The Male Head of Household in Sit-Coms - a target of derision

[CRUE CAB]

I grew up in a working class family in a working class neighborhood and that is exactly the family situation these sitcoms tend to represent. I honestly don't think it's good for kids these days to be inundated with images of their dad being a buffoon. Hollywood libs hate a strong healthy family because they want to embrace the "it takes a village" socialist philosophy. IMO they purposely denigrate the family unit with the intent of breaking it down.

Which is how you get shows like Modern Family.

 

[Paschendale]

I grew up in a working class family in a working class neighborhood and that is exactly the family situation these sitcoms tend to represent. I honestly don't think it's good for kids these days to be inundated with images of their dad being a buffoon. Hollywood libs hate a strong healthy family because they want to embrace the "it takes a village" socialist philosophy. IMO they purposely denigrate the family unit with the intent of breaking it down.

The obsession with nuclear family is a fluke of just the 50s and the single generation you're idolizing. For the rest of human history, it has taken a village. It always will. We live in communities. The mindset that you're espousing is such an aberration that I can't fathom where it comes from. "The family unit" that you're referring to is a warping of healthy human relationships based on authoritarianism and sexism. Real families come in all shapes and sizes and denigrating the ones that don't look like yours is wrongheaded and unfounded.

 

[Gathomas88]

The obsession with nuclear family is a fluke of just the 50s and the single generation you're idolizing. For the rest of human history, it has taken a village. It always will. We live in communities. The mindset that you're espousing is such an aberration that I can't fathom where it comes from. "The family unit" that you're referring to is a warping of healthy human relationships based on authoritarianism and sexism. Real families come in all shapes and sizes and denigrating the ones that don't look like yours is wrongheaded and unfounded.

Nuclear families have been the established norm for most of human history. If anything is a "fluke" of modern society, it is single parenthood. :roll:

 

[sangha]

Nuclear families have been the established norm for most of human history. If anything is a "fluke" of modern society, it is single parenthood. :roll:

Nonsense.

During most of human history, humans were organized as tribes. Even once marriage (and nuclear families) became more widespread, slavery (and slave families) were not uncommon, nor was polygamy. In most of civilized history, the extended family was the norm.

 

[Gathomas88]

Nonsense.

During most of human history, humans were organized as tribes. Even once marriage (and nuclear families) became more widespread, slavery (and slave families) were not uncommon, nor was polygamy. In most of civilized history, the extended family was the norm.

And even most tribal societies tend to make use of some form of family unit which consists of a mother and father working together to aid in the child rearing process. This is the very essence of the "nuclear family," is it not?

In no society was it ever common for men to impregnate women and simply abandon them afterwards.

 

[sangha]

And even most tribal societies tend to make use of some form of family unit which consists of a mother and father working together to aid in the child rearing process. This is the very essence of the "nuclear family," is it not?

Yes, that's what a nuclear family is, but no, that was not the norm in tribal societies.

In tribal societies, children were raised communally, or in an extended family.

In no society was it ever common for men to impregnate women and simply abandon them afterwards.

Not the issue. I took issue with your claim that "Nuclear families have been the established norm for most of human history."

 

[Aunt Spiker]

My thoughts

First I'd like to address the idea that these shows undermined traditional values. IMO, nothing could be further from the truth. When evaluated objectively, one sees that the moral of the episodes tended to be very supportive of traditional values. When hubby deceives his wife so that he could have a weekend of fun with the boys, instead of going to some boring family affair, his deceit is discovered. The moral being "honesty is the best policy". When he gets involved in some hare-brained get-rich-quick scheme, it fails and the lesson is "There is no free lunch" and "Hard work leads to success", etc.

Now, onto the appeal of this formula. I think the poster who mentioned role reversal hit closest to the point. However, that begs the question of why is this role reversal so funny? Why would any man want to see others representing themselves be portrayed as a bumbling, deceitful, fool?

IMO, it has to do with how we feel about traditional gender roles(TGR). According to TGR, it's a man's job to go out and work and support the family. And when he's not working, he's supposed to lead his family with his wisdom about life. It's a big responsibility, and we all realize that we may not be able to do a perfect job of it.

