The reason why I specifically asked about women directors is because director is usually a male dominated field and I thought about the fact that the daytime soap was a genre that targeted women, whose audience was made up of primarily women and to see whether the genre was different from movies and primetime tv in it's day, was it somehow different, more progressive, given its target audience.
Other jobs with television and film production tend to be more open to women. Historically there have been quite a number of producers-associate, line and executive producers. Director is often still regarded as a predominantly the domain of men, especially when one thinks of the most famous directors, women's name don't tend to automatically spring to mind.
What I realize is that for television, especially daytime soaps, the director doesn't seem to occupy the same prominent position as he/she would in film. I'm not sure how gender dynamics might figure into why, for instance, it's so hard to find out definitively who the first woman to direct a daytime drama was, but the fact that the answer isn't right there is strange to me.
Especially in a genre started by a woman, that likes to remind people of its 'feminist' credentials.
Not ruling out that there isn't pure narcissism going on here -- she has surrounded herself with sycophants for a while, from what we can see, and anyone on BH who didn't worship at that altar either had to change their tune (Dorit, Teddi) or get out (LVP, Denise).
But I'm starting to wonder if there is something else more calculated going on.
Did you know that this La Quinta episode in real time was when Erika put Tom's cheating with Justice Tricia Bigelow on blast on her IG? People were like, oh she must have been so wasted to have done something so sloppy. She's going to get her ass sued! But judging by the talk at dinner, I believe she was cool, calm, collected, and knew what she was doing. Which was using 20-year old text messages to drive the narrative of Tom cheating on the marriage. To keep the focus on the marriage. This whole season of BH thus far has been talking about the marriage and Erika leaving him, like that's the real crime here. Not one mention of the V word -- victims.
Now it could be that her lawyers told her not to make any statements about the victims so as not to implicate herself. That is not stopping her from talking about other sh!t on BH or Twitter. And honestly, does Erika strike you as a careless, reckless woman? Not to me she doesn't. I feel like the way she stirs up BH Twitter every week like clockwork, the story she is pushing on the show about Starting Over -- all of that looks carefully laid out and calculated. She's stirring up social media to detract from the detail of the lawsuits. Publishing Tom's texts serves as a timestamp (i.e. coinciding with when she told the other women about what her marriage was like).
But zero mention of $20mn wired to Erika Jayne Global (supposedly weeks before she filed for divorce?). Nor an explanation as to how she affords a sizeable rent on that bungalow in Hancock Park. And certainly nothing about the burn victims or orphans and widows of the Lion Air crash.
The problem for Erika is that the BH audience just does not believe her. The basic facts of the case are far more embedded in viewers' minds (like the $20mn) than what she's saying on TV. Plus, this new Erika does not match with the Erika we have been watching for years. Detached, playing different characters on her VTs, boasting Its Expensive To Be Me, careful, calculated, smart. Erika is smart! Suddenly she's emotional and hurt about Tom treating her like she's nothing? It's whiplash. And because there are big stakes here (Federal charges, massive restitution, possible prison), the sudden shift in personality and 'truth-telling' feels staged in order to duck some of these charges.