NBC’sParks and Recreation, created byMichael Schur, follows a group of quirky coworkers working in a small town in Indiana. April Ludgate, played by the hilariousAubrey Plaza, is one of the fan-favorite characters. April is a headstrong woman who dislikes being told what to do and follows her eccentric tastes. She has an “opposites attract” romance with the sweet, dopey Andy Dwyer (Chris Pratt), who tends to love everyone, while April seems to, well, hate everyone. Despite some rocky moments, their romance is delightful. But, at the last minute, the finale gave them an ending that completely insulted April by playing into sexist tropes.
April Ludgate Didn’t Want To Have Kids on ‘Parks and Recreation’
TheParks and Recreationseries finaleshows the futures of each main character. In April and Andy’s future, Andy tells April how much he wants kids, but she’s resistant. When Andy confides inBen Wyatt (Adam Scott), Ben assures him that April will come around. The advice from Ben, the usual voice of reason, is baffling. There’s no acknowledgment that sometimes, when a woman says she doesn’t want children, shereally doesn’t want them. The show flashes forward, and suddenly, April is going into labor, seemingly having changed her mind off-screen. Not only didParks and Recreationdecide that Andy and April needed to have kids as their happy ending, butthe show went out of their way to show that April didn’t want kidsand had to be persuaded. Furthermore, their ending didn’t show other aspects of their lives and only focused on them having kids as a way to complete their storyline.
‘Parks and Recreation’s April and Andy Are One of the Best Sitcom Couples
Andy and Aprilare one of the most endearing sitcom couples, despite several rocky plot points along the way. Andy was introduced as the inconsiderate boyfriend of Ann Perkins (Rashida Jones) andwas originally written as a guest star, but became a main character due to Pratt’s charming and hilarious performance. Because of this, the show always walked a strange line with the character.
It made sense to lean into Pratt’s golden retriever likability. Just as Andy wasn’t intended to be a main cast member,the relationship between Andy and April was never plannedand started withan improvised moment from Plaza. Once the couple actually got together, they shined. Thelong road the pairing went down to become a strong couple makes their ending in the finale all the more disappointing. Andy pushing something on April despite her objections felt like a return to the pairing’s early stages, ignoring all of their development.
April’s ‘Parks and Recreation’ Character Arc Falls Into a Typical Sitcom Trap
April’s ending is not only insulting to a fan-favorite couple, it’s also cliché. FromGirlsto30 RocktoGilmore Girls: A Year in the Life, many comedies end with a major female character becoming a mother. These endings aren’t all bad in and of themselves. Some are wonderful and fit the character’s journey. But, the overall pattern suggests that the only way for a woman or a couple to be happy is if they have children.
April’s ending is especially reminiscent of another sitcom finale that would come a couple of years later: theending ofThe Big Bang Theory.In that finale, Penny (Kaley Cuoco) reveals she’s pregnant. Like April and Andy,Penny had never wanted kids, while Leonard Hofstadter (Johnny Galecki) had been pushing for them.The Big Bang Theoryhad issueswith misogyny throughout its run, so in some ways, the ending is unsurprising.
This ‘Parks and Rec’ Finale Had a Brutal Alternate Ending That We Never Saw
There’s two versions, and one of them is way sadder than the other.
Parks and Recreation, on the other hand, had a well-developed cast of women and brought up female empowerment often. It’s a strange cognitive dissonance that the same finale that hints Leslie Knope (Amy Poehler) might become the first female President also plays into such a tired, sexist trope.Parks and Recreationseemed to go out of its way to show April saying she didn’t want kids mere minutes before they cut to her going into labor. Why present a “happy ending” that’s explicitly not what a character wanted?
‘Parks and Recreation’ Surprisingly Leaned Into Traditional Relationship Tropes
April isn’t the only character onParks and Recreationwhowas suddenly pushed towards a more traditional, domestic lifein the end.Donna Meagle (Retta)was always wild and fiercely independent. But, in Season 6, she reconnects with her boyfriend Joe (Keegan-Michael Key). In Joe’s first episode, Donna says she’s terrified of the effect he has on her and how he pushes her towards a more boring and routine life. But, she puts down her walls and ends up marrying him in the final season.
Of course, in the real world, plenty of people eventually settle down and commit to a single partner after years of playing the field. But, combined with April’s ending, it contributes to a pattern of women saying they want one thing, then beingpersuaded by a male partner to give in to more traditional roles. The way theParks and Recreationendingpushes the women in its cast of characters into traditional marriages while simultaneously focusing on over-the-top career goals, results in a brand of feminism that goes beyond “women can have it all” and into something more like “womenmustwant to have it all.”
There’s nothing inherently wrong with a sitcom ending on a woman having children. On30 Rock, Liz Lemon (Tina Fey) meeting her newly adopted children is a touching moment because this was a hard-fought battle for Liz. It’s rewarding to see her finally have something she’s wanted for so long. But,April’s ending onParks and Recreationfeels lazy because it was so abrupt. Instead of April getting an ending based on her unique character traits, her happy ending is simply giving in to what her husband wants. After Andy and April’s long, rewarding journey to becoming a fan-favorite couple, it feels insulting to both of them that their ending is Andy strong-arming April into motherhood like he’s still the oblivious, insensitive man he was in Season 1.
Parks and Recreation
The absurd antics of an Indiana town’s public officials as they pursue sundry projects to make their city a better place.
