The portrayals of men versus women in popular culture is vastly different. Something considered socially acceptable for one gender may be deemed sexist for the other. Though many areas demonstrate this, two exemplify this contrast best: news shows and television sitcoms.
When watching a news program, you begin to notice more than subtle differences between the male and female anchors. The male broadcasters are portrayed as well-spoken, intelligent, and experienced. Apparently, being fit, handsome and young were not requirements of their position. While speaking intelligently, a monotonous drone often accompanies their well thought out phrases. Conversely, females are almost always young, attractive and thin. They speak charismatically, but are often shunned when the topic switches to Friday night football. Their topics usually include community goings-on and home issues, while the males speak of hard hitting news, of Afghanistan and political conspiracies. It appears that viewers prefer to look at and admire the female’s beauty, while the male’s experience and intelligence are valued more than his attractiveness.
Sitcoms portray men and women in a similar way to that of news shows, while differing in some aspects as well. Male viewers like to relate to the main character, while females prefer to idolize the feminine ideal. An example that best demonstrates this is The King of Queens, where, in my opinion, the main character, Doug Heffernan, is a fat slob, whose obnoxious personality irks me to no end. He is the average Joe: he has a dead-end job and is a complete ignoramous. This, apparently, is a recurring trend in most male sitcom actors, showing its stereotypical face in hit comedies like Family Guy, The Simpsons and Corner Gas. Doug’s wife, Carrie, is obnoxious as well (her nasally voice is immensely irritating); however, her appearance is much less hard on the eyes, and she is quite a bit more level headed than her male counterpart. In a way, her beauty and common sense balance out Doug’s stupidity and unattractiveness.
There is, and always will be, pressure on males and females to act a certain way and fit certain stereotypes. Regrettably, these stereotypes are reinforced by popular culture, as displayed by news casts and TV sitcoms, thus aggravating artificial gender differences. If we truly want to form a stronger and less cliched society, we must strive to break these social barriers.
The portrayal of men vs. women in the media is vastly different. Something considered socially acceptable for one gender may be deemed sexist for the other. It is in this contrast essay that I wish to touch on three main vistas that (change to three main areas in which…
the two representations differ: in news shows, television sitcoms and print ads. (… and avoid saying things like “in this contrast essay I wish…. Just state your points.)
When watching a news program, you begin more-than-subtle differences between the male and female anchors. (Read this sentence again. It doesn’t make sense.) The male broadcasters are normally well-spoken, intelligent, and old, but apparently (being) fit and handsome weren’t requirements of their position. Adversely, the females are almost always young, attractive and thin. It appears that viewers prefer to look at and admire the female’s beauty while listening to what the male has to say.
Sitcoms portray men and women in a similar way to news shows, while differing in some aspects as well. An example that I will use is The King of Queens, where, in my oppinions (spelling), he (who is “he”?) most certainly is NOT “fly” with the ladies. The main character, one Doug Heffernan, is a fat slob, whose obnoxious personality irks me to no end. This, apparently, is a re-occuring trait in most male sitcom actors. (Do you have some other examples?) His wife, Carrie, is obnoxious as well, however, her appearance is much less hard on the retinas. Now, don’t think that I believe that beauty can make up for a lack of personality, because I don’t. Nevertheless,
An interesting topic choice. This is not as strong a piece of writing as your first. Your support is not always very strong. I think that your last body paragraph is your weakest as far as focus and support are concerned.
Your introduction is well organized, and you have a clear thesis.
You switch tense in your first body paragraph. You need to avoid this.
So, in your second body paragraph, I suppose that you are saying that preferences in appearance are similar to those in the news, but intelligence is reversed?
I think that your organization could use a little “tweaking” in your body paragraphs to make your points more effective.
Your conclusion is also strong.
Ideas: 12 Organization: 11 Conventions: 6 29/30