The sitcom formula allows men to indulge the fantasy of being able to set their responsibilities to the side, and imagine living more like a child. Indulging their impulses, and pursuing pleasure without worrying how it affects others while at the same time encouraging them to think "I may not be perfect, but at least I'm not as bad as that guy"

Slapping the label "self-deprecating" doesn't change the fact that it portrayed the male head of household as a boob, nor does it change the fact that the Honeymooners was not the only sit com to do this.

It also does not explain why so many viewers who were male head of households enjoyed the show.

In I Love Lucy, Ricky was not particularly boobish but he was clueless and clearly not in control of his family. Not exactly very supportive of traditional gender roles in family life. Also, Fred was a boob.

Hmm - well. I've actually found this interesting. I read through the previous-give list I linked to (the 50). Shows given that are 'families' - with both a mom and a dad:

46. How I Met Your Mother - Never seen it, can't comment on the show with a solid answer but it seems that they're all well respected, successful people, generally speaking - they are all being made fun of at time person individual and lifestyle choices.

44. That ’70s Show - Red is portrayed as a successful business man / father. He's rigid, though. His wife, Kat, is a bit of a scatterbrain but in the end, they're decent people - with a bunch of idiots for kids.

42. Everybody Loves Raymond - They're all made fun of. Even the wife.

39. I Love Lucy - Lucy is often the one made fun of, but so is Ricky, just not as much.

35. Happy Days - Both parents are respectable and responsible. They all get into quirky situations from time to time, but mostly it follows the kids.

30. The Honeymooners - You asked why his self-depreciating humor is funny. Well, that's because it's just funny. The women also get involved in various silly issues. It is a sit-com, after all. without the comedy and a target to be laughing at, it's not a sit com.

28. Diff’rent Strokes - The parents (or step, whatevr may have been the case) were presented as respected mentors.

26. The Wonder Years - Presents both mom and dad as being employed, educated, and respectable. The funniness is aimed at the children.

23. Roseanne - Both parents are presented as being fat dopes with dopey kids.

22. Growing Pains - Both parents were successful and respectable, while everyone were at the center of various funny bits from time to time.

20. The Fresh Prince of Bel Air - Both parents were successful and respectable, while everyone found their selves at the center of various jokes.

19. Family Guy - so far, off this list, this is just the 2nd show that portrays him as being a dope, and her as being the opposite.


18. Modern Family - Both parents seem successful and respectable, while everyone were at the center of various funny bits from time to time.

17. The Jeffersons - This might fit into your questioning roles. George was intelligent and successful at the same time, though. They all just did stupid things. It is a sit-com like all the others.

16. All in the Family - Both were presented as dopes. Somewhat like Roseanne, but with racism.

13. The Simpsons - Same thing as family guy

10. Family Ties - Both were successful and respectable with the occasional situation because of what they did.

6. Married with Children - both were dopes

4. Arrested Development - I'm not sure where this falls. All are successful dopes? LOL

2. The Cosby Show - Both parents were respectable and successful

The only one I can think of that's not on this list is Malcolm in the Middle - both parents are successful dopes.

So - just from this list. There are 21 shows that follow a family and 7 follow, or somewhat follow, your point. (28%). Whereas 7 out of 50 sitcoms = 14% that follow your point.

In all due honesty - that's not very many, especially when you consider the number of those which present both parents, or everyone, as being idiots.

Is this far from reality? Well - no. It's not. A lot of families have the "respectable head of household" and a lot of families have "an idiot for a head of household" . . . just because males aren't presented as ALWAYS being the "rule enforcer, successful at work, and worth looking up to" doesn't mean that there's a problem

Why - on the other hand - do you expect otherwise? Why focus on "head of household being made fun of" and not "the Mom's being made fun of"

Or - more so - why do you look at the dopey parent as being "the head of the household" just because they're male? Did you consider that, in reality, what they're doing is presenting the OTHER one (female whose not the dope) as the head of the household instead?

 

[Gathomas88]

Yes, that's what a nuclear family is, but no, that was not the norm in tribal societies.

In tribal societies, children were raised communally, or in an extended family.

Mother and father would still generally stay together and aid in caring for children. This is the foundation of the "nuclear family."

Even polygamists can only really be said to embrace a variation of this model, not eschew it entirely.

Extended families are fine, but that's hardly what Pasch was arguing in favor of, or what modern media generally tends to advocate.

