Rapid Rant: Netflix, If You Had a Face I Would Punch It!

I know that I'm not the only angry person out there!

Let me say this off the bat: I LOVE NETFLIX!

I do.  I have been a loyal customer for over 6 years.  I look forward to that red envelope in my mail.  I arrange my queue like it's a game of chess, but I'm always the winner.  Watch Instantly has been a beautiful double-edged sword in my life, both cutting through the terrible hours of sleeplessness that wreck my life but also allowing me almost endless distraction when I should be living up to my potential.  I've never had a single customer service problem with them; any mistakes or complaints were addressed immediately.

Apparently, years of love and comfort lulled me into a false sense of security, because when I (along with every other customer) got the email yesterday informing me that on September 1st I would be charged separately for the different services under my plan, my blood pressure shot through the roof.  Shocked doesn't even begin to describe it.  Somehow, someone calculated that I should be charged 7.99 for the streaming service and 7.99 for the one-DVD-at-a-time service.  This math results in a 5.00 increase to my account.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME!?!?!?!?!?

It's not just that 5.00 is a big leap in one month (it's a 1/3 increase in price, relatively, it's substantial) and it isn't the company's fault that my finances are such that such an increase is actually noticeable in my budget (part time job, oh how I need thee!).  What fries my zucchini is that these two services, which both have their own benefits and drawbacks are being valued the exact same, implying that if you want to keep your cost lower you should just pick one.

With streaming you have 24 hour access but there are only a limited number of titles available.  With physical discs in the mail there is greater selection, but it takes at least 3 days to receive, watch and return a disc.  These are not equivalent services!!!  They work together: physical discs allowing me to watch (pretty much) whatever I want, streaming filling in the days when discs are on route to or from the distribution center.  So by pricing them equally, Netflix is trying to tell me there will be no repercussions for my life (and by life, I mean rut) to make a simple either/or decision.  This is not at all the case, and whomever decided to think it is couldn't be more wrong.

Now, my soon-to-be-roommate, instead of getting crazy irate (to the point that said anger lasts more than 24 hours), came up with a plan.  She will subscribe to the streaming service, since her account is already synced with her Wii and TV, and I will upgrade to a 2-discs-at-a-time service.  That way we'll both have Watch Instantly and a physical disc.  Look at her brilliance!  We are both sacrificing (some) privacy for (some) savings, and I think we'll be able to make the situation really workable.

But, I reaming frustrated and disappointed in Netflix.  Poorly done guys.

The TV Girl

Rapid Rant: TV is Made Only for Women?

I wish that I hadn't taught an acquaintance the term 'TV-boyfriend" because she proceeded to repeat this to her husband ( "I never heard this phrase before Andrea was talking about the fact that she won't watch Off the Map even though Zach Gilford is on it"), and her husband proceeded to 1) ask me to explain the term (which I think is odd, seems pretty straightforward to me) and 2) tell me how TV was made only for women and aside from sports there wasn't anything on TV made for men.

Who to the what now?

You must be kidding me!

This happened over the weekend and I have tried to just forget the incident as stupid shit people say sometimes. Obviously I've failed in this attempt, and partially that is because his main argument in support of his ridiculous statement was "even on procedural shows there always has to be some stupid love story."  Ugggggg.  I hate hate hate this argument.  (And this instance wasn't the first time I heard it, hence my breaking down into bitch mode.)  Please tell me how "smoking hot female law-enforcement agent falls for brilliant but damaged middle aged boss/co-worker" isn't blatant male wish fulfillment (or in any way remotely plausible)?  Please explain to me how men who have chosen to get married, and thereby pledge their love and fidelity to one woman for the rest of their life, dismiss any romantic storyline as "only there because women need it."  Strangely I've never heard a guy make any complaints about male characters who are womanizers; no one seems to be bothered by those whose copious coupling is devoid of emotion and little more than recreational sport.  Take the former common complaint along with the later telling silence and what you get is a fictional landscape where love is negated from the human experience, leaving you with flat characters, stagnant stories, and limited insight.  Basically, you have Cops.  (Which is fine if that is what you want.)  But of course, on bad shows you have all those deficiencies plus romantic plots.

But how about the fact that many shows airing now/recently are thematically structured around the father-son relationship or the brother relationship?  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women are excluded from these types of shows, and in fact some, like Fringe, Sons of Anarchy, and Supernatural, are among my favorite-st of favorite shows.  I'm just saying that their very existence attests to both the creative and marketing desire for male viewers.

And I'm not even bothering to mention the flood of bromances on TV.

I grant that women watch a great deal of TV (and some of us are damn proud of it), that there are shows designed with a predominantly female audience in mind, and that there are shows that have an added bonus for me because of attractive male leads.  I also openly admit that I get super attached to the romantic pairings on my shows.  But it is wholly disingenuous to, um, REALITY to say that the only thing for men on all of network, basic and premium cable TV  is sports.

The TV Girl