cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/70086414

Given Lemmy’s leftward sociopolitical skew, the appreciation for Star Trek makes perfect sense, but what do we think of “MacGyver”? I specifically refer to the 85-92 Richard Dean Anderson show; I know there’s a reboot but I haven’t seen it yet.

Let’s see…

-Leftward Socio-political Commentary, including environmental activism and anti-authoritarianism

-Male protagonist with actual outward sensitivity & feelings

-“Open-source”; makes his own tools/gadgets from whatever’s available instead of relying on a corporate supply chain.

Sounds right up this platform’s alley.

I’m halfway through season 2 and it’s pretty damn good; it’s basically James Bond as an overgrown Boy Scout and that’s actually rather endearing.

    • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
      8·
      4 days ago

      The premise is they’re a team of crack commandos convicted of a crime they did not commit. They are constantly harrassed by the military and they take on missions that amount to public service; in most episodes, there’s a montage where they build a bunch of shit out junk.

      It also has Dirk Benedict, who is dreamy.

      They also have a “crazy” person on the team, which is good for representation but a little questionable otherwise.

      It’s also got Mr. T who became famous for… being Mr. T.

      • gigastasio@sh.itjust.works
        23·
        4 days ago

        Mr. T was charismatic, had a colorful look kids wanted to imitate, talked in a way that got people’s attention, but most importantly, he was a fundamentally good person who did a lot of charity and public service work and who just happened to have a “tough guy” image. He made it cool be both strong and kind.

        We need more Mr. T’s and fewer Andrew Tates these days.

        • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
          210·
          4 days ago

          I agree Mr. T is better than Andrew Tate, but they both share the same problem of needing to perform masculinity. The whole gender binary is a trap and it makes me sad that we have to sell kindness as a brand of manliness to make people take it seriously. I wish we could throw the whole thing in the trash and just value traits independently of hormonal associations, but likely that is an impossible utopian vision.

          • missingno@fedia.io
            10·
            3 days ago

            Masculinity isn’t an inherently bad thing by itself. If anything, I think we need more positive role models who can show a wholesome side of masculinity.

            • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
              37·
              3 days ago

              Associating traits with gender is an inherently bad thing.

              Edit:

              If men are strong, women are weak, etc. It’s nakedly a bad idea.

              The problem is children identify with their gender naturally (?), so the best PRACTICAL work around is making masculinity less toxic and femininity less passive.

          • [deleted]@piefed.worldEnglish
            9·
            3 days ago

            I’m good with Mr T’s cartoonishly unrealistic version of masculinity that was used to promote the positive aspects while clearly being a character.

            • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
              16·
              3 days ago

              Yeah, me too, but, like I said, it’s a stop-gap; it still relies on people identifying with masculinity.

              It’s kind of like using the bible to push kindness, you still end up supporting Christianity which is, on the whole, pretty toxic.