Representations of women in film/tv by kpo

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Representations of women in film/tv

POSTED BY: KPO
UPDATED: Friday, January 10, 2014 18:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1013
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, January 2, 2014 3:34 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

A question:

Ladies/feminists, what annoys you about how women are represented in film and TV? I'm sure it could be quite a long list, and some of them will be obvious, but still, I'd like to hear.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 2, 2014 9:50 AM

WISHIMAY

What doesn't bug me would be a better question...

99.9 percent of actresses are size 2 or they try to make them look as close to that as possible. There's a template that gets passed around I think. The only times they are allowed to be over that is one week after giving birth or if they have larger "assets". I'm so sick of skinny jeans and boob length barrel curls I could scream- not to mention NO ONE I KNOW LOOKS LIKE THAT. Fat girls are only allowed to be comedians and be laughed at. Black women are usually bitchy bosses with a heart of gold (Castle, Bones, Law and Order)
Disabled women are pretty non-existent, hell disabled people and differently abled people are pretty scarce altogether unless it's the cause du jour. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY DISEASES AND DISORDERS THERE ARE??? How come you never see anybody with anything WRONG with them????? "Characters" run for decades and never have a single health problem or addiction. It's preposterous. Hollyweird is missing out on half of humanity here...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 9, 2014 7:57 PM

WISHIMAY

P.S. Why did you ask?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 9, 2014 8:28 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

1. The woman as an accessory. Exists for no other reason than to look good and provide a bit of a love interest.

2. Lack of complexity - see above. No motive other than to exist for the male protagonist to make him feel bad/good/happy/courageous.

3. Played by younger actors ie mothers of teenagers being 30 something. It's more common that teenagers have mums in their 40's or god forbid 50's.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 9, 2014 11:33 PM

WISHIMAY

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
have mums in their 40's or god forbid 50's.

Yanno, I was watching Downton Abbey tonight(yes, I am THAT bored) when I realized I LIKE watching old people. They've had thirty extra years to get good at what they do. That- and I guess I'm just tired of the faux perfectionism tripe...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 9, 2014 11:45 PM

BYTEMITE

1) one dimensional characters
2) one dimensional FETISH characters
3) annoying stereotypes
4) annoying double standards
5) reinforcing unrealistic expectations

Also, I like Joss, but for a self-described feminist, he does some weird stuff about exploitation and abuse sometimes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 9:21 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Actually, I'd have to say nothing that doesn't also annoy me about how MEN are portrayed...or children, or animals, different races/nationalities, and about everything else. For me at least, we've gotten to a point where women are no "worse" represented than anything else; the entertainment industry pretty much simplifies/misrepresents everyone, as they always have. Yeah, we're not quite "there" yet, and I'll probably end up under a ton of bricks for my opinion, but the days when it pissed me off the way women were portrayed as compared to men have passed for me, if that's what you're asking.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 11:49 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I'd say women are getting the long end of the stick in terms of being portrayed favorably. Homer Simpson, Peter Griffin, Tim Taylor, Al Bundy, Archie Bunker... hell, going back to Ralph Kramden.

Men are generally seen as loud, boorish, dull witted, oblivious, bumbling and self centered.

But this thread is about how WOMEN are shown in t.v. and film. So I guess I can't say anything about that.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 12:09 PM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

I'd say women are getting the long end of the stick in terms of being portrayed favorably. Homer Simpson, Peter Griffin, Tim Taylor, Al Bundy, Archie Bunker... hell, going back to Ralph Kramden.

Men are generally seen as loud, boorish, dull witted, oblivious, bumbling and self centered.

But this thread is about how WOMEN are shown in t.v. and film. So I guess I can't say anything about that.

Several of those characters are more than just problem characters in of themselves. The problem extends to their significant relationships and the women they're coupled with. Al Bundy in particular, though you could make an argument in a slightly different way with Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin. (I don't specifically remember Ralph.... Honeymooners?)

The relationships are dysfunctional almost to the point where they are (mutually) emotionally abusive. Not healthy or realistic, and worse, played for laughs.

If both men and women receive fair treatment in the media, then, with perhaps a few dramatic exceptions, we might also see better examples of relationships as well. INCLUDING both not judging women for their sexuality, but also not putting women up on an untouchable always right pedestal.

And depictions of relationships affect the real world in that they reinforce some underlying expectations, and may for some people or on some level be used as role models.

So your comments here are entirely justifiable within the scope of the conversation. You should explore this line more.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 12:12 PM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Actually, I'd have to say nothing that doesn't also annoy me about how MEN are portrayed...or children, or animals, different races/nationalities, and about everything else. For me at least, we've gotten to a point where women are no "worse" represented than anything else; the entertainment industry pretty much simplifies/misrepresents everyone, as they always have. Yeah, we're not quite "there" yet, and I'll probably end up under a ton of bricks for my opinion, but the days when it pissed me off the way women were portrayed as compared to men have passed for me, if that's what you're asking.

There are definitely problems with both depictions of men and women in television. And their relationships. No slamming here.

You'll notice that my complaints were also general, and gender neutral.

I actually do still get a little mad and frustrated. Because this stuff DOES still affect the real world.

Look at the TWILIGHT literature series. You can't tell me that has had a positive impact on gender identity OR gender relations.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 3:27 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

They (both men and women) are wealthy.
They all live in nice homes... even poorly-paid NYC detectives.
They all seem to work for some sort of security agency, and they shoot someone nearly every episode.
They have a tremendous amount of job autonomy. Doesn't ANYONE get in trouble with the boss?
They don't pay any attention to their children or their spouse (or they don't have any).
They're all chirpy/twerpy or all hard-bitten. Not an empathetic cell anywhere.
They're all roughly the same age and build.
They all EXCEL at what they do... except of course for the obligatory bumbling husband who was the staple of every recent household comedy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 3:35 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Thanks for the replies, all.

Quote:
P.S. Why did you ask?

Well, because I'm curious and generally want to understand such things... But also, because I have a theory: that a lot of the not-very-good representation of women on film/TV is simply down to the under-representation of women as screenwriters. I don't think it's necessarily ingrained, societal sexism on the part of the male writers (although I believe this exists to some extent) - I just think it's male writers writing instinctively for a male audience. I reached this conclusion because a lot of the time when I watch something written by a female writer, I get mildly irked at the representation of the male characters. I'm sure it's not as bad as what you ladies have to put up with, in terms of ridiculous one dimensional characters etc., I'm just conscious that the male characters are not written for my consumption - they're written for female consumption, and to compliment the female character(s) in the story, in one way or other. In other words, women writers do exactly what men writers do - just, perhaps not as bad, and there are less of them, so the balance is out of whack.

Here's something I just read by a (female) literary agent for teen fiction, on the submissions she receives, and male characters (it kind of mirrors what Magons and Byte have said about female characters):

Quote:
The other thing I’m not seeing as much of lately are strong male characters. We talk a lot about what makes a female character “strong.” I, for one, talk about it a lot. But, the boys in YA are being forgotten. I see too many perfect boyfriends, perfectly imperfect bad boys, “nice guy” best friends, and sassy gay friends. Maybe it’s because I read a lot of submissions with female main characters, and boys are generally cast as friend, enemy, or love interest to the main character. That’s all well and good, but that doesn’t mean they have to be one-dimensional. Whether it’s a male or female character, I need them to be strong... meaning, they should be able to stand on their own and have just as many complexities as humans in real life.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 6:35 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Actually, I'd have to say nothing that doesn't also annoy me about how MEN are portrayed...or children, or animals, different races/nationalities, and about everything else. For me at least, we've gotten to a point where women are no "worse" represented than anything else; the entertainment industry pretty much simplifies/misrepresents everyone, as they always have. Yeah, we're not quite "there" yet, and I'll probably end up under a ton of bricks for my opinion, but the days when it pissed me off the way women were portrayed as compared to men have passed for me, if that's what you're asking.

This is what i think too.

Quote:
Look at the TWILIGHT literature series. You can't tell me that has had a positive impact on gender identity OR gender relations.

ugh yes, almost a manual on dysfunctional relationships.

Quote:
They (both men and women) are wealthy.
They all live in nice homes... even poorly-paid NYC detectives.

Dont all americans live in massive houses?

Quote:

They have a tremendous amount of job autonomy. Doesn't ANYONE get in trouble with the boss?

Yep, seems everyone gets to leave the office when they want to investigate. Even when that isn't their job.

Quote:
They don't pay any attention to their children

Classic example was Jennifer Annistan's character in Friends. All hoopla about being pregnant and childbirth, but once the kid was in the world, not so interesting for a comedy. Like babies are a kind of a part time hobby you can pick up when you feel bored.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 10, 2014 6:58 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:

Several of those characters are more than just problem characters in of themselves. The problem extends to their significant relationships and the women they're coupled with. Al Bundy in particular, though you could make an argument in a slightly different way with Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin. (I don't specifically remember Ralph.... Honeymooners?)

Yes. The Honeymooners, which was well before my time, but still a iconic fixture of American TV.

Quote:

The relationships are dysfunctional almost to the point where they are (mutually) emotionally abusive. Not healthy or realistic, and worse, played for laughs.

Well, apparently chaos is funny and entertaining,so it plays well on t.v. Abusive relationships (3 Stooges ) is a prime example.

Quote:

If both men and women receive fair treatment in the media, then, with perhaps a few dramatic exceptions, we might also see better examples of relationships as well. INCLUDING both not judging women for their sexuality, but also not putting women up on an untouchable always right pedestal.

Ever watch CASTLE ? Beckett ( Niki Heat ) is flawed, sexy, smart, driven...I guess she's unrealistic in how much of a super woman she is, even after she's dealt with serious personal issues.

Quote:

And depictions of relationships affect the real world in that they reinforce some underlying expectations, and may for some people or on some level be used as role models.

So your comments here are entirely justifiable within the scope of the conversation. You should explore this line more.

Thanks.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE