MovieChat Forums > Father Knows Best (1954) Discussion > FNB Promoted inequity, comformity, and a...

FNB Promoted inequity, comformity, and a false sense of reality


Although I believe that the intentions were good by the actors and directors of this show, this show just promoted the idea that the man is the leader, children should shut up and obey and not think for themselves, and that a woman's role is to best support her husband. The show reflects this and it comes out of an era that certainly reflected this mentality.

I have several faults with this show, which are in general faults with that era. First, this show illustrated women as best suited in a home as the maternal figure that supports the decisions of the paternal figure. The sexism is pretty much outright and in the open. Statements like, "Women are never so obvious as when they are trying to hide something." Margaret Anderson, clearly very intelligent, very much lived this way. The devoted mother and wife who was more like a side kick to the father than a unique individual even though she went to college. Bringing him his evening drink, softening him up when she wants something in order to get permission instead of thinking she is entitled to it because she carries her own weight. One is left to wonder if she went to college just to meet a husband. You can even see how the female children are submissive to the son a lot or there are pre-conceived expectations that a boy likes this and a girl likes that. Even the neighbors had lives where the man worked, woman at home. The fault in this is less an attack on a woman wanting to be a mother and wife, which is fine if this is what you want, but more that the show says this is what you are supposed to be and if you aren't something is different. And different is wrong.

The inability to talk about politics, global affairs, etc. is constant. I believe this was done not because those issues were never discussed then, but because of an effort to promote this false sense of persistent harmony all the time. People got depressed back then, got angry and yelled, beat each other, got drunk, had affairs, said ignorant things, and often lived in a house that wasn't always all peachy. Peachy sometimes, bad others the way life is and has always been. This show makes you think it was always peachy back then and if your life wasn't like that something was wrong with you.


The show conforms to an ideal that was inequitable and falsely happy. Gender roles, sexism, and inequality blended together in a way where everyone should be happy with it imbues a false reality to that time period. Many women wanted out of the home and to have a career, sought equity with their partner in all affairs, wanted a voice in political affairs, were keen to wear jeans and not always dresses, and wanted to go beyond just being a housewife. Heated discussions about politics occurred, men beat their wives (and often vice versa), and people were people with all their faults, not these strange creatures out of the Stepford Wives.

People who really like this show are, in my opinion, nostalgic for another time where they enjoyed these gender roles. However, for those that wanted to move beyond the stiff conformity and inequity of that era, this show is nothing more than propaganda.

And the father always wore a suit, everywhere. At dinner, when he relaxed. Who wears a suit all the time? Did he sleep in one? That’s just weird.

reply

While reading some of these old posts, I found myself agreeing with most of them, except for the OP. It's wonderful that, the classic shows are still being aired, and for those who weren't born during this era, gets to see how people and society were at that time. I myself prefer these old shows to what is being shown today. I have observed the gender roles in this show, and it seems 'Bud' the only male offspring comes across as being the loser compared to 'Betty' his older sister, who always wins at everything. Of course, maybe it has less to do with gender than 'Bud' being the middle child, and feels inadequate compared to his older sibling.

reply

Y'know, the OP's post reminds me of what I so dislike about I LOVE LUCY (except the "false sense of reality").
Granted, neither Lucy nor Ricky Ricardo was as intelligent or educated as Jim and Margaret Anderson, but one of the basic themes of the show was that Lucy was NOT happy being just a housewife; she wanted a career outside the home.
But Ricky was a bully and control freak, and he demanded strict obedience to his will, sometimes even resorting to physical violence against his wife.

But I do like FATHER KNOWS BEST, and wish that my childhood experience was as warm and fuzzy as the Anderson's.
It was anything but; my mother was a neurotic drama queen (I believe now she was mentally ill), and my father was the passive-aggresive type.
My brother and I grew up in a household lacking in warmth or genuine affection.
As the OP pointed out, there were many dysfunctional families in the '50's and '60's; they were just not shown on TV sitcoms at that time.
And it's wrong to blame the collapse of the traditional nuclear family on "feminism"; there were many other factors as well.

reply

I loved the show and always hoped my family could live the way the Andersons did... we were poor and did not have a nice house, a close family, I could only have dreamt of it... Jim Anderson was a wonderful father, and admired him for caring and loving his family.... to this day I feel if families were like the Andersons were, the world would be a better place for everyone, no matter what the politics of the day are.

reply

Sad to say, but too many families in America were NOT like the Andersons--even in the '50's.
Then again, I'm not sure if the Andersons were meant to be a role model of how the nuclear family should be.
If so, it failed: Betty was a snob and drama queen, Bud was a jerk and a coward, and Kathy was an out-and-out brat!

