The sexual chemistry on The Brady Bunch between Greg & Marcia was also something.
I can’t watch that show without wondering which gay guy Dad (Robert Reed) was boinking on the side.
[QUOTE=Skald the Rhymer]
but on at least one occasions she was clearly trying to call the bard.
[/QUOTE]
What does that mean?
Marc
[QUOTE=Abby_Emma_Sasha]
Jeepers, we just had a David Cassidy thread and no one has mentioned the innapropriate sexual chemistry between siblings Keith and Laurie Partridge? Even as a twelve year old I felt a little dirty watching their furtive glances at each other while they entertained the audience in song. I always assumed the big smile on Shirley Jones’ face was masking a big old “What the hell are these two heathens doing?” voice in her head.
[/QUOTE]
Were Dey and Cassidy getting it on IRL? Does anybody know?
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Suppose that Samantha and/or Jeannie’s big deal is that they had inherited millions of dollars, and Darren/Major Tony had forbidden them to use the money, instead living on their salaries? Everyone would think they were just idiots.
[/QUOTE]
I can think of one similar example, from the Lord Peter Wimsey novels. Lord Peter’s sister, Lady Mary, marries his friend, Charles Parker, an honest cop and a prole. Mary puts her inherited money in trust for their children, and draws an allowance equal to Charles’ earned salary. Authorial voice says this works very well for everyone concerned. Of course, there is no hint that Charles *coerced *Mary into this arrangement.
Back in the day, it was considered “unmanly” to live on your wife’s money. Nowadays–well, just look at all the respect Kevin Federline gets.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Were Dey and Cassidy getting it on IRL? Does anybody know?
[/QUOTE]
I read this as “Drew & Cassidy” and immediately thought of the Drew Carey episode where Drew Carey and Shirley Cassidy did “get it on.” Now I’ll have that image in my brain all day :eek:
[QUOTE=MGibson]
Heh, it just goes along with what Quark said to Rom. “You don’t know these humans like I do. Take aware their comfort and root beer and they become just as mean and nasty as any Klingon.” Ok, so that’s a paraphrase.
Good observation, Matt, yet another reason for me to hate Star Trek.
Marc
[/QUOTE]
That’s funny. My thought when I heard that line was, “That writer knows his Heinlein.”
Yet another reason for me to love Star Trek.
Speaking of Star Trek, I know it isn’t a sitcom but I always thought Picard was rude and condescending to Worf. Once in a while, Picard would pause to tell Worf what a great guy he was in his own way, but that was always a result of having offended him so blatantly that even the writers couldn’t ignore it. But most of the time, it was just plain dismissive. “We’re discussing intellectual things, Worf — things that a mere Klingon cannot understand. Why don’t you go play with your knives.”
Also, after last night, I have to add The Winner. Really creepy, Michael Jackson style.
[QUOTE=Abby_Emma_Sasha]
Jeepers, we just had a David Cassidy thread and no one has mentioned the innapropriate sexual chemistry between siblings Keith and Laurie Partridge? Even as a twelve year old I felt a little dirty watching their furtive glances at each other while they entertained the audience in song. I always assumed the big smile on Shirley Jones’ face was masking a big old “What the hell are these two heathens doing?” voice in her head.
[/QUOTE]
How about mother & son Shirley & Keith Partridge (IRL stepmother & son) singing love ballads like “I Think I Love You” together? Icky, icky, icky.
Since we’re branching out from sitcoms, there’s the often-remarked upon subtext of “Charlie’s Angels” - the three beautiful, intelligent, resourceful & strong women - all receiving orders from an omniscient, unseen (and clearly randy) man who subjects them to a parade of degrading assignments that objectify them - “Jill - you’ll go undercover as a contestant in the wet T-shirt assignment. Kelly - we want you to pose as a pole-dancer in the strip joint. Sabrina - you’ll be the go-go girl at the brothel.”
Although one interesting article I read suggested that “Charlie” might have represented the rising rates of divorce in the country during the 1970s. Lots of young girls only had contact with their distant fathers through phone conversations.
[QUOTE=The New and Improved Superman]
Since we’re branching out from sitcoms, there’s the often-remarked upon subtext of “Charlie’s Angels” - the three beautiful, intelligent, resourceful & strong women - all receiving orders from an omniscient, unseen (and clearly randy) man who subjects them to a parade of degrading assignments that objectify them - “Jill - you’ll go undercover as a contestant in the wet T-shirt assignment. Kelly - we want you to pose as a pole-dancer in the strip joint. Sabrina - you’ll be the go-go girl at the brothel.”
[/QUOTE]
That’s no subtext, that’s the show! Fighting crime is a subtext!
