Please do the assigned readings for today. Now, I would like you to think of today's TV families. Pick one of these TV families. Describe them in as much detail as you can. Select a theory and use it to suggest an "effect." The effect could be at either the micro or macro level. Consider the following in your discussion: Marital relationships, sibling relationships, and racial/gender issues (or other stereotypes). Your blogs will be the central component of our class discussion. So please come prepared to present your findings.Due: Oct. 28 @ 5 p.m.
Oh my, this is an extremely difficult question for me because I haven't watched a family genre television show for years. In terms of active audience theories I could tell you all about how I purposefully turned away from the family genre because it did not provide the escapism I specifically wanted from a television show. I was a mom, with two small kids, I had made it through one season of Parenthood, and decided I had had enough. I dealt with kids having tantrums enough during the day, that I didn't want to turn on a show in my precious post-bed-time decompression moments to watch more kids have tantrums.
ReplyDeleteSo, as Parenthood was the last show I watched before I rejected the genre, I guess I'll have to go off of my memories of that one. The show featured a patriarch and matriarch figure - the empty nest senior parents, and their four kids, and their grandkids. Each of their 4 kids were conveniently living different styles of parenting life: one a traditional working dad with a stay-at-home wife and kids, one a single mother who fled a druggie, one a working mother with a stay-at-home husband, and one a seemingly single reckless guy who finds out he has a 5-year-old son, and tries to step up as a dad. They have all kinds of gritty problems, but always ended with everyone joyfully having some thanksgivingesque dinner at the patriarch and matriarch's house.
The show did actively address some stereotype issues. The single guy who finds he has a kid is white and his child is with a black woman, and they work to build a family. They don't deal with racial difficulties too much because the show takes place in Berkeley, and well, I've lived there - mixed race couples and children are very normal there.
They do have an interesting exploration of gender issues with the stay-at-home dad feeling like he's less of a person with the role he has taken on. My home teacher is a stay-at-home dad, and he's expressed one of the biggest challenges he faces is a feeling of isolation (already a big challenge for any gendered stay-at-home parent) but he has it more because he doesn't feel it's appropriate to try to connect with the stay-at-home moms he's surrounded with. He feels a need for guy friends he can connect to, and isn't finding it.
But I think the biggest cultivation of normative beliefs that Parenthood had on pop culture in general was the introduction of a person with Aspergers (highest functioning on the autistic spectrum) as a main character. The story of his Aspergers was primarily told through the eyes of his parents and siblings, but I still think that was a huge step-forward-first in television history. And in the years since that show's introduction we've seen an Aspie take the starring role of a show with Sheldon of The Big Bang Theory. Also the term Aspergers is thrown around as a likely issue for Sherlock Holmes in the latest BBC televised series. I still think all three of these shows give Aspergers a rather one-dimensional portrayal. In parenthood it hyper-focused on the tantrums and difficulties for others around the Aspie. In The Big Bang Theory it is presented as primarily a lovable quirk, and in Sherlock it's thrown out as the reason for his liking and ability to be so analytical. A true representation would probably integrate all three, but in a world with zero television representation, anything at all seems pretty exciting.
I don’t watch any sitcoms these days. I decided to pick a random one . . . “Arrested Development.” Wow!!! The Bluth have to be one of the most messed up nuclear families in America. This series basically shows what is wrong with this country. Talk about a show and family that’s anything but uplifting. The only “normal” character is Michael, and he seems surrounded by family members who are all misf
ReplyDeleteMichael’s dad is a convict and was in jail during the episode I watched. He seems distant from his family and sex occupies his mind. Michael’s wife, Lucille appears strong-willed, is an alcoholic, and only cares about her personal high-end interests. She doesn’t seem to care her husband sits behind bars, and she is a nymphomaniac. Michael’s son, George Jr., seems like your average teen, but he has a crush on his cousin. Michael’s brother, Gob, thinks he’s a magician and also has a big sexual appetite. Michael’s sister, Lindsay, and brother in law, Tobias, have marital problems. Tobias quit his job as a psychiatrist to pursue an acting career. The couple can’t seem to have a conflict-free conversation.
It appeared every interaction between every family member was negative. Hough (1981) stated sitcoms follow the typical format of “establishment, complication, confusion and resolution.” The episode of “Arrested Development” I watched started with an establishing scene, and then was packed with complication and confusion. I kept waiting for the resolution, but it never came. I finished the episode wondering what on earth I just watched – what a dysfunctional family.
Olsen and Douglas (1997) named several themes found in familial sitcoms since the 1950s. I found several in the episode of “Arrested Development” I watched:
Father ridiculed/rarefied -- George SR appears distant from his son. He barely acknowledges him. His son visits him in jail to enquire about some mysterious book keeping, but George is more concerned about his softball game with the other inmates.
Parent-child conflict -- Michael’s son wants to visit his grandfather in prison, but Michael is reluctant to take him. Michael’s son finally gets to talk to George SR, but his grandfather is more concerned about himself and needing to get out of prison. Michael’s son leaves the prison disturbed. There’s conflict between Michael and his mom. Michael is annoyed his mom has never visited her husband (George) in prison. His mom ignores him and tries to change the subject.
Negative interaction between children --Michaels son and niece are depicted arguing with each other, and can barely have a civil conversation. There’s a scene at home where they talk about their family being “really messed up,” and they are the only two normal ones, but Michael JR apparently has some intimate feelings for his cousin and embraces her in a passionate hug. Also, there is angst between Michael and Gob, after Gob failed to get information out of Michael’s secretary after Gob and her presumably had an intimate encounter.
Gender role (equality/inequality) – In addition to being strong-willed, Michael’s mom appears unsympathetic and uncaring (about her husband). While George seems distant from his family, he appears to be weaker emotionally.
Familial satisfaction-- Michael’s mom tells her husband he’s ruined their family. George SR seems to like his wife only for her body.
Portrayals of romance, physical intimacy – There was plenty of this in the episode.
After reading your full post, I completely agree that sometimes this stuff is sickening. In reality, I feel all families are dysfunctional but media goes the extra mile.
DeleteGerbner’s cultivation theory came to mind when I watched the episode. According to Segrin and Nabi (2002), the theory asserts people who watch a lot of television over a long period of time perceive the world more closely mirroring what the media portrays. Keeping this in mind, I feel “Arrested Development” would be dangerous for a child in an already semi-dysfunctional family. Imagine growing up in an unstable home and watching the show. Over time, one could feel like that was what the world was really like. All families were just as dysfunctional as their own. Dysfunction was a social norm. Then Bandura’s social learning theory could come into play. Children could start to model the “normal” behavior they saw on the show.
