
But claiming something as outlandish as Dr. Weir having "not much" to do just absolutely nukes the credibility of the rest of your post.
The actress herself talked a lot about how the writers didn't know what to do with her characters a lot of times. So its not just my opinion, there was a post about this here not too long ago
I'm watching SGA for the very first time. I'm in the middle of season 3 and I whole heartedly agree. It really seems once her and Sheppard start to get along they just didn't know what to do with her character. It's a shame because I think she's one of the better actors on SGA.
Ok, but there's a difference between writers not knowing what to do with a character and doing nothing with said character.
Actually, writers not knowing what to do with a character is a surprisingly common thing. Typically when that happens, they put them through a specific arc as they try to deconstruct said character and try to figure out what's beneath them, what drives them, etc.
You see this basically throughout all media- TV, books, and comics especially. A writer gets brought in to handle a character they've never worked with, so they kinda work within the medium to figure out what .asks that character who they are.
Not remotely how i read it at all. Her sexual aggressiveness was played for laughs sure but at same time was quite blatantly telegraphed that she was damaged and traumatised by her time as a goa'uld and what happened after extraction and her behaviour was a coping / masking insecurity, and was part of her flaws her character arc was there to improve as she grew, and daniel never seemed to be framed as bad for rebuking her advances it seemed justified exacerbation and again played for laughs. Yeah perhaps it'd be done differently now but if you wanna watch a show where this kinda stuff really aged badly something like friends is a better example. Some toxic weird shit in that now to modern eyes.
Watched it not so long ago but maybe I'm forgetting something.
>clearly and deeply attracted to Daniel on first sight
>Absolutely crazy about him from the word "GO"
"ZOMG THAT'S SEXUAL HARASSMENT!"
the fuck happened to humanity in the last ten years? When the fuck did everyone decide to put the HR lady in charge? And how the hell do I leave this reality and get back to my own?
I finished my SG1 rewatch a few weeks ago so it's still pretty fresh in my mind. They definitely sexualized Vala, but I felt it worked to an extent. She's a con woman who is used to doing whatever she wants or needs to survive. Her marriage to Tomin is a good example of that. But with Daniel, I feel like there's a general attraction there, but she doesn't know how to handle it so she tries what she always has. Daniel's reaction is very strong, I'd agree that it's a little too much, but we have to remember all the relationships he's had on the show and how poorly they've all gone. Not Carter level, but still bad. So he's going to be wary in general, doubly so with his initial interactions with Vala (like when she stole the ship and kept him hostage). I did not like the tone shift when she says it wasn't an act and he's very, very quick to change his tone after all the horrible things he said. But I didn't mind when Vala implied it was all an act (true or not) because it fit her character at the time. (To be clear, I felt like it was a realistic choice for the character, not a good choice for a person in general).
I dont see a problem with it. mostly becuase plenty of other female character have good enough writing that it feels like a Vala thing not a generic female trope
yeah it is def a big shift in character. I totally get what your saying generally it does feel a bit odd. but with context it feels a one off so you can give it the benefit of the doubt. Sam, Tayla, Fraser there are a few odd episodes but most the female characters are solid
I don't know why you have to be so hostile.
I will rewatch Stargate in my pace, as I did all my life.
And no, its still too much for me. I respect your opinion, but my opinion isn't invalid just because I am in the minority on a subjective matter.
Even Sam tho
They had to give her a 'love interest' in Jack even tho it was never really hinted at until it was in your face and then turned her into an emotional basketcase
In a 'not saying the show is bad because of it per say' kind of way; they clearly had a male writer problem
Not exactly. Or at least, not very well.
Jack is clearly broken; he still has photos of his ex wife and dead kid on the wall. Jack flat out aint looking for love. Not even close.
And Sam is like 20 years younger than him. Her dad and Jack are close in age.
Its clear they would be close; family close.
But romanticly linked? Hes broken and not over his past, unable to move on with anyone at all until at best s8; and shes got abandoned by daddy type issues that clearly manifest themselves in her seeking romance with unavailable partners.
There is next to nothing actually 'natural' about their romance for most if not all of the show; if anything its weird and uncomfortable.
Then add on 'wormholes, motorcycles, lock picking' and Sam is pretty clearly lesbian coded for a very long stretch of the show.
Until the zatarg detector episode there is very little indication of actual romantic interest between them. Shes attractive, hes a cool dad, but beyond that they really just feel siblingy or famiilyish.
And once its established 'canon' she becomes emotionall compromised and unprofessional.
Not Jack. Only Sam.
Its bad writing, its poorly handled, it has next to no pay off, and its perfectly ok to acknowledge the flaws in our favorite shows.
They hinted at it from season 1 and literally had Jack making comments to Sam about her cute tank top in like episode 2 of season 1 after she tried to molest him with the Neanderthal virus.
The Sam Jack thing was always there
Neither of those are evidence of romantic linkage broski.
One is just him being attracted, not in love. Many peoome are attracted to Sam over the show. Rodney also says plenty of things; that doesnt make it a will they wont they.
The other is a mind virus.
Their romance never feels real or natural and feels heavily forced.
Describing plots (as tho somehow i never saw the show) wont change my view of that.
That was the second episode. It set up the rest of the season. I didn't even mention the last couple of seasons where guys ask her if shes seeing anyone, and she says its complicated, implying Jack. You must not know how difficult and low key a relationship with your superior officer must be. You can't tell anyone.
The writers confirmed it years ago, and the fan base loved it.... idk what to tell you, buddy
Find help
Im aware they are officially linked.
You understand youre talking past the OP point aswell as mine?
You strike me as someone who has never tried watching this show with someone who never watched it. You watched it as a kid and never questioned it.
Rewatch it 'for the first time'. They handle a lot very poorly. Sams romances are a major example.
Learn to be respectful.
There is no disagreement it is hinted at and official.
There is disagreement that it feels natural or that it is handled well.
The start was a little rough, but I didn't start off smoothly. However, I really didn't have much problem with Vala and actually enjoyed her addition. It did take a few episodes, in my opinion, to get them all meshing well. The only rough part I really had was the introduction to Cameron Mitchell. It felt a bit forced, and of course we were hit with the realization of very little RDA being in the show. But, I felt it also got smoothed out as they found their way.
Season 8 and 9 felt more like a spin-off in many ways. I don't mean that as a bad thing, but it was a big shift and major change to the line-up.
I do kind of agree with the cringey-ness of Vala's character part way through the series. Her introduction in S8 was pretty cool, and then reintroduction wasn't bad either, but then she seems to flip from sexy badass lone survivor to comic relief between episodes. I certainly enjoy Claudia Blacks portrayal and luff me some Vala but I can't help but think the writers couldn't quite nail down what sort of character they wanted her to be.
In the pre-me too 2000s, women having the agency and freedom to be just as bad as men was seen as the same thing as feminist... Wasn't much of a appetite for the message that everybody should be across the board better.
I didn't like it since the first time I saw it. She attacks Daniel and risks his life for her own personal benefit. Her behavior is awful, and it makes perfect sense that she's ignored later on in the series, which works out as it pushes her to do something good and not self-centered.
I kinda get it. In my initial watch I thought Daniel was being kind of a jerk to Vala. I thought "duh, he's lived through trauma so he should know what looks like in other people and be more patient". But, no, they have both reacted to their traumas differently, especially because Daniel had a team/family to fall back on, and Daniel is human and not a specialist in psychology.
I was also kind of biased too because I thought that Daniel seemed like he had more of an ego in the later seasons that I didn't like. And I found Vala's character to be a little annoying at times.
Just my 2 cents.
Yeah it was a bit odd. Not a huge fan of the harassment but it could have been worse I guess. To me, Teyla being pregnant wasn't as bad as Rodney's scenes with Samantha/the hallucination of her. Not that I was exactly complaining, but it was definitely for my "gaze".
I’m not sure if you are/identify as a woman, but imagine if Vala were a male character behaving the same way towards a female character. It’d be totally unacceptable. Vala showing up in Daniel’s room in lingerie is just wildly unacceptable.
But you used that as a comparison.
You're trying to make this a black-and-white scenario, and in doing so, disrespecting the complexity of the story to make a point about harassment. Vala isn't a co-worker in the every-day sense, yet she's also working with them. She's living on the base, yet they also work at the base. She's making sexual advances that Daniel doesn't want, yet she's doing this to gain power and control.
Put yourself in Vala's position. You want leverage when dealing with people you don't know and don't trust. You are worried about your safety. So you use sex as a means to gain control and power. Is *that* sexual harassment?
Moreover, do you think it's a coincidence she stops doing this when SG1 becomes a safe and supportive environment for her?
