The Dangers of Prioritizing Sexualization Over Characterization
 |
| Image description: The character of Hetty from the CBS comedy, Ghosts. Just recently, the series gave me an excellent way to discuss my thoughts about this week's topic, all about why I feel characterization and true character development are more important than sexual plotlines, and the ways media often ignores the former in favor of the latter. |
Picture this: You’re watching a television show or movie, reading
a book, playing a video game, and enjoying the characters you encounter along
the way. As the story unfolds, you expect to watch these characters grow and
change as they progress through the plot and interact with other characters.
Maybe a situation unfolds that forces them out of their comfort zone. Maybe
they meet someone that causes them to rethink their current circumstances. Or
perhaps they encounter something that requires a different approach than they
had before. A well-known piece of writing advice says that everything that happens
in a story should either move the plot forward or facilitate character growth,
and chances are that the best stories or scenes that you remember from your favorite
media have managed to do both.
During your journey with a piece of media, maybe you’ve
experienced this phenomenon: despite the plot moving along and the characters
with it, you encounter one character who just never seems to develop at all
past where they started, or maybe they don’t develop quite so much as they
devolve. Unfortunately, it’s a common enough occurrence – and one you’ve seen
me complain a lot about on the blog whenever I talk about the dreaded concept
of “inconsistent writing.” But when it comes to aspec analysis, there’s an even
worse phenomenon than just flat characters or characters plagued by uneven
plotlines.
In my own life, I’ve often experienced the phenomenon of watching
a character develop, grow, and change, only for some plot element to suddenly
shift their development in another direction, one that is less about the
character growing for their own benefit and one that is thrown in purely for
the benefit of the audience. While this doesn’t only happen because of sex
and/or romance, as an aspec viewer I am often shocked by not only how often it
does happen for these reasons, but at how often it is accepted and even lauded.
While a character can of course grow and develop through these things in ways
that are meaningful or well-portrayed, this is not always the case. I have seen
too many instances where actual character growth is tossed aside in favor of
what is more often sexualization instead.
So today, I want to explore this tendency we see in media. I
want to discuss specifically what the difference is between a well-portrayed
sexual and/or romantic story for a character versus actual sexualization, and I
want to look at how ignoring character development in favor of said
sexualization hurts people of all sexual identities. As always, I will be
looking at some of the most common examples I’ve seen where this happens,
causing characters to either lose their character development entirely in favor
of sexualization or where true character growth and development could happen in
a meaningful way, but is ignored so sexual and/or romantic plotlines can be
explored exclusively, often at the character’s detriment. And of course, as
both a geek and a writer myself, I want to explore some of my own ideas about
how I think these notions can be avoided.
-----------------------------
Let’s Define
Some Terms
As I often tend to do with these types of posts, let me
start this post out with a few definitions. Right away, “characterization”
might require a little explanation because, during the course of writing this
post, I actually learned a few things myself from the dictionary definition. As
a writer, I always think of characterization as the act of fleshing out a
character – setting them up on their journey, sketching out who they are as a
person, and allowing them to grow within the frame of the story. Technically,
this is actually “character development,” but this term and the term
“characterization” tend to be used interchangeably, or at least go
hand-in-hand. In the broader sense, “characterization” is literally the act of
representing a character in a dramatic work.
Technically, both definitions work for what I want to
discuss today. While I’ll technically be using it more in the sense of
“character development” and how I think this development should be emphasized
over sexualization, the other definition makes my point just as well because I
believe portraying a character should mean more than just portraying them as
sexual and nothing else. Just like people are not limited by sex or romance
alone, a well-rounded character shouldn’t be either, and this is where the idea
of sexualization comes in. Since this is arguably the more important term to
this process, let me also discuss and define just what it means to sexualize
someone.
While this all might seem a bit pedantic of me, I think
terms like these have to be seen through this lens, because it’s very easy for
people to take these types of critiques and arguments as attacks, when they’re
really not. There is nothing wrong with experiencing sexual attraction, or
being attracted to a celebrity, a fictional character, or a real person. There
is nothing wrong with expressing or celebrating sex and sexuality, nor is there
anything wrong with sex and/or your sexuality being an important part of your
life. But that is not the same as sexualization.
Sexualization, in its most basic terms, is to make something
sexual. But this basic definition only tells part of the story. The reason why
sexualization is so often seen as a problem is because it can often be linked
to sexual objectification, which is the act of treating someone as an object of
sexual desire, rather than a person. Like I said, there’s nothing wrong with
feeling sexual desire or feeling sexual desire towards a specific person, but sexual
objectification is far darker because it treats a person as existing solely for
the purposes of someone else’s sexual satisfaction, often not caring about
their own rights or feelings.
