why not betty?

SHE wants the divorce, SHE wants to tear up the family and end it all........so why did this selfish, immature ice princess biotche (betz) order don out of the house that HE is paying for?

don shudda "manned up" and told HER to get out of the house his income paid for if she wanted to end the marriage!

Don so firmly believes a woman's place is in the home that he'll move out in these situations, I guess.

If you think about it, though, it'd be more natural for the kids this way.  Betty's always home as it is, and Don's always sleeping various places in the city and is away for days at a time.  Although Betty leaving the kids for a few weeks in the care of their housekeeper kind of flies in the face of that theory.

I know what you mean.  Whenever Marge kicked Homer out on The Simpsons I would always think, "But...that's Homer's house.  He bought it."

Wow. 1963 just called and they want their outdated views back.

Betty raised Don's kids, kept his house, made his meals, ran his errands and softened his woodies for many years without pay. She is the woman behind his success. Her support at home made his success possible. It's THEIR house. And as long as she's continuing to raise the kids for him, the house should be hers, not to mention that it's the best thing for the kids to give them that structure and normalcy. Let's not forget that Don cast the first stone in this marriage and that his betrayals are many, compared to a single indiscretion by Betty.

Then or now, any court would award Betty the house and appropriate alimony. And she's not even asking for alimony. Don's getting off easy.

Adgal, you are right.

Don never said the right thing to make Betty reconsider.  Last week and this week, I kept listening for "I'm so sorry for what I did. Can't we try together?" from Don.  Never heard it.  I especially never heard "I love you." Only "You're not yourself.  We'll get you a good doctor.  Then you'll feel better."  And all the heartrending stuff from Don in his business persona--telling Roger he valued his relationship with him, humbling himself in front of Pete and Peggy, catharsis with all of those people but not for Betty.

You'd think at least he should stay there over the holidays since Betz is in Reno. Keep a sembalance of normalcy for the kids, though Sally seems to be feeling betrayed by both parents now.
That kid is going to be one hell raiser in the early 70's.

Hey, thanks adgal.  Love your humour and your point-of-view.  And Becky, you are absolutely right.  I think Don could easily salvage his marriage with a bit of humility and some honest talk.  What he should have said to Betty, he said to Peggy instead in the very next scene.

Yeah, I don't get why Betty left the kids with the housekeeper, especially during the holidays, not to mention all the upset.  Couldn't she ask their father to be with them at the house while she was away?  Sally is most definitely going to be a handful later on.

Maybe, back in those days, men thought that throwing their wife and the mother of their children out on the street was just not the classy way to go.  I have to agree.

Whoa! Betty did squat...she had a house keeper paid by Don who not only cleaned and cooked most of the time but basically raised the kids as well. She was a spoiled brat that went to college to find a guy to take care of her

I've seen on a lot of blogs that people think Betty has to stay in Reno for six weeks to establish residency.  I'm not sure that makes sense.  Wouldn't she just have to rent a PO box or rent a room and maybe get a telephone?  They don't actually check to see if you're sleeping in the bed.  I don't think even Betty would leave the kids over Christmas, would she?
During my parent's divorce, my father rented an apartment to establish monthly expenses.  I'm not sure he ever even walked through the door.  He was living with his girlfriend.  A lot of this stuff is just formalities for the system.  My guess is Betty and Henry would be back in a few days.

Back then that was unheard of.  The man always left the house.  That's the way it was back then.  Afterall, women were not supposed to work outside the home, they had no way to support themselves.  They didn't have their own money and they didn't have income.

Back then, they needed alimony.  She'll be making a big mistake if she doesn't try to get it.  Listening and trusting whats his name will be a mistake.

I think part of the brilliance of the show is that Don is such a nuanced character, we somehow end up rooting for him despite his despicable behavior. So Betty seems like the villian for kicking him out.  For me, the saddest part is the children's fate in all this... and I come down on Don's side in many ways because he loves the children, where Betty clearly does not. Whether she's capable of loving anyone is debatable. She's a hard character to like and I'm not sorry she's gone, though I'll miss her fabulous clothes!  I wonder if her story thread with Henry (what a sleaze bag) will continue at all?