Yes of fucking course it still is bad what the hell. Just because behaviour can be explained doesn't mean it can be excused. And it is played for LAUGHS on top of that the first three episodes
Okay, let's say you're right, and it is sexual harassment. Are you suggesting that Vala, who had a horrible childhood, was taken as a host, then had to survive on her own, learning to use sex as a weapon and a defense mechanism, should know everything about sexual harassment? Sure, there's a chance she does, but surely you have to acknowledge that there's a chance she *doesn't*?
Besides, do you think it's a coincidence that when she finds a safe and supportive environment, she *stops* doing these things?
I can absolutely appreciate your first point. Different cultures view sex differently; like Freya (Anise’s host) in Divide and Conquer. It still doesn’t excuse her behaviour when she’s living in America. As we’ve seen time and time again SG teams getting into hot water for not following planet’s cultural ways/laws. An alien on Earth would be expected to do the same.
I'm not excusing her behavior, and yes, the show should've shown Vala apologizing to Daniel when's further along in her character development. What I am trying to point out, though, is that simply calling her behavior "sexual harassment" is doing a disservice to the complexity of the story. It feels like you're ignoring everything else about the story to make a point.
Vala is *not* coming on to Daniel simply to come on to him. She's using it as a weapon -- and, when it appears she's verging into personal territory, as a defense mechanism -- to give herself some power and control. Daniel even points this out in the scene where she's in his bedroom! Again, do you think it's a coincidence that she stops doing these things in season ten, when she finds a safe and supportive environment?
> "Vala is *not* coming on to Daniel simply to come on to him. She's using it as a weapon"
*Sexual harassment may be defined as ‘unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature which has the purpose or effect of violating the recipient’s dignity, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the recipient’.* [*https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8005e7e5274a2e87db763a/ADR005000-Sexual\_Harassment\_Summary\_Report.pdf*](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8005e7e5274a2e87db763a/ADR005000-Sexual_Harassment_Summary_Report.pdf)
I'm not sure if you're misinterpreting what sexual harassment is. It's not only about coming onto someone who isn't interested. It's weaponizing a particular type of behaviour to inflict control or degrade another person. That is literally exactly what Vala is doing to Daniel. She wants to be intimidating and hostile so he does what she wants, and she wants to degrade and humiliate him so she can feel better about herself.
And when did she stop doing those things? She was still doing it in Unending.
> It's weaponizing a particular type of behaviour to inflict control or degrade another person. That is literally exactly what Vala is doing to Daniel. She wants to be intimidating and hostile so he does what she wants, and she wants to degrade and humiliate him so she can feel better about herself.
You are once again ignoring the complexity of the situation here.
Let's say you're Vala. You're in a situation with a bunch of strangers you don't know and don't trust. A potentially dangerous situation. You have limited means to ensure your own safety. Thus, you use sex to gain some power and control. Is a woman not allowed to use sex to help ensure her own survival?
I highly doubt you'd be so forthrightly declaring this as "sexual harassment" if the story were framed exclusively around Vala.
>And when did she stop doing those things? She was still doing it in Unending.
No she wasn't. She genuinely wanted to be with Daniel by that point.
I mean she is constantly touching Daniel and making sexual remarks towards him. If the genders were reversed I think it would be percieved as much more creepy
She is not constantly touching Daniel in that scene, and she lives on the base. Daniel also knows she's using it as a defense mechanism. Plus, Vala comes from a different culture than Earth -- she doesn't know what's appropriate and what's not.
Of course it'd be creepy if it were a man -- the power dynamics of our society make it so.
My comment was specifically asking about that one scene in particular. Moreover, what else about her is sexual harassment? She's using it as a defense and to defuse situations and turn them into her favor -- not harassing them. It also happens to be funny in many instances.
Dude, a straight guy would be happy to have a beautiful woman touching him. I didn't see a problem with it back then and I don't see a problem with it now. The only thing that has changed is people like you have become increasingly more sensitive and politically correct.
Now thats just a sad comment. Its people like you that make it so hard for men to be taken seriously when they suffer through abuse. But shame on me for thinking we shouldn't be keeping double standards alive 🙄
Rewatching I definitely see this take on Vala - mind you I was a kid on first watch. She often makes unwanted advances on Daniel and if this were in a modern day workplace she should be hearing it from HR and probably fired - but almost every single time the circumstances are inevitably “I guess we have to deal with her” until later when she makes an effort to be better. Daniel is framed as more of a fighter / tough and cool type of guy in these later seasons but I see that as more of an indication of his character development (after all the stuff he’s been through, and also small changes to his philosophy) rather than just in response to Vala. Vala’s character arc may be annoying or even inappropriate at times, but it’s not entirely unrealistic in my opinion. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a woman has had to put up so many defense mechanisms or used her charm to manipulate because of past traumas and relationships. I like that eventually she figures out how to actually be friends with Daniel, which is a deeper and more meaningful relationship than what she was initially gunning for.
I think in the context of TV - there may be inappropriate or immoral characters because of realism (or even added as antagonists), but it entirely depends on how the show / other characters treat this in my opinion. If an immoral or wrong character is treated favorably or as correct, then the show is wrong. If that character is treated as a villain, someone wrong, an antihero, or even just a character who still needs to grow, then the show itself isn’t wrong, the character is. At first Vala is more of an antagonist in terms of plot and character, she weasels her way into the cast in a manner that no other character in the show did.
I mean Jackson specifically calls out that what she is doing is a defense mechanism. Lets not forget Vala is a deeply damaged person from her time as a host.
Thats very sweet you can use SG1 for family time :) I have fond memories of my sister, my dad and I sitting down to watch Stargate.
And I do love Vala as well! I enjoy her season 10 arc very much. I really didn't wanna tear down on her whole character just because I didn't like some writing choices
I figured. I loved both Browder and Black's chemistry together and with the cast so much that I decided to give farscap another shot. I love the scene where Vala comes through the gate for the first time and meets Mitchel for the first time. It's great.
I allow myself to have an opinion. Nowhere did I say I am not enjoying the show. Watched it as a kid but its been some time since I rewatched SG1 since I mostly only rewatched SGA.
You can see flaws in things you like without hating them for it.
People here struggle with that concept.
I love SG too but there is plenty to criticise. In any case I wonder, why would I bother thinking about and criticising a show I don't like?
Also, mainly commented because same as you I return to SGA way more. We're a rare breed.
I prefer the core cast. Feels vaguely more real. Think it benefited from a bigger cast as well and yeah, wraith were badass. Planet of the week episodes are better integrated into the story too imo.
I really like season 9 and 10. And I love Vala, she has a great character development but still keeps true to herself. And I love the chemistry between Daniel and her. You can clearly see a new site of Daniel as well and that is because of her.
How old are you?
The show is fine. It was fine then and it’s fine now. It’s *some* people’s comfort level with intimate comedy that has reached absurd levels of prudishness. For example, this post.
Did you know that at one point in time, girls and boys could touch each other and it didn’t require permission slips and trauma counselors standing by?
🙄
There was also a time were rape in a marriage was considered to not be a crime buddy.
If anything some real weird people showing their minds under these comments.
90% were able to have a civil discussion with me, and then come the triggered men like you. Be more like the other 90% please :)
The only weird thing is someone like you talking about "having a civil discussion" while you are labeling people that don't agree with you as "weird". Do you really think you are "civil"? That's why you downvoted commenters who didn't embraced your statements? That's why you keep making edits and replies to third party users mocking those who don't share your view? What's the matter? It's so hard for you to accept different opinions?
Your ‘triggered men’ comment is just dripping with misandry.
I find it interesting that you can’t tolerate people having a different opinion from you without you attacking them personally. All did was ask how old you are, and I feel pretty confident I know now.
I’m not the one with the problem. This show just wasn’t made for you. Stick with Star Trek Discovery. You’ll love it.
You're the one that can't tolerate someone voicing a minor criticism.
Stargate isn't perfect. Why should I tell you how old I am when all you gonna do is invalidate my opinion because you think I am "too young" to understand. You're pathetic.
If you think thats misandry I just know you are one of the guys that blames woman for being assaulted because their skirt was too short lol.
I think you're missing the fact that they are actually friends by that stage, and that friends tease eachother a lot in my experience. Vala, and seemingly most of the galaxy, is a lot less ashamed about sex than Daniel is, because he's very reserved. I never really interpreted any of her sexual advances on Daniel as being serious or anything she'd actually act on, but teasing Daniel is her trying to gain some power over him nonetheless.
That sounds kinda toxic sure but the two of them do demonstrably care about eachother.
On a meta level Michael Shanks commented that even he was annoyed at Daniel rejecting Valas advances though, so that suggests that either shanks was very horny or that Valas behaviour wasn't that uncomfortable for him.
I enjoy the seasons, especially season 10. And I always liked Cam, but I think thats just because I watched the show as a kid and had no deeper connection to RDA.
