Damian Tharcisius

Why Fleabag is Not Overrated


WHY FLEABAG IS NOT OVERRATED

The Rise of TV

Having developed a new taste for TV shows in recent times, combined with a declining interest in movies (To my own surprise). Including a waning enthusiasm for the big/good movies: those that tend to come out from time to time. As my affinity with the slow (or not so fast) developing story: where character, aims, motivation, etc. All set within-in the good ones-a well crafted world; where the events, the drama, the controversies, and relationships, are built up over the course of episodes, and in time, seasons.

If one could recall the now infamous speech by the comedian Ricky Gervais, at the Golden Globes, at the start of 2020. Where he commented on-to my mind-the progressive decline of movies. In terms of their quality, originality, and story telling character, and by extension, their waning cultural significance. His words came as a vindication, at least to me anyway, of the growing disenchantment that I (and probably others) had been feeling towards major Hollywood releases in recent years (e.g. Star Wars). 

Whilst the budgets, scopes, and especially the whiz bang aspect of movies have been on the up and up. However, in terms of a meaningful and cohesive plots, deep story telling, character development, mainstream movies in recent times, have been regressing. 

Speaking of the growing prominence of television, the tremendous success of shows like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones and House of Cards (till the Spacey revelations), have been built on the success of the evolving character of the media landscape. Driven by the rise of game changing technological pioneers like Netflix, who have successfully (for now) ridden the growing wave of web-based entertainment, as opposed to traditional television, with good content offerings. 

Following in its lead, the smart and innovative steps taken by the likes of Amazon (with its Prime services); and the old stalwart of television, HBO, along with entertainment giants like Disney, and even technology companies like Apple, now following suit. Hoping to grab a larger share of the near insatiable appetite by tech savvy consumers, for quality content. And these companies have sought to do so, by producing new, original, well produced content in order to stay competitive. The kind of digital entertainment that doesn’t consign itself to telling a story in around 2-3 hours, and be done with it.

The Rise of Women in TV

I’m not sure if the reader (presuming he/she is a TV buff) has noticed it. But of late-last 3-4 years or so-there’s  been a notable rise in the number of shows (in TV, movies and increasingly even in video games) that happen to feature female lead character(s). The uptick in the number of shows that feature a higher percentage of female actresses, judging purely by the main logo of the shows, along with the prominence that is placed on the female cast (however insignificant) has, in recent times. 

Not only in terms of the higher percentage of shows (in Anglo-American world) that feature female lead characters; which naturally approach social, relational and even political subjects from a female standpoint. But also the growing emphasis that is placed on the specific roles that women are portrayed to play within the select shows. Most, if not the vast majority, portray women taking on roles, positions, functions that were traditionally held, played or associated with men. Dr. Who being a notable example. A role which, until the newest version (actress) was played only by a male lead character.

The growing visual prominence that is rendered to women in TV, and popular culture, more broadly, is a side point in relation to this particular post. However, it’s an interesting one that may well require a deeper, longer perusal. For the factors and forces that are driving these changes are many. And, it seems to me, are reflective of deeper social realities, whose origins and effects go beyond the converse pertaining to gender. Which is worth considering in approaching this particular piece.

Fleabag, the multi-award winning show, stars a female lead. Hence it naturally engages social, relational, and even economic issues, all from a concertedly female (though not necessarily feminine) perspective. The show, for what it’s worth, is unabashedly feminist (which we will get to). But unlike most, run of the mill shows (comedies or drams), that engages the subject of the modern, economically liberated woman; living her own free life, in a cosmopolitan environment. 

Fleabag approaches the life of a modern feminist, in a very frank, realistic, and most importantly, self-critical manner. One that is not always pleasant to the senses, but praiseworthy for its ability to elucidate the nature, and effects exerted by contemporary feminism on women. And.. What it tells us about the status of modern men, in relation to them (women), in the Western (English speaking) world.

The Sexually Liberated (but unhappy) Female

The show starts off with Fleabag, getting it on with a guy she’s attracted to. Upon him entering her place, the two get right to it. Like right away! (No times for romantics folks). And in the course of coitus, the bloke, decides to go up/down her a**. An unplanned maneuver on his part (i.e. they did not discuss it in advance), which Fleabag, grudgingly accedes to. Whilst Fleabag at some point seemed to have entertained some hope that things between them could lead somewhere. But it all comes to naught, when the bloke leaves her, whilst she’s still in bed, the next morning. One night stand personified.