ReplyDeleteI simply felt there was little to nothing positive about the episode I viewed. I finished the episode thinking how could anyone stand to watch a family with so many problems. If you ask me, I think the show was sickening, as well as the mannerisms of the Bluth.
It is a bit unconventional, but I decided to look at 'The Big Bang Theory.' The show is about a group of young professionals and their struggles with work and relationships. The group started off revolving around four male friends who worked at the same university and
ReplyDeletetheir struggling actess neighbor. The group expanded to include two more female
characters. One of these new female characters dates and then marries one of the original male friends. This marriage happens a few seasons into the show and has continued for several seasons up to the current one.
This marriage is traditional in as far as it is between a man and a woman and they live together. It departs from tradition because, while the husband does work, the wife makes much more money. This leads to many role reversal situations that the show exploits for jokes. Also, the relationship between the spouses does not change from before the marriage to after the marriage. The couple acts the same way, their lives continue to revolve around their friends more than centering on their marriage.
Using the cultivation theory, continuously watching this show and others similar to this (Friends' Chandler and Monica come to mind), will lead to the viewer becoming convinced that the character of this marriage is normal and typical. A second order effect of this becoming a normative belief is that same viewer will take unrealistic expectations into their own marriage. Unmet expectations (unrealistic expectations are likely to be unmet due to being urealistic) often cause conflict and strife in a marriage. Thus, the effect of viewing this show could be to create conflict and strife in a marriage.
I like that you mentioned role reversals and how their marriage still revolves around the group of friends. I also didn't think about the expectations side of things until I read our readings. It's so interesting how we see media as real and want a reflection of what we see in media to be what we see in our own lives. The problem is, the media isn't reality.
Delete
ReplyDeleteI am not too conversant with the sundry American TV shows, hence the limitations to the depth at which i might attempt the evolution of these shows. However, the one television family show that has remained ever green to me is: LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE. This show from the early 70's created a reality driven, impact filled story of an American pioneer family's struggle to survive the challenges of frontier life with courage, dignity and humor. The show focus on family values, marital relationships and issues such as race where important lessons of acceptance were taught.
Today, the structure and definition of family has changed in many households including the ones on television. A TV editor for The Hollywood Reporter, James Hibberd, puts it aptly, "We have moved from what's ideal to what's most entertaining." He adds that "During the golden age of television, the focus was on these families that everyone would like to have, that were also amusing and entertaining, with the advent of reality television, we introduced the dysfunctional family in 1990's."
Although i am yet to see full episodes, shows like "keeping it real with the Kardashians and ABC's critically acclaimed, Emmy-wining "Modern Family" represent the new definition of family on TV. They are more apt to discuss interracial dating, single motherhood or the challenges of a gay couple parenting.
With more and more people gravitating towards these shows and feeling represented, this resonates more with Cultivation effects theory, which suggests that the more time individuals spend viewing and absorbing certain viewpoints, the more likely their views of social reality will be "cultivated" by the images and portrayals they see on television.
From the reading, Chris Segrin and Robin L. Nabi also alluded to this, citing, Jones and Nelson (1996). who suggested that in the absence of salient role models, "people would be more vulnerable to accept the romanticized view of marriage put forth by society and media." and this is where we are at, today.
I don’t watch many TV shows. However, one that my parents and I have watched for years is F.R.I.E.N.D.S. The unique dynamic of the characters’ relationships with one another creates a virtual film through which we as viewers perceive the show, and in turn, how reality should compare. We watch these six individuals interact with each other over the course of ten years. Set in New York City, we watch their friendships and relationships change, and evolve. Many times, on and off-screen, they resemble a family. We note that the dynamic is such that there are three guys, and three girls, thus establishing a gender balance.
ReplyDeleteTo describe the vast array of personalities, Ross Geller is a responsible, driven scholar. He earned his PhD, and works as a paleontologist. While he has a sweet, gentleman-like disposition, he can also be considered a whiner. He was previously married, and has a little boy. Throughout the series, he has an on-again, off-again relationship with Rachel Green.
Chandler Bing is the show’s jokester, or tease, always using his humor as a springboard/defense mechanism. He is sarcastic, and logical. Many times, Chandler is mistaken for being gay, even though he ends up marrying his best friend, Monica Geller.
Joey Tribbianni serves the role of lady-slayer. While he may rock the bedroom, he’s not so quick to think on his feet, and is even portrayed as quite slow at times. He is an aspiring actor, and while he never can seem to nail a solid job, he’s the expert at dreaming up big ideas.
Monica Geller is Ross’ younger sister. She is the control freak. While totally narcotic and anal, she thrives off of her competitive nature. Nothing is impossible for her to handle, or so she would like to think. Monica used to be fat, and ironically enough, works as a chef.
Rachel Green is the rookie of the group. She was always a Daddy’s girl (still is), and took on the middle name of “Spoiled” because of it. That said, Rachel tries hard at life, and finds herself slowly moving up in the fashion industry throughout the series. Despite her ditsy character, she loves fiercely, and is a true and loyal friend.
Phoebe Buffay has enough weird to go around for everyone. Known as the hippie, she’s always getting lost in her own little world, and giving off the strangest of vibes, and is comfortable in her own skin. Speaking of skin, Phoebe works as a masseuse. She marches to the beat of her own tuba, but is very compassionate, and tolerating of others and their differences.
These characters’ personalities, and attributes are enhanced on-screen. It’s interesting to observe the drastic differences in each, and yet, the way these friends mesh because of it. But would six completely different individuals like these ever hang out, or even tolerate each other in reality. Maybe it was all for the comedy balance. Maybe it was all for the show. You think? Duh.
I have frequently found myself comparing my life to F.R.I.E.N.D.S. Heck, in high school I even had the same group dynamic; three guys, three girls. That was my squad. We didn’t always get along, and we didn’t always spend our days chewing the fat, sitting on an orange couch in some coffee shop. But I always liked to think that we were like them. So let me be the hundredth person on this blog post to bring up a correlation to cultivation theory. Over time, this show began to influence the way I talked, or acted in my reality. My parents and I would laugh and quote it all the time—still do. The point is, this little F.R.I.E.N.D.S. bubble became my bubble. In a very subconscious way, it became my world. It’s funny…if life was really like the shows we watch, what kind of a reality would we be living in? How would it change? What would be different? Something to think about.
Friends was a great example. I could definitely relate!
DeleteFor this blog post I decided to use the show I am currently binging on. It’s called Jane the Virgin; it’s a fairly new show centered around the life of a girl named Jane, who gets accidentally artificially inseminated and pregnant while still a virgin, her love life and her life with her family. The characters are more female based than male and there is a very strong presence of the Latin/Hispanic culture with it having a predominantly Latino cast.
ReplyDeleteJane is the main character. She’s independent for the most part. She tries to live her life with as much normality (work, school, goals) as possible without letting her pregnancy/baby take over. Her family at first consists of mainly her mother and grandmother, who all live together and both of them helped raise Jane, until her father enters the picture. And her love life revolves around two guys, her ex-fiancé and her baby’s father; the whole thing is rather complicated.
Jane’s mother is usually irresponsible and impulsive. She became pregnant with Jane at the age of 16 and has a history of failed relationships, a history Jane herself does not want to repeat. Jane’s grandmother is most often the voice of reason but rarely does she speak English. Her relationship with Jane is a mother/daughter one, while her relationship with Jane’s mother is a mix of highs and lows. She is a strong believer in traditions, especially religious ones (catholic), however, she is an illegal immigrant, an issue that the characters deal with throughout multiple episodes and which affects decisions they make.
Jane’s father is a telenovela superstar. Like Jane’s mother, he also has a history of failed relationships. Though he may come across as shallow and self-centered at times, he truly cares about the 3 new women in his life (Jane, Jane’s mother and grandmother). His character serves as comic relief as well.
Like those before me, I would apply the cultivation theory to talk about the effects of the show and the family portrayal. The first effect I’d like to address has to do with the structure of Jane’s family. She herself (by the end of the 1st season) is an unmarried mother with no stable job and trying to continue her education. Her child has a mother and a father, but they are not together (yet). Jane’s mother raised Jane as a single mother, while her father knew nothing of her existence until she was 23. Her parents are both single, though they rekindle their relationship.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the theory, viewers are seeing a broken family in a different light. They see Jane’s family members caring about each other and trying to be a family. I think this has positive and negative effects. For one, viewers are being shown that marriage doesn’t have to be a priority when raising children, which I take as a negative effect; today’s society does not hold the institution of marriage as important. And on the flip side, viewers are being shown that families are not perfect, but they can be happy, which I think can be positive because in reality, a perfect family does not exist and coming from a broken family does not make you less of a person and shouldn’t cripple you. With regards to social issues, abortion and immigration are discussed. With this show, viewers are shown that abortion is an option and it is acceptable, which I take as negative. With regards to immigration, viewers are exposed to the human side of it; they’re shown that even though illegal immigrants are breaking the law by being in the US without legal documents, there are also reasons and circumstances that make the issue 3 dimensional instead of 1 dimensional.
Gender roles are also shown; Jane symbolizes a strong, independent woman. She is educated and following her dream of becoming a writer. She is determined to continue reaching her goals despite motherhood, and her family is supportive. The last issue I want to talk about is culture/race. This show is portrays the Hispanic/Latin culture here in the US. Viewers get a look at what the culture is like, the traditions, values and beliefs of the majority of Hispanics. Though the show takes a satirical spin, as a Hispanic person, I think its representation of the culture positive overall and not stereotypical. These are all things that as the cultivation theory says, viewers can come to believe are reality. Apart from the representation of marriage and abortion, I don’t think the show has major negative effects on cultivation.
The TV family I chose was the interesting group in The Walking Dead. Through the seasons this make-shift family of survivors has created member roles amongst the individuals within their group. Of course Rick take the leading role. He is a father, husband, and the trusted leader of the survivors. His wife Lori dies a couple of seasons in and he has an adolescent son and an infant baby. You also have Darrel who in my eyes serves as an uncle. There are many other individuals that take different family roles. I think within the show you learn how anyone can become family. There is a feeling of inclusiveness. However, I also feel as if we have possibly began to tackle gender roles. You constantly see men taking care of the infant child and women fighting off zombies along-side the men. I feel like there is definitely a push towards equality for the genders. You also see a pretty diverse group here in regards to ethnicity, but different stereotypes within each ethnic group. I feel like there is even diversity across the ethnic groups. Pulling each of these aspects together you really feel a sense of anyone and everyone who is “good” can be part of this family.
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to bring up some of the current shows that are out there. “Mike and Molly”, “King of Queens”, “How I Met Your Mother”, “Big Bang Theory”, “Friends”, and so many others. I feel like these shows focus so much on the life of single middle aged adults or couples, but not on entire families. I feel like they portray family units as groups of friends/ couples. Don’t get me wrong, I love some of these shows, but I also see a lot of changes within the world’s view on family. I remember the show “7th Heaven” and “Everybody Love Raymond”. I felt like those shows really portrayed families in a way that we could see everyday struggles/frustrations/and happy experiences. You saw these families overcome things together. To go a little more in detail, “Everybody Love Raymond” was one of my favorites. The characters were funny and the average middle class family. A lot of time I see myself comparing my current circumstances with the plot of the show. My future mother-in-law is very controlling and we really but heads. I constantly feel under a microscope and that she is easily offended. I feel like my fiancee is the goofy, happy-go-lucky Raymond, who doesn’t always say the right things, but is all-in-all a good guy. I find myself thinking, how would Debra handle this?
The first theory that came to mind when thinking about families in television, their roles, and the effect of exposure to the media, is cultivation theory. What we see in the media develops in our minds as normative beliefs. How we see families in the media is “normal”. What’s scary about this is that there is so much infidelity, and decrease in the value of family and relationships. I can see how these things have become more and more accepted in our society. What can stems from these “norms” is our actions. When something becomes “normal” or “accepted” the likelihood of mimicking those actions is increased. When we connect with character in the media, we can start to shift our actions to match what we think would be their actions. One example that seems pretty obvious to me is the lack of a family presence in the media. I feel like there are way more shows that portray single adults and there is definitely fewer and fewer children (one exception to this may be the Disney channel). However, I do feel like we as a society have become more and more focused on independency and the urge to “live life to it’s fullest, have a family later”. I feel like the family has become less and less important. Not that we should all have a family by a certain age, but I feel that through media we see the lack of the presence of children and families as a positive and “freeing” thing, and we are now reflecting that in reality. We have also seen increases in divorce, infidelity, pornography addictions, homosexuality, premarital sex, drug use, alcohol abuse, etc.