I'd have to say that the Nelsons were the example of the perfect post-war American family.

reply

It's just a sitcom. Relax.

reply

Who is stupid enough to ever view television as anything other than unrealistic fictional entertainment?

If TV sways or guides your life in any way, you have much deeper issues.

reply

true

reply

I also thought it was dated when I was younger, which was decades ago now. But in re-watching it in the past few years, it's clear that the series had more nuance than that. Yes, it was somewhat idealized. But not to an overly unrealistic extent. Every character had moments of weakness, pettiness, selfishness. And if they came to realize that more often than happens in our own lives, what of it? I don't think an ideal is necessarily a bad thing to have, as long as we remember that we won't & can't always live up to that ideal as frequently as the Andersons did.

And yes, it was shaped by 1950s culture, as all TV series are shaped by their times. Yet it also offered some interesting angles on that culture, too, not just blindly accepting it.

Look at the episode "Bus to Nowhere" with Betty, which could almost be a Twilight Zone episode in its questioning the purpose of each generation just doing the same thing as all previous generations: going on dates, getting married, having children, sending them on dates, them getting married, them having children--and for what? It's asking the same question many more serious writers were asking in novels & plays at the time.

Or the episode in which Margaret takes a day off, just on a whim, and Jim is wondering if their marriage is falling apart. He finally realizes that like their children, he's been treating Margaret solely as Wife & Mother, not as a person who might have her own interests. Tellingly, in a later episode, when she decides to take a college course in English, Jim wholeheartedly supports her without any questions or qualms.

Or the episode where Jim & Margaret have Betty's college career all planned for her, right down to the same courses they took at the same college. It's done out of love, but they have to realize that Betty doesn't want to walk in their footsteps, but would much rather take her own path. And they not only accept that, they encourage it.

(continued)

reply

Or in the "Betty Goes Steady" episode, where college freshman Betty falls into the social rules mandated by the campus elite, so that she'll be one of "The Acceptables" everyone so desperately wants to be. Except for the few non-conformists, including one played by young Robert Vaughn, who questions the validity of such a system, with some pointed quotes from Emerson on conformity.

I could go on, but that's a good beginning. While encouraging 1950s values, it also encouraged the questioning of those values at times, especially if they were simply being followed blindly, "because that's how it's always been done." It had respect for tradition, but also realized that tradition changes over time, too. Yes, it could be corny & problems could be wrapped up a little too neatly. But at its best, it offered decent people of their times, doing their best with what they knew. In the end, isn't that what caring families of every generation have tried to do? Besides, some of what we think of as being so enlightened & progressive today could well look corny & out-of-date a few decades down the line. We should remember that, be a little forgiving, take what was genuinely good about the series while acknowledging the changes since.

reply

You are a wise owl. I read every word and appreciated the thought and effort you put into this post

reply

Bea, thank you!

reply

1. All white family
2. No one in the family was on drugs or had kids from 3 baby daddies
3. No riots, looting, or drive by shootings in the show

You should have been so lucky to live in the 50's.

reply

Sounds like the OP is wishing for another form of conformity; just in the direction he wants

reply

I'd pick the 50's society any day over the shit show now since LBJ ruined it.

reply

I agree, Bea. Father Knows Best may have been filmed in black-and-white, but its stories & approach were far from black-and-white. It understood complexity & was a deeply humane show.

reply

You lost any credibility when you referred to the show as Father Nos Best rather than the actual title. If you can't get the name of the show correct in the subject line, then you cannot be taken seriously .

Actually, if you spend your time obsessing on a TV show from the first half of the last century then you can't be taken seriously.

reply

11 year old thread and I'm adding to the pile::::::::::::::::"""""""""")_)(_)POJf[sdf

"false sense of reality"

Name ONE TV show to ever had an actual sense of reality.

Not even the news is reality.

Funny stuff.

reply