Femininity and Sex in the City

I can’t recite every single line from Sex and the City like many of my Carrie-obsessed friends; however, I have caught a few episodes over the years. Before reading Angela McRobbie’s article, I found the show generally very feminist and progressive. Its whole premise is about four single women having, well, sex in the city. Each character has had several lovers over the years, and they are able to engage in these on-and-off again relationships without obscene amounts of judgment or criticism. The character of Samantha in particular engages in sexual relationships as if she were a man – tossing them aside when she is done with them.  

As McRobbie points out, the show is seen by some as championing post-feminism. While these women can be perceived as unbound from certain gender stereotypes such as the stay-at-home mom and the caring wife, they are certainly not detached from their femininity. The consumerist culture dominates the show, functioning as a “televisual magazine and show window.” The characters are obsessed with clothes, shoes and accessories, embracing the characters’ female-ness rather than repressing it. This idea of consumerism gives off the message that successful, liberal woman can still enjoy the aspects of femininity while not regressing back to old and outdated ideas of what a female’s role should be.

However, what I found most interesting about McRobbie’s article is that while Sex and the City has been praised by feminists (for many of the reasons above and more), the program still has many regressive characteristics. While the characters are very independent and liberal, their minds are still always male dominated. Carrie is especially a great example of this. She’s always after Mr. Big and even in the pilot episode where she “has sex like a man” all she really wants, in the end, is to find love and be swept off her feet.  As McRobbie states, the show is filled with “a tidal wave of invidious insurgent patriarchalism which is hidden beneath the celebrations of female freedom.” Carrie is constantly seeking the approval of men and this, in my opinion, negates many of the feminist qualities of the female leads. While they have taken great strides in both feminist and post-feminist ideas, they have yet to completely break through the barrier of patriarchy and male submission.

Girl Power

  Growing up in the late 90s and early 2000s, I remember hearing and seeing the phrase “girl power” and never thinking of its meaning beyond the fact that girls were more fun and that boys had cooties. Reading Angela McRobbie's article “Young Women and Consumer Culture An Intervention”, really made me reflect on the marketing and the consumption of “girl power”. As Robbie states: "Commercial values now occupy a critical place in the formation of the categories of youthful femininity... Companies draw on the language of 'Girl Power' as though to bestow on their products a sense of dynamism, modernity, and innovation” (p. 2 and 3). McRobbie's idea of consumable goods having the “girl power” message to bestow dynamism, modernity and innovation can be seen in key 1990s girl culture.

    Lisa Frank stationary was the must have brand of school supplies for an elementary school aged girl in the late 1990s. This brand of stationary used bright purples, pinks and blues and had images of butterflies, rainbows, unicorns and anything else deemed “girly”. Some of these folders and pencils had peace signs and aliens in hippie garb, which created a psychedelic mood. Lisa Frank also had “girl power” backpacks. Perhaps these “girl power” themed backpacks were designed in order to create a sense of modernity within the 1960s inspired artwork.


                               

   The Spice Girls were very important to most young girls in the late nineties and early 2000s. In their 1996 song “Wannabe”, the Spice Girls advocate for “girl power”. They believe that female friendships should come before any boy. These lyrics include “If you wanna be my lover, you gotta get with my friends, Make it last forever, friendship never ends”. The Spice Girls' stance that girls come before boys signals to women to stick together and emulate “girl power”. The Spice Girls continued to spread the “Girl Power” message in their book “Girl Power!”. Perhaps it is my 1990s bias, but I disagree slightly with McRobbie, and view that the Spice Girls were innovative. The Spice Girls' music and personas were definitely innovative and created an impact on the young girls on the late 1990s. Perhaps their “Girl Power” message wasn't modern, but it was presented to a group of women to whom it was modern and innovative. A six year old does not understand feminism, but she does understand putting her female friendships first.

                                                     

   While we do not know the true intentions of the Spice Girls and Lisa Frank producers, it is true that both of these aspects of 1990s girl culture were consumable goods.

  

** It is interesting that eleven years later, another all female pop group released a “Girl Power” song. The Cheetah Girls, a Disney Channel group, released their song “Girl Power” in 2007. This song would have reached a younger generation that was not familiar with Spice Girls. It seems as though the “Girl Power” message is here to stay. 

