.....The scene with Pete and Trudy, directly after his "appointment" at the fertility doctor's office.

He informs her, in his usual bone-headed manner, that HE is not the cause of their childless state of affairs. Woo hoo - notify the press.

He is so offensive that she gets very upset and then flounces off to a back bedroom.....

What gets me here is that she has every right to be pissed off and digusted at him, she storms off, and HE CALLS HER BACK, saying "Trudy! Come back here!"

And, lo, if the wench doesn't come back!!

I gotta tell ya, we play that scenario on a regular basis, in my house, and it pretty much never turns out like that! Ha!

Remember Valentine's Day? He brought her a shitty box of cheap chocolates, barely acknowledged her existence, let alone take her out for a nice dinner, and then proceeded to eat the blasted candies in front of her, like the dumb-ass he is.

Was it the norm, in 1962, for women to bow and scrape in this way?

Dry M. said: Was it the norm, in 1962, for women to bow and scrape in this way?

Pretty much! The wedding vows included : love, honor and obey... for the bride, not the groom. It was during/after the hippie revolution, Gloria Steinham (sp), etc., that people started writing their own vows, leaving out "obey".

I think the characters in MM are on the cusp between the Victorian patriarchal family style and the dawn of single parentage. No matter what the male head of the house said, did or thought he was boss.

Pete and Trudy got married because it was the thing to do. Men were supposed to be married in order to advance in their careers and if they had a family it would appear that they were more stable and dependable than if they were single. But being married didn't stop some men from having affairs, as we've seen so often with our beloved Mad Men.

Trudy is what we now refer to as arm candy. She's attractive, has class, is educated and will obey her husband, no questions asked. And she makes Pete look respectable. Pete must have looked like her knight in shining armor or the prince who would provide her with that castle in the air and live happily ever after. She's finding out that the armor has chinks and the prince's crown is a little lopsided. Heaven help Pete when Trudy burns her bra and grows a backbone!

Now that I can't wait to see!!

Go Trudy!!!!

....."I think the characters in MM are on the cusp between the Victorian patriarchal family style and the dawn of single parentage."

That explains it perfectly..... and thank you. Helen Bishop was rather treated like a space alien with three heads, so I assume that means that divorce, at least among that class in that part of the country, wasn't much indulged.

There was so much more left unsaid than in today's marriages!!..... at least it seems that way.....

My guess from that is that the dysfunction which damaged so many people of the time was the glue, or cloaking device, that held the marriages together. Don't ask, don't tell, kind of thing.

One thing striking me on the Season Two Ride, Part II, is the universal theme of loneliness that seems to pervade the plurality of the characters. They are all so alienated and isolated, even when they are surrounded by others.

As to Pete and Trudy, like Don and Betty, there was a glaring disconnect before marriage anyway, from both themselves as well as each other.

With Pete, he's thus far pretty spineless, without a substantial base of strong core values..... there's no "there" there, for Trudy, right now, and the same could be said about Don Draper as well.

Like Don and Betty, Pete and Trudy have gone through all the right motions, and yet, as we saw at the end of Season Two, their marriage is a disaster.

First there was his confession to Peggy about his feelings for her, indicating one foot out of the marriage in any case.

Then there was the scene about the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Trudy's statement, "If you loved me, you would want to be there [at her parents' place] WITH me," and him replying only, "Yes....."

What a devastating revelation by deliberate omission! Yet, as we've seen over and over, that doesn't mean this couldn't go either way.

Right now, we have no notion of whether ANY of these relationships will survive or not, since they have all been portrayed as left hanging in peril.

Knowing Matt, a lot of that will be swept under the carpet, never to be heard from again, but with the reasonable doubt he plants so strategically, anything is and will be possible.

We could tune back in to Season Three, with Betty and Trudy BOTH having a baby. Or not.

Another aspect of this has bothered me, on the second time around with Season Two. The scene I'm talking about was the one in which Betty confronted Don about his affair with Bobbie Barrett.

In desperate defense of his own false position, he approaches Betty with aggression, gets way too close to be anything other than totally threatening, and then stands glowering over her, never looking bigger and more menacing (or more guilty).

Frankly, I found that scene a little frightening and objectionable, and won't forget it any time soon, whatever happens in that marriage. That was some very bad brains happening right there, and you can't blame Betty for requiring distance from that twisted mess.

You could tell she was shaken by the implied threat, but she stood her ground. That's when I knew there was no going back for her, and she was about to shatter the fun-house mirror, imposed on her since birth, once and for all.

I'm excited to see what happens with all these ladies, since the universal theme there seems to be that each has her own struggle against some kind of repression or limitation.

