Misogyny 101: why do WOMEN help produce and watch this show?

[hopelessroman]

The format of this shows calls for humiliation. They even wrote into Trista's contract that she had to agree to be humiliated. There's a clue for yah.

It really is a pitiful sight to see women, often in their very early 20's desperately trying to do whatever is necessary to catch the eye of The Bachelor in order to have him deem her rose-worthy.
For those rejected on the first night it's likely their personality didn't even come into play, they were rejected on the basis of their looks. How charming.

Once you make it into the mansion, the Stockholm syndrome kicks in. With nothing to do but obsess about The Bachelor, the women turn into giggling fools when the date box arrives and so the process of getting yourself noticed begins, and for that purpose the skimpy bikini is a gal's best friend.

The nature of the program demands that the women are as forthcoming as possible while The Bach is required to play his cards close to his chest.
He can't declare his "love" for anyone until he delivers the final rose. All the women have to feel they're in with a shot because the producers can't risk that those on the outs would cut and run instead of staying and fighting for the man.

This show is not set up to find a romance, it's set up to find a winner, someone who gets the final rose.
If you're still "looking for the love story" after this many seasons, then I don't know what to tell you, other than prepare to be disappointed.

Whatever the reason, it's rather sad that their still appears to be a conveyor belt of contestants willing to put up with the conditions for a 1 in 25 shot at a brief fling.
Wait though, it worked for Trista...
So, Melissa looks set to face the ultimate humiliation over the next couple of weeks, haven't they all been humiliated already?

ITA with many of your sentiments here regarding the mysogyny of this show. In some ways, it is much like the Miss America or Miss Universe franchise businesses. . . having started out in a positive note, for outstanding women, smart intelligent who give back to the community to be recognized and awarded. . . however the off shoots have turned four year olds into pimped out little beauty queen, one of which was murdered.

So. . yeah. . .if you were one of these women taking a chance on finding love. . you would really have to question your own motives for doing so, knowing the potential for total humiliation. :nono

[duckysunshine]

Sorry if this is a bit disjointed ... just wanted to add some random thoughts.

1. I watch this show the way I watch movies. I'm the type of person who likes knowing how things end before I watch because I strongly prefer "happy" endings. To me, if this is my "relaxation time," I want to be in a good mood. I watch this show because, in theory, it should produce a happy ending. (I'm aware the "love story" I see is a fictional one.)

2. The "love stories" produced by this show, like most "love stories" I see in movies, tend to be heteronormative (assumption that men and women have certain roles and that heterosexuality is the natural order of things). For example, when a man is the Bachelor, the show makes a big deal out of things like him taking the women shopping or giving one of the women expensive jewelry to wear on a date. When a woman is the Bachelorette, the men compete in activities such as the pushup contest (Deanna's season) or the race around the city to find the Bachelorette (Jen's season). However, both the Bachelor and the Bachelorette also do a lot of similar outdoorsy activities with the contestants (countless helicopter rides, beach dates, etc.) ... which might be because those activities are simply less gendered or it's assumed that everyone should enjoy the outdoors.

3. Returning to the assumption of heterosexuality. It seems to me that by choosing 25 straight women for 1 straight man or 25 straight men for 1 straight woman, the show ensures that all of the contestants are interested solely in the Bachelor(ette). This means that TPTB must cast people who are "100% straight." It is never, never an option that the contestants will fall in love with each other.

4. This setup of 25:1 also places the Bachelor(ette) in a position of supreme power in his/her relationships. Why doesn't the show have multiple Bachelor(ette)s? Or an even number of heterosexual male and female contestants? Or bisexual/gay contestants? It might get too messy with everyone developing feelings for multiple people? I do see that the current setup means the show has a clear beginning and end ... the Bachelor(ette) eliminates people each week until we are left with one man and one woman.

5. The dynamic of power ... how do these couples transition after beginning their relationship in a setting that gives one partner all the power? Because I do believe that the setup of 25:1 gives the Bachelor(ette) the power to choose between options, while the contestants must vie for attention and make the Bachelor(ette) happy if they want to stick around. I was confused by the section from the Access Hollywood article posted by jlccaz, where the author implies that even when a woman is the one choosing from her suitors, she's simply morphing into different models of the straight man's ideal woman. I haven't interpreted Bachelorettes as any different from Bachelors in this respect. People bring out different sides of each other. And just throwing this out there, but I also have seen several cases of a contestant putting the Bachelor(ette) in a position where they have more of an equal relationship, either because the contestant is thinking about leaving, or the Bachelor(ette) really has feelings for the contestant and wants to keep him/her happy.

6. I am fully aware that this type of love story is extremely stereotypical and heteronormative ... so why do I enjoy watching it? Maybe because it's hard to break out of the system of thought I grew up with? Maybe because there aren't any other options right now (I don't consider Tila Tequila an actual alternative to this show)? Maybe because no matter the circumstances, I still enjoy the idea of seeing (fictional) people falling in love?

7. I can't honestly speak for other people who watch the show, but I think it's possible that one of the reasons a lot of people, especially women, are still able to watch one man choose between 25 women ... might be because we're (initially) led to believe that the Bachelor is a wonderful human being. And the final contestants are usually edited as complex, overall wonderful human beings, as well. The other contestants are either edited to show their flaws, or come across as caricatures, so we identify less with them than we do the final couple. I know that I personally would like to believe I am usually nice to other people, relatively intelligent, honest, loyal, fun to talk to (hopefully!), have a decent sense of humor, etc. So I feel satisfied when women who also share a lot of those qualities (in their own unique ways), as shown to us in their edits, make it pretty far in the show. It's almost as if we're watching people who are overall good people get rewarded by falling in love. Right now, for example, if I ignore Reality Steve's rumors, from what I've seen on TV ... Jason is edited as a decent person, who maybe likes to kiss people a little too much for my taste, but seems fine otherwise. The edits show Melissa and Molly, despite their different personalities, to both seem overall nice, intelligent, loyal, fun, etc. So based on what I've seen on TV so far, I would root for either Jason & Melissa or Jason & Molly to succeed. Whereas I would have a hard time rooting for someone like that woman with the vision boards, because that's really all we were shown of her.

8. In terms of humiliation, I really don't know why anyone would sign up for a show like this, knowing how things could be edited. It seems like a huge risk to me. Do they have that much faith that they'll find the person of their dreams on this show? I know a lot of people in the past have said they felt betrayed when they saw how they were edited, and I don't know how to explain that people continue to sign up for this. Are TPTB so convincing that they're not out to exploit people? But let's also take Erica (from PLo's season) as an example. She seemed to enjoy being portrayed as a spoiled princess-wannabe. She completely ate that up! I remember at that WTA, how over-the-top she seemed, and how one of the other contestants even made the comment that Erica acted entirely differently when the cameras weren't rolling. I would have been humiliated to be portrayed the way Erica was ... but she loved it. Maybe some people just want the attention so much, they don't care whether they come across in an embarrassing/negative way?

Anyway, I think I've completely lost my train of thought at this point! I'm sorry if a lot of this doesn't make any sense. I'm sure I've unintentionally made some problematic statements here and there, so I'll probably return at some point with further thoughts/clarifications.

[duckysunshine]

Also wanted to add ... I'm really conflicted about whether this show counts as misogynistic when we do also get a version in which the woman is the Bachelorette. I suppose having a Bachelorette from time to time doesn't necessarily take away from the fact that the majority of the time, we're seeing 1 man and 25 women. Also, all of the Bachelorettes so far have already experienced failed relationships with the Bachelor, whereas we get "fresh faces" for the Bachelor. Hmmmm.

[blasie]

Bachelor 10 Officer and a Gentleman was my first season. A friend asked if I was watching and I said that I was shocked that she watched because it was nothing more than a beauty pageant with an added sex competition. I had only seen promotions for previous shows and couldn't switch the channel fast enough. I then saw Andy on Kimmel and was impressed. When I saw his resume I was even more impressed. I started tuning in to the second half the show because there was another show that conflicted . I found that I had to watch with the sound off because my tolerance b.s. is minimal( I prefer witty repartee and well constructed sentences). Then I saw Tessa on skis with no make-up. I was hooked, but I only payed attention to her scenes. It was obvious that she was uncomfortable in the beauty pageant environment where many of the other women had spent time in competition.

After the show I Googled Tessa to find out more about her and discovered FORT. Now, if I find a participant who interests me.... intelligent, attractive, athletic, sense of humor....I follow the show and post.

No one goes on this show to find the love of her/his life. They go on it because they have an ego large enough to make them want to perform on a worldwide stage. They are exhibitionists. They use this vehicle as a screen test or an opportunity to promote themselves in some way.

Nothing that happens on any of these shows is real. It is like WWF. The producers know it, the participants know it, most of the millions of viewers know it, the only ones who aren't able to grasp it are the rabid message board posters who amount to less than .001% of all viewers.

The proposals that are made are valid only in TV world. They are no more binding than an engagement between two characters on a soap opera would be in the real life of those actors. Every once in a while these actors fall in love and get married, but that is a fluke. The same applies to The Bachelor.

