Bewitched/I Dream of Jeanie
Denise noe
and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships. Society
@ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version of
"The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of Shakespeare's
play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I
mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant
program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
"Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the men in
their lives.
What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
dominant/female submissive? Would women be better wives by following the
examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
Thanks to anybody who answers.
****************************
Denise Noe
Koko the Signing Gorilla says: "Fine animal gorilla."
Sunny
>A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their favorite TV
>and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships. Society
>@ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version of
>"The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of Shakespeare's
>play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I
>mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant
>program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
>and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
>"Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the men in
>their lives.
> What do you think of these programs?
They went the way of Amos & Andy.
>Do these relationships seem male
>dominant/female submissive? Would women be better wives by following the
>examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
> Thanks to anybody who answers.
>
>
> ****************************
>Denise Noe
>Koko the Signing Gorilla says: "Fine animal gorilla."
I always like Burns & Allen, because they clearly loved and respected
each other very much, and seemed to be on equal footing. OKay, she was
a little dingy, but in her own way she was brilliant.
wd
news:20030114163850...@mb-ml.aol.com...
> A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their
favorite TV
> and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships.
Society
> @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor
version of
> "The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of
Shakespeare's
> play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife.
I
> mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male
dominant
> program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch
"Scarecrow
> and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
> "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the
men in
> their lives.
> What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
> dominant/female submissive?
I don't see how either show could be considered "submissive woman/male
dominant" because each of these women characters had magical powers and
therefore had the clear advantage.
Relationship wise, maybe the man was the "king of his castle" and the rolls
were depicted as traditional husband works and is the boss of the family,
while the woman stays home and takes care of the house.
> Would women be better wives by following the> examples of the heroines in
these old TV series?
Maybe not better wives. But surely relationships would last longer and be
healthier.Especially for the kids.
> Thanks to anybody who answers.
My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
*Honeymooners*
"Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
Sunny
wrote:
>My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
>*Honeymooners*
>"Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
"One of these days, Alice -- to the moon! To the MOON, Alice!"
<shaking fist in Alice's face>
John Jones
their favorite TV
> and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive
relationships. Society
> @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth
Taylor version of
> "The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of
Shakespeare's
> play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach
and his wife. I
> mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive
woman/male dominant
> program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to
watch "Scarecrow
> and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to
watch
> "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to
relate to the men in
> their lives.
> What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships
seem male
> dominant/female submissive? Would women be better wives by
following the
> examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
<rolls eyes> Do I think women should refer to their men as
"master"? Don't be ridiculous.
I don't now about Scarecrow and Mrs King (never watched it).
If I had the option of a woman who could change the physical laws
of the universe at the blink of an eye (or nose-wiggle), provide
anything imaginable, and at the same time always be sweet,
beautiful, and pleasant 100% of the time, I know which line I'm
gonna be waiting in.
I thought Darren Stevens and Tony Nelson were idiots, even back
in the 1960's.
Bob
The other half of that picture was that Alice always dominated the house
and everyone knew that Ralph's threats were empty frustration at being
the bottom end at home as well as at work.
Women tended to enjoy the show since it showed dominant women and
subservient (though blustering) men. I never enjoyed it much.
Bob
wd
news:hp392v482tq3hkvhj...@4ax.com...
I liked Alice because she always was portrayed with a silent and gentle
strength no matter what kinda crap Ralph got him self into.. LOL
>
Andre Lieven
> "Denise noe" <deni...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20030114163850...@mb-ml.aol.com...
>
>> A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their
>> favorite TV and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive
>> relationships. Society @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard
>> Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version of "The Taming of the Shrew." This was
>> a very well done movie of Shakespeare's play. Someone else mentioned
>> a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I mentioned that Helen
>> Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant program
>> "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
>> and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
>> "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the
>> men in their lives.
>> What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
>> dominant/female submissive?
>
> I don't see how either show could be considered "submissive woman/male
> dominant" because each of these women characters had magical powers and
> therefore had the clear advantage.
Indeed. As it happened, here in Canada, on Prime ( TV channel up here
on cable for older reruns ), they ran in a one hour bloc, the pilots for
both Beweitched and I Dream Of Jeannie.
In the Bewitched pilot, Darren and Sam meet, court, and marry, and *only
on the wedding night*, did Sam tell Darren about her... heritage and
family.
That strikes me as typical modern woman firsterism of, " I want what *I*
want, and screw him until I *get it*. "
In the Jeannie pilot, after Major Nelson returned to the US, with
Jeannie in her bottle, once she was at his home, and knew that Nelson
*had a fiancee*, Jeannie went out of her way to display herself in
the guise of " the other woman " in said fiancee's presence. IOW,
" I want what *I* want, and screw him until I *get it*... "
My... how male dominant... NOT !
> Relationship wise, maybe the man was the "king of his castle" and the rolls
> were depicted as traditional husband works and is the boss of the family,
> while the woman stays home and takes care of the house.
And, *rules* said house...
>> Would women be better wives by following the examples of the heroines in
>> these old TV series?
Perhaps if they followed the examples of such as.... I can't think of
one where the guy's needs, wants and interests came first... Can *you* ?
> Maybe not better wives. But surely relationships would last longer and be
> healthier.Especially for the kids.
>
>> Thanks to anybody who answers.
>
> My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
> *Honeymooners*
> "Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
Did Alice ever say that to *him* ?
" Everything old is new again ".
Andre
--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.
Andre Lieven
Kinda makes you wonder why no Apollo Command/Service Module-Lunar
Module combo was never named " Ralph " and " Alice "... <g>
Its not like all their names were high falutin'... Apollo 9:
" Gumdrop " & " Spider ", and Apollo 10: " Charlie Brown " &
" Snoopy "... I'm not kidding.
John Jones
"Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:b02961$q5k$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
[...]
> Kinda makes you wonder why no Apollo Command/Service
Module-Lunar
> Module combo was never named " Ralph " and " Alice "... <g>
>
> Its not like all their names were high falutin'... Apollo 9:
> " Gumdrop " & " Spider ", and Apollo 10: " Charlie Brown " &
> " Snoopy "... I'm not kidding.
We know you're not kidding, but that was US 'pop culture' ca.
1968-69. What with Vietnam, Tet, all the political
assassinations, riots, etc of the times, the names Charlie Brown
and Snoopy provided some much-needed levity. I forget the exact
qoute, but some woman wrote to NASA after the Apollo 8 Mission ,
and said "Thank you for saving 1968." Maybe you just had to be
there...
wd
LOL.. absolutly!
>
> > Relationship wise, maybe the man was the "king of his castle" and the
rolls
> > were depicted as traditional husband works and is the boss of the
family,
> > while the woman stays home and takes care of the house.
>
> And, *rules* said house...
>
> >> Would women be better wives by following the examples of the heroines
in
> >> these old TV series?
>
> Perhaps if they followed the examples of such as.... I can't think of
> one where the guy's needs, wants and interests came first... Can *you* ?
Nothing off hand. Its always been women first, men last-- even on TV and in
the movies.
>
> > Maybe not better wives. But surely relationships would last longer and
be
> > healthier.Especially for the kids.
> >
> >> Thanks to anybody who answers.
> >
> > My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
> > *Honeymooners*
> > "Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
>
> Did Alice ever say that to *him* ?
There was ONE episode that i can remember when i was very young where *she*
said similar. But i do not recall the title.(there may have been others, but
i doubt it)
If remember right, she says "Honey.. You're the Greatest" ...She may have
said "Baby.. You're the Greatest" or something similar (but i'm not 100%
sure) and the audiance claped like crazy.
>
> " Everything old is new again ".
Indeed. <s> And everything comes back in style.
wd
"wd" <server57..5@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v29c7a3...@corp.supernews.com...
I could not find a specific page that has some writting on Alice and her
dialog referencing where she says "Honey.. You're the Greatest" BUT
I did fine some "HoneyMoon Bloopers" that some folks may find funny as well
as intresting :-)
http://www.maxpages.com/honeybloopers
>
Andre Lieven
Nonetheless, notice that theres precious little difference between
Ralph Kramdenm in the 50s, and, say, Tim Taylor in the 90s, in that,
in both shows, its the man who gets into " what kinda crap ", and
its never the woman....
Plus ca change....
Andre Lieven
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b02904$psd$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
>> > "Denise noe" <deni...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> > news:20030114163850...@mb-ml.aol.com...
>> >
>> >> A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their
>> >> favorite TV and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive
>> >> relationships. Society @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard
>> >> Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version of "The Taming of the Shrew." This was
>> >> a very well done movie of Shakespeare's play. Someone else mentioned
>> >> a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I mentioned that Helen
>> >> Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant program
>> >> "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
>> >> and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
>> >> "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to
>> >> the men in their lives.
>> >> What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
>> >> dominant/female submissive?
>> >
>> > I don't see how either show could be considered "submissive woman/male
>> > dominant" because each of these women characters had magical powers and
>> > therefore had the clear advantage.
>>
>> Indeed. As it happened, here in Canada, on Prime ( TV channel up here
>> on cable for older reruns ), they ran in a one hour bloc, the pilots for
>>
>> In the Bewitched pilot, Darren and Sam meet, court, and marry, and *only
>> on the wedding night*, did Sam tell Darren about her... heritage and
>> family.
>>
>> That strikes me as typical modern woman firsterism of, " I want what *I*
>> want, and screw him until I *get it*. "
>>
>> In the Jeannie pilot, after Major Nelson returned to the US, with
>> Jeannie in her bottle, once she was at his home, and knew that Nelson
>> *had a fiancee*, Jeannie went out of her way to display herself in
>> the guise of " the other woman " in said fiancee's presence. IOW,
>> " I want what *I* want, and screw him until I *get it*... "
>>
>> My... how male dominant... NOT !
>
> LOL.. absolutly!
>> > Relationship wise, maybe the man was the "king of his castle" and the
>> > roles were depicted as traditional husband works and is the boss of the
>> > family, while the woman stays home and takes care of the house.
>>
>> And, *rules* said house...
>>
>> >> Would women be better wives by following the examples of the heroines
>> >> in these old TV series?
>>
>> Perhaps if they followed the examples of such as.... I can't think of
>> one where the guy's needs, wants and interests came first... Can *you* ?
>
> Nothing off hand. Its always been women first, men last-- even on TV and in
> the movies.
Thats about it. You tend to find man positive stories most often in
stories where women just aren't involved. Such as, one my of more
recent favs, the HBO miniseries on the 60s space program, From The
Earth To The Moon. After reviewing the DVD set, I don't recall any
incidental or deliberate misandry. But, most of the story doesn't
include woman characters and situations in the leads.
>> > Maybe not better wives. But surely relationships would last longer and
>> > be healthier.Especially for the kids.
>> >
>> >> Thanks to anybody who answers.
>> >
>> > My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
>> > *Honeymooners*
>> > "Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
>>
>> Did Alice ever say that to *him* ?
>
> There was ONE episode that i can remember when i was very young where *she*
> said similar. But i do not recall the title.(there may have been others, but
> i doubt it)
Indeed.
> If remember right, she says "Honey.. You're the Greatest" ...She may have
> said "Baby.. You're the Greatest" or something similar (but i'm not 100%
> sure) and the audiance claped like crazy.
One bone for the guys, eh ?
>> " Everything old is new again ".
>
> Indeed. <s> And everything comes back in style.
Yep. Look at capri pants. Remember Laura Petrie wearing them ? <bg>
Andre Lieven
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b02961$q5k$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> [...]
>> Kinda makes you wonder why no Apollo Command/Service
>> Module-Lunar
>> Module combo was never named " Ralph " and " Alice "... <g>
>>
>> Its not like all their names were high falutin'... Apollo 9:
>> " Gumdrop " & " Spider ", and Apollo 10: " Charlie Brown " &
>> " Snoopy "... I'm not kidding.
>
> We know you're not kidding, but that was US 'pop culture' ca.
> 1968-69.
Indeed.
> What with Vietnam, Tet, all the political
> assassinations, riots, etc of the times, the names Charlie Brown
> and Snoopy provided some much-needed levity.
True. Also, as Apollo's 9 & 10 were not the first landing flights,
there wasn't a PR " need " for their craft to have sombre names.
> I forget the exact quote, but some woman wrote to NASA after the
> Apollo 8 Mission, and said "Thank you for saving 1968."
Correct. That telegram, IIRC ( And, who remembers telegrams ? ),
was referenced in the best of the Apollo histories, Andrew Chaikin's
A Man On The Moon, which was also the key book behind HBO's
wonderful From The Earth To The Moon ( Get it, really ! ), and, in
the Apollo 8 episode, the CapCom reads that telegram to the crew
of Apollo 8 ( Quick quiz: Name the crew *and* their positions-
Scroll down for the answer ), after Apollo 8 left lunar orbit for
the coast back to Earth.
> Maybe you just had to be there...
