Advanced search

to be saddened by friends reaction to a tv show?

(24 Posts)
BrokenSunglasses Mon 26-Aug-13 14:40:39

Not sure what you are sad about. Be happy that times have changed!

I think it's ok to feel strongly that you could never give your baby away. It's instinct for most mothers to want to protect their babies and keep them close, we are just lucky that we no longer have to think about going against those instincts because the consequences of following them won't ruin the rest of our lives.

TroublesomeEx Mon 26-Aug-13 13:52:56

I wouldn't say this, but I do tend to put a pretty swift end to any conversation that involves talking about a TV programme as though it's important.

It might have been a conversation that was uncomfortable to her for personal reasons and she might have just wanted to end the conversation as quickly as possible.

My son was born in 1998 and I was a single parent. I was 24 and my fiance was sleeping with someone else. I moved back in with my mother very briefly and she found the modern day equivalent of these homes for unmarried mothers to 'put me into'. I would very much avoid a conversation of this nature because I find it very difficult to answer questions about my son's early life without either lying or it bringing up unpleasant memories.

Silverfoxballs Mon 26-Aug-13 11:15:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Sparklysilversequins Mon 26-Aug-13 11:05:17

Are you watching the current run then? It's on Atlantic every night, up till Season three at the moment if you're interested.

YalleyoftheDolls87 Mon 26-Aug-13 11:00:21

Well I was 13 then Sparkly so it wasn't my kind of thing at the time.

And it's still running. Not everyone watches something right from thr very first episode of when it was first aired.

Bloody hell excuse me for breathing.

Sparklysilversequins Mon 26-Aug-13 10:58:07

Seeing as that series is six years old, maybe people would assume that most people who wanted to would have seen it Yalley?

WafflyVersatile Mon 26-Aug-13 10:57:32

Maybe your friend hasn't spent a lot of time considering the full context of the fictional programme you've been watching and just made her gut reaction to the thought of giving away a child. I could never countenance giving my child away is hardly an unusual opinion today.

I'm not really sure that your friend at 2nd hand is not showing much sympathy with a fictional character's moral dilema from a show she hasn't been watching and has no investment in is something to be so saddened about.

YalleyoftheDolls87 Mon 26-Aug-13 10:52:32

Great spoiler alerts sad

littlemog Mon 26-Aug-13 10:51:20

Amazed that you are 'sad' about this. And that you don't even know the time period when the tv show's events were set.

I was given up for adoption by a single mother in 1970 and had I encountered your friend's reaction I would not have felt 'sad'. It's an opinion that's all and she is entitled to it. Big deal.

It's a tv show - not real.

GhostsInSnow Mon 26-Aug-13 10:47:00

Polter, you are given the impression that the baby with her mother is hers but as the seasons progress you are told that he isn't her child he's her sisters boy and she did indeed put her son up for adoption.

It was also first season which covers mid to late fifties. Even in the last season they hadn't reached the seventies!

PolterGoose Mon 26-Aug-13 09:00:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

christinarossetti Mon 26-Aug-13 06:00:01

The first episodes of Mad Men are set in the very late 1950s, I believe.

Tee2072 Mon 26-Aug-13 05:55:13

It's a TV show. You and she are both upset over something that didn't even actually happen!

NynaevesSister Mon 26-Aug-13 05:12:04

I hate it when people make blanket statements like that. It isn't like we all walk around with badges on identifying the worst life events we've gone through. There are lots of reasons women have to give up their kids for adoption. How was she to know the person she was talking to hadn't been down a similar path? She doesn't sound very empathic. Nothing is ever that black and white.

NadiaWadia Mon 26-Aug-13 00:14:09

Your friend has not much awareness of different attitudes in different times and places. Maybe she's not too bright? But nothing for you to be particularly sad about, really.

AnyCraic Mon 26-Aug-13 00:10:18


AnyCraic Mon 26-Aug-13 00:10:00

Depends on the country. In 70s (and early - mid 80s) Ireland many women were still giving babies up for adoption as they were unmarried. Most didn't want to but felt they didn't have a choice as they would bring shame on their families.

Either way your friend is BU as attitudes in society were v different back then whenever then was so she can't really say what she would or would not have dine

SaucyJack Mon 26-Aug-13 00:07:43


She's entitled to have strong feelings against having her own (imaginary 1970s unplanned pg) child adopted.

Part of being pro choice regarding conception/pregnancy/adoption means respecting every other woman's right to make her own decisions based on her individual values.

And yes, get a real world life!

NadiaWadia Mon 26-Aug-13 00:05:30

And women pregnant and unmarried would normally be expected to give the babies up for adoption, I remember the actress Pauline Collins wrote her memoir 'Letter to Louise' about her own experience of giving up her baby in the early 60s. She found it very upsetting, but it was just expected as the norm, and she thought she was doing the right thing, so that her daughter could have a 'proper family'.

Also, I have an idea it might not have been possible to get any help from the state as a single parent, maybe not even council accommodation. And of course that would be even more so in the US.

squoosh Mon 26-Aug-13 00:04:01

It was the early 60s.

NadiaWadia Mon 26-Aug-13 00:00:24

If you mean when Peggy had Pete's baby (and didn't even realise she was pregnant) than I'm sure this was supposed to be happening in the early/mid 60s, not 70s, so probably a bit more conservative then.

Jan49 Sun 25-Aug-13 23:48:59

I think your friend's reaction was harsh but why on earth did you say the pg woman would be "branded a whore" by most people??????? You're talking about the 1970s not the 1900's.confused It really wasn't that bad.

cory Sun 25-Aug-13 23:48:47

Excuse me, but you are talking about the 1870's here, aren't you?

I am old enough to have been around in the 1970's and I can assure you that women were not branded whores for having an extra-marital baby. And that there were plenty of working single mothers.

MaryJayneHeart Sun 25-Aug-13 23:44:08

I was having a Mad Men marathon, and told my friend that I found one storyline upsetting that a woman had just been given a promotion and then suddenly gone into labour (she had no idea she was pregnant) and then giving her baby away, she couldn't even bring herself to hold him. And further episodes down the line you can see that of course it has had an effect on her.

My friend did this hmm and said "That's disgusting, I would never give my baby away"

It make me sad that although it's a tv show I'm sure this situation was common, she was a single woman working in a very male dominated environment in the 70s.

She would have been branded a whore by most people, lost her job, wouldn't be able to support her baby, could lose friends and family, the father was a married man who would have denied the child was his.

I just found her reaction to be quite harsh. Aibu?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now