Gender On Television: It's Like Feminism Never Happened

[Aquarius]

Are motherhood and being "strong, intelligent, and independent" mutually exclusive? Maybe I'm way off base and reading the tea leaves wrong, but that's the vibe I'm picking up. 

 

Please enlighten me. As a man I can't see the issue through a woman's eyes.

 

They are absolutely not mutually exclusive.  Provided that a woman is not defined solely as "a mother."  And therein lies the problem.

[ElleryAnne]

Are motherhood and being "strong, intelligent, and independent" mutually exclusive?

 

 

I think the two are separate but absolutely compatible ideas.  A woman can be strong, intelligent and independent and still be a mother, or want to be a mother later - or still want NOT to be a mother.  Part of being strong is deciding which is right for her and shaping her life accordingly (which includes choosing a partner with a similar viewpoint if a partner is part of the plan), as best as circumstances allow.  The sad thing is that women occasionally become each other's worst enemies on that ground and forget to respect that other women can make that choice either way for themselves and still be strong and deserving of respect. 

[Sweet Tee]

I don't think wanting children is a bad thing at all and it certainly doesn't mean a woman isn't strong. I think the complaint is that women who don't want children are rarely represented on television. It can come off as the writers saying that not wanting children is wrong and they'll change their mind eventually. Off the top of my head, I can only think of Cristina Yang as a character who was adamant about not wanting children and never changed her mind and everyone tried to make her change her mind. Possibly Marie from Breaking Bad as well. She seemed content in her life and I don't recall children ever being brought up.

[Athena]

Perhaps 'relatable' was the wrong word to use. 'Compelling' might be a better one. In the case of a show like Mad Men, where almost everyone is at least a little bit of a prick, IMO it's a case of it being the era and the upbringing of the characters. I certainly wouldn't want to know many of them personally, with the *possible* exception of Pete, and even that's mostly because I'd follow Vincent Kartheiser to any project than because of any love for Pete himself. But I digress.

 

Yes, I concur with your use of compelling. I enjoy that there is a lot more portrayals of antiheroes on television. Mad Men is not the best example because I have mixed feelings on some of the female characters. I think one the examples I like of a flawed yet strong women is Sarah on Orphan Black. I think what makes her journey fascinating to me is that she is very flawed at the beginning of a show and still is. She makes a lot of mistakes, but it forms a complete picture of her as a person. She has become compelling when she has accepted her journey and conflict. I think a sense of character growth for any character is very important. I would say after acting, I can tolerate a fair from a show if there is decent character writing. Plot is just the side dish.

 

As the father of an adult daughter, this has been bugging me for a while now. She's currently in young career woman mode and enjoying it immensley, but has expressed a desire to have children later. Just not now. I get that there are women (and men) who don't want kids, and that's fine. But, what of those who do? Are motherhood and being "strong, intelligent, and independent" mutually exclusive? Maybe I'm way off base and reading the tea leaves wrong, but that's the vibe I'm picking up. 

 

Please enlighten me. As a man I can't see the issue through a woman's eyes.

 

No, they aren't mutually exclusive. As a woman and a Feminist, I won't speak for all women, but my issue is that many societies expects women to want children. I personally do want children in the future, but am focusing on my own personal growth and career at the moment. I think the issue is that culturally people ask you when you'll get married and then if you do, they want to know right away when you'll have kids. I don't really like these projections on myself (as if I am a ticking clock) or of women who I know don't want to be parents. These women are rarely represented in media. Even when a woman has children, many people think she must choose between family life and career or life away from them. Men are rarely expected to make these choices and don't get questioned or asked nearly as much about it.

[Aquarius]

It can come off as the writers saying that not wanting children is wrong and they'll change their mind eventually.

 

Well, in this way TV mirrors what I found in my own life.  I was so glad when I reached an age where people don't bring it up any more . . . before that it was all the questions about when the children were coming.  When I said "Never", I got told all the time I'd change my mind.  Then when I started getting older, I started getting told I'd better be careful, I was running out of time to change my mind.  Egads, people!!  Now occasionally someone will tell me that 46 is absolutely not too old to have my first child, but most leave it alone.  Thank heavens!

 

Interestingly enough, although my husband was the other half of this procreation that simply HAD TO HAPPEN, very few people ever questioned him about it.

[Snowprince]

Thank you all for your candor and earnestness in answering my questions/concerns. Those who choose to remain childless, for whatever reasons, are woefully underrepresented in the media. I can see how resentment can be bred by that. Your input IS appreciated.

Edited June 26, 2014 by Snowprince

[Wax Lion]

Part of the problem is that television is a collaborative medium, so just because a show does a good job with a female character, there's still the danger of another writer messing that up. I think there are plenty of writers who can do justice for a character who doesn't want to have children but it just takes one writer who can't understand the idea of a woman who is just in some kind of denial when she claims not to want children to undo that.

 

Sometimes, I think there's something about how CBS manages shows that makes their shows especially vulnerable to this. The Big Bang Theory that gets things right, with its female characters, with the way it treats nerd or people with disabilities... and then there are episodes that are completely regressive on some or all of these issues.

[Irlandesa]

But, what of those who do? Are motherhood and being "strong, intelligent, and independent" mutually exclusive? Maybe I'm way off base and reading the tea leaves wrong, but that's the vibe I'm picking up.

Oh absolutely not.  My mother was all of those things and a mother to boot.  I firmly believe that a woman can have it all if they want it all even if I personally don't want it all. But that has less to do with my career and more to do with "me time." And not being very fond of kids but I digress. 

