Racial portrayal in Glee: POC characters

First to understand the depths of racial portrayal in Glee we have to discuss some critical and cultural theory concerning race. There's a lot to cover so I shall try to keep it brief. 

Whitewashing in Hollywood is a long running practice. Whitewashing in terms of painting means 'to try to clear (someone or their name) by deliberately concealing their mistakes or faults.' Whitewashing in Hollywood and on screen is when most of the characters in TV shows, films etc are predominantly white. Whitewashing is when non-white characters are roles then given to white actors. This places non white actors in the place of those "mistakes" or "faults" and is therefore highly unflattering. 


POC characters in Glee are often under-developed characters that remain on the outskirts. Many are portrayed via negative stereotypes. 


POCs in the Glee Club during Season One were Mercedes (raised the point she's always shoved in the background and used to simply add high notes at the end of songs), Tina (forever in the background) and Matt (you know, the student that was constantly consigned to the background and vanished for no reason?)

You have characters like Principal Figgins, a man who is shown to be somewhat incompetent and seems to only be brought into episodes to create tension or comic relief in the plot and rarely turns up otherwise. Roz Washington, shown to be bitchy and vicious. Ken Tanaka literally acts as comic relief, a character not to be taken seriously by the viewer, and apparently when Ken vanished from the show Brad Falchuk from the production team said nonchalantly that Ken 'died of a heart attack' - but no one mentioned it or even seemed to care on the show. Nice one, Glee. 

Then there's Sunshine Corazon, a promising singer that even threatened the 'golden child', Rachel Berry. Rachel sends her to a crack house, endangering her life, but is hardly punished for it. Sunshine appeared at McKinley and eventually transferred schools when she wasn't brought into the New Directions. At Nationals she was so anxious in the run up to the competition that she was apparently planning on begging the Philippines Embassy to revoke her green card to send her back home (thus poking slight fun at emigrants/immigrants/those who have relocated to another country) but when Rachel, the girl who endangered her life, tells her to suck it up and deal with it... she does. Just like that. As if her poorly-crafted, stereotyped worries weren't to be taken seriously. She then vanished from the show like so many POC characters before her.

It is clear that Ryan Murphy and the writers of Glee don't really care for characters of colour. Characters are  whittled down to simply being a product of their race (e.g Tina's superhero alter-ego is "Asian Persuasion") 
The narrative of the show not only goes out of the way to screw up Tina as a character, but then has to reduce her time and time again to her race and little else (having her referred to as 'harajuku girl'/'Asian horror movie', looking at episodes such as "Asian F")
Glee make it abundantly clear that they don't care about reducing characters to mediocre, negative or harmful stereotypes whilst keeping them in the background after promising to give them more screen/singing time. Jenna Ushkowitz, why do you put up with this? Is the pay really that good? I don't know why someone would continue to put up with such treatment...


Here are more links to a critic on Tumblr who has gone through and provided criticism of the treatment of POC characters on the show by going through all POC characters on Glee.

Post One on POC characters in Glee
Post Two on POC characters in Glee
Post Three on POC characters in Glee
Post Four on POC characters in Glee
Article on Whitewashing in Hollywood

Rachel In The Real World

Rachel complains about how Cassandra July picks on her, but is the only student to question her and contest her will.

She is disrespectful to her dance teacher and practically stalked Carmen Tibideaux when she was rejected.... but is rewarded with an invitation to the winter showcase as if to give the thumbs up to such behaviour.
I don't quite understand why Cassandra July is so rude towards Rachel from the point of meeting her, it seems like pointless and unexplained conflict created by the writers but instead of acting like a polite student, she returns that attitude to her teacher and then claims she's being picked on, not at fault.

I seriously doubt that Rachel Berry would function well in the real world...

Hypocritical, much?

Santana patrols hallways in an attempt to monitor bullying.......

Also makes song that bullies Sam for his appearance in front of entire Glee club....

"We need money"

With the Glee kids recently doing a nude calendar a la Calendar Girls to raise money for the bus to Indianapolis it brings into question what it is the club needs to spend money on. Like these guys can afford fabric for elaborate costumes for various performances, they can finance an entire stage show, but they have to really search for ways to get money for transport to the state that's, you know, right next to them? I smell lazy writing to bring in crazy plots. You can afford props and a rain stage for the Singing in the Rain number but not money for a bus? Or gas money for the cars most of the kids seem to have without having a proper job a la Tina?
The show clearly just needed a reason to get most of the male cast shirtless...

Failure To Launch

The graduation of several cast members from the school, set to leave in search of new dreams, was seen as a revolutionary move for television and for Glee overall...

But these characters who've left... haven't really left.