Oh how true, Dry! I recall watching that scene (the confrontation about Bobbie Barett) and seeing that little, almost imperceptible backward movement of Betty's right as she blurted out "Damn it, Don, I know you're having an affair with that woman!" (paraphrased) as if she was bracing for a possible hit/shove/assault-of-some-kind. Turns out she got just the verbal kind, which was just as bad as any physical abuse.

I remember feeling total contempt for the way Don tried to turn the whole confrontation around to Betty being wrong to dare to even accuse him of such a thing!

There is no one more compartmentalized on Mad Men than Don Draper...he has his life segments neatly (he THINKS!) separated and resents any attempt -- by anyone -- to try to demolish any of his carefully constructed walls.

I totally agree with your thoughts on the loneliness theme of S2...every single character has that in common.

Great post, Dry.

meant to say your post was great, too, rozsie, which it was

...hit "Submit" too soon.....!!!

I surprise myself sometimes when I post to this board. There are certain subjects that just hit home with me and I feel I have to comment. Your kind remarks are appreciated.

It constantly amazes me how the MM writers can get into the psyche of the characters and express so well what a lot of us viewers/fans were going through back in the 60s.

Your remarks, DM, about so much being left unsaid and the effects of dysfunctionality are right on the mark, IMHO. Funny thing is, we didn't know we were dysfunctional. What happened in the house with the family stayed in the house. Except when an aunt would visit and my mother and she would discuss things. Then I would, of course, overhear things I really wasn't supposed to. I don't remember my parents actually having a calm discussion about anything. My father may have been the head of the family, but my mother was the boss!

You've probably heard the expression: children should be seen, but not heard...I think Don/Dick was raised under that premise and that's why he can be so gentle with his son. He treats Bobby as a thinking individual person. Whereas Betty is constantly saying "NO"...which really grates on my nerves. She sees Bobby as a thing to be tolerated until he gets older.

I have to say that I've decided that I really don't like Betty. I can understand her anguish and anger finding out Don had an affair, and why she'd leave him. But, I think she has such a cold manner about her and don't really see why Don remains attracted to her. She seems to have a lot of anger bottled up inside her, for sure. ( I'm still not sure if that part where she shot the birds was real or just her imagining it.)

Yes, totally agree about the loneliness theme.
Good insite from both of you Maddicts. I always enjoy reading your posts even though I don't always respond. Ya'll take care!

.....rozsie.....That's the trick of the light.

As they say about the Devil himself....."The greatest charade Satan ever played was making us believe he doesn't exist....."

As to the family grapevine, been there, done that! I was the original "seen, but not heard" child. [Which explains a LOT!]

So much so, that on my fourth Christmas, having received both perfume AND a watch, I meekly entreated my elders at the four-hour mark, from my "kids-only" corner of the living room....

"If you hear anything, or you smell anything, it's me!"

Apparently, hilarity ensued.

Whatever.

There was this thing on my wall, as a kid......

If a child lives with criticism, he learns to condemn.

If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight.

If a child lives with ridicule, he learns to be shy.

If a child lives with shame, he learns to feel guilty.

If a child lives tolerance, he learns to be patient.

If a child lives with encouragement, he learns to be confident.

If a child lives with praise, he learns to appreciate.

If a child lives with fairness, he learns justice.

If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith.

If a child lives with approval, he learns to like himself.

If a child lives with acceptance and friendship, he learns to find love in the world.

If a child lives with criticism, he learns to condemn.

If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight.

If a child lives with ridicule, he learns to be shy.

If a child lives with shame, he learns to feel guilty.

If a child lives tolerance, he learns to be patient.

If a child lives with encouragement, he learns to be confident.

If a child lives with praise, he learns to appreciate.

If a child lives with fairness, he learns justice.

If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith.

If a child lives with approval, he learns to like himself.

If a child lives with acceptance and friendship, he learns to find love in the world.

Fantastic, Dry! Love it love it love it...

My son's brand-new pediatrician gave a copy of that poem to me upon his birth in 1982...it was rolled up as a little scroll on baby blue paper with a tiny white ribbon tied around it...it came on my lunch tray the 2nd day in the hospital after he was born...I have kept it in his baby book...

Thanks so much for a sweet memory....

.....I guess my point there was that, didn't just about every kid, at some point in the 60s, have one of those on their bedroom wall? I think it was in every doctor's office, as you mentioned, also.....

It sure wasn't posted in our house! We had NO rights at all. We did whatever our parents and teachers said, no matter how unjust, unfair or silly and we didn't talk back. Thinking back, I don't know how we were so cowed. Corporal punishment, I guess. It really set the stage for the Generation Gap.

