Coombs 1

Steven Coombs
Katie E. Young
English 1010
6 May 2014
Issue Exploration Project

Issues Exploration Essay

Sexism in Mad Men: Viewing with Post-Feminism in Mind
Feminism has come a long way in the past 30-40 years. Back in its first wave, during the
late 19
th
and early 20
th
century, feminism was still fighting to have the right to vote and own
property. The second wave took place during the 1960s and lasted until the mid 1980s and
included such topics as sexuality, reproduction, family, and the workplace. As it stands, we are in
what many consider to be the third wave of feminism, or post-feminism. Following the second
wave, it is broadly accepted that feminism won and many believe it is something that doesnt
need to be fought for anymore. This simply is not true. There is still a lot of work that needs to
be done in order to completely rid ourselves of sexism, and media such as television and movies
is a large place where we as a culture can start. While there are plenty of examples of
empowering television shows and films, it is more important that we identify the media that is
working against the post-feminist movement and correct that behavior moving forward. A
television show that has gained a large following and much critical acclaim, while being a topic
hot-bed when it comes to feminism is AMCs Mad Men. The show regularly uses humor to
deliver blatantly sexist dialogue, which some argue does not loosen sexism but rather trivializes
women and pacifies patriarchy. Thanks to its time setting, though, it transfers the sexism away in
Coombs 2

the past. Currently, post-feminism allows a nostalgic outlook of that time, and also a self-
indulgent sensation at our current situation. A television show set in the American 1960s and
70s, Mad Men shows many acts of sexism toward women but does so with the context of the
audience watching the show through time-dislocated viewership, showing that despite how far
feminist movements of the subsequent decades got us, sexism is still prevalent in the modern
day.
One of the aspects that Mad Men is most applauded for is its accurate depiction of life in
New York during the late 1960s and 1970s. Because of this adherence to accuracy, the show
often shows the characters acting in ways that are absolutely not acceptable in our current time.
One of the characters, Peggy Olsen, is used as the audiences avatar to the office where the show
mainly takes place- we learn about the workings of the office as she does. This yields many
instances of sexist activity and dialogue towards women. These instances are subject to many
interpretations of purpose from the writers of the show. Some believe the transgressions to be
simply a way to bring authenticity to the series. Others believe that the instances are
inadmissible, perpetuating sexism in a post-feminist culture. Ferrucci, Shoenberger, and
Schauster take it so far as to say:
One implicit characteristic of [the show] involves how blatantly sexist dialogue is
treated . . . In Mad Men, a drama, much humor is derived from the male
executives making sexist comments toward the women. This behavior often times
crosses the line into sexual harassment. Yet, the show clearly plays many of these
moments up as humor, implicitly approving of the old boys will boys clichd
stereotype. The jokes in the program are not a force to liberate sexism and call
attention to a gender bias. Instead, the humor in Mad Men is used to trivialize
Coombs 3

women and pacify the dominant ideology of patriarchy. Simply being set in the
1960s is not an excuse for the kind of sexism Mad Men depicts. (24)
While this is mostly true, where Ferrucci, Shoenberger, and Schauster are wrong, is that the
show has to use it in this manner, otherwise it feels disingenuous to the time setting. If the show
avoids sexism all together, then there would be a disconnect in the feel that the show was
actually taking place during the time. If they made it a heavy and serious topic (as the show does
in later seasons that were not included in the research of their paper), then the narrative of the
characters would have gone in a different direction that intended, and again would have made the
show non-genuine to its characters.
Another reason the show is able to have these acts of sexism towards women and not be
sexist in and of itself, is due to the way that the show is executed. The way it handles the
transgressions is careful and precise and is aided by its setting, as Tudor says The sexism
depicted in this series is overt, but its setting consigns it safely to the past. This allows the series
to perform a postmodern slight of hand to package the past spectacle of men behaving badly as
a salable commodity for contemporary audiences who visit past oppression as postmodern
tourists but can return safely to the present (337). This is a fair assessment of the sexism of the
show, as you feel a relief that you know you would never see such horrible things now, but it
also fails to illustrate how the safety of the present includes the ability to draw similarities from
the issues depicted on screen and the ones that are in our modern day.
A large reason one can watch Mad Men and not feel like an injustice is currently being
made is because of the advancement in feminism. If we were currently still in the second wave of
feminism, when something like what you would see on Mad Men were to crop up anywhere
else, there would be a large group of people crying foul. But because of post-feminism and the
Coombs 4

knowledge that the largest parts of sexism are a thing of the past, we are able to view the show
with clearer eyes on the issues. Or as Agirre says:
The post-feminist ethos could partly explain the disagreement on considering Mad
Men as a feminist or anti-feminist television show. The post-feminist sensibility
allows a nostalgic view of those old times as well as a self-indulgent sentiment
towards our current situation, which, compared to the unjust world of Mad Men,
seems a much better time to live in. (156)
Because we live in the modern day, and have the knowledge of the struggles of feminism, we
know that what we are seeing from a previous era is blatantly wrong. We know that the show is
only being sexist for the sake of being more accurate to characters and their development. We
are ok with this, because once the show is over, we can analyze and appreciate how far we have
come.
There is no denying that there are acts and dialogues of blatant and unrepentant sexism
towards women in Mad Men. But this does not make the show sexist, or even the creators of the
show. In order to deliver a series with the best quality, they adhere to the strict precedence that
the era in which the show takes place made. They make it more digestible by making it
humorous, and with the time dislocation we are able to comfortably put the blame for this sexism
in the hands of the past, and not ourselves. This gives us a feeling of comfort to see how far
weve come, but does not let us go completely free, as it also reminds us that we have ills of our
own we need to tend to.

