Great clip. I think it says as much about capitalism and advertising gone wild (wow--that should be a video series!) as it does about sexism, but the two issues cannot be entirely separated.

That's completely ridiculous. Reality tv shows don't try to force stereotypes on people, or try to tell women what they are "supposed to want."

Reality shows are generally based around the idea of a bunch of people competing for some main goal: to be the survivor, to get the bachelor (or bachelorette!), be the next pussycat doll... And so, they're not telling the general public how they should be or what they should want; they're merely following a group of people who want that specific thing. To say that we can't have reality tv shows, and to say that they're responsible for telling us what we should want is to say that the people on the show shouldn't be allowed to be interested in the things they're interested in. So what if a bunch of girls are trying to marry the next bachelor? It's what they want. So what if girls are competing to be the next pussycat doll? It doesn't mean you have to want to be one too.

Personally, I think reality tv shows are great. They let you get to know "normal" (non celebrity) people that you would probably otherwise never encounter in your life. They let you see that other people may actually have different opinions and goals in life than you. Just because some people are interested in something and decide to be on a televised competition for their goal, doesn't mean others should take offense and try desperately to get the rest of the world to hate reality tv too.

Reality shows are generally based around the idea of a bunch of people competing for some main goal: to be the survivor, to get the bachelor (or bachelorette!), be the next pussycat doll... And so, they're not telling the general public how they should be or what they should want; they're merely following a group of people who want that specific thing.

They let you get to know "normal" (non celebrity) people that you would probably otherwise never encounter in your life.

...you can't be serious.

Reality shows don't just follow a group with a similar goal. Those things are *cast* to pick the most amusing and intriguing characters to keep people watching. There's nothing normal about getting a bunch of strangers together, picked specifically to rub each other the wrong way (The Slut! The Mormon! The Black Guy! The Stereotypical Gay/Lesbian! The Virgin! The Bitch!) and then post cameras around to watch the fur fly. They're designed to present most people with what they want to see--chaos and competition. You can't tell me there's nothing sexist about a group of men or women fighting over the right to marry a near-total stranger on national television. And that there's nothing commercial about a three hour special dedicated to breaking one person's dreams because that brings in more viewers and advertising dollars. Or that it's not degrading to watch someone who is in no way unattractive undergo grotesque, televised surgery to make them more socially acceptable.

And anyway, I think most of us have realized by now that there's very little reality in reality TV. The idea isn't to make a group realize a goal, or even to make them compete for a goal. The idea is to keep people watching the same old stereotypes of behavior because that's what they expect.

And, for the record, I don't think the point is to force the removal of all reality shows. We just need a bit more, I dunno, actual reality in them. There's nothing realistic about Wifeswap or American Idol.

wow lazyfat-fat, did you even LISTEN to the segment, or did you just decide to drive-by the discussion for shits-'n-giggles? Consistently reinforced stereotypes across the board, from network to network and across differing show types, and you want to say it's all bunkum? anyway, the shows are crap on a stick, totally formulaic and predictable and TERRIBLEY boring...no wonder advertisers love 'em. btw, good point, Liz

Yes, I listened to it. Twice, actually, because I was confused and shocked the first time.

Just because tv shows pick the most "amusing and intriguing characters" doesn't make them any less of people. [PS- I was using the term "normal" before to denote non-celebrity people, not people with the same exact opinions as everyone else.]

Also, please explain to me what's sexist about "a group of men or women fighting over the right to marry a near-total stranger on national television". I don't think I'm seeing whatever it is you are. Is it "sexist" for a group of men or women to compete with one another for something they want? Is it "sexist" for a group of women to fight over a job? What if that job is becoming an entertainer (like American Idol, Pussycat Dolls, Next Top Model...)?

And redwards- I think the entertainment value of the shows is a matter of opinion, not fact. And it's "terribly"; no second e required, even if it's in CAPS.

Lazyfat-fat, I'm just going to let you keep talking, because the entertainment value of your posts is too great for me to try and expose a little reason to them. It'd just spoil everything.

I make it a point to avoid this sort of programming, myself, but from what I've seen and read it seems that "The Swan" and "America's Next Top Model" are the most flamboyantly misogynistic... then again, Hugh Hefner's three indistinguishable blonde girlfriends have a sort of reality show of their own, I hear... hmm... how to pick a "winner?"

Just because tv shows pick the most "amusing and intriguing characters" doesn't make them any less of people.

It depends on what you mean, doesn't it? Sure, they're people, but the show doesn't treat them as people- it treats them as characters. Dialogue is cut up and rearranged to create identifiable characters and to make the shows interesting. There's nothing "real" about reality shows.

Also, please explain to me what's sexist about "a group of men or women fighting over the right to marry a near-total stranger on national television".

Sure: There's nothing inherently sexist in the idea, it's about the execution. These shows tend to create 2D stereotypes of people that reinforce traditional gender/sex types.

Is it "sexist" for a group of women to fight over a job? What if that job is becoming an entertainer (like American Idol, Pussycat Dolls, Next Top Model...)?

Again, the concept? Not necessarily. The execution? Absolutely. I totally think that ANTM and the Pussycat Dolls show are sexist. They strongly reinforce the ideas that a woman's primary value is her looks, and push what I think are unhealthy attitudes towards women.