 

As for her decision not to have children, would it have been more palatable if the writers had just had her change her mind and decide she'd like a baby after all? No, not every woman wants children, nor does she have to, but *some* women do change their minds. I'm not in the entertainment industry, but I write creatively as a hobby, and if characters aren't allowed to change or grow, they stagnate.

No, it honestly probably would not have been more palatable.  As @Sweet Tee pointed out, the desire to parent was not an underrepresented desire on HIMYM.  Lily and Marshall were married with kids bound.  (In fact, Lily was a career mother and was employed more consistently than her husband over the course of the series.)  Barney even expressed an interest in having kids. It wasn't make or break for him but the desire was there.  And Ted really wanted to be married with kids. In fact, their differing wants in regards to children was one of the main reasons we were told that Robin was actually "Aunt Robin" and not the mother.  Robin's decision to not want children made her somewhat of a unique character on TV.  I think the percentage of women who choose not to be mothers in the real world is significantly greater than the percentage of TV women who manage to escape their shows without having the "mother" label aded to their description.

 

So the fact that there was a positive and honest portrayal of a woman choosing not to have kids pleased me. I know characters changing is important in fiction but there are thousands of ways to change while still maintaining some core beliefs. Robin did change, by the way, but she changed for the worse. 

Edited June 27, 2014 by Irlandesa

[scarynikki12]

 

would it have been more palatable if the writers had just had her change her mind and decide she'd like a baby after all?

This seems to be what happens whenever a female character expresses a lack of interest in having children.  I remember Brennan on Bones was adamant that she didn't want children in the early seasons but, when the actress got pregnant, it was written into the show.  Cristina on Grey's Anatomy was very vocal about not ever having children and her on again off again love interests Burke and Owen both believed that she'd change her mind eventually.  The fact that she escaped that show without ever having kids, and that there was an episode showing just how unhappy she'd be if she did, is a miracle.  Meanwhile, on the same show, Arizona didn't want children but was not allowed to maintain that stance and is now as baby crazy as television thinks all women are.

 

I think it's definitely better to keep the female character consistent if they have her state that she doesn't want children.  To do other wise feeds the notion that all women will change their mind on the subject eventually and, frankly, there are too many women and men in real life who shouldn't be parents so we don't need to see that reflected on tv unless it's getting explored.

[Bella]

Right, like we don't get "oh, you'll change your mind" from our doctors when we want to discuss tubal ligations.

 

Lots of women don't want children, but TV still has one foot firmly planted in the 1950s.

[galax-arena]

In the TV news area of gender issues, related to this idea of prioritizing women as mothers... Anybody catch the latest Matt Lauer controversy?

 

This was Matt questioning General Motors' first-ever female CEO:

LAUER: You’re a mom, I mentioned, two kids. You said in an interview not long ago that your kids told you they’re going to hold you accountable for one job and that is being a mom.
BARRA: Correct.
LAUER: Given the pressures of this job at General Motors, can you do both well?

This sort of question annoys me as much as the idea of fathers "babysitting" their kids. 

[ElleryAnne]

LAUER: Given the pressures of this job at General Motors, can you do both well?

 

 

Ouch.  I want to find a nice way to put into words how much I hate it that women get asked that question but men don't.  But right now, all I can think is Ouch.  Plus a lot of expletives that I won't type here.  

[Bella]

I don't watch Matt Lauer - is he considered a fool or does he just babble like one?

[Snowprince]

Matt Lauer is a dickhead...always has been.

[Bastet]

He's what passes for a major national reporter these days, not a buffoon from some little-watched niche show, and he's far from alone in asking women - but not men - that type of question.  It's maddening. 

[AntiBeeSpray]

Matt Lauer is a dickhead...always has been.

Yea, once an ass, always one... I say.

 

And asking questions like that... is like seeing something straight out of the 50's.  Come on, Matt... women are more than capable enough of holding a job and raising their children.

[Tunia]

Come on, Matt... women are more than capable enough of holding a job and raising their children.

 

 

Just ask Ann Curry...

[AntiBeeSpray]

Just ask Ann Curry...

Yep :(. Imo, she got the short end of the stick.

[Irlandesa]

He's what passes for a major national reporter these days, not a buffoon from some little-watched niche show, and he's far from alone in asking women - but not men - that type of question.  It's maddening. 

Nope, he's not alone.  It's also not just men asking this question.  I've seen other women ask women this question as well.  The sexism is so pervasive that his set up is based on the fact that somewhere out in the media there is a story in which her children are asked about how they feel about their mother taking this big job.  I just can't imagine anyone doing a piece on a new male CEO and asking his children how they feel he'll be able to handle it. 

 

Just ask Ann Curry...

 

OT But this always baffles me.  All I remember from when she was co-anchor of The Today Show was people talking about how she was a poor fit for that job and not good at it but once she was let go, the opinion of her fitness for the job was changed retroactively.

[kiddo82]

I think the two are separate but absolutely compatible ideas. A woman can be strong, intelligent and independent and still be a mother, or want to be a mother later - or still want NOT to be a mother. Part of being strong is deciding which is right for her and shaping her life accordingly (which includes choosing a partner with a similar viewpoint if a partner is part of the plan), as best as circumstances allow. The sad thing is that women occasionally become each other's worst enemies on that ground and forget to respect that other women can make that choice either way for themselves and still be strong and deserving of respect.