'Narrow Casting' and the Need for More Diversity

Pamela Chan

CTCS 412 Blog

As Andrea Press mentions in her article “Gender and Family in Television’s Golden Age and Beyond,” images of women, work, and family on the small screen have changed significantly throughout the past several decades. In the fifties, we were introduced to the classic “Leave It To Beaver” type of family—with the white picket fence and everything that came with it. Press then discusses the slow emergence of stronger, more rebellious women like Lucille Ball and Gracie Allen, who although continued their roles is the domestic spheres, constantly attempted to escape beyond the confines of their home.

Postfeminist television then opened up a whole new set of possibilities for the representations of women, with shows like L.A. Law and The Cosby Show featuring women making “choices” between work and family. More recently, there have been favorites such as Ally McBeal and Sex and the City, which as Diane Negra puts it in “Quality Postfeminism?”, generate “complex portrayals of (mostly) single, sexually active working women, sketching in rich detail characters who would have merely been femmes fatales in another era.”

Obviously, television has definitely come a long way, and its depictions of gender and of the family continue to influence American culture in indescribable ways. These days, current television, according to Press, “presents a third wave-influenced feminism that picks up where postfeminism left off, introducing important representations more varied in race, sexuality, and the choices women are seen to make between work and family” (p. 139).

            What’s ironic, however, is that although representations of social class, sexuality, and race have become more diversified, there still seems to be a lot of “narrow casting” in television of the postnetwork era. Shows like The L Word or Weeds may be playing to audience groups that are open to lesbianism or drug use, but like the “golden age of family television,” they still have “a white, middle-class bias” and “[err] on the side of portraying conventionally beautiful actress” (Press p. 147).

For example, The L Word, as Press argues, “displays young lesbian women as though they were heterosexual glamour girls” who all possess a kind of beauty that belong to a certain social class. Weeds, in addition, could be given brownie points for its matter-of-fact portrayal of drug dealing in white suburban middle-class America—but it still “retains the norm of focusing on thin, conventionally beautiful women”—i.e. Mary Louse Parker. 

            In the article, Press goes on to mention another example in Lynette Scavo from Desperate Housewives—whose portrayal of an on-again, off-again working mother “contrasts markedly with families of television’s golden age.” Yet in many ways, she is still visually portrayed as someone who remains “conventional and straightjacketed, impervious to decades of feminist critique” (p. 147). This also makes me think about the brief discussion we had in last Monday’s class—about certain people’s criticisms towards Orange Is The New Black and how the storyline seems too devoted to telling Piper Chapman’s journey from upper-class New York socialite to wide-eyed prison inmate.

In short, Press’ article makes an interesting point—television has undoubtedly been able to open up in terms of offering more diverse images of women, work, and family. Shows like The L Word are pivotal in the struggle for gay, lesbian, and minority rights—and its presence on prime time cable television is already a huge step in itself.

Social consciousness about the rights of gender and minority groups, says Press, may have “fundamentally changed in the United States” – but it still has a very long ways to go. Though prime television has become more racially and sexually diversified, that ‘diversity’ still remains limited for women as “thin, young, and conventionally beautiful images [continue to] predominate” (p.148). It seems that even in this day and age, we, as a society, still “remain decidedly ambivalent about feminism for women” (p. 148). Now that’s something to think about. 

How Social Feminism May "Force Independence"

The definition of feminism has continued to evole especially with the rise of social media in recent years. Social feminism can be seen in TV programs and magazines easily and the message they tend to give to women is: be independent and live your life!

But what is the definition of independence? According to dictionary, it is freedom from control, support, or the like, of others. There can be many different ways to live life 'independently.' However, today's social feminism that we see everyday portrays independence as "invidious insurgent patriarchalism which is hidden beneath the celebrations of female freedom" (McRobbie 11). Women who are shown as an independent character is usually someone who has a sufficient job, lives in a big city like New York, is sexually appealing, and pursuits free life style.
Because we have been exposed to these images for a while, many women have come to think that only by meeting those standards one can really become a "cool independent women." If you are not competent enough or daring enough, then automatically you do not meet that "independent women" standards.

Is this independence that social feminism is forming true independence?
It would be interesting to see how social feminism keeps on evolving in the future.

Why showing homophobia in television is important in getting rid of homophobia in society

Homophobia is often compared to racism and sexism because they are all deeply embedded in our culture, according to Walters. Homophobia, like racism and sexism, will take both time and patience until people will be able to see it eradicated from society altogether. Homosexuality television and film has evolved over the years with respect to how society has begun to accept homosexuality more and more. Even showing gay people on television in the 1950’s was radical, and now it is becoming more common to see gay people on TV in normal settings.

