<?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: Who is the Elizabethan widow now?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html</link>
	<description>This Blog Sits At the Intersection of Anthropology and Economics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 20:32:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: irene</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1492</link>
		<dc:creator>irene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:27:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1492</guid>
		<description>I think Peter Spear is right. About a year ago, when New York magazine interviewed Bravo’s  president Lauren Zalaznick, she said that the success of the Queer Eye series really was an epiphany for her network:“’We had to define what pop culture meant on Bravo,&#039; says Zalaznick. &#039;And what pop culture, as defined by us, has come to mean is five affinity groups: fashion, food, beauty, design, and pop. It’s not coincidental that the five guys in Queer Eye each represented one of those things.&#039;”
It seems like all this has happened just in the last 10 years or so -- after AIDS, after Michael Ovitz complained to Vanity Fair about the Velvet Mafia, after Madonna built a career largely on glorifying/co-opting so many aspects of gay culture. It&#039;s as if these things finally made it possible for gay men to transition from the background (stylists to celebrities, for instance) to the spotlight (celebrity stylists).
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Peter Spear is right. About a year ago, when New York magazine interviewed Bravo’s  president Lauren Zalaznick, she said that the success of the Queer Eye series really was an epiphany for her network:“’We had to define what pop culture meant on Bravo,&#8217; says Zalaznick. &#8216;And what pop culture, as defined by us, has come to mean is five affinity groups: fashion, food, beauty, design, and pop. It’s not coincidental that the five guys in Queer Eye each represented one of those things.&#8217;”</p>
<p>It seems like all this has happened just in the last 10 years or so &#8212; after AIDS, after Michael Ovitz complained to Vanity Fair about the Velvet Mafia, after Madonna built a career largely on glorifying/co-opting so many aspects of gay culture. It&#8217;s as if these things finally made it possible for gay men to transition from the background (stylists to celebrities, for instance) to the spotlight (celebrity stylists).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tim dawes</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1491</link>
		<dc:creator>tim dawes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 20:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1491</guid>
		<description>Another group that comes to mind is the burgeoning roster of millionaires, not a generation but a vein that runs through them. They have the economic wherewhithal and the freedom to do as they please. Richard Tait makes a fortune helping Microsoft become dominant in the 90s, then brings a new research paradigm to the board game industry and creates, Cranium, the fastest growing game company in history. Then sells to Hasbro for another fortune only to move on to...whatever he wants to do next.
Jeff Goldsmith gives credence to your view in his upcoming &quot;The Long Baby Boom: An Optimistic Vision for a Graying Generation&quot;.
Here&#039;s an excerpt from the introduction:
&quot;The vision of the baby boomers as a gigantic societal albatross is a myth in the making. Not only are the catastropharians wrong about the next twenty years. Their social prescriptions are also the wrong medicine for American society. They offer a static, zero-sum vision for what is, in fact, a dynamic, growing and creative economy and society. The crisis they envision is eminently avoidable, not by the politically untenable solutions they offer, but rather by listening to the generation itself and helping its members do what they say they intend to do.&quot;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another group that comes to mind is the burgeoning roster of millionaires, not a generation but a vein that runs through them. They have the economic wherewhithal and the freedom to do as they please. Richard Tait makes a fortune helping Microsoft become dominant in the 90s, then brings a new research paradigm to the board game industry and creates, Cranium, the fastest growing game company in history. Then sells to Hasbro for another fortune only to move on to&#8230;whatever he wants to do next.</p>
<p>Jeff Goldsmith gives credence to your view in his upcoming &#8220;The Long Baby Boom: An Optimistic Vision for a Graying Generation&#8221;.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an excerpt from the introduction:<br />
&#8220;The vision of the baby boomers as a gigantic societal albatross is a myth in the making. Not only are the catastropharians wrong about the next twenty years. Their social prescriptions are also the wrong medicine for American society. They offer a static, zero-sum vision for what is, in fact, a dynamic, growing and creative economy and society. The crisis they envision is eminently avoidable, not by the politically untenable solutions they offer, but rather by listening to the generation itself and helping its members do what they say they intend to do.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter spear</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1490</link>
		<dc:creator>peter spear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:05:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1490</guid>
		<description>The first thing that comes to my mind is gay culture. i happen to live in an upstate NY town that found itself saved from economic ruin by the (largely gay) interior design and architectural romanticists that found value in historical purity.
The most interesting notions of masculinity and even of domesticity and the American home seem to have been significantly impacted by gay culture.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first thing that comes to my mind is gay culture. i happen to live in an upstate NY town that found itself saved from economic ruin by the (largely gay) interior design and architectural romanticists that found value in historical purity.</p>
<p>The most interesting notions of masculinity and even of domesticity and the American home seem to have been significantly impacted by gay culture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Frith</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1489</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Frith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1489</guid>
		<description>Surely the Cougar is a 21st century manifestation of the Elizabethan widow? Plenty on the West Coast of the United States.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely the Cougar is a 21st century manifestation of the Elizabethan widow? Plenty on the West Coast of the United States.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: niti bhan</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1488</link>
		<dc:creator>niti bhan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1488</guid>
		<description>Imho, I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if the widow and nowadays, the divorcee, still holds a similar wild card status among the conservative patriarchal societies, particularly if financially independent. Growing up in the 70&#039;s and 80&#039;s, I recall strong professional financially independent women who were outside the &#039;norm&#039; of indian society, rarely though were they still married.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Imho, I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if the widow and nowadays, the divorcee, still holds a similar wild card status among the conservative patriarchal societies, particularly if financially independent. Growing up in the 70&#8242;s and 80&#8242;s, I recall strong professional financially independent women who were outside the &#8216;norm&#8217; of indian society, rarely though were they still married.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2008/07/who-is-the-eliz.html/comment-page-1#comment-1487</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:04:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=242#comment-1487</guid>
		<description>Bates has misinterpreted the legal status of single and married women. The young adult woman (femme sole) owns her own property legally although she may be inclined to follow the intentions of her father or guardian out of social submissiveness. The wife was not a chattle of her husband, but her legal interests were merged with her husband&#039;s. Socially, the husband may have called the shots even concerning her property.
The widow, in law, was once again single with ownership of her (and now his) property.
Any other limitations on her were imposed by the specific terms of her father or husband&#039;s will&#039;s concerning any property. And social pressures may have been of less concern to the mature woman.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bates has misinterpreted the legal status of single and married women. The young adult woman (femme sole) owns her own property legally although she may be inclined to follow the intentions of her father or guardian out of social submissiveness. The wife was not a chattle of her husband, but her legal interests were merged with her husband&#8217;s. Socially, the husband may have called the shots even concerning her property.</p>
<p>The widow, in law, was once again single with ownership of her (and now his) property.<br />
Any other limitations on her were imposed by the specific terms of her father or husband&#8217;s will&#8217;s concerning any property. And social pressures may have been of less concern to the mature woman.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

