Eps 1: The evolution of female television characters
| Host image: | StyleGAN neural net |
|---|---|
| Content creation: | GPT-3.5, |
Host
Brian Baker
Podcast Content
While in many ways, the evolution of the female role has made great strides since the days of the damsel-in-distress characters of silent films, we still have not gone far enough. Dramas offered multiple female characters who drew the attention of audiences; comedy accepted lead ladies capable of conjuring up a laugh, and horror/thriller franchises saw women rise from supporting characters to super stars. Jumping from a platform established in the 00s with shows such as The Sopranos and Mad Men, the 2010s have not only included bright women in important shows, they have seen them move increasingly from supporting characters into starring roles.
Programs with at least 1 female creator employed a significantly higher proportion of women in other pivotal behind-the-scenes roles, and featured a greater number of female characters compared with programs with solely male creators. For example, programs with at least 1 woman executive producer had women represent 42% of the main characters.
Conversely, male characters were more likely than females to take up jobs-oriented roles, such as corporate executives. Female characters were less likely to occupy positions at the top of a work-based power hierarchy--and when they did, they performed fewer actions than male characters did at the same positions--and were more likely to be depicted as students and domestic helpers. More male than female characters were depicted as having worked outside of the home on an ongoing basis, although the disparity has decreased over time.
Female characters were less likely than men to be portrayed as leaders, were less likely than men to be seen working at a job and to be physically working, and were more likely than men to be identified by their marital status. There were no major differences between the numbers of girls and boys depicted among identifiable characters. Male characters continued to be more likely than women to be identified with their professional identity, as well as being seen working, actually working.
White characters and characters of color are similarly likely to have at least one sex partner. The institute found no meaningful sex differences in terms of sex partners, with both female and male characters similarly likely to have at least one . None of 621 lead/co-lead characters had sexual partners, while 2.9% of characters with no disabilities had.
Representation of gender-nonconforming works, both of male and female characters, increased from the 1970s through the 1980s, then decreased again during the 1990s. While the ratio of female protagonists to male protagonists decreased over time, and many of the merchandising storytellers were still male, the portrayal of women changed from an action perspective. Non-typical gender presentation improved for females over time, while it decreased for men, with activity/job being the biggest determinant in whether characters appeared male or female.
Seven percent of films sampled--the top 100 films grossing at least $100 million in the United States, according to Box Office Mojo--featured more female characters than male characters, while eight percent achieved gender parity. Black women represented 16.4 percent of the leading roles for women , but increases in bi-sex representation were driven mostly by Latinas and Asian women , each with a 5.7 percent share of the 2020 pie.
Across platforms, shows with at least one female executive producer featured more female characters and had higher proportions of women directors and writers compared to shows with only male executive producers. Series with at least one woman showrunner attached, compared to those with no women showrunner, featured a higher share of female-identified leads/co-leads , series regulars , and speaking characters . The institute measures screentime and speaking time on live-action television shows by gender using GD-IQ.4 As shown in Figure 3, female characters accounted for a larger share of screentime and speaking time on non-animated shows, with those shares improving since 2018.
The results of this analysis, which were published by Alias, suggest that women may not be the sole protagonist, and there may be more than one strong female character within the same story. Over the years, stronger, more ambitious, non-stereotypical female characters have only multiplied thanks to the dominance of women writers and producers such as Shonda Rhimes and Phoebe Waller-Bridge.
From the conception of female characters as sexual objects in Greek mythology, the conflation of ideal angelic figures mixed with the sexual deviants of medievalism, the representation of women in a lower class during Elizabethan times, layered characters of Victorian times and turn-of-the-century , to the numerous independent female characters seen today, female representations of women in media has continually evolved, and continues to do so. The evolution of female roles, both in cinema and media, is making films and shows more palatable for female viewers, as well as better for children, who are now so readily exposed to media via modern technology. As the feminist movement advanced through the early twentieth century, so did representations of women characters on the silver screen.
When movies and TV depict women, usually, particularly in Italy, we have characters that are quite straightforward. What we see a lot are pretty-as-a-button, ridiculous women, female characters that are just sexual objects, dated damsels in distress without any real personality, or even women that can kick ass and never need a man to save them. Sure, I like the strong, powerful female with the clever one-liners just as much as the next guy, but the strong should not be the only independent female character that we see in media.
Too often, at least one woman is there for the sake of having chemistry with a leading man, or rounding out the cast, not moving the plot along.