Article Discussion

I found this interesting article in The New York Times that relates to the sexism discussion we’ve been having in class. The article, called “Season of Equal-Opportunity Sexism,” discusses how this year’s newest TV shows are giving men and women the chance to “pick between his and her sexism.” The article references the comedies “2 Broke Girls” on CBS and “Are You There, Chelsea?” on NBC as examples of contemporary TV shows that are emasculating for men and ushering in a new surge of female empowerment.

“Are You There, Chelsea?” is based on Chelsea Handler’s comic persona as a slutty, foul-mouthed drunk – characteristics more heavily stereotyped to men than women. While Handler is not the first woman to build a career on crude, offensive and often demeaning jokes about men, sex and substance abuse, she is one of the most persuasive and committed. To have such female characters in prime time be so committed is an innovative occurrence. The catch here is that many critics say that the show is only on the air because of Handler’s pre-existing celebrity status as a result of her popular talk show on E!, and that if the show was pitched by anyone else it wouldn’t make it on the air. They also say that since people already know Handler’s comedic personality, they expect to see her in such crude – some would say “unrealistic”- female roles.

The article also mentions the latest male insurrection on TV, “Work It” on ABC. The show follows two men who lost their jobs at a car dealership in St. Louis and can find work only by dressing in drag to pass as sexy pharmaceutical sales representatives. However, the author feels that the show’s poor narrative and writing leave much room for improvement, comparing it to sitcoms of the past who did it right like “Bosom Buddies” in the 1980s.

I think this article would be interesting to discuss in classes such as the one we’re taking because it presents a curious idea: Is it only possible for female roles to be popular in the rankings if the characters are taking on male-associated or “masculine” personality traits? I will say, I think it’s a good start to have such innovative and unconventional comedies in primetime TV; but, it still doesn’t seem like a complete victory for women. These new shows just demonstrate how highly we, as a society, hold masculine traits over feminine traits. If a woman can act like a man, she is applauded not because she is strong-willed and brash, but because she’s “just being funny.”

I think it’s empowering for women to see other women of power and influence, such as Chelsea Handler, take on these masculine characteristics for the world to see and never apologize for it. But where females find it empowering, I think males find it more of a silly, unrealistic portrayal of a woman who is just trying to make people laugh. Men assume women don’t or wouldn’t act like that in real life. That might be true for some women because society has molded them to believe we won’t be accepted if we act overtly masculine. But perhaps these new shows will start to open the door a little wider for females. Maybe these shows show a slow but steady progression forward to a time when the lines are more blurred between sex and gender.