What really burns my toast regarding this and many other topics is the "with us or against us mentality." (Not here, however, and sadly not always involving fictional circumstances). When in our world did it become okay to bash someone with a different opinion than ours? Kirsten Dunst recently created a firestorm when she backed traditional gender roles in relationships. It's a conservative viewpoint to be sure but she has just as much right to have it as someone with a more progressive opinion. And if her happiness lies in marrying, having 3.5 kids, and being a stay at home mom and she's able to work that out? Bravo for her. It's not hurting anyone and doesn't mean having the opposite viewpoint is any less valid. Conversely, a woman or couple who chooses not to have children takes nothing away from those who do so why do we act like it's some great crime against the gender? There is downright shaming going on regarding these and other very personal decisions. It takes all kinds and as long as the choices we make are the ones that are right for us and we are not hurting anyone then I say rock on.

To bring this back to television, the problem we have with the current landscape is again this "with us or against us" mentality where all the perfect wife/mothers are on one end of the spectrum and all the "cool chicks" (physically strong, usually law enforcement, many times emotionally stunted) are on the other. The problem is that these two ideas aren't mutually exclusive but many representations on television are not diverse or nuanced enough to capture this. It's like show runners wanted to get away from the June Cleaver types so they just swung the pendulum in the exact opposite direction to get the answer. That's not inherently a bad thing, however, the problem is now women are either "just" wife/mother or "cool chick" with very little representation of what I would guess is the majority that falls somewhere in between.

Edited June 30, 2014 by kiddo82

[Luckylyn]

I feel like women can't win in these debates because you'll be judged if you work at home, and you'll be judged if you work outside the home while men aren't expected to agonize over this issues like women do.  There was a great episode of Designing Women that dealt with the Work at Home Mom vs. Work outside of the Home tension.   Mary Jo makes some snide comments about Charlene's decision to stay at home with her daughter and Charlene retaliates about how maybe Mary Jo's son is getting into trouble because Mary Jo isn't at home enough.  I was on Charlene's side because Mary Jo was a Work at Home Mom until her divorce and it seemed hypocritical for Mary Jo to pick on Charlene for making that same choice. 

 

There was an episode of Life Goes On where Libby's decision to be a Work at Home Mom was paralleled with a fictional story of a woman in the 50's who wants to work outside the home.  It shouldn't have to be either choice is right or wrong but what works best for the individual which I think that episode got across.

 

It was really something new when Up All Night featured a Work at Home Dad but the show ruined that by having him to back to work and the wife lose her job leading to her being home with the baby.  The episode that flashed back to the husband deciding to be a Work at Home Dad was nicely done. He father was always working and never around and the husband wanted to by much more involved parent.  It's rear that a man is shown to struggle with that choice.

[scarynikki12]

I think that it depends on the context.  I didn't read the Kristen Dunst article, so I can't comment, but I do have a few real life examples.  The mothers of my two BFFs are stay at home, one of my girlfriends just quit her job to become a housewife and another plans to when she gets married.  The last example is the only one I worry about.  The two mothers are insanely active.  One pursues an lifelong interest in the environment (with a focus on wolves and sea turtles) and the other has a passion for genealogy.  They were both involved in their childrens' educations, and both like to travel for their hobbies.  My one girlfriend who just quit her job is also very active.  She really only quit because she hadn't enjoyed her job in a few years for various reasons and felt burnt out.  They also just bought a house and she's been remodeling it herself (though not anything that requires plumbers or carpenters, she's not stupid).  Ever since I met her she's always been that woman who has to be doing something, be it concerts, movies, travel, arts and crafts, remodeling her living space, working out, etc.  And all three of these women are fortunate enough to have husbands who make enough that a second income isn't necessary.  My final friend, on the other hand, isn't very active and I'm concerned that she'll get very, very, bored.  She's always had this vision of her life and is a big fan of the gender roles of the 1950s, and expects to have a perfect meal ready for her husband when he comes home each night to a perfectly clean house.  She doesn't have any hobbies other than watching procedural shows and hates trying new things so I'm afraid that she'll quit the job she genuinely loves to fulfill this fantasy and end up resenting her choices.

 

I think that the knee jerk reaction to a preference of being a housewife comes from countless examples over the years who fit the description of my last friend.  It was expected of women and those who entered the workforce were so often mistreated.  Women have fought for our rights for so long that the thought of a woman not wanting to be in a two income household is scary when there are many who remember when these options didn't exist.  There also the reality of divorce.  These rates are high and a housewife who finds herself getting divorced is at a disadvantage.  She may get alimony but she had no personal income while the marriage is still in effect and suddenly is without a lot of those same resources.  Plus, the longer people are away from the workforce the harder it is to get a job (unless that alimony sets you up for life, which it rarely does).  

 

Also, there's the simple fact that men are rarely the ones who stay home while the wife works.  If any woman truly wants to stay home with her kids once they are born, fine, but they are also still expected to on some level while the men aren't.  Now, there are men who do so (BFF whose mom is into genealogy's brother is a house husband and they live off his wife's income though, again, he's very active), but they are the extreme minority and they certainly aren't expected to do so.  I also think that there may be those who read about women quitting their jobs to become housewives and find themselves concerned that the women in question might have been pressured into doing so.  And that's a huge issue as well.  It's definitely complicated and no one should be made to feel bad about making decisions they feel are best for them and their families but I do think concerns are valid for discussion.

