tv Archives

Header image for a post about being unable to climax featuring wisteria flowers. Text reads: if you related to Francesca Bridgerton's orgasm difficulties you're not alone

If You Related to Francesca Bridgerton’s Orgasm Difficulties, You’re Not Alone

Published on February 10, 2026April 2, 2026 by Amy

Season 4 of Netflix’s Bridgerton, based on the book series of the same name by Julia Quinn, focuses primarily on the love story between Benedict Bridgerton and Sophie Baek. However, the subplot follows Francesca Bridgerton and her new husband, John Stirling, as they navigate sexual challenges in their marriage. Specifically, Francesca experiences orgasm difficulties: she’s unable to climax and she never has.

Fair warning: this post contains spoilers for Bridgerton, including the recently-dropped first half of Season 4.

Francesca, who has been married and trying for a baby for several months, doesn’t even know what an orgasm (or “pinnacle,” as they euphemistically call it) is. I found this storyline refreshing in a series that has given us a lot of “zero-to-fucking-in-ten-seconds” and “all simultaneous orgasms from penetration all the time” sex scenes.

People who have never experienced challenges with pleasure or been unable to climax might write this off as a product of the times. But if, in relatively sexually liberated 2026, you related to Francesca’s difficulties with orgasm? You’re not alone.

What Francesca’s Orgasm Difficulties Says About Sex Education

A recurring theme in the Bridgerton universe is women entering married life without a single clue about sex or their bodies. From Simon lying to Daphne about his “inability” to have children (when he’s actually just using the notoriously-unreliable pull-out method) to Eloise and Penelope wondering how an unmarried woman could become pregnant so that they can prevent it from happening to them, the naivety of these characters may be exaggerated for television but points to something real: in many times and places throughout history, a lack of basic knowledge about sex and their bodies helped to keep women in a place of powerlessness.

Things are no longer so bleak for young women, of course, and not just because our families aren’t generally marrying us off when we’re barely out of our teens. Most of us receive at least some education about the physical mechanics of sex, however incomplete and heteronormative that education may be. If all else fails, we can turn to the internet with questions like “how does a lady come to be with child?” (Love you Eloise.) But in a different way, misinformation and a lack of comprehensive sex education is still harming people of all genders.

How much time did your sex education curriculum dedicate to pleasure? If it was anything like mine, very little if any at all. In my school, the boys learned about female masturbation but the girls didn’t. Make that make sense. (Hint: it’s misogyny.) The messaging the girls received? That boys would pressure us for sex and it was our job to say no. That sex meant unwanted pregnancies and STIs, not pleasure. It wasn’t quite “don’t have sex, because you will get pregnant… and die,” but it wasn’t far off.

Mention of the clitoris? Completely absent. I learned of its existence from a slightly older friend who talked very openly about her masturbation habits. I have to assume no-one taught us about women’s pleasure for one of two reasons: an assumption it wasn’t important, or a fear that it would make us want to have sex, undermining the “don’t do it” messaging.

But when we don’t learn about pleasure, we don’t know how to get it. More importantly, we don’t internalise the message that we deserve it. This insidious messaging leads people, and especially people with vulvas, to endure unsatisfying sex, feel obligated to fake orgasms, and minimise pain during sex.

**Orgasm Difficulties Are Super Common**

Very few people will come every time they have sex. Not being able to get there occasionally is not, generally, a cause for concern. But anorgasmia, or the persistent inability to reach orgasm even with extensive sexual stimulation, is far more common than you might think.

According to the Cleveland Clinic, up to 15% of cis women report never having had an orgasm (primary anorgasmia) and far more struggle with orgasm at least some of the time. The numbers for cis men are lower, with around 10% reporting orgasm difficulties according to San Diego Sexual Medicine. One study suggested that around 1.5 men in 1000 suffers from primary anorgasmia.

For trans women and trans men, rates of orgasm difficulties were 29% and 15% respectively according to one study. I haven’t been able to find any reliable statistics on non-binary people specifically.

What Causes Anorgasmia or Struggles with Orgasm?

The short and perhaps unhelpful answer is “it depends.” In no particular order, some of the possible causes can include:

Insufficient stimulation or the wrong kind of stimulation
Many medications including SSRI antidepressants and blood pressure medications
Hormonal changes (for example, due to menopause, pregnancy, or breastfeeding)
Physical health conditions (including both acute and chronic illness)
Pain during sex (which itself has many potential causes)
Mental health challenges such as depression, anxiety, and stress
Relationship issues such as conflict or lack of trust
A history of sexual abuse or assault
A strict, restrictive upbringing
Poor self-esteem or body image
Substance use
Fatigue
Ironically, too much pressure to get there (either from yourself or your partner)

What’s Wrong with Me If I’m Unable to Climax!?

Nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

One of the most touching scenes in Bridgerton Season 4 is when Francesca confides in John that not only did she just fake an orgasm, but she’s never had one. My heart broke for her when she blamed her lack of orgasm for their fertility struggles, saying “forgive me, I do not know what is wrong with me.” Sweet and supportive man that he is, he reassures her that there’s nothing wrong with her and that she, and their relationship, are already just right.

So in case you need to hear the same, I’ll say it again. There is absolutely nothing wrong with you. You’re not broken. You’re just struggling with something that is actually incredibly common.

Do Orgasm Difficulties Mean There’s Something Wrong with My Relationship?

Not necessarily!

Many people believe that sexual problems in a relationship mean that there’s something inherently wrong with the relationship itself. But this often isn’t the case. As we established already, anorgasmia and orgasm difficulties can happen for all kinds of reasons. Relationship difficulties are one possible cause, and something you might want to examine if your orgasm problems started during a challenging time for your relationship. But there isn’t necessarily a correlation and even if you determine that there is, it doesn’t necessarily mean your relationship is doomed.

If I’m Unable to Climax, Does It Mean I Don’t Really Fancy My Partner?

Again, no, not necessarily.

In Bridgerton, Francesca has been set up as a queer character who has feelings for her husband’s cousin, Michaela (this change was made for the TV series; in the original book, Michaela was Michael.) However, this doesn’t necessarily mean she doesn’t feel love or attraction for her husband. She could very well be somewhere under the bisexual or pansexual umbrella. In fact, the showrunners have explicitly stated that viewers shouldn’t interpret Francesca’s orgasm difficulties as related to her sexuality.

Of course, problems with sex and orgasm do lead some people to realise they’re not attracted to their partner. This could be because their sexuality is different than they assumed, or because that particular relationship has run its course. But being unable to climax is really common even amongst people who are wildly physically and sexually attracted to their partners. In and of themselves, orgasm difficulties don’t say anything about your attraction to your partner.

So What Now?

If Francesca’s story struck a chord with you… me too. I’ve had plenty of orgasm difficulties throughout my sexual history, from stress-induced loss of desire to pressure-induced faking it to medication-induced anorgasmia.

Bridgerton is not a series that aims for realism. At its heart, it is pseudo-Regency softcore smut, and that’s fine. None of us are watching it for a history lesson. But truth is often wrapped in fiction. And Francesca’s storyline this season highlighted something many of us will relate to.

I’m going to write another post soon about practical strategies for dealing with orgasm difficulties. This one, though, is just to reassure you that if you’re unable to climax (sometimes or always), you’re not alone. You’re not broken. And you’re just right, just as you are.

A man wearing a checked shirt and jeans sits on a bottom step with his head in his hands. Text reads: How damaging sexual scripts allow abuse of boys to thrive

[Guest Post] How Damaging Sexual Scripts Allow Abuse of “Lucky Boys” to Thrive by Poly Lone Ranger

Published on September 29, 2025March 22, 2026 by Amy

Today’s post by Poly Lone Ranger, AKA James Mosley II (he/him), is an important topic that isn’t talked about anywhere near enough. Heads-up that this one comes with a trigger warning for abuse, rape, and sexual violence. It also discusses sexual scripts and the limiting, gendered, and cisheteronormative societal ideals around sex, bodies, and consent.

Amy x

How Damaging Sexual Scripts Allow Abuse of “Lucky Boys” to Thrive by Poly Lone Ranger

It’s Friday night, and I’m lounging in my room with a beer, fully engrossed in the TV miniseries A Teacher (currently on Hulu). For those who haven’t seen it, the show stars Kate Mara as Claire Wilson, a newly appointed AP high school teacher in her early 30s, and Nick Robinson as Eric Walker, Claire’s 17-year-old student on the cusp of college. What starts as Claire tutoring Eric for the SATs soon turns into an inappropriate intimate relationship between teacher and student.

As I watched, I noticed myself experiencing arousal during Eric and Claire’s interactions—a super unsettling reaction that made me think on how much cultural narratives shape our sexual responses, even when we intellectually recognize something as abusive. So I asked myself why. Why would I feel this way knowing what I was watching was an abuse narrative—a young boy being taken advantage of by someone in power?

Digging deeper, I came across BSc psychology grad Charlotte Houghton’s study Addressing Gender Bias in the Narrative of Teacher-Student Sexual Crimes [2]. Houghton calls out this trope: “Media coverage often portrays abusive female teachers as participants in ‘love affairs’ or ‘romances’ rather than categorizing them as sexual predators, as male teachers are typically labelled.”

