<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &quot;Of course not&quot;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/</link>
	<description>Intelligent media, including Mad Men, Downton Abbey, The Walking Dead, Hell on Wheels &#38; more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 04:24:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: hullaballoo</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22078</link>
		<dc:creator>hullaballoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 00:29:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22078</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;Betty *is* already branded exactly like that. She gets more hate from fans than every other mad men character combined.&lt;/i&gt;&quot; 
 
I don&#039;t know if that&#039;s true. I think Betty gets a lot of sympathy. A LOT. It&#039;s a great characterization, and January&#039;s doing a phenomenal job portraying her, but let&#039;s be real. Is the character more hated than Pete, or Duck, or Bobbie Barrett, or Jane, or Joy...or even Midge? You&#039;ll have to show me proof of that. 
 
I challenge you to try visualizing some of Betty&#039;s more controversial scenes with any of the other women on the show. What would you think if you saw Donielle Artese shove Sally into a closet? What would your reaction be to Elisabeth Moss standing around with one of her friends, yapping about how fat her daughter was, or calling her son a little liar? What if Melinda McGraw was the one hitting on the tow truck driver or trying to break into Don&#039;s desk. I bet your reaction to any of those scenes would be completely different. I mean, they were noteworthy with January, but imagine how shocked you&#039;d be if any of the other women on the show pulled that? I think the only reason they could show Betty doing that stuff is that we&#039;ll allow it from her. We wouldn&#039;t allow it from any other woman on the show. At least, I don&#039;t think so. 
 
But on to other things... 
 
&lt;i&gt;Don was already having an emotional affair with Rachel and was just waiting for an excuse to start a physical one with her.&lt;/i&gt; 
 
But how could Don be sure that Rachel would consent to that? Once he told her he was married, she put up a pretty big barrier between them. How could he know for sure that she would eventually relent? 
 
Upon re-watching some of the earlier episodes of season 1, I can see the cracks in his and Midge&#039;s relationship that I hadn&#039;t seen before. But was Don nitpicking on purpose? Just looking for an out because he&#039;d met someone new? He doesn&#039;t seem like the type to give up a sure thing (old business) for  a &quot;possible wink&quot; from someone else (new business). 
 
Don&#039;s thing with Rachel seemed different, but I can&#039;t say for sure -- not now any way. After season 1, and even in the beginning of season 2, I could say that with some certainty. But now? I don&#039;t know. We&#039;ve seen him with four women, other than Betty. Two were completely salacious, while the other two seemed to have more substance. But who knows? Maybe they&#039;re just giving us stuff to give us stuff. There may be no rhyme or reason to any of it after all is said and done. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&quot;Betty *is* already branded exactly like that. She gets more hate from fans than every other mad men character combined.</i>&quot; </p>
<p>I don&#039;t know if that&#039;s true. I think Betty gets a lot of sympathy. A LOT. It&#039;s a great characterization, and January&#039;s doing a phenomenal job portraying her, but let&#039;s be real. Is the character more hated than Pete, or Duck, or Bobbie Barrett, or Jane, or Joy&#8230;or even Midge? You&#039;ll have to show me proof of that. </p>
<p>I challenge you to try visualizing some of Betty&#039;s more controversial scenes with any of the other women on the show. What would you think if you saw Donielle Artese shove Sally into a closet? What would your reaction be to Elisabeth Moss standing around with one of her friends, yapping about how fat her daughter was, or calling her son a little liar? What if Melinda McGraw was the one hitting on the tow truck driver or trying to break into Don&#039;s desk. I bet your reaction to any of those scenes would be completely different. I mean, they were noteworthy with January, but imagine how shocked you&#039;d be if any of the other women on the show pulled that? I think the only reason they could show Betty doing that stuff is that we&#039;ll allow it from her. We wouldn&#039;t allow it from any other woman on the show. At least, I don&#039;t think so. </p>
<p>But on to other things&#8230; </p>
<p><i>Don was already having an emotional affair with Rachel and was just waiting for an excuse to start a physical one with her.</i> </p>
<p>But how could Don be sure that Rachel would consent to that? Once he told her he was married, she put up a pretty big barrier between them. How could he know for sure that she would eventually relent? </p>
<p>Upon re-watching some of the earlier episodes of season 1, I can see the cracks in his and Midge&#039;s relationship that I hadn&#039;t seen before. But was Don nitpicking on purpose? Just looking for an out because he&#039;d met someone new? He doesn&#039;t seem like the type to give up a sure thing (old business) for  a &quot;possible wink&quot; from someone else (new business). </p>
<p>Don&#039;s thing with Rachel seemed different, but I can&#039;t say for sure &#8212; not now any way. After season 1, and even in the beginning of season 2, I could say that with some certainty. But now? I don&#039;t know. We&#039;ve seen him with four women, other than Betty. Two were completely salacious, while the other two seemed to have more substance. But who knows? Maybe they&#039;re just giving us stuff to give us stuff. There may be no rhyme or reason to any of it after all is said and done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roberta Lipp</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22077</link>
		<dc:creator>Roberta Lipp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22077</guid>
		<description>Anne, I agree, except Midge had rules. She doesn&#039;t make plans and she doesn&#039;t make breakfast. We don&#039;t talk about Don&#039;s wife; it makes her feel cruel. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anne, I agree, except Midge had rules. She doesn&#039;t make plans and she doesn&#039;t make breakfast. We don&#039;t talk about Don&#039;s wife; it makes her feel cruel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne B.</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22076</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 19:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22076</guid>
		<description>I still think that, to Don, the two &quot;other women&quot; in Season 1 were fundamentally different.  Midge was Girl With No Rules.  Betty is, in most cases, all about the rules.  But Rachel set up a whole new game for Don:  one he truly wanted to play.  If he wanted in, he had to play by her rules: 
 