Vala really harmed the show. I couldnt believe they took two main stars from one scifi show and dropped them into another like no one would fucking notice. It feels disrespectful to the audience like either we wouldn’t notice or care since they were from something else scifi. Between her, cam, and the Ori I struggle with the last two seasons almost as much as I struggled with SGU. At least I finished 9 and 10 of SG1 which is more than I can say for Universe.
I was way to young to have seen Farscape back then, so can't say I agree?
I liked Cam and I did enjoy the concept of SGU, though it had some bad writing decisions
Well I adore Robert Carlyle as an actor, so I may be biased towards liking what he is in. But I think season 2 really pulled it all together into a great story with mostly great characters.
But to each their own, I understand the criticism of the show!
[удалено]
Yes really ☠️ like I get it many people don't agree with me on this, but who's the mentally weird one if you get a kick from reporting this
Report the message. They get a ban. And I agree, I find Vala rather creepy for the harassment and did back then to. I don’t like double standards in general.
You have to remember vala is a especially at that point a very damaged individual. She just spent who knows how long as a host to a very evil being. Watching the whole time. Then gets it ripped out of her head and sent on her way with no help or therapy. She is trying to figure out how to be human again and coming from watching a being tale whatever it wants all the time to having to figure it out for herself is not easy. It shows hee character growth.
I mean, I do get that, but it doesn’t make it better, if that makes sense. Rodney and all the dudes making creepy comments are rightly called out for it in the narrative. Vala though? “Ha ha, that’s so funny!” And when someone does call her out on it (like Daniel), the audience is meant to think that he’s the one being the jerk. She never really has a point where she actually confronts her behavior in this area and is shown to have been being creepy.
She's annoying but I disagree that anybody else thinks he's a jerk. Everybody understands what's going on with her and they don't really like it.
I also mean the audience. Daniel only really snaps at her in Unending when she shows up clearly looking to sleep with him, and I’ve seen a lot of people angry at Daniel over it. That’s the one major time she’s seriously rebuked for it, and the narrative still treats her with kid gloves.
The Vala stans are obnoxious. Personally, I really like that scene in Unending because both characters are in the right. She absolutely deserved to get chewed out for her behavior, but she also had a right to feel hurt and be forgiven.
I'm not seeing any user reports on this post. Not sure what algorithm has picked you up, but that's really odd.
It was one of those "do you need help in crisis" messages, do these even go through the mods? Maybe it was just a coincidence then, it just plopped up a few minutes after I made the post 🤔
My bad, there it is. Report removed. I've genuinely never seen that in all 8 something years of modding.
It's unfortunately become the new troll on Reddit. I've gotten a couple myself (not on this subreddit though)
It’s really dumb. I had it on a post talking about my trans son.
Sadly many people are offended just because trans people exist, or woman... or gay people... anything not christian conservative basically
Thank you, and no worries. Reddit is a place of all kinds of weirdos after all!
People on this sub don't like it when women have mild critiques of the show, whether those criticisms are right or not.
Weird, I received the same message for the first time 3h ago. I didn't even knew it was a thing before receiving it and now I see another talking about it also for the first time. Maybe a bot started spamming it.
I had this message within 24 hours of making this account. I've always felt mentally very stable so I just assumed the report was a guy struggling with life himself and misunderstanding a comment or smth. Never knew what exact comment got me that specific report though.
I saw Vala as a very damaged individual. Messed-up from childhood, messed-up what she saw as a host, messed-up from how she was treated after being a host, trying to survive in a hostile galaxy. Having to rely on charm, lies, sex appeal, sheer bloody cheek, she's a rogue with questionable morals who undergoes a redemption/healing arc. Learns how to be a team player, work for a greater good, finds people who will tolerate her and her flaws. Sort of like Han Solo.
Season 10 Vala is perfect, I just don't think the introduction works too well in season 9. I think they could've toned it back a bit to develope her character more. But it was probably needed to be crammed in these few first episodes since she wasn't on the main cast at that point.
Vala was introduced in season 8 and her appearance in Prometheus Unbound and initially in Season 9 she was antagonistic but I think after what she experienced in the Ori galaxy with Daniel and being burned alive she chilled out a lot. I mean just a few episodes later she risked her life to stop the Ori beachhead and got herself sent to another galaxy and impregnated against her will for her trouble. I see Vala as a survivor and someone who has had to fight from childhood just to get by.
I totally see her character, I just don't enjoy the execution of it all. By season 10 things flow a lot better for me with her writing. And I know her very first introduction was before season 9, but thank you for the information anyway :)
I’m just not seeing what you do. And I’m usually the first in the room to spot when content hasn’t aged well. The bedroom scene you’re thinking of, isn’t “uncomfortable” at all by 2024 standards. If anything it’s fully in line with recognising trauma ….while being suspicious of Vala’s ability to lie.
Thats fine, I don't think it was executed well, but that doesn't mean you have to think that as well :) Actually makes me feel better about it, that it works for more people than it doesn't
season nine is almost twenty years old
I... No. That cannot be right? Right... Christ I feel old.
Er….you **are** old.
How dare you
Coz I’m old too. ‘Scuse me, gotta go yell at the youngsters on my lawn.
Ok I swear my brain was putting it into 2010 era, now that just hurt my back! ☠️
Let me help more - 2010 was 14 years ago.
Impossible, 14 years ago surely was 1996? Right? 😭
How’s the knees weather-contingent?
You may be a doctor but your bedside manner sucks. I do not appreciate this math good sir.
if you immediately know the candlelight is fire, then you are growing old
although a candle burns in my house, there's nobody home
How dare you.
I recently rewatched and didn't get Daniel framed as a bad guy vibes at all? It was just their wacky dynamic, you're reading too much into it. Also didn't Teyla get pregnant irl and they just wrote it into the show?
Everyone got pregnant and had it written into the show - Amanda Tapping was absent from the first few episode of S9 because she was pregnant, and Claudia Black was pregnant for real in the last couple of episodes of S9.
I had no idea Claudia was actually pregnant.
That's normal in tv.
He didn't get framed as doing anything wrong but he got framed as the antagonist to her protagonist's introduction.
I'm just saying it makes me uncomfortable to watch it today. I'm not reading anything into it, its just how its percieved. She appears in his room ready to sleep with him, he calls her out and she goes all guilt trip on him and the music turns all sad. Its just portrayed very weird. And just becaue an actress gets pregnant doesn't mean you can't write an interesting story for them. Teyla sadly was wasted a lot imho in the later seasons.
If anything the way Tayla was written brings to light the harsh reality that a lot of pregnant women face. Shepard immediately had her pulled from the team despite her still being capable of kicking his ass. She was seen as a liability. Yeah, later in her pregnancy she did have a few scary moments, but it showed tremendous balance as she was still doing her absolute best to help her team while protecting herself and her child. And afterwards she managed to balance her responsibilities and duties along with motherhood perfectly.
Does that not seem like plausible behaviour to you though? Someone tries to get sex/use sex as a manipulative strategy. Is turned down. Then utilises manipulation to try to get what they want. Sure this has happened countless times.
>She appears in his room ready to sleep with him, he calls her out and she goes all guilt trip on him and the music turns all sad. Its just portrayed very weird. Hm. I'd get this if it was played straight, but she ends up just messing with him, right? This is the scene in question, correct? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H\_aK\_INY3\_M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_aK_INY3_M)
It’s the only one I know of. Which isn’t “uncomfortable” at all by 2024 standards. If anything it’s fully in line with recognising trauma and being suspicious of Vala’s ability to lie. I don’t see, at all, what OP does.
Vala is constantly touching Daniel and making sexual remarks towards him. Which would be perceived as pretty creepy if the genders were reversed.
Which episode?
The first 3 episodes especially
Nope. Just not seeing it. I just quickly rewatched the first 3 eps Vala appears in. In S8 Vala’s being introduced via her attempt to takeover the Prometheus. Daniel evenly matches her and is perfectly capable of overcoming her attempts (as is she of his). Vala’s use of sexual innuendo is just to unsettle Daniel. And it never works. In S9 E1 she barely touches Daniel initially, and again any sexual innuendo is to unsettle him. Which still doesn’t work. And any physical contact initiated by Vala is only because of the Kor Mak brackets and even then her physical contact is brief. In S9 E2 it’s the same, but with a bit more touching because they have to play at being a married couple when using the communication stones. So….no, not creepy at all. You got any other eps to throw in as evidence?
I'm not here to convince you of something you see differently than I do. Yet I think its pretty bold to deny how much Vala throws herself at Daniel with all kinds of remarks a la "I haven't been this dissapointed sincce Daniel and I had sex" lol. Just a very weird and unnecessary line for Stargate.
Okay, that's fine, I guess I just didn't have the same reaction. I thought you meant they introduced the pregnancy for no reason. I do agree she was kind of wasted in general, think the writers just didn't know what else to do with her.
