Barbara, Ian and Susan are the Doctor’s first traveling companions we meet. Susan is the Doctor’s granddaughter, and Barbara and Ian are two of her high school teachers (history and science, respectively) in 1960s London. Susan is framed as a child rather than a woman, so she makes mistakes and screams her head off a lot to show how vulnerable she is – though she’s very smart and also sometimes saves the day. But Barbara is framed as a woman, and a very well written one.

Barbara is smart, calm and rational. Several of their travels involve ancient Earth cultures, and her knowledge of history aids and directs the group. She makes mistakes, but never stupid ones. In one particularly good series, “The Aztecs”, Barbara is mistaken for the reincarnation of a god (not a goddess!) because of a bracelet she’s wearing. Against the Doctor’s advice about not changing history, she attempts to use her power to stop the human sacrifices practiced by that culture. It’s a misguided but poignantly noble effort, and even though I agreed with the doctor, I sympathized with Barbara’s intentions.

In another series, “The Sea of Death”, Barbara is the only one who realizes they’re being brainwashed into thinking a dangerous hellhole is a paradise in which their every wish is fulfilled. She struggles to convince her friends, but this only alerts the brainwashers into realizing she’s dangerous. She manages to escape jail with the help of some others who have begun to come out of the brainwashing only to be caught by Ian, who no longer remembers her. He takes her to the creatures who control the place – snail-like things in big glass containers, but before they can hurt her, Barbara grabs a stick and whacks hell out of the snail-things until they are dead. That frees everyone from the brainwashing effect.

While the whole gang fits neatly into a traditional family dynamic, there is no hint of romance or sexual tension between her and Ian. Perhaps this is because it was seen as a kids’ show, but whatever the reason, it’s rare to see two adult characters engage as friends or pseudo-family rather than lovers or would-be lovers or might-have-been lovers or any of the annoying tropes TV foists on us routinely.

Interestingly, this lack of romance doesn’t survive a shift to movie and book media. In 1966, someone decided to make a movie to capitalize on the popularity of the Daleks: Dr. Who and The Daleks. I tried to watch it, really I did, but where the series takes both story and character quite seriously, the movie turns the characters into bumbling fools. In this version, Barbara is Susan’s sister and the Doctor’s granddaughter, and Ian is Barbara’s boyfriend. Neither of them are teachers. When I saw Barbara run to kiss Ian in the TARDIS, thus knocking him down so he lands on a lever that starts the ship off on a random journey, that was about it for me.

Fortunately, Wikipedia has informed me the movie is not considered canon. But there’s also a novel in which Barbara and Ian are supposed to have married after their eventual return to 1960s London. It’s enough to make me think some people just can’t process the idea of two attractive, adult, presumably sexually compatible human beings who do not want to have sex with each other. It’s like the very thought offends them. Or the temptation to sex things up, just because you can, is just too powerful.

But whatever. In the original TV series, Barbara is a character who happens to be a woman rather than someone’s narrow interpretation of what a “woman character” should be.

1. A Year in Review (part 2): 2008 Reviews
2. In the (Entertainment) News – 4/18/09
3. What is Urban Fantasy?

Ruby and the Rockits cast

The premise of the show is that Ruby’s mother died when she was 12, and she was raised by her grandparents who “forgot she was there” and was rescued by her Rock Star father, David Gallagher (David Cassidy). He’s the stereotypical irresponsible, ne’er do well, Peter Pan rock star, who appears in each show for a few minutes. The rest of the episode usually feature Ruby, her uncle (Patrick Cassidy) and his wife (Katie A. Keane) and her two male cousins as she deals with her often-absent father and comes to terms with his immaturity.

What squicked me out was that the writers made her teen cousin Jordan have a wild, inappropriate crush on Ruby from the first moment he saw her sitting at the kitchen table. Now, I realize that cousins are legal to be married in many states in the USA, but…they’re living in the same house, and at no point is Ruby ever seen encouraging him. Instead, his crush is played for laughs (of course) and although she tends to ignore him or innocently tempts him (in one scene, she asks him to zip up the back of her fancy dress for a daughter-father dance) after only four episodes or so of the sitcom, it grates heavily. Jordan isn’t happy that his hormones go wild when she’s around, but he’s not exactly doing anything to stamp them out.

The other thing I’m not so fond of is the role David Cassidy’s father plays. He’s never grown up, has little understanding of what his daughter goes through, and yet, every episode ends up with him being forgiven. One of the arcs in the show is that presumably, he learns how to be a decent father.

Yes, I know it’s a kids’ sitcom, and by definition, they’re supposed to end on  positive notes, but I hoped it would have been more along the lines of classic sitcoms like One Day at a Time. That’s probably way too much to expect from ABC Family, but why not? Then again, the rest of ABCF’s line-up include original  shows like the drama The Secret Life of an American Teenager (15 year old teen has a baby), 10 Things I Hate About You (the Shakespeare derived movie has a new series!), and Greek (sex and hijinks in college). I suppose the execs there felt a bit of fluff was necessary.

1. Golden Girls: relationships without commitment are just fine
2. He That Hath Wings–Edmond Hamilton
3. CSI Miami: Below and Beyond

The daughter of my recently acquired housemate is an avid fan of Hannah Montana, and I can’t help but notice that half the episodes are about how – despite her superstar status – she should remember that her brother is as super special as she is.

And then I recall Aerin’s letter to the mailbag about Horton Hears a Who. Now, sure, “Your siblings are as special as you, and you should appreciate them” isn’t a bad moral in general terms – but why does it always seem to be sisters who must learn it about brothers?

1. Katherine Heigl: it’s okay when the boys do it
2. One of the Boys — Katy Perry
3. A Thursday Interruption: Tori Amos’ “97 Bonnie and Clyde,” Bree Sharp’s “Boys of Summer,” Save Ferris’ “Come on Eileen” (and yes THESE ARE ALL COVERS). Also: Some thoughts on La Gaga and white privilege, and Kelis’ “Acappella”

The Wonder Woman of Justice League is much closer to that of George Perez’s 80s revamp than the Wonder Woman portrayed by Carter or found in current comics. Diana, Princess of Themyscira, is fundamentally an outsider. In her homeland, she has no peers, being in her early twenties while surrounded by millennia-old Amazons, she has no peers in age or rank. She leaves Themyscira against the queen’s orders to help defend Earth against an alien invasion and joins up with five established heroes and one other newcomer (Martian J’onn J’onzz).

During the first season on Justice League, Diana is presented as unfamiliar with the customs of the new cultures that she encounters, but this is never played for laughs at her expense. (When she appears oblivious to the Flash’s initial flirtation, it is Flash who becomes the butt of the joke – as usual.) Instead, she is always shown as learning and adapting quickly.

Diana’s major flaw is not naivete, but instead a quick temper with a tendency towards violence. Nonetheless, she is repeatedly shown to be one of the best fighters on the team, taking part in brawls just as much as any of the others. Since she has flight, superspeed, massive super-strength and invulnerability along with her Amazon fighting skills, she normally acts as one of the front-line combatants along with Superman.

One welcome element is that Diana is not at the center of the show’s romantic relationships. During the first two seasons, she does flirt with Batman, but it remains background until the third-season episode “This Little Piggy,” in which she evidently loses patience and makes her intentions fairly clear. Batman naturally starts listing reasons why getting involved would be a bad idea – teammate relationships cause trouble (to put it mildly – see the next article, on Hawkgirl), she’s a princess from a immortal society of warriors why he is “a rich kid with issues – lots of issues.” But his third reason is pretty spurious – the “my enemies would try to get at you through me” rationale. Diana rightly calls him on this one, since realistically he is in more danger from her enemies given the respective power levels.

The surprising part is what follows Batman shutting down Diana’s advances. She respects his wishes. No mooning over the guy she can’t be with. No analyzing his words for indications that he might change his mind. Where audiences would be expecting angst (I’m sure Stargate SG-1 fans know exactly what I’m talking about), we instead just get a friendship and professional relationship where the UST remains in the background and doesn’t hinder either person’s judgement.

1. A League of Their Own
2. The myth of the woman who craves abuse
3. This Week on Heroes – Building 26

Appearance

Every one of the seven women was tall and slim (none shorter that 165cms or heavier than 80 kgs). They were muscular, but not obviously physically imposing. Four had long blond hair; another had long brunette hair. They were all predominantly white (three of the Nordic blond variety) and feminine-looking.