Characters like Santana, Mercedes, Puck etc - they all seem to come back at the drop of a hat. This suggests that these characters are so focused on the past, an aspect of their high school lives now past, that it is hindering their current life.

Evidently nothing in life is as important as high school show choir. Santana is apparently close to being brought back - but at what cost? The cost is that she's flunking out of college - a harmful message for young teens. "Hey, if you fail it's OK. Just crawl back to where you came from..."

The youth of today needs to know that there is life beyond high school. That dropping out of college is pretty serious. That once you graduate you should look to the future, not the past, and focus on your career or your overall path in life.

You'll achieve nothing if you're running back to your old school at the drop of a hat.

No Rose Without Thorns.

Referring to Marley as "The New Rachel" seems offensive, almost robs her of her introduction and identity. She's not some new, amazing performer that comes along; she's just a replacement for someone who has gone.

Where the show could have taken things in a new, exciting direction with new characters they literally just brought in a new Finn, a new Rachel and a new Puck.

So it's just the same show, repackaged.

Glee: Slut shaming.

The recent episode of Glee entitled 'Naked' casts light on a prevalent issue within our society that ought be discussed: slut-shaming.

Slut-shaming is a contemporary term for what Jessica Ringrose described in her book as a way in which people or society may ‘explore the dynamic of sexual regulation where a girl’s reputation can be invoked and scrutinised to discipline her through codes of sexual conduct’

In the most recent episode 'Naked' we really saw the depths of slut shaming in Glee when Rachel was offered a role in a student film, but had to appear topless in a scene. 

Rachel seemed perfectly fine with it in theory, but before she could even give it much thought she was being judged by her room mate and had friends coming in from out of town to dictate what she should do with her body. The regulation of the human body is something the owner of that body should be in charge with however multiple people feel that they have the right and privilege to tell Rachel what she should do with her body. This further perpetuates the idea that our bodies are shameful and that exposing them is wrong and we should be shamed for it. This shames those who have appeared naked and prevents others from feeling comfortable with their bodies. This isn't something simply directed at Rachel: Sam and Brody are both judged by surrounding characters for essentially being sex workers. Sex workers are a group who already get shamed enough and without reason. 

Rachel is constantly patrolled by her so called "friends" who tell her what to wear, what to do with her body, how people will perceive her. She is being robbed of the freedom to make her own choices because her own views are being to heavily influenced by those around her.

Here are some educational videos on slut-shaming from YouTube educator and personality, Laci Green

Vogue!

Surely I'm not the only one who thinks that Glee is stupid and unrealistic - particularly the section with Vogue.com. As one of the most iconic international fashion publications of all time getting a job here must be practically impossible.

So for an inexperienced high school grad with no real work experience in the fashion industry it'll be easy to get a job right? Not only that but as a newly hired, inexperienced intern your boss will take inspiration and advice from you? Unlikely.

This plot turn is totally unrealistic. It would have been so much better and far more plausible had Kurt been hired to work for an independent publication in New York, and I am sure there are thousands of them, but this is sheer nonsense.

It leaves the youth of today with the illusion that all you need is a plucky spirit and you'll get in anywhere: a job at Vogue, a second chance audition for NYADA and not to mention what seems to be an impossibly expensive apartment in New York City on a student budget? Glee appears to singlehandedly feed the youth of today this false illusion of what life is like in the real world and this is potentially very damaging.

Not to mention that as soon as Kurt gets into NYADA there is suddenly no mention of Vogue in recent episodes.

Less than constructive criticism...

Kurt gives Rachel a makeover and then says...

What happened? You, apparently.

Transphobia.

Unique could have been such a wonderful character giving an under-represented minority a voice on mainstream television but instead of being accepted we see her being shamed...

Ugh. This was so promising but fell so flat... It's like Ryan Murphy thought "Ooh, yes! Alex Newell on The Glee Project wanted to perform in a dress. Something new and interesting to exploit under the guise of love and acceptance!"

Imagine.

"So I know we as the New Directions just performed our song whilst y'all respectfully sat and watch but now you're performing we're gonna intrude, k?"

"Tina Never Gets To Sing?"

Tina complained and complained about the hypocrisy within the choir, how many people never got solos and was assured she'd have the chance to sing.

First solo in ages?
Gangnam Style.

'Because we're not defining a character entirely by her race, nooo...'

Also, Tina, yeah sure you get to sing more and be more in the spotlight next year when Finn and Rachel are gone.

JK - we're getting replacements for Finn and a 'New Rachel'
troloololololololololol

MOAR TINA!

[Warning. This blog post contains extreme amounts of sarcasm in an effort to deal with bullshit plots.]