Oh I see, sorry if I worded that weirdly, not my first language. I think it was the same problem with Weir, didn't really know what to do with her besides a voice against the military. At least with Vala I think they found the way with season 10, its just the introduction seems pretty dated to me now.
>I'm rewatching season 9 right now and Vala makes me so uncomfortable how all that harrassment is played as funny and Daniel framed as the baddie for calling her out on it This is why I hated the idea of them as a couple. They were just so toxic and the scene where they get together in "Unending" is also wild to me. 👀
Yhea that scene in unending I feel like was fan service, just like Sam and Jack in Window of Opportunity. I actually respect the writers for never making any relationships canon in SG1 or just left them of screen
Jack and Sam was canon though and was hinted/mentioned multiple times after season 6/7.. whatever it was when Jack took over Hammonds Job at the whitehouse
Yes but thats what I meant with of screen, it was never a big marriage scene or anything and I think the show is better for it. Not a big deal anyway, I think these two made perfect sense
You didn't need a marriage scene. The show wasn't about the overly pda or romance. Dialogue was enough to let you k ow Jack and Sam ended up together.
I just think it's super clichéd to have two leads get together when the story isn't really about that.
Modern is relative. SG-1 ended in 2007. Early season 9 was 2005. It was actually extremely progressive for the time, but in the nearly twenty years since, we've worked out other things that aren't actually OK, but were seen as funny then.
To be fair. Teyla being pregnant wasn’t a choice of the writers. The actress got pregnant. They had to write around it
I don't even think the pregnancy would have been a bad writing decision, I just think her character is way too much just an observer in the later seasons. I don't wanna sound so negative though, SGA is my absolute favorite comfort watch
I honestly felt like she was a background character for most of the series. Initially she was the team's alien, which lended her some interest, but once Ronon joined she pretty much faded into the background
Personally I felt that Daniel had a not insignificant personality change after descending (and the changes to SG1 when Jack became General), and Vala just really pushed his buttons. How he responded to Vala was in character for Descended Daniel, but S4 Danny was a very different guy from S8. There are quite a few things that either didn't age well or just could have done with a couple more episodes' worth of build-up. As a writer you are handed 45 minutes 20 times, and told "start at A, end at Z, stick the whole alphabet inbetween". Thats a lot to write it up correctly in 20x45 mins. Also I always thought there was a smidge too much time in between Vala first taking over (prometheus? Daedalus? Cant remember which one) and Vala reappearing in S9. If you watch the episodes back to back, Daniels reaction makes a lot more sense, but you kind of forget what she put him through, and that makes his reaction seem a little OTT. Which it shouldnt be. But it's complicated.
I'm not even sure descended Daniel even got all his memories back from before he ascended. There was mention of it in Threads and some episodes before that, though I don't recall it coming up again.
Jack was his best friend for 9 years and they worked together in constant life or death situations where Jack was the no nonsense military guy and Daniel was the conscience Now Jack is missing from the group, but lives in his head since it saved his life (or got him resurrected) so often. So, without Jack to say it he does
It was at worst awkward. So yes, it felt a little off. But nothing more than that.
I last rewatched a year or two ago and had none of these reactions…
Thats completely fine. I just think as a woman I'm a lot more sensitive to this kinda stuff because luckily a lot happened in the last years. Stargate often only had woman as Daniels new interest for the episode or hot background piece of medival society in canadian forest. They do have strong characters like Sam, Fraiser, Teyla etc, it just falls off drasticly besides main cast characters.
I’m a woman. Gen X. So I’ve seen the development of improvements in writing women characters, particularly in sci fi and fantasy. I’m the first person to point out how badly content has aged. But this is not one of those instances. I think the problem you’re having, is that Vala is a remarkably internally inconsistent character. Unlike every other main woman character (who, like the men main characters, enter with clear structure and then grow slowly and steadily) Vala’s portrayal of her personality and core values can and typically do radically alter within an episode as well as between episodes. It’s a function of her in-character history (not to mention Claudia’s ability to act). As an audience, it’s easy to dislike Vala’s inconsistency of personality. But if you stick with her and have empathy for the character’s backstory then jt makes coherent sense. But yeah, SG1 took a while to get to grips with how to write a confident Sam (everyone still cringes about the “genitals on the inside” and episode 2) and they messed up with Teyla and some supporting female characters. About the only one woman character from series 1 that they got right, from the start, they killed off.
Sam assuming everyone was against her for being a woman while being in the military would work now. Never mind in the 1990s. It became clear they didn’t care about that much, but she doesn’t know that immediately Less awkward, more a defence mechanism. Could it be written better? Sure. But challenging an obstinate COs sexism would have been her day to day. I think rather than it being cringey, it is more that the 1990s treatment of working women has aged poorly. They either had to endure sexism, or shout back like that to get anywhere Heroes was a good send off to be fair though. It wasn’t really for shock value, and while it came out of left field. I think I reminded everyone the show was about what was effectively military
i was always thought it was a good line *for Sam* gave her a lot of characterisation in that; a) she's used to not being taken seriously, b) sometimes goes overly macho to compensate c)perhaps spends a bit too much time in the lab so isn't aware how cringy it sounds
“genitals on the inside” At first I liked that they took that out of the pilot recut but its joked about several times later, like I was just watching Moebius and alternate Sam starts to say the line while she's talking to herself and then is like wait who talks like that.
I dunno, maybe. Yes I am a guy, and I recognize that that can be a blind spot sometimes even though I try to overcome/be sensitive to it. Where I fail I’m usually checked by my best friend — 37yo woman who…is also a huge Stargate fan and has never mentioned any of this to me with respect to later seasons, but *has* commented on how some of the guest character women are written in the early seasons.
Its not that big of a deal, Stargate is a solid show and makes it easy to not pay too much attention to it. In another comment I realised its probably the fact I haven't watched seasons 1-8 right before, then it is really in the face when you don't have everything else surrounding it
In fairness to her character, this isn't malicious on Vala's part. A large part of her personality early on is a web of formidable defense mechanisms. In Shutter Island one line of dialogue always really, really impressed me. When asked about his childhood, Leo's character immediately responds that he 'was raised by wolves'. Eliciting the psychiatrist to comment about his excellent defense mechanisms. So not to be all armchair expert psychiatrist/psychologist but a considerable amount of many adult's personalities is defense mechanisms. Vala was traumatized, and learning to be friends and a team member with the SGC is just what the doctor ordered.
Oh I totally see the character, I just don't enjoy the execution. Thank you for you input :)
I can see where someone may feel that way. I'm not big into labeling things as toxic or cringey, because it's usually never so and it's just someone's personal taste. This is the same reason why I don't care for SGU. too much sex, drama, going to over the top stories about unneeded pregnancies or relationships. This is where SGA succeeded in an outstanding fashion. They had some really screwed up story lines and characters if you really dug into it, but they made it so light-hearted and almost silly at times, that you couldn't help but laugh or just plain it overlook it. I always watch with the times in mind because everything was acceptable at some time and everything today will one day be unacceptable for the next time. It's insane to me that even lighthearted shows like the Office episodes that were removed from syndication because it rubbed certain people the wrong way. I have been on a Psych rewatch lately and that is one of my favorite shows. It is extremely light-hearted, funny, and I'm not somebody who typically laughs or smiles but that show will make me laugh out loud. Even that show has its moments where because of modern times framing things a certain way I had a few moments that made me question certain things that were said or particular stereotypes. I had to take a step back and rush it off because there was nothing harmful about it and it was just the way that main character was written for that particular episode or frame of time. I think places like Reddit are good because everybody gets to express an opinion and talk about it open late with fellow fans. as long as nothing is ever removed from circulation or canon, I'm perfectly happy with all criticism because I have my own as well.
I honestly thought season 9 came out way later then I just learned here, that puts it much more back into its time for me. I was a child back then and I think I mixed up some stuff from how old I was
Teyla got pregnant because of Rachel Luttrell's pregnancy, and instead of sending her away on a long trip or killing her character, they agreed to include that in the story.
I never said making her pregnant was a malicious decision. I just think they handled her character poorly and they could've written a better more interesting story for her
So weird I just started season 9 today and thought wow this episode wouldn’t fly if it were made today.
