So unless you have managed to avoid all talk, media-fawning and the like you will know that the future King was born. If you did manage to avoid all references up until this point please share your tips! I don't have a TV or buy gossip mags and yet still could not avoid the coverage. I will congratulate the Guardian on its Republican button, that allowed you to hide the rolling coverage and numerous articles that simply had to be written. However, it would have been even better if they had not covered it at all... (a view I appreciate may infuriate many)
My post brings me to the merchandise that has followed this birth, so many retailers so desperate and so quick to get on the bandwagon. That I can understand, it was a huge media event and people clearly want to buy the stuff. But my objections largely focus on the tired, gendered and stereotypical items of clothing that have been produced. I would have to say that the worst example that I found was ASDA's One day I'm going to marry Prince George. I had thought the assorted Born to Rule items had been bad enough across the media but this one really took the crown.
It's pink, with the boy's version naturally in blue, because clearly clothing for girls must be pink. That's the first problem with it, its simply conforming to the usual stereotypes about clothing colours for girls. Then there is the message, the royalist message is bad enough. The endless fawning over a family that we barely truly know. The celebration of inequality is almost endless, this child will rule over the UK irrespective of skill, ability, political persuasion or personality. As Republic point out 'shouldn't every child be born equal?', shouldn't every child have the chance and opportunity to be head of state, if they have the skill or desire? So for all the clothes that celebrate the recipient being 'born in 2013' perhaps the giver should stop and think about what they are celebrating when they pass on this item. The fact that the recipient happened to be born in the same year as our future ruler? The fact that the recipient will never know privilege like our future ruler? The fact that the recipient will never be head of state unlike the future ruler? Perhaps now it seems like an odd message.
Finally, back to the message of the first item of clothing. Do you really want your child to aspire to marry someone they have never met? Even as a jokey message it is pretty poor. What level of aspiration is that for your child? The focus of clothing like this, even if not explicit, is that girls should be thinking about their looks and superficial pursuits. It's just frustrating that in 2013 we still have this level of inequality and we still produce clothing and items that seek to stereotype and pigeon-hole the sexes.
Showing posts with label gender stereotyping. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gender stereotyping. Show all posts
Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Saturday, 5 January 2013
The Apprentice (and women)
The Apprentice, in particular the UK series, regularly pulls in millions of viewers and is popular prime-time viewing. For anyone who hasn't seen it, the format is simple:
Anyway....back to the point in hand. My frustration about the nature of tasks and the arrogance of some of the candidates is a little irrelevant really. My annoyance is the way that the women are often shown, spoken to and described on this show. Broadly I would break my annoyance down into: women who are strong and capable being portrayed as bossy and aggressive, men speaking down to the women, casual sexism and the contrast between the way men and women are described.
There are some notable examples; two famous and notable examples were Ruth Badger and Claire Young. Both women were very successful on the show, they had been successful in business before the show and continue to be successful after the show. However, they were often described as aggressive women during the tasks, when the same or similar behaviour in business was praised as decisive when talking about the men taking part in tasks. Strong women are often given the label of aggressive, and it is difficult one to shake.
Sexist attitudes are not confined to the 'grown-up' version of the apprentice. This year there were some absolute gems from the Young Apprentice, by absolute gems I of course mean bizarre sexist rubbish. The first episode sees the project manager of the boy's team label the fashion task as quite feminine. Now, not being the most fashionable of individuals I am prepared to be corrected, but I thought there were an awful lot of very famous and very talented male fashion designers. This is not even the worst or most annoying bit from the episode, but it shows how ingrained the notion of 'male' and 'female' jobs are. In the cab at the start of the task one of the candidates, David, declares that the men will win because 'they are the better sex'. This is then laughed about by the other male candidates in the cab. I tweeted about this at the time as I found his attitude and arrogance bizarre and dated. It is the fact that this was deemed a sensible thing to say on national TV about your fellow competitors, that you would win based solely upon your gender. Even if it was a joke, and I doubt it as it was preceded by the argument that even though cooking is feminine 'everyone knows men make the best chefs', it isn't funny or needed in the 21st century.It is that this language and belief system has become such a casual part of our society that no-one seems to really react.