While of course this is most notably a problem in real life,
it’s also a problem in media for a few different reasons. Although fictional
characters are not real people and thus it seems like sexual objectification of
them isn’t an issue, these attitudes rarely exist in a vacuum. Media – and, by
extension, the fictional characters found in said media – influence a lot of
how we think, feel, and behave towards real people and can shape an audience’s
outlook of the world. If this is how writers and viewers alike would treat a
fictional character, what’s to stop them from doing it in real life? If media
constantly asserts that seeing a person’s worth is not nearly as important as
seeing them as an object of sexual desire, this constant diet of sexualization
has the potential to be harmful for aspec people and non-aspec people alike.
Let’s Discuss
the Usual Suspects
Regular readers of the blog may know that there are a few
characters I often discuss when I bring up the topic of characters who are
poorly served by sexualization – both in the sense of being treated as sexual
objects and in the sense of a sexual nature being treated as mandatory for
their development. In fact, in a post I did in 2021, I discussed the dangers of
sexualizing characters that otherwise have non-sexual tendencies. Naturally,
for that analysis, I brought up my oft-cited example of Seven of Nine from Star Trek: Voyager. In that post, I also discuss the fact that, although Seven
was brought into the show for sex appeal, she nevertheless manages to be an
incredible character. The reason for this, of course, lies in moments of truly
excellent characterization, and for that reason, she’s an excellent example for
this post as well, serving to discuss both the positive and the negative.
In terms of the positive, the moments where Seven is allowed
to grow as a person are what give her character such depth. Throughout her time
on the show, she’s allowed to confront her past, make friends, learn to adapt
to changing circumstances, make sacrifices for the good of others, and
cultivate her own personality and interests in ways that are often quite
moving. When at their best, most of these moments don’t include instances of
overt sexualization (her "catsuit" outfits notwithstanding), nor do they need it.
Instead, the strength of the writing/storytelling and Jeri Ryan’s performance
in the role make Seven stand out.
By contrast, many of the worst moments for Seven, in my
opinion, are ones that involve sexualization. As I said in that previous post,
there is a big difference between portraying a character’s sex life and
sexualization. There is also a big difference between sex being used to develop
a character and tossing out characterization for the sake of sexualization,
which is often what we see happen when Seven is forced into these sexualized
moments. The fact that she has other moments where she’s allowed to develop so
beautifully as a character actually make these moments even more unfortunate,
because we see the glimmers of how excellently her character can develop.
Therefore, sexualizing her feels almost like a tragic waste of her character,
or like the writers are telling us that sexualizing her is more important in
the grand scheme of things than whether or not her character grows.
 |
| Image description: In the episode "Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy," the ship's holographic doctor adds the ability to daydream to his program, but it goes horribly awry to the point where the crew can eventually see his daydreams - including Seven seeing this one of the Doctor painting her in the nude. While this is somewhat different than other sexualization, since even the crew points out how wrong it is that they should be able to see anyone's daydreams, showing Seven with only the canvas to block her was clearly meant to appeal to a presumed straight male audience that wanted to see her character sexualized in this way, presenting an entirely different problem. Additionally, this is not the only time in the series where the audience is encouraged to sexualize Seven in this way. |
I believe this happens in a two-pronged way – the first prong being in how the audience is encouraged to see her (both literally and figuratively) and the second in how the story/other characters treat her. As I said, Seven was obviously brought into the show for sex appeal and was described as the show’s “sexy Borg babe,” both by fans and by the show’s creators themselves. The audience is encouraged to see her that way given the way she is often dressed in those aforementioned skin-tight catsuits, and yet there are many times where Seven is portrayed as non-sexual, despite these moments of sexualization. However, as the show goes on, these moments are not allowed to be part of Seven’s personality; rather, they’re portrayed as quirks at best and defects at worst.
Seven doesn’t need these things to be seen as a great or
relatable character; she already is one. And yet, pushing Seven into various
relationships feels to me like something that is done to signal to the audience
that they are now allowed to relate to her or see her as fully human, and I
believe that’s a problem. They are inserted into the story to still give Seven
some metric of humanity to “strive for,” and I believe that the romantic
storylines given to Seven throughout her tenure in Star Trek are there because
the writers couldn’t fathom that their “sexy Borg babe” wouldn’t be a romantic
and/or sexual character. In this way, Seven’s personal development is ignored
because sexual development is seen as more important for her, and I feel that
is the worst type of missed potential.