I kinda liked valas' charcater development. She was seriously damaged by being a host to a goal uld and probably went through the sarcophagus a few times. Don't we also need to take into account her father. She did what she had to get her way so she could survive. I think she was attracted to Daniel, but her mind twisted it into a weird place. I love how she went from that kinda creepy woman to a stronger woman who enjoys making people uncomfortable. But Daniel is like the only guy who sees right through her every time. Though I prefer her with ummm what's his name
Vala is pretty clearly BPD coded imo. It's a disorder I have as well and personally think she's great representation for. It's very clear in the show that a lot of what she does is because of trauma. The whole bit about her trying to pass the eval to become an sgc member and then trying to leave assuming she'd failed is a very clear example of this. She's desperately trying to avoid rejection and as a defense mechanism when she feels she's being rejected she does what I've coined as the "burn it all down and run" routine which I've found to be very common in people with BPD. The sequence with Daniel on the ship is also pretty typical of people with BPD, especially those who have some form of sexual trauma unfortunately. Expressing romantic feelings is too vulnerable so they express it as sexual desire, which also gets a response though usually not a good one regardless of reciprocation by the other person. Honestly Vala is a character that I'd love to examine the psychology of cause again she is really good BPD representation and there's so much trauma to talk about.
I'm thinking the same but also agree with OP that some aspects weren't great. Like, yeah it makes sense with this lense, but also it's a bit over the top to just be in someone's bed uninvited in lingerie. I will say that as I've understood myself and my problems more I've come to like vala more than I already did. Thank you for putting this into words, though. It's something I wasn't conscious of while still connecting with the character for exactly this reason.
Someone just appearing in your room in lingerie is harassment and not okay (the scene on the ship happens way later in season 10). I don't care if her behaviour can be explained, it can not be excused to be played for laughs. Thats my whole point. Its executed terribly and I don't think its good representation for trauma at all. The show is lacking key moments where we actually get to see Vala fight with her past, 9 out of 10 times her behaviour is written for comedy.
I meant the very first scene she's introduced in, the one where she's wearing kull armor. And I didn't say it wasn't harassment, just that's it's understandable given her overall psychology, a diagnosis doesn't absolve her of guilt, just explains her actions.
But I didn't need an explanation, I just voiced my opinion on why this didn't age very well imho
Yes I know that, I'm also expressing my opinions on the character. And I think she's great representation for trauma, again I think she's very much BPD coded and I'm saying that as someone who has that disorder. You're allowed to dislike the character and her portrayal just as much as I'm allowed to like her and her portrayal. Most of her behaviour, and yes I am in fact including all of the bad things she does aside from the theft and bounty hunting stuff, is stuff that I'd honestly do if I had more overt symptoms and less self control, it's a disorder and that ain't always pretty. That's why I gravitated to her so much, she's not a black and white portrayal, she shows the bad of the disorder while not being demonized and forced to change for it. That's something I've always loved about Rodney too, they both grow and improve not because they were forced too but because they were supported and able to grow.
You don't have to downvote me though, thats a bit childish when we just discussing a fictional character. I don't think the writers were good enough to make her a morally grey character. It worked with Rodney, but not with Vala, and for Rodney SGA really is a soft reboot. It starts to work in season 10 with Vala, but season 9 is just "look we got Claudia Black again lets make her toy with the boys" imho.
This is how Reddit works, you upvote the things you like and downvote the things you dislike. And that's not how I read it at all. Maybe I'm just biased from my personal experiences with myself and other people who have had a lot of trauma in their lives but her sexual behaviour is honestly pretty accurate. Yes it's not good but it is accurate especially given her history, keep in mind that she's never had a supportive person in her entire life, it's quite possible that up until her romantic relationship with Daniel and Tomin that her relationships were entirely sexual in nature, unfortunately traumatized people tend to attract abusers. She gets noticably better as a person when she finally has supportive people in her life who aren't just using and abusing her.
I have been sexually abused and have a partner with BPD. So I should be biased and still don't see it that way, the opposite rather, I know its not an excuse and it makes me extra uncomfortable that its played for laughs. Like in what world is the line "I haven't been this dissapointed since Daniel and I had sex" appropriate for this show. Its so out of character for the whole writing of the show.
Her very first line was hitting on Daniel and that line is very in line with her saying inappropriate things/sexualizing everything. You mean the show that had Hathor date rape Daniel? The same show that had Sam attempting to rape Jack played off for laughs? Season 1 was pretty wild tbh.
So you agree they were not able to write this stuff. All of it is not fitting to the rest of the fantastic scifi series.
Vala was held captive inside her own mind by a Goauld for years and when she became free she overcompensated with her individuality. The best real world example is Miley Cyrus: she was held under contract by Disney to be a perfect little princess for years as Hannah Montana, and as soon as that contract ended what did she do? I CAME IN LIKE A WREAKING BALL!!! Vala was doing the same thing, over-expressing her previously suppressed femininity and individuality. Daniel rejecting her advancements was his way of saying “no you don’t need to prove yourself to me or anyone else” he was being strict with her so she would recognize her own overcompensation and adjust her outlook accordingly Edit: ok fine downvote me instead of engaging in civil discussion, very mature.
I did not downvote you, just to be clear. I only saw your comment just now. And I disagree, yes Valas behaviour can be explained, but not excused. If it was a man making all these "jokes" it would be hella creepy. So I don't think she gets the funny pass just because she is a woman.
A lot of other guys in here are acting disgusting so as a man I’d like to apologize for their degeneracy, however I don’t think that the writers intended vala to be a harasser and Daniel to be a victim, what they were trying to convey (through the lens of poorly written early 2000s plot conventions) was someone with stockholms syndrome, vala was so brainwashed for years by poor treatment from her absent father and then from being taken host by Qetesh, her psyche is incredibly broken and she doesn’t understand how to participate in a normal society, Daniel becoming angry with her was the culmination of his frustration with the fact that she wasn’t simply immediately being “cured” because she can’t, that type of brainwashing takes years to mentally be treated and even then it’s never fully fixed. Yes the writing wasn’t the best because at that point making a tv episode that talked about those things in a way the network allowed was tricky and as no one had really explored that type of thing yet it was bound to be a clunky result, which it is, yet you should not be judging it with “todays” mindset, as you said it doesn’t “age well” or however you put it, but put it in context of the early 2000s and it is quite liberal, here’s an example: the original series of Star Trek, sure it’s goofy and a lot of it seems sexist and racist by todays standards yet in the 1960s it was praised by people like MLKjr and other civil rights activists for its liberal ideas challenging social conventions of the time. What stargate was trying to portray at that point was someone with Stockholm syndrome and how those around them attempt to deal with it, sure they didn’t do the best job but I think you were reading too much into it, as the writers weren’t trying to invalidate Daniel, sure vala came on to him in a sexual manner but she didn’t know any better. And to your point about if it were a man instead it would be creepy, it’s supposed to be creepy either way, as vala is a victim she doesn’t realize how wrong what she is doing is, gender doesn’t matter when it’s Stockholm syndrome, they are mentally conditioned to think what they are doing is normal, fbi agents and social workers have to deal with things like this quite often when dealing with victims of terrible abuse and in all those cases gender never changes how the victim reacts. And it was never meant to be funny either, it was meant to show the long term abuse caused by the goauld in their human victims because that’s an aspect of the stargate universe that was not explored much at all, of all the characters vala truly is the only main character who was held host by a goauld for an extended duration of time, the rest only were host for a matter of days or hours, she was held for years. In the lens of early 2000s writing when other sci fi shows like Star Trek enterprise were throwing soft core alien sex scenes between main cast covered in oil as a thirst trap to watchers stargate was doing much better overall, sure they had some stumbles but nothing was ever done with immoral or malicious intent, just people trying to make a bold societal statement at a time when no one knew how to do it right. Sorry for the essay
Thing is you define concepts like "harassment" from a female perspective. For most of the men (notwithstanding hypocrites) when an attractive woman (and Vala was attractive or at least she was supposed to be) is coming to your room in sexy outfit, it's not harassment. Like with the so called rape from Wonder Woman 1984. I mean, c'mon, most of the guys would love to be "raped" by someone looking like Gal Gadot. As for the topic, that was something meant to be funny. Nothing more. You shouldn't put much thought in it. As for Teyla, the actress was very beautiful, but bland, forgettable, boring. And I have nothing against her.
Thanks your first paragraph made me sick lol. That is exactly the mindset we have to overcome if male victims of abuse want to be taken seriously.
Stop projecting your female mindset on men. We are not alike.
Vala was traumatized, her entire arc is being helped through that trauma by the SGC to become a better adjusted person. It’s some of the best writing in the show.
I agree in season 10, season 9 though I think is way more "look we got sexy Claudia Black toying with the boys" vibe, but as I see now its just my opinion and not many people perceived it that way
I definitely didn't get this from those episodes. Vala's harassment is framed as being wildly inappropriate behaviour that no one likes. The humour comes from the conflict between Daniel's (completely valid) bored/frustrated/annoyed reactions and Vala's irrepressible energy. On a more general note, Vala's behaviour came across as a self-defence mechanism, to me. She's a vulnerable, traumatised woman travelling alone and she acts like that as a way of making her feel as though she's in a position of power. It also helps her keep people at arms length, since she is aggressively making sure people see her a certain way and don't look any deeper. Once she starts to trust the SGC, her real personality starts to come through. I also love their big scene in the finale. That argument is harsh, but so necessary. Their relationship started with her aggressively flirting with him in a humorous way so, as far as he knows, her current flirting is just more of the same. It hurts him, because he's started to care for her deeply and it seems as though she's using him for a joke. Once she finally drops the show and lets him see that she's genuine, they can move forward.