 

All of this reminds me of Mad Men, naturally.  I really like how they've been handling the restlessness that the women of that age were feeling en masse.  Betty hates being a stay at home mother, but it's what she was brought up believing was her only purpose in life and she takes out those frustrations on her family.  Peggy is committed to her job and her mother has been vocal about her disapproval (though Peggy's going to make bank in about ten years when her neighborhood becomes desirable).  Joan didn't marry as young as she wanted and ended up with her rapist because she felt desperate and then learned that he wasn't successful enough to support them without a second income.  To no surprise, the marriage imploded though at least she does love her job.  It's been a nice exploration of women's roles in the workplace and at home and really reflects how far we've come and how similar the past is to the present.  

 

One thing that I keep reading about in entertainment articles are female celebrities denouncing feminism.  Yes, the word itself has been corrupted by idiots who never knew what it was, but when I read about Madonna or Shailene Woodley say that they aren't feminist I just roll my eyes.  Really?  They don't believe that women deserve the same rights as men?  Because I'm pretty sure that they do, Madonna especially.  Just because Fox News has convinced the world that feminists want to exterminate all men doesn't make it true.  It seems like denouncing feminism is the current popular political position and it pisses me off.

[Athena]

One thing that I keep reading about in entertainment articles are female celebrities denouncing feminism.  Yes, the word itself has been corrupted by idiots who never knew what it was, but when I read about Madonna or Shailene Woodley say that they aren't feminist I just roll my eyes.  Really?  They don't believe that women deserve the same rights as men?  Because I'm pretty sure that they do, Madonna especially.  Just because Fox News has convinced the world that feminists want to exterminate all men doesn't make it true.  It seems like denouncing feminism is the current popular political position and it pisses me off.

 

Great post. The celebrity denouncing Feminism also bugs me a lot. Yes, there has been different waves of Feminism, but at its core, it is about equally and almost all modern women especially Madonna and Woodley (who is very granola) would believe in it. Ever since I studied gender studies, I've taken on to using the word Feminist more and identifying with it mostly to show people that feminists are everywhere. Celebrities make it seem that feminists are Other, like some sort of inconvenient pest.

[galax-arena]

When in our world did it become okay to bash someone with a different opinion than ours? Kirsten Dunst recently created a firestorm when she backed traditional gender roles in relationships. It's a conservative viewpoint to be sure but she has just as much right to have it as someone with a more progressive opinion.

It's okay to call someone else's opinion out if you believe that their opinion is ignorant or misguided. Of course Kirsten has the right to her opinion, and other people have the right to think that her opinion is wrong. A person absolutely does not have the right to say what they think with no blowback whatsoever. And for me, it was the way that Kirsten Dunst worded it that got under my skin. It's fine if traditional gender roles work for her on an individual level:

 

"We all have to get our own jobs and make our own money, but staying at home, nurturing, being the mother, cooking – it’s a valuable thing my mum created.

Great! No problem with what she said here. But then...

 

And sometimes, you need your knight in shining armour. I’m sorry. You need a man to be a man and a woman to be a woman. That’s why relationships work…"

...Um, no. Nice gender essentialism there. 

 

One thing that I keep reading about in entertainment articles are female celebrities denouncing feminism.  Yes, the word itself has been corrupted by idiots who never knew what it was, but when I read about Madonna or Shailene Woodley say that they aren't feminist I just roll my eyes.  Really?  They don't believe that women deserve the same rights as men?

I think that there are legitimate reasons to not identify with the mainstream feminist movement, but ~omg misandry~ isn't one of them, which seems to be the most common reason that celebrities trot out for not being feminist. In which case, yeah, I definitely roll my eyes. But at least we have people like Ellen Page and Martha Plimpton and Amy Poehler to take up the slack:

 

Ellen: “I don’t know why people are so reluctant to say they’re feminists. Maybe some women just don’t care. But how could it be any more obvious that we still live in a patriarchal world when feminism is a bad word?”

 

Amy: “Some big actors and musicians feel like they have to speak to their audience and that word is confusing to their audience. But I don’t get it. That’s like someone being like, ‘I don’t really believe in cars, but I drive one every day and I love that it gets me places and makes life so much easier and faster and I don’t know what I would do without it.’ ”

 

Martha: “I take a lot of pride in calling myself a feminist and always have. We’re going to have to insist on correcting bigotry as it happens, in real time. And fear of women’s equality, or the diminishment of it, is a kind of bigotry. I think it’s important to remove the stigma associated with women’s equality, and as such, yes, normalizing the word ‘feminist’ and making sure people know what it means is incredibly important, whether we’re talking to celebrities or anyone.”

Edited June 30, 2014 by galax-arena

[Hava]

I love reading your thoughts about feminism as it relates to TV. So great.

 

There are two potential gender issues in Friday Night Lights** that I would like people's thoughts on. First, the character of Julie. I found her to be one of the least interesting characters on the show, and I think a big part of that is that there wasn't much to her character beyond her relationship with Matt Saracen. Basically, if she wasn't with Matt, she was acting out, and when she was with him, she was stable and cool. And I think this is reinforced by the fact that many viewers claim to have liked her character only when she was in scenes with Matt. I find this to be a very disappointing message and a very disappointing characterization of a girl on TV. Tyra--and even Lyla, to a lesser extend--had story lines outside of their relationships that made them individuals.