I think the entertainment value of the shows is a matter of opinion, not fact.

Of course.
Whether the show is seen as entertaining doesn't tell us whether it's sexist. Lots of popular media promotes unhealthy sexist/racist/homophobic views.

And it's "terribly"; no second e required, even if it's in CAPS.

You're not going to win any arguments online by criticizing spelling or grammar. You're mostly just going to make people think you're a jerk.

Not reality TV! That was the one last best hope for true equality! Oh well, maybe Melrose Place reruns will fill the void.

roymac,

really, i don't think i'll ever have anything to say on here 'cos you always say it better and first...

that said, i want to direct this at kalisti's post (btw, great name... lol... eris rawks)...

Those things are *cast* to pick the most amusing and intriguing characters to keep people watching.

i just want to clarify, working on a show right now which is very influenced by reality-show culture... the people picked are not necessarily the most amusing and intriguing... they're the ones moronic marketing execs think are the most amusing and intriguing...

and a lot of these folks (marketing types - no personal offense to anyone who does that ish) have done a great job of internalizing some pretty screwed up values...

i mean, i've had a couple of well-paid women and men push me to create more maxim-styled work than i'd like while they were off making reproductions of postcards advertising "girls next door" events and, well... there is an intention behind it... and not the intention, necessarily, of the participants...

this isn't about the participants, it's about how they're chosen, coached (and they certainly are coached) and framed...

heights and blessings

I haven't followed any reality television series in the last few years for one simple reason: they're boring. I've never seen an example of a compelling human being that I would want to know more about on any of them. I like watching television that doesn't present everyone to me in neat little packages with everything about them spelled out from the beginning. Battlestar Galactica is one of my favorite shows for that reason (don't knock it till you've tried it).

Still, I do agree that reality TV does enforce sexist ideals. That women will always compete over looks or men, the men always compete over money or ALLOW women to compete over them. Yes, there is a Bachelorette and I Love New York, but are the guys shown back stabbing each other or crying when they get eliminated? And yes, I agree that it's perfectly fine if some women want to be models or entertainers, if I'd been 5'9" instead of 5'4" I probably would've pursued a modelling career myself. But I've never seen any of the "winners" of Top Model have a true modelling career after the show ended. They run the course of their endorsements and vanish off to the land of forgotten reality stars for the most part. So, can you really say that the show helps further their career? I think if you were serious about modelling, you'd avoid ANTM.

Jennifer Pozner made some excellent points- I suppose
pretty much all TV is a machine whose purpose is to crank out simplistic stereotypes for mass consumption- its just that reality TV happens to do it with a tabloid -like effectiveness. Not surprising because these shows really are made on the cheap by TV producers.
They get high ratings, product placement and they don't have to pay some "star" a million bucks an episode. Its the ultimate in capitalist exploitation-
mega-bucks for a few media
outfits and mindless crap
manufactured on the cheap for everyone else- just like the rest of our sweatshop economy- and we KNOW what gender suffers most in such an economy.

"Yes, there is a Bachelorette and I Love New York, but are the guys shown back stabbing each other or crying when they get eliminated?"

actually, yes. even worse than the women because the men, after finishing crying and back stabbing, will get into some pretty gnarly fights that freak out the producers.

Genny, I LOVE Battlestar Galactica. I just discovered it a month or two ago and have already watched every episode so far. One of the best shows on television (maybe the best). Also has quite possibly the best strong female leads I've ever seen in a TV series.

I cannot express how much I love this show. I had to suppress a little giggle of excitement when you mentioned it ;)

Well, elektrodot, I stand corrected on that point. As I said, I don't watch the shows, but I'd never seen any hint of that from the commercials or promos whereas the Bachelor frequently runs commercials advertising "The most dramatic rose ceremony EVER!" with images of distraught women. Thank you for setting me straight.

Law Fairy I'm so glad someone else here watches BSG. And I agree with you on the strong female characters, I've got a friend who's a women's studies and film double major and I keep telling her she should watch it because it's so good for both of those areas of study. You know, if you can get past the idea of robots that look like people. Anyway, threadjack geekout done ;)

I didn't mean normal as in "like everyone else" either. I meant normal as in "the sort of person you might meet in real life" as opposed to a plastic, edited sort of personality simplified with jump cuts and quick interviews to reduce them to the second dimension.

Reality show producers aren't casting people as people. They're taking people and creating characters that will appeal to the population at large. I'm sure if you met these reality show folk on the street they wouldn't be anything like the characters you know from TV. They'd be real people, with well-rounded personalities that can't be reduced to a catch phrase or a nickname created for a thirty-second TV spot.

(Puckalish--ALL HAIL DISCORDIA! :D )

"Pozner believes that the interests of media conglomerates are not the same as the American public."

Well there's a shocker.

Actually, Alex, it was nice to hear someone say that aloud. I'd like to hear that line repeated in the mainstream media.

ANTM, The Swan and The Bachelor reinforce stereotypes about women. This is the symbolic form of oppression that reinforces the controlling image of women as passive, followers, weak, emotional and physical.