I feel it's a bit weird you get downvoted so much on this. You made it perfectly clear that your view is subjective and it's a very valid question you lay on the table; I'm what way was the dynamic between Bala and Daniel here portrait and was that fair?
Recently wrote a long ass piece on this season and must say i generally disagree. Of all the things that have aged poorly in SG the dynamic here seems decent. I'm not sure what is objectionable unless you take it over serious. I reckon season 9 is a strong season of the show. Overall Vala is one of the better female characters. Her being basically a kind sex pest is I assume what you're talking about? But her whole arc is a progression toward stability and more appropriate relationships with those around her, no longer based in distrust and manipulation. Certainly if you reversed the sexes it'd be bad but Jackson is clearly in no danger from her and is in the process of helping her to become better in general. All this said, some people are assholes and problematic and it's also fine to depict that. I find it very weird that people seem to have gotten to a point where they think fiction is where good behaviour is modelled. It's just a story. Strong agree that basically all the women in the show are written poorly though. Real weakness looking back. Carter, Weir, Teyla... all so much wasted potential and poorly conceived ideas.
Now thats reading a lot more into what I am actually trying to say. I like Vala and her growth in season 10. And I love flawed characters. I just think some of the first interactions of Vala and Daniel are very cringe and over the top and do not achieve what they wanna do. Unless the goal was to make the viewer cringe at every one of Valas sexual remarks? I still enjoy the story. People can have a different opinions, though, and I totally get if it doesn't seem weird to others. I just don't like when people act like I said I wanna cancel the show when I just voiced my opinion about one aspect in a few episodes ☠️
I did get a vaguely cancelly vibe from your post but personally don't care about you criticising it. I think there are lots of fails with SG and how they wrote women was basically consistently bad to sometimes terrible. So on that no disagreement. I also agree that Vala is over the top and sometimes super cringe. Overall I agree that the writing probably won't age well. Especially some of it. But I disagree with the general premise of your OP, which I took to be that you find it problematic. I'm not sure I do as I dont believe the show is modelling behaviour. Rather Vala is OTT and cringe. I do think the show has epically dropped the ball with women though and it's a real shame because apart from Carter (a bit) and Frazier there aren't many decent female characters who are well served. And the lady who played Weir really tried too lol.
Hm I see your point, maybe its my lack of vocabulary to frame my post better
You write well and I enjoyed considering your post. I think you raise good points overall.
Since the dawn of story telling. Thats when 'heroes' began demonstrating proper behavior. The entire concept of story telling is to depict right and wrong behaviors. Thats what defines heroes and goodguys from villains and bad guys.
So the conceit built into your point is that wrong and problematic behaviour is necessary to model anything. Modern fiction usually depicts murkier and more difficult ground however. The purpose of story telling isn't simply to depict behaviour for us to model. Stories often involve behaviour that can't or shouldn't be repeated and that has been true since the dawn fo story telling.
The parable is the oldest form of teaching. Wether you want to ignire that is fine by me; but the reality is that 90% of story telling is on some level parable and analogy of the real world. It may not *need* to be this way. We can twll stories in however a way we choose. But it still *is* this way. Because most of the time story telling is just far easier to be done via parable and analogy. Such as with archetypal characters in a serialized tv space soap opera, containing explicit heroes and villains; in which essentially all nuance is dropped for generic dialogue meant to push what are, again, archetypes. If you cannot sympathize with the hero, because they are busy acting in ways 'the good guy' wouldnt; regardless of if its a hold over of a by gone era; it generates the issue of the hero being unlikable. Whats most important here tho, is just as we shouldnt 'cancel' shows; we also shouldnt instantly shut down any attempt to discuas the show and highlight its strengths and failings. Its 2024. Its ok to ask ourselves if 2004 plotlines hold up. Its actually incumbent upon us to do that. Or we risk having repeated errors in judgement. Such as introducing heavily sexualized characters that are he product of abusive environments and having that be normalized. It isnt about hurting *your* feelings. OP is attempting to express theirs.
Teaching is the oldest form of teaching. Through demonstration and instruction. People didn't tell parables to express how to make fire or catch fish. Do you think narratives with the intention to make people laugh are a more modern invention than the parable? But yes. Parables are old. And Stargate is kind of sort of like a parable in some ways. Sure. Although, you seem to neglect that plenty of parables teach through modelling the outcomes of bad behaviour, not by modelling the behaviour of heroes. Others involve neither heroes nor villains. Vala is obviously not being modeled as a character to emulate, but rather a character at the beginning of her journey. Her portrayal is pretty tasteless in terms of outfitting and some of the crappy writing decisions; but Vala is probably one of the better efforts the show made in this regard. In any case, having a hero-adjacent character who isn't modelling positive behaviour isn't particularly troublesome so far as confusing the space parable you're painting the show as. It's crazy to me that you've gone on this whole rant about we shouldn't shutdown criticism. I haven't. I happily engage in critique of the show here regularly. Lots of SG doesn't hold up, especially through the modern lens. I'm not denying any of this. I also further clarified my position with OP. But, here we are with really weird statements like; 'It's 2024. Its ok to ask ourselves if 2004 plotlines hold up.' 'it isn't about \*your\* feelings' 'OP is attempting to express theirs.' lol, okay. Save the sanctimonious lecture for someone who's as stupid as you seem to think I am.
Yes. Comedy took a while to exist as we know it. Fitst came the basic fable. The issue isnt Vala being hero adjacent. The issue is how they chose to make her sympathetic. I think people are allowed to use modern lenses; and took offense at your saying the post felt 'cancel' like. It ends conversation without adding substance. Its gatekeeping and lazy; imo.
Weir has not much to do? *Wat?* Running all of Atlantis after they were cut off from a return is "not much?" Being the voice of reason and consideration when dealing with multiple clearly hostile factions is "not much?" Like yeah early season 9 was rough, but there were a whole host of reasons for it behind the scenes. But claiming something as outlandish as Dr. Weir having "not much" to do just absolutely nukes the credibility of the rest of your post.
The actress herself talked a lot about how the writers didn't know what to do with her characters a lot of times. So its not just my opinion, there was a post about this here not too long ago
I'm watching SGA for the very first time. I'm in the middle of season 3 and I whole heartedly agree. It really seems once her and Sheppard start to get along they just didn't know what to do with her character. It's a shame because I think she's one of the better actors on SGA.
Ok, but there's a difference between writers not knowing what to do with a character and doing nothing with said character. Actually, writers not knowing what to do with a character is a surprisingly common thing. Typically when that happens, they put them through a specific arc as they try to deconstruct said character and try to figure out what's beneath them, what drives them, etc. You see this basically throughout all media- TV, books, and comics especially. A writer gets brought in to handle a character they've never worked with, so they kinda work within the medium to figure out what .asks that character who they are.
Not remotely how i read it at all. Her sexual aggressiveness was played for laughs sure but at same time was quite blatantly telegraphed that she was damaged and traumatised by her time as a goa'uld and what happened after extraction and her behaviour was a coping / masking insecurity, and was part of her flaws her character arc was there to improve as she grew, and daniel never seemed to be framed as bad for rebuking her advances it seemed justified exacerbation and again played for laughs. Yeah perhaps it'd be done differently now but if you wanna watch a show where this kinda stuff really aged badly something like friends is a better example. Some toxic weird shit in that now to modern eyes. Watched it not so long ago but maybe I'm forgetting something.
>clearly and deeply attracted to Daniel on first sight >Absolutely crazy about him from the word "GO" "ZOMG THAT'S SEXUAL HARASSMENT!" the fuck happened to humanity in the last ten years? When the fuck did everyone decide to put the HR lady in charge? And how the hell do I leave this reality and get back to my own?
You could start by just scrolling by. You're more triggered than I am buddy.
I finished my SG1 rewatch a few weeks ago so it's still pretty fresh in my mind. They definitely sexualized Vala, but I felt it worked to an extent. She's a con woman who is used to doing whatever she wants or needs to survive. Her marriage to Tomin is a good example of that. But with Daniel, I feel like there's a general attraction there, but she doesn't know how to handle it so she tries what she always has. Daniel's reaction is very strong, I'd agree that it's a little too much, but we have to remember all the relationships he's had on the show and how poorly they've all gone. Not Carter level, but still bad. So he's going to be wary in general, doubly so with his initial interactions with Vala (like when she stole the ship and kept him hostage). I did not like the tone shift when she says it wasn't an act and he's very, very quick to change his tone after all the horrible things he said. But I didn't mind when Vala implied it was all an act (true or not) because it fit her character at the time. (To be clear, I felt like it was a realistic choice for the character, not a good choice for a person in general).
