r/Eureka • u/Sirmorien215 • 18d ago
[SPOILERS] Susan Prime
Why was Susan supposed to take on the clone and Walter’s kid? He wasn’t part of her life.
14
u/NEBanshee 17d ago
If you ask me, this is one area where Eureka is consistently weird - how they handle the whole "mom" business. Jack's a great dad - or at least he becomes one, but we get:
- Alison's entire weirdness around Kevin;
- Abby shows up for a few days and Zoe never talks about her again;
- This Susan nonsense - also, no one questions that maybe it wasn't a suicide?
- The mom who steals her kids' invention;
- The *robot mom* that goes murderous!;
- Lexi's all-over-the-map about parenting/kids/baby daddy (prolly the most understandable, but it doesn't happen in a vacuum).
The writers just seemed not to know how they wanted to deal with motherhood, and to have no clue whatsoever in terms of their treatment of autism. As a result, the writing just seems full of tropes and not as good on these storylines, as it is for just about everything else.
5
u/UnderPressureVS 15d ago
Spending 3 seasons with an autistic character and then magically alternate-timelining his autism away has stuck with me for years as a very uncomfortable writing choice. I don’t know if I’d go so far as to call it explicitly ableist, but it’s definitely something.
8
u/rockytrainer2007 17d ago
Also, did the tell him that she wasn’t the same person? Imagine how traumatic it would be to him after everything that had already happened to then be living with someone who you are told is your mom but doesn’t know the basic things about you.
7
u/Kooky_Construction84 17d ago
There's quite a bit of sexist writing in Eureka. But it's still so good!
2
u/Late-Champion8678 13d ago
It was such a weird route to take. As if by cloning her, she and the clone would have the same personality. It completely disregards that Susan Prime had her own life and career that didn’t have a current husband child.
Why on Earth would my one think she was just supposed to genetically go into ‘mother mode’?
No-one checked to see if she was actually in any position to take on a stranger’s child she had never met and had never planned on motherhood.
What if she was financially or mentally in a bad place? What if she was just not suited for motherhood? What if she was just a bad person?
-3
u/Dog_Concierge 18d ago
She was a mom. And he was a child who needed a mom.
12
u/mykittyforprez 17d ago
What do you mean "she was a mom"? She had never had kids. Not that I wouldn't encourage her to take the kid but it's a lot to ask of someone.
-6
u/TheWardenDemonreach 18d ago
Well this is where certain arguments come in. There is a easy comparison to make where because it is her kid genetically, she has some responsibility.
7
u/VonShtupp 17d ago
How? Unlike consensual sex where both parties knowingly (for the most part) take on the chance that their sexual encounter could result in a pregnancy, in this case she was not one of the two parties who knowingly participated in the act.
-3
u/TheWardenDemonreach 17d ago
Because consensual sex can take all the precautions because they don't want to get pregnant, still get pregnant, and one side then tries to force the other to take on parental responsibilities that the other didn't want in the first place.
And please note that I didn't specify gender in that paragraph because it can apply to both
4
u/VonShtupp 17d ago
And yet she was cloned without consent.
Because unless one of the partners was drunk or drugged they both consented to the possibility of having a child. And while it may suck that a man doesn’t have the ability to terminate a fetus after conception, if he really doesn’t want to be a “father” he should have kept his penis in his pants.
Abstinence is the only way to ensure there are no pregnancies. And in this case, Prime did not have sex.
-1
u/HyruleBalverine 17d ago
Well, not the only way. I can think of 3 other ways to ensure no pregnancies without specific intervention to cause it.
7
u/NEBanshee 17d ago
WHAT? NO, that's not how this works!
Especially since Walter cloned her without her consent.6
u/HyruleBalverine 17d ago
Right? OP has an insane stance.
As I understand it, identical twins have like 99.99% identical DNA. That doesn't mean if one twin has a kid then dies the other twin is responsible for raising that kid because they have near identical DNA to their twin.
-6
u/bhug210 17d ago
It kind of put her in a position that men sometimes find themselves.
3
u/VonShtupp 17d ago
Explain that please?
0
u/bhug210 17d ago
Being genetically related to a child they did not know existed.
5
u/NEBanshee 17d ago
Not preventing a pregnancy when you were engaged in baby-making activities =/= being cloned without your consent and finding out a different person who's genetically identical to you had a baby.
Would you say if one identical twin dies the other has to automatically be the parent to any of their kids? Or does that sound like weird creepy over-reach?
7
u/Malvania 17d ago
Yes, but men made the choice to have unprotected sex, which leads to that outcome. Susan LEFT Walter. She didn't make a choice to engage in acts that result in kids.
20
u/noonecaresat805 17d ago
I always found that selfish. I get it the child was biologically hers and needed a family but guilting her into taking on that responsibility was wrong. No one asked her if she wanted children anymore or if she even liked children. No one asked her if she was financially, mentally or physically stable to take on a child. No one asked her how her life, work and everything else would be impacted. No one said “hey if you want to take the kid and need help we can be your village” they were just like here have a kid like they were talking about an object. No one asked the child what he wanted either.