By comparison, the men ranged from 167cms to 195cms and 76-137 kgs. The ranged from the short and compact to the towering hulks and were black, white, Asian, and more. There was a colour and size that every guy could relate to. I wonder how much of an uproar there would be if all the men were tall, slim white blonds?

Attitude

What stood out for me in the first episode was two of the women, Destiny and Olympia, being very gracious and supportive towards the contestants. It was all ‘it’s such a hard journey and they’re winners just for completing it’ kind of stuff. Meanwhile, the male gladiators were anywhere between civil and absolute strops. It seemed like the typical ‘women must be nice’ trope we see so often in the media.

Names

What kind of name for a gladiator is ‘Angel’? Or Destiny and Olympia for that matter? The men got names that connoted strength and combat, but ‘Angel’? Yeah, they had Viper and Amazon too, but if you were facing down a warrior based solely on their name, who would strike the most fear in your heart – Outlaw, Hunter… or Angel? I guess it’s just not sexy for women to have names that connotated strength and power… even when you are talking about gladiators.

The overall impression I got from the first episode of the show was this: if you’re a man, it’s OK to be all ranges of shape, size, colour and temperament, but if you’re a woman, you have to be tall, slim, white (preferably blond) and nice.

We get a lot on this site about media targeted for children and families, that we should leave it be because it’s meant for children, not meant to be taken seriously. I would argue that it’s important to critique media meant for children and families because it’s meant for children and families. Joss Whedon can write strong roles for women to his heart’s content, but how much of an impact is he making when girls and boys are being introduced to the ‘tall slim blond’ stereotype ten years earlier? How much more of an impact would be made if little girls and boys saw from an early age that women come in all shapes, sizes and colours, just like men?

1. Blonds and Blood
2. Fame
3. A test of one’s stance on reproductive freedom

Three of my readers took it a step further and made a really great point: S.A. Bonasi said:

So I don’t think Hollywood is afraid that little girls will learn that they don’t have to conform to gender roles.

No, I think Hollywood is afraid that little boys will learn that girls shouldn’t have to conform to gender roles. What a revolution that would be!

And Mickle said:

Personally, I think what scares Hollywood – and everyone else – the most is the fear that anyone might learn that little boys don’t have to conform to gender roles. Once you decide that, everything is blown to bits. I mean, there’s a certain logic to women wanting to be like their betters, as much as we can’t have that. But boys identifying with female characters. My god, the horror! Next thing you know people won’t just be saying that women can do men’s jobs, but that men should value women(’s jobs)! And not in a condescending “as only a mother can” kind of way.

And finally, Lizriz added:

And the thought that men might someday not be trained to find female characters and stories to be irrelevant and of no interest – well, it is my fervent dream that all human stories are valued the same. Can you imagine an Oscar ceremony where all the films have primarily female characters instead of the other way around??? And more ideally, where the gender (and race for that matter) is actually balanced???

I don’t really have anything to add. I think they’re exactly right. Part of the equation involves conditioning boys not to wonder when they see a lack of women in government, in filmmaking, in cultural myths, in fairy tales, in maths and sciences, etc. If you don’t get the boys thinking this is natural and that’s just how it is and the girls should be perfectly content with it, you risk a serious social upheaval in which young men and women challenge the old dudes running the show.

The anarchist in me drools at the thought.

Thanks, S.A., Mickle and Lizriz!

1. Open Thread: sex as a commodity in Hollywood
2. One of the Boys — Katy Perry
3. Dear Hollywood, there’s this thing called sexual harassment

To sum up, I told him to hang in there, because nothing seems to anger people as much as pointing out sexism in children’s TV. I mentioned the Ice Age fracas we had here when, after writing some 800 articles about sexism in film and TV, we dared mention that a Disney film which does not show anyone overtly mistreating women can still include some sexist thinking.

Why do people quietly tolerate 800 articles criticize grown-up shows, but flip out when you point out the same issues in a kid’s show?

Because when a young woman watches Battlestar Galactica and realizes she doesn’t have to conform to gender roles, it’s a bit late. She may change and blossom and lead a full life outside the expectations other people put on her the instant she was identified as a baby girl, but what a revolution it would’ve been if she’d figured this out in grade school instead of adulthood.

