This blog will be dealing with
an often controversial topic, feminism. I will be reviewing the celebrated
new-era-type feminist views that are often favoured by the media and identifying
the effects this has on society; in particular society’s views towards what
actions and activities are acceptable for men and women. The mediums I will be
specifically looking at are daytime TV and television adverts. This analysis
will show the negative ways in which both sexes are perceived in advertisements
and the negative ways men are portrayed through daytime television shows.
A couple of years ago, I was watching an
episode of the Jeremy Kyle show. The subject was about domestic violence. The
first guest to be interviewed was a woman who was constantly being beaten up by
her boyfriend. The audience were naturally appalled at the level of violence
this woman faced and how intimidated her partner made her feel. However, the
biggest shock was yet to come. One of the last guests to come out was a man. A skinny,
insecure looking man who had been abused by his wife for many years. When the
man came out and spoke of his situation the audience was clearly shocked.
However, their shock was completely different to the shock displayed when the
female guest relayed her experiences. At certain points, nearly the whole
audience was smirking or giggling as this man spoke about how scared he was of
his wife. The most disturbing aspect of the scene was the insincere way Jeremy
tackled the issue. He made unsympathetic comments along the lines of “grow some
balls” and even squirmed with embarrassment at some of the explanations the man
gave as to why he was choosing to stay with his abuser. At some points Jeremy actually
sniggered, ignoring the genuine upset that this man felt. The overall message
communicated from this episode was that only a woman is allowed to be pitied
when receiving unacceptable abuse and tyranny but a man is not. The woman was
not viewed as a villain in the same way as the man who had been abusing the
previous female guest. This is only one instance where a woman is treated
differently to a man and the woman benefits from this unfair treatment. The
onus seemed to be on the man to stick up for himself, as though somehow this
abuse was of his own doing for not being a ‘proper man’.
Personally I feel that in some
ways men are now being victimised in society. Other than different sets of body
parts and body strengths, men and women
are equal and we tend to forget that men need women and vice-versa to populate
and co-exist in the world. We need to understand and embrace masculine aspects
and feminist aspects in order to function properly. There’s a duality to
everything and there is a balance needed for most things in the universe. We
are no different.
I think there are a lot of
people that have had their views changed towards feminism by the television and
media industry. I don’t think programmes like Maury Povich, Ricky Lake or even
Jeremy Kyle help anyone because they make men seem like demonic creatures who
are put on this earth solely to cheat, lie and abuse women. In every negative
scenario it is as if these women are put in horrible and negative situations by
a man. At the conclusion of these stories the audience usually cheers on the
woman for gaining inner strength and determination to fight back. The woman
often shouts threats and obscenities to the effect of “I’ll cut his p***s off”
which is usually met with rapturous applause. Programmes like these are
basically teaching women to hate men and slaughter them in their sleep.
Personally I wouldn’t want my daughter to grow up adopting this type of view.
I also believe that this modern
day twist on feminism teaches women to become gold diggers: “When you pay as a man, I’m going to give
you love, nurture and totally service you downstairs. I’m not going to service
you downstairs, because if I have to pay, I become the man and we’re no longer
going to have sex because I lost interest. I just close my legs[1]”.
This was a quote by Patti Stanger on the “Joy Behar show”. She is the star
on the show “Millionaire matchmaker”.
And unfortunately for men she is idolized by millions of women worldwide.
This modern day take on feminism she preaches gives out all sorts of negative
messages. I’m now going to rephrase what her quote essentially states in simple
terms:
“If the man pay’s for me on
dates I will have sex with him”.
This is not the greatest
message to convey to young women growing up in today’s already complex world. Imagine
if a man was to come out on a TV show and say that a woman needs to cook, clean
and give him sex before he decides to bring in money and put food on the table.
There would be a huge number of complaints from angry women labelling him a chauvinistic
pig, and rightly so. But in this day and age, men are obliged to preach
equality whilst women are seemingly getting a free pass.
Whilst
researching this topic I read a book
called “TV Living: Television, Culture, and Everyday Life”, by David Gauntlett.
The book discusses how women’s interests and concerns towards daytime
television are represented. There is a survey in the book that highlights young
women’s views (average age 14-20) towards daytime television, and the majority
of women find the content to be trivial and insulting to most women.