A large part of the evolving attitude towards gay people in both television and real life can be attributed to accurate homophobic depictions in television. According to Walters’ article, “by letting homophobic behavior off the hook, homophobia thrives, particularly under the surface of polite behavior,” and television is only presenting “a very small and skewed part of the puzzle” if it does not truthfully depict homophobia. In other words, television needs to address homophobia in the same way that it advocates for gay rights. If television showed gay people but left out the struggles that they have to face regarding homophobia, then this would be an unrealistic representation of what life is like for gay people, therefore taking a step in the opposite direction in the fight for gay rights. Also with homophobia present, the viewer will probably tend to sympathize with the gay character who has to overcome this hardship.

In the episode we watched in which Ellen comes out to her parents, her parents were not accepting at all. This made the viewer feel bad for Ellen and hope that her mom and dad could realize that her daughter was still the same, and continue to treat her the same way. By the end of the episode, her parents were more accepting, which put the viewer at ease. Had her parents been accepting from the start, it would have been unrealistic and the viewer wouldn't have felt compelled to root for Ellen throughout the episode.

Homophobes need to be able to see themselves on TV

I loved every word of the Walters article we read last week, but I'm going to refrain from quoting it at length and just get to the last paragraph that really got my attention: "What you mostly see on television is the 'problem' of homosexuality without the cause. Homosexuality is not an intrinsic problem, any more than heterosexuality is...but if television only shows us homosexuality as a problem, it participates in the erasure of the real problem of homophobia." When I was about 13, I started watching Degrassi, a show that aired on The N (now TeenNick) because of all the ads I saw for it when I watched the Daria reruns on that channel. I quickly realized it was a soap opera aimed at teens. And, of course, I immediately became obsessed with the sprawling ensemble and their web of intricate and dramatic story lines (Degrassi. It Goes There.) "Going there" of course means having a gay character, namely Marco, but Marco is no Matt from Melrose Place. His life is just as full of drama as his classmates', but what I think I took for granted at the time that I saw it was the homophobia which is addressed. One of Marco's best friends, Spinner, is horrified to learn Marco is gay. He is in denial, then disgusted, and becomes a bit of a bully. He uses slurs and tries to out Marco to other students. When Marco gets beat up just for walking by a gay club, Spinner basically tells him it's his fault and to "just stop being gay!" "Sure, Spin. I'm just gonna go do that." Spinner wasn't just some random character, and this wasn't all resolved in thirty minutes. He was an integral character on the show (and quite a popular one at that), and his homophobia storyline was carried out through several episodes. Watching this as a 13-year-old kid, I saw in Spinner who I might become. I never heard over the pulpit or really even my home that being gay was bad - the rhetoric wasn't out in the open at that time, at least for people my age. So I'm not sure where that feeling came from of "wait, Marco is gay? Should I still be watching this show?" But I asked myself all the same. Seeing Marco stand up for himself to Spinner was key, but it also helped me to see their other friends respond to Spinner's homophobia (who could forget Drake in his pre-rapping days saying, "Your friend is gay. Stop hating and just deal."). While Spinner is obviously being criticized by the show, he isn't entirely vilified - and I think that's to the show's credit. It makes it credible when he cures himself of his homophobia and welcomed back into his fold of friends. Anyway, the show offered me a safe place to have a dialogue with myself, if that makes sense. It gave me a much-needed vocabulary and showed me (in its own Degrassi, melodramatic way) the repercussions of words and actions, which all start as our thoughts. I'm grateful to that show for taking on homophobia (not to mention a wealth of other important issues) with a central character, unblinking and upfront, really showing impressionable audiences what a truly damaging problem it is.

Recent Commercials shown on TV

I haven't had the chance to sit in front of the TV in a while, but when I finally did turn on that remote control this past week, I got to see two different yet interesting commercials that I haven't really seen on TV in a while. I wanted to share this with everyone, and if anyone else wants to give their two cents about it, I would greatly appreciate it and be glad to see more points of views on these commercials.