That’s what people are so afraid of. If we teach adult women they’re people just like men, we make a dent in the system. If we teach five year old girls they’re people, we crash the system and replace it with one that’s not all about white perpetual boys in a state of arrested development. Girls would grow up expecting to be taken seriously, to be respected, but more to the point: they would grow up expecting things of themselves (at least as often as men do).

And they would expect maturity from men, which is exactly what the consumer market doesn’t want: it wants men to remain adolescents forever, so it can sell them shoddy products when they’re 60. Maybe this is the real reason why Hollywood hates women: it’s run by Peter Pans, for Peter Pans. They see women as Wendy, who can tag along if she’s willing to do the motherly duty, but must not be allowed to interfere in this unnatural extended boyhood Hollywood has made the norm.

We no longer even have matinee idols who attempt to represent the rugged American male, self-reliant and strong. Many people blame feminists for that, but they’re wrong: feminists offered a reformed vision of manhood, still strong and self-reliant, but with the addition of an emotional palette and the ability to introspect. The consumer marketplace – an extension of the status quo, not feminism – rejected that being as someone who wouldn’t mindlessly buy horse pucky marketed as gold. They instead sought to create a neurotic, navel-gazing mess and market that as the feminist ideal for men (a false premise truly feminist-produced shows like Cagney & Lacey neatly deconstructed with several male characters). This led to the widespread belief that feminists tried to make men into “sissies”, when in fact what feminists sought was a redefinition of gender roles that allowed both men and women to be strong and self-reliant, without demanding anyone stop having feelings.

Feminists want a world in which both men and women are allowed to have feelings about the world and their lives, and both are allowed to take steps to make themselves happy, and everyone can finally be held responsible for his/her own happiness because no one’s being denied the right to feeling or action. That’s the big feminist agenda, folks. Sorry to disappoint you with a complete lack of Communist involvement or man-hating.

But you might find some Communist plotting and definitely some man-hating if you look at the army of folks who get so angry when someone dares suggest film shouldn’t teach women they’re non-persons that they feel compelled to spew venom on every website that mentions it. Because in teaching girls that they’re only accessories, we’re also denying heterosexual men the ability to have meaningful, adult relationships with women who take full responsibility for their own happiness.

1. Film people talk about racism and sexism in film, anonymously
2. Open Thread: is there a stigma against men reading women’s stories?
3. Gender segregating public schools does not work

I recently re-watched the whole of Justice League (re-titled Justice League Unlimited for its last three seasons), and have come to an important conclusion: it is not just the best superhero show ever made, it is one of the best television series ever made. While it does feature jaw-dropping action, intricate plots, excellent character development, an incredible voice cast,* and a mature approach to superheroes as a genre, the reason I’m writing about it here is its treatment of women and other minorities.

For the first two seasons, Justice League features only seven central characters, mostly iconic figures from the comics. Two are white men, one a black man, one a white woman, and three are aliens (two male, one female) who can pass for human to a greater or lesser degree. Essentially, this is the lineup of the League’s “magicificent seven” lineup with a few changes – the Green Lantern used is the black John Stewart, rather than the better-known white Hal Jordan, and Aquaman (a white man) is replaced by Hawkgirl (an alien who resembles a white woman). This less-than-diverse cast actually represents a significant step up from the comics.

With the third season, the show was retitled Justice League Unlimited to go with a massive expansion of the cast. The producers took this as an opportunity to greatly diversify the cast, including a large number of female characters. In addition to founding members Wonder Woman and Hawkgirl, the series prominently features Big Barda, Black Canaray, Fire, Huntress, Dr. Light, Stargirl, Supergirl, Vixen, and Zatanna… and that’s just the League members with speaking parts.

Despite such a large cast, the show provides excellent characterization and character development for just about every character in the show. Apart from a few male gaze issues (which will be addressed in a forthcoming article), the female characters are treated just as seriously as the male characters. Since the show focuses quite a few episodes on specific characters, I’m going to do the same and address each in their own article. Starting, of course, with Wonder Woman. Where else?

*Fans of Joss Whedon shows take note: Justice League’s voice cast includes Adam Baldwin, Alexis Denisof, Amy Acker, Juliet Landau, Morena Baccarin, Nathan Fillion, and Gina Torres.

