<?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: Big Love</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/</link>
	<description>In defense of the sanctimonious women&#039;s studies set.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:12:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: piny</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36499</link>
		<dc:creator>piny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36499</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Maybe it’s just me projecting onto the show, but I didn’t see anything that (successfully) glorified plygamy. Everyone in the marriage(s?) seemed pretty miserable and unfulfilled by the situation. And I didn’t see a golden glow anywhere. Everything “pleaseant” seemed purposefully artificial. 

Before the show I did wonder how HBO would manage to insert their signature gratuitous nudity (not that there’s anything wrong with that) and language. Silly me. They always find a way. Remember, it’s not TV, it’s HBO. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

I have tried to stay out of this discussion, because I do not have HBO and therefore probably won&#039;t see &lt;em&gt;Big Love &lt;/em&gt;any time soon, if ever.  

...But maybe &quot;glorified&quot; is the wrong word for this kind of portrayal?  Maybe &quot;softpedaled&quot; instead?  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Maybe it’s just me projecting onto the show, but I didn’t see anything that (successfully) glorified plygamy. Everyone in the marriage(s?) seemed pretty miserable and unfulfilled by the situation. And I didn’t see a golden glow anywhere. Everything “pleaseant” seemed purposefully artificial. </p>
<p>Before the show I did wonder how HBO would manage to insert their signature gratuitous nudity (not that there’s anything wrong with that) and language. Silly me. They always find a way. Remember, it’s not TV, it’s HBO. </p></blockquote>
<p>I have tried to stay out of this discussion, because I do not have HBO and therefore probably won&#8217;t see <em>Big Love </em>any time soon, if ever.  </p>
<p>&#8230;But maybe &#8220;glorified&#8221; is the wrong word for this kind of portrayal?  Maybe &#8220;softpedaled&#8221; instead?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thagmano</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36493</link>
		<dc:creator>Thagmano</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:18:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36493</guid>
		<description>Maybe it&#039;s just me projecting onto the show, but I didn&#039;t see anything that (successfully) glorified plygamy. Everyone in the marriage(s?) seemed pretty miserable and unfulfilled by the situation. And I didn&#039;t see a golden glow anywhere. Everything &quot;pleaseant&quot; seemed purposefully artificial. 

Before the show I did wonder how HBO would manage to insert their signature gratuitous nudity (not that there&#039;s anything wrong with that) and language. Silly me. They always find a way. Remember, &lt;em&gt;it&#039;s not TV, it&#039;s HBO.&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe it&#8217;s just me projecting onto the show, but I didn&#8217;t see anything that (successfully) glorified plygamy. Everyone in the marriage(s?) seemed pretty miserable and unfulfilled by the situation. And I didn&#8217;t see a golden glow anywhere. Everything &#8220;pleaseant&#8221; seemed purposefully artificial. </p>
<p>Before the show I did wonder how HBO would manage to insert their signature gratuitous nudity (not that there&#8217;s anything wrong with that) and language. Silly me. They always find a way. Remember, <em>it&#8217;s not TV, it&#8217;s HBO.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sparkane</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36141</link>
		<dc:creator>sparkane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:43:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36141</guid>
		<description>reddest: pointing out the action of the young man - the immediate servitude - in the scene is a subtle perception, very interesting.  It&#039;s interesting to wonder if she could boss around a _married_ young man.  I have a hunch not, but I don&#039;t know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>reddest: pointing out the action of the young man &#8211; the immediate servitude &#8211; in the scene is a subtle perception, very interesting.  It&#8217;s interesting to wonder if she could boss around a _married_ young man.  I have a hunch not, but I don&#8217;t know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sparkane</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36136</link>
		<dc:creator>sparkane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36136</guid>
		<description>I think Rhonda also stands as a brief foil for Barb (the first wife? haven&#039;t picked up all the names yet).  She&#039;s quite clearly horrified at the prospect of Rhonda.  We already know that she hates even visiting the Compound, and here she is presented with what appears to be her worst nightmare.  And for those who are not in the know about some fundamentalist LDS practices (I would not call myself one of those), it serves to inform what it is that Barb hates about them.  Really, in terms of what the writers were going for, I&#039;d say Rhonda&#039;s brattiness has a lot more to do with Barb than Rhonda.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Rhonda also stands as a brief foil for Barb (the first wife? haven&#8217;t picked up all the names yet).  She&#8217;s quite clearly horrified at the prospect of Rhonda.  We already know that she hates even visiting the Compound, and here she is presented with what appears to be her worst nightmare.  And for those who are not in the know about some fundamentalist LDS practices (I would not call myself one of those), it serves to inform what it is that Barb hates about them.  Really, in terms of what the writers were going for, I&#8217;d say Rhonda&#8217;s brattiness has a lot more to do with Barb than Rhonda.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zuzu</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36132</link>
		<dc:creator>zuzu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36132</guid>
		<description>I thought that Rhonda also served as a reminder that the &quot;good&quot; polygamy practiced by Bill, Barb, Nicki and Margene is of a piece with the &quot;bad&quot; polygamy practiced by Roman et al.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought that Rhonda also served as a reminder that the &#8220;good&#8221; polygamy practiced by Bill, Barb, Nicki and Margene is of a piece with the &#8220;bad&#8221; polygamy practiced by Roman et al.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: reddest</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36131</link>
		<dc:creator>reddest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36131</guid>
		<description>I thought that the Rhonda scene also served to hint at the humiliating position of young, unmarried males in the fringe Mormon communities. The girls are the obvious victims, there&#039;s no question about that, but I&#039;ve read about young males who weren&#039;t fortunate enough to be the favored sons of powerful men being thrown out of their homes and literally abandoned at roadsides. When you have numerous powerful men with three, four, eleven wives, where are the girls for the young men to marry? These boys, I&#039;ve read, are sometimes just tossed out or even excommunicated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought that the Rhonda scene also served to hint at the humiliating position of young, unmarried males in the fringe Mormon communities. The girls are the obvious victims, there&#8217;s no question about that, but I&#8217;ve read about young males who weren&#8217;t fortunate enough to be the favored sons of powerful men being thrown out of their homes and literally abandoned at roadsides. When you have numerous powerful men with three, four, eleven wives, where are the girls for the young men to marry? These boys, I&#8217;ve read, are sometimes just tossed out or even excommunicated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sparkane</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36127</link>
		<dc:creator>sparkane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:25:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36127</guid>
		<description>Re: the excessive sex, how many scenes were there?  I only remember the one with the third wife and the attempt at one with the first wife, after the shot of the viagra bottle, which only received the brushoff; but I didn&#039;t catch the whole show.  Two scenes is too much?  What about six feet under, and Brenda&#039;s shenanigans?  Those were rather graphic, or no less graphic than in BL, and not always short IIRC - or am I mistaken here?  In other words, to me it seemed par for the course for an HBO show.

