reality tv

With hidden cameras and a hint of pedantry, ABC's primetime series What Would You Do? has tested society's comfort with everything from same-sex parents to public breastfeeding. This week's segment tackles transphobia and reveals what we already knew: No conversation about transgender people is complete without bringing out the Bono.

I have never been much of a reality television viewer, and any lingering desire I may have had to watch reality shows disappeared after I read Jennifer Pozner’s Reality Bites Back earlier this year. But as soon as I heard about the new season of America’s Next Top Model, I realized I had to give it a shot. That’s because Cycle 18 of ANTM features not one, but TWO openly queer women. And one of them is bi-identified Laura LaFrate.

Few women of color are allowed to represent themselves on television with much nuance; frequently they are reduced to stock characters like mammies and Jezebels that deny them full, complex humanity.  Successful women of color are slammed with stereotypes of the "Angry Black Woman" or are forced to represent all women of their race as impossibly perfect standard-bearers.

Within this all of this, the Real Housewives of Atlanta become caricatured and over-representative of what we think wealthy black women should like like.

I understand that reality television has to have some sort of "hook" to get you, the viewer, interested enough to stick around. For the most part, that's usually drama. Even when shows are about parenting, it’s not the day-to-day rhythm that gets airtime, but rather the sensational, unbelievable, and usually questionable parenting decisions that take center stage.

So...is that really the "reality" of parenting?

But most of the time, when Tyra is talking about the contestants' speech, she’s talking about their accents.  And when she’s talking about their accents, she’s talking about class. 

Links ahoy!

• HuffPo reports on Rachel Maddow's statement that "[g]ay people—generally speaking—have a responsibility to our own community and to future generations of gay people to come out, if and when we feel that we can." Do you agree?
• ColorLines talks about the attack on a trans woman at McDonald's and the questions it raises about hate crime laws. Questioning Transphobia also speaks out about the shameful incident. (Trigger warning for transphobic violence.)
• Bitch Flicks recalls bell hooks' still-pertinent words about race and gender in films.
• On Trans/plant/portation, Bitch contributor EvMaroon humorously dissects a bizarre religious invitation.
• Feministe discusses the myriad frustrations with clothes' inconsistent sizes.
• Also at Feministe: Will you be near Madison on May 26-30? Check out WisCon, the feminist sci-fi and fantasy convention! Past panelists include Emily Horner.
• Feministing gives a run-down of a Times article about colleges' failure to comply with Title IX.
• Gender Focus explores the societal notion that cats are for girls and dogs are for boys.
• Twisty unpacks the slut-shaming and victim-blaming in recent news stories at I Blame the Patriarchy. (Trigger warning for domestic violence and sexual abuse of a minor.)
• TransGriot updates us on Caster Semenya's athletic plans.
• The Arizona Republic talks about the many negative repercussions of the hateful SB 1070. (via Racialicious)
• Bitch contributor Sady Doyle hilariously snarks on reality TV mogul Aaron Sorkin's abysmal-sounding next show at Tiger Beatdown.
• AfterEllen interviews Malindo Lo, author of Bitch YA Reading Club's selection Ash, which we'll be discussing in July!
• Bitch contributor s.e. smith gives guidelines on "How to Evaluate Disabled Characters in Pop Culture, for Nondisabled Viewers."
• Have you seen the Budweiser commercial with the soldier implied to be queer? If not, Mother Jones has you covered.
• Our Turn: Feminism for Newbies remembers Lisa "Left Eye" Lopes.
• RH Reality Check tells us more about the infuriating "Don't Say Gay" bill. (reposted at AlterNet) In happier news, Queerty explains Sir Ian McKellen's homophobia-busting school tour.
• Speaking of... Queerty's coming back!

Thoughts? What have you been reading?

Bravo's latest reality series, Pregnant in Heels, follows clothing designer and "Pregnancy Concierge" (which basically means just what you think it means: doing stuff for pregnant people) Rosie Pope as she deals with clients whom she's dubbed "million dollar moms." Only one episode of the show has aired so far, but it's already being billed as showcasing the "bitchiest" women ever while they're at their hormone-fueled worst. Call me a bleeding-heart, reality-television-loving apologist if you must, but after watching the pilot episode I think some of that snark is missing the point.

Owning a network doesn't mean you offer up fresh programming. Even if you're Oprah. Also, Dr. Phil can go away now please.

I'd be lying if I said that when I heard about a reality TV casting call asking "Do you bend gender roles? Do you go against the norm?" I truly believed a show was going to focus on folks who reject prescribed ideas of gender and sexuality. But just in case there was a show that wanted to feature, to make visible, people who go against the grain when it comes to gender and sexuality (dare I say...gender outlaws?), I investigated.

Here's the description for Straight as a Board:

I’ve watched America’s Next Top Model intermittently over the years. I can’t really say why. I was never that interested in fashion magazines, which seemed to me to depict another planet altogether, accessible only to the very rich. I have, furthermore, never much understood the fascination with models. Understand that when I say that I am not trying to make any claims about the difficulty of the work they do - I don’t "hate models" or anything so broad as that. It’s just that they don’t seem to hold for me the kind of visceral fascination they do for other people.

I admit I do have one philosophical objection to modeling. I simply do not know how we are going to build a world where everyone is valued if we keep insisting that no, really, some people are more valuable than others. Particularly if we do so on bases over which they have little individual control - such as being socially "attractive," meeting the critical mass of "pretty" that will get you on magazine covers and sigh-ingly acknowledged, by almost everyone, as "gorgeous." I don’t see how that strain of the cultural conversation benefits anyone in the slightest.