 

Second, the character of Landry. Loved him, especially in the beginning when he was an outsider of the football culture. But I started to become uncomfortable with his character when his relationship with Tyra started to become romantic. I felt that Landry was turning into a Nice Guy. Even though Tyra did have questionable taste in men, I thought it was out of line for Landry to essentially shame Tyra for these decisions. And the show's perspective on the whole relationship appeared to be that Landry "deserved" Tyra--the pretty, popular girl--because he was good person and good friend. And I don't think I need to tell the people in this forum what a dangerous message that is.

 

**I apologize for posting so much about Friday Night Lights in the various threads. I just finished marathoning the show and I have so many thoughts on it.

[galax-arena]

Heh, I can't really comment on FNL since I never watched that show, but I'll pipe in with my obligatory comment of how Nice Guys are the worst. 

 

Here's an article to whet everyone's appetite: Orange is the New Black's irresponsible portrayal of men. O-kay. Go and watch OZ if you want a show about a men's prison. Let women have this one thing, damn.

Edited June 30, 2014 by galax-arena

[Cobalt Stargazer]

 

One thing that I keep reading about in entertainment articles are female celebrities denouncing feminism.  Yes, the word itself has been corrupted by idiots who never knew what it was, but when I read about Madonna or Shailene Woodley say that they aren't feminist I just roll my eyes.  Really?  They don't believe that women deserve the same rights as men?

I'm not familiar with either Madonna or Woodley saying anything against feminism, but as a longtime Buffy addict I would think it would be more problematic when Joss Whedon claims that *he's* a feminist. Considering that the last two seasons of his signature work were basically spent isolating his one-time heroine, having her rely almost solely on the unrepentant serial killer who tried to rape her in her own bathroom, It's a head-scratcher for me when I hear that Joss considers himself in favor of 'Girl Power' and whatnot. It's particularly aggravating when he has his main character do *exactly* the thing that the supposedly controlling men did, only to do it to hundreds of girls at once, infuse them with demon essence that they'd have no idea of how to handle or what to do with it without the basic moral building blocks to not use those strengths to their advantage. Hell, the entire point of Faith's arc was to show how being a Slayer could go wrong without guidance. And AtS actually touches on the subject for one episode when one girl escapes from an asylum after being granted her powers because it finished shattering her already badly damaged psyche. No, I'm not saying that women on television can't make mistakes, and I'm not even saying that they don't, but is it really feminist if the heroine of the show does what  she herself sees as problematic, and in fact rejected allowing a further boost of her own powers because of the IMO blatant implication that it was a form of rape.

[scarynikki12]

I think that Joss is a feminist in the sense that he believes that women deserve equal rights.  He would never dream of supporting politicians or legislation that lower the amount of money women make, removes paid maternity leave, makes it illegal for us to vote, etc., but that doesn't prevent him from having sexist parts of his personality.  The horrible 'Spike tries to rape Buffy and becomes her most trusted ally' story was dreamed up by Marti Noxen who, like Joss, no doubt believes that women deserve equal rights.  Very few people who identify as feminist are 100% perfect when it comes to expressing that view.  

 

That's why analysis and discussion of these shows is so great, as there's always the chance (albeit tiny) that one of the writers or producers we talk about reads our reactions and makes the necessary adjustments.  Right now we're experiencing a gross celebration of rape culture, so this is unlikely, but you never know.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

 

The horrible 'Spike tries to rape Buffy and becomes her most trusted ally' story was dreamed up by Marti Noxen who, like Joss, no doubt believes that women deserve equal rights.  Very few people who identify as feminist are 100% perfect when it comes to expressing that view.

This is true, and like you I give Noxon and Jane "Spuffy is such a gorgeous love story" Espenson their fair share of the blame. But the flip side of that is that Joss was the one who gave Marti the reins because he was giving his attention to Firefly. I'm sure Marti is a nice person, and I doubt she intended  for the entirety of season six  and most of seven to become one giant ball of dysfunctional heartache and misery, but when I think BtVS, I think of Whedon first and Noxon second because he's the one who created it. And considering that Joss is the one who happily eats up all the kudos he gets for being a feminist, I think it's perfectly acceptable to give him some of the blame when things turn out to suck because he turned the proceeding over to an IMO incompetent showrunner.

 

And yes, equal rights for women are part of having a feminist viewpoint, but do those equal rights include being just as much of an asshole as the men? In the example I mentioned, for instance, Buffy (with an enabling assist from Willow) essentially commits mass rape on girls all over the world in order to empower the handful of potentials who are actually present and can consent to it. BtVS portrays this as a positive thing, but later on AtS it turns out that at least one girl became a psychopathic murderer because she went even crazier after having this "gift" bestowed on her. Now imagine a hundred girls just like her, all far more damaged than Faith and with pretty much no way of helping them. I don't think that Joss *intended* for the empowerment spell to make Buffy and Willow look horrible, or for Buffy's entire "brilliant" plan to be utterly ridiculous and doomed to failure without a piece of magical bling from another show on another network, but considering that both of these things are kind of true, I think he deserves a bit of a side-eye when he continues to be hailed as someone with a progressive viewpoint. How progressive is it to make your main character into someone who should have gotten everybody killed, and only succeeded because of the Amulet of Assitude? I don't think he has to be a hundred percent perfect, but IMO there's a hell of a gap between "perfect" and what we ended up seeing onscreen. They should have at least aimed for the middle ground.

Edited July 1, 2014 by Cobalt Stargazer

[galax-arena]

I side-eyed Joss when he revealed his plans for Inara on Firefly. 

