On Women in Science on the Box - The Grimm, The Bold and the Bang (Part 3)

Here we are at part 3 in this series of posts talking about representations of women in STEM on TV and film. I kicked things off by talking about Grimm and the good things it does (find that here) and continued by looking at Star Trek, Hannibal and others (that's here!), with some thoughts about what works and what doesn't in character representation.
Firstly, disclaimer time:

I have not done an extensive survey on all women in STEM in TV shows and films now and in the past. This is purely an observation from my perspective on some of the media I've consumed recently and also, a musing on what makes female characters in a STEM professions or related roles good or bad.

Now finally, we're going to talk about the biggest current program about (in a loose sense) scientists doing science things in science ways, The Big Bang Theory. I regularly watch Big Bang, after all if there's nothing else on the box E4 is a stalwart for showing How I Met Your Big Bang all day (How I Met Your Mother and The Big Bang Theory). But, the more I've thought about writing this post the more I've ummed and ahhed over what to say.  I do like Big Bang, but there are things in it that I'm not a fan of and I don't think it's just about how the show presents women in STEM, the men are not presented in a much better light by any stretch. However, there are certain things that are particularly grating that tend to revolve around the female characters. Now, I really like Amy and Bernadette, they are practicing scientists with PhDs in Neuroscience and Microbiology respectively, they have developed into key characters, but I feel that the show gives them a raw deal more often than the other characters. There are also other women in STEM in The Big Bang Theory, but I think Bernadette and Amy as main characters are where some of the issues with Big Bang really come to light.

The first thing that really gets my back up is the constant "Oh no, women aren't nerdy!" thing which is repeated throughout the show. From the ever present jokes about there being no girls in the comic book store to comments of, "Girls don't game." and "Girls don't play dungeons and dragons". The most annoying thing is whenever the girls (particularly Bernadette) get involved with this sort of stuff, they like it! But, the next to the episode we're right back to "Girls don't". One specific example that annoyed me recently was when Sheldon does a straw pole about which console to buy. Obviously Bernadette goes for the Wii because 'it's for casual gamers', but instead of subverting this by her listing all the great things about the Wii (Mario Kart, Zelda, Smash, Super Mario, I could go on) its just played for the "Oh no she doesn't know anything" laugh, which can only help perpetuate the 'Fake Geek Girl' myth which is very annoying.

My second gripe is the way Bernadette and Amy are presented in terms of dress and interests against Penny and the smart vs pretty dynamic the show seems to go for. In the show it always seems that women are presented as beautiful and sexy OR smart, but not both. Which is exceptionally silly seen as all the actors are Hollywood pretty. The show goes out of the way to make Amy and Bernadette less attractive than Penny, which gives the strong message that you can't be both pretty and successful in STEM. Moreover, they are characterised as odd and out of place with Penny, which isn't a) realistic or b) a great image for women in STEM. Conversely you can say the same about the Leonard, Sheldon, Raj and Howard, as they are presented as other to Penny and normal people. However, the kicker is that they seem to view Amy and Bernadette in the same way as the viewer, as 'other' and lesser than Penny, which lowers their status compared to the male leads.

What about the flip side to my niggles with Big Bang Theory? Well the show does now have female scientists as main characters and not just Penny, which is a positive. They have a lot of screen time, they do talk about their work and they are presented as being extremely good at what they do to a level equal with Raj Howard and Leonard. And, on that theme, none of the characters in STEM careers are presented a way that would make them good role models. Or are they? After all, Leonard gets the girl and Howard goes to space, so aren't those positives that come of their behaviour? Having said that, if the representations of STEM careers aren't great and the women get the worse end of the deal, does that mean much? It's a comedy after all and the jokes are all centred around nerd culture, so should I expect it to have positive messages about women in STEM, or people in STEM at all? Its not like I watch Brooklyn Nine Nine (the best new comedy since Not Going Out btw) and say, "Oh! That's what police officers do!", because well, they don't. However, I think some of the differences between Nine Nine and Big Bang are that Nine Nine seems to mainly joke about police show clichés, it has a diverse cast and really awesome characters on all sides (I point you here for more detail). I also get the feeling that the writing staff respect the characters, a weird thing to say, but I think it's true. Comparatively, I'd say the Big Bang writing staff have a lower level of respect for their characters, which then bleeds through into audience perception.