That hit me hard. The same thing occurs with pornographic scenes and cultural conditioning. Maybe I wasn’t fantasizing freely on my own, but repeating what society had taught me to see as “desirable” and, in some minds, acceptable.

Why It Matters

According to the CDC as of 2025, one in 20 boys in the U.S. experiences child sexual abuse before adulthood [1]. Yet male victimization is immensely underreported because cultural norms discourage boys and men from seeing themselves as victims of sexual violence.

While most people correctly recognize sexual contact between an adult and a minor as abuse, society often reacts more leniently when the predator is a woman and the victim is a young boy. Dr. Houghton further notes that public perception of adult male teacher/minor female student abuse is overwhelmingly negative, but adult female teacher/minor male student cases are often romanticized or even outright eroticized.

Boys are handed scripts from a young age about what being a man means. These scripts come from the media, family, and peers. These narratives become instructions for how men “should” act in intimate and sexual scenarios, often erasing the acknowledgement of consent, emotional awareness, vulnerability, and the possibility of victimhood.

Let’s unpack seven common sexual scripts that disguise abuse as a normal or even desirable part of male development, silencing young boys while protecting predators.

What Are Sexual Scripts?

So what are sexual scripts? Sexual scripts, a term coined by sociologists John H. Gagnon and William Simon [6] and later expanded by N. Tatiana Masters, Erin Casey, Elizabeth Wells, and Diane Morrison [3], are social manuals teaching people how to conduct themselves intimately and/or sexually. These scripts become performed out on the world stage and are usually enacted subconsciously.

Masters’ study Sexual Scripts Among Young Heterosexually Active Men and Women: Continuity and Change [3] outlines some common male scripts: always desiring sex, initiating it, having strong “sex drives,” being skilled lovers, prioritizing sex over emotional connections, and seeking multiple partners.

Below are seven sexual scripts that help abuse of boys flourish:

Men should always be ready and willing for sex
Men should always initiate sex
Masculinity is synonymous with sexual conquest
Men are supposed to be dominant and in control
Men must be skilled lovers naturally
Men should prioritize penetration and orgasm
Men shouldn’t show emotional intimacy or vulnerability during sex

Script 1: Men Should Always Be Ready and Willing

The assumption that men should always want sex disregards the requirement for them to consent to sex each time. Mark Travers, Ph.D., in Are Men Always Ready & Willing To Have Sex? [7] found that 61% of men reported “mild sexual compliance” in the past year. That is, they said yes to unwanted sexual activity simply because it was expected.

When boys internalize this script, they become easy targets. A teenage boy “going along” with an older woman’s advances may believe he consented, even when his gut said no. Predators can frame abuse as harmless or even generous: she “gave him” a sexual experience he was supposedly lucky to have.

This script primes boys to misinterpret coercion as a natural expectation, and ignores the very power imbalances that enable and normalize abuse.

Script 2: Men Should Always Initiate

From evolutionary “hunter” myths to contemporary media portrayals, boys are told they should pursue and chase everything sexual. When an older woman initiates, the taboo can feel erotic rather than predatory, at least on the surface.

Grooming often disguises itself as a choice. A boy may feel he “chose” the relationship, when in reality he was carefully steered by his abuser. Because society casts men as pursuers, young male victims may convince themselves they always had agency in the dynamic.

This script reinforces the idea that boys can be complicit in their own abuse.

Script 3: Masculinity is Synonymous with Sexual Conquest

When I was in middle school and high school, having sex was the ultimate status symbol among boys. Counting sexual partners became a toxic but common pastime. Masters’ study cites Ethan, a young man who felt it was his “mission” to have sex with “as many girls as I can,” even though it left him feeling unsatisfied. I’ve been there myself.

When masculinity is measured by the number of sexual partners (especially female partners), boys can even be pushed to count sex with a female predator as an accomplishment instead of harmful. Abuse becomes viewed as a trophy rather than a trauma.

Script 4: Men Are Supposed to Be Dominant and in Control

Societal narratives about masculinity conflate it with dominance. The National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) notes: “male survivors struggle to label abuse as abuse because vulnerability doesn’t
fit the dominant male role” [4]

Boys may interpret sex with an older woman as “being chosen” or “having power”, or “being the man” (as Eric Walker repeatedly says in A Teacher) as even when the power imbalance is stacked against them.

Sexual scripts that reinforce the idea of being a man alongside “dominance” prevents boys from acknowledging when they are in a situation in which they are overpowered or in danger, normalizing abuse under the guise of masculinity.