[lucindabelle]

The thing about being treated as if you are a ticking clock is that there is, sadly, some truth to it. I'm 49 so it's over for me. i always assumed at some point I'd have kids, and now that option's off the table. It's not off the table for my 54-year-old brother (well it is, because he just married an age appropriate woman, but you know what I mean). This is unfair, but a reality. When I was in my 20s, egg freezing wasn't the norm.

 

A lot of women are like me, pursuing advanced degrees and careers and assuming things would fall into place, but they don't always. That's one reason the issue comes up. It's not the only one of course, and sexism plays a part in it, but not everyone who asks is coming from a sexist place.

 

As for stay-at-home moms-- my mother was, though she worked before. Being a mom was her calling. I'm sensing a kind of "oh no she'll be bored" thread here that is kind of a slap at people who really are NOT bored just making a nice life for their families. My mom was not a sew, cook, etc. homemaker, just a very involved mom who got very active in the synagogue and in the schools too.

 

Yes, there are some women who just don't want kids. And there are women who made having a family a priority. There are also a lot of women like myself, who would have loved to have kids and can't anymore. We exist, too. If I had the choice to have kids in the next few years I'd do it. There are limits to choice. I'm limited by biology (money too, but that's a totally separate issue). Characters like myself should also be represented on television. It really isn't a dichotomy. Unless you're saying that I and my feelings do not matter.

 

And yes, I loved seeing Cristina stand her ground. I especially loved that we could see she was good with children and liked them, just didn't want any of her own.

Ann Patchett has a wonderful essay on this, about how she never felt the need to stop carriages and look at babies, but always stopped to scratch dogs' ears and look into their limpid eyes.

 

ETA: I personally do know women who have changed their minds. So while it may not be palatable to some to see that, it is not unrealistic, nor unrepresentative. Some people start out life wanting kids and change, too.

Edited July 1, 2014 by lucindabelle

[Bastet]

There are also a lot of women like myself, who would have loved to have kids and can't anymore. We exist, too. If I had the choice to have kids in the next few years I'd do it. There are limits to choice. I'm limited by biology (money too, but that's a totally separate issue). Characters like myself should also be represented on television.

 

I can't think of any as main characters, but one sure seems to pop up for an episode to give advice any time a younger female character decides to delay or forgo having children.

[mansonlamps]

Good post Lucindabelle. It bothers me when offense is taken when the biological clock is mentioned but it is, in fact, very real. I would hate to see young women of the future being denied motherhood if they want to go that route because they foolishly didn't consider the odds of childbearing diminishing as they get older.

[lucindabelle]

 

I can't think of any as main characters, but one sure seems to pop up for an episode to give advice any time a younger female character decides to delay or forgo having children.

Bastet, I find that really offensive. You do realize you've just slammed me as the kind of character who offends you. I'm not giving any advice here. I'm just saying that people like myself are JUST as real as you are and our concerns are JUST as valid as yours.

Maybe this thread has been misnamed, because it sure seems to privilege one point of view and one point of view alone.

 

I am a real person. With real regrets. And I've never seen anyone like myself represented on television. No, I don't want to be a "lesson" to you. I'm just a person too. Delaying can turn into forgoing. That's what happened to me. That's a real deal. Sorry it offends you to hear it, but it's the truth. I look 35, but I'm not. That makes me sad. Sorry that makes You angry, but it's the truth. I have a PhD and a great job title. What I don't have and probably never will have are kids of my own.

 

(yes, the probably is me in denial, I know).

 

Women in their 40s and 50s and hey! 60s! are real people too. We also care about feminism.  It means choice, not shaming and silencing.

 

 

[Bastet]

You do realize you've just slammed me as the kind of character who offends you.

.

No, I didn't.  I pointed out that such characters generally appear only in one context (and said nothing about taking offense, but if you're curious, I find it offensive on two levels -- that female characters who express a desire to delay or forgo having children must always be narratively lectured for their choice, and that female characters who have regrets at the end of their fertile years exist only on the periphery rather than as characters whose stories are fully told).

 

 

Sorry it offends you to hear it, but it's the truth. I look 35, but I'm not. That makes me sad. Sorry that makes You angry, but it's the truth.

 

It does neither.  I'm going to assume your intentions are good, and I believe I've cleared things up by stating my actual opinion, but I'm open to any private conversation you'd like to have.  I would like to ask, however, that in future you refrain from publicly ascribing to me motivations and positions I have not taken.  My complaints have been about the stereotypical ways in which various choices with respect to motherhood are generally presented on television, and the imbalance (in terms of representation by sheer numbers) between those who do and don't want children.

Edited July 1, 2014 by Bastet

[Bella]

Okay, let's everyone step back and inhale, maybe even step outside and look at the summer flowers for a moment.

 

I don't think anyone was calling out anyone else in particular; it seemed like the discussion was of types and points of view.

 

This is generally a good thread for serious discussion, and I'd hate to have to start hiding posts because they violate our rules, which call for respecting one another.

[lucindabelle]

Oh, I apologize then, I misunderstood you. Obviously it is a sensitive issue.

(I've recently been reading up on Wiki about women bearing children naturally at 50-something. This really should be in a sitcom somewhere. I know I'm not alone).

In that case, I agree with you. Older women really are not always int he business of handing out lectures and advice unless we're asked. I didn't like it when I was in my 20s and don't like it now, heh.

And I completely agree that the woman who didn't make a choice but had one handed to her is also worthy of portrayal. Of course, that's not the ONLy issue facing women in their 40s (ask me about bra sizes). But it isn't always do I/don't I.

