MovieChat Forums > Frasier (1993) Discussion > Frasier's comment about women over 30 ge...

Frasier's comment about women over 30 getting married

posted 8 years ago by shrilltrills
22 replies | jump to latest

Does anyone remember the episode where Roz had met a guy on a bus that she had an instant connection with, and Frasier was trying to get her to use the radio show to find him? She hesitated, and then he said ON THE AIR something about how a woman over 30 has more of a chance of being attacked by a terrorist than getting married.

I think that is the most offensive thing that has ever been on this show, but it seemed to just be laughed off. In terms of the show, I can't believe he would have gotten away with saying something like that for all his listeners to hear. He's supposed to be a radio psychiatrist who helps people, and he's saying crap like that that for them to hear. There would probably have been plenty of single women over 30 listening to that and feeling like crap about themselves, which is the opposite of what he's supposed to be doing. I think it would have made sense to have the next caller be a 35 year old single woman who was crying because of her age and single status and when he tried to be comforting she could have said something like "YOU yourself JUST said..." It would have been funny seeing him struggle to get his foot out of his mouth there, lol.

It really just didn't even seem to fit with his character to say something like that. Most, if not all, of the women he dated were over 30. He sometimes even went for women who were older than him, such as his old babysitter who ended up marrying his father and his old piano teacher. And I don't think he ever said anything else indicating that he thought women were less eligible based on age.

If there is one line that I could choose to have removed from the show, it would be that. It wasn't funny, it was out of character for Frasier, it didn't make sense, and it was offensive.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] blakgard 8 years ago

It was certainly hyperbole and may be outdated, but the chances are still small.

It comes from a real-life headline based on a real-life scientific study done in the late-80s. In 1986, it was on the cover of Newsweek. There was even a firestorm back then, but the study determined that the chance was 20%. By 35, the chance dropped to 5%.

You shouldn't get offended by these things, because they meant to point out the inequities of real life.

[–] shrilltrills 8 years ago

I'm pretty sure it's not true that if a woman is not married at 30, that she has a 20% chance of ever getting married. And I'm also pretty sure that a woman does not have more than a 20% chance of being a victim of a terrorist attack in her lifetime.

But that's beside the point anyway. My point was that this line just didn't fit the situation on the show. I highly doubt anyone on the radio, especially a radio psychiatrist who is supposed to be helping people, would get away with saying something like that. He might as well have made a racist comment on the air. And as I also pointed out, Frasier himself dated plenty of women over 30 and it just seemed completely out of character for him to say that. The line just didn't make sense, as well as not being an okay thing to say.

[–] blakgard 8 years ago

It was true in 1986. We tend to get married later these days.

[–] booklady1-1 8 years ago

I think the point was that it was inappropriate for a radio psychiatrist to say something like this, and I agree. I too am surprised he didn't catch any hell for that on the show.

The study did come up with those results, but you have to keep in mind that this was 30 years ago. The average age at first marriage was much younger than it is now. Back then, yeah, a 30 year old unmarried woman was seen almost as a spinster, but that is not the case at all now. Now, amen are putting off marriage to focus on education and career, and it is very common for women in their 30s to be getting married for the first time. In terms of that study, 40 is probably the new 30.

This episode aired in the early 90s. There may have been a little bit of truth to that comment at that time, even though I agree, it is odd that he said that on the radio to his listeners. He should be trying to cater to all of them, not say things that could upset an entire group of them.

[–] blakgard 8 years ago

He was only saying it in jest.

[–] shrilltrills 8 years ago

How would his listeners, some of whom have serious psychological issues, know that?

[–] Insomniatic102 8 years ago

He's said worse that than on air in the show before. It's part of the comedy of the show, Frasier flubbing up. If he were perfect and always right it'd be boring.

Anyway, that factoid has been around for years. He certainly didn't create it, and it was bandied around everywhere.

[–] shrilltrills 8 years ago

He's said worse that than on air in the show before.

Yeah, but something always came of it, right? An angry caller, or getting in trouble with a station manager. This was just basically nothing, although that is something that would piss off a lot of listeners and the station managers as they wouldn't like him alienating their listeners.