When my daugter was little, she was going through that stage where they want to bite. My mother was visiting and she said just pick her up and BITE HER BACK. I pointed out that you can't teach a kid not to do something by doing it yourself. (Plus I do not bite other human beings.) I gave her timeout. My mom was livid that I was such a "wimp".

.....roszie..... What was the difference between your childhood, and that of your daughter?

Would you or your sibs have been allowed to even go through a biting stage?

Someone else on here had a similar biting story....damn, I wish I could remember.....

The weird thing is, we didn't KNOW we were so powerless.....as you said. Hindsight is 20-20 in more ways than one.

My extended family situations are best summed up by viewing the movie Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

Sit through THAT hot mess five times a year!

....Oops.....Sorry flower.....I got my eyeballs mixed up for a second.

How did the story with your daughter turn out?

I used to make my son sit in his time out chair and stare at a particular (his eye-level) leaf on the wallpaper....he still can walk up to that wall and name exactly that one particular "staring spot"!

Whenever the time-out-leaf-staring didn't do the trick(about half the time), he'd get a swipe with a wooden backscratcher (through 2 layers of clothing, one being heavy denim jeans!) on the butt....hardly the equivalent of the beltings and swats with fly swatters, wooden spoons, etc. (whatever they could grab in a hurry!) his uncle (my bro.) and I received as children....nothing major and not terribly often, but we did receive what would easily qualify as spankings....even slaps were not unheard of.

Yes, I, too endured the "wimp" situation with parents who never hesitated to spank, belt, or slap US...BUT, even more maddening was how they would be forever saying -- after becoming grandparents! -- "If I had it to do over again, I'd never spank you kids" (my bro. and me) -- I always wanted to reply, "NOW you say that!!"

Yes, Dry, the extended family gatherings are/were definitely a mess...I can definitely empathize with you on that one.

Funny thing, though, now that my older brother has passed on, I miss fighting with the nut! Such is human nature....

Flower/Rozie, it's a natural association!

To answer your question, I did NOT bite her back. My daughter is now 24 and doesn't bite. I guess that was the end of the story.

My mother (and I guess most mothers of that time?) disciplined with physical punishment, belittlement and manipulation; I hope I have done a better job. Somewhere between cruelty and no boundaries at all lies the way to raise a kid. It's not easy being on the cutting edge of civilization!

All children would be like the young Helen Keller in the Miracle Worker if we didn't impose strictures on them - little more than animals. But there is a way to discipline with respect left intact. The biggest problem I had was that I had to work all the time my kid was growing up, so a lot of her training was left to the babysitter, preschool etc. THAT is the curse of my generation, I think. We did not get to raise our own children.

Amen, flower...the hard part was always trying to find that middle ground between cruelty and the road to Bratville, right? They don't say parenthood is the hardest job you'll ever love (well, most of the time!) for nothin'.

Mine is 27 and so far so good....I think! He's in the Air Force -- so I'm sure he now believes that (by comparison) his father and I were easy on him!

I would have answered sooner but one of my cats was in need of cuddling... he's okay for now.

As to the subject of biting. I realize DM's response was a little misdirected, but she's excused - this time. lol

My mother thought it was okay to bite the biter back. That was in the 50s when one of my cousins was a toddler. In some perverse way it worked, according to my aunt. I don't recall that my brother and I were ever biters, but he, being older, would tease me to the point of tears. When I complained to my mother she said something to the effect that he teases me because he loves me. My mental reaction was that I wish he didn't love me so much! I didn't have the nerve to say that out loud.

How my brother and I were disciplined would really depend on how mother was feeling that day. I do recall a time when we were both made to kneel on some dried beans for what seemed an eternity. But her favorite saying was: just wait until your father gets home. This was after yelling and telling us to go to our rooms. My dad was such a sweet natured man so the threat really didn't mean too much. I remember only one time when I got a good hard swat on the behind from him. It hurt my feelings more than my bottom, though.

Somehow my son, 43, turned out very well without too many swats or time outs. I'm sure SC that your son is a fine young man. (My brother was in the Air Force, too, from 1954-64.) My son was nearly 5 when I got divorced so I went the daycare route, too. It was good for him to learn to socialize with other kids. He and I talked a lot. I respected him as an individual and would listen to him and tried never to belittle him. He taught me lot - I mean that sincerely. One day after a rough time at work, I came home in a lousy mood. I was out of patience and was giving him a very hard time. All of a sudden he just stood in front of me and said: "If you had a bad day at work, don't take it out on me!" What a wake-up call that was. If I had said that to my mother I would have either been spanked or sat in the corner. In that moment's time I realized how right he was and hugged him real good.

