The Construction of Masculinities and Femininities in Beverly Hills, 90210

143 Pages·2012·0.66 MB·English

by  Justin Charlebois

The Construction of
Masculinities and
Femininities in
Beverly Hills, 90210
Justin Charlebois
UNIVERSITY PRESS OF AMERICA, ® INC.
Lanham • Boulder • New York • Toronto • Plymouth, UK
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb ii 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
Copyright © 2012 by
University Press of America,® Inc.
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite 200
Lanham, Maryland 20706
UPA Acquisitions Department [phone]
10 Thornbury Road
Plymouth PL6 7PP
United Kingdom
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
British Library Cataloging in Publication Information Available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2012935198
ISBN: 978-0-7618-5825-6 (paperback : alk. paper)
eISBN: 978-0-7618-5826-3
™
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum
requirements of American National Standard for Information
Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials,
ANSI Z39.48-1992
1122__220099__0022__CCRR..iinndddd iiii 88//22//1122 33::2233 PPMM
Contents
Overview v
1 Theory and Methodology 1
2 Dominant and Hegemonic Masculinities 18
3 Dominant and Emphasized Femininities 48
4 Dominant Oppositional Masculinities 73
5 Subordinate Oppositional Femininities 99
6 Conclusion 122
References 129
Index 135
iii
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb iiiiii 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb iivv 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
Overview
The purpose of this book is to present the analysis of representations of mas-
culinity and femininity in the hit television series Beverly Hills, 90210. The
series arguably defined the genre of teen television and thus merits critical
investigation and analysis due to its influence on subsequent programs. This
section provides a general overview of each chapter of this book.
The first chapter provides an overview of the theoretical and methodologi-
cal framework that underpins this study. I first discuss gender and sexuality.
Next, I define the concepts that serve as theoretical constructs for this empiri-
cal investigation. These concepts include dominant forms of masculinity and
femininity, hegemonic masculinities, emphasized femininities, and opposi-
tional forms of femininity and masculinity. The final section of the chapter
explains the case study methodology that I utilized.
Chapter 2 is the first of the empirical chapters and presents the results of
my analysis of dominant and hegemonic forms of masculinity in Beverly
Hills, 90210. The chapter begins with a plot summary of the series. I then
discuss the main gender practices that constitute culturally-idealized dominant
masculinities (Messerschmidt 2010; 2011). The dominant masculine gender
characteristics that I identified through my analysis are whiteness, a wealthy
class position, rationality, a lean, muscular bodily appearance, heterosexual-
ity, and professional prowess. Social actors who mobilize specific gender
practices to structure and legitimate a hierarchical relationship between men
and women, masculinity and femininity embody and enact hegemonic mascu-
linity (Connell 1995; Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). Individuals utilized
heterosexual prowess, homosexual intolerance, professional prowess, and pro-
tecting women in order to accomplish hegemonic masculinity. It is necessary
to underscore that these social practices are in no way static and ossified but
fluid and subject to change. At the same time, these gender practices in no way
v
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb vv 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
vi Overview
predetermine one’s gender identity, so individuals possess agency to appropri-
ate, resist, and even reformulate dominant and hegemonic gender practices.
Chapter 3 discusses the results of my investigation of dominant and em-
phasized forms of femininity. Whiteness, an affluent class position, emo-
tionality, a slender bodily appearance, heterosexuality, and altruism are the
gender practices that constitute dominant femininity in this television series.
Noticeably, masculine and feminine gender characteristics reflect a ubiqui-
tous cultural ideology of complementary difference; however, this ideology
oppresses women because the relationship is fundamentally unequal. Empha-
sized femininity refers to a femininity that forms a complementary subordinate
relationship with hegemonic masculinity and therein supports the ascendance
of hegemonic masculinity (Connell 1987, 183; Messerschmidt 2011, 206).
The series delineates heterosexual romance, altruism, and receiving men’s
protection as emphasized feminine gender practices. Again, dominant and
emphasized femininities refer to fluctuating patterns of social practice that
exist as gendered resources for individuals to avow, disavow, or reconfigure.
