Bashing the Bachelor (and Why “It’s Okay”)

I’m feeling extremely conflicted about this season of The Bachelor (not that I necessarily feel at ease with it in other years).  I had absolutely no feeling whatsoever about former-soccer pro Juan Pablo Galvis being selected as the star of the reality program.  He received relatively little screen time while on The Bachelorette and left much earlier in the season compared to prior bachelors pulled from the same type of pool (usually one has to make it into the final four to earn that honor).  But while I was neither excited nor horrified at the prospect of this seemingly nice single father appearing on the show, I was slightly bothered by the way that ABC marketed this season – focusing almost entirely on his physical appearance and drawing upon all the stereotypes concerning Latino men.  It seemed like Juan Pablo won the gig because he was “hot” and had a sexy accent.   I think the franchise also was proud of itself for diversifying its contestant pool (for which it has been aptly criticized) as they were quick to point out that it was their first Latino bachelor.  However, the Venezuelan playboy always seemed a bit “white washed” to me.

A lot has been made of some of the language barriers that accompanied this bachelor selection.  (We’ll touch on this again in a moment).  Juan Pablo himself often brought up his difficulties always finding the right words to convey his thoughts.   Although I suppose this could have contributed to him coming off as not intellectually engaged with the women on the show, I don’t think this is the case.  I think the show marketed his body (continuing its practice of being an equal opportunity offender on the front of sexual objectification regardless of gender) because he simply doesn’t have much going on in his head. (His dates with Sharlene, the well-traveled, sophisticated opera singer, were excruciatingly painful for me to watch because of this).  While I can’t say that the show is known for its stimulating, intellectual conversation, the lack of substance was particularly evident this year.

Somewhere in the middle of this season I realized why I was perturbed with this bachelor – I think he has helped to cement some problematic stereotypes about Latino men.  It appears he is the embodiment of machismo.  I first became unnerved by his sexist demeanor when he “slut-shamed” one contestant after he partook in a dirty midnight ocean swim with her.  (The lecture the following day was about how he was raising a daughter and didn’t want to send her the wrong message or have inappropriate female role models in her life).   Besides for the fact that placing the blame on the woman when he had equally participated was problematic, this lecture (along with other talks where he told girls he wasn’t going to kiss them because he was trying to be a good example for his daughter) was very hypocritical and conflicted with his actions.  He had, and continued to, made out with multiple women (often publically in front of the other contestants).   My first thought:  so much for being a good role model.  My second thought:  what did he think was going to happen on this show?

The program itself is sexist by nature.  As is much of reality television.  In Reality Bites: The Troubling Truth about Guilty Pleasure TV, Jennifer Pozner discusses the detrimental effects of reality programming, particularly on female viewers.  She also notes the draw of schadenfreude and the escapist appeal, but argues that while those may get viewers to tune in initially, that is not what holds their attention.  Pozner suggests:

on a more subconscious level, we continue to watch because these shows frame their narratives in ways that both play to and reinforce deeply ingrained societal biases about women and men, love and beauty, race and class, consumption and happiness in America. (17)

One major societal message that surfaces in reality television is associated with the antifeminist backlash. The tactic by which this message is hammered home most regularly is humiliation.  The strategic humiliation of female reality television characters is often “used to offer women an ugly, unstated, and all-too-clear message:  “This is where independence leads, ladies – to failure and misery” (Pozner 53).

In the reality television dating shows this is particularly obvious.  The practice can be seen when the “cameras zoom in on the tear-soaked face of some woman shattered by romantic rejection.  Producers bank on such scenes to reinforce the notion that single women are whimpering spinsters who can never be fulfilled without husbands” (Pozner 55). The strategic editing of such shows, such as the infamous “Frankenbiting” (wherein the actual words of onscreen persons are edited so that they come across as saying almost the opposite of what they really said), also paints women in a negative light.  Pozner notes that women get

edited into stock reality TV characters:  The Weeper, whose self-doubt is played for laughs.  The Antagonizer, whose confidence is framed as arrogance.  The Slut, whose strategic use of sex appeal we’re meant to condemn.  Through their beauty-based bravado and anxiety, participants become vessels on whose bodies and from whose lips these shows can reinforce antifeminist backlash values. (72)

Knowing all of this, I wasn’t surprised to see blatant sexism on The Bachelor.  However, what I was surprised about was that ABC allowed a contestant to call the star out on it.

This past week Andi Dorfman (a smart lawyer, and a candidate I had originally hoped would “win” the season) chose to leave the show after her overnight date in the “fantasy suite.”  While I thought it was cool that she was the second girl to choose to walk away (shattering the unrealistic myth that 25 women can all fall in love so easily with one network-selected beau), I was more thrilled that she was able to call him out on his bad behavior.  It was nothing drastic, just the mundane sexist, insensitive things that countless men have probably done on dates:  he was only interested in talking about himself, he shut down any attempt she made to talk about serious/emotional topics, and he talked about his intimate experiences with other women (his previous night’s “fantasy suite” date).   In regards to making little effort to truly get to know her, Andi asked:  “Do you have any idea what religion I practice? What are my political views?"  As Emma Gray points out in The Huffington Post,

His response, or rather, the utter lack thereof, exposed what anyone who has watched even a few episodes of the white wine tears-filled show already knew. "The Bachelor" brand of romance is built on the fantasy that big conversations about religious beliefs, socioeconomics, career aspirations and politics -- the very things that would make or break a budding relationship in the real world -- are unnecessary in the face of amorphous "connection."

It was a refreshing message to hear a contestant point out that, indeed, these types of conversations are important – not just romantic romps on a beach and so breath taking helicopter rides.

As happy as I was, part of the confrontation bothered me.  Andi focused a lot (and I mean A LOT) on Juan Pablo’s use of the phrase “it’s okay” to shut down her attempts to discuss serious matters.  The phrase itself was said in regard to her choosing to leave the show as well.  Andy pointed out that it was dismissive and rude.  Juan Pablo explained the verbal tick as being due to English being his second language, and perhaps that is partially true.  Or maybe he’s just exhibiting the aversion to emotional conversations that John Gray (author of Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus) would claim men have.   While I agreed that it did sound dismissive and seemed to trivialize her feelings, I also found her mockery of his speech to be uncomfortable and I worried what wider message the show could be sending through this exchange.   I felt even more this way when I saw a tweet where she thanked fans for the support and then jokingly reminded them that “eeees okay.”  Had she simply typed “it’s okay,” I would have smirked at her repurposing the phrase, however, her choice to mimic his accent pushed it over the line.  After all, one set of bad behavior shouldn’t justify another, right?

I don’t necessarily dislike this woman now but I do think it shows a different side of her personality and it makes me wonder what else we’ll see now that (rumor has it) she is set to be the next bachelorette.  However, it’s not really her tweet that makes me wary of her next 15-minutes of fame, it’s the fact that she’s walking away mid-murder trial from her job to star on the reality television show.  Here’s a great message to send to young girls:  finding a man is worth walking away from your successful, professional career.  Sigh.