Script 5: Men Must Be Skilled Lovers Naturally

From medieval chivalry to modern porn, men are told they should already “know” how to perform sexually. This social expectation leaves no room for learning, confusion, or boundaries.

Boys may believe they naturally have components of intimacy such as consent figured out when they don’t. If an older woman initiates, the boy assumes he’s supposed to rise to the occasion and “perform”. He judges himself on skill instead of reflecting on his short life experience and giving himself space to learn, grow, and get to know himself.

Scripts that enforce performance over agency contribute directly to silenced boy victims.

Script 6: Men Should Prioritize Penetration and Orgasm

This script reduces sex to mechanics. Emotional impact and consent barely factor in.

Research on male sexual assault mentions that men often experience erections or ejaculation during assault. NSVRC adds, “Some men may question that sexual assault could have happened if part of it was enjoyable, or if they became physically aroused” [4].

Physical response isn’t consent. Scripts equating orgasm with pleasure or consent dismiss boys’ abuse as enjoyment, enabling predators.

Script 7: Men Shouldn’t Show Emotional Intimacy or Vulnerability

John Wayne. Gary Cooper. Clint Eastwood. From toxically masculine figures in film to emotionally shut-down fathers, boys are often taught, “don’t cry, don’t feel.” Vulnerability during sex is especially off-limits.

NSVRC explains: “men may feel the need to be silent about their abuse because of the internalized belief that men can’t be victims, or that men should not express weakness” [4].

If an older person crosses a line, there is little space for boys to process trauma. They may brag to peers or stay silent—both strategies that bury real harm. Scripts that enforce emotional suppression keep abuse
hidden and unacknowledged.

Sexual Scripts, Abuse, and a Cultural Double Standard

Reactions to abuse differ starkly by gender. Comment sections of headlines online describing female teacher/male student abuse are full of men saying, “where was she when I was in high school?!” While passed off as jokes such remarks excuse predators and erase boys’ victimhood.

Australian and U.S. studies of Facebook comments executed by Kristan Russell, Ph.D. confirm this: attractive female predators are often excused as “pretty women,” while male victims are framed as “lucky blokes” [5].

In Dr. Russell’s study participants read newspaper articles describing a case of a local teacher who engaged in sexual misconduct with a 17-year-old student. When the scenario was an adult female teacher and underage male student, the relationship was viewed to be less harmful to the student, the student to be more mature and responsible, and the relationship to be more acceptable. Society’s double standard hides abuse and shields perpetrators.

Real-World Consequences

These scripts don’t just warp perception. They leave deep scars. Male survivors of childhood sexual abuse face a higher risk of depression, anxiety, intimacy struggles, and substance abuse. Many disclose their experiences only decades later, if ever.

Society’s insistence that boys “enjoyed it” or were “lucky” leads survivors to gaslight themselves, misinterpreting abuse as consensual. Without validation, trauma festers, negatively impacting relationships, self-worth, and mental health.

Beyond Sexual Scripts: What Can We Do About It?

Now the good news is that sexual scripts aren’t permanent. Since they were learned, they can be unlearned.

First we must shift how we view offenses and stop romanticizing and/or eroticizing young male victimization, especially when the abuser is attractive and female. The “lucky boy” narrative isn’t harmless—it shields abuse.

If we want boys to speak up without shame, we must challenge these scripts. Male victimhood is as real and deserving of compassion as female victimhood. Boys who experience abuse deserve protection, recognition, and empathy. Anything less ensures the abuse continues. Until we rewrite these scripts, abuse will continue to hide in plain sight.

Sources & Further Reading

[1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024, May 16). About child sexual abuse.
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

[2] Houghton, C. (2024, March 14). Gender bias in teacher-student sexual crimes. The
Academic. Retrieved August 21, 2025

[3] Masters, N. T., Casey, E., Wells, E. A., & Morrison, D. M. (2013). Sexual scripts among
young heterosexually active men and women: Continuity and change. Journal of Sex
Research, 50(5), 409–420.

[4] National Sexual Violence Resource Center. (n.d.). Understanding male socialization,
stigma, and reactions to sexual violence. National Sexual Violence Resource Center. Retrieved August 21, 2025

[5] Prairie View A&M University. (2021, April 26). Study: Teachers’ gender, sexuality, age
affect perceptions of sexual misconduct of students. Prairie View A&M University.
Retrieved August 21, 2025

[6] Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human
sexuality. Aldine Publishing Company.

[7] Travers, M. (2022, May 7). Are men always ready and willing to have sex?
Therapytips.org. Retrieved August 21, 2025

[8] Thomas, J. C., & Kopel, J. (2023). Male victims of sexual assault: A review of the
literature. Behavioral Sciences, 13(4), 304.