Not the issue. I took issue with your claim that "Nuclear families have been the established norm for most of human history."

That depends on how strictly you want to define the term. Single family units living in their own distinct domiciles might not have always been the norm, but mothers and fathers living and working together to help raise children is pretty much universal.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Nonsense.

During most of human history, humans were organized as tribes. Even once marriage (and nuclear families) became more widespread, slavery (and slave families) were not uncommon, nor was polygamy. In most of civilized history, the extended family was the norm.

We are not tribes and slave communities or communes.
We are peoples of the 21st century. The nuclear family has been a stalwart for our lives for many generations.

 

[sangha]

Hmm - well. I've actually found this interesting. I read through the previous-give list I linked to (the 50). Shows given that are 'families' - with both a mom and a dad:

46. How I Met Your Mother - Never seen it, can't comment on the show with a solid answer but it seems that they're all well respected, successful people, generally speaking - they are all being made fun of at time person individual and lifestyle choices.

44. That ’70s Show - Red is portrayed as a successful business man / father. He's rigid, though. His wife, Kat, is a bit of a scatterbrain but in the end, they're decent people - with a bunch of idiots for kids.

42. Everybody Loves Raymond - They're all made fun of. Even the wife.

39. I Love Lucy - Lucy is often the one made fun of, but so is Ricky, just not as much.

35. Happy Days - Both parents are respectable and responsible. They all get into quirky situations from time to time, but mostly it follows the kids.

30. The Honeymooners - You asked why his self-depreciating humor is funny. Well, that's because it's just funny. The women also get involved in various silly issues. It is a sit-com, after all. without the comedy and a target to be laughing at, it's not a sit com.

28. Diff’rent Strokes - The parents (or step, whatevr may have been the case) were presented as respected mentors.

26. The Wonder Years - Presents both mom and dad as being employed, educated, and respectable. The funniness is aimed at the children.

23. Roseanne - Both parents are presented as being fat dopes with dopey kids.

22. Growing Pains - Both parents were successful and respectable, while everyone were at the center of various funny bits from time to time.

20. The Fresh Prince of Bel Air - Both parents were successful and respectable, while everyone found their selves at the center of various jokes.

19. Family Guy - so far, off this list, this is just the 2nd show that portrays him as being a dope, and her as being the opposite.


18. Modern Family - Both parents seem successful and respectable, while everyone were at the center of various funny bits from time to time.

17. The Jeffersons - This might fit into your questioning roles. George was intelligent and successful at the same time, though. They all just did stupid things. It is a sit-com like all the others.

16. All in the Family - Both were presented as dopes. Somewhat like Roseanne, but with racism.

13. The Simpsons - Same thing as family guy

10. Family Ties - Both were successful and respectable with the occasional situation because of what they did.

6. Married with Children - both were dopes

4. Arrested Development - I'm not sure where this falls. All are successful dopes? LOL

2. The Cosby Show - Both parents were respectable and successful

The only one I can think of that's not on this list is Malcolm in the Middle - both parents are successful dopes.

So - just from this list. There are 21 shows that follow a family and 7 follow, or somewhat follow, your point. (28%). Whereas 7 out of 50 sitcoms = 14% that follow your point.

In all due honesty - that's not very many, especially when you consider the number of those which present both parents, or everyone, as being idiots.

Is this far from reality? Well - no. It's not. A lot of families have the "respectable head of household" and a lot of families have "an idiot for a head of household" . . . just because males aren't presented as ALWAYS being the "rule enforcer, successful at work, and worth looking up to" doesn't mean that there's a problem

Why - on the other hand - do you expect otherwise? Why focus on "head of household being made fun of" and not "the Mom's being made fun of"

Or - more so - why do you look at the dopey parent as being "the head of the household" just because they're male? Did you consider that, in reality, what they're doing is presenting the OTHER one (female whose not the dope) as the head of the household instead?

Never watched How I Met Your Mother, but I thought it was about a bunch of friends, not a family.

In That 70's Show, Red loses his job. And while he is probably portrayed as more level headed than most sitcom dads, he has plenty of moments of boobishness.

Everyone Loves Raymond - most of the family sitcoms mock most of the characters. I don't deny that. I was merely focusing on the dads because of how some have made a political issue of it.