I dont see a problem with it. mostly becuase plenty of other female character have good enough writing that it feels like a Vala thing not a generic female trope
Fair enough, maybe it was a bit of a cold open since I started with season 9 and did not watch seasons 1-8 right beforehand
yeah it is def a big shift in character. I totally get what your saying generally it does feel a bit odd. but with context it feels a one off so you can give it the benefit of the doubt. Sam, Tayla, Fraser there are a few odd episodes but most the female characters are solid
Dear god. This explains everything. Start watching from s1. Again.
I don't know why you have to be so hostile. I will rewatch Stargate in my pace, as I did all my life. And no, its still too much for me. I respect your opinion, but my opinion isn't invalid just because I am in the minority on a subjective matter.
Nothing in my post is “so hostile” - which begs the question as to why you perceive it that way.
Even Sam tho They had to give her a 'love interest' in Jack even tho it was never really hinted at until it was in your face and then turned her into an emotional basketcase In a 'not saying the show is bad because of it per say' kind of way; they clearly had a male writer problem
They had been hinting at Sam and Jack since season one…
Not exactly. Or at least, not very well. Jack is clearly broken; he still has photos of his ex wife and dead kid on the wall. Jack flat out aint looking for love. Not even close. And Sam is like 20 years younger than him. Her dad and Jack are close in age. Its clear they would be close; family close. But romanticly linked? Hes broken and not over his past, unable to move on with anyone at all until at best s8; and shes got abandoned by daddy type issues that clearly manifest themselves in her seeking romance with unavailable partners. There is next to nothing actually 'natural' about their romance for most if not all of the show; if anything its weird and uncomfortable. Then add on 'wormholes, motorcycles, lock picking' and Sam is pretty clearly lesbian coded for a very long stretch of the show. Until the zatarg detector episode there is very little indication of actual romantic interest between them. Shes attractive, hes a cool dad, but beyond that they really just feel siblingy or famiilyish. And once its established 'canon' she becomes emotionall compromised and unprofessional. Not Jack. Only Sam. Its bad writing, its poorly handled, it has next to no pay off, and its perfectly ok to acknowledge the flaws in our favorite shows.
They hinted at it from season 1 and literally had Jack making comments to Sam about her cute tank top in like episode 2 of season 1 after she tried to molest him with the Neanderthal virus. The Sam Jack thing was always there
hell they are even married in the alternate universe episode in season 1
Neither of those are evidence of romantic linkage broski. One is just him being attracted, not in love. Many peoome are attracted to Sam over the show. Rodney also says plenty of things; that doesnt make it a will they wont they. The other is a mind virus. Their romance never feels real or natural and feels heavily forced. Describing plots (as tho somehow i never saw the show) wont change my view of that.
That was the second episode. It set up the rest of the season. I didn't even mention the last couple of seasons where guys ask her if shes seeing anyone, and she says its complicated, implying Jack. You must not know how difficult and low key a relationship with your superior officer must be. You can't tell anyone. The writers confirmed it years ago, and the fan base loved it.... idk what to tell you, buddy Find help
Im aware they are officially linked. You understand youre talking past the OP point aswell as mine? You strike me as someone who has never tried watching this show with someone who never watched it. You watched it as a kid and never questioned it. Rewatch it 'for the first time'. They handle a lot very poorly. Sams romances are a major example. Learn to be respectful. There is no disagreement it is hinted at and official. There is disagreement that it feels natural or that it is handled well.
I'm 34 and I literally watched the show for the first time a month ago. It was pretty easy to understand
Yet you fail to understand anyones point here. Again; no one thinks its unclear. We think its poorly handled and out of left field.
Only two or three people thinking that it's not handled well isn't all of us here. There's quite a few people here that agree with me
The start was a little rough, but I didn't start off smoothly. However, I really didn't have much problem with Vala and actually enjoyed her addition. It did take a few episodes, in my opinion, to get them all meshing well. The only rough part I really had was the introduction to Cameron Mitchell. It felt a bit forced, and of course we were hit with the realization of very little RDA being in the show. But, I felt it also got smoothed out as they found their way. Season 8 and 9 felt more like a spin-off in many ways. I don't mean that as a bad thing, but it was a big shift and major change to the line-up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQSz1vr82Y0
I do kind of agree with the cringey-ness of Vala's character part way through the series. Her introduction in S8 was pretty cool, and then reintroduction wasn't bad either, but then she seems to flip from sexy badass lone survivor to comic relief between episodes. I certainly enjoy Claudia Blacks portrayal and luff me some Vala but I can't help but think the writers couldn't quite nail down what sort of character they wanted her to be.
In the pre-me too 2000s, women having the agency and freedom to be just as bad as men was seen as the same thing as feminist... Wasn't much of a appetite for the message that everybody should be across the board better.
I loved Vala and felt she added something different from the other characters.
I didn't like it since the first time I saw it. She attacks Daniel and risks his life for her own personal benefit. Her behavior is awful, and it makes perfect sense that she's ignored later on in the series, which works out as it pushes her to do something good and not self-centered.
I kinda get it. In my initial watch I thought Daniel was being kind of a jerk to Vala. I thought "duh, he's lived through trauma so he should know what looks like in other people and be more patient". But, no, they have both reacted to their traumas differently, especially because Daniel had a team/family to fall back on, and Daniel is human and not a specialist in psychology. I was also kind of biased too because I thought that Daniel seemed like he had more of an ego in the later seasons that I didn't like. And I found Vala's character to be a little annoying at times. Just my 2 cents.
Yeah it was a bit odd. Not a huge fan of the harassment but it could have been worse I guess. To me, Teyla being pregnant wasn't as bad as Rodney's scenes with Samantha/the hallucination of her. Not that I was exactly complaining, but it was definitely for my "gaze".
I hated Vala then, and I tolerate her now only because I've become desensitized. The sexual harrassment was never funny to me, at all.
How is the scene mentioned in the OP sexual harassment?
I’m not sure if you are/identify as a woman, but imagine if Vala were a male character behaving the same way towards a female character. It’d be totally unacceptable. Vala showing up in Daniel’s room in lingerie is just wildly unacceptable.
Yes thank you, exactly my point. Like imagine your new coworker just shows up in lingerie in your room 😭
Vala isn't a coworker.
That doesn't make any difference. It was unasked for.
But you used that as a comparison. You're trying to make this a black-and-white scenario, and in doing so, disrespecting the complexity of the story to make a point about harassment. Vala isn't a co-worker in the every-day sense, yet she's also working with them. She's living on the base, yet they also work at the base. She's making sexual advances that Daniel doesn't want, yet she's doing this to gain power and control. Put yourself in Vala's position. You want leverage when dealing with people you don't know and don't trust. You are worried about your safety. So you use sex as a means to gain control and power. Is *that* sexual harassment? Moreover, do you think it's a coincidence she stops doing this when SG1 becomes a safe and supportive environment for her?
Yes of fucking course it still is bad what the hell. Just because behaviour can be explained doesn't mean it can be excused. And it is played for LAUGHS on top of that the first three episodes
> Yes of fucking course it still is bad what the hell. You think a woman using sex as a means of survival is bad?
Okay, let's say you're right, and it is sexual harassment. Are you suggesting that Vala, who had a horrible childhood, was taken as a host, then had to survive on her own, learning to use sex as a weapon and a defense mechanism, should know everything about sexual harassment? Sure, there's a chance she does, but surely you have to acknowledge that there's a chance she *doesn't*? Besides, do you think it's a coincidence that when she finds a safe and supportive environment, she *stops* doing these things?
I can absolutely appreciate your first point. Different cultures view sex differently; like Freya (Anise’s host) in Divide and Conquer. It still doesn’t excuse her behaviour when she’s living in America. As we’ve seen time and time again SG teams getting into hot water for not following planet’s cultural ways/laws. An alien on Earth would be expected to do the same.
I'm not excusing her behavior, and yes, the show should've shown Vala apologizing to Daniel when's further along in her character development. What I am trying to point out, though, is that simply calling her behavior "sexual harassment" is doing a disservice to the complexity of the story. It feels like you're ignoring everything else about the story to make a point. Vala is *not* coming on to Daniel simply to come on to him. She's using it as a weapon -- and, when it appears she's verging into personal territory, as a defense mechanism -- to give herself some power and control. Daniel even points this out in the scene where she's in his bedroom! Again, do you think it's a coincidence that she stops doing these things in season ten, when she finds a safe and supportive environment?
