The role of the media in reproducing masculine gendered norm through trans men
Public discourse, particularly that which takes place in the mainstream,
has the potential to affect people’s perceptions of gender (McLaren et al., 2021). For this reason, it is
imperative to examine the extent to which media depictions of trans individuals
reinforce or challenge misconceptions of trans existence. Much academic work
has been dedicated to the analysis of how, historically, portrayals of the
trans community have been limited and riddled with negative stereotypes that either
vilify or victimise the trans characters (Escudero-Alias, 2011; Reed, 2009;
Siebler, 2010; Capuzza, 2015; Billard, 2016; GLAAD, 2020). This essay will
attempt to take the analysis further to show that mainstream media has failed
to authentically represent the subversiveness of the lived experiences of trans
men. Rather, there has been a tendency to apply normative notions of
masculinity onto characters who are trans men. This analysis will be carried
out via the examination of three representations of trans men in film and
television throughout time. Namely, Lawrence and Jack in the 1914 film A
Florida Enchantment, Max in the 2004 Showtime TV series The L Word, and Paul in
9-1-1: Lone Star, a program currently running on Fox.
The essay will begin by exploring diverging opinions on the
subversiveness of portrayals of trans men in mainstream media. This discussion
will include conversations around the political importance of visibility and how
it needs to be balanced against the danger of assimilation, drawing a parallel between
representations of trans men and representations of gay and lesbian characters
in the late 20th century. I will then move on to analyse the representation
of black and white masculinity in A Florida Enchantment. In this section, I
will be examining the role of the audience and the studio in regulating the
characters’ portrayals of race and gender. I will then assess Max in the L Word
to discuss how representation is received by trans men. In this instance, I
will be focusing on the perceived authenticity of such portrayals. Finally, I
will look at Paul to show that avoidance of negative stereotypes does not
equate to positive representation. I will do said analysis through a discussion
of transnormativity, as equivalent to cis and homonormativity, in relation to
modern day trans discourse.
Representation: The risk of
assimilation for the goal of visibility
As stated in the introduction, media influences perception.
Consequently, gaining visibility through mainstream media can be an important
first step for minority groups to obtain political power (Capuzza, 2015; Fejes
& Petrich, 1993; Gross, 2001). This issue is not different for the trans
community, a group that is “seldom seen and even less often understood” (Booth,
2011, p. 186). Since most cisgender (non-trans) people gain knowledge about the
trans community from TV and film (Disclosure 2020;
Faye 2021; Zottola 2021),
representations of trans people can provide cisgender viewers with an
educational opportunity. An opportunity that functions by triggering
self-reflexiveness thus forcing the viewer to “confront or reconsider the
personal and political complexities of sex, gender, and sexuality” (Booth,
2011, p. 186). However, there are some inherent dangers to claiming political
progress from media representation (Dow, 1996). Of particular interest to this
essay is that the effectiveness of the challenge to gender norms will be
largely dependent on the accuracy of the representations.
In real life, trans men’s physical body messes with the gender binary by
breaking away with the assumption that gender and sex always correlate
(Siebler, 2016). In this sense, trans men’s existence is inherently subversive
because it crosses over cultural gender boundaries and norms that have been
constructed by modern western society (Stryker, 2008). Some authors argue that
this boundary disturbance does translate into media depictions of trans men. In
an article analysing the appearance of a transgender man in the show Queer Eye
for the Straight Guy, Booth (2011) described trans embodiment as liminal,
meaning that it “slips through the network of classifications that
conventionally function in society” (Booth, 2011, p. 186). Departing from this
basis, he argued that the introduction of such a liminal status into the
hegemonic context of mainstream media, disrupts the conventional behaviours of
the characters and of the binary essentialism most media is built upon (Booth,
2011). Booth is not alone in this conclusion. In a similar fashion, authors
Kerry (2009) and Reed (2009) also emphasized the destabilisation and
disruptiveness that takes place whenever trans, or trans adjacent, subjects are
introduced into mainstream media. Even though there is value to their
assessment, I argue that the reality of trans representation is rarely as
straight forward.