Yep. Luckily, I was. I watched the coverage of that XMas flight,
and I still have clipping files for all the Apollo flights from
that one.
( Answers: Frank Borman, Commander, James Lovell, Command Module
Pilot, William Anders, Lunar Module Pilot- even though Apollo 8
had no LM )
Ah, sweet history...
Michael Snyder
Sunny wrote in message <57192vgrhcj7b079m...@4ax.com>...
>On 14 Jan 2003 21:38:50 GMT, deni...@aol.com (Denise noe) wrote:
>
>>A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their favorite TV
>>and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships. Society
>>@ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version of
>>"The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of Shakespeare's
>>play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I
>>mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant
>>program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
>>and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
>>"Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the men in
>>their lives.
>> What do you think of these programs?
>
>They went the way of Amos & Andy.
>
>>Do these relationships seem male
>>dominant/female submissive?
They seem kinda late-50s / early-60s, n'est ce pas?
Maybe that's why they don't air any more...
Society
news:zP%U9.159438$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> Denise noe wrote...
> >
> > A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters
> > about their favorite TV and movie depictions of male
> > that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male
> > dominant program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages
> > her followers to watch "Scarecrow and Mrs. King." I've
> > since learned that she also tells them to watch "Bewitched"
> > and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the
> > men in their lives. What do you think of these programs?
> > Do these relationships seem male dominant/female
> > submissive? Would women be better wives by following
> > the examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
>
> <rolls eyes> Do I think women should refer to their men as
> "master"? Don't be ridiculous.
"Ridiculous"? Sounds like a good first step toward healing
the breach between the sexes to me... hmmm. 8)
Seriously, it's not being called "master" that's important;
it's being treated as if one were metaphysically (as John
MacLaughlin would say) her master that is important.
When Jeannie appeared, she was always _enthusiastic_
and eager to please her man. Although Jeannie had no
material needs for which she needed a man (and so, oddly
enough, could serve as a prototype for the modern man-
hungry careerist woman), she still needed his affections.
So much so that all her powers were nothing to her in
comparison to being able to please her man.
The character of Samantha Stevens in _Bewitched_ was
similarly situated WRT her man, with the added wrinkle
of always standing up for her man to her mother. (IMO,
a _lot_ of women could learn from _that_ example!)
> I don't know about Scarecrow and Mrs King (never watched it).
Although Mrs. King had no special powers but rather was
portrayed by Kate Jackson (whom I first noticed in the TV
show _Emergency_ and was later the IMO most attractive
of Charlie's Angels -- despite Jaclyn Smith striking me as
physically more beautiful) as _ordinary_ a suburban woman
as could be ('cept for being widowed), she was devoted to
the man to whom she felt an attraction. By that standard,
the character of Mrs. King was similar to her more magical
counterparts of 1960s television.
> If I had the option of a woman who could change the
> physical laws of the universe at the blink of an eye
> (or nose-wiggle), provide anything imaginable, and at
> the same time always be sweet, beautiful, and pleasant
> 100% of the time, I know which line I'm gonna be waiting in.
Hence, the attraction of the Islamic paradise to millions
is explained.
> I thought Darren Stevens and Tony Nelson were idiots,
> even back in the 1960's.
Yeah. And so was Benedick and Hero's beau whatshisname
in Shakespere's _Much Ado About Nothing_. The more things
change, the more they stay the same. ;-)
Most men know women are their moral superiors.
Our myths, upbringing, and pop-feminists instill this
widely held though seldom acknowledged belief.
from "Morality" by Rod van Mechelen
http://www.backlash.com/book/sexism.html
Anyway, think about it, if their men Darren Stevens and Tony
Nelson were 'better' than the women in some way, wouldn't
the romantic element in their relationship be obscured because
then the women wouldn't necessarily be in love with their men
for being ineffably masculine but might be attracted to that more mundane
superior characteristic in which their men were better,
faster, smarter, stronger, etc.?
Society
news:lbu92vs1p37oop2ek...@4ax.com...
>
> Andre Lieven wrote:
> >
> > wd writes:
> >
> > [N] notice that theres precious little difference between
> > Ralph Kramdenm in the 50s, and, say, Tim Taylor in the
> > "what kinda crap ", and it's never the woman....
>
> In I Love Lucy it was always Lucy that got into "what kinda crap"
> and it was the long suffering Ricky Ricardo who wound up either
> putting up with her nonsense or bailing her ass out. I can't think
> of one episode where Lucy actually did anything to help Ricky
> at home or in his career.
Well, there's that episode in which she was to jump into the
hotel pool so Ricky could 'rescue' her in front of Hollywood
columnist Hedda Hooper (well, that's how Ricky pronounced
it!) and get mentioned in the newspapers to help him in his
big break in a Hollywood movie. Lucy was inept of course
(so was Ricky). It was 'sabotaged' because Lucy's mother
was a bigger ditz than her daughter...
And then there was the episode in which Lucy wangled her
way into a fashion show. She had two motives for that one,
her desire to meet big stars and to help Ricky by getting the
Ricardo name into the papers, along with a mention of Ricky's
latest doings to land some publicity for him.
I'm sure there were others but I only watched _I Love Lucy_ for
a week or so at the home of a relative recently. A lot of the
show's plots IIRC revolve around: Lucy is trying to make some
extra money on the side (without Ricky knowing), Lucy is trying
to meet big stars (without Ricky knowing), Lucy is trying to
get on Ricky's show, and Lucy is trying to help Ricky get
some publicity (often without Ricky knowing).
Of course, most of Lucy's "help" backfired horribly but her
intentions were good (if sometimes a little self-serving, too)
and the show _is_ a comedy, one heavy on farce and pratfalls.
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 04:59:16 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> wrote:
>
>>"wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
>>> "Sunny" <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in message
>>> news:hp392v482tq3hkvhj...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:16:36 -0800, "wd" <server57..5@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
>>>> >*Honeymooners*
>>>> >"Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
>>>>
>>>> "One of these days, Alice -- to the moon! To the MOON, Alice!"
>>>> <shaking fist in Alice's face>
>>>
>>> I liked Alice because she always was portrayed with a silent and gentle
>>> strength no matter what kinda crap Ralph got him self into.. LOL
>>
>>Nonetheless, notice that theres precious little difference between
>>in both shows, its the man who gets into " what kinda crap ", and
>>its never the woman....
>
> it was the long suffering Ricky Ricardo who wound up either putting up
> with her nonsense or bailing her ass out. I can't think of one
> episode where Lucy actually did anything to help Ricky at home or in
> his career.
No, there was a woman character who was truely useless... And, whose
life basically was covered by Ricky's generosity.
The difference between the kinds of troubles that Ralph Kramden got
into, and Lucy Ricardo got into, was that Ralph's were portrayed as
pathetic and un-manly, while Lucy's were portrayed as " cute ",
harmless ( Since her troubles didn't place the family income at
risk... ), and feminine, in an excusing and enabling manner.
>>Plus ca change....
Indeed.
Andre Lieven
> "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> news:zP%U9.159438$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>>
>> Denise noe wrote...
>> >
>> > A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters
>> > about their favorite TV and movie depictions of male
>> > dominant/female submissive relationships. [...] I mentioned
>> > that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male
>> > dominant program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages
>> > her followers to watch "Scarecrow and Mrs. King." I've
>> > since learned that she also tells them to watch "Bewitched"
>> > and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the
>> > men in their lives. What do you think of these programs?
>> > Do these relationships seem male dominant/female
>> > submissive? Would women be better wives by following
>> > the examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
>>
>> <rolls eyes> Do I think women should refer to their men as
>> "master"? Don't be ridiculous.
>
> "Ridiculous"? Sounds like a good first step toward healing
> the breach between the sexes to me... hmmm. 8)
>
> Seriously, it's not being called "master" that's important;
> it's being treated as if one were metaphysically (as John
> MacLaughlin would say) her master that is important.
Not entirely...
> When Jeannie appeared, she was always _enthusiastic_
> and eager to please her man. Although Jeannie had no
> material needs for which she needed a man (and so, oddly
> enough, could serve as a prototype for the modern man-
> hungry careerist woman), she still needed his affections.
> So much so that all her powers were nothing to her in
> comparison to being able to please her man.
Did you see my post, describing the show's pilot episode ?
In it, Jeannie went out of her way to insinuate herself into
Nelson's life, even to the extent of donning ( as her only
attire ) one of his shirts, *while his fiancee was in his
house*...
Tell me thats not passive-agressive control behavior...
> The character of Samantha Stevens in _Bewitched_ was
> similarly situated WRT her man, with the added wrinkle
> of always standing up for her man to her mother. (IMO,
> a _lot_ of women could learn from _that_ example!)
Indeed, but, as I described about that show's pilot, Sam
decieved Darren about her heritage, until the wedding night.
Hardly the choice of a woman who is going to support her
man, since a man can't support *what the witch hides from
him*...
>> I don't know about Scarecrow and Mrs King (never watched it).
>
> Although Mrs. King had no special powers but rather was
> portrayed by Kate Jackson (whom I first noticed in the TV
> show _Emergency_ and was later the IMO most attractive
> of Charlie's Angels -- despite Jaclyn Smith striking me as
> physically more beautiful) as _ordinary_ a suburban woman
> as could be ('cept for being widowed), she was devoted to
> the man to whom she felt an attraction. By that standard,
> the character of Mrs. King was similar to her more magical
> counterparts of 1960s television.
OK. The main thing I know about that show is that Bruce
Boxlietner, whom I know from his Captain Sheridan character
on Bbaylon 5, was in it.
>> If I had the option of a woman who could change the
>> physical laws of the universe at the blink of an eye
>> (or nose-wiggle), provide anything imaginable, and at
>> the same time always be sweet, beautiful, and pleasant
>> 100% of the time, I know which line I'm gonna be waiting in.
>
> Hence, the attraction of the Islamic paradise to millions
> is explained.
Indeed, as well as westen " heaven "...
>> I thought Darren Stevens and Tony Nelson were idiots,
>> even back in the 1960's.
>
> Yeah. And so was Benedick and Hero's beau whatshisname
> in Shakespere's _Much Ado About Nothing_. The more things
> change, the more they stay the same. ;-)
>
> Most men know women are their moral superiors.
> Our myths, upbringing, and pop-feminists instill this
> widely held though seldom acknowledged belief.
>
> from "Morality" by Rod van Mechelen
> http://www.backlash.com/book/sexism.html
Indeed.
> Anyway, think about it, if their men Darren Stevens and Tony
> Nelson were 'better' than the women in some way, wouldn't
> the romantic element in their relationship be obscured because
> then the women wouldn't necessarily be in love with their men
> for being ineffably masculine but might be attracted to that more
> mundane superior characteristic in which their men were better,
> faster, smarter, stronger, etc.?
You mean, Lois Lane and Superman ? <g>
wd
And a small bone at that
>
> >> " Everything old is new again ".
> >
> > Indeed. <s> And everything comes back in style.
>
> Yep. Look at capri pants. Remember Laura Petrie wearing them ? <bg>
yep yep.
Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that showed a single
father and how they could care for children equally as well as women, was
"The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
John Jones
I watch it every chance I get. I wanted to be an astronaut, like
many, many kids my age. My granddad worked on the Apollo 8
project.
> and, in
> the Apollo 8 episode, the CapCom reads that telegram to the
crew
> of Apollo 8 ( Quick quiz: Name the crew *and* their positions-
> Scroll down for the answer ), after Apollo 8 left lunar orbit
for
> the coast back to Earth.
Borman and Lovell are the only 2 I can remember, and Frank Borman
was the commander. Do I get partial credit?
[...]
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <20030114163850...@mb-ml.aol.com>, deni...@aol.com
(Denise noe) wrote:
> A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their favorite
TV
> and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships.
Society
> @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version
of
> "The Taming of the Shrew."
I preferred the Moonlighting version of that story.
> This was a very well done movie of Shakespeare's
> play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife. I
> mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant
> program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch "Scarecrow
> and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
> "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the men
in
> their lives.
> What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
> dominant/female submissive?
No, not really. The overt context is yes, they are male dominant, but the
subtext was that the men, at best, only seemed in control of the situation.
The women looked to the men for the emotional strength, but the women had
the power. Both Genie and Samantha end up being the ones that could both
cause and solve the problems. The men just reacted to the situations.
> Would women be better wives by following the
> examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
They'd be 1960-style wives and have cool hairdo's and fashions. The reality
of course, of what women were like in the 60's was totally different than
the tube portrayed them. Would they be happier? I dunno, but it would be
quite surreal.
Deb.
Andre Lieven
I'll add the point that, if those shows were really about men being
*more powerful* then women, why, the MEN would have had the super
powers...
