How many times have you seen this plot in movies and television? Man and woman are friends. Man harbors romantic feelings for woman. Woman isn’t interested and/or doesn’t even realize the man loves her. Man is determined to make her see the light. Man does all sorts of ridiculous, over the top things, and sometimes even creepy things to make the woman see how perfect they would be together. By the end, the woman miraculously does see the light and falls madly for this man she previously hadn’t considered.
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.
{ 39 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Chuck: Love the show, think it’s cute and funny. But they have one full-out case of stalker-dweeb (Chuck’s friend harasses Chuck’s sister for great laughs all around), and one partial – even Chuck himself kind of has a puppy dog thing going for Sarah.
The Big Bang Theory: I haven’t actually watched this, but the premise is Hot Girl moves in across the hall from two geeks. Even not having seen it, I just KNOW that at least one of the geeks is already devoted to do Hot Girl’s every whim and will pine after her the (probably short) length of the series.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
Of course! Because in TV world, women’s beauty enslaves men. Women make themselves beautiful on purpose for the express purpose of controlling men! Whether the men pine or stalk in response, it’s that hot woman’s fault – poor, poor man. And of course, like children, they take no responsibility for their reactions to women.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
From Purtek:
I forgot to say this, but who the heck would find that shirt funny? It’s disturbing that the behavior is treated as a joke so often.
sbg(Quote) (Reply)
SunlessNick,
Oh, I agree with you that it’s cool that Mohinder’s from India, given that he’s the narrator and “guide” character for the audience. Just didn’t want to be perpetuating the “Perpetual Foreigner” stereotype. (Which only applies for the second season, which you said you haven’t seen yet.)
<– Emoticon of peace.
General,
Anyone else see Reaper last night? It was horrible, with Sam (the male main character) being all AAAANGST that Andi (designated female love interest) is thinking about going back to college full time, which would mean she would have to quit her job at the Work Bench. So even though Sam’s playing the role of platonic friend, he totally likes her and so totally does not want her to go to college so she can get a career rather than continuing to work at the dead on job. Lip service is paid to the idea of, ya know, maybe Sam could go to college to, but it’s never a serious option.
What’s even worse is that the Devil encourages Sam to act on his attitude. I know, he’s the Devil, but on Reaper, the Devil is very much the authorial voice of the show; he endorses the lesson that Sam is supposed to learn. That lesson? Prevent the woman you like (but won’t say you like) from bettering her own life if her doing so will prevent you from acting as her friend while secretly wanting her. Ick ick ick.
In the end, the Devil gets the school closed down, but this is after Sam has already gone to talk to Andi. So now Andi has to wait to go back to college. Yuck.
S. A. Bonasi(Quote) (Reply)
This question often gets lost in the din of voices saying it’s ‘not that big a deal’. If it doesn’t matter, then just what’s funny about it? Seriously–that this passes even the most basic level of screening makes me think the world is just completely upside down.
Re: Reaper. I’ve never watched it, but that description gives me a high level of ‘ick’. It’s not just the specific decision, and the fact that it will be good for her, that bugs me, but the basic premise that this male friend thinks he has some right to influence her decision essentially for entirely selfish reasons and nobody seems to be questioning either his authority or his motives. He’s being both the persistent stalker type and already manifesting controlling behaviour before they’re even dating.
Ick again.
Purtek(Quote) (Reply)
Nothing, and I think that adds to the offensiveness. When I read about that shirt, I didn’t chuckle guiltily, then don my Downer Feminist hat and go purposely grumpy. I read it, thought it was totally unfunny, and actually I think that made me take even more offense than I would have if it was in any way amusing. I mean, had it been funny, I’d at least understand why they wanted to push the envelope. But a joke about stalking that isn’t even funny just seems like it wasn’t meant to be a joke at all.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Sure.
And even worse, the show seems to think he’s right.
SunlessNick(Quote) (Reply)
I finally saw Waitress last night, and, while I was impressed with the subtlety with which they treated the main plot line, the secondary romantic subplot, involving Becky, really unsettled and then infuriated me. Becky goes on a short date with a man, and the date doesn’t go well. She rejects him. The following day, he shows up with flowers. When Becky won’t talk to him, he talks her friend into getting Becky to see him. He tells her he’s going to marry her, and is just waiting for her to realize that.
You’d think that would be the end of it. No; we see him again, and they’re dating. Becky’s friends are, understandably, dismayed. They just keep their thoughts to themselves and remain distantly polite on the subject.
I really thought, the way the movie seemed interested in portraying the subtleties of relationships, that this one was headed the same way Jenna’s and her husband’s had. The movie implies no such thing.
I asked my husband what he thought of that subplot afterwards, and apparently, he thought the exact same thing; that this was how lopsided, unhappy marriages happen.
God forbid a man listen to a woman’s rejection, and trust she knows her own mind.
alicetheowl(Quote) (Reply)
By “Becky,” in my previous post, I meant “Dawn.” I flaked.
alicetheowl(Quote) (Reply)
← Previous Comments
{ 1 trackback }