Don left the house and will give Betty the house for the same reason why he didn’t wack her when he came home drunk.  Betty has the upper hand and if push comes to real shoving he could find himself breaking rocks at Ft Levingsworth as an Army deserter. 

It sort of makes sense on a practical point of view even though Betty is a horrible mother and doesn’t deserve all the spoils.  With Don’s new business he would be coming home at what time?  If ever?

Would Carla become a live in raising the kids?  Or would Betty be forced to move in with Henry and have them living in his house that isn’t made for three children? (I’m assuming) his first home went to his first wife.

Don is better off for now living and working in the city and keeping his kids in their home.  But while Betts is away he should be there no question about it.

Back in those days women of her ilk had housekeepers. From what I've observed, Betty works in tandem with her housekeeper. Yeah, it's a pretty plush job. But I'd rather live without a housekeeper than live with a man who cheats on me, spies on me with my psychiatrist, and holds my lifestyle over me like a carrot so I won't leave him.

Betty gave up having a career of her own to care for her husband and family. It was a choice she made, certainly, and Don made it easy for her. Perhaps it was all she ever wanted from life. But flash forward 10 years into a marriage and she's a grown adult with zero work experience and two children to raise. Don benefited from his marriage to Betty, as did she. The price she paid was in sitting at home while her husband philandered and shamed her. The price he should pay is continuing to support her as she supported him for so many years while he stepped outside of the vows of his marriage.

Betty was misled into believing that Don would "honor her and keep her until death do we part." He did not honor her. And living in a situation like that for the sake of the kids, for the sake of Don and, yes, for the sake of herself is harder work than doing a load of laundry each day.

Doesn't seem to me like Betty is the one who acted like a spoiled little brat in that marriage.

And that is the entire point. She made a decision. The Betty I see as no hustle no desire to be independent, she wants to be kept and she exchanges her good looks and what ever else comes with that for a house and lifestyle. Don said it best in the statement that She is a whore. High class but as cold self centered and emotionless.

Remember Don came from an extremely abusive situation, Betty was treated like a princess. That doesn't excuse Don but we know Betty cheated too so she can no longer claim the high road on this.

And not everyone had a housekeeper and not everyone who had one used that person as a barrier between her children and herself like Betty.

Tell me have you witness any great behavior from Betty that has her putting children ahead of her needs? She is dragging the baby to Vegas because she can't wait like most parents would to get a divorce in the right time and place. Many separate for years before they make this move but not Betty, She is so needy she dumps her kids with a sitter and drags a new born on a plane to travel across the country.

Yes Don cheated so did she and was a bad mother to boot.

You're joking, right?

Not joking. I'm guessing the two of you are men? Because you have some pretty harsh judgments of Betty and yet act as if Don's indiscretions are minimal.

Betty kissed a man. Don had full-on intercourse with countless women over a period of years. What kind of Dad does that make him? What kind of man?

You use her kiss as a reason why she shouldn't get anything in a divorce. That's just ridiculous! Everything you're saying about Betty can be said about Don tenfold.

I think the relationship between Betty and Don has a lot of layers in it and it's not easily boiled down to one side being wrong.

Don is a bad husband in the emotional sense, he doesn't share, he doesn't make amends and he cheats.  But of course, he does his job - he brings home money.  I mean really though - the one thing that surprised me about Don was that he called off his affair.  Because how easy would it be for him to just take off and marry someone new?

Betty is a bad wife in that she's icy, but she does her share too.  She dolls up well (as is her expectation given Don's sales life) and she schmoozes.  Given her stance in society in those times, I can see why she's jumped to a quickie divorce to jump on marrying Henry Francis.  It's protective for her, economically and she has no real skills otherwise.   

And their relationship with the children - from both sides - seems distant and uncommunicative.  I guess that's how things were back in those days.  I see Betty ordering the kids around, but for the most part, Don's not even home and hardly ever engages in any parenting at all.  Frankly, the kids are all going to be messed up. 

I don't think it's easy to sympathize with either character here at all.

Madwoman is right.

Unfortunately they seem like my parents, I know it is sad. 

The irony here though, is that Don is the one who really loves his children.

Love this show, but sometimes, it really hits home and can make me sad too.