Wheras now, we get such drivel as the new WB Batman abomination " Birds
Of Prey ", with a crippled Batgirl ( Whihc is in continuity with the
comics, and for the same reason- The Joker shot her ), leading the
*daughter* of Bruce Wayne ( Batman ) and Selina Kyle ( Catwoman ),
Helena Kyle, with a key point of Helena's ( aka The Huntress- although
her superheroine character doesn't wear a mask- I guess that the men
cops in New Gotham are *dumb* enough not to figure out who The Huntress
*is*... ) character is that she never knew her father, NOT because he
was dead/etc., but because he wasn't willing to be a father with her.
IOW, Bruce Wayne as " deadbeat dad ". No matter that hes the world's
greatest detective, he didn't *know* that Selina got preggers, and had
the child, or where *his child* ended up... Uh huh.
>> >> " Everything old is new again ".
>> >
>> > Indeed. <s> And everything comes back in style.
>>
>> Yep. Look at capri pants. Remember Laura Petrie wearing them ? <bg>
>
> yep yep.
>
> Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that showed a single
> father and how they could care for children equally as well as women, was
> "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
John Jones
> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
[...]
> >
> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that
showed a single
> > father and how they could care for children equally as well
as women, was
> > "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
>
> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and
Sebastian
> Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
"Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have slipped
my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
Andre Lieven
Isn't it just *grand* ? For the topicality of here, its a
wonderful chronicle of what a large collection of men could
do, when given the challenge and the resources to make it
happen.
> I wanted to be an astronaut, like many, many kids my age.
I hear that. At the time, being a kid, I used a tent that we
had, set up in the yard, to " simulate " Apollo missions. By
placing three chairs on their backs inside of the tent, we could
get a good " feel " of a flight. No zero G, of course...
> My granddad worked on the Apollo 8 project.
Kewl. What area did he work in ?
>> and, in the Apollo 8 episode, the CapCom reads that telegram to
>> the crew of Apollo 8 ( Quick quiz: Name the crew *and* their
>> positions- Scroll down for the answer ), after Apollo 8 left
>> lunar orbit for the coast back to Earth.
>
> Borman and Lovell are the only 2 I can remember, and Frank Borman
> was the commander. Do I get partial credit?
" Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad... " <g>
Given that Apollo 8 flew shortly after the film 2001 was released,
its worth noting that Arthur Clarke once commented that he'll never
quite forgive Bill Anders for not giving into his temptation to
report a large black *monolith* on the farside of the Moon...
> [...]
wd
"Deborah Terreson" <foodNOTS...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:83fV9.71971$%n.25168@sccrnsc02...
heh.. thats a good choice of words. Because many relationships today are
quite surreal enough with out adding a 60's version of relationships in the
mix. And, can you even imagine a 'feminist style' TV show with Jeannie {and
no master} running around zapping men into tiny dogs in every episode?
And,Just because she can? Or a feminist Smantha twitching her nose when a
man makes a sexist remark and he finds himself on Pluto? LOL Surreal to say
the least! Maybe i'll write a pilot and make a million bucks selling it to
feminist hollywood.
There has never been a time in the recorded history of the world where men
have been demonized and removed from the family structure as they have been
today. Adding a woman with special powers would be quite surreal indeed.
ha!
~wd
wd
"John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
news:9lfV9.159513$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
>
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> > "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> [...]
> > >
> > > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that
> showed a single
> > > father and how they could care for children equally as well
> as women, was
> > > "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
> >
> > You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and
> Sebastian
> > Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
Yep. I had forgotton this one.
>
> Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
> "Bachelor Father".
And i over looked these also.
> I'm sure there were others that have slipped
> my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
Thats true. These types of shows were not really welcomed by many men of
*that* time period. OTOH, today, these type of shows probably would be more
generally accepted by men --**and**--they are really needed today to place
men in a more positive light as fathers and roll models,but we do not see
feminist hollywood bringing shows like this on the air.
~wd
John Jones
> "John Jones" (enuf...@nothanks.invalid) writes:
> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> > news:b02qk2$o9a$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >> "John Jones" (enuf...@nothanks.invalid) writes:
> >> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in
message
> >> > news:b02961$q5k$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >> > [...]
> >> >> Kinda makes you wonder why no Apollo Command/Service
> >> >> Module-Lunar
> >> >> Module combo was never named " Ralph " and " Alice "...
<g>
> >> >>
> >> > I forget the exact quote, but some woman wrote to NASA
after
> >> > the Apollo 8 Mission, and said "Thank you for saving
1968."
> >>
> >> Correct. That telegram, IIRC ( And, who remembers telegrams
? ),
> >> was referenced in the best of the Apollo histories, Andrew
> >> Chaikin's
> >> A Man On The Moon, which was also the key book behind HBO's
> >> wonderful From The Earth To The Moon ( Get it, really ! ),
> >
> > I watch it every chance I get.
>
> Isn't it just *grand* ? For the topicality of here, its a
> wonderful chronicle of what a large collection of men could
> do, when given the challenge and the resources to make it
> happen.
>
> > I wanted to be an astronaut, like many, many kids my age.
>
> I hear that. At the time, being a kid, I used a tent that we
> had, set up in the yard, to " simulate " Apollo missions. By
> placing three chairs on their backs inside of the tent, we
could
> get a good " feel " of a flight. No zero G, of course...
>
> > My granddad worked on the Apollo 8 project.
>
> Kewl. What area did he work in ?
I can't recall exactly what he did WRT to the Apollo 8. I'm
pretty sure it was work involving the Saturn 5 rocket. He was an
electrical engineer contracting with NASA. He worked in
Huntsville, Ala. He showed me his Apollo 8 Medallion containing
metal that Frank Borman carried with him to lunar orbit. It's the
second one from the top on this page:
http://www.lotn.org/~calkinsc/coins/1034.html (I think I told
you that part before).
[...]
Andre Lieven
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> [...]
>> >
>> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that
>> > showed a single father and how they could care for children
>> > equally as well as women, was "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
>>
>> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and
>> Sebastian Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>
> Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
> "Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have slipped
> my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
Ah yes, I now recall " My Three Sons ". They had the paternal
grandpa living with them as well, yes ?
The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
I'll have to re-skim my copy of Ellison's books on TV of the times.
Bob
Yep, the man is a buffoon who is always in trouble. The woman is wise,
strong, and dominant. TV has played to and promoted misandry since its
inception.
Bob
Bob
>>
>>>"Sunny" <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in message
>>>news:hp392v482tq3hkvhj...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:16:36 -0800, "wd" <server57..5@hotmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>My favorite old school married couple is Ralph and Alice in the
>>>>>*Honeymooners*
>>>>>"Baby!... You're the Greatest!"
>>>>
>>>>"One of these days, Alice -- to the moon! To the MOON, Alice!"
>>>><shaking fist in Alice's face>
>>>
>>>I liked Alice because she always was portrayed with a silent and gentle
>>>strength no matter what kinda crap Ralph got him self into.. LOL
>>
>>Nonetheless, notice that theres precious little difference between
>>Ralph Kramdenm in the 50s, and, say, Tim Taylor in the 90s, in that,
>>in both shows, its the man who gets into " what kinda crap ", and
>>its never the woman....
>
>
> it was the long suffering Ricky Ricardo who wound up either putting up
> with her nonsense or bailing her ass out. I can't think of one
> episode where Lucy actually did anything to help Ricky at home or in
> his career.
TV teaches us that men support women, no matter how stupid they are and
no matter how much her stupidity hurts his career, not the reverse.
Bob
Bob
Lucy is one of the worst TV shows ever produced. It ought to have been
canceled after the first episode. But misandrists, especially women,
love it.
Bob
Andre Lieven
You've never watched " Buffy, The Vampire Slayer " series then ?
I'm *serious*... Add in " Birds Of Prey ", " Relic Hunter ", and so on...
> And,Just because she can? Or a feminist Smantha twitching her nose when a
> man makes a sexist remark and he finds himself on Pluto?
" Charmed "....
> LOL Surreal to say
> the least! Maybe i'll write a pilot and make a million bucks selling it to
> feminist hollywood.
You're too late... Those shows are already on the wir...
> There has never been a time in the recorded history of the world where men
> have been demonized and removed from the family structure as they have been
> today. Adding a woman with special powers would be quite surreal indeed.
Pick up a copy of TV Guide, dude... <g>
> ha!
Andre Lieven
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:02:42 -0800, "Society"
> <Soc...@feminism.is.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Jill" <perspic...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:lbu92vs1p37oop2ek...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> Andre Lieven wrote:
>>> >
>>> > wd writes:
>>> >
>>> > [N] notice that theres precious little difference between
>>> > Ralph Kramdenm in the 50s, and, say, Tim Taylor in the
>>> > 90s, in that, in both shows, it's the man who gets into
>>> > "what kinda crap ", and it's never the woman....
>>>
>>> In I Love Lucy it was always Lucy that got into "what kinda crap"
>>> and it was the long suffering Ricky Ricardo who wound up either
>>> putting up with her nonsense or bailing her ass out. I can't think
>>> of one episode where Lucy actually did anything to help Ricky
>>> at home or in his career.
>>
>>Well, there's that episode in which she was to jump into the
>>hotel pool so Ricky could 'rescue' her in front of Hollywood
>>columnist Hedda Hooper (well, that's how Ricky pronounced
>>it!) and get mentioned in the newspapers to help him in his
>>big break in a Hollywood movie. Lucy was inept of course
>>(so was Ricky). It was 'sabotaged' because Lucy's mother
>>was a bigger ditz than her daughter...
>
> "did help" Ricky. Big difference.
>
> And your examples above and below only confirm that Lucy was no help
> at all to Ricky and often her "good intentions" were just a road paved
> to hell for him that sometimes (God knows how) turned out ok despite
> Lucy's "help."
>
> That was basically the whole premise of the show...Ricky had a madball
> wife and he was the fall guy when her idiotic plans, schemes, ideas,
> etc., fell through. And they always did. "Luuuceeee!!! You gotta
> lotta of 'splaining to do!"
From a comedy of the times point of view, this shows very well that
Lucille Ball was the lead comic and that Ricky was the straight man,
who is always a performer of lesser billing and promotion.
Clue: It was " The *Lucy* Show ", not " The Ricky Show "...
> BTW, good intentions don't really count for much in the real world.
> Results do.
>>
>>And then there was the episode in which Lucy wangled her
>>way into a fashion show. She had two motives for that one,
>>her desire to meet big stars and to help Ricky by getting the
>>Ricardo name into the papers, along with a mention of Ricky's
>>latest doings to land some publicity for him.
>>
>>I'm sure there were others but I only watched _I Love Lucy_ for
>>a week or so at the home of a relative recently. A lot of the
>>show's plots IIRC revolve around: Lucy is trying to make some
>>extra money on the side (without Ricky knowing), Lucy is trying
>>to meet big stars (without Ricky knowing), Lucy is trying to
>>get on Ricky's show, and Lucy is trying to help Ricky get
>>some publicity (often without Ricky knowing).
>>
>>Of course, most of Lucy's "help" backfired horribly but her
>>intentions were good (if sometimes a little self-serving, too)
>>and the show _is_ a comedy, one heavy on farce and pratfalls.
Andre
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 14:07:08 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> agree with you as to what the premise the show relied on...that she
> was truely useless to her husband and was always being covered by
> Ricky's generosity, love, and patience (which often seemed on the
> verge of wearing out).
I'll cop to a minority view on this, but what you just said is
*precisely* the reasons why I hated Lucy's shows. I do grant that she
was an able comedienne, though not in series TV, and an astute
buisinesswoman, with DesiLu studios ( Where the pilot of Star Trek
was made, BTW ), but otherwise.. Nah.
>>The difference between the kinds of troubles that Ralph Kramden got
>>into, and Lucy Ricardo got into, was that Ralph's were portrayed as
>>pathetic and un-manly, while Lucy's were portrayed as " cute ",
>>harmless ( Since her troubles didn't place the family income at
>>risk... ), and feminine, in an excusing and enabling manner.
>
> Well sometimes her capers did put the family's income at risk...like
> the time she was having Ricky's new club manager (Gale Gordon) over
> for dinner. Lucy being her useless character self, couldn't cook so
> she worked up some scheme for Ethel to cook the food and sneak it in.
> I don't recall what went wrong but it wound up with Ethel pitching
> dinner rolls to Lucy and Lucy catching them with a catchers mitt and
> throwing them to her guests.
OK.... Basically bad vaudeville schticks.
> One of the basic idea's of I Love Lucy was probably feminism. Lucy
> was totally unprepared and ill suited to be a wife, mother, and
> homemaker and longed to be a career gal in show business. That in a
> way makes the show more on topic today than I'd ever really realized.
Indeed. Lucy Ricardo was a type of women who could *not* succeed
without sexist hiring and performance preferences. Very NOW girl...
> Especially when other shows like Leave It To Beaver, The Donna Reed
> Show, Ozzie and Harriet, etc., were showing very different types of
> wives and mothers.
Yep. Women who supported their men, by living the Hippocratic Family
Oath: " First, do no harm "...
Accidents happen, but thats different from willful choices...
wd
I see your point.And i did not say there were not feminist hero type shows
on air.
