Good Girls Revolt Makes Me Want To Revolt

I had every intention of watching Good Girls Revolt when it was first released on Amazon, purely because of the name. I had no idea what the series was about because I hadn't seen any trailers for the series (although I use Amazon Instant Video frequently and am bombarded with ads for various other Amazon  tv series) so all I had to judge it by was its promotional poster which tells me nothing. Other than there is three women in it (one that I mistook for Clemence Posey). And it's on Amazon. And there might be some bad wallpaper.

I didn't watch the show right away which was a mistake on my part, I always feel that even though I am only one viewer a show would've survived if I made the effort to watch it. In my defence for an online series the show was cancelled awfully quickly after it was first released which made me believe that it must have been truly awful. Amazon has kept Hand Of God on for two seasons and although I initially found that show intriguing it has become terrible in a short space of time so I figured Good Girls Revolt must be terrible and made me put off watching it for even longer. Then one day I found myself at a loss and decided to watch the first episode and see how it was and now I find myself ten episodes later wanting to scream "WHAT THE FUCK AMAZON".


It's no secret that I adore Amazon programming and actually tend to prefer it over Netflix but they have finally failed me. Good Girls Revolt deserved to last a hell of a lot longer than it did. It's set in 1969 and follows the goings on of a fictional newspaper called "News of the Week" and explores the hierarchal structure within it which places women firmly at the bottom. In 1969 women seemingly have equal rights to males due to to the Civil Right's act of 1964 which included equal rights for women. Something I learned from Good Girls Revolt was that the clause that specified that women are equal members of society was placed in the bill so that it wouldn't pass. I think I'm going to throw up a little bit. Needless to say, although on paper women were equal to men that wasn't actually the case in the 1960s. Some would say it isn't the case now.

"News of the Week" was littered with male editors and reporters and women we relegated to researcher and secretarial roles, even though some were more qualified and they worked as hard or even more so than their male counterparts. In some cases the female researchers writings were incorporated into articles and they received no credit or when their articles made it to print a male reporters name was placed on the by-line. As if that wasn't enough of a blow to their integrity they earned a fraction of what the males they worked alongside earned. The only thing more infuriating about this premise is if it actually happened. Wait, it actually did. The premise behind Good Girls Revolt is based on true events that occurred at a news magazine named "Newsweek". In 1970 sixty of their female employees filed a claim seeking equal opportunities in the work place, a work place which had an unwritten rule of only allowing males to become reporters even though at the time it was against the law.

Good Girls Revolt doesn't just track the lawsuit, in fact by the end of the ten episodes the claim has only just been made. In the series we're introduced to our three main characters Patti Robinson (Genevieve Angelson), Jane Hollander (Anna Camp) and Cindy Reston (Erin Darke). In addition to these three the series also has a strong set of supporting characters in Eleanor Holmes Norton (Joy Bryant), Nora Ephron (Grace Gummer), Finn Woodhouse (Chris Diamantopoulos), Doug Rhodes (Hunter Parrish) and Wick McFadden (Jim Belushi). Patti, Jane and Cindy couldn't be anymore different from one another but they do have the same goal, they want to be writers. Initially they were unaware that they were victims of sexism but come to that realisation when their eyes were opened by Eleanor and Nora, strong females strive for their success and work on behalf of their gender to gain equality for all.

Patti is the more rebellious character which we witness from the outset. She is unafraid to speak her mind and is against conforming to the gender roles that society has set for her. She is fascinated by Eleanor Norton and the most receptive to her cause, making attempts to get her female colleagues to fight against the inequality that they're experiencing. Jane is seemingly strong willed as well but initially feels that she has to conform as it appears that her whole life has already been predetermined by her family. Although she is to get married, have children and do whatever a woman is supposed to do in the 60s/70s she still has ambition and believes if she works hard at "News of the Week" she will eventually be able to become a writer. I believe that Cindy is the most tragic character within the series because I see her as the most victimised of the time. Like her peers she dreams of being a writer but is pessimistic about it as she has already married and will soon need to start a family as her husband has only allowed her to work for a year, she must take on the mantle of housewife when that year is up.

These three characters relationships initially develop due to their common goal but over the course of the series they each become interwoven with one anothers personal lives and are able to depend on each other, no matter the issue. This support system isn't just resigned to these three but other researchers and even women in the secretarial pool. It also helps that they are all flawed yet likeable, in fact it's probably the flaws that make them so watchable. They are loveable young women, intelligent and ambition but they are realistic. I'm always wary of watching a female led series because women don't tend to come off well which is probably due to the limited number of female writers working in the industry, the females we see on screen are what men think women are. The truth is we aren't wholly catty and shrewish, we have both positive and negative character traits which makes us real people. It was nice seeing a television show represent that, even if it was only for a short space of time.

I honestly don't understand why Good Girls Revolt was cancelled, the characters alone are enticing to watch but the central premise would've been enthralling if the series was allowed to continue. Not only would it have been a must watch but it would've been an important watch, this is a story that needs to be told again and again because inequality is still prevalent in our society and a lot of people don't see it. Amazon hasn't just failed me but it's failed the series, the amount of money that was splashed on advertising for the likes of The Grand Tour and Sneaky Pete must eclipse the advertising budget of Good Girls Revolt. It's lack of advertising and swift cancellation makes me feel like someone higher up didn't appreciate the show as much as they should have done, unfortunately it seems like it had no chance. It's a shame because the show would've diversified Amazon's roster and been a nice accompaniment to Z: The Begging Of Everything.

So long Good Girls Revolt, I wish I'd known you longer and your cancellation truly makes me want to revolt against Amazon.

Live Long and Blog!