I remember an article many many years ago that interviewed the late Ross Martin (played Artemus) and he suggested that they were able to "get by with it" because the villains on the show were often women. In the opener, the man is hitting a dance hall girl, so that distinction is not at all clear and seems really inappropriate; but at least, it seems it was questioned, even in that era...

... I think an exception may reasonably be granted on grounds of self-defense.

-- Mal

He doesn't hit the CARTOON woman.....

isn't the women in the opening credits about to stab him in the back? I can't recall as I watched it as a kid all the time. Having said that, its an old fictional, make-believe tv show, who cares. Lots of things don't cut the mustard on tv anymore. Let's applaud the progress made and continue to fight for it, but if you don't like WWW or Have Gun Will Travel, turn it off. The campy acting is more of a crime.

I thought about putting a statement in the OP that I did not want to get these shows taken off of TV; I was just surprised that women were hit in these shows. I do not hate those shows and I am not trying to get people to stop watching the shows I am just pointing out that I am shocked that stuff like that happened in shows from that era. I just assumed women were not hit by men in shows from that era.

What I have noticed is that many of these shows could've had an influence in shaping me as a liberal thinking person. Take Westerns like Bonanza or Big Valley. The Cartwrights and Barclays are always taking the side of the marginalized. The same is true for the Lone Ranger, Roy Rogers and moving from the western genre, Perry Mason.

Discounting the power of fiction is a grave mistake. It is powerful. Why else do totalitarian governments like NAZI Germany, The Soviet Union and China squash freedom of expression by novelists, composers, song writers and artist?

I agree with you in the broader scheme

John Wayne Spanking Maureen O'Hara in Mclintock.It offended my 13 year old sensibilities.

in which our "hero" (Clint Eastwood) takes a women into the barn right off of the street in front of a town of cowards. I remember as a kid thinking: WTF.

I always have had a thing for Maureen O'Hara. The Quiet Man specifically. Another Duke flick coincidentally.

It was 'fashionable' to be 'outrageous' and hit a woman, although mainstream media was careful about how it was done.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

about it, as it was normalized by the culture that produced those shows. I grew up in that era and when I now see movies and shows from back then, I cringe at the misogyny. Remember the Honeymooners, when Ralph always bunched up his fist and acted like he was going to bust Alice in the face? Sure, he never did, but there were plenty of women in the audience who got busted in the face regularly, so showing that Ralph did it to Alice was a way of normalizing it for the audience -- both the men and the women.

TV back then most absolutely showed that it was normal, not wrong, to hit women "when they needed it." Watch some more shows and see all the ways in which women are treated like second-class citizens, fluffheads, ornaments for men's arms, etc. It's why I don't often watch those old shows; I can see how I, as a little girl, was so easily programmed to be second-class.

Is there an underlying agenda here, perhaps?

This wasn't uncommon in movies. It's turning a woman into a child not to mention physical abuse.

I think McLintock was the most famous of these. The husband loves John Wayne movies and I made sure he understood why I loathe this particular movie.

What's disturbing is how so many movies turn violence against women into a joke thus normalizing it.

Having been brought up in the culture, I still catch myself doing it.

Not that often anymore, but still...