But since denise asked about 60's shows, and deb mentioned surreal when
comparing the 60's and relationships wrt the 2 shows,--- i think bringing
back both of those shows today, but with a feminist tone would be quite
surreal.
~wd
wd
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:44:05 GMT, "John Jones"
> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> >news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> >[...]
> >> >
> >> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that
> >showed a single
> >> > father and how they could care for children equally as well
> >as women, was
> >> > "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
> >>
> >> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and
> >Sebastian
> >> Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
> >
> >Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
> >"Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have slipped
> >my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> >fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>
yep, thats another good example of a single father show back them.
We need more shows like that today.
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> *morally* powerful. They did not believe in using unfair advantages
> in the world to get ahead like using witchcraft. They wanted to make
> their own way under their own steam and by their own God-given
> talents. It was almost always Sam or Jeannie who eventually fell back
> on "magic" to get their way or fix messes they had inspired.
In one sense of the term, you're corrrect. Nonetheless, to many people,
one critical definition of " power " is the ability to make one's life
choices, including in situations that one must deal with in order to
get through life, and, in that area, Sam and Jeannie were the ones
who held and used power. Darren and Nelson were almost always placed
by their women ( And, we've skipped the fact that Jeannie essentially
ran Nelson's pre-existing fiancee off- Making Nelson another problem,
since said fiancee was the daughter of a higher ranking officer )
in positions where their efforts were needed, both for themselves
and by their women, to correct some problem manufactured beforehand
by said women.
Thats the power to choose. To *act*, rather then having to *react*...
> I personally compare Sam's and Jeannie's powers to the powers of
> young, pretty, sexy women who can get doors opened with just a smile
> (nod to the Eagles). Men have no such "powers" in the real world and
> must do things by their own sweat and brains.
Indeed. Thats a useful metaphor. And, in the context of that, and the
expectation that men will *react* to the superpowered women ( Be
their powers of actual magic or merely sexual " magic " ), that tells
us well who's in charge... Not the guys.
> The really enlightening thing is what happens to those pretty young
> things when they aren't pretty young things anymore.
" Beauty fades, but dumb is forever "...
No comments about this added angle ? :-(
Sunny
>Lucy is one of the worst TV shows ever produced. It ought to have been
>canceled after the first episode.
Yet, like Gilligan's Island, it's one of the most popular TV shows
ever produced. Go figure.
>But misandrists, especially women,
>love it.
I hated that show. Always have. It's dumb. I dislike crazy ditzes,
particularly intelligent women who pretend to be ditzy. But the laugh
track is what really annoyed me.
<enter Ricky>
"HELLOOO LUCI, I'M HO-OME!"
<uproarious canned laughter>
Sunny
wrote:
>>Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
>>"Bachelor Father".
I used to watch that. Jiminy cricket, am I that old...?
>I'm sure there were others that have slipped
>>my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
>>fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>
>Not a sitcom but Bonanza.
Good call, Jill.
Does anybody remember a show called "It's A Man's World"? (Sightly
off-topic, as the two lead characters were not fathers..)
Sunny
wrote:
>The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
That's because you're still young.... :o)
It was about an uncle who somehow was given custody of his bobby soxer
teenage niece. Kind of a latter-day "8 Rules for Dating My Daughter."
Other than that, I get it mixed up with "My Little Margie."
(I wasn't THAT old when it was on, maybe four or five.)
Sunny
wrote:
>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
Good one.
How about "Father Knows Best"??
Sunny
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 10:57:50 -0600, Sunny <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu>
>wrote:
>Marcus Welby
(lol)
>had a wife on that show.
Oops... you're right.
How about, do you remember the show, "My Two Dads"?
John Jones
"Jill" <perspic...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:in2b2vkrvf1jrhulu...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:44:05 GMT, "John Jones"
> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> >news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> >[...]
> >> >
> >> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period
that
> >showed a single
> >> > father and how they could care for children equally as
well
> >as women, was
> >> > "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
> >>
> >> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith
and
> >Sebastian
> >> Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
> >
> >Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom
called
> >"Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have
slipped
> >my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> >fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>
Andy Griffith show (sorta - no mother, but an aunt)
The Beverly hillbillies (sort - no mother, but granny)
John Jones
He had a wife, didn't he?
>
Bob
How would that be different?
Bob
John Jones
> "John Jones" (enuf...@nothanks.invalid) writes:
> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> > news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> >> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> > [...]
> >> >
> >> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period
that
> >> > showed a single father and how they could care for
children
> >> > equally as well as women, was "The Courtship of Eddie's
Father."
> >>
> >> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith
and
> >> Sebastian Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
> >
> > Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom
called
> > "Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have
slipped
> > my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> > fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>
> Ah yes, I now recall " My Three Sons ". They had the paternal
> grandpa living with them as well, yes ?
Uncle (First Bub, then Uncle Charlie)
>
> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
It only lasted a season. Funny how things stick in ones memory
for no reason.
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 16:24:28 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> I have no logical reason why...the show just makes me laugh.
> Sometimes that is the beauty of comedy and entertainment...to enjoy it
> without dissecting it.
Well, for some, that works for them.
> Outside of saying I liked the show, I agreed pretty much in full with
> your appraisal of the show. What you've added above, I also agree
> with. But even though I rationally agree with your opinion of I Love
> Lucy, I still like the show and it still makes me laugh.
In general, I've found that I cannot easily disconnect my life values
from what I take in as entertaining or engaging media. This probably
also explains why I don't much watch cop/lawyer shows, as I find them
to be grossly unreal, and extremely overly focused on very minute types
of cases.
And, I suppose that, being a man, ie- a member of the class most often
put down in so many ways by said media, that reinforces my disdain for
taking in more of such.
As always, other's mileage may vary...
>>>>The difference between the kinds of troubles that Ralph Kramden got
>>>>into, and Lucy Ricardo got into, was that Ralph's were portrayed as
>>>>pathetic and un-manly, while Lucy's were portrayed as " cute ",
>>>>harmless ( Since her troubles didn't place the family income at
>>>>risk... ), and feminine, in an excusing and enabling manner.
>>>
>>> Well sometimes her capers did put the family's income at risk...like
>>> the time she was having Ricky's new club manager (Gale Gordon) over
>>> for dinner. Lucy being her useless character self, couldn't cook so
>>> she worked up some scheme for Ethel to cook the food and sneak it in.
>>> I don't recall what went wrong but it wound up with Ethel pitching
>>> dinner rolls to Lucy and Lucy catching them with a catchers mitt and
>>> throwing them to her guests.
>>
>>OK.... Basically bad vaudeville schticks.
>
> Yup. And that is what IMO makes The Honeymooners a better show...they
> didn't soley rely on old vaudeville schticks. The writing was much
> better and good writing is the basic essential of any good comedy,
> show, play, or movie.
Indeed. Thats another thing that is common throughout my various
tastes. Good writing, no matter the format. If good writing is there,
I'll stay a while. If not, I'm so gone.
> Unfortunately the Honeymooners is not seen as much as I Love Lucy. I
> imagine that has a lot to do with Ralph being so un-PC.
And, that Lucy's a woman... Remember the stats on which sex watches more
overall TV.... Take out sports, and its likely that that discrepancy
only increases...
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 16:10:16 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> wrote:
>
>>The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
>
> That's because you're still young.... :o)
Thanks for the try... <g> Its more likely that, when I was a kid,
we didn't have cable, so that I saw shows that were picked up in
Canada. I even had to arrange to see a friend on the block, in
'72-'73, to be able to watch the Star Trek animated episodes.
> It was about an uncle who somehow was given custody of his bobby soxer
> teenage niece. Kind of a latter-day "8 Rules for Dating My Daughter."
> Other than that, I get it mixed up with "My Little Margie."
> (I wasn't THAT old when it was on, maybe four or five.)
Yeah, that one I've heard of, but I don't think I've ever seen one.
Sunny
<enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
>
>It only lasted a season.
I recall it lasting longer than that. I should google it....
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-625/
Bachelor Father
First Telecast: September 15, 1957
Last Telecast: September 25, 1962
Episodes: 157 B&W Episodes
>Funny how things stick in ones memory
>for no reason.
Yeah, I first watched it in 1957 when I was 4, even though I had no
way of understanding what they were talking about. I can't recall
anything more specific about the show than what the cast looked like.
Why do I even remember watching this show? The mind works in
mysterious ways!
Sunny
wrote:
>> All I said is I really like the show...I gave no reasons why...because
>> I have no logical reason why...the show just makes me laugh.
>> Sometimes that is the beauty of comedy and entertainment...to enjoy it
>> without dissecting it.
>
>Well, for some, that works for them.
The only "ILL" episode that I recall making me laugh was the Candy
Factory episode, where Lucy and Ethyl are working at the conveyer belt
that is going fast and faster, to the point they start shoving
chocolates in their mouths and up under their hats, etc. But it was
funny because of the action, not because it was Lucy and Ethyl. It
would have been just as funny with Huntley and Brinkley.
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> wrote:
>
>>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
>>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>
> Good one.
Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth, in no small part to his wonderful
role as the island sheriff in the film " The Russians Are Coming, The
Russians Are Coming ". I also liked that the director of that film is
Canadian... :-)
> How about "Father Knows Best"??
Vague memories, only.
Hot Frog
Soc...@feminism.is.invalid writes:
> Although Mrs. King had no special powers but rather was
> portrayed by Kate Jackson (whom I first noticed in the TV
> show _Emergency_ and was later the IMO most attractive
> of Charlie's Angels -- despite Jaclyn Smith striking me as
> physically more beautiful) as _ordinary_ a suburban woman
> as could be ('cept for being widowed), she was devoted to
> the man to whom she felt an attraction. By that standard,
> the character of Mrs. King was similar to her more magical
> counterparts of 1960s television.
The first time I noticed Kate Jackson was in "Dark Shadows". She played
various ghosts and characters there for the last 2 seasons of the show.
They are still running it on the SciFi channel on weekday mornings, if
you want to set your VCR. :)
If you are looking for TV sitcom relationship role models, I was always
fond of "Mad About You," created and scripted by Paul Reiser, and
"Roseanne," created and scripted by Roseanne Barr. I particularly found
it interesting that, while Roseanne was the darling of the feminist set,
she always depicted an underlying support and affection for her husband.
Neither show stooped the the "flushable John" attitude of today's
feminist whores.
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 16:33:00 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> your definition above, Darren and Tony both did choose (therefore had
> the ability to choose) to live life as they demanded.
Not really, no. Lets recall that the temporal context of those shows,
the relatively low divorce 60s, and also that, in Bewitched, Sam
*hid* her witchiness from him, until the wedding night. Not really an
open and honest start to the marriage, eh ?
This also falls next to an old issue, when I was on the divorce ng.
That of, if one has an affair, should one, after ending it, tell the
other spouse. I agreed with several there who said " yes, always ".
For the reason that the other spouse *deserves to know* the full
person they're with, so that the other spouse can *decide with full
knowledge*, what they want to be a part of.
Now, in Bewitched, we can say that Darren stayed, so that was his
choice, and there is some validity to that. But, Sam's denial of
letting him make that choice *before they were wed*, given the
times, is a rather significant betrayal of Darren, and left him in
the unenviable position of finding out that what he expected he was
a part of, wasn't that at all. Further, since mortals have little
practical knowledge of marital life with witches, he didn't even
have a way to estimate the long term meaning to his life, from that
only-given-to-him-after-the-fact choice.
Hardly a sign of the man ruling over all, or even over his own life.
> That is,
> without relying on supernatural powers for a living. Instead they
> chose to continue working in the professions they had started, living
> in the homes they had already chosen, etc. They could have sat back,
> lived in luxury, without working another day in their lives...but
> morally that was repugnant to these men and they did not choose to
> live that way. And whatever Sam or Jeannie wanted, they lived they
> way Darren and Tony chose to live.
Indeed. On that level, it shows the honour of those men. Not that they
had real power, per se, as their honour denied them any *improper*
powers that were not available to others.
Gee... That would mean, unlike the chyks on Charmed, Darren and Tony
were.... *fair*.
>>and, in that area, Sam and Jeannie were the ones
>>who held and used power. Darren and Nelson were almost always placed
>>by their women ( And, we've skipped the fact that Jeannie essentially
>>ran Nelson's pre-existing fiancee off- Making Nelson another problem,
>>since said fiancee was the daughter of a higher ranking officer )
>
> There is nothing supernatural about that trick. I would guess mortal
> women have pulled it more than once. What that trick shows is just
> how devious women can be. Women don't fight fair.
Indeed. Thats my point. We're used to that being socially OK now. But,
this was 40 years ago, when the perseption is that it was all about
what men wanted. In this example, we see that that perception *simply
isn't true at all*.
