To what extent is this true for the group or place you have studied?
When audiences gain certain generalised views about certain groups of people, the media play on these stereotypes to create recognisable and identifiable characters for mainstream audiences. Although the stereotypes can be beneficial in soaps and sitcoms, where the exaggerations of these stereotypes are used for comedic effect, stereotyping also raises issues as it may cultivate audience to develop beliefs about certain groups of people, some of which are negative. Tokenism in the media also sparks debate as although different groups of people want to be represented in the media, they should add to the narrative rather than being included just as token characters. Tokenism and stereotyping have been seen across the media over the years, but some groups of people are now starting to take control over the way that they are represented, while some producers are breaking stereotypes to show alternative representations.
In the 1950’s to 70’s, only 20-35% of all TV characters were women. Gaye Tuchman described this underrepresentation as “the symbolic annihilation of women”. However, most texts had the token female. When they were shown, they were given the stereotypical housewife role and were represented as happy to stay at home cooking and cleaning. This stereotype helped to reinforce the patriarchal ideologies of the time because, as the cultivation theory suggests, the audience would be made to believe that the women represented in the media were examples of the ideal woman that everyone should strive to be like. Not only was the happiness of women exaggerated, but as this was the only representation of women that was ever seen, the exaggerated stereotype seemed normal. As the media was run by men, they created women how they wanted them to be by the way that they represented them.
During the Second World War, women posed a threat to men as they were given the jobs that belonged to men who were fighting in the war. The power and rights that women were now starting to gain threatened patriarchy, so the film noir era saw a backlash to these threats. The femme fatale of film noir represented the stereotypical view at the time that women with too much power are dangerous and shouldn’t be given the power that men should have. An example of this is Double Indemnity, a film that shows a woman using her femininity to manipulate men, which could be seen as a warning to male audiences that women with power are dangerous. Like most film noirs, the film ends with a man murdering the femme fatale, emphasising the stereotypical view that a man is needed to restore harmony. This cultivated audiences to trust the patriarchy of the time, restoring the hegemonic hierarchy.
The feminist era led to media texts representing women in a wider range of roles. Women were liberated and given more authoritative roles, showing the power that women now have. However, post-feminism caused women to revert to previous roles where they were objectified for the voyeuristic pleasure of men, as well as narcissistic pleasures as seeing men in films with beautiful women made male audiences members believe that they too could get these women. Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze believes that women in cinema have the role of pleasing an assumed male audience. However, post-feminism saw not only a rise in the amount of objectification of women in cinema, but across all platforms, especially with the new lads mags. The difference between post-feminism and the previous objectification of women is that the objectification had turned into self-objectification, with women now being happy to adhere to the male gaze. This brought back the ideology that the stereotypical woman is promiscuous and is happy to be, a stereotype that the media still maintains today. Although this seems negative as it is the male owners of the media that create these texts, post-feminists would argue that it empowers women as they have the choice of showing themselves and giving the men what they want.
Another way that women have tried to break their stereotypical subordinate roles is by being androgynous. As Judith Butler suggests, gender is only determined by how people behave, so by taking on stereotypically masculine characteristics, women appear to be more powerful and dominant as they are now the male gender. This is widely seen in the music industry, with artists such as Pink and Lady Gaga seeming more assertive by the way that they act and dress. By getting rid of the characteristics that are associated with the female gender, they also lose the stereotypes.
Soap operas use a lot of stereotyping to make their characters instantly identifiable. Also, every soap uses tokenism to include what they believe is all types of people in their soap. Eastenders included a character who was the token disabled character. However, he did not have a stereotypical role as rather than being a character for the audience to sympathise with, he was a Proppian villain, which highlighted issues about people with disabilities being represented as people to pity. There is also the token gay character in Eastenders but, like the disabled character, the two gay characters are not stereotypical. One of them is a strong fitness instructor, which does not follow the stereotype of gay men being androgynous, and the other is a Muslim, which raises debates about how homosexuality is viewed by different groups of people. While Eastenders uses many stereotypical roles, such as young people and chavs, they also include other characters who lead audiences to rethink stereotypical roles.
Young people are often demonised in the contemporary media landscape. This was recently seen during the London riots, when the news represented young people as violent and with no morals. As the news is mainly owned by the hegemonic elite, white, middle aged men, a Marxist would argue that young people were all stereotyped as destructive when it was only a small group of people to keep themselves in power. This same stereotype of young people being antisocial is seen in The World’s Strictest Parents as the young people are so bad that even their parents cannot cope with them anymore. When they are sent to other parents, the children of these parents have an alternative representation of young people as they are always respectful and well behaved. This influences the British youths to change when they get back home. This offers different receptions for the audience as while the dominant reading of the text is that young people are disruptive and need strict parenting to change, an oppositional reading is that it is not the young people that the fault lies with, but the way that they are brought up. This is because of the young people from other countries who do not have the stereotypical characteristics of young people in Britain.