1) One of them is a commercial for a healthcare organization, Cigna. This advertisement featured a woman portrayed in more "male occupations" or "male outfits" than I have ever seen before. Can't tell exactly what type of message they are going for, but for me, it was kind of refreshing to see more women portrayed as firefighters, policewomen, sports driver, etc and for that to actually be shown on TV. Gives little girls more role models and ambitions of what they can be.

Cigna "Born an Original"

2) The second commercial I saw was a two-part advertisement. The product they were selling was the new Samsung Smart TV and all it's cool, new voice-activation and personalization features. The family portrayed in this commercial is interracial- the dad is white, the mom is asian, and the kids are mixed races. I hardly ever see a commercial that features a interracial couple, let alone a whole family. It was kind of refreshing to see a more diverse type of family situation.

Samsung "Meet the Family"

Samsung "Battlestar Marathon"

Diversification, Dualcasting, and Direction

Ting Ting Liu

After reading Katherine Sender's article on "Dualcasting: Bravo's Gay Programming and the Quest for Women Audiences" and watching an episode of Ellen and Orange is the New Black, it got me thinking about a diverse and dualcast direction in which the world of TV could become. Let me explain...

Diversification:
In the article, Sender stated that Bravo used gay content not only to shift and grow audience demographics, but Bravo's bigger picture was their larger strategy of diversification. Diversification is important for Media & Entertainment due to the sheer amount of power media and entertainment has on the world, economy, and society. Media & Entertainment hold such a strong influence, thus diversification is an important subject that needs to be seen more in films and television shows. More diversification on a channel or in a movie would give more people a chance to see, learn and understand things that they probably will never know or talk about. More diverse content such as different cultures, mannerisms, traditions, rituals, and lifestyles should be shown more on TV. "Premium cable channels like HBO and Showtime have pushed the envelope on gay themes, modeling a television environment more friendly to gay characters and viewers" (Sender, 306). I believe more shows should take on Bravo, HBO, and Showtime's strategy and try to diversify their networks and TV content as well.

Dualcast:
I understand that media works in very complex and different ways. Even cable networks and broadcast networks work differently, "Cable has also been able to afford to take more risks with gay programming than the broadcast networks can, because of its different sources of revenue and types of regulations. Cable can be less concerned by advertiser backlash, because cable channels have an additional source of sponsorship from distribution and subscription. Cable channels are not subject to the same FCC regulations on content as the networks, allowing them to take greater risks with controversial content" (Sender, 306). However, I believe this is why Netflix is a great platform for a diversification and dualcasting direction for TV. Think about it: There's no way TV channels, movie studios, and such could just suddenly drop all their rules and regulations that they've built over the past few decades, and just start showing more diverse content. It would be chaos- there'll be people that aren't going to agree with this and could appeal it, rebel against it, there'll also be people who are going to argue about the way they should diversify their content, and so much more. Honestly, the best way and approach I could think of, is to slowly integrate diverse content into our society.

Direction:
The direction I would like to see in future Media & Entertainment is a more diverse and dualcast type of direction. Netflix is a great starting platform that could bring this direction forward. Netflix isn't like normal TV, it doesn't follow rules and regulation of the FCC, Netflix as a media platform is a great start on showing, supporting, and promoting shows that  involve gay and lesbian content, interracial content, cultural content, and so on. Netflix is a big enough platform that it would reach to many people across the country. Look at the success they've had with their original TV series, Orange is the New Black. Yes, there are a lot of articles out there discussing certain controversies of Netflix's original show, but the point is, Netflix is also promoting a dualcast viewership. It is important to diversification, and it is important to the society.

I do hope to see that TV and Film content in our society would grow in diversity and this could hopefully help create a tremendous social change in our world.

A funny coincidence

Sasha Stock

This is certainly not an academic post, but I did notice a funny coincidence. In one of the Keeping Up With The Kardashian's episode, one of the "real" situations included Kourtney having a crush on and then making out with a woman named Jackie. This actress, Jackie Cruz, is one of the cast members in Orange is the New Black! It is a funny coincidence considering all of the gay and lesbian themes found in Orange is the New Black.

Jackie and Kourtney on K.U.W.T.K.