What I intend to do, and any help is gratefully appreciated(!), is to properly document all the instances of dated or sexist language in the apprentice. I think that when we change the arena in which women are expected to work then we will start to see better moves towards equality. A Daily Mail article says that research blames women for the pay gap, this is because they allegedly do not ask for pay rises. Whereas other research suggests that women fear being seen as aggressive and pushy if they ask for a rise, a label that will only serve to hold them back in the future. We see women stuck in a vicious cycle, ask for a pay rise and they risk being seen as pushy, don't do it and they risk being seen as too cautious and not driven enough. TV shows like the Apprentice can help the portrayal of women in industry, they can remove the stereotypes and challenge them. However, at the moment I think it is falling short. I'd like to end this post with a link to some of the criticism that star of the show Lord Sugar has received for some of his comments about employing women of child-bearing age.**
*I have often reasoned that the business tasks/environment is very artificial because of the quick timings and lack of acknowledgement for the specific skills that would be needed to be successful in certain tasks. For example in Series 7 episode 2: Mobile Phone Application the candidates were required to design an App and launch it by the next day. An artificial task, that ignores the work required to design (properly), code and test an app for launching.
**These obnoxious comments are ignoring the basic fact that not all women of child-bearing age can have or wish to have children.
- Between 14 and 16 candidates are normally involved.
- Their bios at the beginning of the series, and included as snippets during the episodes, showcase these individuals as often allegedly the 'best business brains' in Britain
- The candidates are then split into teams for business tasks, for the first few episodes they are normally split along gender lines
- The business tasks are designed to test different aspects of the business world, albeit in a very artificial environment.*
- The team that is deemed to or does lose each week is up for firing.
- Each team has a project manager and the losing manager selects two candidates to go into the boardroom for the potential firing.
- Finally, the winner gets a job or investment from Lord Sugar
Anyway....back to the point in hand. My frustration about the nature of tasks and the arrogance of some of the candidates is a little irrelevant really. My annoyance is the way that the women are often shown, spoken to and described on this show. Broadly I would break my annoyance down into: women who are strong and capable being portrayed as bossy and aggressive, men speaking down to the women, casual sexism and the contrast between the way men and women are described.
There are some notable examples; two famous and notable examples were Ruth Badger and Claire Young. Both women were very successful on the show, they had been successful in business before the show and continue to be successful after the show. However, they were often described as aggressive women during the tasks, when the same or similar behaviour in business was praised as decisive when talking about the men taking part in tasks. Strong women are often given the label of aggressive, and it is difficult one to shake.
Sexist attitudes are not confined to the 'grown-up' version of the apprentice. This year there were some absolute gems from the Young Apprentice, by absolute gems I of course mean bizarre sexist rubbish. The first episode sees the project manager of the boy's team label the fashion task as quite feminine. Now, not being the most fashionable of individuals I am prepared to be corrected, but I thought there were an awful lot of very famous and very talented male fashion designers. This is not even the worst or most annoying bit from the episode, but it shows how ingrained the notion of 'male' and 'female' jobs are. In the cab at the start of the task one of the candidates, David, declares that the men will win because 'they are the better sex'. This is then laughed about by the other male candidates in the cab. I tweeted about this at the time as I found his attitude and arrogance bizarre and dated. It is the fact that this was deemed a sensible thing to say on national TV about your fellow competitors, that you would win based solely upon your gender. Even if it was a joke, and I doubt it as it was preceded by the argument that even though cooking is feminine 'everyone knows men make the best chefs', it isn't funny or needed in the 21st century.It is that this language and belief system has become such a casual part of our society that no-one seems to really react.
What I intend to do, and any help is gratefully appreciated(!), is to properly document all the instances of dated or sexist language in the apprentice. I think that when we change the arena in which women are expected to work then we will start to see better moves towards equality. A Daily Mail article says that research blames women for the pay gap, this is because they allegedly do not ask for pay rises. Whereas other research suggests that women fear being seen as aggressive and pushy if they ask for a rise, a label that will only serve to hold them back in the future. We see women stuck in a vicious cycle, ask for a pay rise and they risk being seen as pushy, don't do it and they risk being seen as too cautious and not driven enough. TV shows like the Apprentice can help the portrayal of women in industry, they can remove the stereotypes and challenge them. However, at the moment I think it is falling short. I'd like to end this post with a link to some of the criticism that star of the show Lord Sugar has received for some of his comments about employing women of child-bearing age.**
*I have often reasoned that the business tasks/environment is very artificial because of the quick timings and lack of acknowledgement for the specific skills that would be needed to be successful in certain tasks. For example in Series 7 episode 2: Mobile Phone Application the candidates were required to design an App and launch it by the next day. An artificial task, that ignores the work required to design (properly), code and test an app for launching.
**These obnoxious comments are ignoring the basic fact that not all women of child-bearing age can have or wish to have children.
Friday, 4 January 2013
Women as portrayed by TV
This is just a briefish post (I promise!) because I want to add a couple of longer posts that focus on specific TV shows in the near future. I find myself watching a lot of random TV shows on DVD and on the iplayer etc (none of them live I might add!). Increasingly I have noticed some frustrating cliches and stereotypes that are not only boring and tired but offensive.
I'd like to start with a show that I had enjoyed as a child: Jonathan Creek. As a child I remember watching it and enjoying the puzzle solving, always a small competition between me and my dad as to who could solve it first (frustratingly for him I normally won!). Re-watching it as an adult I was disappointed to see the often sexist bit-part portrayal of so many of the female characters. Take the first episode for example: The Wrestler's Tomb, not wishing to spoil it for anyone it starts with an artist who has made his living painting nudes. Now there is nothing wrong with painting the female form, however, the comment was made that he was then sleeping with or had slept with a large number of his models. The women are characterised as falling madly for him and being almost in awe. It is assumed that the wife must have killed him out of jealousy, this is focused upon for a considerable part of the episode.
However, this is one episode and is perhaps not the worst of the show. One of the main recurring characters, Adam Klaus, the TV magician. He seems to permanently have scantily-clad women draped over his performances or he is portrayed as lusting after women. The women he lusts after seem to be portrayed as mere objects, in one episode he is pursuing a porn-star and is disappointed when her implant 'bursts', complaining that he has been cheated. Now I know that this is only *fiction*, but it is the fact that the writers felt this was an acceptable way to portray women and that it was necessary for the plot and episode. When actually the show would be fine with simply solving mysteries, murders and the rest. The fact that it seems almost automatic to have the female characters as 'entertainment' or the side-kick is frustrating.
Then there is the sheer number of shows devoted to beauty and conforming to an ideal. One particularly annoying example is 'Snog, Marry, Avoid?' in which women (and occasionally men) are rated by the public based solely upon their looks, they are then given a make-under. There are several flaws with this concept:
I also think it is dangerous for younger viewers to have this type of imagery and ideal presented as entertainment. An interesting piece by the National Association of Social Workers, based in Washington, looks at the role of body image for adolescent girls; considering the role of culture and media upon their self-image and esteem. So whilst these TV shows might be marketed as light entertainment they should be viewed as part of the cultural landscape that these young people are growing up in and trying to navigate.
I was going to look at The Apprentice and the contrasting way that women and men in business are often seen, described and portrayed. However, that is an entire blog post in itself. So I will finish with one more irritating example of casual sexism in TV fiction: Bad Education: Episode 4 School Trip: the bus driver amongst other misogynist little 'gems' reasons that he will never use sat-nav as he will not be told what to do by a woman. Again, I realise that this is *fiction* but it has been included for an attempt at comedy. It perpetuates the view that women are bossy and always moaning at these put upon men. Somewhere a writer decided that this an amusing little line for another show aimed at young people (BBC), it feeds into the society that sees women as a source of humour rather than part of the humour.
I appreciate that people might find this a little ranty or moany but I can't see a reason why TV can't be well written, respectful and still funny! We don't need to make cheap gags at the expense of a section of society. When adolescents grow up seeing women (in particular) as objects to assess based upon their beauty and as a source of amusement then is it any wonder that we still have street harassment and inequality? When our TV better reflects the world we should live in perhaps this will change.
I'd like to start with a show that I had enjoyed as a child: Jonathan Creek. As a child I remember watching it and enjoying the puzzle solving, always a small competition between me and my dad as to who could solve it first (frustratingly for him I normally won!). Re-watching it as an adult I was disappointed to see the often sexist bit-part portrayal of so many of the female characters. Take the first episode for example: The Wrestler's Tomb, not wishing to spoil it for anyone it starts with an artist who has made his living painting nudes. Now there is nothing wrong with painting the female form, however, the comment was made that he was then sleeping with or had slept with a large number of his models. The women are characterised as falling madly for him and being almost in awe. It is assumed that the wife must have killed him out of jealousy, this is focused upon for a considerable part of the episode.
However, this is one episode and is perhaps not the worst of the show. One of the main recurring characters, Adam Klaus, the TV magician. He seems to permanently have scantily-clad women draped over his performances or he is portrayed as lusting after women. The women he lusts after seem to be portrayed as mere objects, in one episode he is pursuing a porn-star and is disappointed when her implant 'bursts', complaining that he has been cheated. Now I know that this is only *fiction*, but it is the fact that the writers felt this was an acceptable way to portray women and that it was necessary for the plot and episode. When actually the show would be fine with simply solving mysteries, murders and the rest. The fact that it seems almost automatic to have the female characters as 'entertainment' or the side-kick is frustrating.
Then there is the sheer number of shows devoted to beauty and conforming to an ideal. One particularly annoying example is 'Snog, Marry, Avoid?' in which women (and occasionally men) are rated by the public based solely upon their looks, they are then given a make-under. There are several flaws with this concept:
- Beauty in a person is something that can be judged, measured and rated
- Beauty is merely your appearance
- To be truly happy you should want to be desired by others, including people who you don't even know
- You should want to be married
I also think it is dangerous for younger viewers to have this type of imagery and ideal presented as entertainment. An interesting piece by the National Association of Social Workers, based in Washington, looks at the role of body image for adolescent girls; considering the role of culture and media upon their self-image and esteem. So whilst these TV shows might be marketed as light entertainment they should be viewed as part of the cultural landscape that these young people are growing up in and trying to navigate.
I was going to look at The Apprentice and the contrasting way that women and men in business are often seen, described and portrayed. However, that is an entire blog post in itself. So I will finish with one more irritating example of casual sexism in TV fiction: Bad Education: Episode 4 School Trip: the bus driver amongst other misogynist little 'gems' reasons that he will never use sat-nav as he will not be told what to do by a woman. Again, I realise that this is *fiction* but it has been included for an attempt at comedy. It perpetuates the view that women are bossy and always moaning at these put upon men. Somewhere a writer decided that this an amusing little line for another show aimed at young people (BBC), it feeds into the society that sees women as a source of humour rather than part of the humour.
I appreciate that people might find this a little ranty or moany but I can't see a reason why TV can't be well written, respectful and still funny! We don't need to make cheap gags at the expense of a section of society. When adolescents grow up seeing women (in particular) as objects to assess based upon their beauty and as a source of amusement then is it any wonder that we still have street harassment and inequality? When our TV better reflects the world we should live in perhaps this will change.
Tuesday, 28 August 2012
Feminism and Fairytales
I came across an interesting article on the Guardian's website today. It was a piece about an art installation in which women signed their consent to be kissed and married by a visitor to the gallery. And like sleeping beauty these women would lie with their eyes closed and wait to be kissed. They did not have to open their eyes upon being kissed, but if they did they were to marry the man who kissed them. The man in question having also signed consent agreeing to this process, and having confirmed that they were not already married. The piece is very interesting and well worth a read, you can find it here.
