Could It Be Anymore Toxic? Toxic Masculinity and the Power of representation in Friends
Translated title
Could It Be Anymore Toxic? Toxic Masculinity and the Power of Representation in Friends
Author
Christensen, Liv Natashia Ravnholt
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2022
Submitted on
2022-05-30
Pages
80
Abstract
Portrayals of gender in popular media shape how we understand masculinity and femininity. This thesis examines how the sitcom Friends depicts its male leads and whether it both shows and endorses what is often called toxic masculinity - harmful behaviors linked to narrow ideals of manhood. Drawing on gender theory by Judith Butler, Raewyn Connell, and Michael Kimmel, it focuses on hegemonic masculinity - the dominant cultural ideal of manhood - and how the characters try to live up to it. The study finds that all of the main male characters attempt to emulate hegemonic practices in different parts of their lives. The laugh track, however, makes it unclear whether the series mainly exposes or affirms these attempts: oppressive behavior is often framed as a joke, with laughter signaling ridicule; at other times, moments of intimacy, close friendship, or vulnerability are also turned into jokes. This ambivalence makes it hard to tell which aspects viewers are meant to endorse and which to question, and it underpins much of the show’s humor. Each character exhibits a form of complicit masculinity - they benefit from dominant norms - yet also shows empathy and vulnerability that reach beyond what the hegemonic ideal expects. The analysis keeps the 1990s context in view while noting a 2018 backlash tied to a changed audience and shifting views of masculinity and gender relations. Overall, the thesis concludes that Friends includes representations of toxic masculinity and attempts to criticize them, and that overt male competition is not a major theme. It recommends further research on the show’s representation of race and its portrayal of trans people, both criticized in 2018.
Skildringer af køn i populærkulturen påvirker, hvordan vi forstår mandighed og kvindelighed. Denne afhandling undersøger, hvordan sitcomen Friends fremstiller de mandlige hovedfigurer, og om serien både viser og understøtter det, der ofte kaldes toksisk maskulinitet - skadelig adfærd knyttet til snævre idealer for mandighed. Med udgangspunkt i kønsteori af Judith Butler, Raewyn Connell og Michael Kimmel fokuserer analysen på hegemonisk maskulinitet - det dominerende kulturelle ideal for mandighed - og på hvordan figurerne forsøger at leve op til det. Afhandlingen finder, at alle mandlige hovedpersoner forsøger at emulere hegemoniske praksisser på forskellige områder af deres liv. Lattersporet gør det dog uklart, om serien primært udstiller eller bekræfter disse forsøg: Undertrykkende adfærd rammes ofte ind som jokes, og latteren signalerer, at den kan latterliggøres; andre gange bliver ømhed, nære venskaber eller sårbarhed også gjort til jokes. Denne ambivalens gør det svært at afkode, hvilke elementer publikum forventes at støtte, og hvilke der bør kritiseres, og den bærer en stor del af seriens humor. Hver figur udtrykker en form for medskyldig maskulinitet - de drager fordel af de dominerende normer - men viser også empati og sårbarhed, der går ud over, hvad det hegemoniske ideal forventer. Analysen tager højde for, at serien blev sendt i 1990'erne, og noterer et tilbageslag i 2018, knyttet til et ændret publikum og skiftende syn på maskulinitet og kønsrelationer. Samlet konkluderer afhandlingen, at Friends rummer repræsentationer af toksisk maskulinitet og forsøger at kritisere dem, og at åbenlys konkurrence mellem mænd ikke er fremtrædende. Den anbefaler videre undersøgelser af seriens repræsentation af race og af transpersoner, som begge blev kritiseret i 2018.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords