FINAL FINAL FINAL FINAL DRAFT OF MY ESSAY

To what extent are women accurately represented in the crime genre, with close reference to CSI: crime scene investigation (Las Vegas)?

“What counts is what the heroine provokes, or rather what she represents. She is the one, or rather the love or fear she inspires in the hero, or else the concern he feels for her, who makes him act the way he does. In herself, the women has not the slightest importance.”[1] Females are not given a true or equal representation, within the media. Historical texts are often guilty of tokenism, using females as a turn within [i]the narrative to keep audiences entertained, rather than showing them as complex humans, and able to protect and provide for themselves. Women were represented as sex objects to fulfill the male gaze in the media. In the past the two stereotypical female images seen were Madonna, or whore[2]. These extreme stereotypes left no room for anything in between, or even a realistic image for a woman. Texts within the crime genre, such as Cagney and Lacey, made the initial break with these stereotypes, beginning to show women as powerful and authoritative figures. The crime genre opened up a new way to relate to women beyond the stereotype boundaries. I will argue that CSI: crime scene investigation is one of the few programmes that subverts the stereotypes of women created in the media, and shows them as equal to men. However, one may argue that even CSI has some way to go. For example, to refer to a quotation from the series “I am a woman, and I have a gun. And look how he treated me. I can only imagine how he treated his wife” (Sara Sidle)...there was no apparent reason for Sara to state she has a gun, but referring back to Freud’s[3] and Mulvey's[4] findings, a gun can be considered as a phallic symbol which gives all power and control to a man. This can be perceived as a negative representation, because the audience may ask 'are the makers of CSI: crime scene investigation suggesting that a female crime investigator needs a male appendage to wield any power?'
Cagney and Lacey was a very popular investigation programme in the 1980’s. It showed two policewomen fighting crime in America. This in itself was a significant departure, as Taylor stated in 1989, “It is a rather conventional cop show except for the fact that the
two are women; their sex leads them to combat problems not normally raised in male police shows such as sexism, their relationships to their fellow officers, reactions of others to their unorthodox work, problems with unemployed husbands, the problems of working mothers, and a series of other issues related to women's lives, even though these crises are often posed as the problems of individuals rather than of women as a collective group” ( Taylor 1989:159)[5]. Cagney and Lacey broke new ground within the genre to fully represent women as powerful, independent individuals helping the society, (a role of a stereotypical man). Cagney and Lacey could represent almost any woman, because it tackled all problems within a woman’s life, therefore allowing the mass female audience to be able to relate to a character of just a scenario within the programme.
However, the roles of each of the characters never really developed. There was a character change when the series directors cast Sharon Gless to play Cagney, because they felt a lack of femininity in Meg Foster. With Meg, the programme had two brunette females which was probably the biggest reason for the change. Sharon had long blonde hair making her seem feminine, whereas with Meg in the programme it almost seemed as though two men were fighting crime because Meg’s characteristics allowed her to be similar to the other character, both had qualities which would be seen in a typical man. Working for the family, bringing food to the table each night, more aggressive and stable able to save and protect people etc. The change was needed to provide the audiences with a “heterosexual” relationship. The directors thereby re-instated the idea of having a masculine and feminine character. In terms of female characteristics Cagney and Lacey both had their own parts to play. Lacey had short brunette hair, wore trousers and had a far more masculine look, whereas Cagney had longer blonde hair and preferred her dresses. Lacey fulfilled the male role with her looks and Cagney completed the feminine side of the story. What the series celebrated, then, was not, arguably, friends and sisterhood, but the traditional heterosexual relationship.
They were also referred to as “Dykes”[6] which now would be seen as an offensive term, just because two women are working together and are good at what they do apart from housework; make them seem incomplete in another. People suggested that if they were out working, there not real women, making them less “perfect” than a man. Lacey had settled with a husband and two children; in that respect she was seen more feminine as she was competent enough to have a family. Cagney was a single female, and at some points appeared depressed without a man. This also implies that Lacey was only stable in her lifestyle because she had a husband to rely on; despite being unemployed, his role within the narrative suggests that he is ultimately Lacey’s backbone. He was able to encourage her whenever he was present within an episode, almost as if he were her psychiatrist. In the episode “Heat”, the audience saw that when Lacey heard her husband’s voice she calmed down and recollected herself, showing that he made her strong.
The implication is that women are not able to be strong and independent on their own. The award winning episode “Heat” also emphasizes under-representation of women within the media in the 1980’s. Cagney and Lacey were the only two women shown, a minority among the 15 males. One female is trapped within a small office and is taken under hostage by a man, implying that a man is stronger than a female psychologically and psychically. Then Lacey is not able to free Cagney on her own therefore relies on the rest of the male dominated police force to help to “rescue” her. This female role is adopted from Propp’s character theory where the female plays the princess who needs to be rescued. No more women are seen within the police force, suggesting that Cagney and Lacey are “token” female characters who despite their roles as professional law enforcers are swiftly reduced to damsels in distress in need of male rescue supporting the symbolic annihilation identified by Gaye Tuchman[7]. However, while women were still under represented within the media and women were not yet accurately represented, “Cagney and Lacey” did start a revolution of sorts.
