I found this surfing today, it's a take on the 60s Bewitched written by a modern feminist. You can google to figure out who, but don't let on.

What do you think? Has she nailed it? Or is it so wildly off as to prove reality's case against her? As in, she's nuts.

... it’s a show that purports to be I Love Lucy, but with magic, where the moral lesson every week is how women need to tamp down their passions and skills and instead choose to be docile housewives in order.

But that is not how the audience actually reads the show. Instead, the show reads like a darkly comic take on the horrors of patriarchy, where a brave and magnificent woman named Samantha is trapped by a malevolent man named Darrin intent on destroying everything that’s beautiful and magical in the world for his own petty reasons. Samantha may claim to love her captor, but we all understand she’s just suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, and we firmly agree with her mother, who is the best woman ever, that she needs to get rid of Darwood or Darfuck or whatever his name is and rejoin the land of the living.The fact that Endora can never remember Darrin’s name shows she is the most prescient character on the show. Darrin is not just a man, but the living embodiment of The Man, an abstract symbol of oppressive patriarchal power. That’s why it was no thing to just switch the actors halfway through the show’s run. It matters not what the specific face of Samantha’s captor looks like so much as the idea of a white man who ruins everything because he’s power mad.

Who wrote this and what did she get right, and what did she get wrong?