“I think women’s interests and concerns
sometimes get highlighted more during the day because men are meant to be at
work. I don’t think it’s very fair and it is very sexist. I was ill a few days
ago so I had to stay home from school, I spent most of the time watching
daytime television, nearly all the programs were aimed at women”[2].
This
was a statement by one of the women in the book. There are also other
statements of women talking about how this type of media is only designed to
suit the stereotypical view of a “house-wife”[3],
and is no way aimed in any such way to men.
Daytime
television talk shows are often considered to be pro-feminist because of their
strong orientation towards women. Talk shows are now one of the main forms of
television entertainment. They are fast and easy on the eye. Not only that,
they are also cheap to produce, as they are not hiring actors; but using so-called
“everyday people” like you and me. Since relating to the viewers is one of the
main strategies of talk shows, the focus is more and more on programs where
people talk about their experiences. Relying on ordinary peoples’ lives
provides ammunition for the producers and an inexhaustible fund of stories.
The
new genre of pro feminist talk shows has ended the near-fifty-year reign of
soap operas as the most popular daytime “dramatic” form. More importantly, talk
shows have become the most watched “for-women” TV genre. In a social study, more
than fifteen million people were tuning in daily to watch Oprah Winfrey and her
female studio audience debate personal issues. Generally a talk shows target-audience
is a woman who is a mother, a homemaker, and consumer of emotion-filled
narratives.
There
are some talk shows out there that have a negative attitude towards males with
misguided views of feminism intertwined with blatant sexist viewing. For instance
there is an American talk show called “The Talk” which is presented by Sharon
Osbourne. On one episode there was a news story about
a woman who cut off her husband's penis and threw it in a garbage
disposal because he filed for divorce. Sharon Osbourne happily justified
this and said that this was an act that was "quite fabulous" and "hysterical[4]," adding that
she lights candles by Lorena Bobbitt's picture. I wonder what a child
would think if he or she heard the female audience laughing at Sharon
Osbourne’s trivialization of a vile act of domestic violence?
Also
we had the whole Rihanna-Chris Brown situation. It was reported that Rihanna
hit Chris, which resulted in him violently attacking her. This was obviously a
terrible crime but my argument with this is that it was wrong on her account as
well as his. He should never have attacked her as we all know but what was
wrong on her account was that she hit him first. No one is saying that she was
wrong to hit him, so, if it was okay for her to get so mad as to hit him, why
is it not okay for him to get mad and hit back? By law the first aggressor is
the one to take most of the blame, be it male or female. Feminists on the other
hand seem to think that the man is the one to take all of the blame regardless
of hitting first or hitting back. If Rihanna hitting first is not an excuse for
Chris Brown’s hitting back, what is Rihanna’s excuse for hitting first?
Men are also frequently
portrayed in a negative light on daytime television program “Loose Women” which
seems to be another case of modern day feminism gone too far. There could never be a male
equivalent to a show like Loose women. Can you really imagine a show with a crew of laddish reality-TV rejects whistling
at females, boasting about past affairs they have had behind their partners’
backs and slating the female race for being “good-for-nothing”? Not only would
it obviously be sexist, but the idea would never be supported in the first place.
In the beginning of 2011, Sky Sports presenters Andy
Gray and Richard Keys lost their jobs for making off-air sexist comments[5].
None of the comments made were made during air-time but someone
deliberately and deviously leaked recordings of their private conversations to
destroy their Sky Sports careers. The “Loose Women”, presenters never come
under the same scrutiny for their on-air sexism. Why is it acceptable for these
women to base their TV programme around slagging men off but the same thing is
a sackable offence for TV presenters who made their comments off air?
Nowadays, if a man is sexist he's called a misogynist;
if a woman is sexist she's called a feminist. In advertisements, sexism is
often present in a way to sell the product to the consumer and it is so readily
used, we are often unaware of it even taking place. This is a medium in which
men and women are often stereotyped. Men are either idiotic or shown as sex
objects. And women are either sex objects or only love you for expensive gifts.
This is different to the 1960s when only women were portrayed as the mindless
and weak individuals. The media tends to feed this view in to our brains in a
persistent way that we start to see this view as a normal way of life and feel
this ideal is what is expected of us.
