There is an appeal about simpler, well-defined roles. Expectations are a lot clearer. Though Burrell's capsulization of Liese's comment trumps clearer expectations for me. If you aren't built to meet the narrow range of expectations, life can be hell.

This is the part of VK's response that really bothers me:

I just had a conversation with a friend today. He called me and wanted me to know that last night I was a little aggressive with him and he felt he needed to talk about his feelings. And it’s like Jesus Christ dude! You weight 210 pounds and spend all day long in the gym. Are you really this much of a pussy? And it’s true, we are.

Being "a man" means you aren't supposed to value your friendships enough to be concerned that you may have stepped over the line and hurt the friendship? Caring about your friends' feelings makes you a "pussy"? (And VK's use of that particular word is revealing in its own way.)

My 17-year-old niece, wrestling with college and life choices, told me she wished she lived back when all you had to do was "meet someone nice, get married, and then you didn't have to worry about a career." She told me a lot of her friends feel the same way. These are smart kids (and many of her friends are minorities) who know rationally that things weren't "nicer," but who feel they are under way more pressure these days. Hearing this shocked feminist me to my core, but in speaking more with her, it was clear they were idealizing having a clear path, instead of having to figure it out for themselves--because figuring it out is overwhelming sometimes. She is going to college and thinking about what she wants to do and I am sure will have a successful life, but the idea of not HAVING to seems idyllic.

But, even the "simpler" times were fraught with their own pressures. If she thinks it's difficult living up to Paris Hilton or whomever, I don't think being a "good wife" is any easier. At least with Paris you just have to be a pretty fool. Plus, she's allowed to be her own person no matter how irritating that person may be.

A good housewife has to do that plus housework, child rearing, host a perfect dinner party, and even if you are able to accomplish all that, it's more of a testament to how awesome your husband is that he got such a cool piece of property.

I feel we're treading a little too far into "observe the lowly housewife" territory here. Both of my grandmothers were housewives in the 30s and 40s, and while they didn't have all the opportunities that men of their time did, they were hardly voiceless slaves or household appliances of their husbands.

The '50s and '60s were actually worse for women, because of the concerted effort to get them out of the workforce after WWII to give the jobs to returning servicemen. There were ads and articles that all talked about the importance of being a housewife and supporting your man.

I grew up in the '60s, which is why I couldn't watch this show for very long. Having less choice is not simpler. I grew up surrounded by women who could only pour their considerable talents into housework, decorating and childcare. They were, as Margaret Mitchell described herself, dynamos going to waste.

(And VK's use of that particular word is revealing in its own way.)

and in an interview, not just amongst friends (not that that's better, but the fact that he feels so comfortable using it for national consumption is telling as well)

Mine was too, well in the 40s, and I'm absolutely sure my grandfather loved her and valued her input as a mother and wife, but that's in all reality as far as it probably went.

I don't think it was simpler--I think it SEEMS simpler. When I was a teen in the 70s and "Happy Days" was on, we talked about the 50s as a simpler time, and it used to make my parents laugh at us. As my mom pointed out, living with the Korean war and McCarthyism and racism and the threat of Atomic war was not happy.

I think I'm on team Robin & Burrell. Kartheiser may well be a jerk in person -- that's irrelevant to me -- but nothing in that interview made me raise an eyebrow. I'm also confused because the part that seems to have irritated some people comes right after he says that he thinks the show isn't about how different things were then, but how similar.

But I've been known to call male friends "pussies," so I guess that reveals a lot about me, too.

It's just...he says that the actresses on the show think it would be better, and I can't imagine any of them saying it, but specifically the leads-Peggy, Betty, Joan (maybe), or Rachel thinking any of it was easier.

There are a lot of background actresses for the secretarial pool so maybe one of them are saying it.

Plus someone with a smaller role isn't going to know exactly what's going on in scenes where it's just Don's wife and the shrink, right? Not until they saw the whole thing together?