While the portrayal of trans embodiment may be temporarily disruptive of
usual narratives based on the stability of gender, the representation of trans
people can also be manipulated to support and, thus, further the "ongoing
foundational power" of established binary gender categories (Prosser,
1998, p. 11). Because the gender binary, taken together with the assumption
that physical sex and gender presentation always align, is hegemonic,
mainstream audiences expect and even demand its maintenance (Booth, 2015). The audience’s
position matters because television and film work on and around commercial
interests. Due to their need to attract a large viewership, preferably composed
of those who possess purchasing power, the industry almost exclusively
addresses the dominant audience by producing relatable programming that matches
their interests and comfort (Booth, 2015; Condit, 1989). In essence, creators
and studios have a fundamental obligation to put the values and comfort of the
dominant audience above the interests and needs of the communities they are
representing. Hence, “mass media coverage works, in a seemingly natural way, to
reinforce dominant understandings of gender and sexuality” (Sloop, 2006, p.
325).
We have seen this happen with gay and lesbian representation. A number
of authors have looked into the growing numbers of shows portraying gay men and
lesbians in network television since the 1970s (see generally: Doty, 1993;
Escudero-Alías, 2011; Goltz, 2011; and Dow, 2001). In their analysis, they all
similarly concluded that most, if not all of these shows, were geared toward
the comfort of the heterosexual audience, which led to the control,
depolitization, and eventual assimilation of the queer characters. In the words
of Alex Doty, they “put the normative back into their homos” (2010). I argue
that a similar process takes place with the representation of trans men. The
following sections will explore how this phenomenon is currently, and has
historically been used in the portrayals of trans men. I will begin by
examining the film A Florida Enchantment, as it clearly exemplifies the
regulatory process based on commercial interests that I have just described.
A Florida Enchantment: Lawrence, Jack
and 20th century censure
A Florida
Enchantment constitutes the first appearance of a trans man in film. The first
decade of the 20th century saw an influx of female characters
“passing” as men for multiple reasons, primarily financial and social (Horak,
2016). However, it is not until A Florida Enchantment that we see what was then
called gender inversion, which is the equivalent of modern day trans identity (Raphaeli
2018; Somerville 2000).[1] The story follows Lillian Travers, a New
York heiress, and Jane, her maid. In a visit to Lillian’s aunt in Florida,
Lilian purchases magic African seeds that turn people into the opposite gender.
After a fallout with her fiancé, Lillian decides to test the seeds. She wakes
up the following morning transformed into Lawrence Talbot. It is at this point
that Lawrence forces Jane to also consume a seed when he decides he wants a
valet rather than a maid. Jane immediately transforms into a man, Jack.
Upon their transformation, both characters begin to portray what was at the
time considered normative masculinity.
The actress Edith Storey plays Lawrence Talbot through heavily
masculinised mannerisms. For example, he becomes careless, stumbling into
furniture; when he sees his facial hair, he is somehow able to shave it
skilfully; his walk, posture, stance, and hand movements shift from graceful to
unsophisticated, to showcase the move from femininity to masculinity.
Additionally, Lawrence loses all interest in his fiancé, and begins to flirt
with women despite not showing any previous interest in them. Overall, he
becomes a “fantasy of male privilege” and a “gentleman” who shows “genteel
codes of behaviour” that represent “power and authority” (Horak, 2016, p. 99;
Somerville, 2000, p. 65). The portrayal of Lawrence can be directly contrasted
with that of Jack, the black maid/valet. This allows for examination of the
ways in which the films portrayal of gender stereotypes intersects with racial
stereotypes. Once Jane turns into Jack, his violent outbursts and overt sexual
drive become the defining factors of his masculinity. Furthermore, he too
begins to flirt with women. However, unlike Lawrence’s, Jack’s advances are
violent and threatening to the woman they are directed to. As Somerville points
out, “the film thus calls on asymmetrical contemporary cultural constructions
of black and white masculinity, reinforcing stereotypes of the aggressive black
male” that is dangerous to women (Somerville, 2000). What can be inferred from
this description is that, despite quite literally portraying a gender
inversion, nothing the characters do moves away from normative conceptions of
race and gender. On the contrary, they very closely reproduce what was expected
of white and black men at the time.
