'Why are male representations stereotyped in reality television?'
Male representations arguably form an outer structure for our perception of women; female stereotypes swirl around the drinking glass of male representation, and are played out daily on our television screens. In order to expose the hidden truth about male representations, one must investigate and understand the concept of female representation at work in the media. The theory of the male gaze in early feminism is a useful way of understanding how images are constructed. This theory outlines that all women are perceived and seen through perspective of a man, framed according to desirability and objectified. In this study I will show how, as men filter and construct representations of women, they in effect are imprisoned in their own representations. This is most apparent in reality television, the principle texts of this investigation will be television shows such as Made In Chelsea (MIC), The Only Way Is Essex (TOWIE), and Geordie Shore.
The most commonly known male representation at play in the media is hyper-masculinity. However, this identification of the issue is only a mere insight into the real problem. Hyper-masculinity is mutually affected by female representation and hyper-sexualisation, and is directly undermines the theory of post-feminism; although post-feminists suggest that women are not being exploited or objectified, it is clearly evident in the entertainment industry that they are. Having looked at the opening scenes of reality TV shows such as Geordie Shore and TOWIE, the biggest social issue portrayed is appearance and the provocation of physical features. This is a recurring theme in opening scenes alone. This is a controlled perception, which has led to the subconscious sexualisation of a TV shows characters. From provocatively looking at the camera (seen in figure 1), to playing with their hair, women are puppets filtered through the male gaze and are controlled to cater to the approval of a man. This augmented reality puts a question mark on the realism that reality TV shows actually have. The link this has to male representations, is through how men are often presented as suave, high status playboys. In order to gain equilibrium of representation, and use of binary oppositions, playboys must be matched with promiscuous women. Comparing the two Reality TV shows of MIC and TOWIE, has led me to significant discoveries. This is that culture and social identity have a great impact on said representations. An affluent and high-cultured society of MIC have formed a more upper class idea of male stereotypes. Spencer Matthews is depicted as a high fashion playboy; he treats women as objects (for example, he dates multiple women, treating them as a kind of pastime) and represents an aspirational character for young men, however his behaviour cannot be labelled as sexually promiscuous. There are rules and social codes of behaviour, and he follows the code of a 'gentleman playboy'. This contrasts with the character of Joey Essex, where the more working class culture of Essex has controlled the representation of his character, as a more sex-focused attitude is displayed. An interesting point to make is how both of these celebrities have been built up through star construction in the same way, but their behaviours contrast due to class culture. This can link to how Richard Dyer* said that a celebrity is recognised through their culture, ideology and as a commodity.
(figure 1)
It can be suggested that contemporary audience has been desensitised, in the way that sexuality is becoming a softer, less controversial topic. Sexual relations and sexual orientation has changed in reflection to societal change, and audiences are becoming more accepting towards issues regarding sexuality. However this has caused a shift in the style and genre of TV, specifically reality TV. A growing convention in such television is promiscuity and some form of social relationships. This is very significant as sexual behaviour is presented but always to an extent. It can be said that reality TV has become a modern version of soft pornography for the masses and is deemed appropriate. The man carries the role as the dominant sexual partner, who chooses and pursues, or does as he pleases with a woman. One might say that this links to the extreme view of pornography being a theory and rape being a practical, by Robin Morgan**. So this represents men as having sexual empowerment over women, and in effect stereotypes them as being physically dominant. Audiences make a passive response to what they watch as they take in and believe the values represented to them. This hypodermic needle of sexuality has influenced the way in which male representations are made, as it is increasingly accepting for men to have this empowerment over women. Producers have narrowcasted this style of reality TV to the growing demographic of reality TV consumers, the Generation Z 15 to 25 year olds, who have in turn used it to gratify their needs of scopophilia, surveillance, escapism, cultural belonging, and also a hidden agenda of sexual voyeurism, all factors that explain why male representations are stereotyped in reality TV.
Institutions play a key role in the influence of such representations. It is quite significant how the different broadcasting services produce the different forms of reality TV. The BBC is a publicly funded institution, which demonstrates different values, evident from the style of shows they broadcast, contrasting that of which Channel 4 or ITV broadcasts (both funded through advertisements). Reality TV on the BBC does not promote brands nor institutions, presenting a whole hearted service which prides itself on authenticity and social justice. However, commercial channels like ITV, thrive on promotion of brands. This has caused their broadcasting to include elements of marketing, through the use of sponsors on the intro and outro of scenes, and star construction, through the use of characters as a face for the programme. More and more institutions are using star construction as they understand how growing reality stars can be used as a commodity for financial gain. The values of such producers like Channel 4 can be perceived as having bourgeoisie connotations as they are growing in control of what the masses (proletariat) are watching. This emphasises the theory of Hegemony, as it suggests that the dominant group persuades the masses that there is a necessary power structure and influences them to believe they are in control of what they consume. However, the way in which producers create their media takes a more Liberal Pluralist approach, as an increasingly sexualised society demands television which relates to them. So ITV and Channel 4 give in to this idea of demand and supply. Giving scopophilic people TV with beautiful characters. How this relates to male representation? Well producers are just giving the masses what they want, and expressing their ideologies in the meantime. However, these ideologies have fluctuated over time due to the changing attitudes towards women but has recently experienced a retrogressive return to pre-1960s treatment of gender. Objectification of women and Hyper-masculinity are reoccurring themes in television, as they were in early Carry-On and James Bond films where binary gender representations are almost cartoon-like. Whilst the hyperdermic syringe debate has been challenged, it is arguable that in the world of reality TV audiences hypodermically accept meanings that media producers construct. Ideologies regarding sexual and social issues are commercially driven and imprint these values onto their viewers.
