Look, I think it’s pretty clear that, at TheGloss, we are not always big fans of Sex and the City. I find Carrie Bradshaw an absolutely neurotic nutcase (why did she take Charlotte’s wedding ring!? Why wouldn’t she let Big have a TV!? Why was she always being horrible!?). Still, I think I’m absolutely the product of a generation molded by Sex and the City. And to be honest? Given that it’s the direction everyone involved seems to want to move in, I wouldn’t hate seeing it on TV again.

Because I feel that, at the time when it came out, Sex and the City did some really good things. The first episode of Sex and the City was, in part, about how most TV shows or movies showed women in a state of despair after having emotionless sex. And if that was true, I think Sex and the City showed that is not necessarily the case (did we know what happened to any of Samantha’s lovers? 90% of them just disappeared right?). The show taught me as a teenager that it was absolutely okay to have pre-marital sex and that I never feel had to feel bad about it afterwards. Which was a good thing to know!

And it taught me that not being married doesn’t mean that life isn’t fun. Oh, sure, the show was always a fantasy, nobody – NOBODY – eats in 4 star restaurants every night and has that kind of wardrobe on a writer’s salary. But it did help people realize that your life wasn’t going to be over if you were past 30 and unmarried.

I remember, oddly, around the time SATC was hitting the air seeing a book on “what to do if you’re unmarried and on the wrong side of 25,” and thinking “oh, geez, I only have 13 more years to get married.” In a post-SATC world thinking that even for a second seems crazy. It made it clear that the answer was “go out drinking and have awesome sex.” Whatever its flaws were – and there were a lot of them – the show made it clear that being unmarried and on the wrong side of 25 can be filled with laughter and adventures and love and is generally just fine.

However, oddly, I think the show did its job so well that it planted a notion with people that married life was going to be a downer. If being single meant running around in Manolos and getting drinks every single night with your friends, then being married means… fighting with him over the fact that he bought a really cool TV? (Jesus, I hate the SATC movies.)

Life doesn’t necessarily end, or stop being glamorous, or fun, or filled with bankrupting restaurants and shoes, just because you get married and have a kid. SATC showed women that the 30’s can be the best years of their lives, but what about the 40’s? The 50’s? Beyond?

If an updated version of the show could make the post-30 years seem like anything but a slow slide into death, then I think it would be doing a lot better than most of the shows on the air right now. Because, since Golden Girls, I can’t remember a whole lot that have made it seem like getting older was going to be okay. I think it would be terrific if Samantha, like Blanche Devereaux before her, could show women that you could still be desirable at 60 and that there is no age limit on having fun.

I’m not saying I think it would be a great TV show in the manner of say, Mad Men or Breaking Bad or the other ones that I feel I “learn” something from (the quotes are because I don’t know if “dealing meth is complicated” or “being a woman in the 1960’s was kind of fun but also, kind of not fun at all!” is something you really need to “learn”). But I do think women still need to be shown that there is no age where you’re going to stop having fun. And if a Sex and The City redux could show us that in any measure, well, then maybe it isn’t the worst idea since spending your entire rent on absurdly uncomfortable shoes.