At the heart of the “normativisation” of the characters is the need to
regulate the representation to be in accordance with acceptability standards of
the time. The studio had to manage two factors here. Firstly, they had to avoid
censorship. The film was shot and distributed at a time when the National Board
of Censorship, as well as regional censorship boards, were banning and cutting
films that contained sexual deviance (Horak, 2016). Consequently, failure to
comply with the censor’s guidelines could result in great financial loss.
Secondly, much like any other commercial venture, the film had to be
financially successful (Sommerville, 2000). In the words of Vitagraph, the
studio that produced A Florida Enchantment, they wanted to “not only draw
record crowds, but bring Higher Class Patronage at Higher Prices" (Cripps,
1977, p. 118). For this reason, the studio advertised the film as familiar
entertainment for white middle-class audiences. If general audiences and
censors had seen the protagonists deviating from the gender or racial norm, the
film would not have been saved from censure, let alone be popular among
middle-class families. Therefore, the film had to “downplay race and racial
narratives” (Sommerville, 2000, p. 69) and avoid “writing anything that might
stir up vulgar feelings or sexual thought” (Bertsch, 1917, p. 276).
This normativisation continued beyond the 20th century. The
following section will examine the next pivotal representation of a trans man
to analyse how the authenticity of these normative portrayals are perceived by
trans men themselves. This has not been done at this stage because a film
distributed in 1914 evidently did not elicit any reactions from the trans
community.
The L Word: Max and inauthentic
narratives
The show The “L” Word premiered on Showtime in 2004. The focus of
this TV drama was the lives of a group of friends composed of lesbian and
bisexual women living in Los Angeles. In its third season, the creators
introduced Max, the first recurring transmasculine character in television
(Disclosure, 2020). Because the main target audience of the show were lesbian
and bisexual women, the portrayal of Max was designed to content them, rather
than to be an accurate representation of trans lived experiences. As writer
Zeke Smith puts it, “the writers and producers of The L Word’s approach to Max
is that they are seeing trans men increasingly enter the lesbian community, and
that they are traitors to feminism” (Disclosure, 2020). A position which is
evidenced when one of the women tells Max that “it just saddens me to see so
many of our strong butch girls giving up their womanhood to be a man” (Chaiken
et al., 2006a). Accordingly, the character of Max was based upon a cisnormative
and binary understanding of gender, whereby womanhood is in direct opposition,
and perhaps even in conflict with manhood and masculinity.
The way the creators ended up portraying this oppositional binary was by
keeping Max in line with normative masculinity and, crucially, dominant gender
relations (Reed 2009). More specifically, in this instance the writers used
what Raewyn Connell (2010) called an “endocrinological theory” of masculinity.
This theory argues that men’s aggression is a natural effect of testosterone.
We can infer that this was the creator’s position from Max’s behaviour and
dialog. As soon as he goes on testosterone, Max starts having violent outburst.
He is constantly aggressive, and in episode 3.10 he states that “it’s the
testosterone. It, like, amps me up” and “I feel like if I didn’t work out, I’d
wanna break someone’s face” (Chaiken et al., 2006b). Furthermore, his
relationship to women also changes. For example, he becomes irrationally
jealous and possessive of Jenny, his girlfriend, to the point of being
physically aggressive with her in episode 3.9 (Chaiken et al., 2006a).