 

Sorry for jumping the gun.

One of my favorite lines in John Patrick Shanley's brilliant "Outside Mullingar" was when this rural 30-something young woman announces triumphantly, "I've been to the doctor and i've frozen my eggs!"

An appreciative laugh all over the theatre (funny because unexpected in this rural town, funny because she's so practical).

 

Schematic writing like what you describe is annoying on loads of levels. Please accept my apology.

[galax-arena]

I can't think of any as main characters,

Yeah, considering that Hollywood occasionally seems to have a difficult time remembering that older women exist at all, this doesn't surprise me. 

[Bastet]

Yeah, considering that Hollywood occasionally seems to have a difficult time remembering that older women exist at all, this doesn't surprise me.

 

As Cynthia Heimel said:  “From the viewpoint of many men, there are two stages in a woman's life: prey and invisible.  After a certain age, when they don't want to fuck you anymore, they don't see you at all.”

 

This seems especially true of the men writing television!

 

Please accept my apology.

 

Certainly, lucindabelle. 

[lucindabelle]

Hah, Heimel was right. But you'd think that with so many more women writing and being showrunners that would change. But patriarchal thought exists in women too, along with the myth of appealing to men being moneymaking when in reality women are bigger consumers of media (theater too). When I was in high school we didn't read one single female author in AP English...this idea that men's stories are universal whereas women's stories are some girl thing. That kind of hangs on. Which is one reason I'm heartened by the huge successes of Frozen and The Fault in Our Stars.

For me, 50 which is a few months away is terrifying,...ever notice how women's magazines for fashion at any age go 20s, 30s, 40s, 50+? as if 50 and 80 are the same...

There's nothing between nubile and granny. When you do see a woman in her 50s she's invariably someone's mom, with grown kids. Women like myself? not there at all.

Thanks, Bastet.

[Athena]

Good post Lucindabelle. It bothers me when offense is taken when the biological clock is mentioned but it is, in fact, very real. I would hate to see young women of the future being denied motherhood if they want to go that route because they foolishly didn't consider the odds of childbearing diminishing as they get older.

 

As a later twentysomething woman receiving these comments, I do consider it. Maybe more than others because I studied health and gender, but often these comments - while well intentioned - can be patronizing. It's not as if I don't want children or a family, but for whatever reason, it is not happening to me or many women I know at this point in our lives. Perhaps it's school, work, lack of money, environment, or whatever. The clock comment also means that there is an expiry date on what society sees as an essential part to a woman. Even worse, my life is seemingly less meaningful if I don't have kids or become a mother. Sure, I'd like kids, but I'm not biblical Rachel. 

 

Women do change their minds, but I'm glad that Christina on Grey's didn't. Often, women in the media who say that do end up changing their minds, but there are women who don't. Christina's storyline irked me because the men in her life married or almost married her knowing it and they tried to change her. It'd be nice for TV to feature a child-free couple because they made that choice together not to parent.

[lucindabelle]

Couples making choices is underrepresented, period. I'm always amazed by the TV couples that appear not to have talked about children, religion or where they want to live before they married.

Mad Men, Thirtysomething, I'm looking at you.

[BoogieBurns]

Well, lucindabelle, I look forward to a day when you can feel represented on TV.

I sure am racking my brain trying to come up with any TV character that fits your description. Nothing! Liz Lemon from 30 Rock, maybe? That's all I've got...

[lucindabelle]

Thanks... But pretty sure that characters in her 30s.

Jennifer Aniston in real life... I'm sure she's wishing she hadn't gone so public with her desire to have kids now.

[BoogieBurns]

Liz Lemon turned 40 halfway through the series, and they did try and conceive when she was about 42.

[Irlandesa]

ETA: I personally do know women who have changed their minds. So while it may not be palatable to some to see that, it is not unrealistic, nor unrepresentative. Some people start out life wanting kids and change, too.

I appreciate that this is a difficult subject for you and I enjoyed reading your post but let me be clear again, since I think I'm the one who brought up Robin/changing minds, that I never argued that it was unrealistic.  It's absolutely realistic. I've known people who have done it as well. I just argued that 'changing one's mind' is well represented on TV whether it's by choice or an "oops, I'm pregnant and now I'm super happy about it."  Happily childless by choice is less so.

 

And people in your situation are also underrepresented on TV. They appear to give the "don't let the time fly by" lecture or they appear as the childless older woman who ends up adopting (whether legally or just spiritually) a troubled younger being because they never had the chance to have kids of their own.  It's kind of sad that 99 times out of 100, an older woman who never had kids on TV expresses regret about it.  I doubt 99% of older childless women regret that decision or result.  Some yes, but not as many as TV would portray.

 

But I think the biggest insult with treating women like a ticking clock is the presumption that women are stupid.  It's condescending to point out a woman's ticking clock.  The reason I say it's insulting is because I believe most women know that fertility drops as they age. It's just that many make the choice to put off having kids for valid reasons to their lives at the time. Whether it's because they haven't found the right man or don't feel like they're where they want to be in their careers or whether it's lack of money, it's not so much complete ignorance about when the easiest time to get pregnant is but rather a choice to put it off for one reason or another.  Eventually, they may come to regret not pulling the trigger earlier instead of waiting until the time was "perfect" but that's usually the benefit of hindsight and not because the younger woman doesn't understand biology.  I doubt anyone decided to get pregnant because a nosy co-worker asked a woman when she was going to get pregnant because the "clock is ticking."  Who knows?  Maybe women have gotten pregnant solely based on that but I tend to think better of women. 