About the Writer

James Mosley II, AKA Poly Lone Ranger, is a writer, aspiring sexuality educator & researcher, and a current graduate student at Widener University, where he’s earning his M.Ed in Human Sexuality. He is passionate about non-monogamy, robust sex education, and helping others find and accept their most authentic selves in the realm of sexuality. James is the author of the children’s coloring book, “Coloring Connection VOL 1.” You can find more of his projects at https://beacons.ai/polyloneranger.

Everything The L Word: Generation Q Got Wrong About Polyamory

Published on May 1, 2024April 2, 2026 by Amy

I just finished my rewatch of The L Word: Generation Q. This follow-up from the hit series from the early-mid 2000s catches up with fan faves Bette (Jennifer Beals), Alice (Leisha Hailey), and Shane (Katherine Moennig) 10 years later as well as bringing in a host of new gay, queer and trans characters. The L Word Generation Q also covers new ground including polyamory and the much-discussed triad (“throuple“) relationship of Alice, Nat, and Gigi.

From here on out there will be spoilers for all three seasons of the series, so stop reading now if you want to avoid those!

It’s safe to say that, in many ways, Generation Q tries to fix some of the things that The L Word got wrong. Notably, there is significantly improved representation of Alice’s bisexuality (and bisexuality in general), much better trans representation (Shane’s apology to Max for “the way we were back then” reads to me as an apology from the producers to the entire trans community), and the addition of non-binary characters as well as butch women characters.

One thing it still manages to get horrendously wrong, though, is its representation of consensual non-monogamy and polyamory. The most notable polyamory storyline features Alice, her girlfriend of two years Nat, and Nat’s ex-wife Gigi, but I also have things to say about Shane and non-monogamy.

Back in 2018, I wrote about all the things You Me Her got wrong about polyamory (spoiler: a lot.) Let’s give The L Word: Generation Q the same treatment, shall we?

The L Word Generation Q’s Alice, Nat and Gigi: The Inevitable Throuple Trope

This is the eternal problem of polyamory in fiction: most writers seem to think that the default configuration for polyamory is a triad (or, to use a cringeworthily terrible word I wish would die already, “throuple.”) That is, three people in a relationship all together. In the vast majority of cases, this is the only representation we get.

The reality is that triads are fairly rare. Stable, healthy, functional triads are even rarer. It’s a really difficult dynamic to both find and sustain, with a very high failure rate, and is just not representative of how most people do polyamory.

The only slight saving grace of The L Word Generation Q’s throuple storyline is that it’s three women rather than the “one man, two women” configuration we usually see.

When Triads Do Happen, They Don’t Usually Result From Drunken Threesomes

I wouldn’t have had a problem with The L Word Generation Q’s throuple story if it had been handled differently. The show could have done something interesting with Alice, Nat and Gigi having the threesome and then having to deal with the resulting awkwardness and emotional fallout. Things happen, particularly when unresolved feelings and a lot of tequila are involved. And frankly it’s a fucking hot scene.

But for an alcohol-fuelled spontaneous threesome to transition to a full-on triad in the space of about two days is flat-out ridiculous.

The L Word Generation Q’s Throuple Involving Two Ex Wives is Hard Mode on Speed

Look, I understand that the point of this storyline was to show that Nat and Gigi aren’t over each other and that Nat genuinely loves Alice while also genuinely loving Gigi. But The L Word Generation Q’s bungled throuple storyline was the worst possible way to do it. Anyone with a modicum of polyamory experience would have been screaming watching this.

Poor Alice never stood a chance in this situation. Pro tip: if you’re going to try polyamory, a triad is hard mode. If you’re going to try a triad anyway, doing it with your (or your partner’s) ex is the worst possible way to go about it.

Why Does Nat Give Alice False Hope With a Promise of Monogamy?

After the L Word Generation Q throuple falls apart, Nat turns up at Alice’s show recording to win her back. She promises Alice that she wants to love and be with “just her.” But they’ve barely reconciled when Nat os coming out as polyamorous, and has apparently been thinking she might be poly for a long time.

So why, then, did she make a promise she knew she might not be able to keep? This just seems exceptionally and needlessly cruel to Alice.

Does Alice Have to Be So Judgy?

Alice has been subjected to a fair amount of bigotry and prejudice on both the original L Word and Generation Q, not least a lot of biphobia (including from her friends.) She’s also a fan favourite, and perhaps the character I personally relate to the most. So it was really, really disappointing to see this exchange:

Nat: “Monogamy isn’t for everyone.”
Alice: “It’s for most people. Except the bad ones.”