I think you're forgetting the time Betty grabbed that guy in the bar and took him to the back room for a quickie.  She's not just a smoocher.

I'm not excusing Don's infidelities; he's clearly flawed in that respect.  What kind of Dad does that make him?  Frankly, it really hasn't had much of an impact on his kids at all.  He's proven time and time again to be the more loving parent.  The examples are too numerous to list. 

One instance I thought was particularly telling didn't even come from Don, but from when Grandpa Gene was talking to Sally over ice cream at the table.  In his deteriorating mental state, both he and young Sally were equals then, looking over their shoulders in fear of Betty storming in to bitch at them.  Gene then tells Sally that she shouldn't pay any mind to her mother's browbeating, and that despite what she might say to her, young Sally "could really be something" - inferring that Betty had done just the opposite.

I'm waiting, adgal.  I'm prepared to list any number of caring and heartfelt moments Don has shared with Bobby, Sally, and even young Gene, despite his largely necessary and often prolonged absences from the home.  Yet despite the fact Betty rarely leaves, I think you'll be hard pressed to give me a convincing list of hers.  Whenever she mentions Bobby, it seems she's pleading for Don to hit him.  When Sally comes up in conversation, she's referring to her as fat, calling her a "little lesbian," or attempting to bribe her into compliance with Barbie dolls she obviously has no interest in.  Gene's still very young, so we haven't seen much; however, his arrival in the world was more of a trippy, childish tantrum on Betty's part than anything else, and then we hear how she's not even prepared to breastfeed him!  This could be symbolic of her lack of attachment to her kids, either figuratively or literally, or maybe a comment on Betty's perceived status, since women of "high birth" (Get it?  She was high when...never mind) would not feed their babies themselves, but pass those duties on to wetnurses and other surrogates.  That's not literally happening in this case, but we've seen Betty shuck her responsibilities onto Carla, Don and others.

Now - what kind of a man does Don's cheating make him?  Well, you know how women just hate to define what it is they should or shouldn't be (both then and especially in our so-called "post-modern" era today), so I don't think I'm going to attempt it with Don.  All I know is that he's kept his affairs hidden and totally casual, suggesting that they're purely sexual, while Betty has swept off her feet by this serpentine politician - and we all know how they treat promises.

Perhaps this is a reach -- but in some ways I don't think we're properly taking some of these things into account. 

Yes, Betty is icy and cold to her husband - but wouldn't you be too if you stayed with a spouse who was perpetually and flagrantly cheating on you?  So I think it's part of her personality and its part of their relationship.

Don perhaps has affairs because he's never really his whole self anywhere.  He's always selling you something, unless he's with someone who can't talk to anyone about it - lest their affair be discovered.   

Betty is not the most loving mother - although you have to admit she's quite gentle and tender with her infant son.  It's only with Sally that I think her mothering tendencies are truly off base.  I suppose its partly back to season 1 where you hear how betty's mother raised her that you sort of see how distorted her view is of a woman's value.  Of course she wants Sally to conform, that's all she's ever been taught was proper and it's how she got herself a nice house and steady income/husband. 

Don has some tender moments as a father, but again, he doesn't get involved with any of the discipline or regular order of everyday living.  Sure, it's easy to seem more loving when you only interact with your kids when they're behaving well or having a field trip with their hot teacher. 

I guess I just think - it doesn't really matter who's a better parent.  They fill different roles as parents, and both do them poorly.  I kind of want to see the other characters get more spotlight!

Nope, sorry.  I'm right.  You're wrong.   

LOL - some people only have 1 perspective.  Its a shame.

I've considered all the evidence and present a stronger argument.  There's no shame in that.

You haven't moved me, White Bread.

I've said what I wanted to say. And now I bid you adieu.

"betty gave up having a career of her own..."

WHAT "career"?  looking pretty and being a model????

some long term carrer that would had been!  in 4 or 5 years (if even THAT long!) she would had been history.

betz has always been a frigid, cold mother to her children; allowing the maid to do most of her child-rearing duties.

but jetting off to reno at Christmas time, immediately after telling her children that she and their father were splitting up, and NOT allowing the kid's father to remain with them while she is gone......this is the epitome of selfishness and shallowness.

betz is ALL about "ME, ME, ME!"