From the description above, it is evident that Max’s journey was meant to
be understood as negative. Importantly, it was also meant to be seen as him
giving up the queerness of lesbian identity in favour of the normativity of
trans identity (Reed, 2009; Halberstam, 1998). Consequently, Max’s storyline
was not well received by the trans audience, with many feeling devastated and
betrayed (Disclosure, 2020). In an interview about the show’s representation,
actor Brian Michal Smith stated that "a lot of what was being represented
for him, it just didn't have that much truth in it" (Bendix, 2019). Sadly,
a show about the queer community, ignored, and intentionally sacrificed, the
subversiveness of trans existence for the comfort of its viewers. Instead, they
favoured of a dominant narrative of masculinity that did not reflect the lived
experiences of the trans men watching.
Thus far I have not examined how these normative representations
assimilate trans people. In the following section I will use Paul to exemplify
this process.
9-1-1 Lone Star: Paul and
transnormativity
In the series 9-1-1 Lone Star, Paul is a black man who works as a
firefighter in Texas. His character is an advancement from previous
representation. Firstly, he is a complex and three-dimensional character. We
see him building friendships, interacting with his co-workers, and having
conflict with his family. More importantly, however, the audience is given the
opportunity to learn about his emotions, opinions, and taste on a wide range of
issues (Capuzza & Spencer, 2017). Secondly, the audience gets to engage
with him beyond his trans identity. While the fact that he is trans is
mentioned, he is allowed to exist outside of this part of his identity. This
was certainly not the case for the previous two examples where the reason for
the existence of the characters, and the central focus of all the conflicts
they encountered, was the trans identity (McLaren et al., 2021). Thirdly, he
offers much needed visibility to trans people of colour, particularly black
trans men, as the majority of trans men in film and television have been white
(Bendix, 2019). However, despite the depth given the character, Paul’s gender
presentation is far from complex. His gender performance is rather simplistic
and binary as it falls perfectly within contemporary normative masculinity. He
“passes” as a cisgender man, he wears normative masculine clothing, he is
heterosexual, he exercises and has defined muscles, he is on testosterone and
has had gender affirming surgery which left no scarring... All in all, if we
were not told that Paul is trans, nothing about his embodiment, behaviour, or
gender performance would indicate that he is trans. Because of this, Paul
becomes a transnormative subject.
Johnson (2016) defines transnormativity as the “ideological
accountability structure to which transgender people’s presentations and
experiences of gender are held accountable” (pp. 465-466). Such a “structure of
accountability” is based upon a binary medical model that regulates trans
identity to be in accordance with cisnormative standards (Siebler, 2012;
Johnson, 2013). Consequently, the behavioural and presentational standards of
masculinity and femininity applicable to transgender individuals, largely
overlap with those of cisgender masculinity and femininity (Connell, 2010). As
a result, transnormativity creates a hierarchy of legitimacy that renders the
gender performance of “passing” trans people as legitimate and as that of “real
trans people”, while marginalising the more genderqueer performances as “not
trans enough” (Catalano, 2015).
Considering the above definition, I argue that transnormative
representation is a form of stereotyping. Stuart Hall described stereotyping as
a portrayal that “sets up a symbolic frontier between the ‘normal’ and the
‘deviant’, the ‘normal’ and the ‘pathological’, the ‘acceptable’ and the
‘unacceptable’, what ‘belongs’ and what does not or is ‘Other’, between
‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’, Us and Them” (1996, p. 258). It follows that
transnormative subjects do not serve as subversive representation, rather they
serve to assimilate trans identity through stereotypes of acceptability. Paul does
not break with the gender binary, on the contrary, he represents the acceptable
trans man that can be easily assimilated into cisgender society. He is the type
of trans man that other trans men should aspire to be if they want to be
respected. Which in turn also serves to marginalise and other trans men who are
less normative. Paul’s character clearly exemplifies Siebler’s argument that “the
media environment serves to define what is acceptable rather than to accept all
that is possible” (2012, p. 137).