Don&#039;t pretend being married doesn&#039;t matter.  Don&#039;t forget your responsibilities, to others and to me.  Don&#039;t put this on my bill. 
 
And Don is &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; Joan&#039;s jerk of a fiancee.  He is very much interested in the hunt, but no definitely means no.  For Don, the rules of engaging with any woman and the game of pursuing her are probably the same.  At the very least, he wants to know the rules so that he can find places to bend them -- when necessary. 
 
I do think that Don saw Midge and Rachel -- and Betty -- as individuals.  For him, this was a hindrance as much as it was a help.  If he could have placed his lovers on the same level, he never would have given that bonus check to Midge.  He would have lost Rachel much sooner, and saved himself a certain degree of heartbreak. 
 
And perhaps a man like that could have left Betty, without needing to place her in the care of a shrink.  But Don feels things he does not want to feel.  This is one aspect that makes him fascinating to watch. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I still think that, to Don, the two &quot;other women&quot; in Season 1 were fundamentally different.  Midge was Girl With No Rules.  Betty is, in most cases, all about the rules.  But Rachel set up a whole new game for Don:  one he truly wanted to play.  If he wanted in, he had to play by her rules: </p>
<p>Don&#039;t pretend being married doesn&#039;t matter.  Don&#039;t forget your responsibilities, to others and to me.  Don&#039;t put this on my bill. </p>
<p>And Don is <i>not</i> Joan&#039;s jerk of a fiancee.  He is very much interested in the hunt, but no definitely means no.  For Don, the rules of engaging with any woman and the game of pursuing her are probably the same.  At the very least, he wants to know the rules so that he can find places to bend them &#8212; when necessary. </p>
<p>I do think that Don saw Midge and Rachel &#8212; and Betty &#8212; as individuals.  For him, this was a hindrance as much as it was a help.  If he could have placed his lovers on the same level, he never would have given that bonus check to Midge.  He would have lost Rachel much sooner, and saved himself a certain degree of heartbreak. </p>
<p>And perhaps a man like that could have left Betty, without needing to place her in the care of a shrink.  But Don feels things he does not want to feel.  This is one aspect that makes him fascinating to watch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bee</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22075</link>
		<dc:creator>bee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2009 10:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22075</guid>
		<description>^ Yes, I thought the whole reason he was okay with ending things with Midge was because he knew he had another one ready to go. Don was already having an emotional affair with Rachel and was just waiting for an excuse to start a physical one with her. You would think he would&#039;ve be more upset finishing his relationship with Midge since they&#039;d been boinking for god knows how long. I think Don would have had no problem at all at cheating with both Midge and Rachel at the same time if Rachel had agreed to a physical affair earlier in the season. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>^ Yes, I thought the whole reason he was okay with ending things with Midge was because he knew he had another one ready to go. Don was already having an emotional affair with Rachel and was just waiting for an excuse to start a physical one with her. You would think he would&#039;ve be more upset finishing his relationship with Midge since they&#039;d been boinking for god knows how long. I think Don would have had no problem at all at cheating with both Midge and Rachel at the same time if Rachel had agreed to a physical affair earlier in the season.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22074</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:48:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22074</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;What is interesting about that is that we believed it to. &lt;/i&gt; 
 
How though?  The show has Don putting a new pan on the burner while the old one hasn&#039;t even congealed yet. 
 