 

I think there have been cases where women were too old to get pregnant but those women (Cuddy on House and Addison on Private Practice) were well off doctors who ended up adopting.  Women who aren't in a position to go that route and genuinely miss out on motherhood aren't covered enough.  But I think that middle/lower class is often not covered enough on TV these days in general.  There always seems to be the money somewhere. 

 

Moving on to other pregnancy tropes, how about the fun "women who has abortion ends up struggling with fertility" message that usually comes with abortion related stories.  That's a fun one, eh?

Edited July 2, 2014 by Irlandesa

[lucindabelle]

I hear you. I'm pretty tired of huge woman goes to abortion clinic and changes her mind plot. I know it happens but it's a TV cliche. Joan on mad Men most recently.... I totally see why she would keep the baby, just wonder why she couldn't have made the choice sooner.

Though with the current political climate doubt well be seeing many abortion stories at all for awhile.

[myril]

Women are underrepresented on screen (TV and movie) in number, makes it already harder to get enough diversity of women. But worse societal images of what makes a woman a woman, feminine, attractive, good woman limit it even more. And somehow it is stuck in our images, obviously and subtle, that a woman is a woman because she can be a mother. If not, she has to have a good reason for it, and success in career is not always good enough reason.

 

That doesn't mean on the other hand that being a mother stands (or should stand) in the way of being a modern, independend woman with manifold interests. We can have it all, it's a matter of reorganizing society and especially work places, not just a matter of women having jobs, there has to be done a lot more. I wish more men would fight for having time with their family as well for example, because though it has been made a gender role problem, it is a gender role problem, it is about how we organize things and not that we are men and women and other genders. And would be great to see some of it on screen. Fiction reflects on society, as it is, as well as it can play with ideas and show options how things can be done differently.

 

It as okay and as womanly to want to be a mother, to have children as it is to not want to have children or not to have children out of whatever reason. For many women it is not clear cut one or the other, and we change or minds or not. We are diverse and that is great.

 

It will be interesting to see if there will be a change on screen seeing that the number of women coming now of age who had no children out of whatever reasons or circumstances is growing in our societies.

 

I love Helen Mirren, who is an image of change for me, of a different view on women and women coming of age. Her and some of her characters, particular DCI/Detective Superintendent Jane Tennison. By the way, and tell you all to better sit down and take a deep breath before reading it, if you not already know it:  Tatiana Maslany plays a younger version of a character played by Helen Mirren in the movie The Woman in Gold. Filming is under way, might come on theater screens in 2015. Can it get any better than that?

 

There is slow progress. Like women in The Good Wife, Diane Lockhart (Christine Baranski) is such an interesting character (and what I sure what call a "strong" female character, complex, strong and vulnerable, independent but not a lone wolf) as is Alicia Florrick (Julianna Margulies). Patricia C. Hewes (Glenn Close) on Damages comes to mind also.

 

Anyone wanting to see women beyond their 40s, though many of them still are mothers, but that is not all what defines them, should take a look at British productions and especially at the works of Sally Wainright like Last Tango in Halifax, Happy Valley, Scott&Baily (some of it has been shown or is available in the US as well).

 

Sadly crime and law shows seem to bit more progressive than other drama and even more than family shows. But that might be just my impression, family and drama is not that much on my watch list.

Edited July 2, 2014 by katusch

[Luckylyn]

I think Carrie on Sex and the City is an example of a character who didn't become a mother partially because of circumstance.   Her character always seems ambivalent about becoming a mother.  She never seemed sure she wanted or didn't want kids.   I think she wanted to have to option to have kids available just in case she decided she wanted them.  It just worked out that she never had them.  There was one episode where she was dating a guy who already had children who were adults and had no interest in having more.  She mentioned to him that she was 38 and so if it didn't work out between them she might be too old to have a child with someone else.  She ended up choosing to pursue the relationship, and it didn't work out.  She ended up with Big and kids never seemed part of the plan for them. Even if Carrie was too old to conceive, they could have picked other options like adoption, but children never came up for discussion with them on screen. So, I assume at that point Carrie was certain she didn't want children, but it isn't clear because we never got to see her and Big discuss it.  I think a character asks her if she and Big plan to have children, and she says no which is the only time it gets mentioned.  It's also possible that because Charlotte had fertility and adoption storylines the writers didn't want to retread with Carrie.  Whether or not Carrie/Big would have had kids if they got married when they were younger is unknown. 

 

Samantha made a conscious choice to never become a mother and was fine with that, and I don't think anyone ever tried to talk her out of it.  It was just accepted.  I think Sex and the City showed all the possibilities;  A woman who is determined to be a mother (Charlotte), a woman who never wanted kids (Samantha), a woman ended up without children because of circumstances (Carrie), and a woman who became a mother because of a surprise pregnancy (Miranda).

[St. Claire]

Are motherhood and being "strong, intelligent, and independent" mutually exclusive?

 

I know I'm late to the party, but I want to offer up Tami Taylor as an example of a strong character who shows various stages of motherhood (not to mention part of what I find as one of the best TV marriages EVAH). When FNL began, she was raising a teenager and during the course of the show had a baby. She was a darned good mom, held a couple different jobs over the series (from the non-paid "Coach's wife" to actual professional positions), and struck a good balance between supporting her husband in what he was doing when necessary and calling upon him to step up and support her when it was necessary. Seriously, I just want to be Tami Taylor when I grow up.