I am a divorced 62 year old woman with 2 single sons in their late twenties and early thirties. I have no romantic illusions and am fascinated by observing human nature and people's willingness to dismiss the obvious in order to support the outcome that would most validate their own situation.

For example: Melissa has a "tramp stamp". Some people regard this as particularly trashy. Others regard this as perfectly acceptable and even desirable as it implies that this person is somewhat of a rebel. I wish there were a survey of posters to see how many "Molly" fans have tattoos and how many "Melissa" fans have tattoos.

As to why women would produce such a show......The Revenge of the Nerds. It is an opportunity for women who may have been ignored because they weren't cheerleaders or beauty pageant worthy to make the women who are appear shallow or foolish and make a lot of money in doing so.

[MsFroggy]

It's tempting to out them by name, but why would smart, educated, professional women produce this stuff ? I guess the answer is as simple as to "earn a living" or because they met their spouse/boyfriend while producing it and now "this" is what they do together. How romantic but still it would require a lot of hot showers at the end of the day to slough off the lies and stupid set ups.

Because not ALL of these contestants "asked for it" or "have it coming."

There are always a smattering of normal fun very smart sophisticated gals, ready for fun and adventure, only to find themselves at some mud bath being asked to rub mud on the Bachelor God.

Tessa balked at the tactics, etc., I always thought, not anything to do with whether she would capture the prize at the end.

How yucky to recruit someone like that to the show, knowing what one knows about how it really is put together. Lies, plain and simple.

There's just one problem with saying that "not all of them asked for it": they did sign up for it all and willingly. That's not really like taking the dark alley shortcut in a miniskirt at 2am kind of "willingly" then being raped by some animal because that's not asking for it. That's being victimized and being prayed on. Poor choices on the woman's part, but being raped is being raped. Nobody ever asks for it no matter what they wear or where they walk.

I can excuse women on the first couple of seasons when the show seemed a bit more innocent, more an odd Victorian throwback with a silly premise that was so anti-feministic it was almost charmingly nostalgic. Almost. To me, with Ms in my user name here, it was always mostly a joke, an unbelievable harem meets Hassidic shidduch meets speed dating on crack kind of spectacle. It was like watching this bug that everyone thought died out long ago resurrected in a lab and exhibited under glass in a museum. It still feels like it at times. The Jurassic Park of courtship and matrimony, if you will. The big manly 20th century Neanderthal evaluates a gaggle of giggling beauties and picks the one who is youngest, prettiest, most apt to worship him and make him look good in front of other males. Stupidest thing I've ever heard of, but for some women that's romantic.

However, back in those days the show still featured the phrase "if at any time you do not feel you have a connection with the Bachelor, you are free to refuse the rose" but hardly anyone took advantage of that escape clause even back then. Maybe they liked being in the harem of the banker/insurance salesman/millionaire Neanderthal. Maybe they didn't mind wiping out a few decades' worth of women's lib, maybe they were just stupid. Who cares? I felt sorry for them for a minute there but right after that I laughed out loud and haven't stopped laughing since.

It's been at least 7 or 8 seasons since Chris has uttered that phrase at Rose Ceremonies. In short, they're no longer free to leave. Tessa, the seemingly conflicted victim certainly wasn't. Her temporary insanity ran into the iron wall of that 20 page contract she was none too intelligent to reject. No matter how smart she was otherwise she still wasn't smart enough to say no when she was recruited for the show. And yes, she was reportedly recruited.

What's there to feel sorry about then? Tessa was clean cut, came from money, was seemingly smart but when it came right down to it, she was no different than one of Flava's, er, ladies. Same idiocy, different manifestation. One came on a show for starry eyed 20 to 49 year old nostalgia seeking middle class women, the other on a show for 20 to 49 year old middle class women looking for something to point at and be horrified by.

Many women on both shows might wake up and leave if allowed, but I think that they shouldn't be allowed to leave. It's like taking out a loan. You knew the interest was 9.5%, but now think that's too much, so you stop paying. What? You signed that paper, you knew what you were doing then, you damn well should pay off the loan now and shut up. Women have seen this show, have seen what becomes of those who have gone through it, and they still sign on the dotted line. Perhaps the fame, or rather infamy, carrot is too sweet a lure. I don't see how one can blame a female producer - as opposed to a male producer - for that.

