Stories with women gaining control, freely constructing themselves, and self-actualizing in ways that preserve their autonomy and self respect would be interesting and inspiring. I think of Julian in Children of Men, Nancy in Weeds, especially Ugly Betty.

But women degrading themselves as successful executives, lawyers, and news anchors because they can do no better than swallow whole the failed aspirations of men? Not so much.

and i'd rather see futurama any day than one of these. yet someone had to come up with the concept, someone had to write it, and someone had to sign off on it. who *are* they? are they all unmarried women and gays?

The central anxiety of post-second wave feminism has long been recognized, in these pages and elsewhere, as being based in the paradox of this radically new idea of girl power in a society which is still very conservative in how it evaluates marital success.

Put very simply, a man can still marry a woman whose achievements in public life are less than his, and need never worry about what anyone will think of him. But for a woman to marry a man who "takes the back seat" in terms of status is a discredit to her, still in this day and age, and will get her no end of criticism.

And yet isn't that the inevitable outcome of girl power? That some of the girls will be more powerful than all the boys? That they will marry men whom they don't adore with that submissive thrill of belonging to a real ubermensch? Men and women of my generation still have a very hard time with this, and as more and more of them realize that this is it, this is how we're just all going to be ... voila, along comes TV to provide some drama therapy.

But there are some other things to consider here as well. For one thing, the kids are all right. Young guys out of college are increasingly ditching professional service economy career tracks for child-raising, garage rock with their buds, and mountain-man beards (what is up with that?), while their honeys are bringing in the bread in total acceptance.

For another thing, these shows are never (really, even when they pretend) about working class America -- or about nonwhite America, for that matter. Men bitching about how their old ladies keep all their money isn't wacky world-upside-down hijinks in the blue collar bars and bowling alleys of middle America -- it's an old story, maybe even a comfortable one.

And try talking to a black American woman about how crazy it would be if women really did start doing all the work, like in those TV shows, while the men sat around trying to get it together, har har har. Har.

So, rich white people of America, get over yourselves, for crying out loud. You're smart, creative, empowered -- if you of all people can't find some way for this new and exciting partnership to mean less stress and self-absorption for everyone involved, then you deserve to marinade in every bit of anxiety Rebecca Traister has to preview for you.

Gender conflict is real and the smart shows understand how to deal with it. Men are not neutered when women are put in positions of power. They learn how to deal. Shows like the Shield or Battlestar Galactica or the Wire understand how to introduce powerful women and powerful men and how to create interesting plots showing the tension and showing how sometimes the sexes learn to work together and how sometimes they resent each other. Yet gender and race conflicts are wrapped up in stories about gangs or robots or drugs. This new network season promises veiled sexism showing that when women finally attain positions of power, there is no room for men. Men either become neutered lapdogs or revert to cavemen. This is not reality.

It's unfortunate that our television networks seem to believe that powerful women are so distasteful and awful that men must be demasculated in the process. And it's even worse that these patriarchal values are hidden in shows obstensibly presenting themselves as feminist.

Television viewership has been in serious decline for several years now, as alternative forms of entertainment abound. (I personally don't even own a TV). According to an AP article from earlier this year, 2.5 million fewer viewers were tuned into the major networks compared to just one year ago.

It is also a fact that women watch more television than men in general and watch more drama-oriented stuff in particular. Thus, far from "Women are the new men on TV" having some sort of deep meaning, it merely reflects the demographics of the audience to which these shows are pandering. It IS, after all, a strictly commercial venture, with an expected payoff for the advertisers.

As a mocking William Shatner pleaded to a rabid group of Trekkies in a classic SNL skit: "It's just a TV show!"

It is. Really.

I'm very tired of all the sexy, wealthy, powerful people and their sexy, whiny significant others on network TV, regardless of gender. Knights of Prosperity was onto something smart and original that didn't make me feel like I was the only person left without a six/seven figure income and a gardener/secretary that I was secretly fucking.

I miss ugly, fat, dumb, poor, ethnically diverse people that were actually funny and/or entertaining.

...it's a shame we can't turn the TV off and do something else with our time.

Sometimes I really feel sorry for straight people.

I love strong characters with flaws male or female in my fictional entertainment. In the past ten years I've been disgusted by the complete lack of "Real Men" as network TV trots out an endless parade of weak comical men who are always to be pitied or inspire dred. Thank God for HBO.

What's more upsetting is the environment that created the situation seems to have lept over into realty as well. What role models of manhood would you give to a young boy to follow these days? It leaks through.

It's become unsightly to be a "Man". When men are outlawed, males can only be 1 of two things, insecure boys and or malicious beasts.