CSI: crime scene investigation was first broadcast in 2000 and received 17.8 million viewers[8] for the first season which showed it was a hit with the U.S audience. This has seen an increase ever since with each series showing it was popular eight years ago and still is. CSI has shown a positive change and has helped to accurately represent women in terms of working life. CSI has genuinely empowered women. CSI has been able to conquer stereotypical female representation and offered women representations of themselves as assertive, powerful and independent.
These two women, who may be seen as a minority, hold great importance within the programme. Catherine willows is second in command and extremely high in the CSI night shift team, and Sara Sidle a blood spatter analyst who is highly regarded as an important member of the team. An episode called “built to kill” [9] shows a situation which would be hard to deal with for a woman in real life. Catherine’s drink is spiked at a club and she wakes up the next morning in a sleazy hotel believing that she may have been raped. As part of a forensic science team she knows she is capable of gathering evidence to find out who raped her, but instead of working alone, she involves Sara, the only other woman on the team. Sara’s reaction to this news however, seems quite unrealistic. It’s as though she has no emotion or feelings for Catherine. They don’t sit down to cry about it, but instead Sara becomes much more hard headed and gets straight to work, because she knows she needs to get the job done. This shows that women can be strong individuals that don’t need to sit around and mourn about anything. They can overcome any obstacles that men can.
Although women are present within the series they are shown as a minority compared to the six key male characters, and the program is also able to convey men as more superior with Gil Grissom in power of everyone. This could be in order to satisfy the male audience, making them feel superior by relating to the men in the programme. The programme itself is created by Antony E. Zuiker and Jerry Bruckheimer. These two creative directors have worked alongside many other directors of who are largely male. This male dominated culture within the media, and particularly within the crime genre, reveals itself in patriarchal ideologies. Hegemony is always a danger while the media is dominated by an unrepresentative slice of society because powerful elites are able to disseminate their ideas, through the media to public. Time has progressed and this has developed the audience, which has made them more media literate and liberal. This should have had a knock-on effect on the directors of the program. Zuiker should embrace feminism, but his subconscious belief that men can, and should, control women is seen within the program. These views are then perceived by the audience and adopted, most probably more by the male audience, who can relate to the characters within the narrative and assuage their insecurities by believing they have control over women.
According to Laura Mulvey’s controversial paper, “Visual pleasures and narrative cinema”, the audience indulges in two types of gaze; the fetishistic gaze and the voyeuristic gaze. Mulvey assumes the audience to be male, and both types of gaze ultimately treat females shown on the screen as sexual objects. Catherine Willows’ character is played by Marg Helenberger. To get herself through university studying forensic science, she worked as a stripper. While she breaks some stereotypes, she simultaneously reinforces others. As a scientist she is shown to be successful and independent, but as an ex-stripper she will always be a sex object to please the male audience.
Of the two female characters, Willows is seen to be the feminine one. Just as in “Cagney and Lacey” one character is blonde and feminine and the other is brunette and masculine. The colour of the females’ hair itself suggests stereotypes. Ever since the 1990’s when there were stereotypes of blonde bimbos in films such as ‘Legally Blonde’, they tried to show a more intellectual side to females. It was shown that Ms Woods was able to conquer the world of legal attorneys by using common sense and not really studying.[10] It showed that the legal world was dominated by males and had a patriarchal sense in the way it was run. When Elle came she was able to change a few things, and add pink here and there. This again shows that the media no matter how hard they try to subvert stereotyping of women they end up creating a stereotype all on their own. They were able to restrict Elle’s character into feminine features, but CSI allows the females to be free and as liberal as men, giving them as much respect as each other.
Blonde women are predominantly seen to be beautiful with no brains, classified as “blonde bimbos”; brunettes may not be extremely attractive but tend as a trade-off, to be highly intellectual. CSI does subvert the blonde stereotype. Catherine Willows is extremely attractive but on top of that she is part of Las Vegas’ forensic crime team. However, CSI still conforms to representation of women needing a masculine figure in order to get through life. Willows is second in command, first in command is Gil Grissom (a man). Below Catherine are four other members of the forensic science team, only one of whom is a woman: Sara Sidle. Sara has brunette, short, unkempt hair which matches her general appearance, although she is just as knowledgeable as any other man or woman on the team. She is, however, more defensive, has a more masculine personality and seems quite immune to romantic relationships. Catherine able to flirt with men and is very comfortable, but Sara seems more uptight and finds it difficult to relax around men. These two characters allow a relationship to form between them, as Catherine is more feminine she takes on the role of a woman, whereas Sara is more masculine therefore takes on the role of a man.