> Why women in general want men they have to trick (often via pregnancy)
> because the men don't want them is a mystery to me. But such sneaky
> behavior confers no real power to Jeannie. She hasn't chosen...Tony
> rejected her...he chose another...Jeannie reacted. If he wanted to
> continue with the fiance he would have...as I recall Tony continued
> dating other women for some time after that even though Jeannie
> resented it and often tried to prevent it.
Indeed. She prepared a long campaign, and IIRC, she did win him by
the end. Not as much inspiration as perspiration, albeit of a magical
type. Hardly " work ".
> That's what I liked about his (and the Darren character). They would
> not be henpecked or dictated to...not even by "superwomen." I
> especially liked that Darren stood up to Endora even when you knew she
> could outpower him. Because he continued to stand up to her, she
> never really won anything. And it was his ability to choose that
> allowed him to basically give Endora the bird.
To some extent, yes. But, his victories seemed rather pyrrhic,
as all he was able to do, was hold his existing ground, barely.
Running furiously, to stay in the same place...
>>in positions where their efforts were needed, both for themselves
>>and by their women, to correct some problem manufactured beforehand
>>by said women.
>>
>>Thats the power to choose. To *act*, rather then having to *react*...
>>
>>> I personally compare Sam's and Jeannie's powers to the powers of
>>> young, pretty, sexy women who can get doors opened with just a smile
>>> (nod to the Eagles). Men have no such "powers" in the real world and
>>> must do things by their own sweat and brains.
>>
>>Indeed. Thats a useful metaphor. And, in the context of that, and the
>>expectation that men will *react* to the superpowered women ( Be
>>their powers of actual magic or merely sexual " magic " ), that tells
>>us well who's in charge... Not the guys.
>
> Wrong. Guys can be in charge. I don't buy that men are ruled by
> sexual lust or desire. Guys can be in charge just like Tony and
> Darren. Guys do not have to give into every pretty princess who comes
> down the pike.
True, though to manage that, guys have to fight past a lot of very
powerful biological hard wiring.
We *want* women, for a myriad of reasons, and women don't appear to
want men, as much as they want men's *resources*. Thus, the relative
attractions are never going to be " equivalent ".
>>> The really enlightening thing is what happens to those pretty young
>>> things when they aren't pretty young things anymore.
>>
>>" Beauty fades, but dumb is forever "...
>
> Sort of. I was channel surfing this morning and caught a bit of the
> Imus show. One guy was talking about some beer commercial featuring
> sexy big busted beautiful young babes and how over 40 women were
> mounting a letter writing campaign to get the beer commercial off the
> air.
>
> That is what happens to most pretty young things over the years. They
> become petty, jealous, vicious older women jealous of this year's
> young beautiful women. They become feminists.
Indeed. They *expected* that their genetic lottery winnings wouldn't
run out, *and* that new winners wouldn't enter their stages...
Dumb and dumber, indeed.
John Jones
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:40:23 GMT, "John Jones"
> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
> >
> >It only lasted a season.
>
> I recall it lasting longer than that. I should google it....
>
>
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-625/
>
> Bachelor Father
> First Telecast: September 15, 1957
> Last Telecast: September 25, 1962
> Episodes: 157 B&W Episodes
<shrugs> It ended before I started first grade, so I guess it's a
wonder I remember it at all.
> >Funny how things stick in ones memory
> >for no reason.
>
> Yeah, I first watched it in 1957 when I was 4, even though I
had no
> way of understanding what they were talking about. I can't
recall
> anything more specific about the show than what the cast looked
like.
> Why do I even remember watching this show? The mind works in
> mysterious ways!
My earliest memory is of watching the Garry Moore Show (ca
1958-59) from my crib. I remember that he had a crew-cut, and
that my arm had fallen asleep from hanging over the bars of the
crib too long. Go figure.
Sunny
wrote:
>Sunny (mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu) writes:
>> On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
>> wrote:
>>
>>>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
>>>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>>
>> Good one.
>
>Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth,
Didn't he pass away recently?
> in no small part to his wonderful
>role as the island sheriff in the film " The Russians Are Coming, The
>Russians Are Coming ".
I loved that movie!
> I also liked that the director of that film is
>Canadian... :-)
<googlegoogle> Yes! Norman Jewsion, from Toronto.
>> How about "Father Knows Best"??
>
>Vague memories, only.
I should not have suggested that one, since it isn't what is being
discussed, which was single fathers portrayed positively on TV and in
the movies. FKB had a married, dad with an intact family. But at least
Father's Knows Best didn't try to pass off a dad as being a
struggling, bumbling fool all the time.
In fact, the reason single dads were the subject of sitcoms at the
time was because back then, a single dad was a rarity, and were
thought of as being parental-skills challenged, paving the way for
lots of half hour plots. They wouldn't have made a show about a widow
with three sons, would they?
Speaking of which, did you ever see a game show called Queen for a
Day? It had several female contestants who would each tell their
pitiful tale of woe, and the audience would vote for who they felt the
sorriest for. The winner would be swathed in an ermine coat, handed a
dozen roses, and would be given cash prizes and appliances. Today's
feminists would draw their weapons if they showed something like that
today, yet it was about exactly what the feminists want today, by
virtue of overstating their plight: sympathy, attention, and a free
handout.
Andre Lieven
Agreed. Its the bit that was funny.
Still, for sheer physical comedy, it doesn't get any better then the
Marx Brothers...
We all remember that scene at the broken wall mirror in Duck Soup ?
Andre Lieven
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:40:23 GMT, "John Jones"
> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
>>
>>It only lasted a season.
>
> I recall it lasting longer than that. I should google it....
>
> http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-625/
>
> Bachelor Father
> First Telecast: September 15, 1957
> Last Telecast: September 25, 1962
> Episodes: 157 B&W Episodes
Ah, thats why I've never heard of it. It went on before I did...
>>Funny how things stick in ones memory
>>for no reason.
>
> Yeah, I first watched it in 1957 when I was 4, even though I had no
> way of understanding what they were talking about. I can't recall
> anything more specific about the show than what the cast looked like.
> Why do I even remember watching this show? The mind works in
> mysterious ways!
Indeed. In fact, my earliest hazy TV memory is of seeing my dad
on the tube, oh, when I was maybe three. He was a writer and
producer for CBC, and did occasional then TV work. Local to
Montreal. And, my mom told me that I was very confused at how
my dad could be on the box *and* be sitting calmly in the
living room.
Magic ! :-)
Andre Lieven
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b04158$ktq$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> "John Jones" (enuf...@nothanks.invalid) writes:
>> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
>> > news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> >> "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
>> > [...]
>> >> >
>> >> > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period
>> >> > that showed a single father and how they could care for
>> >> > children equally as well as women, was "The Courtship of
>> >> > Eddie's Father."
>> >>
>> >> You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith
>> >> and Sebastian Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>> >
>> > Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom
>> > called "Bachelor Father". I'm sure there were others that have
>> > slipped my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
>> > fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>>
>> Ah yes, I now recall " My Three Sons ". They had the paternal
>> grandpa living with them as well, yes ?
>
> Uncle (First Bub, then Uncle Charlie)
>> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
>
> It only lasted a season. Funny how things stick in ones memory
> for no reason.
Yep. Thats why I have my Thunderbirds DVDs... :-)
Mark Borgerson
says...
> [piggy back]
>
>
> "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> news:9lfV9.159513$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
> >
> > "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> > news:b03uc5$gj1$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> > > "wd" (server57..5@hotmail.com) writes:
> > [...]
> > > >
> > > > Come to think of it, the only show of that time period that
> > showed a single
> > > > father and how they could care for children equally as well
> > as women, was
> > > > "The Courtship of Eddie's Father."
> > >
> > > You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and
> > Sebastian
> > > Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>
>
> >
> > Add "My Three Sons" and a short-lived John Forsythe sitcom called
> > "Bachelor Father".
>
>
> > I'm sure there were others that have slipped
> > my mind, but I remember thinking at some point that single
> > fathers were a well-worn gimmick in 60's sitcoms.
>
> *that* time period. OTOH, today, these type of shows probably would be more
> generally accepted by men --**and**--they are really needed today to place
> men in a more positive light as fathers and roll models,but we do not see
> feminist hollywood bringing shows like this on the air.
>
One of my kids' favorite shows on the Disney channel is
'Smart Guy'. Its about a 10-year-old boy genius and
his experiences in high school. He lives in a single
parent home with his father, older brother, and older
sister. His dad runs his own roofing company in the
Washington DC area, IIRC. Oh, and the family is
African-American. Guess they tried to dispel
as many stereotypes as they could in one program. ;-)
One of the best things about the Disney channel shows is
that quite a number of them do have fathers portrayed
as strong and sensible men. Something that is a bit
rare among the network sitcoms.
My kids also watch "My Wife and Kids" with Damon Wayans.
His character certainly doesn't take the BS from his
wife that Raymond puts up with.
Mark Borgerson
Andre Lieven
> In article <v2a74fa...@corp.supernews.com>,
> Soc...@feminism.is.invalid writes:
>
>> Although Mrs. King had no special powers but rather was
>> portrayed by Kate Jackson (whom I first noticed in the TV
>> show _Emergency_ and was later the IMO most attractive
>> of Charlie's Angels -- despite Jaclyn Smith striking me as
>> physically more beautiful) as _ordinary_ a suburban woman
>> as could be ('cept for being widowed), she was devoted to
>> the man to whom she felt an attraction. By that standard,
>> the character of Mrs. King was similar to her more magical
>> counterparts of 1960s television.
>
> The first time I noticed Kate Jackson was in "Dark Shadows". She played
> various ghosts and characters there for the last 2 seasons of the show.
> They are still running it on the SciFi channel on weekday mornings, if
> you want to set your VCR. :)
>
> If you are looking for TV sitcom relationship role models, I was always
> fond of "Mad About You," created and scripted by Paul Reiser, and
Indeed. I quite enjoyeed the run of Mad About You, and they did some
rather innovative things with the show and the characters.
There was a story arc, that went about a half of a season on Mad About
You, right before they got preggers, where the relationship nearly came
apart, and the reasons and actions that played into that were amazingly
real and detailed, as was the process of how they got out of there.
Thats damned rare a thing to see on any TV show, never mind an
obstensible comedy.
Plus, they did several nifty hour long " special " episodes. The
one where Lyle Lovett, playing a ConEd lineman married them, the one
where their first meeting place burned down ( Continuity error- Over
the run of the series, they gave us at least two different how they
met tales... well, its TV, kiddies ), and when they went home, the rest
of the world didn't know them as them, and the amazing series finale,
where it was a film made in around 2020 by their adult daughter,
about her parents, and their lives 1999-2020.
The first season's out on DVD...
> "Roseanne," created and scripted by Roseanne Barr. I particularly found
> it interesting that, while Roseanne was the darling of the feminist set,
> she always depicted an underlying support and affection for her husband.
The sheer coarseness of her character never did it for me...
> Neither show stooped the the "flushable John" attitude of today's
> feminist whores.
" Everyone Loves Raymond ", you mean ? <g>
Sunny
<enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
>"Sunny" <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in message
>news:blcb2v4cbkvoi8qj2...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:40:23 GMT, "John Jones"
>> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >> The Forsythe show I've never heard of.
>> >
>> >It only lasted a season.
>>
>> I recall it lasting longer than that. I should google it....
>>
>>
>http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/ShowMainServlet/showid-625/
>>
>> Bachelor Father
>> First Telecast: September 15, 1957
>> Last Telecast: September 25, 1962
>> Episodes: 157 B&W Episodes
>
><shrugs> It ended before I started first grade, so I guess it's a
>wonder I remember it at all.
<snort> You younger people are just too damned young! By crackey....
actually, it's a wonder I remember it. I was too little to comprehend
it.
>> >Funny how things stick in ones memory
>> >for no reason.
>>
>> Yeah, I first watched it in 1957 when I was 4, even though I
>had no
>> way of understanding what they were talking about. I can't
>recall
>> anything more specific about the show than what the cast looked
>like.
>> Why do I even remember watching this show? The mind works in
>> mysterious ways!
>
>My earliest memory is of watching the Garry Moore Show (ca
>1958-59) from my crib. I remember that he had a crew-cut,
Who could forget that buzz cut! Garry Moore had a show from 1950-51,
and then another show by the same name from 1958 to 1967 (often
screenwtritten by Neil Simon.) Remember his sidekick, Durwood Kerby?
Then, later on, he was a panelist on "To Tell The Truth."
>and
>that my arm had fallen asleep from hanging over the bars of the
>crib too long. Go figure.
I think maybe that back then, TV was such a novelty, that we kids
would watch literally ANYTHING in utter awe. And that was before
color!
Andre Lieven
> On 15 Jan 2003 19:31:38 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> wrote:
>
>>Sunny (mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu) writes:
>>> On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
>>>>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
>>>
>>> Good one.
>>
>>Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth,
>
> Didn't he pass away recently?
I hadn't heard, but I miss most celebrity/actor news.
>> in no small part to his wonderful
>>role as the island sheriff in the film " The Russians Are Coming, The
>>Russians Are Coming ".