After all that, why do I watch The Big Bang Theory? Well, it's one of the only show's that touches on nerd culture (especially since The Fades got cancelled) and it's one of the few places that shows nerd culture without having people stuck in their parents' basements. It's amusing, it's easy viewing and it can be really good at times. Also, I do like a lot of the characters; Bernadette is brilliant and I hope one day she'll properly take Sheldon down, Amy is excellent and I want her to realise she's better than her relationship Sheldon and that she deserves more or I'd like to see a lot more development Amy and Sheldon's their relationship at a much greater pace.

The Big Bang Theory is a key show to think about as it has a lot of influence. In the US, last season was watched by an average of 19.96 million people! It's one of the only shows out right now to focus on science as a career and that has the potential to make it very influential. Do I think it's driving people. particularly women, away from science? Probably not. But, I do think it adds to the narrative of "things for boys" and "things for girls" being separate and the air of science not being for everyone. Yes. However, its great to know that although The Big Bang Theory might not be the most inspirational show ever, there are some really good examples of women (and men!) in science out and about on the TV now. This hasn't been an exhaustive look, but I think I've found that there are great characters working in STEM out there on the box and although there's not been a huge shift from past to present, general writing quality might just make the characters of today slightly better than those of the past. Let's hope the positive momentum continues and maybe, just maybe, the next generation of scientists might be inspired by things like Grimm, Bones and the odd re-run of Star Trek.

Did any of the character's or TV shows make you interested in science? What do you think about The Big Bang Theory? Let me know in the comments!

On Women in Science on the Box - The Grimm, The Bold and The Bang (Part 2)

Last time I began this mini series talking about the representations of women in STEM in TV and film by talking about the positives I came across in Grimm (if you haven't already, you can read that here).
As with my first post the following disclaimer still applies:
I have not done an extensive survey on all women in STEM in TV shows and films now and in the past. This is purely an observation from my perspective on some of the media I've consumed recently and also, a musing on what makes female characters in a STEM professions or related roles good or bad.

So, let's begin to look backwards and sideways to find where the representations of women in STEM have come from and whether there is a sense of progression or regression.

I would be extremely remiss to look at this topic and not talk about a certain Star Trek series. Voyager had its television début in 1995 and it did something no other Trek incarnation had done before. It had a female captain. Not only did the USS Voyager have a female captain, it also had a female chief of engineering in B'Ellana Torres and what career path did Janeway take to get to the captain's chair? She was a Science Officer! And that's not all, when Seven of Nine is introduced she becomes the Astrometric's Officer. In short Voyager is a ship full of women in STEM, who are treated (for the most part) in the same way as the rest of the crew.  A much better look at the wonder of Voyager than I've written can be found here, it's a great read and made me feel oh so nostalgic for the days of Trek watching on BBC2 (except when it was swapped for live snooker). It wouldn't be fair to mention Star Trek's women in STEM without commenting on Deep Space Nine (where the protagonists boldly sat where people have sat before) which had Jadzia Dax, as scientific officer. However, I unfortunately don't really have much recollection of what sciencing Dax actually did... But, Voyager didn't appear in a vacuum. In 1997 Stargate SG1 began, featuring Captain Samantha Carter, astrophysicist and officer in the US Air Force. Unfortunately, she is SG-1's only female main character, which is a shame, but I suppose they at least made Sam a good one. This grouping of characters from sci-fi are, in my opinion, a positive set of representations. Ok, they may not be doing modern day science, but they show women in STEM at the forefront of knowledge and expertise on a new frontier. Not to mention all these TV shows aired in the nineties, which, when we're still talking about perceptions of what a scientist is, is both good and bad. On the one hand we have had a set of really positive images, but its looks like they haven't spread into the public conciousness, an interesting thing in itself. 