In fact, we can take one of the reasons the Midge relationship wound down to be because Rachel was &quot;new.&quot; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>What is interesting about that is that we believed it to. </i> </p>
<p>How though?  The show has Don putting a new pan on the burner while the old one hasn&#039;t even congealed yet. </p>
<p>In fact, we can take one of the reasons the Midge relationship wound down to be because Rachel was &quot;new.&quot;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roberta Lipp</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22073</link>
		<dc:creator>Roberta Lipp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22073</guid>
		<description>Agree with bee. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree with bee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bee</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22072</link>
		<dc:creator>bee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:47:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22072</guid>
		<description>&quot;I imagine that she&#226;&#8364;&#8482;d be branded every kind of &#226;&#8364;&#339;bitch&#226;&#8364; imaginable. She&#226;&#8364;&#8482;d be called ball-breaking, nagging, and materialistic. Harridan, virago, shrew. Somehow she&#226;&#8364;&#8482;d be regarded as both slutty AND frigid, and would probably be blamed for everything wrong in her life.&quot; 
 
Betty *is* already branded exactly like that. She gets more hate from fans than every other mad men character combined. You can&#039;t go to any blog or site discussing the show without reading those kind of comments about her. 
 
Betty is most definitely judged to a different standard by fans more than any other character, especially by female viewers. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&quot;I imagine that she&acirc;&euro;&trade;d be branded every kind of &acirc;&euro;&oelig;bitch&acirc;&euro; imaginable. She&acirc;&euro;&trade;d be called ball-breaking, nagging, and materialistic. Harridan, virago, shrew. Somehow she&acirc;&euro;&trade;d be regarded as both slutty AND frigid, and would probably be blamed for everything wrong in her life.&quot; </p>
<p>Betty *is* already branded exactly like that. She gets more hate from fans than every other mad men character combined. You can&#039;t go to any blog or site discussing the show without reading those kind of comments about her. </p>
<p>Betty is most definitely judged to a different standard by fans more than any other character, especially by female viewers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hullaballoo</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22071</link>
		<dc:creator>hullaballoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 18:55:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22071</guid>
		<description>As always, Anne B., your insights are spot on. Especially this: 
 
&lt;i&gt;What was interesting to me in S2 was the extent to which Betty was able to act out in ways that I&#226;&#8364;&#8482;d argue are unavailable to Joan.&lt;/i&gt; 
 
Frankly, I don&#039;t think &lt;b&gt;ANY&lt;/b&gt; other woman on the show could act like Betty in S2 and get away with it. Not on TV, not in 1962, not in life, now. Society grants a kind of permissiveness to slender, young blond women, that they don&#039;t give to anyone else. They are revered and cherished, regardless of what they do. They go missing, and the world stops. They behave badly and no one seems to notice (or worse, it&#039;s regarded as &quot;cute&quot;), but let someone treat them badly, and that person is the most vile of villains who should be whipped and chained, then strung up and left to die. 
 
I wonder how people would have reacted to S2&#039;s Betty if she were played by Donielle Artese -- or even Vanessa Williams. I imagine that she&#039;d be branded every kind of &quot;bitch&quot; imaginable. She&#039;d be called ball-breaking, nagging, and materialistic. Harridan, virago, shrew. Somehow she&#039;d be regarded as both slutty AND frigid, and would probably be blamed for everything wrong in her life. 
 
Like Anne B. said, &quot;It&#039;s not just a gender thing...&quot; it&#039;s the &lt;i&gt;kind&lt;/i&gt; of woman people perceive her to be -- the &lt;i&gt;kind&lt;/i&gt; they decide she is. 
 