1. A League of Their Own
2. Film Review – Watchmen
3. Fame

The Suite Life of Zack & Cody is a show about twins who live in a hotel with their mother, Carey, who is the singer for the hotel’s lounge. As with most Disney shows, the mother and all other adults are there for comedy fodder and have no real role as authority figures. Oh, sure, once in a while it happens…and yet still the adults are the butt of jokes. I could go on and on about that phenomenon in pre-teen programming, but I want to talk specifically about one episode I saw this weekend.

In it, Carey’s contract with the hotel is up for re-signing. Details are fuzzy on why, but for some reason her son Zack thinks she’s being taken advantage of and promises if she lets him speak on her behalf that he’ll get her a bigger suite, one with two bedrooms instead of just one – wouldn’t she like her own bedroom (she gets to sleep on the sofa bed at the moment)? The whole family could use more space.

For some unfathomable reason, we’re to believe that Carey thinks her thirteen-year-old son would be better at negotiating than she herself is. She agrees to let him be her agent. The very next scene, Zack looks like he’s stepped out of the movie Wall Street – he’s decked out in a miniature little three piece suit, slicked back hair, handless cell, etc, and he’s walking around like Mr. Power. Carey, meanwhile, continues to regress into Helpless (Female) Child mode. She frets, she kvetches, she fears she’s going to lose her job. Zack tells her, basically, not to worry her pretty little head; he’s got it all under control.

What he does is pay someone to pretend to represent a competitive hotel, make Carey increasing offers in front of her hotel manager, to get him to counter-offer until Zack (yes, Zack, not Carey) is satisfied. Finally, the fake competitor offers something Carey can’t refuse. She accepts, and her hotel manager doesn’t have the means to counter. Zack freaks and tells Carey the competitor isn’t real.

And she’s left scrabbling and begging to keep her old job. All she gets for re-signing is a wardrobe budget and one extra week of vacation, because her bargaining power has been shot to heck.

It’s all harmless fun, right? Ha ha ha, look at that Zack – so clever and yet so wrong. Ha ha ha, look at how Carey just goes along with a child’s plan. Ask yourself if the genders were reversed, would an adult male have been allowed to put his career in the hands of a thirteen-year-old girl, act like a Helpless Child and then grovel with someone in a position of actual power for his job, all for a few laughs?

I really don’t think so.

1. Reviews in Brief — Prospero Lost, Mocha Manual to Military Life, Ice Song
2. “Find Your Strongest Life” actually makes sense
3. Wendy Shanker — The Fat Girl’s Guide to Life

Now, all of that plays out as romantic and funny, yet in real life having someone repeatedly ask you out or even show continued, persistent interest after you’ve clearly said “no thanks, move along now” is anything but romantic and it sure isn’t funny. I don’t know that I’d call it stalking, but, from first hand experience, it is extremely offputting. Depending on the person, it’s even harrassment. I could certainly see it leading up to worse things. I’m going to cheat here in highlighting all that’s wrong with the above scenario and direct you to an older post on The F Word, a link provided to me by someone on my LiveJournal in response to my complaints of yet another man (two, actually) who couldn’t take no for an answer. The author there is pretty concise, and she makes a very good point about how the same type of behavior in women garners a far different reaction.

This weekend, I realized just how pervasive this particular trope is. I have weaned myself off of children’s programming, but caved on Saturday and watched Nickelodeon’s newest show, iCarly. Right there on the screen, from the very first episode, we have this scenario playing out. Carly’s neighbor and pal Freddy has a huge crush on her. She tolerates his advances like he’s a silly boy, because he is. She does nothing to encourage his devotion (unless, and this is odious, she wants him to do something for her), but he is prepared to follow after her like a puppy for the slightest chance. She’s not bothered by his behavior, and the behavior is always greeted with canned audience laughter.

Obviously, it’s too soon to say if Freddy’s love will go from unrequited to reciprocal, but the point is more how this scenario is catered to a young audience, and that audience will continue to get these messages over and over and over.

For women, the ultimate message in this seems to be “relax, let your guard down and let the guy that’s exhibiting stalkerish behavior in, because he could be The One.” (Never mind that he’s being creepy.)

For men, the message is “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try, try, try again - and don’t worry, you’re entitled to get the woman in the end, just like all those guys in the movies.”

Both messages are troublesome.

1. The Last Few Weeks on Chuck – Predators, etc.
2. Commercials I Hate
3. Two and a Half Men, Men, Men, Men, Manly Men