A genre where women in science are represented very well, is Crime Drama. From Silent Witness to Bones to Hannibal, both in the past and present there's a lot of female characters working in forensic sciences. Long running Silent Witness has featured a female pathologist in every season, beginning with Prof. Sam Ryan and continuing until today with Dr Nikki Alexander. I've only seen later seasons of Silent Witness, so I can only comment on Nikki, but she always came across to me as a touch on the lifeless side. She has work, but what else is there? On a similar theme we also have Bones, which has Dr Temperance 'Bones' Brennan as a forensic anthropologist. On the one had, Bones is the lead character, but she also falls victim to the classic tropes of social awkwardness and lack of empathy. However, in contrast the series also features Dr Cam Sayoran as the head of bone's research institute and fellow pathologist. For my money Cam is a must more positive example of women in STEM as she is feels more believable and real, but she I don't think she gets enough screen time to compete with the rest of the cast. Next, let's think about Hannibal, the dark crime thriller which features Prof. Alana Bloom, a professor of psychology and Special Agent Beverly Katz, a forensic investigator. Beverley is the focus of the three strong FBI forensics team followed in  Hannibal, and it's great to see that she is treated in the same way as her male counterparts. The flip side is that she doesn't get a lot of personal development compared to Alana, but from the screen time she does get, we see Beverley as brave, capable, clever and not afraid to take risks. Even though Nikki in Silent Witness and Cam in Bones have more screen time than Beverley, I'd struggle to write a list like that about them. Alana Bloom is one of my favourite characters in Hannibal full stop, but she's not very science-y. She's an academic but we don't really see her doing research, apart from occasionally when she interacts with Will Graham so its hard to really see her as a scientist, which I think is highly unfortunate, considering how well other aspects of her character are handled.

I think the main thing that has crossed my mind while writing this post is that its important to think about how everyone in STEM roles is represented, not just women. So far I've looked at a lot of good examples of female representation, where many of my examples also have some great male characters in STEM careers too, with Bones, Stargate, Hannibal and Silent Witness being pretty good in these respects. However, I think where things fall down, is where characters are scientist first, human second. That's something that particularly comes to my mind some of the Crime Drama's I've talked about; they are full of character's defined by their jobs, which isn't very reflective of real life. I think it's also becoming clear that the best characters, like those in Grimm, are those who have more to them then their work. On the whole I think there is a growing trend towards writing scientists with lives, but I also don't think it would be fair to say that women in STEM career's were 100% poorly represented in the past especially when we have the greatness of Voyager to look back on. However, I think there is room for improvement in how all STEM professionals are represented in the media and it's that shift away from mindless stereotyping for major and minor characters which might just be on the rise.

Next time we get to the big one. We're looking at The Big Bang Theory... This could get very interesting.

On Women in Science on the Box - The Grimm, The Bold and The Bang (Part 1)

The way in which women in Science, Technology and Mathematics (STEM) are portrayed in TV shows, films and all other kinds of media is something which, unsurprisingly, interests me a lot. Whether its a female presenter or expert on a science program, like Professor Tanya Byron on last week's Horizon Specials, or a fictional character like Bernadette in the Big Bang Theory, they all shape our perceptions of what it means to be a woman in STEM. I've been thinking more and more about how women in STEM careers are represented recently thanks to watching lots of The Big Bang Theory and binging a very different show, Grimm. In turn, I started wondering if the way in which women in STEM are represented in the media at the moment is better or worse than it was in the past? That's a question I won't be get anywhere near to answering conclusively here, but I am going to look at some of the good and not so good shown in some of the characters that I have recently, and not so recently, been spending time with. However, before I begin I must say that the big caveat of this post/series is this:
I have not done an extensive survey on all women in STEM in TV shows and films now and in the past. This is purely an observation from my perspective on some of the media I've consumed recently and also, a musing on what makes female characters in a STEM professions or related roles good or bad.