>
> I loved that movie!
Weren't it way kewl ? :-)
" Emergency. Emergency. Everybody to get from street. "
>> I also liked that the director of that film is
>>Canadian... :-)
>
> <googlegoogle> Yes! Norman Jewsion, from Toronto.
<g> Some of us knew... :-)
>>> How about "Father Knows Best"??
>>
>>Vague memories, only.
>
> I should not have suggested that one, since it isn't what is being
> discussed, which was single fathers portrayed positively on TV and in
> the movies. FKB had a married, dad with an intact family. But at least
> Father's Knows Best didn't try to pass off a dad as being a
> struggling, bumbling fool all the time.
Yep. That shows that fathers were valued as fathers, as opposed to
being opportunites for laughs always at their expense, back then.
Hmm... And, so were real dads, in real families... Just a coincidence,
I wonder...
> In fact, the reason single dads were the subject of sitcoms at the
> time was because back then, a single dad was a rarity, and were
> thought of as being parental-skills challenged, paving the way for
> lots of half hour plots. They wouldn't have made a show about a widow
> with three sons, would they?
Nope, 'cause the state of widowhood would be percieved by the network
as a starting downer. Heck, in '69-'70, CBS didn't want Mary Tyler
Moore's character on her show to be a divorcee. Granted, they had a
concern that they thought that people would think that she divorced
Rob Petrie...
> Speaking of which, did you ever see a game show called Queen for a
> Day? It had several female contestants who would each tell their
> pitiful tale of woe, and the audience would vote for who they felt the
> sorriest for. The winner would be swathed in an ermine coat, handed a
> dozen roses, and would be given cash prizes and appliances. Today's
> feminists would draw their weapons if they showed something like that
> today, yet it was about exactly what the feminists want today, by
> virtue of overstating their plight: sympathy, attention, and a free
> handout.
Never saw it, but I recall reading about it in Harlan Ellison's
columns about teevee, titled The Glass Teat. Two books were the result,
The G.T, and The Other G.T., and, if you can find a copy, they
terrific reads. Both about TV of the times, and about Tv as a whole.
John Jones
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:22:22 -0600, Sunny
<mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu>
> wrote:
>
[...]
> >The only "ILL" episode that I recall making me laugh was the
Candy
> >Factory episode, where Lucy and Ethyl are working at the
conveyer belt
> >that is going fast and faster, to the point they start shoving
> >chocolates in their mouths and up under their hats, etc. But
it was
> >funny because of the action, not because it was Lucy and
Ethyl. It
> >would have been just as funny with Huntley and Brinkley.
>
The
> funniest episode IMO will always be the Vitameatavegamin
episode where
> Lucy is to do a live commercial but gets drunk practicing for
it
> before going on air. Another show biz big break gone bad for
Lucy.
No way! It was the one where Lucy & Ethyl stole John Waynes's
footprints from the walk of fame, and had to get new ones so Lucy
wouldn't go to jail. That was the one where Ricky apparently and
finally lost his mind dealing with her.
>
>
>
Sunny
wrote:
>Norman Jewsion, from Toronto.
That should say Jewison. Sorry.
Sunny
wrote:
>Hot Frog (hot...@teleport.com) writes:
>> In article <v2a74fa...@corp.supernews.com>,
>> Soc...@feminism.is.invalid writes:
>>
>>> Although Mrs. King had no special powers but rather was
>>> portrayed by Kate Jackson (whom I first noticed in the TV
>>> show _Emergency_ and was later the IMO most attractive
>>> of Charlie's Angels -- despite Jaclyn Smith striking me as
>>> physically more beautiful) as _ordinary_ a suburban woman
>>> as could be ('cept for being widowed), she was devoted to
>>> the man to whom she felt an attraction. By that standard,
>>> the character of Mrs. King was similar to her more magical
>>> counterparts of 1960s television.
>>
>> The first time I noticed Kate Jackson was in "Dark Shadows". She played
>> various ghosts and characters there for the last 2 seasons of the show.
>> They are still running it on the SciFi channel on weekday mornings, if
>> you want to set your VCR. :)
>>
>> If you are looking for TV sitcom relationship role models, I was always
>> fond of "Mad About You," created and scripted by Paul Reiser, and
>
>Indeed. I quite enjoyeed the run of Mad About You, and they did some
>rather innovative things with the show and the characters.
I watched that show too, and I remember Helen Hunt's character as
being irritatingly neurotic and bossy. Sometimes I wanted to smack
her. But Paul Reiser's character handled it well, with great patience.
>There was a story arc, that went about a half of a season on Mad About
>You, right before they got preggers, where the relationship nearly came
>apart, and the reasons and actions that played into that were amazingly
>real and detailed, as was the process of how they got out of there.
>Thats damned rare a thing to see on any TV show, never mind an
>obstensible comedy.
I remember that. I was kind of a shocker for a sitcom. They did handle
it very realistically, yet delicately.
>Plus, they did several nifty hour long " special " episodes. The
>one where Lyle Lovett, playing a ConEd lineman married them, the one
>where their first meeting place burned down ( Continuity error- Over
>the run of the series, they gave us at least two different how they
>met tales... well, its TV, kiddies ),
They didn't meet at the newspaper stand? (That was the "It's A
Wonderful Life" episode, with the vanishing wedding ring.)
>and when they went home, the rest
>of the world didn't know them as them, and the amazing series finale,
>where it was a film made in around 2020 by their adult daughter,
>about her parents, and their lives 1999-2020.
I missed that one, sounds like a good one.
>The first season's out on DVD...
<trivia> Did you know that Paul Reiser sings the theme song?
>> "Roseanne," created and scripted by Roseanne Barr. I particularly found
>> it interesting that, while Roseanne was the darling of the feminist set,
>> she always depicted an underlying support and affection for her husband.
That was just Hollywood. Look at how she acted in real life.
>The sheer coarseness of her character never did it for me...
Me neither, I found her unfunny and often offensive. Even worse was
her character in real life.
>> Neither show stooped the the "flushable John" attitude of today's
>> feminist whores.
>
>" Everyone Loves Raymond ", you mean ? <g>
God I hate the wife on that show. Bitch, bitch, bitch. She has such a
sweet husband, who she treats like total shit. She should never have
married him in the first place.
>Andre
Denise noe
Andelin considers these programs exemplary in their depicitions of male
dominant/female submissive relationships. In "Jeanie," her subservience is
constantly underlined with the word "Master." In "Bewitched," Samantha is more
housewife than Jeanie is and defers to Darrin.
The magical powers of the women might represent the way women's submissiveness
and childlikeness is, according to Andelin, supposed to "Fascinate" dominant
men.
****************************
Denise Noe
Koko the Signing Gorilla says: "Fine animal gorilla."
Mark Borgerson
@FreeNet.Carleton.CA says...
> Sunny (mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu) writes:
> > On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
> > wrote:
> >
> >>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith and Sebastian
> >>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
> >
> > Good one.
>
> Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth, in no small part to his wonderful
> role as the island sheriff in the film " The Russians Are Coming, The
> Russians Are Coming ". I also liked that the director of that film is
> Canadian... :-)
Must be handy for a film director to come from Toronto these days---
considering the number of productions that are now filmed there.
>
<<SNIP>>
I liked 'The Russians are Coming..." for a different reason. It was
filmed in Mendocino and Fort Bragg, California where I was working
a summer earlier with the Cal. Dept. Transportation. It was fun
to watch the movie and recognize the buildings and scenery.
Any movie with Carl Reiner will always be worth a peek, in any case.
Mark Borgerson
Mark Borgerson
says...
>
> "Deborah Terreson" <foodNOTS...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:83fV9.71971$%n.25168@sccrnsc02...
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > In article <20030114163850...@mb-ml.aol.com>,
> deni...@aol.com
> > (Denise noe) wrote:
> >
> >
> favorite
> > TV
> > Society
> > > @ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor
> version
> > of
> > > "The Taming of the Shrew."
> >
> >
> > > play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his
> wife. I
> > > mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male
> dominant
> > > program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch
> "Scarecrow
> > > and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
> > > "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the
> men
> > in
> > > their lives.
> > > What do you think of these programs? Do these relationships seem male
> > > dominant/female submissive?
> >
> > subtext was that the men, at best, only seemed in control of the
> situation.
> > The women looked to the men for the emotional strength, but the women had
> > the power. Both Genie and Samantha end up being the ones that could both
> > cause and solve the problems. The men just reacted to the situations.
> >
> > > Would women be better wives by following the
> > > examples of the heroines in these old TV series?
> >
> > They'd be 1960-style wives and have cool hairdo's and fashions. The
> reality
> > of course, of what women were like in the 60's was totally different than
> > the tube portrayed them. Would they be happier? I dunno, but it would be
> > quite surreal.
> >
> > Deb.
>
> heh.. thats a good choice of words. Because many relationships today are
> quite surreal enough with out adding a 60's version of relationships in the
> mix. And, can you even imagine a 'feminist style' TV show with Jeannie {and
> no master} running around zapping men into tiny dogs in every episode?
> And,Just because she can? Or a feminist Smantha twitching her nose when a
> man makes a sexist remark and he finds himself on Pluto? LOL Surreal to say
> the least! Maybe i'll write a pilot and make a million bucks selling it to
> feminist hollywood.
>
> have been demonized and removed from the family structure as they have been
> today. Adding a woman with special powers would be quite surreal indeed.
>
Perhaps true from our perspective. But have the other 90% of the
men in the world (in Africa, China, India, and Japan) even noticed?
I wonder what they think of all these current TV programs in reference
to their relationships with the women in their societies?
Mark Borgerson
John Jones
> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 19:56:20 GMT, "John Jones"
> <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> >Funny how things stick in ones memory
> >> >for no reason.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I first watched it in 1957 when I was 4, even though I
> >had no
> >> way of understanding what they were talking about. I can't
> >recall
> >> anything more specific about the show than what the cast
looked
> >like.
> >> Why do I even remember watching this show? The mind works in
> >> mysterious ways!
> >
> >My earliest memory is of watching the Garry Moore Show (ca
> >1958-59) from my crib. I remember that he had a crew-cut,
>
> Who could forget that buzz cut! Garry Moore had a show from
1950-51,
> and then another show by the same name from 1958 to 1967 (often
> screenwtritten by Neil Simon.)
I didn't know Neil Simon wrote for that show. Of course, since I
was about 2, I would have laughed even if it were written by the
meowers, flonkers, Devin, and deadbeatdad.
> Remember his sidekick, Durwood Kerby?
Oh yeah. The tall blonde guy that everyone kept calling Kurwood
Derby. And of course, Carol Burnette in her early days.
> Then, later on, he was a panelist on "To Tell The Truth."
Um, I think he was the host - at least by the late sixties. I
remember Garry going off on Orson Bean (remember that perennial
game show guest?) for making a tasteless wise-crack about cops
being called 'pigs'.
Sunny
wrote:
>Never saw it, but I recall reading about it in Harlan Ellison's
>columns about teevee, titled The Glass Teat. Two books were the result,
>The G.T, and The Other G.T., and, if you can find a copy, they
>terrific reads. Both about TV of the times, and about Tv as a whole.
Thanks for the tip. It sounds fascinating! I will look for them on
Amazon.
Sunny
wrote:
>( Continuity error- Over
>>the run of the series, they gave us at least two different how they
>>met tales... well, its TV, kiddies ),
>
>They didn't meet at the newspaper stand? (That was the "It's A
>Wonderful Life" episode, with the vanishing wedding ring.)
Wait a minnit! You're right! Didn't they meet when Paul dropped off
her dry cleaning? Maybe I'm just confused.
Sunny
wrote:
>>>Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth,
>>
>>Didn't he pass away recently?
>
>Not so recently...several years ago.
I mean, in the relative scheme of things. The older I get, the more
fleeting "several years" becomes.... :o) Five years ago was just
last week, wasn't it?
>He had some very painful disease
>and committed suicide as I recall. I'd look it up but I'm too lazy at
>the moment. <g>
<gogglegoogle> You are corect. He died by his own hand on June 24,
1997. Was born in 1921, started his acting career in 1924, and worked
pretty regularly ever since.
Sunny
wrote:
>I must be roughly the same age as John but I remember all of the shows
>being discussed here.
Did you ever see Queen for a Day?
>However, I remember them from seeing them in
>reruns. Now those shows are so old they aren't likely to play in
>reruns much anymore. What a shame.
Yeah... Nick at Nite still has some classics.
<trivia> I'll be 50 this year. I don't have cable.
Sunny
>I liked 'The Russians are Coming..." for a different reason. It was
>filmed in Mendocino and Fort Bragg, California where I was working
>a summer earlier with the Cal. Dept. Transportation. It was fun
>to watch the movie and recognize the buildings and scenery.
