Indexed

-or- Sitcoms

Third overlapping circle is “confused child” who grows up wondering why all of the seemingly clear cut TV stereotypes don’t really apply.

I have always been offended by the idea that these seemingly smart women tolerate such idiotic men. People don’t just magically turn stupid one day– so these women obviously CHOSE to be with stupid men who are (in most ways) rather useless. It happens, but it’s certainly not the norm.
Ah…fiction…

+1 on the sitcoms.

It gets really old and is so consistantly one sided.

It also makes the rather sexist assumption that if the woman were always the “adult” one, she would be good at it. We all know that being female does not automatically make you intelligent or responsible. That to is a wrong stereotype.

Amen.

In a perfect world, Ray Romano, Tim Allen, and everyone associated with their shows would be the first against the wall.

You guys are whining about sexist shows, but let’s be honest here: any show that displayed the opposite would be immediately labeled as a terrible sexist program and taken off the air.
Seriously, imagine it. A show where a smart, do-everything man marries a bumbling woman who isn’t good at anything. The rest doesn’t matter, it would be immediately decried as a show that displays women as less intelligent than men.

The fact is that white men are the only possible “idiots” in a TV show or ad. Anything else is either racist or sexist. The only exceptions are shows where every main character exhibits that same negative traits, or where every main character is female/minority.

Someone+Joshua,
I agree, part of the answer is the entertainment industry isn’t that clever, but they do have a bias.

“White men” are the one of the last groups allowed to be made fun of. Why? Because they don’t have a group to lobby en masse. There’s no “CottonBall Coalition” or “National Organization of Men”.

An even better exercise is to ask yourself why can’t white men have a lobby? If your answer had anything to do with them being “in power” then you are part of the problem.

White men ARE involved in rights lobbies.

Jessica is right once again. This is the legacy of feminism–enjoy boys and girls!

Someone and Someone Else are missing the key point on why straight, white, middle (to upper) class men are the only viable targets and everything else is “wrong”.

It’s because for the past 300+ years this particular class made a habit out of oppressing *everyone* else through malice and often in the form of “humor” (to them at least).

Since most entertainment is still produced by straight, white, middle-to-upper class men, continuing to use humor at the expense of those who were (formerly?!) in the oppressed classes still carries shades of that oppression.

My thought: no straight, white, middle-to-upper class man gets to complain until about 2310. Suck it up and think on history.

drklassen, that’s the most intelligent punditry I’ve read in a while.

Thankfully, the modern world learned better after we did that to Germany following WWI…

“You Jerries just sit there, and think about how you’re wrong. No, don’t complain… we just want you to sit there, be wrong, and think about how bad you are.”

So dammit, how the hell are we supposed to have a sitcom that’s funny and doesn’t make fun of anything?

smart wife with dumb husband? well now, if she was smart in the first place she wouldnt have a dumb husband…

Agreed with Lord_Tristan, someone is usually the butt of the joke (an x, a y and a z walk into a bar). And, it’s funnier if the privileged person is the one laughed at.

BTW, please don’t complain about 30-second ads. Take a look at how minorities are generally portrayed in 2 hour movies…

Only in America…

Or at least not in NZ.

We’re a bit behind the times here, it’s the other way around with women generally being portrayed as the useless ones on tv. Probably because here it’s alot more practical to be a chippie or sparky (or atleast have some DIY sense) than some fancy-pants lawyer, and so “real” men get alot of respect

although these shows portray the man as the idiot, i’m not convinced the “joke” isn’t ultimately on the wife, who is often still an at-home mom. tough luck, women still need a husband to make the money, even though she is clearly more capable.

obviously its just lazy writing. “how do i make two characters who spend all of their time together different?” and almost always the answer is: one is smart, one is dumb.

All I can do is shake my head and sigh when guys bitch about how it’s sooooo unfair that men are portrayed as bumbling fools in sitcoms.

The fact is, straight, white men have MANY roles in media. Action heroes, spies, business men, dad, idiot, etc, etc.

Nobody else is afforded that. When’s the last time we had a mainstream black, lesbian action hero? Are gays/lesbians shown as regular, long-married couples with 2.5 kids and a dog in the suburbs on mainstream television? NO.

And do sitcoms even pass the Bechdel test? That is, two women who talk to each other about something other than a man? RARELY.

Even if men are sometimes portrayed as bumbling fools, women are almost NEVER portrayed as anything but an accessory to a man.

So, guys, if you want to be taken seriously, QUIT FUCKING WHINING about “reverse” discrimination against straight white men. Straight white men are the only group to even come close to being fairly represented in media.

I’m a feminist and I’m pissed when white guys are portrayed as idiots. Mostly because it makes it seem like a societal norm for women to act as a mother to their husband, a role that I would hate!

Note, I’m not saying that men do act like children… but TV shows that portray this as a norm do change the way a lot of people think of things.

For instance, my husband and I went to a wedding recently. He didn’t wear a suit. His father pulled me aside and said that next time I should make sure he wore his suit…. HE’S A FULLY GROWN MAN, I LET HIM DRESS HIMSELF!

If it weren’t for this societal preconception that I should be responsible for my husbands feeding, clothing, and medical attention, then I don’t think his father would have said this to me

@Drew

“BTW, please don’t complain about 30-second ads. Take a look at how minorities are generally portrayed in 2 hour movies…”

You have to pay to get into the 2 hour movie, harder to avoid the 30-second ads and they play all day for months.

I’m a Latina, and I don’t think we need to play the Oppression Olympics. Women AND racial/ethnic minorities still face stupid, stupid stereotypes in mainstream media.

Also — the idea is that men can’t cook! Haha, so funny! Which plays on the idea of women as domestic. Watch Sarah Haskins on this:

http://current.com/items/90569059_sarah-haskins-in-target-women-doofy-husbands.htm

I know this thread is old but I wanted to say my two cents.

The idiot/smart-person combination is a formula loved by ad people it seems.

I’ve seen ads by KFC in Australia where the Dad will try to take the family out to do something family-oriented or cook a meal for them, and fails hopelessly, and then the wise mum fixes everything by buying dinner from KFC.

I have a feeling that the idiot/smart-person combination is used to present one thought process or idea that people have, ridicule it, and deliver the advertiser’s message through the actions of the “smart” person.

When a contradictory behaviour to the advertised one is not presented, associating a smart person with the product only makes sense from an advertising point of view.

I don’t like this formula at all, by the way.