Where these women are seen as powerful and independent in their working life, however they seem quite inadequate in relationships, love and family bonds. The programme sends a hard hitting message to women that work, that they may not be able to deal with the domestic side of life. Catherine has a broken marriage, is constantly looking for a boyfriend (reinforcing the idea that women cannot survive without a man) and has a daughter to raise alongside doing her job. The audience sometimes sees Catherine breaking down without a man’s helping hand and also witness’ affairs with male colleagues, Grissom and Brown. An article called “Blinded by Science”[11] describes Catherine Willows not as a successful scientist, but a former stripper. This reduces her to the elements which help portray females as inferior and gives the male audience the pleasure of imagination. Catherine is also seen as an incompetent mother; one episode focuses on her daughter’s abduction, suggesting that Catherine cannot work and be a prudent mother at the same time. Catherine in one scene is attending a club with fellow CSI, Nick Stokes. She leaves him to dance with another woman, and she goes to the bar to enjoy a drink. From this follows on the rape scenario discussed earlier. Thus even programs such as CSI, which aim to convey women as powerful strong individuals who can cope with any ordeal that a man can, still reduce them to sexual beings to please the male gaze. Sara on the other hand is not recognized as a woman. The programme does not focus on her relationships with men, until she establishes her relationship with the male protagonist Gil Grissom. The only reason this relationship is seen by the audience and established by the creators of CSI is so that the male viewers are able to identify with Grissom and are able to create a relationship with Sara, this also makes them feel a sense of self gratitude and feel that no woman is immune to their charms. Apart from this Sara is seen incompetent in relationships outside of this she conveyed as a lonely individual.
Although these women are seen to be extremely intellectual and superior, they are represented as lacking crucial elements of their lives, elements which are fulfilled by the characteristics and stereotypes of housewives.
Furthermore, there are a few episodes within season 2 which focus on a murder in a leather fetish club; surprisingly the owner is a woman, a dominatrix who goes by the name of ‘Lady Heather’. For once the female is seen as superior to the male. However Lady Heather is only a feature character. Her function is to break through Grissom’s masculine armour and get him to bring down his barrier. She is able to allow him to express his feelings like a true human being and not act like an emotionless man she is able to see through his strong persona and allows him to be human and is therefore seen superior. She may however, not have been able to do this if she was just an average woman. Her occupation is owner of a strip club and she is herself a paid dominatrix. She gets paid by a man to be in control of a man therefore in reality she has no control whatsoever. Catherine and Lady Heather became exotic dancers for money, but because they danced for men this, any financial independence achieved was gained at the expense of the characters’ feminist credentials.
Episode 93 of CSI also suggests that, however successful women are in their careers, they feel they must always look perfect for men to look at[12]. The scene involves Catherine walking through a clinic where she is thoroughly looked up and down by a younger female. Catherine then feels a sense of paranoia and stops and looks at herself in the mirror. She is at the looking at herself through the male gaze. Catherine shows the importance that women feel they must be able to please a male[13].
Overall by analyzing CSI: Crime Scene Investigation it is clear to see that the producers and scriptwriters, alongside the actors, have worked hard to subvert female stereotypes and convey a more realistic representation of women. However, Catherine Willows is only in her successful position because of her previous profession, which happened to be “shaking her ass in four inch heels”[14]. Catherine has, more than once been reduced to her “eroticized zones”[15]. Sara is seen for quite a few series as a hard hitting feminist who doesn’t have much of a love life. If women are shown to be successful as scientists, they are sure to lack other elements which contribute to human happiness. When Catherine is raped, this is one moment in time where the audience is able to see a female union between the two; otherwise they do usually just keep their distance and keep everything professional. This allows them to react like men and protect their feelings with a strong armour but within that episode when Catherine is alone we see her very emotional, crying and worried. These real emotions will be recognized by the female audiences and they could sympathize with the character. Women are therefore again re-instated as nothing more than emotions in a body. Men are strong inside and out, and women are yet still to be seen in this frame.
Even though CSI: Crime Scene Investigation represents women as a minority within the programme, they do have major roles which influence many of the stories. Women are conveyed with the same presence as men within the program, allowing a decent female representation. Catherine Willows and Sara Sidle are two investigators quite high up in the hierarchy, with Willows second in command, which is not usually seen; however with other central female characters such as Lady Heather, it re-enforces the idea of fulfilling the male gaze with a “whore”. The following quotation from Cagney and Lacey identifies why women cannot be equally represented. “I hope the people of United States of America will be able to sleep better knowing that women like us have guns- thank you.”[16]. the fact that these women need guns-phallic symbols according to Freud-shows they need the characteristics of a man to be successful and powerful. As well as guns, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation suggests that women need male characteristics in order to be independent successful.
CSI has been a controversial programme overall, but has been successful enough to provide spin off’s for the audience to enjoy. CSI is able to please both the male audience with attention to sexual female characteristics, and also able to please the female audience with independent roles to enjoy. CSI is a strong start in the representation of equality between men and women, and also a more realistic perception of women overall; but a lot more work is needed. Even though CSI has been able to develop the female image since the 80’s, it has conformed to many already prevalent stereotypes. Even in CSI, Gil Grissom controls everyone in the group, Catherine is below him. Ultimately CSI: Crime Scene Investigation suggests that women pay a high price for financial and emotional independence. Sadly it seems that CSI has broken through the traditional boundaries of representing women only to develop a new form of stereotype: that of the successful, but ultimately unfulfilled, career woman.
Word count: 3395 words
Bibliography
“Movies and methods: an anthology” by Bill Nichols
“Madonna as the postmodern myth” by Georges-Claude Guilbert
“The interpretation of dreams”, Freud published in 1899
“Working girls” by Yvonne Tasker 1998
“The female eunuch”, Germaine Greer
“Women, men and language: a sociolinguistic account of sex difference in language” by J. Coates 1986

