I started watching “The Good Wife” in its second season. I liked it because the heroine, Alicia Florrick, wasn't having sex with anyone. She was annoyed that her husband had cheated on her, but wasn't jumping into bed with anyone to compensate for her separation from him.
Alicia was a lawyer and worked closely with a detective, Kalinda Sharma. We the viewers suspected Kalinda was a lesbian, but I don't recall any scenes where it was clear that she was having sex with either males or females.
My sister thought Alicia's fellow lawyer, Cary Agos, was sleazy. Far as I could see, he was a fine, upstanding fellow. I never got the impression he was getting any action, either.
Eventually, all three of them started having sex. Alicia did it with one of the lawyers who owned the firm, Will Gardner.
Kalinda made it clear that she was indeed having affairs with women, and the occasional man. Among many other encounters, Cary was asked by a fellow lawyer if he liked “Ethnics” (She was black) and I could see him furiously calculating. He hesitantly answered “Yes.” That turned out to be the right answer, as she shortly afterwards slept with him.
Did I lose any desire to follow the show now that they were all having sex? Nah, I had gotten familiar with the characters and decided that they and their adventures were interesting and worth following further.
In Angel and Faith, two characters that were spin-offs from the comics series that was based on the TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the two protagonists decide in their first issue that they had no desire to sleep with each other.
Angel still desires Buffy, who's not around in this series, and Faith is too busy dealing with her own posse and other personal problems to concern herself with any men. As we can see below, Neither one is sexually unknowing or incapable or has any hang-ups or inhibitions, it's just that neither one is doing anything romantically or sexually with anyone at the moment.
And yeah, I think I'd still follow their adventures if they were to start doing it like Spike and Harmony are clearly doing.
Valkyrie's an interesting one. I liked the character a lot and from her appearances in the 1970s and 1980s, I'm not aware that she ever engaged in sex with anyone. She did engage in sex as Brunnhilde many centuries past with Siegfried in the Ring of the Nibelung, but basically remained untouched since that affair. Here, in The Fearless Defenders 1, Valkyrie and Misty Knight got together to battle some reanimated Vikings.
Misty has a long-time boyfriend, Daniel Rand/Iron Fist, but I was pretty surprised to see the following scene:
So yeah, I was a bit surprised to see that Brunnhilde was now gittin' all sorts of action. Yeah, I guess that makes her a pretty standard woman of today, someone who's not romantically attached to anyone in a long-term manner and where sex is not a really big part of her life, but where she does get some on an irregular and somewhat frequent basis.
Are her actions considered normal and routine and uncontroversial to everyone? To what I believe is a small and shrinking section of the population, no. A columnist recently opined on the “War on Women” in my local paper, a description that many right-wingers take issue with.
I agreed with the columnist and included two of the crazier statements that hard-core anti-choicers have made (All of these statements will be deleted after a few days, so none of them will be available soon):
Posted 6:00 AM, 06/26/2013 Tucker expresses a few of my beliefs here. In isolation, being opposed to abortion seems like a good, moral position to take. But when one looks at it in context, especially when one sees the ignorance of women's biology that opponents express, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” "[I]n hospital emergency rooms, we have funded what’s called rape kits that will help the woman, basically clean her out. And then hopefully that will alleviate that,” (Rape kits collect evidence, they don't do anything about preventing pregnancy), it's very hard to take abortion opponents seriously. — rich2506
1. Todd Akin
2. Texas State Senator
Here are some statements from right-wingers on the same page:
Posted 7:03 AM, 06/26/2013 Tucker is certainly unhinged. She confuses charity with the forced contribution. That is what Medicaid and food stamps are. She takes the statement from one crackpot and paints all opponents of abortion with a broad brush. Also, if this woman is supposed to be a professor, the least she can do is point out where abortion, funding for Medicaid, and funding for food stamps are written in the U.S. Constitution. — Rowdy Roddy
8:12 AM, 06/26/2013 I don't expect Cynthia to understand the
conservative position on abortion. It is based upon personal
responsibility. That is something that vitually all liberals are
completely unfamiliar with. — Right:&Right
9:11 AM, 06/26/2013 What a sad, angry person that Tucker is. Cynfia,
I'll pray that you can find inner peace and put your vicious, ugly
anger against your fellow man whose 'sin' is to dare to disagree with
you aside. Forward. — bill_altkins
Posted 1:47 PM, 06/26/2013 Once again liberal talking points. tying abortion to federal foods stamps. At least have a legitimate argument for pete's sake. Food Stamps are NOT charity. btw I am not pro-life. However I don't think that the govt should be paying for abortions. I also think that allowing a minor to get one without parental consent is wrong. [[women's reproductive freedom.]] This is a non existent term. Woman have a right to privacy which gives them this right. There is no such thing as "reproductive rights". At least get your facts straight. — puddydawg
Posted 1:48 PM, 06/26/2013 What an idiot(s). — Fro 75
I took issue with one of the commenters while calling attention to the Texas State Senator Wendy Davis' actions in the Texas “Lege”.
4:51 PM, 06/26/2013 BTW, thought folks here might appreciate hearing
about Wendy Davis, the Democratic Texas State Senator who conducted
an eleven-hour filibuster for women's reproductive rights (And
puddydawg, we wouldn't have to defend women's reproductive rights if
right-wingers weren't attacking them all the time) at
Which got the answers of:
Posted 9:31 AM, 06/27/2013 You go girls.....Go abortion!!! — Fro 75
9:32 AM, 06/27/2013 Women have the ultimate basic right to keep their
legs closed. "Reproductive rights begin and end there. Anything
that happens after that makes it a good or bad decision, depending in
part on their moral character and the partner they selected. That
decision is no different than the many other decisions we make and
live with everyday. It is sad commentary on the state of the US, that
Michael Vick's dogs have more rights and protection than unborn
babies in this country. All under the guise of "reproductive
rights"... — Wiseman6
So there ya have it, ladies! Ya want control over your reproductive organs, it's simple, just don't have sex until you're prepared to give birth and raise the resulting child to maturity. So yeah, Brunnhilde's actions are indeed controversial, but fortunately that's just to a small and shrinking portion of the population.