My wife and I finished watching a show last year called “Parenthood” which is a show all about family and some of the challenges that can be faced. At the head of the family are the grandparents who have four married children (two sons, two daughters). The show is all about the issues that are dealt with in each of the individual families as well as some of the concerns and issues that involve everyone. Some of the issues that are brought up are teen pregnancy, autism, adoption, mixed race families, divorce, health challenges, and family business conflicts. The show is all about getting through life’s challenges and coming together to be stronger and improve.
ReplyDeleteOne family in particular experiences marital issues that involve infidelity. The two characters (Julia and Joel) are one of the most likeable couples on the show. As a viewer, you wouldn’t think that they could ever be separated, but as issues at work and at home escalate, the family begins drifting apart. Eventually, Julia cheats on her husband and it looks like Julia and Joel are going to get a divorce, but with time, they work things out. It is amazing how attached people get to the success of this relationship, I pulled a piece from an article on the Hollywood reporter describing their relationship:
“To say Parenthood's Joel and Julia's marriage and subsequent separation has been rocky would be an understatement. But after a season and a half, the couple that has divided fans and shattered hearts may be showing signs of hope. Following the most civil divorce proceedings, Joel — acting on advice from his father-in-law/Jedi master Zeek Braverman— finally decided to fight for his wife when both were merely a signature away from making their split legal”
While watching the show, I did become aware of the fact that the show had an agenda to show what family relationships would be. I was amazed when one of the parents in the show found out that their daughter was a lesbian. The parents handled the situation in a way that reflects society’s current beliefs on LGBT orientation and relationships. It was interesting that the parent’s had almost no reaction when they found out about their daughters sexual orientation, they basically said they still loved her and that it wasn’t a big deal.
I definitely think that shows like this in some way or another cultivate beliefs or assumptions of how we could or would act in similar situations. I think it also influences out normative beliefs about what relationships are and how conflict should be dealt with. Sometimes the behaviors that we see on TV however can reinforce our existing beliefs that may be counter to what the show is trying to convey.
The most interesting aspect of the show Parenthood is that they send strong signals about how to deal with conflict or issues that arise in a family. These depictions likely cultivate attitudes and in some instances behaviors that can harm or not be as effective in real-world application.
Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/is-hope-parenthoods-joel-julia-748206
Jason I feel that people are also attracted to shows that promote happy endings because they desire that for themselves. Personally I think that people preferred the Cosby show over Roseanne in Olson and Douglas' (1997) study because they wish their family could be like that. Similarily people dont want to see others get divorced because they wouldnt want that or maybe wish that it did not happen to them. I dont know what to call this concept but I believe it is applicable. Maybe identification?
DeleteEverybody loves Raymond was one show that I highly favored back in its day. The interesting thing about the show is the sibling relationships were not highlighted in Ray’s own children but rather between him and Robert his older brother. The show’s main character was Raymond, who was a sports journalist for Newsday. Raymond is always at the center of attention in each episode and usually faces some conflict with his family, usually at the hand of his intruding next-door-neighbor parents. He undoubtedly loves his family, but sometimes has trouble communicated with them in an effective way. This is usually the source of conflict and humor, as in various examples, Ray struggles to confront his parents when they may be in the wrong, has a hard time understanding his wife’s emotions, and constantly runs into the jealousy and sibling rivalry of Robert. His wife Debra, is the typical mother and housewife, who is patient with Ray and his follies, but usually frustrated with the constant subtle critiques of her mother-in-law. Debra is not a very good cook and feels a need to compete with the female affection that is countered by Ray’s mother Marie. Marie is the over protective, ultra clean, all knowing supermom who does not usually consider the feelings of her daughter-in-law or Debra’s progression as a wife. Marie is ultra-loving and feels the need to be a constant part of her son’s life. She has grown used to the crudeness and wit of her husband Frank, who like Debra, is constantly annoyed by the behavior of Marie but cannot resist her food. Frank is the outspoken and very opinionative grandpa, who does not hesitate to criticize Ray or Robert, or anyone else in the community for that matter. Robert is Ray’s older brother who is subtly agitated by his parent’s favoritism of the young child Ray. He is divorced but nevertheless fulfills his civic duty as a cop and faithfully obliges, sometimes with a grimace, to be there for his brother and parents.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the characters were overdrawn and over dramatized, and sometimes stereotyped (i.e. stay at home mothers, sibling rivalry or jealousy, rude grandpa), in most occasions, I feel that the perceived realistic nature of the situations that the characters were involved in drew audiences to selectively expose themselves to material they felt was authentic. I agree with Segrin and Nabi’s (2002) second assumption about expectations that are developed through familial socialization, in their study regarding expectations for marriage. They refer to Gottman et al (1997), to suggest that while conflict exists in marriage, parents use positive behaviors to null the negative effects. I believe that such is the case in the family as a whole. For the good of the team, families will resort to positive attitudes to avoid the destruction of the whole. This concept is constantly portrayed in ELR where the characters must constantly battle between expressing their true feelings and choosing to get along to promote harmony in the home, in both marital and sibling relationships. Raymond must apologize to Robert in one episode and in another spends time with him during Robert’s injury so Robert can confront the bull that injured him. In one episode I remember where the characters are arguing about the concept of marriage, Marie assertively declares to all characters present that the point of a good marriage is not for it to be perfect but to be able to address and work through its challenges
Alluding to the concept of equality that Olson and Douglas (1997) proposed in their study, I suggest that the equality in ELR also led to the show being liked and viewed. This must be taken in the context of the show, because although Debra and Marie both portrayed a stay at home mom occupation, equity was more exhibited in all the characters ability to be assertive and confront conflict about more everyday matters such as Debra crying to relieve stress, Robert choosing to be honest with all his girlfriends, and Frank learning to appreciate the presence of his wife more. The show was able to find middle ground between “Father Knows Best” and gender submission shows like “Roseanne”, due to ELR’s confrontational nature. Thus as viewers perceived ELR as an accurate representation of the situations they faced in their family, they selectively exposed themselves to content more familiar with them.
ReplyDeleteI am not much of a TV watcher and usually regard it as a huge waste of time. But then again, we all have our guilty pleasures. And thus I will confess mine: I am a big fan of Modern Family. As much as I don’t necessarily agree on the moral principles with all of the family dynamics that we see in the show -- I appreciate that it is a relatively clean, upbeat, non-dramatic and quite humorous show.
ReplyDeleteThe show focuses on Jay Pritchett’s family: Jay being the eldest member of the clan and divorced father of Claire and Mitchell, his now grown children. He is currently married to second-wife Gloria Pritchett and together they share Gloria’s son from a previous marriage (Manny Delgado) and have one son together - Fulgencio (Joe) Pritchett. Claire (Pritchett) Dunphy is married to Phil Dunphy and they have three children: Haley, Alex and Luke. Mitchell Dunphy is married to Cameron Tucker and together they have adopted a Vietnamese daughter, Lily Tucker-Pritchett.
EFFECT: The idea for the show was supposedly based on the writers’ own “modern” families -- but it obviously goes much further than that. Within myself I have seen a lot of “Social Learning” going on while watching this family (as also noted by Olson and Douglas in their literature review). I have never really been privy to how another American family lives, and have enjoyed the “mockumentary” style of the show where the characters speak occasionally directly to the camera and can reveal some very human feelings and thoughts. I know that my apprehension over how to deal with or discuss gay marriage has weakened after watching the show -- my moral beliefs have not, but most definitely my understanding of people being people and making their own choices has expanded.
When I was just barely married I looked to the show sometimes for catharsis -- an escape from my own life confusions or comfort that though things may go terribly wrong in life -- (and like Olson and Douglas state) they usually resolve themselves within the allotted 25 minutes of prime-time TV. Because it was genre-specific and had to do with marital and familial relationships - the effect of the show was probably greater on me than I realized (Segrin & Nabi, 2002).
Some evident stereotypes on the show are that of Phil Dunphy as the “dumb Dad” -- a close resemblance to the inept working class dad of the 1950s and 60s mentioned by Olson and Douglas. However, Dunphy’s counterpart Claire is not exactly the “smart Mom” contrast that usually media portrays. Another aspect of this TV family relationship is mentioned by Olson and Douglas: the adult relationships tend more to the affiliative side, with interaction and communication from both partners.
As for the rest of the family, the Dunphy’s daughter, Haley, is a ditz, and their middle child Alex is a nerd. Their son Luke is usually off in his own world. The family by-and-large adheres to typical gender roles -- with the exception of the gay couple (though one partner is still more the breadwinner, the other more the nurturer of the child). I can’t argue as to whether anyone has learned gender roles or parenting techniques from Modern Family -- but I can say that there is usually a feel-good moment at the end of every show where the theme of family-together-and-foreverness comes around...which is what viewers want anyway, right?
Unfortunately, I do not watch any TV shows that depict a family. Doctor Who, Twilight Zone, White Collar and the X-files are probably the only shows I have watched within the last 3 years and none of them really have traditional families in them, but maybe that's just saying something about popular shows in general. I guess I'll go with shows I used to watch and use Lizzie McGuire as an example. Lizzie is a teenage girl and her family consists of her mom (Jo), her dad (Sam) and her little brother (Matt). Most of the show involves Lizzie's relationships with her best friends Miranda and Gordo, her schoolmates (mean girls, crushes, etc), and her relationship with her family members.
ReplyDeleteCultivation Theory suggests that the more time people spend watching TV, the more likely they are to believe that what they are watching is social reality. In other words, TV influences attitudes and beliefs. As far as what was depicted, her parents had a great marriage relationship. There are a few episodes that show the parents having a great time together when the kids are out of the house. There are a few episodes where the parents are left alone and they decide to have pillow fights and eat popcorn and do other childlike things. According to Cultivation Theory, if I were to watch Lizzie McGuire a lot, I would believe that married couples take the opportunity to goof off, have pillow fights, play video games and tell jokes when they are home alone...(How rated G).
As for sibling relationships, Lizzie and Matt do not get along at all. There are a couple episodes where they stand up for each other and show love and support, but most of the time, Matt is plotting ways to ruin Lizzie's life. They call each other names a lot. According to Cultivation Theory, if I were to watch Lizzie McGuire all the time, I would assume that siblings fight most often than not and that name calling and pranking is a funny and acceptable thing for siblings to do to each other.
I think that racial issues and other stereotypes seem to be handled well in this show. Lizzie's best friend Miranda is Latino and sometimes she will talk about the cool things that she does in her culture. Her parents have the typical accents, but they are good people doing ordinary things. (This is coming from the perspective of me, a white girl, so maybe it's not good. I don't know.) Gordo, Lizzie's other best friend, is Jewish. There is a whole episode about his bar mitzvah and discusses his beliefs and cultural decisions as a Jew. So I thought that was kind of cool. In regards to gender issues, there is an episode where Miranda thinks she's fat and stops eating so there is a discussion about how girls don't need to look that way to be beautiful and how not eating is unhealthy. All of these things are great messages and I remember them having a good influence on my attitudes and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteRight now I am totally obsessed with the TV show Friday Night Lights, partly because of the family portrayed, The Taylors. Eric Taylor starts as the football coach at Dillon High School, his wife Tammy works as the school guidance counselor, and their daughter Julie is a sophomore there. I don’t want to share any spoilers (and I’m only on season 2, so please don’t spoil it for me!), but the Taylor’s end up having to go through a lot stress throughout the first season. Coach Taylor’s star quarterback gets injured and his family ends up suing the Taylors, Coach catches some of his football players using illegal substances, Tammy and Eric have a hard time making time for each other, Julie starts hanging out with the wrong crowd and considers having sex with her boyfriend, and the drama just continues! Eric and Tammy have one of the best marriages I have ever seen portrayed on television. Yes, they argue and have to talk through their problems, but they always resolve those issues through conversation and seeking to understand each other. As Julie contemplates becoming sexually active, Tammy talks to her about it and they have a really great conversation about why it’s better to wait until marriage to have sex. At times, Coach Taylor has to decide what is best for his family and what is best for his career, and as far as I can tell—he always ends up choosing what is best for his family (or making a bad choice and fixing that choice by putting his family first).
The first theory that comes to mind when talking about the effects of media is Gerbner’s Cultivation Theory. In this way, I feel that Friday Night Lights teaches (for the most part) really great things, regarding the family. Of course there are instances of unfaithfulness among the high school students and other dysfunctional families, but as far as the Taylor’s are concerned, they display VERY good family values which is what is portrayed as normal and right throughout the show. As I watched the episode where Tammy taught Julie about sex, I thought of moms watching this show thinking of ways they could better help their children understand sex. I thought of teenagers watching the show, hopefully learning about why it’s a great idea to wait until marriage to have sex.