Not to reinforce the 20 to 50 stereotype quoted above where that age group of women tends to blame the victim, as I am in that age range, but I don't think there are real victims on this show. If you are presented with a 20 page contract written in tight legalese, containing so many clauses, sub-clauses and whatnot that your eyes cross and you sign because you're either too stupid to know better, too eager to be on TV anyway, too lazy to call up a lawyer, too cheap to call up a lawyer, feel pressured by the producers, or indeed, you just want to be on TV no matter what, or all of the above, then I think it's not fair to blame the producers for your misfortune and exploitation, even if some of those producers are women. I don't think any woman signing up for this show has a right to say "I didn't know". Boohoo.

As to the female producers, I reject the idea that just because one is a woman, one cannot be a ruthless, money-hungry careerist with her eye on the ball and a kill-or-be-killed attitude. If we're to have equality between the sexes, we have to acknowledge that a woman can be just as bad as a man, anything else, I think, is condescending towards women.

[kultainen]

Not to reinforce the 20 to 50 stereotype quoted above where that age group of women tends to blame the victim, as I am in that age range, but I don't think there are real victims on this show. If you are presented with a 20 page contract written in tight legalese, containing so many clauses, sub-clauses and whatnot that your eyes cross and you sign because you're either too stupid to know better, too eager to be on TV anyway, too lazy to call up a lawyer, too cheap to call up a lawyer, feel pressured by the producers, or indeed, you just want to be on TV no matter what, or all of the above, then I think it's not fair to blame the producers for your misfortune and exploitation, even if some of those producers are women. I don't think any woman signing up for this show has a right to say "I didn't know". Boohoo.

As to the female producers, I reject the idea that just because one is a woman, one cannot be a ruthless, money-hungry careerist with her eye on the ball and a kill-or-be-killed attitude. If we're to have equality between the sexes, we have to acknowledge that a woman can be just as bad as a man, anything else, I think, is condescending towards women

Please understand I do not approve of that stereotype, just saying it exists. It is very real and has painful consequences. But it is generally true that the closer you are to a victim or to someone in a partlicular unhealthy situation in terms of your demographics, the more you look to separate yourself by finding their wrongs and your rights. Othewise, you fear it could be you.

I agree that sex plays no role in ultimate character. that is more nurture than nature.

Finally, it has always bothered me that the Bach(ettes) are always the rejectee who needs to be validated or saved, while the Bach is always some great guy who does not need the show, but the women sure should want him. The only different one was jason and that was only because of the kid angle. If not for Ty we would never have had this thirty something insurance salesman.

[pminn1608]

There's just one problem with saying that "not all of them asked for it": they did sign up for it all and willingly. That's not really like taking the dark alley shortcut in a miniskirt at 2am kind of "willingly" then being raped by some animal because that's not asking for it. That's being victimized and being prayed on. Poor choices on the woman's part, but being raped is being raped. Nobody ever asks for it no matter what they wear or where they walk.

I can excuse women on the first couple of seasons when the show seemed a bit more innocent, more an odd Victorian throwback with a silly premise that was so anti-feministic it was almost charmingly nostalgic. Almost. To me, with Ms in my user name here, it was always mostly a joke, an unbelievable harem meets Hassidic shidduch meets speed dating on crack kind of spectacle. It was like watching this bug that everyone thought died out long ago resurrected in a lab and exhibited under glass in a museum. It still feels like it at times. The Jurassic Park of courtship and matrimony, if you will. The big manly 20th century Neanderthal evaluates a gaggle of giggling beauties and picks the one who is youngest, prettiest, most apt to worship him and make him look good in front of other males. Stupidest thing I've ever heard of, but for some women that's romantic.

However, back in those days the show still featured the phrase "if at any time you do not feel you have a connection with the Bachelor, you are free to refuse the rose" but hardly anyone took advantage of that escape clause even back then. Maybe they liked being in the harem of the banker/insurance salesman/millionaire Neanderthal. Maybe they didn't mind wiping out a few decades' worth of women's lib, maybe they were just stupid. Who cares? I felt sorry for them for a minute there but right after that I laughed out loud and haven't stopped laughing since.

It's been at least 7 or 8 seasons since Chris has uttered that phrase at Rose Ceremonies. In short, they're no longer free to leave. Tessa, the seemingly conflicted victim certainly wasn't. Her temporary insanity ran into the iron wall of that 20 page contract she was none too intelligent to reject. No matter how smart she was otherwise she still wasn't smart enough to say no when she was recruited for the show. And yes, she was reportedly recruited.

What's there to feel sorry about then? Tessa was clean cut, came from money, was seemingly smart but when it came right down to it, she was no different than one of Flava's, er, ladies. Same idiocy, different manifestation. One came on a show for starry eyed 20 to 49 year old nostalgia seeking middle class women, the other on a show for 20 to 49 year old middle class women looking for something to point at and be horrified by.