These
are just some examples of adverts that portray a sexist view of both men and women[6].
1)
Dolmio:
The mama makes the Bolognese sauce and the papa and son are incapable of making
it themselves
2)
Sheila’s
wheels: Girls are magicians and a stupid gormless bloke is their stooge. Bit by
bit they make him disappear until he is replaced with a baby elephant. Everyone
laughs and the crowd of women goes nuts.
3)
Un-known
jewellery advert: A guy proposes to his girlfriend in the street. She is not
impressed until he shows her how huge the diamond ring is. Then she says yes…
4)
Natwest:
A male customer on a fishing boat and a high-powered
businessman on a trip to Rome. But the female customer is pictured at home with
a baby hanging off her.
5)
Calgon:
reassuring guy in overalls, and a grateful mum in the kitchen.
But there are other ad’s
that really caught my attention.
The first is an American
ad selling “Fit Light Yogurt[7]”
with an overweight lady in a Marilyn Monroe inspired scene with her dress
blowing up in the air. The text under the ad says “Forget about it. Men's
preference will never change. Fit Light Yogurt." So basically, this ad is
saying that if you want to be with a man you need to look good and be thin.
Even though the woman in this ad looks happy and even fun-loving, the ad is
saying that she’s not good enough.
Can you imagine how it
must feel if you are a bigger woman viewing this ad? This ad is demeaning and
superficial.
The second is the most
disturbing of all of the ads:
It is an ad for “Dolce
& Gabbana”[8]
that looks like what can only be described as a gang rape. There is an
attractive young woman on the floor who is being pinned down by a man with his
top off, and his body is oiled down to represent sweat. Around them are 3 other men who are just
watching her. The woman looks helpless and is in a powerless position as
compared to all the men who surround her. Is this image really necessary to
advertise clothes? Does the woman need to be viewed as submissive to be sexy?
Dolce and Gabbana seem to think so.
All that the company
cares about is that they all look good but they are not worried about the
subliminal message this advert gives out.
In conclusion, I have discovered through my research that
the general direction of day time television
shows is a distorted new interpretation of “feminism”. This new view is not
about “girl power” but more to do with stereotypical views of men and the
derogatory things that can be said about
them to get better ratings and encourage a “girl power” type solidarity amongst
the targeted female audiences towards these programmes. This direction is
having a negative and often misleading effect on women. Shows like Maury Povich
and Jeremy Kyle are teaching women that the vast majority of men are cheats and
cannot be trusted. Shows like Millionaire Matchmaker are sending out the
underlying message that money is power and money is enough to make a woman
submissive. Patty Stanger’s views reach millions of people around the world and
she is subconsciously sending out the message that enough money can buy a man
sex on the first date[9].
Advertisements, on the other hand, generally discriminate against both sexes;
regardless of whether it’s pre or post watershed. The real crime that is being
committed here is that our society now just accepts this and even adopts this
attitude as a normal way of life.
Bibliography
1.
M.
Samuel, Want to see real sexism? Watch
some TV adverts, 27 January 2011. Can be found: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1351183/Want-real-sexism-Watch-TV-adverts.html
2.
D.
Thompson, Are TV ads getting more sexist?
October 31st 2011. Can be found: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/10/are-tv-ads-getting-more-sexist/247545/
3.
A.
Pearcy, 10 modern ads that are sexist
toward men, November 29th 2010. Can be found: http://blog.ragan.com/prjunkie/2010/11/it_gets_better_too_guys_--_10.html
4. D. Gauntlett, A. Hill, TV Living: Television, Culture, and Everyday
Life, British Film Institute.
5. Video by Krazie316, Catherine Kieu castrates husband, 15
July 2011, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wP4VeMJp9pE&feature=watch_response#t=4m45s.
6. Glassvisage, Sexism in product advertising, April
2010. Can be found: http://glassvisage.hubpages.com/hub/Sexism-in-product-advertisements
8. HLN’s Joy Behar and Patti Stanger interview, February 18th
2011. Can be found: http://sex.sheknows.com/2011/02/18/should-men-always-pay-for-dates/
9. O. Gibson, Andy Gray sacked but
pressure on Sky to remove Richard Keys, 26 January 2011. Can be found: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/26/andy-gray-richard-keys
