<?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/"
	
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Women of MAD MEN</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s only national weekly current affairs magazine.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 16:13:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: @allaboutgeorge</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153475</link>
		<dc:creator>@allaboutgeorge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153475</guid>
		<description>Excellently put.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellently put.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terren</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153474</link>
		<dc:creator>Terren</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:34:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153474</guid>
		<description>Mad Men is pure genius. Best show on TV.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mad Men is pure genius. Best show on TV.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153473</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:40:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153473</guid>
		<description>This whole post is excellent, but the most important part is the paragraph about the way MAD MEN&#039;s recognition of its world&#039;s male hegemony contributes significantly to its ability create strong female characters. The most frustrating pieces of feminist criticism are the ones that argue the recognition of such a hegemony makes a work inherently anti-feminist. You see this from time to time in regard to BtVS: ie.- &quot;Slayers were created by and are subservient to the Watchers&#039; Council. Therefore BtVS is not really a feminist text.&quot; I think I&#039;ve read similar articles about MAD MEN, though I can&#039;t find any right now. (These are minority opinions, obviously, but they still grate.)

Such arguments ignore that the male hegemonies these shows depict are metaphors for the male hegemony that still exists in modern society and suggest that for some the only truly feminist texts are those that are purely escapist fantasy, in which female characters face no conflicts from society and can therefore achieve perfect empowerment as ideal feminist heroes. But such characters, and texts, would be extremely boring and unrealistic and thus not ideal feminist heroes. And this what we see on most shows: a reluctance to recognize in societal conflict leads to boring characters, so writers try to make those characters interesting by putting them in relationships, which results in boring characters defined by their relationships.

This isn&#039;t to say that MAD MEN doesn&#039;t occasionally exploit its forthrightly sexist setting. Some of the sexist jokes the male characters tell are more legitimately funny than horrifying and not the sort of thing most shows could get away with. Additionally, I agree that the museum-piece quality lends a distance to the show and the characters, and this distance can sometimes lead to sense of triumphalism (&quot;Look how backwards they were, aren&#039;t we so much more evolved now?&quot;) that might allow viewers to ignore that the power structure and sexism the show depicts still exists in a less obvious, egregious form.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This whole post is excellent, but the most important part is the paragraph about the way MAD MEN&#039;s recognition of its world&#039;s male hegemony contributes significantly to its ability create strong female characters. The most frustrating pieces of feminist criticism are the ones that argue the recognition of such a hegemony makes a work inherently anti-feminist. You see this from time to time in regard to BtVS: ie.- &quot;Slayers were created by and are subservient to the Watchers&#039; Council. Therefore BtVS is not really a feminist text.&quot; I think I&#039;ve read similar articles about MAD MEN, though I can&#039;t find any right now. (These are minority opinions, obviously, but they still grate.)</p>
<p>Such arguments ignore that the male hegemonies these shows depict are metaphors for the male hegemony that still exists in modern society and suggest that for some the only truly feminist texts are those that are purely escapist fantasy, in which female characters face no conflicts from society and can therefore achieve perfect empowerment as ideal feminist heroes. But such characters, and texts, would be extremely boring and unrealistic and thus not ideal feminist heroes. And this what we see on most shows: a reluctance to recognize in societal conflict leads to boring characters, so writers try to make those characters interesting by putting them in relationships, which results in boring characters defined by their relationships.</p>
<p>This isn&#039;t to say that MAD MEN doesn&#039;t occasionally exploit its forthrightly sexist setting. Some of the sexist jokes the male characters tell are more legitimately funny than horrifying and not the sort of thing most shows could get away with. Additionally, I agree that the museum-piece quality lends a distance to the show and the characters, and this distance can sometimes lead to sense of triumphalism (&quot;Look how backwards they were, aren&#039;t we so much more evolved now?&quot;) that might allow viewers to ignore that the power structure and sexism the show depicts still exists in a less obvious, egregious form.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153472</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153472</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a January Jones fan myself</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m a January Jones fan myself</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andr&#233;</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153471</link>
		<dc:creator>Andr&#233;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:42:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153471</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t watch that show because Christina Hendricks is too hot for my virgin young eyes...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#039;t watch that show because Christina Hendricks is too hot for my virgin young eyes&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/11/the-women-of-mad-men/comment-page-1/#comment-153470</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=75283#comment-153470</guid>
		<description>Thanks for highlighting the article.  I love MadMen, the scripting is fantastic.    The stories are great and he characters wonderful.

I was glad to hear they hold the integrity of the show high, like no revenge for Joan, too Soap Operaish.   The box of the history forces rules and constraints that drive the creativity.

Not only is about women trying to figure things out, but also about men trying figure out how to deal with the changes.....this season should be great.   Think about 1963, if this is the year they are starting in....Beatles on ed Sullivan, Kennedy Assisnation, changes colour television begining.  Youth culture really taking hold. The shift from New York to California, the beginnings of US involvement n Viet Nam,  Thalidomide!!!!

But the last couple of shows, particularly Don&#039;s &quot;Baptism&quot; in the Pacific was some of the best I have seen.   The season ender from season 1, the carosel speech was one of the most moving things I have ever seen on TV.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2bLNkCqpuY&amp;feature=related&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2bLNkCqpuY&amp;fe...&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for highlighting the article.  I love MadMen, the scripting is fantastic.    The stories are great and he characters wonderful.</p>
<p>I was glad to hear they hold the integrity of the show high, like no revenge for Joan, too Soap Operaish.   The box of the history forces rules and constraints that drive the creativity.</p>
<p>Not only is about women trying to figure things out, but also about men trying figure out how to deal with the changes&#8230;..this season should be great.   Think about 1963, if this is the year they are starting in&#8230;.Beatles on ed Sullivan, Kennedy Assisnation, changes colour television begining.  Youth culture really taking hold. The shift from New York to California, the beginnings of US involvement n Viet Nam,  Thalidomide!!!!</p>
<p>But the last couple of shows, particularly Don&#039;s &quot;Baptism&quot; in the Pacific was some of the best I have seen.   The season ender from season 1, the carosel speech was one of the most moving things I have ever seen on TV.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2bLNkCqpuY&amp;feature=related" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2bLNkCqpuY&#038;fe&#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