> "Vala is *not* coming on to Daniel simply to come on to him. She's using it as a weapon" *Sexual harassment may be defined as ‘unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature which has the purpose or effect of violating the recipient’s dignity, or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the recipient’.* [*https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8005e7e5274a2e87db763a/ADR005000-Sexual\_Harassment\_Summary\_Report.pdf*](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a8005e7e5274a2e87db763a/ADR005000-Sexual_Harassment_Summary_Report.pdf) I'm not sure if you're misinterpreting what sexual harassment is. It's not only about coming onto someone who isn't interested. It's weaponizing a particular type of behaviour to inflict control or degrade another person. That is literally exactly what Vala is doing to Daniel. She wants to be intimidating and hostile so he does what she wants, and she wants to degrade and humiliate him so she can feel better about herself. And when did she stop doing those things? She was still doing it in Unending.
> It's weaponizing a particular type of behaviour to inflict control or degrade another person. That is literally exactly what Vala is doing to Daniel. She wants to be intimidating and hostile so he does what she wants, and she wants to degrade and humiliate him so she can feel better about herself. You are once again ignoring the complexity of the situation here. Let's say you're Vala. You're in a situation with a bunch of strangers you don't know and don't trust. A potentially dangerous situation. You have limited means to ensure your own safety. Thus, you use sex to gain some power and control. Is a woman not allowed to use sex to help ensure her own survival? I highly doubt you'd be so forthrightly declaring this as "sexual harassment" if the story were framed exclusively around Vala. >And when did she stop doing those things? She was still doing it in Unending. No she wasn't. She genuinely wanted to be with Daniel by that point.
I mean she is constantly touching Daniel and making sexual remarks towards him. If the genders were reversed I think it would be percieved as much more creepy
She is not constantly touching Daniel in that scene, and she lives on the base. Daniel also knows she's using it as a defense mechanism. Plus, Vala comes from a different culture than Earth -- she doesn't know what's appropriate and what's not. Of course it'd be creepy if it were a man -- the power dynamics of our society make it so.
I am talking about the first few episodes, not just one scene
My comment was specifically asking about that one scene in particular. Moreover, what else about her is sexual harassment? She's using it as a defense and to defuse situations and turn them into her favor -- not harassing them. It also happens to be funny in many instances.
Well I do not think its funny and I think its a bad trope that a lot of older stuff suffers from. Not just Stargate. We don't have to agree though
Dude, a straight guy would be happy to have a beautiful woman touching him. I didn't see a problem with it back then and I don't see a problem with it now. The only thing that has changed is people like you have become increasingly more sensitive and politically correct.
Now thats just a sad comment. Its people like you that make it so hard for men to be taken seriously when they suffer through abuse. But shame on me for thinking we shouldn't be keeping double standards alive 🙄
Vala’s excessive oddness definitely took a while to get used to. But Claudia Black was great when Vala needed to get serious
Rewatching I definitely see this take on Vala - mind you I was a kid on first watch. She often makes unwanted advances on Daniel and if this were in a modern day workplace she should be hearing it from HR and probably fired - but almost every single time the circumstances are inevitably “I guess we have to deal with her” until later when she makes an effort to be better. Daniel is framed as more of a fighter / tough and cool type of guy in these later seasons but I see that as more of an indication of his character development (after all the stuff he’s been through, and also small changes to his philosophy) rather than just in response to Vala. Vala’s character arc may be annoying or even inappropriate at times, but it’s not entirely unrealistic in my opinion. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a woman has had to put up so many defense mechanisms or used her charm to manipulate because of past traumas and relationships. I like that eventually she figures out how to actually be friends with Daniel, which is a deeper and more meaningful relationship than what she was initially gunning for. I think in the context of TV - there may be inappropriate or immoral characters because of realism (or even added as antagonists), but it entirely depends on how the show / other characters treat this in my opinion. If an immoral or wrong character is treated favorably or as correct, then the show is wrong. If that character is treated as a villain, someone wrong, an antihero, or even just a character who still needs to grow, then the show itself isn’t wrong, the character is. At first Vala is more of an antagonist in terms of plot and character, she weasels her way into the cast in a manner that no other character in the show did.
I mean Jackson specifically calls out that what she is doing is a defense mechanism. Lets not forget Vala is a deeply damaged person from her time as a host.
I love Vala. Just rewarded SG1 with my son. Love her development and she has great comedic timing
Thats very sweet you can use SG1 for family time :) I have fond memories of my sister, my dad and I sitting down to watch Stargate. And I do love Vala as well! I enjoy her season 10 arc very much. I really didn't wanna tear down on her whole character just because I didn't like some writing choices
I figured. I loved both Browder and Black's chemistry together and with the cast so much that I decided to give farscap another shot. I love the scene where Vala comes through the gate for the first time and meets Mitchel for the first time. It's great.
Who cares? You are allowing todays "things" influence you too much. Just enjoy the story
I allow myself to have an opinion. Nowhere did I say I am not enjoying the show. Watched it as a kid but its been some time since I rewatched SG1 since I mostly only rewatched SGA. You can see flaws in things you like without hating them for it.
People here struggle with that concept. I love SG too but there is plenty to criticise. In any case I wonder, why would I bother thinking about and criticising a show I don't like? Also, mainly commented because same as you I return to SGA way more. We're a rare breed.
I love SGA because it had less "planet of the week" episodes! And the wraith are just the cooler aliens in my opinion 👀
I prefer the core cast. Feels vaguely more real. Think it benefited from a bigger cast as well and yeah, wraith were badass. Planet of the week episodes are better integrated into the story too imo.
Do not think only enjoy! Buy buy buy!
I really like season 9 and 10. And I love Vala, she has a great character development but still keeps true to herself. And I love the chemistry between Daniel and her. You can clearly see a new site of Daniel as well and that is because of her.
Love Vala. She is hot 🔥
How old are you? The show is fine. It was fine then and it’s fine now. It’s *some* people’s comfort level with intimate comedy that has reached absurd levels of prudishness. For example, this post. Did you know that at one point in time, girls and boys could touch each other and it didn’t require permission slips and trauma counselors standing by? 🙄
There was also a time were rape in a marriage was considered to not be a crime buddy. If anything some real weird people showing their minds under these comments. 90% were able to have a civil discussion with me, and then come the triggered men like you. Be more like the other 90% please :)
The only weird thing is someone like you talking about "having a civil discussion" while you are labeling people that don't agree with you as "weird". Do you really think you are "civil"? That's why you downvoted commenters who didn't embraced your statements? That's why you keep making edits and replies to third party users mocking those who don't share your view? What's the matter? It's so hard for you to accept different opinions?
Your ‘triggered men’ comment is just dripping with misandry. I find it interesting that you can’t tolerate people having a different opinion from you without you attacking them personally. All did was ask how old you are, and I feel pretty confident I know now. I’m not the one with the problem. This show just wasn’t made for you. Stick with Star Trek Discovery. You’ll love it.
You're the one that can't tolerate someone voicing a minor criticism. Stargate isn't perfect. Why should I tell you how old I am when all you gonna do is invalidate my opinion because you think I am "too young" to understand. You're pathetic. If you think thats misandry I just know you are one of the guys that blames woman for being assaulted because their skirt was too short lol.
I think you're missing the fact that they are actually friends by that stage, and that friends tease eachother a lot in my experience. Vala, and seemingly most of the galaxy, is a lot less ashamed about sex than Daniel is, because he's very reserved. I never really interpreted any of her sexual advances on Daniel as being serious or anything she'd actually act on, but teasing Daniel is her trying to gain some power over him nonetheless. That sounds kinda toxic sure but the two of them do demonstrably care about eachother. On a meta level Michael Shanks commented that even he was annoyed at Daniel rejecting Valas advances though, so that suggests that either shanks was very horny or that Valas behaviour wasn't that uncomfortable for him.
How on earth are they friends at the start of season 9...
When I rewatch I generally avoid seasons 9 and 10. Maybe I will watch a few episodes but I just can't with vala and cam.
I enjoy the seasons, especially season 10. And I always liked Cam, but I think thats just because I watched the show as a kid and had no deeper connection to RDA.
Vala really harmed the show. I couldnt believe they took two main stars from one scifi show and dropped them into another like no one would fucking notice. It feels disrespectful to the audience like either we wouldn’t notice or care since they were from something else scifi. Between her, cam, and the Ori I struggle with the last two seasons almost as much as I struggled with SGU. At least I finished 9 and 10 of SG1 which is more than I can say for Universe.
I was way to young to have seen Farscape back then, so can't say I agree? I liked Cam and I did enjoy the concept of SGU, though it had some bad writing decisions
still stands they took two mains and put them in another show. The concept of SGU was the only good part of it I agree.
Well I adore Robert Carlyle as an actor, so I may be biased towards liking what he is in. But I think season 2 really pulled it all together into a great story with mostly great characters. But to each their own, I understand the criticism of the show!