<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Episode 13 &#8211; Too Girly?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.futuretraditions.com/2009/04/episode-13-too-girly/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.futuretraditions.com/2009/04/episode-13-too-girly/</link>
	<description>A podcast about Jericho</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2010 11:14:23 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris From Poland</title>
		<link>http://www.futuretraditions.com/2009/04/episode-13-too-girly/comment-page-1/#comment-624</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris From Poland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futuretraditions.com/?p=240#comment-624</guid>
		<description>Hi gals,

I&#039;ve been listening to your podcast ever since it appeared on FarPoint Media and I&#039;m already cought up with all the previous episodes. To comment on your last discussion about the show being &quot;too girly&quot;: as I guy I agree it&#039;s very &quot;girly&quot;, but I wouldn&#039;t go as far as to say it&#039;s &quot;too girly&quot;. I wouldn&#039;t want to make my claim sound like an accusation, but rather, just a statement of a fact. The show is indeed &quot;girly&quot;, but is that bad? Not necessarily. It just shows how different people react in such an extreme situation as depicted on &quot;Jericho&quot;. I was surprised how much your appreciation of &quot;Jericho&quot; differs from mine, but after giving it some thought, I found it interesting. Some people might focus on the big picture, the millitary issues and the logistics in a postapocalyptic setting, while others will focus on the importance of family and relationships. Both of these attitudes are necessary if the society is to survive. When I saw the first episode and saw the bomb on the horizon, as a viewer I adopted an analytical attitude to the show. I was constantly asking myself the questions: who is responsible for the bombings? Will there be nuclear fallut? How will they cope with radioactive rain? Will they succeed with farming? What about energy production? How many people in &quot;Jericho&quot; are there? How many will survive? It seems I was enjoying &quot;Jericho&quot; in a similar way I would watch &quot;Battlestar Galactica&quot;. So I was indeed surprised when your first episode neglected the big picture and focused on the relationships of Emily, which as a guy I completely disregarded as something unimportant, but I guess that such issues are as important if a community is to survive such a scenario. In the last episode you encouraged guys to call in or write in about the characters they like to &quot;balance&quot; the show, but the problem is, guys are seldom about &quot;characters&quot; and &quot;relationships&quot;, so talking about the women we like on the show is not really a &quot;guy thing&quot;. As a guy (perhaps stereotypical) I would rather concentrate on the big issues: the city Jericho as a whole entity, Jericho in the context of other settlements, Jericho in the context of the US etc. Anyways, I&#039;m still enjoying your show despite the abundance of the &quot;girl factor&quot; :-).

Keep up the great work,
Chris from Poland.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi gals,</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been listening to your podcast ever since it appeared on FarPoint Media and I&#8217;m already cought up with all the previous episodes. To comment on your last discussion about the show being &#8220;too girly&#8221;: as I guy I agree it&#8217;s very &#8220;girly&#8221;, but I wouldn&#8217;t go as far as to say it&#8217;s &#8220;too girly&#8221;. I wouldn&#8217;t want to make my claim sound like an accusation, but rather, just a statement of a fact. The show is indeed &#8220;girly&#8221;, but is that bad? Not necessarily. It just shows how different people react in such an extreme situation as depicted on &#8220;Jericho&#8221;. I was surprised how much your appreciation of &#8220;Jericho&#8221; differs from mine, but after giving it some thought, I found it interesting. Some people might focus on the big picture, the millitary issues and the logistics in a postapocalyptic setting, while others will focus on the importance of family and relationships. Both of these attitudes are necessary if the society is to survive. When I saw the first episode and saw the bomb on the horizon, as a viewer I adopted an analytical attitude to the show. I was constantly asking myself the questions: who is responsible for the bombings? Will there be nuclear fallut? How will they cope with radioactive rain? Will they succeed with farming? What about energy production? How many people in &#8220;Jericho&#8221; are there? How many will survive? It seems I was enjoying &#8220;Jericho&#8221; in a similar way I would watch &#8220;Battlestar Galactica&#8221;. So I was indeed surprised when your first episode neglected the big picture and focused on the relationships of Emily, which as a guy I completely disregarded as something unimportant, but I guess that such issues are as important if a community is to survive such a scenario. In the last episode you encouraged guys to call in or write in about the characters they like to &#8220;balance&#8221; the show, but the problem is, guys are seldom about &#8220;characters&#8221; and &#8220;relationships&#8221;, so talking about the women we like on the show is not really a &#8220;guy thing&#8221;. As a guy (perhaps stereotypical) I would rather concentrate on the big issues: the city Jericho as a whole entity, Jericho in the context of other settlements, Jericho in the context of the US etc. Anyways, I&#8217;m still enjoying your show despite the abundance of the &#8220;girl factor&#8221; <img src='http://www.futuretraditions.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> .</p>
<p>Keep up the great work,<br />
Chris from Poland.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KrzyKitty</title>
		<link>http://www.futuretraditions.com/2009/04/episode-13-too-girly/comment-page-1/#comment-520</link>
		<dc:creator>KrzyKitty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 04:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.futuretraditions.com/?p=240#comment-520</guid>
		<description>Great episode.... good job on the April Fool&#039;s Joke! Skeet&#039;s new pilot is called &quot;Back&quot;. :D Keep up the wonderful work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great episode&#8230;. good job on the April Fool&#8217;s Joke! Skeet&#8217;s new pilot is called &#8220;Back&#8221;. <img src='http://www.futuretraditions.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' />  Keep up the wonderful work!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
