Television and Gender Roles

Television and Gender Roles

Daniel Chandler
Gender and TV Production

Numbers of males and females on TV
Gender vs Sex
Occupations by gender
Stereotypical representations of gender roles
General advertisements
Adverts for children
Children's programmes
Children on TV
Gender and genre
Soaps
The openness of soaps
'Masculine' genres
The male gaze
Buddy narratives
Gays on TV
Modes of use
Degree of attention
Choice of programmes
Programme Types
Influence of TV gender images
Some suggested reading
Key Links
Gender and TV Production

Television still perpetuates traditional gender stereotypes
because it reflects dominant social values. In reflecting them TV
also reinforces them, presenting them as 'natural'. As one might
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/TF33120/gendertv.html (1 of 20) [26/04/2011 14.39.10]
expect in a society still dominated by men, men dominate TV

production and, influenced by these stereotypes, unconsciously
reproduce a traditional 'masculine' perspective, perpetuating
dominant gender stereotypes. Many narratives on TV are still
implicitly designed to be interpreted from a masculine
perspective. Viewers are frequently invited to identify with male
characters and to objectify females. This has been called 'the
male gaze'. This mode of viewing is called 'unmarked': it is an
invisible and largely unquestioned bias - the masculine
perspective is the 'norm'.
Girls learn from most TV that it is a man's world, and learn to
displace their own perspective. In recent years there has at least
been a notable increase in the number of women news
presenters. Formerly, TV directors (largely male, of course) had
argued that women were less likely to be taken seriously by
viewers. However, one could perhaps argue that physical
attractiveness may play more part in their selection than for their
male counterparts.
There is in fact some evidence that girls (aged 8-12) may tend to
find a male newsreader more believable than a woman
newsreader, whereas the newsreader's sex does not seem to
influence boys' ideas of their believability. Girls may grow used to
being presented with the male on TV in general as more
powerful and knowledgeable (see Durkin: 94).
Numbers of males and females on TV

Whatever its limitations as a TV research method, content
analysis does at least provide us with basic data about the
prevalence of gender images on TV. The number of women
shown on TV is far smaller than the number of men shown. Men
outnumber women in general TV drama by 3 or 4 to 1. 70-85%
of those on children's TV are male, and in children's cartoons,

males outnumber females by 10 to 1. Even in soap operas
women can be outnumbered 7:3. There are also more men than
women in starring roles; the exceptions are notable only as
exceptions. In contrast to this dominance of the screen by men,
we all know that in the everyday world, women in fact slightly
outnumber men. In this sense, TV does not reflect observable
demographic realities, although it may well reflect the current
distribution of power, and the values of those who hold it.
Gender vs Sex
Most social scientists distinguish gender from sex. Gender roles
are not biologically determined, but vary acording to culture and
epoch, and even for individuals during the course of their lives.
Gender roles are consequently described by social scientists as
socially constructed. Most of the behaviour associated with
gender is learned rather than innate. People learn what sorts of
behaviour and personality are regarded in their cultural context
as appropriate for males or females.
Even within a culture masculinity and femininity may be defined
differently by various groups, in particular according to ethnicity,
age, social class and sexuality. In this sense there is no single
masculinity or femininity, but rather multiple masculinities and
femininities. Not all men are 'leaderlike', 'aggressive', 'assertive',
'independent', 'risk-taking' and so on; and not all women are
'affectionate', 'gentle', 'sympathetic', 'dependent', 'emotional',
'nurturing' etc. Such qualities are found in varying degrees in
most people.
But all men and all women are aware of the cultural prevalence
of traditional gender stereotypes, and television contributes to
this awareness. Sex roles involve cultural expectations, such as
that men will seek achievement and dominance, and that women
will be compliant and supportive. The relationship of individuals
to these expectations often involves tensions.
Occupations by gender
The majority of women on TV are restricted to a few roles. Male
roles are far more extensive and more exciting. Women are
often shown on TV in 'traditional' roles such as housewives,
mothers, secretaries and nurses; men are shown as husbands
and fathers, but also as athletes, celebrities and tycoons. Marital
status on is more often revealed for women on TV than for men.
Men on TV are more often portrayed in employment, tend to
have a higher status and are less likely to be shown in the home.
Where women are shown as successful outside the domestic
sphere they are frequently portrayed as unhappy in their
personal lives. Once again, such a distribution of occupational
roles lags well behind current realities in the workplace (however
limited these may still be).
Stereotypical representations of gender roles