Wow! I never realized that, and I am from Northern California. I
always assumed it was shot on the East Coast, like Maine or Mass. or
somewhere. They sure fooled me! I will have to rent it, and see it in
a whole different light.
I can *usually* tell by the waves which seacoast it might be. Small
waves, Atlantic; big waves, Pacific. Not always true, though.
>Any movie with Carl Reiner will always be worth a peek, in any case.
I concur!
>Mark Borgerson
>
Sunny
<enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
LOL Yup.
>And of course, Carol Burnette in her early days.
>
>> Then, later on, he was a panelist on "To Tell The Truth."
>
>Um, I think he was the host -
Whoops! Xop
> at least by the late sixties. I
>remember Garry going off on Orson Bean (remember that perennial
>game show guest?) for making a tasteless wise-crack about cops
>being called 'pigs'.
Oh, man. Was Garry *that* straight?
John Jones
> On 15 Jan 2003 19:31:38 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre
Lieven)
> wrote:
>
> >Sunny (mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu) writes:
> >> On 15 Jan 2003 15:22:45 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
(Andre Lieven)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>You could also add in " Family Affair ", with Brian Keith
and Sebastian
> >>>Cabot, as the butler, raising, IIRC, three kids.
> >>
> >> Good one.
> >
> >Thanks. I rather liked Brian Kieth,
>
> Didn't he pass away recently?
He killed himself after the death of his daughter.
[...]
> In fact, the reason single dads were the subject of sitcoms at
the
> time was because back then, a single dad was a rarity, and were
> thought of as being parental-skills challenged, paving the way
for
> lots of half hour plots.
I don't know if the existence of a single dad was a rarity, but
the portrayal of one as a competent parent was.
> They wouldn't have made a show about a widow with three sons,
would they?
Hmmm. Maybe. I'll have to think about that one.
>
> Speaking of which, did you ever see a game show called Queen
for a
> Day? It had several female contestants who would each tell
their
> pitiful tale of woe, and the audience would vote for who they
felt the
> sorriest for.
I remember that. (BTW, you failed to mention the copious tears.)
Sunny
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:44:13 -0600, Sunny <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu>
>wrote:
>
>>On 15 Jan 2003 20:25:47 GMT, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven)
>>wrote:
>>>Indeed. I quite enjoyeed the run of Mad About You, and they did some
>>>rather innovative things with the show and the characters.
>>
>>I watched that show too, and I remember Helen Hunt's character as
>>being irritatingly neurotic and bossy. Sometimes I wanted to smack
>>her. But Paul Reiser's character handled it well, with great patience.
>
>I am so happy to see someone else say that.
You and I agree on most things. :o)
>I find Helen Hunt in
>general to be an over-rated actress these days.
She only has one facial expression and one persona. I mean, even
Nicole Kidman has some depth and range.
>There was a time when
>I thought she was refreshing and quite talented but I think the awards
>and praise spoiled her.
Yeah, she really started putting on airs after she made "As Good As It
Gets," "Twister," "Pay It Forward" and "Castaway" all in the same time
frame. She played the same character on TV and in all her movies, in
my opinion.
> I think her personality was what came through
>and spoiled the Jamie character for me. I did not enjoy the later
>years of Mad About You as much as I did the early ones.
Same here... her characterization of Jamie became so manipulative,
controlling, bitchy, self-centered... all the things that really bug
me about some women. I get very irritated with women who think that
the world revolves around them, and their husbands are merely
housepets to be trained to obey her every whim. Plus she can't cook.
*Never trust a woman who can't cook!*
Mark Borgerson
enuf...@nothanks.invalid says...
Does Ben Cartright on 'Bonanza' count? He seemed competent, but
the old-west setting and the indeterminate date of death for the
boys' mother may remove him from consideration as a good
image of a single father.
>
> > They wouldn't have made a show about a widow with three sons,
> would they?
>
> Hmmm. Maybe. I'll have to think about that one.
>
from:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/M/htmlM/mythreesons/mythreesons.htm
"While there were occasional widow-with-children programs (The Ghost and
Mrs. Muir, Julia), these women were not granted the same versatility of
their male counterparts, and were forced to turn to strong male figures
(dead ship's captains and doctors, respectively) for continual guidance.
"
BTW, there's some interesting stats on the number of single mothers
and fathers on current TV shows at:
http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/publications/release/2002/pr061202.asp
(It turned up when I was googling about for 'TV widow children' or
something similar.
Mark Borgerson
Sunny
<enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote:
>> Speaking of which, did you ever see a game show called Queen for a
>> Day? It had several female contestants who would each tell their
>> pitiful tale of woe, and the audience would vote for who they felt the
>> sorriest for.
>
>I remember that. (BTW, you failed to mention the copious tears.)
Oh, my, yes -- buckets and buckets.
Contestant number one:
"Sniff-- my son broke his leg and lost all his teeth in a fight with
the class bully -- sniff sniff -- my husband died by being run over by
a garbage truck on his way to our anniversary dinner -- <sob> My
mother has cancer of the earlobe, and -- sniff -- <choke> my car broke
down!"
Contestant number two:
"My husband ran off with a barmaid in Baltimore... my daughter has two
sets of toes on her right foot and can't walk... <voice wavering> we
have no electricity... we have eaten anything in 47 days... <wiping
tear> my baby is suckling off our cat... our apartment was condemned
due to roaches..." <breaking down in wracking sobs>
Contestant number three:
"I have 26 children, all of whom have colic. <long pause to compose
herself> My husband used to beat us, but I shot him in self-defense,
so now I have no income. <another long pause, nervously dabbing at
outer corner of eye> My grandparents live with us, and my mother as
well, and all three of them have senile dementia. <choking back sobs>
And I have not bathed since 1952!" <collapsing in tearful anguish>
Applaus-o-meter:
Contestant number One!
yay!! clap clap clap |....|....|..../|...|
Contestant number Two!
clappity clap clap |....|../.|....|...|
Contestant number tha-REE!
YAYYY!! CLAP CLAP CLAP <whistle> |....|....|....|..../|
An orchestration of "Pomp and Circumstance" plays over the loudspeaker
as Contestant Number Three is crowned, is draped in a full-length
ermine coat (which she is not allowed to keep after the show,) is
given an armload of long-stemmed roses, is handed a check for a
thousand dollars, and is introduced to her NEW WHIRLPOOL WASHING
MACHINE!
<music swells dramatically... camera pans the crowd applauding
enthusiastically ... switch to close-up of Contestant Number Three's
tearful, joyous smile... fade .. and... cut to commercial for Dash
detergent.>
Sunny
wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 15:03:46 -0600, Sunny <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:45:49 -0600, Jill <perspic...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I must be roughly the same age as John but I remember all of the shows
>>>being discussed here.
>>
>>Did you ever see Queen for a Day?
>
>Oh sure. I can remember being about 4 years old when my mother used
>to watch that. I remember the long velvet robe and the crown and
>roses and how much my mother envied the prizes...washing machines of
>all things. But I don't remember what they had to do to win the
>prize.
They just had to have the saddest sob story. Seriously, that's all
they had to do. The audience would applaud, and the loudest applause
would select the winner.
IIRC there were usualy four contestants. The host's name was Jack
Bailey.
>>>However, I remember them from seeing them in
>>>reruns. Now those shows are so old they aren't likely to play in
>>>reruns much anymore. What a shame.
>>
>>Yeah... Nick at Nite still has some classics.
>
>They don't play the old ones anymore. With all the sinus problems
>I've had the last few months, I've been watching a lot of Nick at Nite
>all night long.
You poor thing, you do have it bad. That's been bothering you for
months now. I sure hope you feel better soon! <concerned look>
>Now they have Coach, Cheers, Cosby, All in the
>Family, Three's Company, The Brady Bunch, Happy Days, Charles in
>Charge, and Family Ties on. While I still enjoy some of these shows,
>none are pre 1970's shows.
>
>BTW, I've never understood the appeal of the Brady Bunch. Even
>Charles in Charge has more going for it than that show IMO.
I could never bear to watch the Brady Bunch. By the time it first
aired, I was in high school. I was too cool for the Brady Bunch.
My kitchen floor linoleum (circa 1969) is straight out of a Brady
Bunch set. Hurts my eyes to look at, some times. And when we first
moved in, the bathroom was wallpapered in giant colorful daisies.
<gag> That was painted over in a hurry, let me tell you. The kitchen
floor will be next.
>><trivia> I'll be 50 this year. I don't have cable.
>
>We just got cable back after a few years without it. I wouldn't find
>it worthwhile except for it has kept me company many a night lately.
I'm afraid I'd become a total potato if we got cable. Fortunately, I
live out in the countryside, and the cable doesn't reach us. :o)
Instead of paying for Direct TV, we buy big bags of bird seed and
watch the birdfeeders. We call it the Bird Channel.
>Oh yeah. I won't be 50 this year. <g>
Oh, you are a slippery one. :o)
Sunny
>BTW, there's some interesting stats on the number of single mothers
>and fathers on current TV shows at:
>
>http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/publications/release/2002/pr061202.asp
Thanks for posting this intersting link, Mark
Risking copyright infringement, I would like to quote some of their
thought-provoking statistics:
(QUOTE)
The PTC <Parents' Television Council> reviewed every original series
airing during prime time (8:00-11:00pm ET/PT) on the broadcast
networks during the 2001-2002 television season. The analysis
encompassed 119 shows depicting 150 children. Key findings include:
83% of TV children have a father figure involved in their lives.
64% live with their biological father.
47% live in a traditional family, with their married biological
parents.
14% are raised by single fathers (the father is the only parent
involved in their lives).
90% of TV single fathers are widowers.
8% of TV children live in a joint-custody situation where both parents
(whether divorced or never married) share time with the children. Of
that number, 92% of those children live with their mother while 8%
live with their father.
Of the 97 Television Family Households:
40% are traditional nuclear households with married mother and father
and biological kids
7% of households are married parents raising some combination of
foster, adopted, or step-children -- sometimes in addition to their
own biological children
27% are single mothers raising their biological children
14% are single fathers raising their biological children
7% are adults raising another family member's children
4% are unmarried couples raising their biological children
together
1% are households with biological mother and cohabiting
partner.
Of the 150 TV Children:
47% of TV children live in traditional family (with married
biological mother and father)
17% of TV children do not have an involved father figure
30% of TV children do not live with a father figure (biological,
step-father, foster-father, non-biological father that adopts a child)
36% of TV children do not live with their biological father
14% of TV children are raised by single fathers
15% of TV children are raised by single mothers
3% of TV children are raised by their single widowed biological
mother
? 13% of TV children are raised by their single widowed biological
father
? 21% of TV children do not have an involved mother figure
? 33% of TV children do not live with a mother figure (biological,
step, foster, or non-biological mother)
? 92% of TV children in joint custody situations live with their
mother, the other 8 percent live with their father
83% of TV children have a father figure involved in their lives.
(a "father figure" is defined as a biological father, step-father,
foster-father, or adoptive father)
Some additional statistics, dealing with TV mothers:
79% of TV children have a mother figure involved in their lives
15% of TV children are raised by single mothers (the mother is the
only parent involved in their lives)
20% of TV single mothers are widows
30% of TV children do not live with a father figure
33% of TV children do not live with a mother figure
(All statistics taken from original series on broadcast networks
during the 2001-02 season.)
Total number of shows: 119
Total number of family types: 17
Total number of family units (households with minor children): 97
Total number of no family units and N/A: 52
Total number of TV children: 150
(UNQUOTE)
John Jones
<perspic...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>I must be roughly the same age as John but I remember all of
the shows
> >>being discussed here.
> >
> >Did you ever see Queen for a Day?
>
used
> to watch that. I remember the long velvet robe and the crown
and
> roses and how much my mother envied the prizes...washing
machines of
> all things. But I don't remember what they had to do to win
the
> prize.
> >
> >>reruns. Now those shows are so old they aren't likely to
play in
> >>reruns much anymore. What a shame.
> >
> >Yeah... Nick at Nite still has some classics.
There's actually a Game Show channel that shows old B&W reruns of
classics such as "What's My Line", and "To tell The Truth". In
case you were wondering, yes I do have insomnia from time to time
;-).
>
> They don't play the old ones anymore. With all the sinus
problems
> I've had the last few months, I've been watching a lot of Nick
at Nite
> all night long. Now they have Coach, Cheers, Cosby, All in the
> Family, Three's Company, The Brady Bunch, Happy Days, Charles
in
> Charge, and Family Ties on. While I still enjoy some of these
shows,
> none are pre 1970's shows.
TVLAND shows some sixties oldies like Batman. The deciding
factor seems to be whether the episodes are in color. Kids won't
watch black-and-white (or as my kids call it - gray).
>
> BTW, I've never understood the appeal of the Brady Bunch. Even
> Charles in Charge has more going for it than that show IMO.
Two Words: Kid's show.
> >
> ><trivia> I'll be 50 this year. I don't have cable.