The first impression one gets of Fleabag based on this encounter, and I guess of modern women in cosmopolitan cities like London, New York, in general, is a revealing one. One is that often touted in conservative, and notably Christian circles: which is that women don’t enjoy causal sex as much as men do. 

Or at least, are unable to manifest the kind of emotional distance that needs to be maintained when getting it on with, what is effectively a virtual stranger (i.e. someone you met on the night/day or two, with little to no intention of pursuing something substantial). In this sense, the show is commendable, in that Fleabag is not portrayed as a woman who is able to have causal sex and simply move on to other concerns. The choices she makes in her personal life (naturally) affect her. And its effects are on show. 

However, Fleabag is a bit different (or maybe no different) from the modern liberated woman. For no sooner, she runs into another guy. Some knucklehead, with obnoxiously overt bunny teeth. The emotionally/sexually desperate Fleabag (it’s not clear which) soon “hits if off” with the doofus. And it’s worth mentioning that Fleabag is also stuck in an on/off relationship with some man-baby named Harry: an anemic stiff, with serious emotional problems of his own. 

Much of it, seems to stem from his inability to grow into a man. (The guy habitually cleans Fleabag’s house whenever the two decide to “breakup”). However, given his retarded (there’s no other way to put it) attachment to, for the most part unscrupulous, self-interested Fleabag; he always finds a way/excuse to get back into her life. Oh, by the way he sucks in the bedroom. Leaving the unsatisfied Fleabag, to habitually masturbate.

In the course of the first season, Fleabag gets busy with each of these three men. And the sex, with each of them is bad for different reasons. The hot/selfish bloke, who is not serious about getting serious, is bad from an emotional standpoint. The fact that he is not willing to give their very physical relationship an emotional shot. 

Well, besides sodomizing her (for whatever that’s worth). Whilst at one point in the show, the two seem to hit it off again, as there are signs of him connecting with her. But it soon fizzles out. As it’s revealed (for the sake of the plot/effect), that whatever connection she thought he had with her, was actually aimed towards another woman. One whom he was falling in love with. Ouch! But.. Not unexpected.

See, the thing about the sexually liberated woman message that feminism seems to propound, is that it expects women to approach the reality of relationships, exactly the way that men would do. But reality is such, that women, for whatever reason (ahem.. Biology), seem to approach it, somewhat differently to that of the opposite sex. 

Women, unlike, men, are not able to, or simply don’t have the emotional capacity to approach sex, in the casual, purely functional, and solely pleasure-centric frame of mind. For example, even when Fleabag gets busy with the doofus bunny teeth (known as bus rodent), it only occurs after a night of drinking, which included an uncomfortable encounter with her brother in law, and after her “date”, earlier on in the night, makes a fool of himself in the middle of the party. You know, the sort of thing that would have killed off any sexual energy that could have lead to a, “hey you wanna come over?” question. In sum, despite her very active sex life, Fleabag is very unhappy.

The plight of the sexually active, economically independent (she owns a café in London) and horny (for what it’s worth) female hits an important point, one that is often overlooked (or simply ignored) by the “women in work”, “women in leadership”, “women are dominating the (at least they’re going to) the future” crowd. When it comes to sex and relationships, despite what modern feminists would like to claim or believe, there are fundamental differences in terms of how women and men approach the question of intimacy. 

Whilst, men (at least the “good” ones) can play this game well, with little in terms of emotional or psychological after effects. Sexual promiscuity does take a toll on women, at some level. Fleabag (the show), with its presentation of a sex-addicted female (who at point-in season 02-raves about hitting multiple orgasms with her lawyer/f**k buddy), with apparently no standards when it comes to who she lets in, illustrates this point well.

Modern Women are Unhappy

A key narrative arch in the show is Fleabag’s relationship with her “successful” sister. The well established business woman, who is married to a man, lives in a nice English home, with the signs of success all around her. Such as her expensive clothing. Whilst the supposed contrasts between the messed-up Fleabag and her doing-well sister, Claire, is often mentioned in the course of the first and second seasons. It soon becomes clear that Claire too is no different in the happiness scales. Her life, despite its outward success, is riddled with shortfalls. 