[–] booklady1-1 8 years ago

the chances are still small

Um, no they're not. They may have been small in the 80s when the study was done, but certainly not now. Most of my friends with successful marriages didn't get married until 30 or later. The majority of them who got married in their 20s ended up divorced.

[–] booklady1-1 8 years ago

Also, the study was clearly extremely flawed, considering that the vast majority of the women who were subjects of the study did end up getting married between then and now. The two that didn't stayed single by choice.

It seems that it's one of their studies that was done by biased researchers who wanted to price their own agendas. Not to be taken seriously at all. It certainly doesn't mean a single woman in her 30s should start to give up hope.

[–] shrilltrills 8 years ago

Also, even with the study, I'm pretty sure that they said over 40, not over 30. Women over 40 supposedly had less of a chance of getting married than being killed by a terrorist.

[–] Helena727 8 years ago

It comes from a real-life headline based on a real-life scientific study done in the late-80s. In 1986, it was on the cover of Newsweek. There was even a firestorm back then, but the study determined that the chance was 20%. By 35, the chance dropped to 5%.

The study was specious. For one thing, it didn't take into account lesbians in committed relationships; single lesbians; and single hetero women with no desire to be married.

Nor did it treat as a crisis the fact that the stats were essentially the same for men! It promulgated the nonsensical idea that all women want to be married and all men don't. (Never mind the legit stats about married men being in better health and living longer than single men.)

The "terrorist" study is one of many silly-nesses debunked by Susan Faludi in her brilliant book Backlash.

https://www.amazon.com/Backlash-Undeclared-Against-American-Women/dp/0307345424/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1474610078&sr=8-1&keywords=faludi+backlash

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."

[–] MissOlenska 8 years ago

It comes from a real-life headline based on a real-life scientific study done in the late-80s. In 1986, it was on the cover of Newsweek. There was even a firestorm back then, but the study determined that the chance was 20%. By 35, the chance dropped to 5%.

30 bloody years ago!

In Ireland, where I'm from, the average age for a woman to get married is 33.

[–] booklady1-1 8 years ago

I think just women who had never been married. This study has been shown to be bull over and over though, to the point where Newsweek actually retracted the headline 10 years ago. They printed the headline for sensationalist purposes before the actual study had even been published. It was all crap, really, not to be taken seriously.

[–] Robert_A_Fett 8 years ago

Don't be such a snowflake.

[–] pritch636 8 years ago

That line, along with 'a dingo ate your baby' were all the rage in the early 90's

From the Simpsons, Seinfeld and films such as Sleepless in Seattle.

There's nothing offensive about it.
Just a supposed statistical observation .

[–] Helena727 8 years ago

There's nothing offensive about it.
Just a supposed statistical observation .

That's not quite true. The study treated unmarried women as a CRISIS yet it had nothing to say about unmarried men -- and since the population is roughly 50/50 when people are in their 30s, the "unmarried/terrorist" equation was just as applicable to men, yet no one applied it! The study promulgated the nonsensical idea that all or most women long to be married whereas all or most men don't.

Plus, the so-called study came out just as women were starting make significant gains in the higher echelons of the workplace. It was misogynistic fuel and it was fueled by misogyny; I suggest you take a look at Susan Faludi's groundbreaking book Backlash to get a better understanding of just how poisonous it was and just how meaningful its timing was.

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MedicJenny 8 years ago

You have to consider that Season 3 aired in the mid 90's and society was different. It is common knowledge that many women get married in their 30's now, but it wasn't so front and center then. If they made that joke today, it would reference women in the 40's. Plus, Frasier is kind of a d-bag. That's the whole point of the show. lol.

[–] depaul_rules 8 years ago

^^^^^^THIS^^^^

I agree back then it was much more common for people to get married in their twenties, but now it seems much common for people to get married later in life or not at all.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-s-adults-are-married-a-record-low/
Kind of a cool article about it. It's a bit dated (2011), but shows the trend.

TWITTER @bigdaddy6666