I can accept that Alice can’t handle polyamory in her own relationship. That’s fair. Like monogamy, it’s not for everyone. But it makes me really sad to see her being so harsh and judgemental about it. When Nat goes and cries in the bathroom after this exchange, my heart broke for her.

When Did Nat and Alice Discuss… Literally Anything?

In a pretty tender and emotional L Word Generation Q scene, some time after their throuple with Gigi falls apart, Nat comes out as polyamorous to a horrified Alice. Next thing we know, she’s coming back from her first overnight sex date. I hate that the show totally skipped over everything that comes in between these two points. The hours of talking, negotiating, processing, discussing agreements and boundaries and more… all skipped.

Obviously we couldn’t see all of this, because the show only has so much time. But one or two scenes is, surely, not too much to ask for. Instead, it gives the impression that the opening up journey is a quick hop, skip and jump from “I think I’m polyamorous” to “overnight dates.”

How the Fuck Has Shane Never Heard of Polyamory?

After Shane inevitably cheats on her girlfriend Tess (played by the gorgeous and fabulous Jamie Clayton of Sense8 fame) and they’re trying to work things out, Tess asks Shane if she wants to do ethical non-monogamy (ENM.) Shane, the player and womanizer extraordinaire who also lives in a huge liberal city and has been part of the LGBTQ community for decades, has apparently… never heard of this concept.

It’s even implied at one point that Shane and her ex-wife Quiara had some kind of non-monogamous relationship when Quiara says something like “you and I have never done things the conventional way.” Yet later on, Shane’s somehow never even considered this possibility. It makes absolutely no sense.

**And One Thing The L Word Generation Q Got Right: The Heartbreak of a Failed Throuple and Fundamental Incompatibility**

I hate how it got there, but I actually think having Alice and Nat break up over their incompatible views on monogamy was a good and powerful storyline. Because in those situations, where one of you wants monogamy and the other doesn’t, breaking up is often inevitable and usually the best choice (even though it utterly sucks.)

Credit where credit is due, this was a far better choice than either Alice reluctantly going along with polyamory or Nat reluctantly going along with monogamy.

But seriously, when are we going to get better polyamorous representation on TV? When are writers and producers going to start actually, you know, talking to polyamorous people?

Wedding cake with bride and groom toppers, for a post about The Bold Type's Suttard and incompatibilities around wanting children

Richard and Sutton: Fundamental Incompatibilities, and Happy Ever After

Published on July 28, 2021March 3, 2026 by Amy1 Comment

Like many fans of Freeform’s The Bold Type, I was rooting for a happy ending for Sutton Brady-Hunter and Richard Hunter (known collectively by the fandom as “Suttard”) as the show wrapped up its final season. From their attempt at a Bluetooth vibrator sex date to their adorable Paris reunion, Richard and Sutton (played by Sam Page and Megan Fahy, respectively) have been one of the show’s strongest couples from the beginning.

Fair warning: spoilers for all five seasons of The Bold Type and its ending incoming!

At the end of The Bold Type season 4, the newly married couple have a blow-out argument when Sutton realises she doesn’t want to have children while Richard longs to be a dad. At the beginning of season 5, he leaves her and begins divorce proceedings.

Over the course of the final season, Sutton destroys her wedding dress, throws a “divorce party,” starts therapy, and quits drinking in an attempt to get over Richard and get her life back together. Then they meet up to swap divorce papers, inevitably fall into bed with one another, and Richard realises how much he loves Sutton and that he doesn’t want a life without her. Even if it means giving up his dream of having children.

So far, so romantic, right? But…

Richard and Sutton Are Fundamentally Incompatible

No two people will ever be perfectly aligned on every issue or desire. That’s impossible because we’re all multifaceted, nuanced, and complex creatures. But there are, I believe, a few compatibility fundamentals. These are the things you need to agree on (or at least be genuinely, wholeheartedly happy to compromise on) in order to have a functional relationship.

Having children is one of those things. Others might include getting married or not, being monogamous or not, and possibly even political affiliation.

Some things are just deal breakers. Some things should be deal-breakers. Because in reality, much as we want to believe that love conquers all, it doesn’t. Love doesn’t conquer wanting different things in uncompromisable situations. You can’t have half a child. You can’t be half married. Love, however real and powerful, doesn’t make these incompatibilities go away or create the potential for a compromise where there is none. Sutton and Richard’s ending neatly sidesteps this reality.

Fairytale Endings: Fantasy vs. Reality

I’m glad the writers chose to end The Bold Type the way they did. Ultimately, this show is escapist fantasy, a Sex & the City for millennials with little grounding in the real world. Richard and Sutton fans were crushed when the couple split up and were rooting for them to get back together and somehow find a way through their conflicting desires.

The writers gave us what we wanted. Find me a single fan who didn’t let out a collective “awwww” at this moment:

GIF of Richard Hunter and Sutton Brady (Suttard)

But it really is just fantasy. In reality, fairytale endings like this don’t happen. Or if they do, they cause intense resentment and bigger problems down the line.

I admit that I struggle to relate to Richard, personally. As someone who decided early on that I will be childfree for life, I find it very difficult to imagine wanting to have children more than wanting to be with the person I love. (And my god, these two really do love each other. The two actors have incredible on-screen chemistry!)

But many people do feel like that, and it’s valid and real. Many people want to be a parent more than anything, even if it means they can’t be with the person they thought was their forever person. And those people can’t just switch that off the way Richard seems to in this too-neat-to-be-real happy ever after where he decides he wants to be with Sutton after all.

Do Fairytale Happy Endings Exist?

Sadly, no. At least not in the way you’re thinking of.

A much younger, more naive version of me thought that I’d find a fairytale happy ending someday. There have even been moments when I thought I’d found it. But I hadn’t, because it doesn’t exist.

Real relationships require constant communication, ongoing compromise, and re-calibration as you both grow and change. You can decide to be together, to commit, to go all-in, but that doesn’t take away from the very real work required to make love work long term.

Love is messy, love is nuanced, love is the best thing in the world. But it is not magical. It does not remove all obstacles or effortlessly sweep them aside. And some obstacles are too big to overcome. One person wanting children while the other doesn’t? That’s probably one of those obstacles.

So I’ll enjoy Richard and Sutton’s happy ending for what it is: escapist fantasy wrapping up five seasons of escapist fantasy. But I’m glad it’s not real. Because as much as I want someone to love me for the rest of my life, I would never want them to give up their greatest dream to be with me.

The polyamory flag colours on a pink background for a post about what You Me Her got wrong about polyamory

All the Things “You, Me, Her” Got Wrong About Polyamory

Published on October 25, 2018March 21, 2026 by Amy1 Comment

Regular readers might remember that I briefly flirted with a ridiculous quest to review and recap every episode of You, Me, Her, the polyamory-centered romcom that premiered on Netflix in 2016. However, this fizzled out somewhere in the middle of Season 1 because I ran out of time, energy and fucks to give about this stupid show.

By the way: if you enjoyed this post, you might also enjoy my review of everything The L Word: Generation Q got wrong about polyamory.

You, Me, Her was inexplicably well-received, receiving an average review rating of 84% on Rotten Tomatoes and 7/10 on IMDB. However, I suspect the vast majority of the watchers and reviewers were monogamous people who enjoyed this show as a titillating peek into what they imagine polyamory to be like. Amongst polyamorous people, though, it was pretty much universally trashed.

**Heads-up that this review contains spoilers for the first three seasons of You, Me, Her.**

In case you haven’t seen it, You, Me, Her is an American comedy-drama series following suburban married couple Jack (Greg Poehler) and Emma (Rachel Blanchard.) Bored with their marriage, both members of the couple hire much younger sex worker, Izzy Silva (Priscilla Faia.) When they both fall in love with her, they decide to enter a polyamorous triad. Chaos ensues.

Instead of reviewing this mess one episode at a time, I thought I’d bring you all the things I think it got wrong about polyamory – so far – in one easy post.

1. Triads don’t typically start with married couples hiring the same escort

Or: Izzy would never date these two idiots.

Izzy is a 25-year-old college student who is doing sex work to pay her way through university. Jack hires her for a date and, when Emma finds out, she does the same thing because that’s how mature, married adults slap a bandage on cheating, apparently. However, Izzy inexplicably decides she’s super duper into both of them for real. This would never happen.

Any sex worker in Izzy’s place would do her job, take the money, and leave this pair to work out their shit in suburban hell by themselves. Polyamorous relationships can start in lots of ways, but “we both hired the same sex worker” isn’t one of them.

2. Being polyamorous in Portland would not destroy your life

This show is set in Portland, Oregon, a city that is not only famous for being super liberal, but where I know for a fact there’s a huge polyamorous community. Sure, there are some conservative people there as there are anywhere. But the idea that being outed as bisexual and/or non-monogamous in fucking Portland would totally destroy Emma’s life is wildly unrealistic. If the writers wanted that narrative to work, they should have set it in rural Alabama or something.

Jack and Emma agree that they each get “two nights with her… I mean you” (that is, with Izzy) per week. They then have a debate about who “gets” Izzy first.