Her drunken husband, whose persona fluctuates between being some kinda flaky artist (wannabe), to an outright douchebag, who only think about himself. And there are indications that she’s having trouble conceiving. Oh, and there’s also this weird thing about her step-son, which I rather not mention. 

Taken together, the successful female Claire, despite her business successes and other accomplishments, is plagued by hardships of her own. And it shows, on her often-miserable looking face. One of things that is noticeable about Fleabag’s unhappy (possibly unhappier) sister is that her pain, and the accumulated stress of the frustrations of life, just shows. Her face is clearly not something she “keeps in a jar by door”.

The reality (of the unhappy female) is most reflective in the persona of the other key female in the show: Fleabag’s (eventual) stepmother (known as Godmother). The predictable conflicts that ensue between the unbelievably sarcastic, and this often times dismissive woman, was interesting to watch. But Fleabag’s stepmother, despite being a successful artist, with a loving partner, and her outwardly pleasant demeanor. Is also a terribly unhappy person. Whose cynicism towards others (including her husband to be), and towards life in general, reeks from a mile away. 

I must say this is something I have observed in a number of women who “want to have it all”. Including from my time in England. Their single minded pursuit to have “everything” in life, in practice tends to mean, forgoing all sense of brotherhood and heart. For if being happy = getting what you want, exactly the way they want to it? Then what you’re left is a deeply obnoxious, miserable soul. Whose self-seeking attitude towards life, infects everything around her.

However, what’s more difficult to stomach (in relation to the stepmother), is how Fleabag’s father is able to One: put up with a woman of this sort, and Two: the fact that he does not take a firmer stance with respect to the confrontational, and often times toxic relationship that manifests between the two important women in his life. For other key (problematic) facet of the show, is that the men, despite the problems all around them, seem to be either unwilling or unable to do anything to make things right. Especially for the women. (With one exception, which I shall leave to the end). A point which takes us to the third, and to my mind, the most important point in the whole show.

In a Feminist Society, the Men Suck

So far I have avoided engaging the topic of Fleabag’s former business partner/roommate: the blonde female friend. Whose encounters with Fleabag are told via flashbacks. As the story goes, the blonde friend (I think her name is Boo) had developed a thing for this guy. And they apparently hit it off. But unfortunately fate intervenes. 

Well, specifically it’s too much testosterone on the part of men, who are unable to stay faithful to one woman, by turning down the offer of causal sex from their partner’s best friend. As the oversexed Fleabag, who is unable to say no to her best friend’s man. Her decision, drives her friend to overreact. As she tries to make a statement.. By walking onto a bike lane!? The ensuing (unplanned) accident leads to her demise and that of three other people. And the selfish, libidinous Fleabag is all to blame. Though curiously, the producers for some reason, ignored the role played by the bloke in this drama. 

In the first episode of season 02, Fleabag punches her brother-in-law. After he made a dismissive remark/joke about “her” miscarriage. Well it was her sister’s, for whom she was covering for. The assault leads to him file charges. To help her sister out, Claire introduces her sister to some lawyer. 

A professional philanderer, who treats his clients (presumably only the female ones), from the standpoint of a pimp. And for some reason, the females in question, in this case Fleabag and her sister, are all too happy to go with it. Leaving aside the utter lack of professionalism on both sides: I mean who the heck would hire a lawyer, who makes sexual advances, less than five minutes into the first introduction? And what kind of lawyer, expects to be taken seriously for his trade, after passing hints within the first few minutes of the meeting? 

However what is not unbelievable is the idea of a lawyer, even one “who has never lost a case” (or something like that), who uses his position to pursue selfish ends. Men, especially men in some position of power, tend to employ the casting couch methodology, as a way of encouraging women drop their panties (requiring little effort, in the case of Fleabag). 

The humor of it all aside, what is sad about the whole dance is that sex, which men instinctively seek, and I would argue, value more greatly than women; and hence tend to actively pursue as an end in itself. Which is exactly the sort of thing that women are supposed to rebuff (i.e. not make it easy for us). Especially for the sort, who are not serious about commitment, and are just looking for another female to inseminate, and then feel good about the sense of (egoistical) accomplishment that comes with it.