When it comes to the idea of how characters react to other
characters and how that in turn affects how the audience reacts, another usual
blog subject I have to bring up briefly is Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory. Although Sheldon is not sexually objectified the way Seven is – and
if he were, it would be portrayed differently anyway – sexualization is still a
tragically large part of his story. Even though we as the audience are never
really encouraged to see him as a sexual object, I feel that his girlfriend Amy
tends to, ignoring Sheldon’s wishes in favor of her own sexual desires and the hope
that he will be sexually intimate with her. Furthermore, the show allows
Sheldon to develop in some ways but never in others, and his sexual development
is almost always portrayed as more important.
 |
| Image description: Although Sheldon is never made to be a sexual object for the audience, he often is put in that position specifically for Amy. For instance, the above is a portrayal of Sheldon as he appears in fanfiction that Amy writes about him. |
In some ways, I think it could be argued that Sheldon is a flat character, or at least one that is selectively flat. Throughout the show, he does open up a great deal more to the people in his life and even shows empathy or genuine warmth towards them in a way that originally would have been unthinkable thanks to his usual analytical and self-absorbed nature. Sometimes, this development is even portrayed rather poignantly, leading to moments that are both heartfelt and very funny. But, because the show is a comedy first and foremost – and often a rather tone-deaf one – they occasionally go for the easy laugh by making Sheldon utterly unaware of his own problematic tendencies. Even several seasons into the show, the idea of Sheldon casually saying racist and misogynistic things or holding onto these attitudes is played for cheap humor, ignoring the idea of his development in favor of quick and off-color jokes.
Because of this inconsistency in his character’s portrayal, it
feels like the show doesn’t care about Sheldon’s development as a character
until it suits them – that is to say, until they can make him more “normal” and
push him into more “normal” relationships. In Sheldon’s case, it may be more
accurate to say that his characterization is thrown out in favor of
“normalization,” wherein sex and romance are portrayed as development, even as
the show ignores the other moments of actual genuine development. Sheldon
doesn’t need sex or romance to grow as a character, and if the show would just
allow him to continue to develop in response to the people around him rather
than at their whims, I think that could have been very meaningful.
When it comes to both Seven of Nine and Sheldon, I can’t say
for certain why their respective pieces of media decided that pushing them into
sexual situations and romantic relationships was more important than developing
their personalities and stories. However, I believe it’s because of the media
attitude that sex/romance are “more important” or “more interesting” than other
types of development. But I also believe that this is categorically untrue.
While romance and sex can be interesting, watching a character grow and develop
on their own merit is the most interesting arc a character can go through, and
if done well, it can be the best part of a piece of media. Ignoring these
things not only demonstrates problematic societal attitudes, but I believe it
also severely limits storytelling and creativity. Better stories are possible,
but they are only possible if we view characters as characters, not as objects
solely for the purpose of sexual storytelling.
Let’s Talk
About How This Can Be Better
Obviously problems like sexual objectification will not be
solved overnight, and probably won’t even be solved just through better media
portrayals. Even the problem of sexualization being prioritized over more
in-depth character development won’t magically go away. However, I believe a
problem like this can only be solved if we put a greater emphasis on character development
rather than relying on tropes and plot conventions, or defaulting to what is
often an easy plot device. This doesn’t have to be a difficult or unpleasant
process, and can actually be incredibly meaningful. For a great example of
this, I’d like to turn to a recent episode of the CBS sitcom Ghosts called "Holes Are Bad."
I've mentioned Ghosts before on the blog as a show
I significantly enjoy because, despite some of its instances of sexual humor,
it often involves very wholesome messages at its core such as friendship, support,
and mutual kindness. However, the show’s third season seems to be going in a
slightly more obvious direction, amping up the use of the sexual inuendo terms
that many of the ghosts unwittingly use and also playing up many of the more
sexual storylines between the house’s ghostly inhabitants. Again, this is
nothing new, as many of the ghosts have started pairing off or exploring other
relationships since at least the show’s second season, but it was often just
one part of otherwise larger plot elements and many of these relationships were
actually quite poignant, such as the relationship between Isaac and Nigel.
One of the relationships that started taking the show in a
different direction was the dalliance between Trevor, an over-sexualized
“finance bro,” and Hetty, one of the original owners of the manor where the
ghosts now find themselves who is often portrayed as somewhat sexually
repressed. Various storylines involving Hetty also involve her trying to
redefine her own ideas of sex and sexuality. While of course these are not
plotlines that speak to me or my experience, I certainly don’t mind that
they’re portrayed for Hetty as ways of reasserting her power in the afterlife
after having spent her living years under the thumb of oppressive men in her
life, including a husband she hated.
 |
| Image description: Hetty (left) talks to Sam and Isaac in the episode "Holes Are Bad." If Ghosts relied only on sexual plotlines for Hetty, we would not have this important and brilliantly done episode - read on for more details. |
That being said, her sexual liaisons with Trevor do feel somewhat odd and out of place when compared to the ways the ghosts often related to one another as platonic friends in the first season. They also take moments where Hetty explores sexuality and make them feel less like her own personal attempts at self-discovery and more like the same old tired idea that people who don’t express sexuality are “prudish” and “denying themselves.” This is made even more pronounced due to the hypersexualized nature of characters like Trevor himself or the hippie ghost named Flower who tries to encourage Hetty to discover her sexuality more. In that case, it feels a little less like characterization and – while perhaps not sexualization the way we see with characters like Seven – a bit more like relying on sex for the cheap joke rather than actual character development.
