The Young & the Restless is soap opera that has been on the air for over 30 years. Y&R is full of drama, rivalry, love, and scandal. However one theme that has not been represented on Y&R until recently is homosexuality or queerness. Queer, according to the dictionary, means of a questionable nature or character; suspicious; shady. Avila-Saavedra (2009) states “the presence of homosexual characters in American television would seem to imply an endorsement of a liberal agenda of tolerance and inclusion of alter-native lifestyles and sexual orientations,“ (pg. 5). The Young & the Restless recently coverage of homosexual relationship and culture was CBS’s way of increasing the demographic of viewers. These two clips are scenes from the show where they have introduced a homosexual storyline. What do you think of this? Is/how (is) homosexuality being commodified?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y2ANFcbqBM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vs16xZgkg0
The commodification of homosexuality in the media is becoming a reoccurring theme. Are TV shows airing more storylines that include homosexual relations to make a larger profit or to be more inclusive of all people?
I do not think that homosexuality is necessarily being commodified in these two clips. Avila Saaverda writes, " the perceived progressive- ness of gays’ sudden appearance on American television could be undermined if it responds to traditional norms of social relations." I think that the homosexual characters on this show seem to act the same as straight people on the show. They do not seem to conform to the traditional representations of gay people on television. An example of a television character who is guilty of this is Jack on Will and Grace. He is typically described as "campy" or feminized to the point of parody. The characters on the Young and Restless seem to have masculine qualities. I'm not saying that masculine equals good, just that the traditional representations of gays throughout the nineties in television was typically through men with feminine qualities.
ReplyDeleteI think TV stations are airing more homosexual friendly shows to make a profit. In this world nothing is done by my mistake especially in TV it is meant to yield a monetary value. As we all know sex sales and so does homosexualty because people want to know why are they homosexual and what make them different from heterosexuals.Which why so many people tune into RuPauls show because it interesting and you get to see how homosexuals act.
ReplyDeleteI agree that television shows are adding homosexuality as a profit as well as an attempt to be more inclusive to all people. So, yes I agree with Bola's economic standpoint. To Matthew's statement. Yes, the homosexuality being presented on this soap opera is not typically what you see in other homosexual-targeted networks like Will and Grace. I feel this is because of the need to seek traditional views of heterosexuality within mainstream. This is the way to continuously keep this in tact so that our society would not be completely "corrupted" by marginalized identities and the "Other." Therefore, I agree with Avila-Saavedra's statement which says, "However, the perceived progressiveness of gays’ sudden appearance on American television could be undermined
ReplyDeleteif it responds to traditional norms of social relations" (pg.5). This is very true. Otherwise, society is not acceptable of it. I think Soap Opera's are typically reaching mainstream slowly because of their audience being primarily people over 45, they tend to focus on more traditional views of society rather than those that are progressive and contemporary. Furthermore, of course homosexuality is commodified not for the sake of advocacy but for the sake of market.
Homosexuality is clearly being commodified here because as you stated, it does bring in revenue when viewer ratings go up. People are oftentimes elated to see representations of themselves as I quote Harvey Fierstein from the documentary "The Celluloid Closet", he was very excited to see some campy or even relatively close representation of himself (homosexual) on screen. Therefore, as a result of seeing these characters, it appears that broadcasting agencies, networks and shows appear to be more accepting of homosexual characters, yet their very identities are being capitalized upon for monetary purposes. They are not seriously being represented as icons for the sake of inducing some sort of lulled American comfort of homosexual identity, people that identify as gay are used for television appeal. In the case of these episodes in the young and the restless, they are also shown after having sex (very often a stereotypical depiction of the homosexual identity). Also, according to Sender "Trade and popular press articles abound with claims that marketing appeals to gay and lesbian consumers are a matter of "business, not politics." And he further goes on to quote "As a spokesperson from Naya water said "This not a political decision to go after the gay niche. It was a business decision. (2) "
ReplyDeleteWe are no longer placed in a space where we have to even guess the agenda of companies anymore. They are flat out telling us that their appeals with regard to business towards gay people is not about creating acceptance, it's monetarily founded and how it is that people can be aware of this and continue to consume is the saddest part. Although it may not be directly offending that particular individual, it's still quite disturbing indeed.
As you see that laws are changing about marriage, you see TV shows changing as well. There are 'queerness' involved in society now.So TV station adapt to the world views about this matter. I think it's wrong to commodify people sexual orientation to get money. Would I sell this type of product or portrayal? No because I thoughts would only be judging homosexuality standpoint and reasoning.
ReplyDeleteI feel most in agreement with Tichina's statement. Although, yes Matthew, the homosexually perceptions are not exactly "stereotypical" like Jack from Will and Grace, but there is a very specific agenda to this clips. Yet at the same time, can a queer representation in the media ever be "normal"? According to Avila-Saavedra, "queer represents a resistance to anything that is socially defined as normal, and in that sense queer may exclude some gay and lesbian practices that have a 'normative perspective' or may include other experiences that are not explicitly sexual."
ReplyDeleteThis idea that we can show homosexual people together but only show interactions that are not explicitly sexual is directly reflected in this soup opera. The stroking of the face, looking into each other's eyes, OHHH the confusion, and the next thing you know they are putting their clothing on. How is this even close to representing intimate relationships? It's a fluff to widen audiences that are desperately looking for something to relate to in a hegemonic society.
I also believe that within these two clips homosexuality is being commodified. In today's society seeing as we are moving forward to a more "acceptable" social and cultural environment, why wouldn't soap operas shift from love relations and problems of heterosexual individuals to homosexuals?
ReplyDeleteAs we have been discussing these past few weeks on how the media uses certain representations in a safe and more acceptable way, yes I do believe that the appearance of homosexuals on TV is for the market. Whats interesting is why in these soap operas are the homosexuals shown as people who are scared of their sexual identity and as people who are trying and wanting to hide their sexual identity? Is this example really a push for acceptance?
Both clips show that TV shows have attempted to be more inclusive to the sexual, gender minority. As Avila-Saavedra suggests, I don’t see any queerness in these two videos. Despite of the appearance of gay characters, there is nothing made to challenge the traditional values, such as family and heterosexuality. In the first clip, I think the implied homoeroticism dominates homosexuality between two men. It looks like Rafe just wants to have sex with Adam. After sex, Rafe is happy and doesn’t seem to care about Adam’s feeling. Then Adam asked Heather to come to have sex. It seems to me that Adam wants to prove to himself that he is straight. He is confused with whether it’s homoerotic desire and appeal of Rafe or his hidden homosexuality that makes him to have sex with Rafe. Both videos show that the binary of homosexuality and heterosexuality is not challenged in TV shows. You can’t be both (ie bisexual). By default, everybody is heterosexual; when some characters have confusion, they always have an urgency to find out which one of the two categories they belong to. Once they admit that they are homosexual (with words or action), they feel guilty to themselves and to their families. These characters are there for profit and larger audience, not for any radical social and political changes. Even though homosexuality has gained visibility in TV shows, I think that, at least from these two clips, including homosexuality is about business much more than politics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bola that T.V is definitely trying to get something out putting ore homosexual scenes and characters on television. They are trying to get a hold on a audience type and doing what they can to boost up their rating. Using the angle of Acceptance as a way of gaining profit and doing good for this community.
ReplyDelete