Tina wants limelight? Fans want a Tina storyline?

So thanks Ryan Murphy for taking one of the oldest, underrated characters and giving her a storyline. A creepy, unflattering and disrespectful storyline.

Let's give her a creepy and inappropriate crush on Blaine, a man who identifies as gay, and let's have Tina then totally disrespect that.

Let's have her then put him on the spot and ask him to the Sadie Hawkins dance in front of everyone as if to try and pressure him into going with you.

Let's have her straddle Blaine while he's asleep/unconscious and unbutton his shirt and rub VapoRub on him. She probably knew that he would say no to such advances were he concious, this scene echoes non consensual acts of sex, sexual harassment and abuse or even rape. Blaine is unconscious/sleeping and Tina takes advantage of that in pursuit of her own desires despite knowing his sexuality, current relationship dilemma and response to her interest.
because, you know, if it's caring it's not creepy right? May as well straddle him while you're doing it. If a guy was on top of an unconscious girl and unbuttoning her shirt, rubbing his hands over her, would that be OK?
Nuhuh. All sexual contact should/must be with consent. If a person involved isn't awake or conscious then they are not able to give consent.

Later Tina wonders why Blaine doesn't return her affection - I mean, she's cared for him and been so sweet? Surely that should 'turn' him and make him straight right?
Here we see an element of internalised misogyny - within lad culture there seems to be this idea of the 'friendzone' and people wonder why a girl won't have sex with them even after they've been super nice to her. Tina embodies this view in her questioning Blaine about why he's not returning her affections, why he can't love her. She's showing little respect for his identity, sexuality and choices and not even in an ironic, let's-make-fun-of-the-friendzone-believing-idiots kinda way. It also seems to support the ridiculous and often sexist idea of 'turning' people from one sexuality to another. It's often said about lesbians by men, that maybe they'll "turn" her straight. Such comments often come from heterosexual, cisgender and undereducated members of the population.

This is a mess of a plotline...I mean I get it, sometimes we fall for people we can't have, but instead of accepting it Tina begins a weird contestation of the situation.
Apparently the tweet below from Glee creator Ryan Murphy is meant to justify such actions

Sure, whatever you say... but whenever I feel lonely I don't straddle someone emotionally and sexually unavailable to me to feel better about myself. Thank you for attempting to normalise and justify such inappropriate and creepy behaviour to an army of devoted fans. 

To add insult to injury, let's give her a song too...

Racial stereotyping?
Gee, thanks Mr Murphy.

Thank you for taking a promising character and making her super creepy.

I'm sure that's exactly what she'd been hoping for having stuck with the cast since Season One.

I say these next words with not a drop of sarcasm.

Guys - don't take any of this current plot line to heart.
Respect the choices of those around you.
Only act when full consent is given.
Stay safe and show respect.
This current depiction of 'love' is harmful, degrading and just plain wrong.
Follow your heart, love as you like, but always respect your peers.

Sue Sylvester: The Inconsistent Villain.

For any strong protagonist, there is often an equally strong antagonist. For Glee, the antagonist was
Sue Sylvester, cheerleading coach and hater of all things show choir. However her feelings towards the New Directions aren't exactly consistent which serves as a source of confusion.

Originally she was a character with a lot of great zingers, a villain we loved-to-hate but also still kinda loved regardless. She was impetuous and brash in her ongoing hatred of the Glee club (but I can't really remember if a substantial reason was given for such hatred?) as she perpetually seemed to attempt to take the club down and insult the various members within it personally.
But maybe that didn't matter - we had our antagonist... for a while.

As soon as the Glee club got to Regionals and lost she stepped in to share funding with them (under the ruse of "what would I do if I didn't have you to hate?" which makes all of her previous motives seem kinda pointless), she votes for New Directions and therefore openly recognises some support for them and later forms some sort of truce with Will but then, not too long after, coaches a rival team to try and beat them. She creates the 'League of Doom' to try and take the Glee club down in season two as if to suggest that the Glee truce is now gone. Sue will viciously verbally attack students, and later hold an anti-bullying stance. Sue is revealed to be pregnant, but has the baby off screen. The child is mentioned once or twice after birth and then never mentioned again with no evidence of post-natal weight or maternity leave. This seems to show lazy writing as a way to spice up the plot, something pregnancy is often used for on TV to pick up ratings, which they then never follow through on. She'll go from hating them and stealing their gifts as a Grinch-like being to giving them everything back. Then hating them, then giving Marley and her family money in the Glee, Actually episode. I'm not sure about you but this emotional yo-yo of morality is making my head spin.