The reality of the chase seems to be woefully lacking in this feminist inspired story: The traditional role of women in making the man’s entry into a girl’s you-know-what, tougher; the function of women in helping to facilitate the relational element to grow and develop, by staying the man’s early sexual advances. Are all kinda sadly (weirdly enough) missing. 

There’s just too much sex on show. The unpleasant type. And unsurprisingly, the women seem unhappy with the men, and logically, with life in general. One that seems to draw the women (as women) closer to each other. In episode 04, of the first season, Fleabag and Claire go to a female only retreat. To mediate and rejuvenate. In the course of the retreat the two women, despite their many differences, start to bond. At one point, Fleabag, creeps into the other bed, next to her sister, placing an arm around her. Which is followed by a reciprocal gesture by Claire. 

To make a related point. Recently, I have been getting through the second season of House of Cards. In the story there is a character named Rachel. Who at one point worked as a call girl, and then gets entangled with the bad guys/main characters of the show (If you’ve watched it, you’d know what I am talking about). 

As events play out, Rachel is taken to a location away from where all the action is taking place, and is made to live in a state of virtual house arrest. And her movements and contacts are closely watched by her virtual captor. In the meantime, Rachel manages to join a Christian prayer group, which helps her find some comfort and community. Where she befriends a girl named Lisa. The two bond, despite some opposition from her “captor”. For Lisa, who is also having troubles of her own, moves in with Rachel. 

At one moment the two girls share their problems, and their rather hopeless outlook for life. Which came down to one thing: the lack of love. Specifically the kind of romantic but committed, sensual but caring love, that women and men naturally seek. It was kinda sad (as a man) to watch it. But it was also thought provoking. 

As the story goes, the two girls in the course of sharing their pain, proceed to embrace in a lesbian hold. Which wasn’t great to watch to be honest. Caz for one thing, it seemed to imply, that the reason why these women are in such a pathetic state, one that is drawing them together in such a manner, is because (we) men are not providing the needed love, security and leadership that we’re supposed to render to women. 

Interestingly enough, in the third episode of season 02 (of Fleabag), Fleabag has a thoughtful conversation with a character named Belinda. The woman who apparently “has it all”, professionally speaking. But it soon emerges that she’s a lesbian. Curiously enough, Fleabag and Belinda lock lips together at one point. Where Fleabag expresses uncertainty over her sexuality. Wonder why?

Taking a step back, if you ask me, much of female sexual uncertainty in present times, at any level, seems to come to down to the men in their lives. Men have sucked at loving (i.e. being there, caring, supporting, providing for) women. A reality, that I would conjecture, is driving women towards ideologies like feminism, and whatever quasi-utopian promise of a women-led world that it may hold. Unfortunately, but predictably it seems, this shift-which is psychological, relational, and at a deeper level, possibly even moral; is driving women increasingly into the arms of each other. Whilst men can give them good sex, but are failing at the task of loving them. Which matters more to women and men. 

In sum, the idea of portraying women as empowered creatures, who can do the very same things that men can do when it comes to sex (or at least to adopt the same mindset in relation to it), works to undermine the sensual polarity between the sexes. Its absence, in practice, undermines the value, and if I may say, the beauty and innocence that all women carry with them. With consequences for both sexes. 

In the case of Fleabag, in addition to her promiscuity, she is also quite unethical: she steals, lies quite freely, and is generally unprincipled. And is apparently quite content to go on living that way. Her behavior, upon deeper inspection, can be attributed to other factors and forces. Notably the absence of goodness in life. And my argument is that the real source of gloom, and emptiness that plagues her life, and that of all women in the show: that which drives them to act out in such.. Whatever ways, emanates, from the absence of healthy, confident, principled, masculine men. Those who are willing to lead, provide, and love the women in their lives.

The World Needs a Few Good Men

The dominant theme of season 02 of Fleabag is the evolving relationship between the main character and a Catholic priest. The one who is brought in to officiate the mass between her father and her stepmother-to be (Godmother). So in the backdrop to all of the other passions, the onset of the wedding, and emotions it evokes, this complicated relationship drives the story forward. 