Though not as strongly as in earlier years, the portrayal of both
men and women on TV is largely traditional and stereotypical.
This serves to promote a polarization of gender roles. [With
femininity are associated traits such as emotionality, prudence,
co-operation, a communal sense, and compliance. Masculinity
tends to be associated with such traits as rationality, efficiency,
competition, individualism and ruthlessness.]
Meehan has shown how on TV, 'good' women are presented as
submissive, sensitive and domesticated; 'bad' women are

rebellious, independent and selfish. The 'dream-girl' stereotype is
gentle, demure, sensitive, submissive, non-competitive, sweetnatured and dependent. The male hero tends to be physically
strong, aggressive, assertive, takes the initiative, is independent,
competitive and ambitious. TV and film heroes represent
goodness, power, control, confidence, competence and success.
They are geared, in other words, to succeed in a competitive
economic system. There is no shortage of aggressive male rolemodels in Westerns, war films and so on. Many boys try to
emulate such characteristics through action and aggression.
There are few women in the heroic role played by Sigourney
Weaver in Aliens. Men tend to be shown as more dominant,
more violent and more powerful than women. Men on TV are
more likely to disparage women than vice versa. They drive,
drink and smoke more, do athletic things, and make more plans.
They are found more in the world of things than in relationships.
Women on TV tend to be younger than the men, typically under
30.
So TV images largely reflect traditional patriarchal notions of
gender. Stereotypical masculinity, for instance, is portrayed as
natural, normal and universal, but it is fact a particular
construction. It is largely a white, middle-class heterosexual
masculinity. This is a masculinity within which any suggestion of
feminine qualities or homosexuality is denied, and outside which
women are subordinated. The notion of 'natural' sex differences
help to preserve the inequalities on which our economic system
continues to be based.
General advertisements
In television advertisements, gender stereotyping tends to be at
its strongest because the target audiences are frequently either

male or female. There has been some lessening of this in recent
years but the general pattern remains. In adverts, men tend to
be portrayed as more autonomous. They are shown in more
occupations than women; women are shown mainly as
housewives and mothers. Men are more likely to be shown
advertising cars or business products; women are mostly
advertising domestic products. Men are more likely to be shown
outdoors or in business settings; women in domestic settings.
Men are more often portrayed as authorities. As far as ads go,
with age men seem to gain authority, whilst women seem to
disappear.
Voice-overs represent the programme-maker's interpretations of
what is seen: these are the voices of 'authority'. They are
overwhelmingly male (figures of up to 94% have been reported).
There have been more female voice-overs in recent years but
mainly for food, household products and feminine care products.
Male voice-overs tend to be associated with a far wider range of
products.
Adverts for children

Most modern TV ads feature both girls and boys, but boys tend
to be the dominant ones. Ads aimed at boys portray far more
activity and aggressive behaviour than those for girls, and tend
to be far louder. Boys are typically shown as active, aggressive,
rational and discontented. Boys ads contain active toys, varied
scenes, rapid camera cuts and loud, dramatic music and sounds.
Girls ads tend to have frequent fades, dissolves, and gentle
background music (Welch et al.)
Children's programmes
Up to 85% of the characters in children's TV are male, even in
cartoons, and with animal characters - the sexual distribution of
which is roughly as for Homo sapiens. Similarly, the occupational
range for female characters on children's TV far more limited
than for males.
Children on TV
In general on TV, boys tend to be shown as active, aggressive,
rational and discontented. They tend to engage in traditional
male activities such as sports, travel and causing trouble. Even
now, girls are often shown talking on the phone, reading and
helping with the housework. This pattern is even found in
educational programmes for children.
Gender and genre