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
Nah, your analysis is off. Suppose that Samantha and/or Jeannie’s big deal is that they had inherited millions of dollars, and Darren/Major Tony had forbidden them to use the money, instead living on their salaries? Everyone would think they were just idiots. It was the fact that Samantha and Jeannie had powers that made them threatening to Tony and Darren.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, that analysis is right on. Class is barely even a subtext in Bewitched .
Not only was a woman not supposed to have more money than her husband, but no one was supposed so much unearned wealth that they didn’t have to do anything for a living. If you want to put it in political and social contexts, this was long before Dynasty, or Powerball Lotteries, and shortly after the top marginal income tax rate had been cut - from 90% to 70%.
Wow, four pages in and no one has mentioned Smurfette? The dumb, one-dimensional, hyperfeminized blonde who had nothing that made her special except her gender? Look at the other smurfs for contrast. You had Handy, you had Painter, you had one that cooked a lot. They had talents and personalities. But Smurfette was just Smurfette. She was just there to look pretty…and maybe do other things that weren’t shown.
What was that all about?
[QUOTE=you with the face]
Wow, four pages in and no one has mentioned Smurfette? The dumb, one-dimensional, hyperfeminized blonde who had nothing that made her special except her gender? Look at the other smurfs for contrast. You had Handy, you had Painter, you had one that cooked a lot. They had talents and personalities. But Smurfette was just Smurfette. She was just there to look pretty…and maybe do other things that weren’t shown.
What was that all about?
[/QUOTE]
Not that this makes it any better, but they’re theories that Smurfette isn’t even actually female since it’s possible that Smurfs don’t have sexes and reproduce asexual. Especially because Smurfette was created out of clay in a plot to destory the Smurfs from the inside. So her shtick could actually be “Smurfette is the smurf who likes girly things” rather than “Smurfette is the girl Smurf.” Still pretty offensive/unsettling.
[QUOTE=OBJECTION!!]
Not that this makes it any better, but they’re theories that Smurfette isn’t even actually female since it’s possible that Smurfs don’t have sexes and reproduce asexual. Especially because Smurfette was created out of clay in a plot to destory the Smurfs from the inside. So her shtick could actually be “Smurfette is the smurf who likes girly things” rather than “Smurfette is the girl Smurf.” Still pretty offensive/unsettling.
[/QUOTE]
Smurfette is the smurf who is a Fifth Columnist :eek:
[QUOTE=Rilchiam]
There were issues with step-parenting, in the first season…
[/QUOTE]
There was also an episode where the kids got sick and Mike called his (male) doctor for the girls and Carol called her (female) doctor for the boys without thinking. I remember Bobby being very upset when Carol’s doctor wanted to take his temperature 
.
[QUOTE=NDP]
That’s one interpretation. However, as I pointed out in this post and in this thread, a more accurate comparison would be money and class. Once you take away the magical trappings, “Bewitched” is basically a show about a marriage between two people from very different socio-economic backgrounds. Darrin is middle class (perhaps one generation removed from working class) while Samantha comes from an aristocratic family of idle rich. Using magic to get or accomplish something on the show is the same as using unearned wealth and privilege. In a supposedly classless society like America that emphasizes social advancement by way of one’s merits (at least in principle), doing this is like cheating.
[/QUOTE]
If you want to skip the subtext and go right to the text, there’s Mona McCluskey, which premiered a year after Bewitched and the same season as I Dream of Jeannie. Mona was a beautiful, rich, movie star who married an Air Force sergeant. She promised to live on his salary alone. This might have been an interesting topic to explore, but the show focused on her wacky schemes to make her husband rich on his own.
[QUOTE=OBJECTION!!]
Not that this makes it any better, but they’re theories that Smurfette isn’t even actually female since it’s possible that Smurfs don’t have sexes and reproduce asexual. Especially because Smurfette was created out of clay in a plot to destory the Smurfs from the inside. So her shtick could actually be “Smurfette is the smurf who likes girly things” rather than “Smurfette is the girl Smurf.” Still pretty offensive/unsettling.
[/QUOTE]
The smurf who likes girly things. That’s great.
As long as we’re analyzing the Smurfs, did you know that they were Communists? There’s more than one such site, too. Google “Smurfs communism” if you dare.
[QUOTE=Diceman]
As long as we’re analyzing the Smurfs, did you know that they were Communists? There’s more than one such site, too. Google “Smurfs communism” if you dare.
[/QUOTE]
Heh, the Federation is a militaristic communist republic, while we’re at it, albeit a very successful, powerful one.
[QUOTE=MGibson]
What does that mean?
Marc
[/QUOTE]
It means when I post in the early morning, I often misspell “kill” as “call.” I blame the bees.
[QUOTE=Skald the Rhymer]
It means when I post in the early morning, I often misspell “kill” as “call.” I blame the bees.
[/QUOTE]
Heh, and I went on Google to see if that was some obscure Shakespearian metaphor for knocking the snot out of someone. I need to use that from now on “Call the Bard” 