Do I really have to spell out all the ways this is gross beyond belief? She’s a human being, not a pie to be shared out in equal slices. Ethical polyamory does not involve married couples treating third parties like literal toys.

4. Using polyamory to save a failing marriage never works

The entire You, Me, Her polyamory situation begins when Jack and Emma decide they’ll each go on dates with Izzy, then come back fired up and ready to ravish the hell out of each other. However, that’s not how polyamory works. That’s also not how feelings or sexual desire work. And once again, it’s objectifying as hell. They’re basically using Izzy as a human sex toy.

Opening up the relationship isn’t how you inject sexual spark back into your ailing marriage. “Relationship broken, add more people” is a cliche because people attempt it all the time and it works… literally never.

Also, can we talk about how angry Jack gets mad Emma comes back from her date and isn’t up for fucking him right there and then? Your partner doesn’t owe you sex just because they just went on a date with someone else.

5. Jealousy is inevitable, but courting it isn’t healthy

Jealousy in polyamory is normal and fine, as long as you deal with it in a healthy way. Trying to make your partner jealous deliberately in order to make them want you more is manipulative, cruel, and ineffective.

Jack and Emma use Izzy to make each other jealous. Izzy then uses Andy, who is a kind of dick but seems to be really into her, to make Jack and Emma jealous. No-one is having a good time.

6. Polyamory isn’t just for rich white people

Jack and Emma are the type of white, affluent, married professionals you’d expect to see at a swingers’ club. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, except that the polyamorous community is actually hugely diverse and we’re all bored as hell of seeing every representation of polyamory reduced down to “rich white people who don’t like fucking their spouses any more.”

7. No-one falls for two people at the same rate, at the same time, and in the same way

Unfortunately, this is exactly what Jack and Emma expect of Izzy. In fact, it’s pretty much what all inexperienced unicorn hunters expect of their new partners and it is wildly unrealistic.

At one point in the show, it becomes apparent that Izzy’s connection with Emma is growing stronger while her connection with Jack is developing at a slower pace. Instead of dealing with his feelings or communicating with his partners, Jack throws a fit and fucks off for several days.

8. You don’t have to live with all your partners (and most people don’t)

Jack, Emma and Izzy move in together almost the moment they’ve decided to give a triad relationship a go. Not only is this the mother of all bad ideas, it’s also just unrealistic.

Most people, regardless of relationship structure, want to wait until a relationship is stable and established before cohabiting is even discussed. Many polyamorous people never want to live with all their partners. Many of us have one nesting parter. Others prefer to live alone.

By the way: regardless of relationship set-up, the trope of three people sharing a double bed every night trope is sweet but unrealistic. Being the middle spoon is lovely for about five seconds, until you overheat or both your partners start snoring.

9. Extremely conservative, homophobic parents don’t come around in three seconds flat

When Emma’s parents visit, they inevitably find out about the polyamory situation almost immediately. However, they also transition from being hyper-conservative, openly-homophobic bigots who only care about Emma having babies to being totally chill with everything in less than five minutes of screen time (which equates to perhaps an hour in plot-time).

People can come around, of course. People question their assumptions when they are directly confronted with them by someone they love. But it usually takes more time than this, and often much more.

10. Communication, not sex, is the way to solve your problems

Whenever Jack, Emma and Izzy have a relationship problem, they just fuck and it all goes away (until it inevitably returns, of course, because they didn’t actually address it.) Sex is great but it’s not a way to fix problems. Only honest, open, and respectful communication can do that.

And by the way? Treating someone like shit until they leave and then chasing them through an airport is not romantic.

11. And finally, we are all monumentally sick of MFF closed triads

Many people assume that all polyamory is one straight, cisgender man with two bisexual, cisgender women in a closed triad. Polyamorous newcomers often assume this is the most desirable configuration. However, it’s actually a fairly rare set-up, hard to attain and even harder to maintain over a long period of time. Yet it’s the only fucking representation the mainstream media is willing to give us.

Can we move on to something more representative and less male-gazey already, please?

You, Me, Her review: a bad show with worse messaging

I am convinced the people who made this show have either never met a polyamorous person or don’t like us very much. This is bad representation. It furthers negative stereotypes, it romanticises behaviour that is at best toxic and at worst abusive, and it views polyamory through the “tee-hee look at these weirdos” gaze of the monogamous world.

There are two more seasons of this show still to come, so maybe I’ll watch them and come back with a full review when we’ve seen how it ends. On the other hand, maybe I don’t hate myself that much.

Did you enjoy this You, Me, Her review of sorts? If so, please buy me a coffee!