ANY sympathy i had for betz evaporated with this narcisstic move of hers.

P.S.  why can't she breast feed her children?  oh, that's right...she would have to BE THERE to do this....

It could go two ways for Betty:

Now she is going back to the "old" way, the way she was brought up to be, letting someone take care of her.

But, I think there may be an awakening on the horizon.  Who knows?  Maybe she'll become a real womens libber.?

We are appoaching the time when conscienesses were raised and people, especially women were asking questions and realizing that they could run their life if they wanted to.  Not to depend on a man for their happiness or their livelihood. 

Back then, some went one way, some went the other.

Betty is a hard character to have empathy with, I agree, but she still has a chance to have an epiphany, the times are right.

I think some commenting here are too young to know how it really was for women back then.

rnch

Back then, women did not breast feed.  It simply wasn't done.  It was considered something that the poor did.

i beg to differ, MM.

my middle class mother breasted all of her children during this time period; as did many of my friend's mothers.

perhaps we are just more close to our children here in the south?  (new orleans)

or does the catholic religion encourage this natural closeness between mother and child?

...yeh, but they had NO problem soaking their ex-husbands for alimony money when they went out to "discover themselves"!

SO easy to "find yourself" when someone else is still paying all your bills.

rnch

That's true, but that's the way it was back then.  Remember, at first, women did not have gainful employment.  Still, women are paid less than men, even now.  Imagine back then?

As for the breast feeding maybe it was a north south thing.  My mother was/is a devout Catholic, but we are from the north.  She and none of her freinds or relatives breast fed back then, it just wasn't done in their circle.

still, women are paid less than men, even now..  ???

i am a federal govt employee..women make the same wage that I do. 

even more, in many cases!

most of the recent promotions in my office have gone to women and minorities.  90% of my supervisors hae less time-in-grade than I do; were promoted earlier and more often than i was.

the "pale male" is the new minority in many jobs environments today.

rnch

Not everyone works for the government.

I do payroll, I know.

Just because you may not experience something personally, doesn not mean that it doesn't happen.

I'm not bitter.  I know it takes time.  But believe me, it's still a man's world in the private sector.

It's hard for this topic not to turn into a discussion of sexual politics because one of the things MM does so well is highlight how things have changed since the '60's.  How we react to those changes depends on many things.  Just as no two witnesses describe an accident the same way, no two people perceive the past the same either.

Yet we speak of the past as though it were fixed, that everything was static and everyone's experience was the same.  Obviously, the past cannot be changed, but the reality is that the wider culture has been changing dramatically since the end of WWII.  A society's path to the future is not a straight line, but a crabwalk.

jkerouac - you are so right! The brilliance of the show is that for people of a certain age (I'm one of them) reared in the 60's, the show captures the poignancy of a certain type of American suburban life, just as it falls off the edge into enormous social change. Betty & Don's marriage is one of the casualties.

First its you must both be men (like that was slandering us or something-, then its the passive agressive "I bid you adieu"

I now understand why you love Betty so much.

This fact does seem to have been conveniently forgotten. Along with the distinct possibility that Gene may not be Don's baby. Is a blood test in the future for season 4?

Yeah, adgal gave an astonishingly inaccurate synopsis of Betty's character, House.  Did you read it?  She's completely wrong on every point she tries to make.  It was embarrassing to read, in fact, since she either has difficulty with retention, or she's delusional.  And then there's the "adieu" at the end of that last post!  Pfft!  Sorry adgal, but you don't get the privilege of a pretentious kiss-off like that until you first bring something to the table.

I read AG's analysis as having little to do with Betty's (or Don's, for that matter) character. Her argument is founded in economic equity, and has a lot of merit.  It has nothing to do with whether Betty is a lazy, shallow, bitch or Don is an pompous, arrogant, ass.  All you have to do is follow the money. 

A marriage is, and always has been, governed by a contract.  All economic transactions are.  If no oral or written agreements exist, there are, at a bare minimum, common law duties that govern to some degree.