Re: the Rhonda, new wife of the prophet, I don&#039;t understand viewers&#039; attempts to subtextualize her behavior.  She&#039;s 14.  She&#039;s been honored (or &quot;honored&quot; if you prefer) with marriage to her community&#039;s absolute patriarch.  She&#039;s not behaving like a brat because the writers have a point; she&#039;s behaving that way because when you&#039;re 14 and placed in a position of great power in your community, you will likely act like a complete brat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: the excessive sex, how many scenes were there?  I only remember the one with the third wife and the attempt at one with the first wife, after the shot of the viagra bottle, which only received the brushoff; but I didn&#8217;t catch the whole show.  Two scenes is too much?  What about six feet under, and Brenda&#8217;s shenanigans?  Those were rather graphic, or no less graphic than in BL, and not always short IIRC &#8211; or am I mistaken here?  In other words, to me it seemed par for the course for an HBO show.</p>
<p>Re: the Rhonda, new wife of the prophet, I don&#8217;t understand viewers&#8217; attempts to subtextualize her behavior.  She&#8217;s 14.  She&#8217;s been honored (or &#8220;honored&#8221; if you prefer) with marriage to her community&#8217;s absolute patriarch.  She&#8217;s not behaving like a brat because the writers have a point; she&#8217;s behaving that way because when you&#8217;re 14 and placed in a position of great power in your community, you will likely act like a complete brat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Surfing the blogosphere</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36107</link>
		<dc:creator>Surfing the blogosphere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36107</guid>
		<description>[...] Teri Hatcher&#8217;s role in Desperate Housewives Big Love: zuzu&#8217;s comments on the HBO polygamy show Dita von Teese, No Less:  Zu [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Teri Hatcher&#8217;s role in Desperate Housewives Big Love: zuzu&#8217;s comments on the HBO polygamy show Dita von Teese, No Less:  Zu [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Samantha Vimes</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36104</link>
		<dc:creator>Samantha Vimes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:55:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36104</guid>
		<description>I think my polyamourous friends have *plenty* of drama in their lives. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think my polyamourous friends have *plenty* of drama in their lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kim</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36093</link>
		<dc:creator>Kim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2006 16:04:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/03/13/big-love/#comment-36093</guid>
		<description>I get that people would wonder about polygmaous sex.... but I mean, c&#039;mon. All I needed to know was that he rotated beds each night and needed Viagra. Not the details of whether he was hittin&#039; it from the back or getting a blowjob. I&#039;m no prude... but I thought the scenes were needlessly prolonged. And awkward. (But then, I was watching with a roomful of people.)

And on the 14 year old girl thing: I thought that her being bossy was used to illustrate the unhealthiness and absurdity of her situation. (Especially since it came on the heels of her &quot;God gave the elder wife cancer for being sinful&quot; speech.) </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I get that people would wonder about polygmaous sex&#8230;. but I mean, c&#8217;mon. All I needed to know was that he rotated beds each night and needed Viagra. Not the details of whether he was hittin&#8217; it from the back or getting a blowjob. I&#8217;m no prude&#8230; but I thought the scenes were needlessly prolonged. And awkward. (But then, I was watching with a roomful of people.)</p>
<p>And on the 14 year old girl thing: I thought that her being bossy was used to illustrate the unhealthiness and absurdity of her situation. (Especially since it came on the heels of her &#8220;God gave the elder wife cancer for being sinful&#8221; speech.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching 15/21 queries in 0.027 seconds using disk: basic

Served from: www.feministe.us @ 2012-02-10 02:30:53 -->