I Love Lucy - Ricky is in many ways tangential to the plotlines, and not portrayed as a boob. But he is pretty clueless and clearly not in control of the family unit, which addresses the claims about how modern sitcoms are designed to undermine "traditional families" and "feminize america".

But I'll admit, I didn't make that aspect clear in the OP

Happy days - Yes, that show is more supportive of the nuclear family.

The Honeymooners - yeah, I should have been clearer about what I was getting at, which in addition to refuting the politically motivated arguments, I was also wondering why people (specifically men) would enjoy a show that mocked their role in the family.

My bad.

Different Stroke, Growing Pains and the Wonder Years are geared more to kids, no? I don't think it's watched by many male heads of households. Again, my bad for not being clear about why men would enjoy shows that mocked their role.

Roseanne - true about all of them, but I was focusing more on how the dads were portrayed. However, I'm sure that it would be equally valid and interesting to examine why women enjoy sitcoms that portray them as shrill, whiny, obsessed with shopping, etc

I could go on but I won't except to say that your stats would be more supportive of my claim if you didn't eliminate shows that do what I talk about but also portray others in a negative way.

As far as your last line goes, I'd say that goes a long way in explaining why women enjoy sitcoms where the wife is portrayed negatively because, in spite of the negativity, these shows do give recognition to the important role woman play in leading the family.

 

[sangha]

Mother and father would still generally stay together and aid in caring for children. This is the foundation of the "nuclear family."

Even polygamists can only really be said to embrace a variation of this model, not eschew it entirely.

Nope, extended families (including grandparents, uncles, cousins, etc) would stay together and aid in the caring of families. The extended family is not a variation of the nuclear family. It's the other way around.

Extended families are fine, but that's hardly what Pasch was arguing in favor of, or what modern media generally tends to advocate.

I wasnt responding to anything Pasch said. I was responding to your claim. The one I quoted.

That depends on how strictly you want to define the term. Single family units living in their own distinct domiciles might not have always been the norm, but mothers and fathers living and working together to help raise children is pretty much universal.

It's not a matter of how I want to define the term, and definitely not how you want to define it. The term nuclear family does not apply to extended families, nor does it describe the norm throughout history.

 

[sangha]

We are not tribes and slave communities or communes.
We are peoples of the 21st century. The nuclear family has been a stalwart for our lives for many generations.

Not really. The extended family has been more the norm than the nuclear family has been.

But even if that were true, so what?

 

[CRUE CAB]

Extended blood family is not a communal living arrangement.
Its still "family".

 

[sangha]

Extended blood family is not a communal living arrangement.
Its still "family".

But it's not a nuclear family

 

[FederalRepublic]

I can't stand everybody loves raymond. Shows can be funny when the husband is an oaf, but they really demean each other in that one. Makes me sad.

 

[soot]

I honestly don't think it's good for kids these days to be inundated with images of their dad being a buffoon.

They're not.

They're inundated, to the extent that they're actually "inundated" (which I believe is a very suspect word to choose), with images of fictional television characters being buffoons.

I don't know if you're actually raising children or not but I am.

I can pretty much guarantee you that my kids know the difference between me an a buffoon caricature "TV dad".

If your kids can't tell the difference, or if the "average American kid" can't tell the diffference, that's your failing, or their failing, not Hollywood's fault.

...want to embrace the "it takes a village" socialist philosophy.

Who exactly wants to embrace that philosophy?

Hollywood?

Or people who think that a television set does/should play some relevant role in their child's upbringing?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Never watched How I Met Your Mother, but I thought it was about a bunch of friends, not a family.

In That 70's Show, Red loses his job. And while he is probably portrayed as more level headed than most sitcom dads, he has plenty of moments of boobishness.

Everyone Loves Raymond - most of the family sitcoms mock most of the characters. I don't deny that. I was merely focusing on the dads because of how some have made a political issue of it.

I Love Lucy - Ricky is in many ways tangential to the plotlines, and not portrayed as a boob. But he is pretty clueless and clearly not in control of the family unit, which addresses the claims about how modern sitcoms are designed to undermine "traditional families" and "feminize america".

But I'll admit, I didn't make that aspect clear in the OP

Happy days - Yes, that show is more supportive of the nuclear family.