Friday Night Lights also has some great episodes about racial prejudice and biases. There’s a couple of black families portrayed and a few episodes revolve completely around how an assistant football coach made a racially inappropriate statement. Coach Taylor and the team members had to figure out how to discuss racial inequality at the high school and on the football team. Everything was resolved (to some degree) but some really good things we said and talked about throughout those episodes. According to the cultivation theory, viewers of this television show would learn about racial prejudice and how to avoid prejudiced thoughts and behaviors.
In all, I think Friday Night Lights is a fabulous example of a family on television. The show is not perfect in every way, but the portrayal of the Taylor family is AWESOME! Hopefully through the Cultivation Theory viewers can learn some good things about family life.
The only modern show I watch is Bones. So, I’ll just comment on the small range of modern TV families that I’ve been exposed to from that.
ReplyDeleteThe series started with more of the friend-family thing going on. No one was married, only Booth had a son, and you only get brief glimpses of other family members. But as the series went on, you see more and more family members and people start reconnecting with family, getting married, adopting children, having babies, etc. Eventually, you end up with quite a range of family situations.
First, there is Brennen’s family. She starts totally alone, but then gets reconnected with her long-lost brother (and his eventual wife/step-daughters), then her criminal father who left years ago. Her dad desperately wants to rebuild his family and always stresses the importance of family. He believes family members should stick up for each other, protect each other, sacrifice for each other, forgive each other and be together as much as possible. These are things she eventually learns to do. Later, Brennen gets pregnant, starts a new family with Booth, and then they eventually get married.
Booth was raised by his grandfather, because his father was abusive. He also has a son out of wedlock, who Booth loves and cares for deeply. He is always trying to be the best dad – spending time with him, protecting him, talking bout life, etc. You also meet the grandfather and Booth’s little brother –and they address all sorts of themes like complex sibling relationships, helping each other, learning to let go, and becoming different than your parents.
Angela and Hodgins end up married and have a son. Hodgins has no other living relatives and Angela only has her dad – a hard-core Texan rock star. Her father is extremely protective, adores his daughter and grandson, and loves to test Hodgins via ridiculous initiation rites to welcome him into the family. They are the closest thing we get to a traditional family.
Cam ends up adopting a teenage daughter and you get to see her struggle to jump into motherhood with no prior experience. You see the learning process for both mother and daughter as they try to figure out how to be a family and what roles they need to play for each other.
In each of these family relationships, we get to explore gender roles, communication, priorities, responsibilities, values, and the challenges of nearly every style of family. I get the feeling Bones likes to be as diverse and all-inclusive as possible. We get the un-wed parents, the one-parent adoptive family, the traditional nuclear family, the multi-generational family, the dysfunctional family, the estranged family, and so on.
Theoretically speaking, this makes me think of framing in an interesting way. In the past, any given show tended to favor one style of family over others as superior or ideal. However, Bones (and I assume many other modern TV programs) introduces several familial frames, all equally acceptable, and widens the scope of their conception of what it means to be family. Rather than focusing on the structure of a family or what roles people should play, Bones throws that all to the wind and focuses on what are the important traits that makes people family: loyalty, protection, sacrifice, love, time, etc. They are re-framing family based on quality, not on structure. I find this take refreshing, regardless of my personal religious belief that the husband-wife-children nuclear family is technically ideal.
What is the effect? I wouldn’t say TV portrayals have a direct or causal effect. We definitely get that chicken-egg dilemma of which is driving which – society or media. But simply put, I’d say people are relaxing their definitions of family and accepting them in all shapes and forms as long as they have the qualities that bind people together in un-selfish, permanent, and (usually) legal ways.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTammie and Eric (Coach) Taylor have the best marital relationship I have ever seen displayed on TV. They are equal partners that share responsibilities and talk about all major choices before they make a decision. They are respectful of one another and support each other different amounts in different times of life (their relationship spans 5 years on Friday Night Lights). Tammie and Coach are not perfect, however, and often disagree on various issues—but they are great at working things out and compromising, although one person often has to compromise more, which is similar to marriage in real life. I love that they are authentic characters with personalities who viewers can relate to.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in the 5th season, Tammie wants to take a position as a school counselor at a college, but Coach was offered the opportunity to be the head coach at a university in another state. When coach received this offer, he quickly accepted before talking to Tammie (the one exception); however, when Tammie was offered her position at the college, she was open with her potential employers and told them she needed to speak with her husband. During the 5th season, Tammie and Coach struggle to remain close to one another amidst their big decisions regarding their future. It was hard to watch because each person wanted what he or she had been offered so badly! In the end, Coach decided to give up his dream of being a head coach so that Tammie, who has followed him for 18 years, could finally follow her dreams. You could tell that it was a hard decision for both of them, but their love for one another was strong throughout their struggle. This display of a marriage was healthy and overall positive, which is influential on viewers, especially those who are married. [FYI this is a HUGE SPOILER for anyone watching the show, so let's keep this on the down-low].
Particularly, the Uses and Gratification theory may shed some light on what users would get out of viewing Tammie and Coach’s relationship as displayed on Friday Night Lights. For example, perhaps those who watch Friday Night Lights for the purpose of observing the Taylor’s relationship may develop views of how marriage works, and as a result would internalize the interactions between Coach and Tammie and use them as a point of comparison in personal relationships. Therefore, a person who was interested in marital relationships then viewed the interactions between Coach and Tammie would learn to be patient, giving, open, and stern when necessary.
Maybe this will sound awful but I really loathe most modern "family" sitcoms today. Before they actually had FAMILIES but now "non-convention" is the theme of the day. From single mothers, to Gay relationships, 900 people raising one baby (Saving Grace), it's differed much father than I think the study we read suggests. I mean, I remember families like "Step-By-Step", "Family Matters", and "The Wonder Years" may have had families that were slightly out of the norm, but not to the extent of intentionally throwing traditional values out like garbage. The problem then, as I'm seeing with my cohort answers as well- none of us like to watch these garbage shows and we don't know enough about them to write intelligently about them.
ReplyDeleteOne other thing I could talk about is how the depictions of families in cartoons are far different from that of adult sitcoms. Shows like Rugrats, Finnias and Pherb, and Gravity Falls may have families that are awkward, but they still exist within the possibly of norm.