There I said it -- so flame me, if you will. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As always, Anne B., your insights are spot on. Especially this: </p>
<p><i>What was interesting to me in S2 was the extent to which Betty was able to act out in ways that I&acirc;&euro;&trade;d argue are unavailable to Joan.</i> </p>
<p>Frankly, I don&#039;t think <b>ANY</b> other woman on the show could act like Betty in S2 and get away with it. Not on TV, not in 1962, not in life, now. Society grants a kind of permissiveness to slender, young blond women, that they don&#039;t give to anyone else. They are revered and cherished, regardless of what they do. They go missing, and the world stops. They behave badly and no one seems to notice (or worse, it&#039;s regarded as &quot;cute&quot;), but let someone treat them badly, and that person is the most vile of villains who should be whipped and chained, then strung up and left to die. </p>
<p>I wonder how people would have reacted to S2&#039;s Betty if she were played by Donielle Artese &#8212; or even Vanessa Williams. I imagine that she&#039;d be branded every kind of &quot;bitch&quot; imaginable. She&#039;d be called ball-breaking, nagging, and materialistic. Harridan, virago, shrew. Somehow she&#039;d be regarded as both slutty AND frigid, and would probably be blamed for everything wrong in her life. </p>
<p>Like Anne B. said, &quot;It&#039;s not just a gender thing&#8230;&quot; it&#039;s the <i>kind</i> of woman people perceive her to be &#8212; the <i>kind</i> they decide she is. </p>
<p>There I said it &#8212; so flame me, if you will.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Deborah Lipp</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22069</link>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Lipp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:12:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22069</guid>
		<description>portia, I think your insight into gender prejudice is dead-on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>portia, I think your insight into gender prejudice is dead-on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne B</title>
		<link>http://www.lippsisters.com/2009/03/24/of-course-not/comment-page-1/#comment-22070</link>
		<dc:creator>Anne B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lippsisters.com/?p=4399#comment-22070</guid>
		<description>portia, right on.  And it&#039;s not just aggressiveness based on gender, I would argue.  I think that Joan suffers as she does in part because of her body type. 
 
There.  I said it. 
 
Because she has &lt;i&gt;a body type&lt;/i&gt; that looks like that period&#039;s physical embodiment of every man&#039;s ideal of sex, Joan has to be more than responsible for her own actions and appearance.  Look at her clothing, and consider how modest it is.  It&#039;s form-fitting, as the dress of that time was -- but Joan is covered up, her hair and makeup is neat and perfect, at all times.  And she doesn&#039;t just draw those lines of decorum:  she polices them, for herself and for others. 
 
Joan&#039;s aware that everyone is watching her, all the time.  She bears the weight of that with the grace of a woman who knows the value of what she carries.  And aside from her vulnerable moment after MM&#039;s death in Roger&#039;s office, she no longer even seems to resent it. 
 
What was interesting to me in S2 was the extent to which Betty was able to act out in ways that I&#039;d argue are unavailable to Joan.  Joan, stranded on the side of the road, discussing car repair with a mechanic and admitting to having only a few bucks in her pocketbook.  How would that have played out, do you think? 
 
And Joan, having a quiet drink alone at a bar, bought by a stranger whom she finds attractive.  She has an indiscretion with him in the restroom.  What would people say about her -- at that time, or now?  And why? 
 
Think about it.  It&#039;s not just a gender thing:  it&#039;s the &lt;i&gt;kind&lt;/i&gt; of woman people see as being sexually available, that is of issue here. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>portia, right on.  And it&#039;s not just aggressiveness based on gender, I would argue.  I think that Joan suffers as she does in part because of her body type. </p>
<p>There.  I said it. </p>
<p>Because she has <i>a body type</i> that looks like that period&#039;s physical embodiment of every man&#039;s ideal of sex, Joan has to be more than responsible for her own actions and appearance.  Look at her clothing, and consider how modest it is.  It&#039;s form-fitting, as the dress of that time was &#8212; but Joan is covered up, her hair and makeup is neat and perfect, at all times.  And she doesn&#039;t just draw those lines of decorum:  she polices them, for herself and for others. </p>
<p>Joan&#039;s aware that everyone is watching her, all the time.  She bears the weight of that with the grace of a woman who knows the value of what she carries.  And aside from her vulnerable moment after MM&#039;s death in Roger&#039;s office, she no longer even seems to resent it. </p>
<p>What was interesting to me in S2 was the extent to which Betty was able to act out in ways that I&#039;d argue are unavailable to Joan.  Joan, stranded on the side of the road, discussing car repair with a mechanic and admitting to having only a few bucks in her pocketbook.  How would that have played out, do you think? </p>
<p>And Joan, having a quiet drink alone at a bar, bought by a stranger whom she finds attractive.  She has an indiscretion with him in the restroom.  What would people say about her &#8212; at that time, or now?  And why? </p>
<p>Think about it.  It&#039;s not just a gender thing:  it&#039;s the <i>kind</i> of woman people see as being sexually available, that is of issue here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