The fourth chapter analyzes oppositional forms of masculinity in Beverly
Hills, 90210. Oppositional masculinities are built upon gender practices that
significantly depart from hegemonic masculinity and indeed may threaten its
supremacy (Messerschmidt 2000, 11). I identify and analyze two individuals
who practice a dominant oppositional masculinity and then consider their
potential to seriously undermine hierarchical gender relations.
Oppositional femininities are the focus of the fifth chapter. Oppositional
femininities oppose the formation of a complementary, compliant, and ac-
commodating subordinate relationship with hegemonic masculinity (Mess-
erschmidt 2011, 206). I determined that two individuals from the show can
be considered representations of subordinate oppositional femininities. After
performing an analysis of these individuals, I consider their potential to serve
as catalysts to promulgate the formation of equal gender relations. The chap-
ter then considers the similarities and differences between oppositional forms
of femininity and masculinity.
The concluding chapter draws together the study’s main findings and argu-
ments. The chapter further discusses the crucial role that oppositional forms
of femininity and masculinity play in equalizing gender relations. The book
concludes with a discussion of the media’s role in constructing gender and the
necessity of critical analysis of syndicated representations of gender.
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb vvii 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
Chapter One
Theory and Methodology
Television is arguably a site where multifarious images of gender and sexual-
ity, race/ethnicity, and class are not merely disseminated/represented but also
constructed (Feasey 2008, 45; Litosseliti 2006, 92). For this reason, television
should not be dismissed as an innocuous form of entertainment. Rather, the
gendered images produced by television media should be critically examined
and interrogated. As a result, television analysis can provide insight into how
particular societies normalize or denigrate certain gendered actions and be-
haviors and in the process construct masculinity and femininity.).
GENDER
Before proceeding, it is necessary to more specifically define the interrelated
concepts of sex and gender. Most Western industrialized societies distinguish
between two biological sex categories based upon physical appearance and
behavior, but this tendency is not ubiquitous elsewhere. For instance, Native
American cultures are historically more accepting of diverse expressions of
gender and sexuality. Consequently, many Native American societies recog-
nize men and women who adopt the social roles of the opposite sex as third
and fourth genders (Roscoe 1998; Williams 1992). Transsexual and transgen-
dered individuals further challenge and reveal the artifices of dichotomous
gender categories and indicate that gender is more accurately conceptualized
as existing not as a simple dichotomy but on a continuum with various mani-
festations (Messerschmidt 2004, 145–146).
Gender is a social division between men and women based upon perceived
biological sex from which notions of masculinity and femininity evolve. Al-
though binary categories fail to capture the complexity of gender, dichotomous
1
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb 11 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
2 Chapter One
sex categories remain as a powerful organizing device in many Western societ-
ies (Jackson and Scott 2010, 83; Wodak 1987, 12). Significantly, biologically-
based differences can be utilized to justify an unequal social and political order
(Cameron 1996, 43–44; Weedon 1987, 2). As an example, in many workplaces
men are paid more than women solely on the basis of their biological sex
(Wodak 1997, 12). My later discussion of masculinity and femininity will il-
lustrate how it is not arbitrary that men and masculinity are defined as superior
to women and femininity, but a mechanism to sustain unequal gender relations
and therein oppress women (Connell 1995, 77; Connell and Messerschmidt
2005, 832; Schippers 2007, 94–95). As a result, men are the main beneficiaries
of the patriarchal dividend where they accrue material wealth and social power
(Connell 2009, 142).