Finally, one other avenue we could discuss are reality TV show families like the Karashians, John and Kate Plus 8, Big Love, Honey Boo-boo or even so far as to observe the ShayTards who is my favorite family on YouTube (they have produced a daily vlog for about 6 years). But I'm going to guess our conversation in class is going to tend around more controlled mediums- scripted and more intentional than reality TV.
Onto the assignment.
ReplyDeleteI could have written about the Cosby shows but it's not "modern" and it's already discussed in the readings. Also I considered "Golden Girls" but it also is not modern and not all the main characters are families and it lack siblings. I finally decided to try Downton Abby. It has a strong family tie in it with all sorts of dramatic social hierarchy embedded into it.
I'll only address the first season since it's the most consistent and it's the one I'm most familiar with. The show is about a turn-of-the-century family in Britain struggling with the changing social tides around them: the modernizing technology, rapidly changing social standards including freedom for women's rights, the blurring of station between the servants and the house family, and of course the war.
The structure of the Main family consists of a father from England, his wife from America, their three young adult daughters, a paternal grandmother, and the introduction of marriages for the daughters.
Social structure is very prominent. The grandmother constantly considers it her right to boss the family around and oppose to such things as electricity and other new-fangled ideas about changing morality. The father exerts himself as the head of the household over the potential inheritor of his estate who insists on modernizing the way the house it run (to a more capitalist system). The house cannot be inherited by any of the daughters so the fate of their lives fall to this unknown American man (who *Spoiler alert* luckily falls in love with the eldest daughter and fathers a son who can then inherit everything they own). The wife basically takes a back seat but we cannot also forget she has a will of her own- being American after all.
Among the siblings, the eldest is prideful and brash. For a long time she is considered having a cold heart willing to marry for money. The second is rather talentless and is simultaneously always seeking marriage and independence through employment (how dare she! A woman work?!) The family generally treats her as the lesser stupider daughter. The young of the three is full-on a revolutionary. Not only does she express herself recklessly (revealing dresses, learning to drive, going to political rallies), she even goes so far as tries to elope with a SERVANT!... FROM IRELAND!!! (Dun dun duuuun!) The sisters often are backstabbing and bitter although the audience can commiserate with each of them in turn as the show progresses- they all learn from their mistakes. There is a huge tension from everyone trying to be independent over the others. It's rare to find any of the characters completely without fault. And when one of the characters is actually right, they are often blamed for not understanding the feelings of others. One thing that is consistent however is their kindness to their servants.
Because the show is more a soap-opera instead of a sitcom, there isn't a laugh-track associated and the end of an episode does not signify the conclusion to a problem.
ReplyDeleteAs for a Media effect, I believe this would be a good example of Leon Festinger's Social Comparison Theory- namely, that we look at other people and feel better about ourselves and our own family in comparison to what we see on TV. Most of the beginning of this series compares the rich lazy to the poor and hard working. While it shows that evil exists in both worlds, in particular the point it made that wealth does not equal happiness. In addition, it could follow that because the show is set in the 1900's that the viewers is constantly comparing modern day. Because so much of the show talks about the difficult transition to the values we in modern society hold, the entire show relies on a thinking audience to apply their modern values. It does not follow however that such a comparison needs to be positive or negative. Following the social comparison theory, audiences can make an upward or downward comparison. Some of the values in the show are shown as preferable to the modern wildness of modern day. It suggests that we have lost some innocence (in modesty, humility, or the supportive role of a wife). In other cases, the show highlights negative aspects of tradition such as how their financial circumstance necessitates the eldest daughter be married in order to save the family. That puts her in a position above her other sisters and fosters a feeling of resentment between all of them. Other examples are found easily in the description I provided above.
Specifically addressing your question about racial stereotypes, the Irish man in the show is highly political and a bit of a drinker. His ole in the show is to combat those stereotypes or embrace them in a positive light. I don't think he represents only the Irish but all social classes and discriminated groups.
In any case, the show is made for the purpose of re-evaluating our modern standards.
*Spoilers*
I do have to mention somewhat off topic episode of the show. the Irishman eventually does legitimately marry the wealthy daughter but she dies in childbirth. In a later episode, the family is still treating him as upper class (when he used to be their personal chauffeur). But a new maid in the house starts to flirt with him because she believes they are of the same economic social class. It's a very confusing point to make.
*End of spoilers*
Here is a basic run-down of the show, Parody Style: https://screen.yahoo.com/sketchy-downton-arbys-090000773.html
DeleteThe only show I could think of to use for this assignment are the little parts of "Gossip Girl” re-runs my girlfriend watches all the time. The show takes place on Manhattan’s Upper East Side in New York. One of the families portrayed in it is the Waldorf family.
ReplyDeleteWhen the viewers first meet the Waldorf family, it features a matriarch figure, Eleanor Waldorf. Eleanor is a famous fashion designer with business all over the world and a single mom. Her daughter, Blair Waldorf, is an only child and a "Queen Bee” of her high school. The patriarch figure of the family, Harold, is not in the picture after he decided to leave Eleanor for a male model, Roman, and move with him to Paris.
After her husband decided to leave her, Eleanor throws herself into work. She barely spends anytime at home not to mention with her own daughter. When Eleanor does see Blair, all she can do is criticize her. The mother-daughter relationship is weak and unstable especially that since her mother is gone all the time. The closest person Blair can call a friend is her maid Dorota. On top of that, because of the damaged relationship she has with her mother, Blair struggles with bulimia because she thinks that if she will be as skinny as the models her mom devotes so much time to, Eleanor will pay more attention to her. Basically all that Blair does is to impress her mom in hopes that she will approve of her and love her more. She dates a boy her mom wants her to date, she dresses the way her mom wants her to, and during dinners with family friends she only eats what her mom would approve.
While watching this show, viewers could assume that not only the Waldorf family but also the other four that appear in the show are the typical American family. In fact, all those families are dysfunctional in a way. Based on cultivation theory and the fact that these families do not represent the majority of the families in the USA, the show could create a false image of the way family live looks like. This effect could be greater on people from outside the USA that are only exposed to it and who do not have any other knowledge of the life in America could create false stereotypes that are not accurate.
The first TV family I thought of was Modern Family, but I have a feeling others may use them so I am going to discuss the family in the TV show I’m currently watching, Jane the Virgin. In this show, Jane is an only child and she lives with her mom and her grandmother. Her mother had her out of wedlock in high school. The father figures are pretty much out of the picture. The grandfather left the family way before the show even started. However, Jane’s father comes back in the picture and he is a Telenovela star. Jane’s mother and father are not married. They never were. But once Jane’s mother, Xiomara, saw Jane’s father on TV, she decided to reach out to him and tell him that he has a daughter.