The contract was first written by the church and lives on in the traditional marriage vows.  As the pervasive power of the church waned, the contract came to be written by the state.  In the US, for example, the state in which you live  declares who can get married, who can't, which party controls the property, what happens to the property upon dissolution of the marriage.  When two people get married, they either accept the default contract written by the state or they write their own - a pre-nup. 

It is no different than dying without a will.  A will is a contract with your heirs about the division of your estate.  Absent a will, the state gets to decide what happens to your property.

Viewed purely from an economic perspective, then, each party to the contract makes a contribution to the success or failure of the venture (the marriage).  The contract doesn't care who goes out into the world and works and who stays home and works.  Society has long placed greater recognition on the contribution of the party who delivers more coin of the realm rather than the one who maintains the home and family.  The default contract, however, recognizes the contribution of both.  Don could not have been as successful as he was in business without Betty's help.   Betty would not have enjoyed the material comfort and ease she did without Don's efforts.  You can debate the relative merits of the contribution of each party till the cows come home but the fact remains that, once the venture was joined, its overall success or failure rests on the combined effort of both parties and it is impossible to say with 100% certainty who was the "more responsible" party for that success or failure - with one exception, and we'll get to that in a minute.  At the end of the day, the venture is like a glass of saltwater - it is impossible to separate the two back into their attendant parts unless the whole is destroyed.

Now to the "exception".  Betty and Don accepted the default contract of the state in which they were married, which at that time specified the only grounds for dissolution of the marriage contract was adultery (proven in open court, no less).  Arguments can be made about whether Don or Betty was more culpable in this department - THOSE arguments go to character, but have little bearing on the underlying economics of the situation.  From what we have seen, however, Don was probably the first and most frequent "breacher" of this one inviolable term of the contract.  The lion's share of any damages as a result go to him.  While going to Reno changes the allowable reasons for divorce, thus altering the contract, the underlying economics still remain the same.

An alimony settlement compensates Betty for the lost "opportunity cost"  of entering into the contract which Don ultimately violated.  Yes - she chose to be married, but it was under the terms of the marriage contract.  The "opportunity cost" is somewhat blind to her probable success or failure.  We are never shown how successful she was when Don met her.  Modeling could have led to acting or a line of cosmetics.  She gave up the opportunity to develop a different future to enter into the marriage with Don and lost the opportunity to do something else.  Don violated the contract and Betty should be made whole as a result. 

Like most contracts, there are economic remedies for breach.  In this case, it would have been alimony.  Typically, spousal support is paid by the partner who has the means to do so to the partner who suffers the most economically as a result of the dissolution of the marriage.  In the 60's, that was primarily men. Today, however, it is not unheard of for women who are more successful to be paying support to an ex-husband.  Marital conduct may once have affected what a court did in terms of alimony in the past but that doesn't happen much anymore.  By the way, Betty seems to be declining alimony at this time, so Don is getting off lightly in this department. 

The payment of child support is also a matter of equity.  Neither Don's nor Betty's  obligation to provide care and support for the children that issued from the marriage ends when the marriage ends.  Absent any other agreement, however, the state is allowed to decide which parent is better suited to have custody of the children.

As to the house, the alternative would have been to sell it and have the state divide the proceeds.  I'm unsure whether that was a popular concept in the 60's.  Based on how the episode ended, I don't believe Don would have wanted it that way if for no other reason than the sake of the children.  My guess is that if Betty does go ahead and marry Henry Francis, that is what will happen anyway.

The bottom line is that regardless of how much society dresses it up as something else, a marriage has always been an economic unit.  In the past, divorce was difficult to get for a variety of reasons, chief among them was that there was no social support network (WIC, welfare, food stamps, etc.) to assist "broken' families, no way for them to help them take care of themselves.  At the end of the day, a society has only as much social justice as it can afford.

Sorry for such a long post.

Good points, JK.

effin' lawyers......

This is a short comedy sketch from several years ago with very Don and Betty-like characters. I always thought Mad Men might have sprang from this:

http://www.youtube.com/wa ...

Just some thoughts on people's posts.

You make some interesting points Madwoman.  Betty was raised with what we would consider a distorted picture of her own worth.  Maybe distorted is the wrong word.  Perhaps overly-circumscribed is a better word, as society only allowed woman of that time a limited choice of roles. Being beautiful is kind of a 'negative power' as it allows you to secure a better situation for yourself within these limited roles but, that only leaves you a beautiful bird in a gilded cage. (To me, that is Betty in a nutshell.)  It's like the Lily Tomlin quote, "even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat". 