As my son was growing up he spent alternate weekends with his father and grandparents and got to know his paternal cousins. Not too long ago he told me that he now realizes what a tough row it was to raise him as a single parent. He also said that he felt loved wherever he was.

Dry, I am familiar with the "If a chld..." and must have filed it in my memory bank when I first read it. Somewhere along the line I vowed when and if I had children, I would not be like my mother...I would listen, get the facts and think before I reacted. Sometimes I did, but there were those awful moments when I didn't. All we parents can do is try to love our kids and do the best we are able to. Looking back I'd say that our parents were doing what they thought was right at the time and they were doing it with love, too.

At least my brother and I didn't have to suffer the leather shaving strop my maternal grandfather used on my mother and her siblings. My mother did have a wooden spoon, though. All she had to do was say she was getting it...

One thing family gatherings were good for was to learn more about my parents' childhoods. Oh, the tales my aunts and uncles would tell.

Flowerpower, I'm glad you didn't bite back. I can relate to your post. There was no back talk. If we went visiting we sat with our hands in our lap and listened. That went on until we were around ten or so. Somehow we lived through those terrible years.

.....It was? Whad-I-do??

I'm definitely ceding the floor to you guys - I got expreriences, like anyone, but am in no way qualified to interpret them publicly.

(This would not be the first of many lame attempts to keep "things" going.....)

.....roszie.....Were you here when the other threads about various modes of childhood discipline came up?

That was really interesting, as well as the number of people who had things to say about Betty and Bobby, and Betty and Sally. People were kind of all over the spectrum about it.

I was there, Dry, when that topic was posted...and most of us had the stories about a quick swipe with whatever was handy...I think jamm told of a wooden spoon being used (?) (probably just got one good smack, like my mom would do, and she'd miss pretty often!) and some told of the hairbrush, fly swatter, belt, etc. Which all sounds as if we were beaten...hardly...in my case, anyway, I usually could outrun her! I'd head out when I saw her reaching for "it" (whichever item was closest) and would run out in the backyard and climb my favorite elm tree and sometimes she'd come after me ("You get down out of that tree this instant, young lady...you know what you did!!) Sure, like I was going to do that!...same thing as "Don't you run from me!" (!) (child's thoughts: "sure, I'll just stand here and let you do your thing---no attempt to avoid the beatings!" -- to quote Bill Cosby!

I'd sit up on my favorite limb (yes, I had a favorite limb! ha) and 'wait her out'...most times she'd forget all about it in an hour or less. If you'd done something earth-shatteringly bad (not often she said polishing her halo!) you'd get a swipe with the belt when your dad got home. All the kids in the neighborhood/family were in the same boat...it was the way to discipline back then. Most I knew got much worse than my bro. and I...our parents were pretty light handed compared to most I was witness to. I think spare the rod and spoil the child was taken pretty litterally.

.....SCfan, sitting in a tree, b-l-o-gg-i-n-g.

No, Dry...no blogging, no texting, no cell-phoning, no computering of any sort or any kind!

We were such deprived children, weren't we???

What "weapon" did your parent(s) employ, Dry?

A belt, a fly-swatter, a "switch", an actual paddle, maybe?

Or just the plain old human hand?

If you grew up in the '50's -- 60's, odds are it was one or all of the above....

Any other Maddicts want to share the discipline "memories"....??

Well, the weapon of choice in my house was the switch stick, which was kept on top of the refrigerator. But the hand, the fly swatter and once a brush (on me) was used as well. We were spanked only by our mother, never our father. However, when he was mad he used to say "I'm going to break your arm!" You know, it sounds like we were all abused, but really, we weren't. At least my sister and I weren't. Actually, we were spanked only a handful of times, but in my memory it seems like a lot more. I guess that's why it's so effective as a discipline tool.

Now it seems like the pendulum has swung too far the other way; children seem to be disciplined not at all, for anything! Surely there's a happy medium in there somewhere.

Yes, Mambo, our posts do sound like we were all abused, but, actually, it was not that often (spankings, etc./'physical punishmen') but, they did tend to linger in one's psyche and cause one to think more than once before commiting any "offenses" more often than not, right? ha

My Dad used to say "I'm gonna scob your knob" which sounds vaguely sexual, but it wasn't. Just another of the southern (?) expressions I grew up hearing.

One thing about it, my parents were very affectionate to my brother and I growing up ~ and I remember that more than anything, God rest their souls.

.....Maybe later.....{:)