The Honeymooners - yeah, I should have been clearer about what I was getting at, which in addition to refuting the politically motivated arguments, I was also wondering why people (specifically men) would enjoy a show that mocked their role in the family.

My bad.

Different Stroke, Growing Pains and the Wonder Years are geared more to kids, no? I don't think it's watched by many male heads of households. Again, my bad for not being clear about why men would enjoy shows that mocked their role.

Roseanne - true about all of them, but I was focusing more on how the dads were portrayed. However, I'm sure that it would be equally valid and interesting to examine why women enjoy sitcoms that portray them as shrill, whiny, obsessed with shopping, etc

I could go on but I won't except to say that your stats would be more supportive of my claim if you didn't eliminate shows that do what I talk about but also portray others in a negative way.

As far as your last line goes, I'd say that goes a long way in explaining why women enjoy sitcoms where the wife is portrayed negatively because, in spite of the negativity, these shows do give recognition to the important role woman play in leading the family.

Hmm - well of all these, my husband loves some of those that I bolded, just as much as he loves Taxi and Scrubs.

All in all - why does he like it? That comes back to my main point forever ago: making fun of authority and poking fun at stereotypes is - well - funny to people who seem to enjoy low-ball humor and crude jokes.

I guess I'm in your boat - I don't get why people can stand to watch it. Not just those father-role characters, though - but the 'zanny, quirky, dufus, slapstick' humor found outside these shows you're referring to (as in: shows outside of your focus like Gilligan's Island and Mork and Mindy). It just irritates me. I enjoy comedy and humor - but nothing that extreme.

But, boiling it all down: you're asking "Why do guys watch anything that might make fun of them." (it doesn't seem that having them as a *father* is the crucial element. . . because the male-gender role in society doesn't require this). . . Why wouldn't they? It's not making fun of THEM directly. I watch a lot of stuff (or - more so - read a lot of stuff) which pokes fun at the female characters, too . . . and it doesn't insult me, personally. I'm not like any of them. It's not about me at all but sometimes I can say 'haha - I've done that!' The only thing we have in common (me and the female characters in books I read) is our gender - which means nothing to me.

Maybe people can say the same - it's not about them, it's about the character. . . and it's all for a good laugh.

 

[sangha]

I can't stand everybody loves raymond. Shows can be funny when the husband is an oaf, but they really demean each other in that one. Makes me sad.

I like it, but don't love it. I agree that it is a bit on the nasty side.

 

[sangha]

They're not.

They're inundated, to the extent that they're actually "inundated" (which I believe is a very suspect word to choose), with images of fictional television characters being buffoons.

I don't know if you're actually raising children or not but I am.

I can pretty much guarantee you that my kids know the difference between me an a buffoon caricature "TV dad".

If your kids can't tell the difference, or if the "average American kid" can't tell the diffference, that's your failing, or their failing, not Hollywood's fault.



Who exactly wants to embrace that philosophy?

Hollywood?

Or people who think that a television set does/should play some relevant role in their child's upbringing?

And I could argue that the fact that these fathers are so obviously unrealistic sends the message that "Boobish dads are not real. Real dads are responsible and wise" and so these shows serve to reinforce traditional roles.

 

[sangha]

Hmm - well of all these, my husband loves some of those that I bolded, just as much as he loves Taxi and Scrubs.

All in all - why does he like it? That comes back to my main point forever ago: making fun of authority and poking fun at stereotypes is - well - funny to people who seem to enjoy low-ball humor and crude jokes.

I guess I'm in your boat - I don't get why people can stand to watch it. Not just those father-role characters, though - but the 'zanny, quirky, dufus, slapstick' humor found outside these shows you're referring to (as in: shows outside of your focus like Gilligan's Island and Mork and Mindy). It just irritates me. I enjoy comedy and humor - but nothing that extreme.

Well, I don't know about the same boat. I do watch some sitcoms, and do enjoy some amount of silliness, etc. However, half hour after half hour of it bores me. A sitcom needs more than that to keep my interest. I prefer more subtle forms of humor.

So I guess we're floating in different boats, on the same lake.