However, it got me thinking about some of the child-friendly fairy-tales that I had been told as a child. (Ignoring the fact that many fairy-tales have their roots in much darker and possibly scarier tales!) Many of the fairy-tales that we tell to our children and market as toys, characters etc have perhaps undergone a re-make to make them less scary for their audiences. With this in mind we should then think about the message that is retained, added or underlying in the tales that we tell our children.
I am sure many readers can think of several straight away....
As referenced by the tale in the article, Sleeping Beauty the young, unmarried and beautiful maiden who is put to sleep by a wicked fairy awaiting her handsome and brave prince to kiss her and awaken her. What message does this give young readers?! Innocence and success are tied up in beauty, while plainness or unattractiveness is evil or up to no good! That the woman must wait helpless and lost, her life in stasis until the man comes along to awaken her and give her purpose. Her life literally was on-hold until he came along. Perhaps I am being miserable and it is simply a tale for small children...
Cinderella is another such tale. Beautiful and hard-working because her jealous and crucially here, ugly (whatever happened to everyone is beautiful or beauty is in the eye of the beholder?) step-sisters spend their time taunting her and providing her with work. The sisters attend a ball where their ugliness is once again highlighted, portrayed as miserable spinsters. The beautiful Cinderella finds herself at the ball and captures the attention of the handsome prince (notice a theme here). Fleeing as she is out of time, leaving only a shoe for the prince to use to track her down. Once again, the beautiful woman who has no hope or future is rescued by the prince.
Too many modern fairy-tales (or the adaptations that we know in modern books and films) have removed the stronger cautionary messages of traditional tales and have instead created a world where helpless but beautiful princesses await their prince. These women lack the means or ability to escape the situations that they have been placed in. A value is put upon their looks, that is not healthy, all that is good is always labelled beautiful or fair and all that is evil is lonely and ugly. The message that seems to run throughout is that these women need a man to save them. And, in the 21st century is that really a message that we want to be reinforcing every evening in bedtime reading for young children? Traditional tales with humorous messages, cautionary fables or adventurous yarns...but leave out the gender stereotyping.
However, it got me thinking about some of the child-friendly fairy-tales that I had been told as a child. (Ignoring the fact that many fairy-tales have their roots in much darker and possibly scarier tales!) Many of the fairy-tales that we tell to our children and market as toys, characters etc have perhaps undergone a re-make to make them less scary for their audiences. With this in mind we should then think about the message that is retained, added or underlying in the tales that we tell our children.
I am sure many readers can think of several straight away....
As referenced by the tale in the article, Sleeping Beauty the young, unmarried and beautiful maiden who is put to sleep by a wicked fairy awaiting her handsome and brave prince to kiss her and awaken her. What message does this give young readers?! Innocence and success are tied up in beauty, while plainness or unattractiveness is evil or up to no good! That the woman must wait helpless and lost, her life in stasis until the man comes along to awaken her and give her purpose. Her life literally was on-hold until he came along. Perhaps I am being miserable and it is simply a tale for small children...
Cinderella is another such tale. Beautiful and hard-working because her jealous and crucially here, ugly (whatever happened to everyone is beautiful or beauty is in the eye of the beholder?) step-sisters spend their time taunting her and providing her with work. The sisters attend a ball where their ugliness is once again highlighted, portrayed as miserable spinsters. The beautiful Cinderella finds herself at the ball and captures the attention of the handsome prince (notice a theme here). Fleeing as she is out of time, leaving only a shoe for the prince to use to track her down. Once again, the beautiful woman who has no hope or future is rescued by the prince.
Too many modern fairy-tales (or the adaptations that we know in modern books and films) have removed the stronger cautionary messages of traditional tales and have instead created a world where helpless but beautiful princesses await their prince. These women lack the means or ability to escape the situations that they have been placed in. A value is put upon their looks, that is not healthy, all that is good is always labelled beautiful or fair and all that is evil is lonely and ugly. The message that seems to run throughout is that these women need a man to save them. And, in the 21st century is that really a message that we want to be reinforcing every evening in bedtime reading for young children? Traditional tales with humorous messages, cautionary fables or adventurous yarns...but leave out the gender stereotyping.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)