Significantly, gender and sexuality are not the prime representations within Reality TV. Numerous social representations are explored within such shows like MIC. However, the most noteworthy are representations of identity, race and ethnicity. The London borough of Kensington and Chelsea is said to have 25.8% of its population being of ethnic minority, however MIC under-represent this. Roughly a quarter of the cast should be of ethnic minority but this is not the case (seen in figure 2). The cast is dominantly White British ethnicity. To combat this clear breach of realism, MIC introduced its very first character of ethnic minority, Akin Solanke-Caulker, a black male born in London. Why this is key? The biggest question that is being asked, is who and what will he be representing. Will he fall into the stereotypical black male Londoner representation, or will he represent the typical Chelsea persona. And how will each of these be influential in the portrayal of women. Well from an interview with the Sun newspaper***, Akin himself said 'I’m not just representing myself but I’m representing other people that look like me, not just the racial side of things but also people who are from where I am from'. This connotes that Akin believes he will be representing his background and his home culture. However, in the same interview, Akin does not object to labelling himself as a playboy who is there to fill the boots of the departed Spencer Matthews, implying that he will not stray from the typical MIC male representation. This suggests that objectification and sexualisation of women will still occur in his characters actions, and is made evident by his labelling of Louise Thompson as a 'target' within the same Sun interview. This is significant as it displays how race and ethnicity within Reality TV does not change the way in which gender is represented, and that bringing diversity to MIC does not impact male stereotypes.
(figure 2)
Looking at how women are depicted in media is a key source which can illustrate male representation. Angela McRobbie**** said that there is a close-minded focus on feminism, where women are only given empowerment through choice of clothing and how they look, even to conforming to male playboy behaviour- this in fact has an extent as significant numbers of women in media forms like reality TV, are rarely liberated in their choice of sexuality and promiscuity. They are enclosed in a door-less hallway of sexualisation.
(figure 3)
In order to fully fathom the problem that is male stereotypes, one must not confine the investigation to Reality TV alone. Having looked at different media platforms, I have found that they are highly influential in the construction of male stereotypes. In print media, there is a multitude of magazines which dive into the ocean that is gender representation. Notably, Men's Health Magazines is a massively consequential entity for male representation. This is due to contemporary society becoming increasingly fixated on appearance, especially men, magnifying the need for going to the gym to look and feel physically attractive. Men's Health are directly exhaling the idea of hyper-masculinity into the minds of men. Ordinary men are striving to appear like the highly muscled model on the current issue, conforming to the idea that as a man you have to look physically empowering. Intertextuality has played the role of transferring male stereotypes, as this portrayal of men in print media has branched into broadcasting media - Reality TV. A high number of male readers are looking to recreate hyper-masculinized body images of such characters like Spencer Matthews (figure 3). When looking at the regression of women, magazines like FHM promote the ideology of women only being useful if they are sexually attractive. This type of media allows the incentive for men to see women first and foremost as sexual objects. This directly links to the growing stereotype of the male 'sex hound'- only wanting and looking to have sexual encounters with women. However, issues in print media are not strictly based on sexualisation. In OK Magazine (a magazine which depicts both men and women), the way in which the articles are written are particularly interesting. Men are often displayed and constructed in unison with significant experiences in their profession, like their role in a movie, whilst women are often presented with events which relate to female life, for example pregnancy (figure 4), but also with controversial topics such as appearance and clothing. This is a subtle form of the media being socially detrimental to women, constructing the perceived dominance of men over women and reinforcing the idea of the male gaze. Such trends in print media influence representations in reality TV which show women to sexualised and men to be in power.
Social media is one of the most influential forms of media, as it is one of the main places in which give people liberation and a voice. Institutions have noticed this, as a new and key source of marketing is through social media. However, the ways in which marketing is done is quite noteworthy, as there is a clear trend in the type of endorsement. More often than not, men in reality TV will endorse some sort of gym related item, for instance protein powder. This links to the perception that men should constantly care about being muscular and physically endowed. Whereas women in reality TV, are frequently use to endorse make-up or some sort clothing. This demonstrates how institutions use E-media to force male and female characters to play into their stereotype.(figure 4)
There can be no true summary of gender representation as it can be argued to a great extent, and no single opinion or view point is 100% true. From looking at male representations and stereotypes, despite being slightly subjective, I think the foundation of this investigation was strongly built with reliable sources and research. Current male representations are not new, they have dated back several centuries. Medieval, Victorian, 1960's etc all display this idea of male dominance and power,especially in the upper/elite class and in a much more physical way. As society has moved on to a more technological age, these representations have adapted to this new form. Male stereotypes have submerged itself into the ocean that is technology and is polluting mainstream media products. Institutions are becoming the new elite class and are using their tools of media platforms to imprint gender representations into audiences. With reference to reality TV,
*Richard Dyer - Stars; British Film Institute; 2nd ed. 01/03/1998
**Robin Morgan -Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a feminist; Random House Inc 01/08/1978
***Sun Newspaper: https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/1770950/akin-solanke-caulker-becomes-made-in-chelseas-first-ever-black-castmember/
****Angela Mcrobbie- The aftermath of Feminism; SAGE Publications Ltd; 1 edition 20 /2011/2008