The growing attraction between Fleabag, and initially reluctant priest is well engaged. For the priest, as a celibate man, who has taken a life long vow of celibacy, is clearly attracted to Fleabag. But unlike the other men in her life, his desire for her is of a deeper kind. The moments between the priest and Fleabag are very well done. It touches on the emotional, psychological complexities that govern man + woman relationships. One which are not solely driven by the urge for physical intimacy. Where the want for closeness, the desire intimacy (that is not just sex), and the possibility for something greater, that it open the doors to.

A powerful scene in the second season, comes in episode 04. Where Fleabag meets her, somewhat tipsy priest at Church. Their growing passion, which is fought, seemingly by both parties, seems itching to come out. For Fleabag, seems to have finally gotten around to the old school: a girl who is willing to make her man “wait” approach. Which is a welcome change. The priest, however is still battling his passions, whilst trying to stay true to his vocation. 

Eventually the priest moves her to make a Confession. Which is a very powerful, very believable, and very real.. Confession. Where Fleabag actually confesses the story of her life. Her moral failing and the need for, in her own words, Redemption. The part of the Confession where Fleabags confesses the need for someone in her life. Someone who will tell her what to do, with virtually every aspect of her life (including who to vote for), was revealing for many reasons. Especially from a feminist standpoint.

Feminism, notably the third/fourth waves of it, and the changes that it has brought about on society, in my view, hasn’t made women necessarily happier. Speaking of the developed world, with the many technological advances and comforts brought forth by market societies, which operate under the transaction framework. 

The empowered woman of today, speaking of the Anglo-American world: educated, well-connected, with ready access to abortion and contraceptives, egged on by the chorus voices in popular culture onto new, and greater heights: From the many equality/diversity gender initiatives, the women in business forums, to UN mandated programs for gender parity on a global scales. In addition to my earlier observation, at the start of the piece, on the growing prominence of “strong female characters” in pop culture.

Despite it all, women. Average women, who are left to face the challenges of every day life are, at a deeper level, in need of some leadership. In fact, despite the outward show of strength, deep down, women seem to be craving that leadership, that, dare I say, only a man can bring into their lives. The sort that men are capable and ought to render to the women in their lives, but are failing to do so, more broadly. 

In the world today, where many men cannot even take control of their own lives at the emotional, psychological, and possibly even  economic levels. And hence are incapable of being the providers. Whilst the ones who manage to attain a degree of stability, are too busy keeping score. With the idea of committing to one bony lass: one whom they could, care, listen, love and provide for, being a far fetched thought.

Returning to the Confession, which, speaking as a man of Faith, let me reiterate, was a powerful scene. Especially when Fleabag completed it, the priest states with a firm voice: “kneel”. Which she does. At which point, I thought (and hoped), that he would perform the act of contrition: forgive her sins, bless her, lift her up and send her away in peace. But.. anti-climatically, he tries to get busy with her (inside the Church). Thankfully, God intervenes, and the priest calls it off. But the power of the scene remains. For the takeaway is, despite all the advances of feminism, and the empowered, liberated, women narrative that we hear so often. Deep down, women still desire, or possibly, crave for a man who can lead them forward.

To conclude, with the concluding scene from season 01. Where Fleabag, with her life falling apart all around her, walks to the edge of the street, where her former best friend (unwittingly) took her life. Contemplating suicide, her decision, thankfully is stayed by the car of the bank manager. 

The person who has been in her life-in someway-from the beginning. Despite their initial differences, the two, during that retreat in season 01, find a moment to mend their relationship. As a married man, who loves his wife (a point which he strongly asserts), he is one of the few souls who is able to be that comforting, strengthening, presence in her life. 

A man in her life, who does not harbor the primary/sole intention of sleeping with her. And when he prevents her from taking her life, he also makes his way into her life. In a constructive way. At one point in season 02, he even covers for her. As Fleabag heads off to complete an urgent errand. You see this is what the world needs. More caring, responsible men, who are willing to be leaders in the little things and in great ones. Men who are strong, principled, and sexual. Men who are capable of passion, but also who are willing to love. And women today, as the example of Fleabag attests, are in desperate need of that.


Image source: <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/photos/people’>People photo created by KamranAydinov – www.freepik.com</a>