Many scholars have investigated the portrayal of the LGBTQ+ population in the media, noting that it does not always reflect reality. Seif (2017) provides an analysis of several characteristics of gay and lesbian characters in the media. They include gendered stereotypes, victimization, representation as villains, a sexual depiction, or a complete absence of such, and depicting equality rights concerning marriage and children (Seif, 2017). Looking at the aspect of gendered stereotype in detail, one can notice a tendency of presenting one person in a gay or lesbian couple as feminine and the other as masculine. Another example, victimization, refers to portraying gay and lesbian characters as victims, often in contrast to heterosexual people depicted as happy, independent individuals. Finally, either an excessively sexual representation of gay and lesbian couples, or a lack of sexual context constitute another characteristic of the phenomena at hand. As can be seen, the author’s analysis highlights the adverse aspects of gay and lesbian characters’ portrayal in the media. This approach emphasizes heterosexuality as a standard, while the LGBTQ+ population is viewed as a deviation.
The idea of gender binary lies in the assumption that only two categories of gender exist: in forms of masculine and feminine. According to Seif (2017), the US media actively promotes gender binary by, for instance, depicting gay males in a stereotyped feminine manner, like “dressing well, exaggerated extravagance and high-pitched voices.” (p. 17). In doing so, the media intends to make it easier for the heterosexual audience to accept a character. Another example is a lack of representation of gay or lesbian couples raising children (Seif, 2017). Hence, heteronormativity is promoted and set as a standard for society. It is a concept that perceives many aspects of life through the prism of heterosexual norms, with which gays and lesbians do not comply. For instance, depicting traditional families in TV shows identifies the importance of child-raising, marriage, sharing property, and other conservative values for the audience. Another example is portraying gay and lesbian characters as villains, hence, sending the message that homosexual identity is “bad.” Overall, the examples show how the media often aims to show that the LGBTQ+ population does not fit in the heterosexual society.
Zombie TV shows and movies are among popular and financially successful projects in the media. In their article, Cady and Oates (2017) studied zombie narratives to determine the role of a nuclear family and traditional values in such movies. The plot usually focuses on the survivors after infection spreads and institutional collapse, often identifying their desire to recreate a conventional family if they successfully avoid contamination and death. Cady and Oates (2017) came to the conclusion that “neoliberal ideological representations of heteronormative family relations” play a crucial role in the modern zombie media (p. 308). Besides, despite being open to multiracialism and anticonsumerism, zombie TV shows and movies still primarily rely on the assumption that a “traditional” family is a standard of societal form. Hence, they add to the promotion of traditional gender roles, as other examples are hardly depicted. Presenting a nuclear family as the only solution to survive and avoid threats emphasizes conventional gender roles and cultivates more bias against gay or lesbian characters. At the same time, zombie narratives could be a new way to restructure society and broaden its view of a traditional relationship.
On reflection, I can say that after completing both readings, I see the effect of the media on the Americans’ perception of the LGBTQ+ population quite clearly. For instance, even the TV shows and movies that portray gay and lesbian characters can, in fact, be demeaning and biased, and, hence, promote an adverse image. The media is a powerful tool for social consciousness, and forming the wrong opinion of the issue can be critical for the present and future generations. The representation of gay and lesbian characters is often guided by the standards and beliefs of heteronormativity, imposing its values and not considering those of the LGBTQ+ population. For example, presenting a gay male whose voice is high-pitched and who cares for his appearance too much will likely make many people believe all the gays in real life are similar to him. At the same time, it is not valid, and a more comprehensive approach is needed to identify and avoid all the issues the media presents in the wrong light.
This assignment was informative for me as it made me more aware of the issues in contemporary media. It helped me better understand that the promotion of binary gender and heteronormativity creates social problems, primarily due to emphasizing the role of a “traditional” and demeaning the role of an “odd” family. The belief in heteronormativity is currently prevailing over the idea of the existence of identities outside the gender binary. When this tendency is represented in the media, it aggravates the ongoing inequity in society in real life. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the media’s role and the changes that can be made in social consciousness through it.
References
Cady, K.A. & Oates, T. (2016). Family splatters: Rescuing heteronormativity from the zombie apocalypse. Women’s Studies in Communication, 39(3), 308-325.
Seif, R. (2017). The media representation of fictional gay and lesbian characters on television: A qualitative analysis of US TV-series regarding heteronormativity [Master’s thesis, Jönköping University].