But in “Holes Are
Bad,” I feel the show demonstrates how you can swing back in the other
direction. [Content warning for brief mentions of
suicide] Given the show’s ensemble cast, it feels like Hetty hasn’t
really had much to do lately, but this particular episode finally reveals how
she died and in so doing, allows her to both be a hero and someone in need of
healing. As it turns out, Hetty died when the police who were investigating her
missing husband’s crimes began closing in on her; seeing no other way out, she
chose to take her own life, hoping the act would save the rest of her family from
being punished and humiliated. When her friends find out this truth, they
remind her that she’s never alone and that she can always ask for help.
The title of the episode refers to the fact that Flower has
fallen down a well and can’t get out without the help of the others – chiefly
Hetty. But it also comes back later when Isaac reminds Hetty that emotional
holes are just as bad and also sometimes require help to climb back out of. She
never had that help or support before, as a flashback scene during the episode
shows rather sadly, but she has it now in the form of her friends. It’s a
poignant and beautiful episode, the type that made me fall in love with Ghosts
in the first place, and I think it proves that characters are best served
through actual characterization. Can that sometimes also include plotlines
about sex or discovery of sexuality as some of Hetty’s own earlier plotlines
did? Sure. But at the end of the day, a character’s growth should be
facilitated by just that – growth.
This is one of the reasons why I love Korean dramas so much
and why K-Drama characters are often among some of the most memorable I’ve ever
seen. At the beginning of this post, I mentioned several instances of how
character development should work, centering on how characters interact with
other characters and react to plot situations. Many of my favorite K-Dramas are
masterclasses in this, offering exciting and often highly inventive plots while
also serving as incredible character studies full of richly nuanced characters
who develop and change due to many different factors. As they do so, romance
may be a part of that, but it’s very rarely the sole motivating factor and sex
almost never so.
For instance, my favorite K-Drama is the 2018 fantasy series
Memories of the Alhambra, which centers on Yoo Jin-woo, the CEO of a
successful tech company who is looking to invest in a massive virtual reality
roleplaying game that can be played through a set of special contact lenses.
When the series starts, Jin-woo is not an especially likable guy – having
experienced his second failed marriage and other disappointments in life
despite his successful company, he is bitter, selfish, and haughty. As the show
progresses, however, and the game begins malfunctioning in ways Jin-woo could
never have fathomed, we see how he changes. Soon he learns to care for the
people around him that work closely with him every day, and evolves as a
character as the circumstances of his life push him into wild situations. While
eventually his story does include a romance, it’s not the romance that solely
precipitates this change; rather, it’s the change in him that allows the
romance to fully develop.
Many of my favorite K-Dramas are the same way, and many of
my favorite characters and/or romances within these dramas work so well because
they allow their characters to develop organically rather than shoehorning in
the romance plots. In these dramas, romance isn’t used as a way to make a
character more relatable or to artificially change them, and if romance is
included, it’s the end, not the means. Character development is allowed to
shine first and foremost with the romance as something that a character can
have if it works for the story and the characters, but not as something that
is required. Additionally, there are many great K-Drama character studies that
have absolutely nothing to do with romance, and entirely involve a character
growing for the sake of their own growth.
Again, this is frequently done without sexualization,
proving that it can be done if creators and fans allow space for characters to
grow without being sexualized. While a good story may include sex, there is no
reason why good storytelling is also required to have sexualization, and I
believe that teaches important lessons for real life as well. When media
entrenches the idea that being sexualized is “normal,” it creates a world where
people need to accept this treatment or where they need to overemphasize the
sexual parts of their life rather than other parts of themselves. We see very
clearly elements in our culture and society where romance and sex are
considered required parts of life, but we don’t need to buy into that
narrative, and I believe the first step to not accepting this is by demanding
better storytelling and character development in our media.
 |
| Image description: Yoo Jin-woo from the Korean drama Memories of the Alhambra, a character whose complexity and growth is not reliant on his romantic arc in a show that values adventure, storytelling, drama, and friendship just as much as its romance. |
Again, these things don’t exist in a vacuum, and if
characters are sexualized, then so too will real people – whether those people
be celebrities, strangers, or people we know well in real life. Just like there
is so much potential for storytelling if it’s not limited by these limiting
factors, I believe the same is true of relationships in our own lives. Just
like characters grow, we all grow as people everyday when we encounter new
situations and types of people, including aspec ones. By acknowledging that
there are other ways to express ourselves, experience love, see the world, and
grow as people, I think we can all truly break out of being flat characters in
real life and become more well-rounded individuals full of depth and complexity
– just like our favorite characters and stories.
Comments
Post a Comment