I take issue with calling Betty "frigid".  She may be icy but I don't think she has been written or portrayed as frigid.  If she were continiously screwing others outside the marriange like Don, the name-calling would be non-stop.  So, because she doesn't like him doing that to her, she is frigid?  I don't think so.  Also, don't forget what she said to the shrink about her sex life with Don. (paraphrasing here)  She likes when they are in bed and he is fully aware of her presence and he does things to please her.  However, there were times when it was obvious he wasn't really there with her and he was doing things that somebody else wanted.  To sense that inside and to have a husband that actively negates your deepest feelings by denying his own behaviours, even going as far as to send you to a shrink - well, that has got to bloody hurt like hell!

As for breastfeeding, many women of the late-fifties to mid-sixties did not breastfeed their babies.  It was a time when multi-national corporations like Nestle were at the apex of their influence.  When this influence began to wane in the later sixties, they turned their eyes toward developing countries. 

I do agree that Don does seem the more compassionate parent (when he's there) but in Betty's defense and in defense of mothers everywhere, it is easier to be the more compassioante parent when you don't spend all day, everyday with the kids. 

As for Don's affairs being hidden . . . I don't think he's hidden them all that well.  Cooper knew about the department store lady.  The comedian knew about Don & his wife.  The comendian's wife heard stories about Don's dalliances from other women.  Peggy found out about Don's nooners.  I wouldn't call all of these affairs casual either.  He was perfectly willing to run away with at least two of them, leaving his wife and children behind.  And of course, you can't let Betty off the hook for screwing that guy in the bar.   I think she was hurting and wanted to prove to herself that if she chose to behave like Don, there would be takers. (Duh!) Personally, I was both shocked and excited by her behaviour.  That guy was so good-looking it was kind of like Ken and Barbie getting it on.  (Speaking of a sixties childhood fantasies!)

Finally, there are many points of view on this site that I agree with and many that I don't but, could we please keep the personal attacks off the posts?  If you can't make your point and walk away without denigrating someone else, you demonstrate to everyone that you have no confidence in your own point of view.

Amen.

Quote:
Finally, there are many points of view on this site that I agree with and many that I don't but, could we please keep the personal attacks off the posts? 


YES, I agree! 

Did anyone see January Jones on SNL the other night?  I heard she was really bad.  And according to an interview with Weiner, Don and Betty's marriage is finito.  Ovah.  Gonzo.  My guess is they are dumping JJ.

Quote...
Did anyone see January Jones on SNL the other night?  I heard she was really bad.  And according to an interview with Weiner, Don and Betty's marriage is finito.  Ovah.  Gonzo.  My guess is they are dumping JJ. 

My answer...
YES, and she was AWFUL. Maybe we have seen the back of Betz.

Anyone know the name of the song that plays at the end of the series finale, when Betty's on the plane to Nevada?  It sounds like Roy Orbison to me, but I don't know the track.

Hey Loungers,

January Jones was not only bad, she was awful !!!She is a fine dramatic actress, but she seems to have no sense of comedic timing or delivery. I saw this coming during the opening "monologue". She barely said anything other than feed lines to the  Mad Men Fanatics in the front row who basically carried the bit. Its always a bad sign when a guest host cant deliver funny lines. Its a trend I'm seeing much of lately on that show. In the Today Show sketch she was hardly doing anything except add-on lines that had no punch, while the other actors acted. Jon Hamm did a much better job and the Mad Men sketch they did with the A Holes was great. They even had a pen necklace on Joan !!! Now that's good prop work .

I felt bad for JJ on SNL. You could tell she was nervous, and why wouldn't she be. She was asking which camera to look for during the Today Show sketch. She also blurted her lines.

As the show went on, she was a little more confident and comfortable. I was really rooting for her, but they didn't give her much to work with, either. Now, that could have been because they sensed early on she wasn't going to be able to carry a sketch on her own.

As juvenile as it was, she probably did her best in the "Rear Window" sketch. I admit, I laughed during it.