Representing women myths of femininity in the popular media By Myra MacDonald (1995)
Spectacular bodies: gender, genre and the action cinema By Yvonne Tasker (1993)
Defining women: TV and the case of Cagney and Lacey by Julie D’Acci (1994)


Websites used
http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/candl/c31.html
www.google.com
www.wikipedia.org
www.youtube.com
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Modules/MC30820/represent.html
http://www.uiowa.edu/~commstud/resources/GenderMedia/index.html
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/gaze/gaze09.html
http://lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/gmj/fa06/graduatefa06/gmj_grad_fa06_kleminski.htm
www.wickedness.net
[1] “Movies and methods: an anthology” by Bill Nichols. Page 309, quote from Budd Boetticher
[2] “Madonna as the postmodern myth” by Georges-Claude Guilbert
[3] “The interpretation of dreams”, Freud Published in 1899
[4] Feminist theorist, established because of her non academic paper, visual pleasure and narrative cinema

[5] http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/candl/c31.html

[6] http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/candl/c31.html
[7] Representation of gender in the past-handout
[8] www.Wikipedia.org CSI: crime scene investigation ratings
[9] “Built to kill” episode 1 season 7 CSI: crime scene investigation

[10] “Legally blonde” released in year 2001, legally blonde 2 released in year 2003.
[11] “Blinded by science”

[12] “the female eunuch”, Germaine Greer
[13] J. Coates 1986 “Women, men and language: a sociolinguistic account of sex difference in language”.
[14] CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, season 5, Episode 93 “Viva Las Vegas”.
[15] Roy 2005: from academic paper called scrutinizing the male gaze

[16] “Working girls” by Yvonne Tasker 1998, page 94