ReplyDeleteJane the Virgin is like a satirical TV show played on the dramatic Telenovelas. Although Jane does not have any siblings, she does find out that she has twin stepsisters. Their relationship is like the “evil stepsister” stereotype where the twins get everything they want because their stepdad, Jane’s dad, will spoil them. The girls and Jane do not get along. However, they come and go throughout the series and are not in all the episodes. I think another stereotypical issue in this show is that the grandma never speaks English. Everyone else does, but when the grandma speaks, she is always subtitled. She can respond to them when Jane and Xiomara speak English to her, but her responses are always in Spanish.
There is also another main character who plays opposite of Jane. His name is Rafael and he is her boss of a hotel. Jane works at the hotel, not as a cleaning lady, but as a server in some sense. At the beginning of the show, he is married and he has a sister who is the doctor who accidentally inseminated Jane with Rafael’s sperm, hence Jane the Virgin. His marital relationship with his wife Petra is not doing well, and his relationship with his sister can be a bit rocky. His sister is emotionally unstable for the majority of the time, and she makes poor impulsive choices.
A theory that could work with this show would be a feminist theory because the story centers Jane and her family. Jane’s character is a strong, independent woman who has a drive to be a writer. The women are portrayed as strong characters who don’t have to rely on men to do things for them. I don’t think they undermine men because when the male characters are present, I feel that both male and female characters are more equal and they try to work things out together. The only undermining character at times is Jane’s father because he is more aloof and cares more about his followers on twitter and how he is portrayed in society.
The TV show I thought was a natural fit for this assignment is Modern Family. Jay, the grandfather of the family is in his second marriage. His wife Gloria is Colombian and much younger than him. He has two sons from this marriage. The grandmother isn’t in the picture for most of the TV show. The children from his first marriage are Claire (who is married with 3 kids—the only “traditional” family in the group) and Mitchell (gay, married to his husband with an adopted Vietnamese daughter). The children from Jay’s second marriage are the same age or younger than his grandchildren from his first marriage.
ReplyDeleteThe show does address some stereotypes. Mitchell is a lawyer while his husband Cam fits the flamboyantly gay stereotype more—he wears floral shirts, decorates his house, and is very expressive and emotional. However, Cam is also a high school football coach while Mitchell is terrible at sports.
The show seems to try to normalize nontraditional families from its very first moments. Even the title, “Modern family” implies that these family relationships may be new and different, but they are just the way things are now. The show does occasionally address nontraditional family issues. For instance it had an episode about the gay dads trying to get their daughter into preschool. They thought they had the upper hand getting in because they fit into two minorities: gay dads, Vietnamese daughter. They later find out that the other child being considered is also not white, has lesbian moms, and is in a wheel chair.
However, I think most of the effects from this come from peripheral processing rather than central processing. It seems that the show tries to normalize gay relationships by portraying that they face the same challenges that traditional families do. By having other humorous issues front and center and stereotypes in the peripheral, it has a stronger effect that trying to forcing people to think about gay issues.
TV FAMILY: I just started and caught up on Grey's Anatomy in a matter of months, so I'm gonna focus on Meredith & Derek's family, because their marriage is (was) :'( so dang weird. The show starts off with them waking up from a one-night stand after meeting in a bar, and then realizing that they work together. They keep seeing each other. Turns out Derek is still technically married to Addison. Drama...they're on-again/off-again for like a million years until they get "married" by writing their vows on a post-it note and then signing it. They frame the post-it and put it up in their house, and consider themselves married. They got legally married later at city hall. They adopt a kid together, and then she gets pregnant, and then he dies, and then she has another kid. Their marriage was super tumultuous and they were either fighting all the time, not speaking to each other, or happy for like a day until they started fighting again. Also, in terms of family, Meredith also has a bunch of random half-sisters that keep showing up. Okay, two. But still. TWO sisters who you never knew existed? I don't buy it. Now that Derek (and one of the half-sisters) is dead, Meredith lives with the other half-sister and Derek's sister (and technically the kids, but I think the show forgot that they exist...). So family is a pretty intense theme on this show.
ReplyDeleteSide note: marriages on this show basically never work out. Meredith's parents were divorced. Jackson & April are probably gonna get divorced - after April left another guy at the altar for him. Cristina got left at the altar and haaaaates marriage. Everyone runs away from their relationship at some point. It's messed up.
THEORY: Of course the theory is gonna be uses & grats. This show is my "when my husband isn't home" show so I don't netflix cheat on him. But as a married woman, and a homebody with a very limited social life, I live vicariously through the insane drama on this show. Their marriage is the same...if my husband catches part of an episode with me, we inevitably end up talking about how much their marriage sucks and how glad we are that our marriage rocks. Thereby strengthening our relationship as we bond over a mutual frustration of terrible people.
For people who aren't married/are cultivated by the views of marriage in this show, I think it would provide a lot of distinctive worldviews that could be potentially destructive. Marriage is less of an institution to be entered into, and more an idea of commitment. It isn't a goal or really even an ideal. It's kind of something that grows on you if you aren't careful.
ReplyDeleteI have 3 siblings, and I think we have a pretty normal relationship dynamic going on. However, Grey's takes it to such a weird place. Derek is overprotective of Amelia because they witnessed their father being murdered when they were very young. (naturally). Meredith grew up as an only child, and then discovers she has a half-sister, Lexie, who dies in a plane crash. Then she just recently found out that her mother had a love child with the chief of surgery, so she has another half-sister, Maggie. At first, Meredith hates Lexie and Maggie because they interrupt her sibling-less world. But I think her experiences are not easily relatable for most people.
They specifically never talk about race on the show. But they talk about gender issues a lot. Females are at the head of every single department in the hospital. Recently there was an episode where Meredith got promoted and the other heads were looking at her offer letter and told her she wasn't making enough money. So she went to the (female) chief and asked why it was so low, and the chief gave it to her when she asked for it. It's very pro-woman, but the spectrum of what type of woman is promoted is quite wide. April is super Christian and has to fight for her beliefs. Cristina has a few abortions on the show. Meredith is super emotional but no one ever calls her out on it. Callie is bisexual and marries a man, has a kid with another man, marries a woman, dates another woman, etc. The show is very accepting of a wide range of viewpoints, as long as those viewpoints are strongly in favor of women as leaders and independent people.