Got that? Then let us begin.

The big kick-start which made me want to write this post is Grimm. In short Grimm is about Nick, a police officer who also happens to be a descendent of the Brothers Grimm. This interesting family history makes Nick capable of seeing the not-so-humans hiding in the city of Portland and, as a Grimm, it's Nick's job to make sure humans are kept safe from this hidden threat. The show has a very wide supporting cast which includes Juliette and Rosalie, who may not be 'scientists' in name but, who are the font of most scientific knowledge and support in the show.

Rosalie is a strange person to class as having a STEM career as she actually owns a herbalists shop, where she makes up various remedies to supernatural ailments. I can feel people going "Nope. Nonsense! Not science.", but in the world of Grimm herbal cures are essential for dealing with various supernatural threats and the way in which Rosalie works is part pharmacologist, part chemist, part researcher. Therefore, I think she is a portrayal of a woman in a STEM career. Rosalie often is shown working with various pieces of chemistry equipment, researching and inventing medicines and providing advice to 'regular' customers at her shop, all in an extremely competent way. If mistakes are made its very rarely her that makes them, and the most mistakes made by male members of the cast. Why? Well, they're cops and clock makers who don't really know what they are doing! She's the expert so they defer to her. Rosalie is also presented as intelligent, through making mental leaps and deductions when books don't give her a full picture of the remedy needed, and through coming up with strokes of genius to deliver some of the concoctions she does make. In short, she's characterised as a capable (and complex) woman who is good at her job, which happens to be technical. She's a person, not a caricature of a person in a STEM-esque career, which is what I would like to see so, so, so, so, so much more often. 

Next in the parade of Grimm greatness is Juliette. Juliette is pure awesome in human form, seriously, I want to be like her when I grow up! But I'm getting off track, Juliet is a Vet, a STEM related career, but she provides scientific support to Nick (even if she doesn't know the whole truth behind why he's asking her for help) mainly in the form of immunological and physiological know how. Juliette is not a biologist by trade, but she obviously keeps up to date on relevant developments in her field. She's a really great example of someone using their science training outside of its original sphere of context, which, as far as I know, is not very common in film and TV. If you don't mind about mild spoilers with where the plot goes she bounces off Rosalie really well and together they solve all kinds of problems in the later seasons. Also, she could have easily been killed off in the first episodes for the sake of male character development (a la Supernatural), but she wasn't, making her a trope breaker in lots of ways. (Just highlight the blue strip with your cursor to read that bit).Once again she has that key feature of being a person who isn't defined by her job and I think that's the major thing which makes both her and Rosalie's characterisation special. They're people first, professionals second, which is not only good writing, it's also surprisingly refreshing to see, particularly in technically minded female characters. 

The bonus feature of Grimm is that along side Juliette and Rosalie there are also a lot of women in STEM presented in one shot episodes and as recurring minor characters, such as the Medical Examiner who keeps popping up and the one shot female game developers who resisted a lot of common stereotypes. It's really good to see a world populated with female characters that aren't just there to scream and run away. It is a show about monsters, so there is plenty screaming and running away, but it tends to be done by everyone, not just the female portion of the cast. 

To sum up, Grimm is not just a great TV show which is worth watching, but (in my opinion) it also has some really interesting female characters, who happen to have STEM related careers and are presented in a very positive way. So, the next question is, are there other good representations of female STEM professionals out there in current media and what is it that makes good? Also, were positive "women in STEM" characters present in the past and have we gone forward or backward in recent years? I'll be looking at some of these questions next time, with a look Star Trek, Hannibal and more.

Have you seen Grimm? Do you agree with my comments? Or do you know of other good or bad female characters in STEM? Let me know in the comments!