But, boiling it all down: you're asking "Why do guys watch anything that might make fun of them." (it doesn't seem that having them as a *father* is the crucial element. . . because the male-gender role in society doesn't require this). . . Why wouldn't they? It's not making fun of THEM directly. I watch a lot of stuff (or - more so - read a lot of stuff) which pokes fun at the female characters, too . . . and it doesn't insult me, personally. I'm not like any of them. It's not about me at all but sometimes I can say 'haha - I've done that!' The only thing we have in common (me and the female characters in books I read) is our gender - which means nothing to me.

Maybe people can say the same - it's not about them, it's about the character. . . and it's all for a good laugh.

Well, yeah! That's the question. It could be expanded to "why would anyone watch anything that makes fun of their position?", or even just "what is funny?"

Both are interesting questions to ponder. I was focusing on the male role due to statements made in other threads. I should have been clearer about that.

Thanks for your contributions.

 

[Smeagol]

From the Simpsons, to Everybody Loves Raymond and on and on, sit-coms seem to adhere (for the most part) to a formula where the male head of the household is a childish fool, always getting into some kind of hare-brained scheme requiring his wife or children to pull him out of.

In another thread, some have speculated that this is the result of "librul media's" hostility to white men and support for feminism. However, the "foolish man" formula long predates feminism and liberalisms' supposed "control" of Hollywood. As far back as The Dick Van Dyke Show and The Honeymooners the male head of household has been portrayed as a childish fool in sitcoms.

I have my own theory as to why this formula is so popular, but I will withold it until I hear what some of you think about it.

What I find even more interesting and to me a obvious attempt by Hollywood to challenge traditional cultural norms is depicting females as courageous war heroines or some other champion who saves the day typically requiring an unrealistic level of physical strength kicking numerous mens' butts and ultimately rescuing men (sometimes cowering in fear) from their eminent demise. Its hilarious. Look out for that in movies you see, it happens all the time and is in my opinion the funniest PC propaganda you'll see.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

They're not.

They're inundated, to the extent that they're actually "inundated" (which I believe is a very suspect word to choose), with images of fictional television characters being buffoons.

I don't know if you're actually raising children or not but I am.

I can pretty much guarantee you that my kids know the difference between me an a buffoon caricature "TV dad".

If your kids can't tell the difference, or if the "average American kid" can't tell the diffference, that's your failing, or their failing, not Hollywood's fault.



Who exactly wants to embrace that philosophy?

Hollywood?

Or people who think that a television set does/should play some relevant role in their child's upbringing?

It's just the same as when Hollywood created Archie Bunker to make all cons look like idiots. Unfortunately things like that eat their way into the psyche of people and they start believing it without knowing why. I have done a lot of reading on brain washing techniques and things like this are subtle long term drip drip drip brain washing.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

What I find even more interesting and to me a obvious attempt by Hollywood to challenge traditional cultural norms is depicting females as courageous war heroines or some other champion who saves the day typically requiring an unrealistic level of physical strength kicking numerous mens' butts and ultimately rescuing men (sometimes cowering in fear) from their eminent demise. Its hilarious. Look out for that in movies you see, it happens all the time and is in my opinion the funniest PC propaganda you'll see.

Ah but yet - some women do exactly that :shrug: I like anything that deals with the lives of people in ways I'll never experience (might explain why sitcoms are boring). I want the intrigue and daring individuals from both genders. . . a lot of men are portrayed in the same 'gung-ho over-the-top heroics' sort of way but, as with women, only few men in the real world are like that AT ALL. I know they're out there - I've yet to meet one. Most men I know are more like the sit-com character that started this thread.

I can play the couch potato with a ****ty family just fine. LOL

 

[sangha]

Ah but yet - some women do exactly that :shrug: I like anything that deals with the lives of people in ways I'll never experience (might explain why sitcoms are boring). I want the intrigue and daring individuals from both genders. . . a lot of men are portrayed in the same 'gung-ho over-the-top heroics' sort of way but, as with women, only few men in the real world are like that AT ALL. I know they're out there - I've yet to meet one. Most men I know are more like the sit-com character that started this thread.

I can play the couch potato with a ****ty family just fine. LOL

C'mon! Don't tell me you don't believe that the male hero can fire a fully automatic weapon for minutes without reloading, hitting all of his enemies (except the leader), while managing to not get hit by one of the many bullets fired by numerous villains armed with similar fully automatic weapons?

I'm not fooled! No can be that cynical

 

[Caine]

The King of Queens FTW.