Loading...
Start Date
24-6-2022 12:00 AM
End Date
24-6-2022 12:00 AM
Abstract
Despite the powerful #metoo movement and the brave testimony of women like Christine Blasey Ford, in so-called “he said/she said” situations, credibility tends to be granted to cis-men by default. One likely source of this continued injustice is fictional representations of gendered and sexual violence that may promote the view that women’s and survivor’s credibility is inherently unstable and emphasize empathy for characters accused of assault (Phillips, 2017). A particularly insidious example of this representation comes from the wildly popular and highly controversial Netflix series, 13 Reasons Why. Through an in-depth narrative analysis of Seasons 1 and 2 of 13 Reasons Why, we argue that, although depicting sexual assault largely from the survivor’s point of view, the audience of 13 Reasons Why is encouraged to question the narratives of women. The credibility of women is undercut in four key ways: a presentation of truth as inherently malleable, dismissal of the emotional and physical experiences of women, encouragement of emotional identification or “himpathy” (Manne, 2018) with men, and amplification (at times literal) of the narratives provided by male-identified characters. Our analysis reveals a systematic devaluation of the lived experiences of women and non-cis men in 13 Reasons Why. We know that media are an important source of information about sex and relationships for adolescents (the show’s target). By portraying women’s experiences as inherently suspect or, at the very least, requiring intense scrutiny, 13 Reasons Why may perpetuate the very rape culture it appears to call out.
“She never called it rape”: Gender, power, and credibility in Netflix’s 13 Reasons Why
Despite the powerful #metoo movement and the brave testimony of women like Christine Blasey Ford, in so-called “he said/she said” situations, credibility tends to be granted to cis-men by default. One likely source of this continued injustice is fictional representations of gendered and sexual violence that may promote the view that women’s and survivor’s credibility is inherently unstable and emphasize empathy for characters accused of assault (Phillips, 2017). A particularly insidious example of this representation comes from the wildly popular and highly controversial Netflix series, 13 Reasons Why. Through an in-depth narrative analysis of Seasons 1 and 2 of 13 Reasons Why, we argue that, although depicting sexual assault largely from the survivor’s point of view, the audience of 13 Reasons Why is encouraged to question the narratives of women. The credibility of women is undercut in four key ways: a presentation of truth as inherently malleable, dismissal of the emotional and physical experiences of women, encouragement of emotional identification or “himpathy” (Manne, 2018) with men, and amplification (at times literal) of the narratives provided by male-identified characters. Our analysis reveals a systematic devaluation of the lived experiences of women and non-cis men in 13 Reasons Why. We know that media are an important source of information about sex and relationships for adolescents (the show’s target). By portraying women’s experiences as inherently suspect or, at the very least, requiring intense scrutiny, 13 Reasons Why may perpetuate the very rape culture it appears to call out.
Bio
Dr. Sarah Erickson is an Associate Professor of Communication and the co-director of Women's and Gender Studies at Trinity University in San Antonio, TX. Her research examines the intersection of media psychology, gender studies, and television.
Kailey Lopez is the Recruiting Communications Coordinator of the Rellis Academic Alliance at Texas A&M University. Ms. Lopez graduated from Trinity University in Spring 2021 with a degree in Communication.