Conclusion
From all of the above, it can be concluded that representations of trans
men in media have served to assimilate trans men’s identity. By masculinising
trans characters in accordance with normative male standards, these
representations have divided the trans community between the acceptable and the
other. Much like it happened in the 80s and 90s with gay and lesbian media, the
comfort of cisgender and heterosexual viewers has been repeatedly prioritised
over the needs of the community being represented. However, it must be noted that
this essay has not examined every single instance of characters who are trans
men. A wider look that includes online streaming services allows for optimism.
For example, since 2019, Netflix has produced four shows that include
non-normative trans men. In Tales of the City, The Umbrella Academy, The OA,
and Dead End: Paranormal Park, we get to see queer trans men performing
non-normative masculinity, who show discomfort with traditional male roles
because of their lived experiences, and who engage with other trans people and
build community with them. It is vital to engage in what Joyrich (2014)
described as a vicious cycle, because it is the constant critique of existing
representation what guarantees that future stories will not sacrifice the
subversiveness of trans narratives in the name of cisgender comfort.
Bibliography
A Florida
Enchantment (1914) Directed by Sidney Drew, General Film, Vitagraph.
Ahmed, S. (2006) Queer
Phenomenologies: Orientations, Objects, Others, Durham: Duke University
Press.
Bendix, Trish (2019)
Doing right by trans men; Showtime's new 'Generation Q' takes to heart
lessons from 'The L Word,' Los Angeles Times. Available at: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2019-11-26/glaad-trans-representation-the-l-word-generation-q-showtime
Bertsch, M. (1917) How to Write for Moving Pictures: A Manual of Instruction
and Information, New York: G. H. Doran Company
Billard, T. J.
(2016) Writing in the margins: Mainstream news media representations of
transgenderism, International Journal of Communication, 10, 4193–4218.
Booth, E. T. (2011) Queering
Queer Eye: The stability of gay identity confronts the liminality of trans
embodiment, Western Journal of Communication, 75(2), 185–204.
--- (2015) The
provisional acknowledgement of identity claims in televised documentary, In
L. G. Spencer & J. Capuzza (Eds.), Transgender communication: Histories,
trends, and trajectories (pp. 111–126). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Capuzza, J. (2015) What’s
in a name? Transgender identity, metareporting, and the misgendering of
Chelsea Manning, In In L. G. Spencer & J. Capuzza (Eds.), Transgender
communication: Histories, trends, and trajectories (pp. 96–110). Lanham, MD:
Lexington Books.
Capuzza, J. &
Spencer, L. (2017) Regressing, Progressing, or Transgressing on the Small
Screen? Transgender Characters on U.S. Scripted Television Series,
Communication Quarterly (pp. 214-230)
Catalano, D. C. J.
(2015) “Trans enough?”: The pressures trans men negotiate in higher
education, Transgender Studies Quarterly, 2, 411–430.
Condit, C. M. (1989)
The rhetorical limits of polysemy, Critical Studies in Mass Communication,
6(2), 103–122
Connell, Catherine (2010)
Doing, Undoing, or Redoing Gender? Learning from the Workplace Experiences
of Trans People, Gender and Society 24(1):31–55
Connell, Raewyn
(2010) Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California
Press
Cripps, T (1977) Slow Fade to Black: The Negro
in American Film, 1900-1942, New York: Oxford University Press.
Disclosure (2020)
Documentary, Directed by Sam Feder, USA: Netflix.
Doty, A. (1993) Making
things perfectly queer: Interpreting mass culture, Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
--- (2010) Modern
Family, Glee, and the Limits of Television Liberalism, Flow TV 12 (9).
Available at: https://www.flowjournal.org/2010/09/modern-family-glee-and-limits-of-tv-liberalism/
Dow, B. J. (1996) Prime-time
feminism: Television, media culture, and the women’s movement since 1970,
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
--- (2001). Ellen,
television, and the politics of gay and lesbian visibility, Critical
Studies in Media Communication, 18, 123–140. doi:10.1080/07393180128077
Escudero-Alías, M.