Many commentators argue that viewing pleasures may be
different for men and women. This is partly a question of
programme genres, and partly of style of engagement with TV.
Some theorists distinguish between styles of programmes which
are broadly 'masculine' or 'feminine'. Those seen as typically
masculine include action/adventure programmes, Westerns and
factual programmes; those seen as more 'feminine' include
soaps, sitcoms, romantic fiction and melodrama. Actionadventures define men in relation to power, authority,
aggression and technology. Soap operas define women in
relation to a concern with the family. It is largely in sitcoms and
soaps that men may sometimes be seen as caring, loving and
expressive rather than dominating and authoritative.
Soaps
Soaps in general have a predominantly female audience,
although prime-time soaps such as Dallas are deliberately aimed
at a wider audience, and in fact at least 30% of the audience for
this soap was male. According to Ang, and hardly surprisingly, in
Dallas the main interest for men was in business relations and
problem and the power and wealth shown, whereas women
were more often interested in the family issues and love affairs.
In the case of Dallas it is clear that the programme meant
something different for female viewers compared with male
viewers.
The audience for soaps does include men (and probably more
men than are prepared to admit it), but some theorists argue
that the gender of the viewer is 'inscribed' in the programme so
that soaps address women in particular. Soaps appeal to those
who value the personal and domestic world. Dorothy Hobson
argues that women typically use soaps as a way of talking
indirectly about their own attitudes and behaviour. There is no
doubt that viewing and talking with family and friends about
soap operas is experienced by many women as a pleasurable
experience, and the dismissal of the worth of the genre by many
commentators, including some feminists critical of gender
stereotyping, is open to the charge of cultural litism.
The openness of soaps

Some feminist theorists have argued that soap operas spring
from a feminine aesthetic, in contrast to most prime-time TV.

Soaps are unlike traditional drama which has a beginning, a
middle and an end: soaps have no beginning or end, no
structural closure. They do not build up towards an ending or
closure of meaning. Viewers can join a soap at any point: there
are built-in devices to recap on aspects of the plot. There is no
single narrative line. In this sense the plots of soaps are not
linear. Narrative lines are interwoven over time. The structure of
soaps is complex and there is no final word on any issue. A soap
involves multiple perspectives and no consensus. Ambivalence
and contradiction is characteristic of the genre. This leaves soaps
particularly open to individual interpretations.
Modleski argues that pleasure in masculine narrative forms
focuses on closure, whilst soaps delay resolution and make
anticipation an end in itself. She also argues that masculine
narratives 'inscribe' in the text an implied male reader who
becomes increasingly omnipotent whilst the soap has 'the ideal
mother' as inscribed viewer - a sympathetic listener to all sides.
In 'realist' soaps female characters are portrayed as more central
than in action drama, as ordinary people coping with everyday
problems. Christine Geraghty argues that viewers see events in
realist soaps through the eyes of such women (in Dyer et al.,
1981). There is no single hero in soaps and no privileged moral
perspective.
Easthope argues that the masculine ego favours forms which are
self-contained, and which have a sense of closure. 'Masculine'
narrative favours action over dialogue and avoids indeterminacy
to arrive at closure/resolution. It is linear and goal-oriented.
Dialogue in masculine narratives is driven by plot which it
explains, clarifies and simplifies. John Fiske has argued that
'masculine' programmes are less open to multiple interpretations
than 'feminine' programmes, which tend to be more open and
ambiguous. Certainly women frequently report the importance to
them of talking to others about the situations and characters in
the soaps they watch. The characters in this sense become part
of the viewers' everyday lives.

In soaps dialogue blurs and delays. Soaps make consequences
more important than actions and involve many complications.
Not much seems to 'happen' in many soaps because there is no
rapid action. In soaps such as Coronation Street and Brookside
what matters is the effect of events on the characters, This is
revealed through characters talking to each other. Viewers tend
to feel involved in interpreting events from the perspective of
characters similar to themselves or to those they know.
Women who are housewives and mothers need to be able to do
several things at once, to switch from one task to another, to
deal with other people's problems, to be interrupted. Modleski
argues that watching soap operas habituates women to
interruption and fragmentation. As Livingstone puts it: 'through
narrative redundancy and repetition they make it easy, through
dramatic tension and delayed gratification they make it
pleasurable'.
However, it is easy to oversimplify gender differences in
interpreting TV. Social class, ethnicity, age and education are all
complicating factors, and there are considerable differences
within gender.
'Masculine' genres
Sport on television is dominated by men and tends to inculcate
masculine values. Sports programmes define men in relation to
competition, strength and discipline.
Most war films promote violence as 'natural' and heroic for
males. Women in these films are typically mothers, chattel or
whores. The soldiers are men of few words, heroic deeds and
stoic endurance. As John Wayne put it, 'Never apologize, mister it's a sign of weakness'. Lethal tasks are performed by soldiers in
these films with no show of emotion.
Easthope argues that detective stories 'give the masculine ego
the pleasure of mastery, certainty, seeing it all clearly laid out in
the end'. Detective stories involve following clues and unravelling
plots to re-establish a sense of order.
The male gaze