                                                   Jackie on Orange is the New Black

Dualcasting

Sasha Stock

    

    Bravo is my guilty pleasure. Whether it is the housewives' endless Louboutins, ruthless family fueds or “singing” careers, the real estate cat fights on “Million Dollar Listing” or the “ba-nan-as” drama of Rachel Zoe, I live for Bravo. Having started this addiction only a couple years ago, reading Katherine Sender's essay “Bravo's Gay Programming and the Quest for Women Audiences” was very interesting. I have taken for granted that such a heavenly channel exists and never thought about Bravo's history within television and American history. It was fascinating to learn about the connection between the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn sodomy laws and Bravo's Queer Eye For The Straight Guy and Boy Meets Boy.

       Bravo has successfully changed it's reputation from a “artsy, highbrow tradition” (307) to a a “sophisticated” reality TV haven. Some of the original tactics in gaining young women viewers is still apparent. The Queer Eye For The Straight Guy idea that the gay men, or in Queer Eye's case the “Fab Five” are “helping” straight women and men is still apparent. Shows like Rachel Zoe, It's a Brad Brad World, Interior Therapy with Jeff Lewis, Dukes of Melrose and Bethenny Getting Married have this Queer Eye idea of a gay man helping a straight women and men. In these more recent shows, gay men help straight women and men with interior design, fashion and wedding advice. Furthermore, the idea of “endors[ing] the adage that gay men are women's best friend” (309) found in Queer Eye For the Straight Guy and Boy Meets Boy is apparent in current shows like Flipping Out, Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, Interior Therapy with Jeff Lewis and Rachel Zoe. Brava to Bravo for succeeding in creating a dualcast audience! 

Visibility

Sasha Stock

   As a twenty one year old who watches Modern Family, Sex And The City, The New Normal and Orange Is The New Black, I take for granted the visibility of these gay and lesbian characters. While reading Suzanna Walters' article “The Story of Gay Visibility in America” it was intriguing to learn about the drama Heartbeat. This eighties medical show featured a lesbian nurse as the main character. Heartbeat was canceled after one season. This reminded me of The New Normal, a show featuring two gay main characters, one doctor and one film producer. The New Normal, like Heartbeat, was canceled after one season. It is interesting to see that even though America has started to include more gay and lesbian characters, they do not seem ready to have gay and lesbian main characters.

   Walters brings up various issues with gay and lesbian representation. She speaks about how gays in the past were generally “generally depicted on TV as either victims or villains” (61). It was engaging to think about how even in 2013, this is still somewhat evident. In HBO's Girls, Hannah's ex boyfriend Elijah isn't malicious, but his actions are somewhat “villainesque”. Elijah, recently out of the closet, tests his sexuality when he instigates sex with Hannah's best friend Marnie. This betryal deeply wounds Hannah, as she believed she would be the last woman Elijah would sleep with. Furthermore, Walters also brings up the stereotypical representation of queens as hairdressers (61). This stereotype is still evident in the recent series Orange Is The New Black which includes a transgender hairdresser inmate character.

 It is interesting to look at Suzanna Walters' 2001 article and see how the problems still apply to 2013.

Dualcasting for the Win!

 

            Striking at first, but logical after further investigation, is the lack of success when narrowcasting to a gay/lesbian audience. In Frietas’ article he goes through the history of homosexual targeted niche channels like Pridevision, Outlet and GLAAD and illustrates how none of these channels, even in the hands of the once trendy MTV, were able to sustain themselves through subscriptions and advertising. While I can see the appeal of trying to capture this niche audience and profit it seems contradictory to further isolate a group of people that have never been fully incorporated into the American sensibility or culture.  In contrast to these channels that narrowcast is Bravo, a channel that dualcasts to women and gay men which has been successful for many years.

            In a narrowcasting versus dualcasting showdown that observes shows like Will and Grace and the more recent Orange is the New Black, it seems dualcasting takes the championship trophy home. It’s only more logical to include gay characters and sensibilities within existing shows/concepts rather than to isolate them. To give the lesbian and gay community their own channels and magazines is to further exclude them and label as a minority. While Netflix has yet to reveal their ratings to the public, Orange is the New Black is trending and buzzworthy. The show, which makes has lesbians on display even more cutting edge than Bravo’s work because it appeals to a niche that has historically been considered anti-consumerist (Sender) while maintaining a wide heterosexual audience as well. A protagonist with a hazy sexuality is definitely a contending reason, but nevertheless the structure of a mix of sexualities is also at play here.  Dualcasting is definitely a more inclusive and effective strategy for gay visibility in the media. It may not be the final solution for gay/lesbian visibility, but it definitely knocks down narrowcasting.  

-Natalie Qasabian