Similar to sex categories, gender is a social construct that is actively accom-
plished within specific institutional and interactional contexts (Connell 2009;
Messerschmidt 2010; West and Fenstermaker 1995; West and Zimmerman
1987, 2009). Particular social contexts offer gender practices or repertoires
of social actions and behaviors that individuals enact in accordance with or
in violation of the gendered institution and simultaneously construct certain
forms of masculinity or femininity (Martin 2003, 2006). As individuals draw
on these contextually available gender practices and accordingly practice
gender (Martin 2003, 2006), they simultaneously construct various forms of
masculinity and femininity and social institutions such as workplaces, fami-
lies, and schools (Martin 2003, 2006). The institutional component of practic-
ing gender indicates that relations of power are central to this interactional
process (West and Zimmerman 1987, 137). Notwithstanding, power is never
wholly oppressive and unidirectional but fluid and shifting, so individuals os-
cillate between positions with relative degrees of power and privilege (Baxter
2003, 2010; Connell 2009; Weedon 1987). In many organizational contexts
men occupy positions with institutional power and authority by virtue of their
sex category alone (Baxter 2010; Martin 2001; Pierce 1995; Powell 2010;
Wajcman 1998). As previously indicated, dichotomous sex categories can be
utilized to relegate individuals into unequal social positions.
Although individuals are held accountable to perform certain gender prac-
tices based upon perceived sex, social actors also possess agency to contest or
reformulate these norms. Indeed, gender subversion challenges intact social
structures and gender practices; however, it may incur sanction and marginaliza-
tion (Connell 1995, 78–79; 2009, 81; Schippers 2007, 94–95). Nonetheless, the
important political implication of gender transgression is that it may contribute
to destabilizing and potentially democratizing unequal gender relations.
The accomplishment of gender intersects and thus operates in tandem
with other systems of power which are based upon sexuality, race and class
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb 22 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM
Theory and Methodology 3
(Collins 2010; Skeggs 1997; West and Fenstermaker 1995). Contextually-
available gender practices vary by institutional and social context and reflect
individuals’ social position, which can be elevated or diminished by age,
race, class, and sexuality. As a result, while social actors possess agency to
perform gender in multifarious ways, their agency is inhibited by perceived
sex category, sexuality, race and class, and the social/institutional context.
For instance, femininity norms construe women as natural caregivers and
thus suited for fulltime motherhood or employment in certain caregiving pro-
fessions (Wajcman 1998, 60; Weedon 1987, 2). In any event, power is never
completely unidirectional and oppressive, so social actors possess varying
degrees of empowerment which insect with gender, race, sexuality, and class
(Baxter 2003, 39).
A major implication of this vein of research which targets the intersection
of gender and other social categories is that certain identities are unmarked
and normalized while others are rendered illegitimate and deviant (Collins,
2010; Messerschmidt 2004, 2009; Pascoe 2007). Despite the important
implications gained from foregrounding marginalized social positions,
researchers also need to critically interrogate and scrutinize the hegemonic
norm in order to gain further insight into the multifaceted nature of oppres-
sion. When mainstream social identities become the object of empirical
investigation, we see how heterosexuality is neither natural nor inevitable,
but is actively produced and accomplished (Cameron and Kulick 2003, 59;
Ingraham 2006, 311).
SEXUALITY
Sexuality refers to all forms of erotic desires and practices (Cameron and
Kulick 2003, xi). More precisely, we can distinguish between sexuality and
sexual identity. Sexuality refers to “…any and all human qualities, behaviors,
feelings and preoccupations of a sexual nature” and sexual identity references
sexual orientation or preference (Cameron and Kulick 2006, 3). Contempo-
rary Western societies tend to conceptualize sexual identity in terms of a rigid
hetero-homo binary; however, a dichotomy fails to capture the dynamic and
fluid nature of erotic desires and practices. Indeed, the existence of bisexual,
transgendered, and transsexual individuals reveals how binary categoriza-
tions are fundamentally flawed and fail to capture the sheer complexity of
sexuality. The proceeding discussion will illustrate how heterosexuality can
be viewed as an oppressive social institution which normalizes certain het-
erosexual desires, practices and relations, and pathologizes nonheterosexual
ones (Jackson 2005, 18; Jackson and Scott 2010, 85).
1122__220099__CChhaarrlleebbooiiss..iinnddbb 33 77//1166//1122 1100::2244 AAMM