I have referred already to the overwhelming use of males for
voice-overs. Visuals are similarly given an invisible masculine
frame...
Erving Goffman (1979) found that in media advertisements 'men
tend to be located higher than women' and 'women are pictured
on floors and bedas more than men'. He noted that 'lowering
oneself physically in some form or other of prostration' is 'a
classic stereotype of deference'. It effectively presents women as
inferior to men.
On TV, men tend to be shown in clseface shots whereas women
tend to be seen in full body shots. This has been called 'faceism'. The face is generally seen as representing intellect and the
body as emotion in western cultural mythologies.
Buddy narratives
The so-called 'buddy movies' portray men paired as co-heroes
and tend to be action-oriented. In them, men are seen as acting
together rather than just being together as women tend to be.

Westerns tend to be the clearest example of images of male
bonding on TV, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid being a
classic celebration of the 'buddy' relationship. Women in the film
are treated as marginal and as objects of exchange between the
two buddies (see Easthope). Other example of the buddy theme
are The Man from U.N.C.L.E., Starsky & Hutch, M*A*S*H, Star
Trek and Miami Vice. Such narratives shown bonding through
activity rather than intimacy - though sometimes physical (rather
than emotional) intimacy is portrayed (as in Starsky & Hutch).
And bond is goal-oriented rather than relationship-oriented.
Male friendships on TV are rarely intimate. Any intimate
relationship between men is more likely to be found in sitcoms
(which tend to be aimed largely at women and children). Men in
TV drama who express their feelings do so largely to women.
Gays on TV
Intimacy between men inspires homophobic reactions. Typically
gays are symbols of what masulinity should not involve. Without
homosexuality, heterosexuality has no meaning. Although gays
are largely invisible on TV there has been an slightly increasing
tendency to feature token gay stereotypes on TV, though they
are rarely shown enjoying happy lives (in Dynasty, one recalls
Steven's lovers getting killed). Stories about gays tend to
reinforce conventional values. Even when gay men are portrayed
the central focus tends to be on the reaction of others to this as
a 'problem'. This is particularly disturbing if, as some suggest, TV
images may be more important to gays in identity- formation
and socialization than to heterosexuals - who have frequent
access to positive images.
Modes of use
David Morley's important study Family Television offers a host of
insights into the differences between mothers and fathers in
terms of the way in which they use television, at least amongst
white lower-middle- and working- class families. Morley
emphasizes that he does not see these differences in modes of
use as related to biological sex differences, but to social roles in
the home and the distribution of power. For men the home still
tends to be primarily a place of leisure; for women (even those
who work outside it) the home is still mainly a place of work. The
way men tend to use TV is not so much an inherently 'masculine'
mode but what Charlotte Brunsdon calls 'a mode of power'.
Degree of attention
Morley reports that many men prefer to watch TV with full
concentration, without interruption, and in silence, and that
many women watch with less attention. Some women prefer to
watch and chat at the same time, seeing television viewing as a
social activity. Women also refer more often than men to
chatting about TV programmes with friends and workmates. One
women (cited by Hobson, in Seiter et al.) declared 'I only watch
Coronation Street so I can talk about it.'
Fathers who become engrossed in TV programmes (most clearly
in news programmes, apparently) are of course at the time less
responsive to other members of the family. Some commentators
have argued that watching in this way is a deliberate way for
men to shut out the rest of the family. It is very uncommon for
mothers to neglect the family in this way: they tend to maintain
a monitoring role. Some may on occasion even watch primarily in

order to make social contact with another viewer. This is a clear
reflection of prevailing social roles in the home. Most mothers
would feel too guilty to watch television as wholeheartedly as
many men like to do, and the prevailing pattern of
responsibilities in the home does not permit women to watch in
the way that men prefer. As Ang puts it (in Seiter et al.): 'Men...
can watch television in a concentrated manner because they
control the conditions to do so.'
Choice of programmes
Fathers are the ones referred to most often as controlling the
selection of TV programmes on the main family TV set, though
fathers often didn't see it this way (Lull). In Morley's sample,
men were far more likely to plan a evening's viewing in advance
than women were. For many men the remote control device is
effectively symbolic of their power of choice over programmes.
Some women complain that their husbands often switch
programmes without regard for whether their wives had been
watching. Mothers only rarely take such unilateral action. This is
a reflection of male power in the home. As one girl put it, 'Dad
keeps both of the automatic controls - one on each side of his
chair.'
Programme Types
Morley's study showed a strong male preference for 'factual'
programmes such as news, current affairs and documentaries,
and a female preference for fictional programmes, including
romantic fiction in particular. Morley also felt that this pattern
was reinforced for men by a sense of guilt that watching TV is

'second best' to other more physically active leisure pursuits.
When men watch fictional programmes, they also seem to prefer
what they feel are more 'realistic' programmes (eg. 'realistic'
sitcoms). Radway's research on women's reading has shown that
many of the women she interviewed read romantic fiction as an
escape from the continual demands of their work within and
outside the home. Morley reported that the women he
interviewed felt guilty about their enjoyment of romance or
soaps on TV.
When women watch news programmes, they tend to prefer local
rather than national news. Morley argues that this also reflects
women's sense of domestic responsibility, for instance in keeping
an eye on local crime in case it has implications for the family.
Regarding tastes in comedy, women in Morley's sample tended
to reject 'zany' comedy (in particular, at the time, The Young
Ones), whilst the men and teenagers tended to enjoy such
comedies. Here Morley suggests that domestic disorder may not
seem funny if domestic orderliness is your prime concern.
However, any tendencies for men and women to use TV in
different ways can be easily oversimplified. Many modes of
interaction with TV are shared by men and women, and other
factors apart from gender may sometimes be more important. It
results from the dominant model of gender relations in western
society.
Influence of TV gender images

There is a general consensus that the mass media act as
important agents of socialization, together with the family and
peers, contributing to the shaping of gender roles. I stressed in
my previous lecture the emphasis given by social learning

theorists such as Bandura to the modelling of behaviour on
observed examples. Certainly we learn to be male or female - it
doesn't come 'naturally' and the mass media contribute to
making such roles seem 'natural'. And there is no doubt that TV
presents powerful, attention-grabbing images of gender. It has
been noted that many boys spend more time with male rolemodels on TV than with their own fathers.
But television alone is not responsible for shaping people's
gender roles. There are plenty of examples of gender-typed
behaviour around us in the social world. A special contribution of
TV may be to present examples of models found in a broader
world than that which is more directly experienced in the home
and the locality. Wherever they get their ideas from, by the age
of about 6, (even in rhetorically anti-sexist families) it seems that
most children develop clearcut stereotypes about what the sexes
can or cannot do. And given that TV is not short of sexist
images, and that children watch a lot of TV, it's tempting to
assign the blame to television.
Early researchers (such as Sue Sharpe) tended to see the media
as inevitably socializing children into traditional stereotypical
roles, because of the prevalence of such images on TV and the
importance ascribed to them by children. However, such
accounts tend to overestimate the power of the media and
underestimate the variety of ways in which people - even
children - handle their experiences of them. TV images of boys,
girls, men and women are more varied and less clearcut than
such arguments suggest. Television offers contradictory images
which can be interpreted in many ways, and viewers are far
more active interpreters than the passive recipients suggested by
such accounts.
Kevin Durkin stresses developmental factors. In the preschool
years (up to around 4), children learn to use gender as a way of
discriminating between people. It is unlikely that TV is a major
influence at this stage, since the child is heavily engaged in

social interaction with family and friends, and since much of TV
is too complex to be fully understood in the early years.
During the early school years (around 4-7), the child's sense of
gender becomes well established, though somewhat rigidly
stereotyped. During this phase, children seem pay more
attention to same-sex figures than to other-sex figures on the
screen. This probably serves both to confirm and extend their
assumptions about gender. But again, TV is far from the only
source of data on gender for the child: schoolteachers now join
friends and family as sources, and the peer group becomes
significantly more important.
During middle childhood (around 7-12), children refine their
psychological understanding of gender and develop sex-typed
preferences for differing types of TV programmes. Even at this
stage they do not necessarily accept as real or desirable what
they watch. Indeed, there is some evidence that at this stage
heavy viewers may show some scepticism about gender
steroetypes.
The potential influence of TV may be greatest during
adolescence (around 12-18), since at this stage gender plays
such a key part in social life. At this stage dominant gender
images on TV may tend to reinforce traditional expectations
amongst adolescents, thus inducing role conflicts. Some
commentators speculate that the gap between adolescent selfconcepts and glamorous media images may sometimes induce
personal insecurity.
In short, although there are huge gaps in our knowledge of
developmental factors, the developmental perspective
emphasizes the problem of talking about the influence of TV on
'the child' in general. And the critical importance of the family
should not be neglected, either. I have already outlined features
of the politics of TV use. It would be unlikely for children not to
be influenced by the differing ways in which their parents use