From her opinions on the New Directions, to her motives and personal life, Sue is the embodiment of inconsistency and the fault lies with the writers who have knocked this once promising character all over the place. Sure, we can feel sympathy for the villains. Sure, they can change their mind... but Sue's back-and-forth antics are tiring and render her character confusing and unrealistic.

This just shows one of many inconsistent characters and shows how each character is merely a tool for the writers to explore ridiculous plots and themes from a rotating band of writers with different, conflicting ideas. It's lazy, messy screen writing posing under the guise of creating a character with depth and emotion. Really, Ryan Murphy... I'm sure you can do better than that.

Glee Don't Need No Education.

A further problem with Glee is that, despite being a show about kids in high school attending school and being at school... you never see them learning.


The impact of this on the teens that watch must be considered: it places far too much emphasis on your love life, friends and extra curricular activities over your education. The youth of today needs to understand how important their education is, something that Glee isn't suggesting. We rarely see these kids in classrooms, studying or working for exams. This gives teens an unrealistic representation of their education suggesting they can get by doing the bare minimum or nothing at all and instead or breeding a wave of teens ready to learn and achieve academic excellence, it's telling teens that school isn't as important as gaining the attention of your peers. This confusing, harmful representation gives teens the wrong impression of life, specifically their life during this tender and important time.

You're not going to get anywhere in life just dancing around school and singing about your problems, kids. I hate to say it, but crack open your damn books.

Glee and Stereotypes: Effeminate homosexuals

Writer Ryan Murphy was so taken with Chris Colfer at his audition that the role of Kurt was then written specifically for him. Kurt Hummel, as a character, has gone on to be one of the most successful characters on the show.

I, and this blog, are pro gay rights. Why? Because people happily living their LGBTQ lifestyle harms no one. It's not a debate I wish to get in to here and now and I will not suffer homophobia on this blog.

In this post I'd like to discuss the stereotypical depiction of gay men as effeminate and why this is harmful.

Now to discuss why this image is potentially upsetting and harmful we have to consider two key things: sexuality and gender. We also have to consider the correlation between the two.

What bothers me is that Ryan Murphy, creator of Glee, is a gay man himself. Having created a widely popular and successful TV show during a time when the LGBTQ community have more of a voice than ever surely this would be a great time to raise awareness and support for gay characters and gay issues. Instead he writes his male characters in this effeminate style - not only in Glee, but in his new show The New Normal.

This is harmful as it supports the idea that gay men as 'lesser' men for their sexuality. Characters even refer to Kurt as "Lady Hummel" and having Kurt and Blaine join in with Rachel singing 'Big Girls Don't Cry' - this is offensive. It is demeaning to the gay community. Having Kurt voted as Prom Queen as if to suggest the entire school is bullying him because of the supposed correlation between sexuality and gender. Offensive, presumptuous nonsense, my friends, that's what it is.

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with this effeminate image, people can live however they want to live and be who they want to be, but the pre-existing stereotype almost suggests that there is something emasculating about homosexuality and what has to be understood is that masculinity is such an abstract and arbitrary concept. When a stereotype is overused people may find themselves thinking that this is a representation of the gay community as a whole and this simply isn't so. Perpetuating the stereotype may not only make LGBTQ teens feel insecure ("I don't fit into this image of gayness I always see, what does this mean?") but it also perpetuates certain negative aspects of the stereotype such as the notion that all gays are catty/bitchy and therefore not nice people.

In the Glee episode "Naked" Tina says to Blaine that he should come to the mall with her because she wants to go shopping thus reducing Blaine to a commodity: that sassy gay friend you can go shopping with. Needless to say gay men aren't accessories. The picture below is from an episode where people wore their flaws on a shirt. Is gay really something people should be made to feel bad about? Is it really a flaw? Come on America, this is the 21st Century. I think it's about time we started treating the LGBTQ community as people, not commodities to be stereotyped for the ever consuming public.

Why Glee Is Awful: Introduction

Greetings, fellow internaut!

I hope that the title of this blog renders the purpose clear so I shan't have to explain it in too much detail. Within this blog I hope to seek to explain why Glee is, on so many levels, an awful show.

Now I understand that there are many people who love and enjoy the show. I would like to make it perfectly clear: this is not a troll blog. This is not a blog purposely created to annoy and upset fans. This is a blog dedicated to highlighting the flaws of the shows and some of the damaging messages it broadcasts; I do this not to be preachy, but to point out things you may not be aware of. In our modern society we all too often suspend our disbelief or take things at face value instead of giving any further consideration which is sad as we as humans should constantly be exploring our consciousness and question/consider everything even when kicking back and relaxing with some TV.

I hope that you enjoy this blog.