TO DO THIS WEEK:
Things I want to convey - asexuality, aromanticism, TV, dominant societal ideas, dominant ideas seeping in even to TVs that are trying to be progressive and positive
At its most extreme, the construction of a-spec identity as a negative or lack can be expressed as the idea that being a-spec is in some way unhealthy. This can be most obviously seen in the House episode “Better Half”, which depicts a man’s apparent asexuality as actually being the result of a tumour in his brain. Dr House summarises the episode’s apparent stance on asexuality as “lots of people don't have sex. The only people who don't want it are either sick, dead, or lying”. This draws a distinction between not having sex (but still wanting to) as normal, while not wanting to have sex at all is abnormal and unhealthy. The rest of the episode supports the correctness of this view by depicting the man’s apparent asexuality as a symptom of a life-threatening condition. In the worldview of House, asexuality is not merely a source of difficulty, but is in fact a danger to health.
as several participants felt that their understanding was lacking or wished to know more. Thomas admitted to feeling like they knew “very little about asexuality and aromanticism” while Evan said that “there’s just a lot I don't know”. Even though all the participants had a basic understanding of these identities, most of them expressed that they didn’t know much more than the basics.
Similarly, disabled people are often stereotyped as “undesirable as well as uninterested in or incapable of sexual expression” (Barounis, 2014, p.176).
Models like these of how media values are produced can be broadly divided into those that argue that ideology is produced unintentionally, like Butsch’s theories on the prominence of stereotypes, and those that argue it is intentionally produced, like the radical model.
whether that is in the form of films that “privilege tolerance and acceptance of gender fluidity” (Cooper, [2002] 2012, p.365) or through comedies depicting gay characters in a way that criticises “homophobia rather than homosexuals” (Padva, [2008] 2015, p.208).
Despite the progress that has been made in depicting queer characters, there is clearly still a great deal more progress needed. The issue of queer characters in TV specifically is a controversial one. Glyn Davis (2004) provides a useful summary of the key arguments, with some arguing that It is certainly the case that “the scope […] has become wider” in recent years, However, In TV, like in all media,
Furthermore, similar attitudes can also be seen in subtextual depictions of a-spec identity from this time period such as Dexter and Mysterious Skin, which depict characters who have no interest in sexual or romantic relationships but without using the terminology of asexuality and aromanticism. These depictions are also criticised by Sinwell (2014, p.171) for “restrict[ing] our cultural understanding of asexuality to be one defined by its relationship to trauma, pathology, and abnormality”. In the case of Dexter (Michael C. Hall), lack of sexual attraction (and potentially romantic attraction – Dexter claims to “fak[e] all human interactions”, including with his girlfriend (Ibid., p.169)) is linked to “abnormality” and “psychosis” (Ibid.), while in Mysterious Skin, it is explained as a trauma response to childhood sexual abuse (Ibid., p.170).
Participants were free to choose which focus group they took part in.
The emphasis on language in the case study sample appears to reflect the general lack of education and understanding around a-spec identity. Many a-spec resources refer to the lack of understanding many have of these identities, for example one website that gives advice to aromantic people advises that when coming out, to bear in mind that “when it comes to aromanticism you will rarely, if ever, come across people outside the LGBTQIA+ community who know what you’re talking about” (AUREA, 2020 cited in Paramo, 2024, p.42).