TV. In families in which the gender roles are largely traditional,
TV may tend to serve to reinforce such gender roles. In this way
television certainly plays a role in the construction of gender
roles.
More broadly, we need to remember that all viewers have
several options regarding gender images: to accept them; to
disregard them; to interpret them in their own way; and to reject
them. As John Fiske puts it (in Seiter et al.), 'Television is not
quite a do-it-yourself meaning kit but neither is it a box of readymade meanings'. Children's scatological rewriting of jingles from
TV ads is an amusing example of the way children reinterpret TV
from their own perspective.
TV offers a wide range of potential role-models, both positive
and negative. Many people find these models of some use to
them. It is not inevitable that viewers accept TV gender images
without question, but many popular commentators tend to
assume that they are more discriminating than ordinary mortals.
Not all women, children - or even men - are passive victims of
patriarchal stereotyping.
Though there is little doubt that TV presents largely traditional
gender images there is mixed evidence about the impact of such
images on gender attitudes and behaviour. It is difficult to isolate
the role of TV, since people are influenced by their whole
environment, although there is fairly widespread agreement that
over time TV seems likely to influence people's ideas about
gender roles.
There is some research evidence suggesting that heavy TV
viewing may contribute to gender role development and/or
reinforcement amongst children and adolescents, and some
associating sexism or stereotyping of gender roles with heavy TV
viewers (Gerbner). Durkin finds the evidence so far inadequate.
However, there is evidence that counterstereotypical portrayals
do seem able to influence children's perceptions of their options,

but such portrayals are generally rare.
In short, studies of the influence of TV gender images on
children are not very conclusive, partly because they have not
always been well designed. Many studies have shown a modest
association between viewing patterns and gender stereotypes.
There is not much evidence yet for any strong impact of TV.
Children are not passive recipients of TV images. Their existing
attitudes to gender role play an important part in interpreting
images of gender on TV.
Thus, once again, the available evidence does not offer a simple
picture of the role of TV in the development of gender roles. As
always in social science, the picture is subtle, complex, and rich
in research opportunities.
Some Suggested Reading
Ang, Ien (1985): Watching 'Dallas': Soap Opera and the

Melodramatic Imagination. London: Methuen
Craig, Steve (ed.) (1992): Men, Masculinity and the Media.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Curran, James & Michael Gurevitch (eds.) (1991): Mass
Media and Society. London: Edward Arnold
Durkin, Kevin (1985): Television, Sex Roles and Children.
Milton Keynes: Open University Press
Dyer, Richard (ed.) (1981): Coronation Street. London:
British Film Institute
Easthope, Antony (1990): What a Man's Gotta Do: The
Masculine Myth in Popular Culture. Winchester, MA: Unwin
Hyman
Fiske, John (1987): Television Culture. London: Methuen
Fiske, John & John Hartley (1978): Reading Television.
London: Methuen
Goffman, Erving ([1976] 1979): Gender Advertisements.
New York: Harper & Row
Hobson, Dorothy (1982): 'Crossroads' - The Drama of a
Soap. London: Methuen
Livingstone, Sonia M (1991): 'Audience Reception; The
Role of the Viewer in Retelling Romantic Drama' in Curran
& Gurevitch (eds.), op.cit.
Lull, James (1990): Inside Family Viewing: Ethnographic
Research on Television's Audiences. London: Routledge
Meehan, D M (1983): Ladies of the Evening: Women
Characters of Prime-Time Television. Metuchen, NJ:
Scarecrow
Modleski, Tania (1982): Loving with a Vengeance: MassProduced Fantasies for Women. Hamden, CT: Archon
Morley, David (1986): Family Television: Cultural Power
and Domestic Leisure. London: Routledge
Seiter, Ellen (1981): 'The Role of the Woman Reader: Eco's
Narative Theory and Soap Operas', Tabloid 6
Seiter, Ellen, Hans Borchers, Gabriele Kreutzner & EvaMaria Warth (1989): Remote Control: Television, Audiences
and Cultural Power. London: Routledge
Sharpe, Sue (1976): 'Just Like a Girl': How Girls Learn to be
Women. Harmondsworth: Penguin
Welch, R L, A Huston-Smith, J C Wright & R Plehal (1979):
'Subtle sex-role cues in children's commercials', Journal of
Communication 29: 202-9

Television and Gender Roles

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Television and Gender Roles

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Television and Gender Roles