Many women on both shows might wake up and leave if allowed, but I think that they shouldn't be allowed to leave. It's like taking out a loan. You knew the interest was 9.5%, but now think that's too much, so you stop paying. What? You signed that paper, you knew what you were doing then, you damn well should pay off the loan now and shut up. Women have seen this show, have seen what becomes of those who have gone through it, and they still sign on the dotted line. Perhaps the fame, or rather infamy, carrot is too sweet a lure. I don't see how one can blame a female producer - as opposed to a male producer - for that.

Not to reinforce the 20 to 50 stereotype quoted above where that age group of women tends to blame the victim, as I am in that age range, but I don't think there are real victims on this show. If you are presented with a 20 page contract written in tight legalese, containing so many clauses, sub-clauses and whatnot that your eyes cross and you sign because you're either too stupid to know better, too eager to be on TV anyway, too lazy to call up a lawyer, too cheap to call up a lawyer, feel pressured by the producers, or indeed, you just want to be on TV no matter what, or all of the above, then I think it's not fair to blame the producers for your misfortune and exploitation, even if some of those producers are women. I don't think any woman signing up for this show has a right to say "I didn't know". Boohoo.

As to the female producers, I reject the idea that just because one is a woman, one cannot be a ruthless, money-hungry careerist with her eye on the ball and a kill-or-be-killed attitude. If we're to have equality between the sexes, we have to acknowledge that a woman can be just as bad as a man, anything else, I think, is condescending towards women.

Your entire post makes absolute sense, as usual. Your last paragraph is right on, ITA with your thoughts.

[blasie]

Sorry if this is a bit disjointed ... just wanted to add some random thoughts.

1. I watch this show the way I watch movies. I'm the type of person who likes knowing how things end before I watch because I strongly prefer "happy" endings. To me, if this is my "relaxation time," I want to be in a good mood. I watch this show because, in theory, it should produce a happy ending. (I'm aware the "love story" I see is a fictional one.)

Ducky,
I hate to be the one to break this to you, but there is no such thing as a happy ending. Every relationship has ups and downs and eventually ends in either death or abandonment. Only Hollywood tries to pass off a happy ending as being plausible. All other literatures...Russian, Greek, Scandinavian, British...are closer to depicting reality. Only fairy tales have happy endings.

[annabanana2]

What a wonderful thread with intelligent conversation. So refreshing. Several days past as I read through hundreds of posts trying to find people of like mind I considered"advertising" for a new message board for those of us who were watching TB from a whole other perspective, keeping in mind all the opinions/approaches mentioned above. And, here it is. If I can contribute anything I'll jump in, meanwhile I will enjoy reading and nodding...yes! yes!
Thank you, ladies.

[duckysunshine]

Sorry if this is a bit disjointed ... just wanted to add some random thoughts.

1. I watch this show the way I watch movies. I'm the type of person who likes knowing how things end before I watch because I strongly prefer "happy" endings. To me, if this is my "relaxation time," I want to be in a good mood. I watch this show because, in theory, it should produce a happy ending. (I'm aware the "love story" I see is a fictional one.)

Ducky,
I hate to be the one to break this to you, but there is no such thing as a happy ending. Every relationship has ups and downs and eventually ends in either death or abandonment. Only Hollywood tries to pass off a happy ending as being plausible. All other literatures...Russian, Greek, Scandinavian, British...are closer to depicting reality. Only fairy tales have happy endings.

Please don't misunderstand me as trying to claim that things can be 100% happy all the time. I don't think anyone really believes that. I was making the point that this show, to me, is fantasy. I like the idea that two people can fall in love under crazy circumstances. That's why I watch this show in my down time, for fun. And I think it's interesting to look at how TPTB choose to depict that fantasy, which in my opinion, usually (not so much recently, perhaps) seems geared towards portraying a neat, "happy" ending.

I'm also aware that relationships have their ups and downs. I'm relatively young, but mine is almost at the 10-year mark right now. So I certainly know what the struggles can be like, although I recognize that everyone has their own experiences and opinions on how relationships work. But I certainly don't think that just because relationships will always end in death or abandonment, they can't be considered positive, "happy" experiences overall.

And I understand that most "good" literature and art, and anything else meant to be intellectually stimulating, will portray the positives and negatives of relationships in a more balanced light. But this is a "reality" TV show. I'm not expecting huge, groundbreaking things from Fleiss. This is a different medium, with different purposes. I was trying, in my post, to figure out what exactly our goals are when we intentionally watch, supposedly enjoy, and spend time posting about, a show that many have deemed mysoginistic. I was wondering if, for me, it has to do with the mindless fantasy of it.