>
> We just got cable back after a few years without it. I
wouldn't find
> it worthwhile except for it has kept me company many a night
lately.
Discovery Channel, Science Channel, Discovery Civilization, and
the History Channel are OK, but they seem to have more
commercials than so-called commercial TV. They also show the
same programs several times a day.
John Jones
[Regarding the old TV show "Queen For A Day"...]
<snipped for brevity>
> An orchestration of "Pomp and Circumstance" plays over the
loudspeaker
> as Contestant Number Three is crowned, is draped in a
full-length
> ermine coat (which she is not allowed to keep after the show,)
is
> given an armload of long-stemmed roses, is handed a check for a
> thousand dollars, and is introduced to her NEW WHIRLPOOL
WASHING
> MACHINE!
>
> <music swells dramatically... camera pans the crowd applauding
> enthusiastically ... switch to close-up of Contestant Number
Three's
> tearful, joyous smile... fade .. and... cut to commercial for
Dash
> detergent.>
>
Omigosh! Dash detergent! You really *do* remember it!
wd
"Mark Borgerson" <ma...@oes.to> wrote in message
news:MPG.188f64127...@netnews.attbi.com...
Maybe i should turn the TV on more often
>
>
>
wd
They probably think "surreal"
>
>
> Mark Borgerson
>
wd
"John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
I saw the "Gong Show" on that channel not long ago.
Now i use to watch that show when i was in my 20's and i thought it was
funny, but this time around, i simply could not believe how DUMB the show
actually is!
~wd
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <b041ms$ln9$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca>, dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA
(Andre Lieven) wrote:
> You've never watched " Buffy, The Vampire Slayer " series then ?
>
> I'm *serious*... Add in " Birds Of Prey ", " Relic Hunter ", and so on...
'Relic Hunter'? Tell me you haven't watched that show. I tried one day and
almost threw my teevee out the window. How on God's green do those shows get
made? And I thought Xena and Hercules were bad!
Deb.
>
>> And,Just because she can? Or a feminist Smantha twitching her nose when a
>> man makes a sexist remark and he finds himself on Pluto?
>
> " Charmed "....
>
>> LOL Surreal to say
>> the least! Maybe i'll write a pilot and make a million bucks selling it to
>> feminist hollywood.
>
> You're too late... Those shows are already on the wir...
>
>> There has never been a time in the recorded history of the world where men
>> have been demonized and removed from the family structure as they have been
>> today. Adding a woman with special powers would be quite surreal indeed.
>
> Pick up a copy of TV Guide, dude... <g>
>
>> ha!
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <v2b3beq...@corp.supernews.com>, "wd"
<server57..5@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Andre Lieven" <dg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:b041ms$ln9$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
>> > And,Just because she can? Or a feminist Smantha twitching her nose when
> a
>> > man makes a sexist remark and he finds himself on Pluto?
>>
>> " Charmed "....
>>
>> > LOL Surreal to say
>> > the least! Maybe i'll write a pilot and make a million bucks selling it
> to
>> > feminist hollywood.
>>
>> You're too late... Those shows are already on the wir...
>>
>> > There has never been a time in the recorded history of the world where
> men
>> > have been demonized and removed from the family structure as they have
> been
>> > today. Adding a woman with special powers would be quite surreal indeed.
>>
>> Pick up a copy of TV Guide, dude... <g>
>
> I see your point.And i did not say there were not feminist hero type shows
> on air.
> But since denise asked about 60's shows, and deb mentioned surreal when
> comparing the 60's and relationships wrt the 2 shows,--- i think bringing
> back both of those shows today, but with a feminist tone would be quite
> surreal.
Are you kidding? With the way programming is skewered towards women,
bringing those series back *without* a feminist tone would be surreal.
Mother Knows Best is almost the daily fare.
Deb.
P.S. KILL YOUR TELEVISION!
John Jones
"wd" <server57..5@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v2bp5gk...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> news:0XkV9.159534$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
> >
> > There's actually a Game Show channel that shows old B&W
reruns of
> > classics such as "What's My Line", and "To tell The Truth".
In
> > case you were wondering, yes I do have insomnia from time to
time
> > ;-).
>
> I saw the "Gong Show" on that channel not long ago.
> Now i use to watch that show when i was in my 20's and i
thought it was
> funny, but this time around, i simply could not believe how
DUMB the show
> actually is!
Did you ever see the Popsicle Twins on the Gong Show? (Hint:
Think Deep Throat). The network censors were surely on vacation
that day.
It was all pretty dumb, but we only had 4 networks in those days
(counting PBS). The first sign of that changing was when I saw
SCTV out of Canada about 1978.
Hot Frog
Paul Reiser wrote the theme song. Andrew Gold sang it for most of the
series run. I don't know who sang it for the last season.
I know about Andrew Gold because he was a member of my favorite group-
that-never-made-it, Bryndle. He was with them for one album, then moved
back east to care for a dying parent.
http://www.dirtynelson.com/linen/feature/64bryndle.html
http://www.bryndle.com/
John Jones
"Denise noe" <deni...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030115154435...@mb-ce.aol.com...
> Since I started this thread, I've been thinking about the
question of why Helen
> Andelin considers these programs exemplary in their depicitions
of male
> dominant/female submissive relationships. In "Jeanie," her
subservience is
> constantly underlined with the word "Master." In "Bewitched,"
Samantha is more
> housewife than Jeanie is and defers to Darrin.
> The magical powers of the women might represent the way women's
submissiveness
> and childlikeness is, according to Andelin, supposed to
"Fascinate" dominant
> men.
What's the point of you bringing this up again?
If Samantha and Jeannie have superhuman powers, feminists
consider that proof that women are oppressed.
If most TV women have ordinary human abilities, feminists
consider that proof that women are oppressed.
If TV women are portrayed as incompetent, feminists portray that
as proof that women are oppressed.
If TV men are portrayed as idiots, feminists also take that as
proof that women are oppressed.
Have you forgotten the Male Gender Bias Test?
http://www.vix.com/men/articles/genderbiastest.html (appears to
be down right now).
wd
>
> "wd" <server57..5@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:v2bp5gk...@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:0XkV9.159534$VQ2.42...@twister.midsouth.rr.com...
> > >
> [...]
>
> > > There's actually a Game Show channel that shows old B&W
> reruns of
> > > classics such as "What's My Line", and "To tell The Truth".
> In
> > > case you were wondering, yes I do have insomnia from time to
> time
> > > ;-).
> >
> > I saw the "Gong Show" on that channel not long ago.
> > Now i use to watch that show when i was in my 20's and i
> thought it was
> > funny, but this time around, i simply could not believe how
> DUMB the show
> > actually is!
>
> Did you ever see the Popsicle Twins on the Gong Show? (Hint:
> Think Deep Throat).
I dont recall that episode. But i bet it was a good one.
The network censors were surely on vacation
> that day.
I bet they were .. heh...
>
> It was all pretty dumb, but we only had 4 networks in those days
> (counting PBS). The first sign of that changing was when I saw
> SCTV out of Canada about 1978.
SCTV was the best along with the original saturday night live shows. When
John Candy died, i was truly sorry; because i think he is probably the most
lighthearted and best actor/comedian ever to hit the big and small screen.
I remember in 1974 my wife (at the time)was excited about something
relatively new. Cable TV with a movie channel that had no commercials called
HBO (beamed in from space the way she put it<s>). She had the brochures
spread out on the table one evening ready for her attack when i came home
from work. And at the time Florida was one of the few states with catv back
then.
I said "why should we pay $9.99 per month for TV? (HBO and about 50
channels) We have 5 stations! and most places only have 4. (chuckle). We got
it anyway because of her relentless bitching that all of her "sisters" had
it already in Pennsylvania.
I guess being at home with all her friends, our kids, and all the kids in
the neighborhood was not time consuming enough. Of course, shortly after
getting the cable tv we needed a dish washer....
Why? More time for the TV of course----
~wd
Denise noe
Date: Wed, Jan 15, 2003 10:46 AM >>
<< On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 22:46:27 -0800, "Michael Snyder"
<msn...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>Sunny wrote in message <57192vgrhcj7b079m...@4ax.com>...
>>On 14 Jan 2003 21:38:50 GMT, deni...@aol.com (Denise noe) wrote:
>>
>>>A long time ago, I started a thread here asking posters about their favorite
TV
>>>and movie depictions of male dominant/female submissive relationships.
Society
>>>@ feminismisinvalid said his was the Richard Burton/Elizabeth Taylor version
of
>>>"The Taming of the Shrew." This was a very well done movie of Shakespeare's
>>>play. Someone else mentioned a movie about (I think) a coach and his wife.
I
>>>mentioned that Helen Andelin, founder of the submissive woman/male dominant
>>>program "Fascinating Womanhood," encourages her followers to watch
"Scarecrow
>>>and Mrs. King." I've since learned that she also tells them to watch
>>>"Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeanie" for guidance on how to relate to the men
in
>>>their lives.
>>> What do you think of these programs?
>>
>>They went the way of Amos & Andy.
>>
>>>Do these relationships seem male
>>>dominant/female submissive?
>
>They seem kinda late-50s / early-60s, n'est ce pas?
>Maybe that's why they don't air any more...
They are on the Hallmark Channel every Saturday morning and are in
syndication so other independents may also be carrying them. I like
both shows for nostalgic reasons and enjoy watching them. But then
I'm adult enough to understand that these shows are for entertainment
purposes and are NOT real life stories in any remotely possible way.
But feminists have no real life so how would they tell the difference? >>
Helen Andelin likes them because she believes they are strongly ANTI-feminist
as she is. She believes they show women being properly submissive to men and
men responding to that submission with "fascination."
****************************
Denise Noe
Koko the Signing Gorilla says: "Fine animal gorilla."
John Jones
Doh! <slaps forehead> How could I forget that one? I saw the
original SNL episode, and we couldn't believe what we were
seeing. "George Carlin on TV? No way. Must be the dope!"
[...]
>
> I remember in 1974 my wife (at the time)was excited about
something
> relatively new. Cable TV with a movie channel that had no
commercials called
> HBO (beamed in from space the way she put it<s>).
That was back in the days when they still called it Home Box
Office. I knew some people that got it early-on. They watched
Blazing Saddles it seemed like 9 times a day.
Mark Borgerson
says...
When you've got pre-teen kids in the house, you need
to keep track of what they're watching. I follow
the same principle with the internet---they log on
only in the 'computer room' (my office during the
daytime). I'm in the room about half the time
the kids are on line.
I catch a lot of the Disney programs because I let
my kids watch that in the family room between
school and dinner, except for an hour of news
at 6pm. I get exposed a lot because I'm often
in the adjoining kitchen cooking dinner.
Better an hour of 'Smart Guy' and 'Even Stevens'
than an hour of MTV!!
Mark Borgerson
wd
"John Jones" <enuf...@nothanks.invalid> wrote in message
ROFLing!
Carlin is in the top 10 best also.
>
> [...]
> >
> > I remember in 1974 my wife (at the time)was excited about
> something
> > relatively new. Cable TV with a movie channel that had no
> commercials called
> > HBO (beamed in from space the way she put it<s>).
>
> That was back in the days when they still called it Home Box
> Office. I knew some people that got it early-on. They watched
> Blazing Saddles it seemed like 9 times a day.
And thats exactly what it was like. They ran about 5 movies per day and one
or two of them they ran them over and over and over...
And what of the other 50 channels?-- half of them were in languages we could
not understand or were not broadcast 24/7, so we usually ended up watching
the same shows we watched on the free networks.
~wd-- keeping up with the jones's back then (no pun intended) <s>
<snip>
wd
Ha! ok ok........
But i still think watching a feminist Samantha show would as surreal as
watching Flipper on some really bad acid.
:P
~wd
Andre Lieven
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 13:22:22 -0600, Sunny
> <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
> [...]
>> >The only "ILL" episode that I recall making me laugh was the
>> >Candy Factory episode, where Lucy and Ethyl are working at the
> conveyer belt
>> >that is going fast and faster, to the point they start shoving
>> >chocolates in their mouths and up under their hats, etc. But
> it was
>> >funny because of the action, not because it was Lucy and Ethyl.
>> >It would have been just as funny with Huntley and Brinkley.
>>
>> That one is so over esteemed as to make it non-funny to me.
>> The funniest episode IMO will always be the Vitameatavegamin
>> episode where Lucy is to do a live commercial but gets drunk
>> practicing for it before going on air. Another show biz big
>> break gone bad for Lucy.
>
> No way! It was the one where Lucy & Ethyl stole John Waynes's
> footprints from the walk of fame, and had to get new ones so Lucy
> wouldn't go to jail. That was the one where Ricky apparently and
> finally lost his mind dealing with her.
Come to think of it, I recall seeing a part of an episode where
George Reeves, who then played Superman on TV, was a guest star,
as Superman, and, after dealing with some of Lucy's antics, he
turned to Ricky, and said words to the effect of " You're married
to her ? You're the Superman ! "