(2011) Ethics, authorship, and the representation of drag kings in
contemporary US popular culture, Journal of Popular Culture, 44(2),
256–273.
S.2021LondonAllen Lane
Fejes, F., &
Petrich, K. (1993) Invisibility, homophobia and heterosexism: Lesbians,
gays and the media, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 10(4),
395–422.
Gamson, J. (2001). Talking
freaks: Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered families on daytime talk TV.
In M. Bernstein & R. Reimann (Eds.), Queer families, queer politics:
Challenging culture and the state (pp. 68–86). New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
2020Victims or Villains: Examining Ten Years of
Transgender Images on TelevisionAvailable at:https://www.glaad.org/publications/victims-or-villains-examining-ten-years-transgender-images-television
Halberstam, J.
(1998) Female Masculinity, Durham: Duke University Press
Hall, S. (2013) The
Spectacle of the "Other" in S. Hall, J. Evans, S. Nixon (Eds), Representation,
Second edition., London: Sage Publications Limited pp. 215-287
Horak, L. (2016) Girls
Will Be Boys: Cross-Dressed Women, Lesbians, and American Cinema, 1908–1934,
New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=kent1374765386&disposition=inline
Joyrich, L. (2014). Queer
television studies: Currents, flows, and (mainstreams), Cinema Journal,
53 (2), 133–139.
Kerry, S. (2009) “There’s
genderqueers on the starboard bow”: The pregnant male in Star Trek,
Journal of Popular Culture, 42(4), 699–714.
Lead, Follow, or
Get Out of the Way, The L
Word (2006a) Ilene Chaiken. Dir. Moises Kaufman. Produced by Ilene Chaiken
and Rose Lam. Showtime. Episode.
Losing the Light, The L Word (2006b) Ilene Chaiken. Dir.
Moises Kaufman. Produced by Ilene Chaiken and Rose Lam. Showtime. Episode.
McLaren, J.; Bryant,
S.; Brown, B. (2021) See me! Recognize me! An analysis of transgender
media representation, Communication Quarterly, 69 (2), p.172-191
Miller, L. (2015) Becoming
one of the girls/guys: Distancing transgender representations in popular film
comedies, In Spencer, L. G. & Capuzza, J. (Eds.), Transgender
communication: Histories, trends, and trajectories (pp. 127–142). Lanham:
Lexington Books.
Prosser, J. (1998) Second
Skins: The Body Narratives of Transsexuality, New York: Columbia University
Press.
Raphaeli, K. (2018) Victorian
Gender Fluidity: Performativity and Reception in A Florida Enchantment and
Gabriel, Victorian Review, Volume 44 pp. 131-146
Reed, J. (2009) Reading
gender politics on The L Word: The Moira/Max transitions, Journal of
Popular Film & Television, 37(4), 169–178.
Showtime (2004-2009)
The L word, California: Paramount Home Entertainment.
Siebler, K. (2010) Transqueer
representation and how we educate, Journal of LGBT Youth, 7, 320–345.
--- (2012) Transgender
transitions: Sex/gender binaries in the digital age, Journal of Gay &
Lesbian Mental Health, 16(1), 74–99.
--- (2016) Learning
Queer Identity in the Digital Age, New York : Palgrave Macmillan.
Somerville, S. B.
(2000) Queering the Color Line: Race and the Invention of Homosexuality in
American Culture, Durham: Duke University Press.
Stryker, S. (2008) Transgender
history, Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.
Vitagraph (1914) A
Florida Enchantment 16 mm, 5 reels, 63 minutes, Directed by Sidney Drew.
A.2021LondonBloomsbury
Academic
[1] It must be noted that there is discussion as
to whether the film represents lesbian rather than trans identity (see
generally: Brasell (1997) and Horak (2016). For concision I will not engage
with such a discussion. Hence, for the purpose of this essay, the film
represents gender inversion.