Coombs 5

Works Cited

Ferrucci, Patrick, Shoenberger, Heather and Schauster, Erin. Its a Mad, Mad, Mad, Ad World: A
Feminist Critique of Mad Men Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International
Communication Association. Phoenix May 24, 2012. Web.

Tudor, Deborah. "Selling Nostalgia: Mad Men, Postmodernism and Neoliberalism." Society 49.4
(2012): 333-38. Print.

Agirre, Katixa. " Whenever a Man Takes You to Lunch around Here: Tracing Post-feminist
Sensibility in Mad Men." Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies 4.2 (2012):
155-70. Print.

Coombs 6

Annotated Bibliography

Lotz, Amanda D., and Sharon Marie Ross. "Bridging Mediaspecific Approaches." Feminist
Media Studies 4.2 (2004): 185-202. Web.
Feminist criticism of film and television have very regularly been two separate studies. In this
article, Amanda D. Lotz and Sharon Marie Ross argue that studying the results that film and
television have on post-feminism need to be studied together, as the mediums themselves often
rely on one another to be properly consumed. They do this by first going over the history of
feminist television criticism and then how film criticism has contributed to feminist studies. It
then goes on to analyze the film Legally Blonde, and explains how to understand the positive
take it has on feminism, you need to first have an understanding of the history of feminism on
television. We can trust the authors, because Amanda D. Lotz is both a television and media
scholar, writing numerous studies on the two topics; and Sharon Marie Ross is also a professor
of television studies at Colombia College. Because my paper is focused on how feminism is
portrayed in Mad Men, this paper helps to bolster the study of feminism in media in general,
including television.

Ferrucci, Patrick, Shoenberger, Heather and Schauster, Erin. Its a Mad, Mad, Mad, Ad
World: A Feminist Critique of Mad Men Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the International Communication Association. Phoenix May 24, 2012. Web.
The show Mad Men is first set in the American 1960s, where unless you were a white male, you
had some sort of oppression holding you back. The series does not shy away from showing the
wrongs that could happen to the average woman during the era. This had led to many studies
about whether the show is anti-feminist or not. In this presentation, the authors set out to show
that the show is indeed sexist. They first go about this by defining feminism, and explaining
where feminism is in the current day, mostly in contrast to patriarchy and how our society is built
upon it. They then go on to discuss how feminism is represented in media, and why it is
important when it is either missing or prevalent. After establishing these points, the authors then
describe certain events that happen in Mad Men that show women and the struggles they had
during the 1960s. They summarize that the show is in fact sexist, saying that there is no excuse to
show women being degraded, even through the lens of time. Patrick Ferrucci and Erin Schauster
are assistant professors of journalism at Bradley University, where they study the connection of
media sociology and representation in popular culture. They were assisted by their doctoral
student Heather Shoenberger. I am using this source, because it shows a misunderstanding of not
only where feminism is today (post-feminism), but also of what Mad Men is trying to accomplish
in showing the wrongs done to women in that time.


Coombs 7

Haralovich, Mary Beth, and Andrea L. Press. "New Feminist Television Studies: Queries Into
Postfeminist Television." The Communication Review 15.3 (2012): 163-66. Print.
Where feminism stands today is difficult to surmise without much detail in the history of
feminism, and even still, is in debate. The term post-feminism or after feminism have
become common in describing what is essentially the third wave of feminism. This articles
suggests how the production culture of television engages, constrains, and challenges post-
feminism. It explains very briefly what post-feminism is, then gives several examples of shows
that are on television that have characters that are considered champions of the post-feminist
world. It explains how on a show like Gilmore Girls, even though the characters are largely
driven by things that would normally be considered sexist, that because they embrace it and take
charge of it themselves, it is in fact not sexist. It then goes on the explain how the main character
of the show 30 Rock is also a great example of post-feminism, by explaining that although her
main priority is work, she also has a longing for a husband and family. But because she does not
allow this desire to be her main or only focus, she is a wonderful example of post-feminism.
Mary Beth Haralovich is a professor of theater, television, and film at the University of Arizona
where she studies the effect of these formats of media and their effects. Andrea L. Press is a
professor of media studies and sociology at the University of Virginia, where she studies the
social effects that media can have. I chose this article, because in order to frame the horrible
things that happen in Mad Men, you need to first understand that feminism is no longer in the
same state as it was in the 1960s and that, in fact, we are 2 waves removed from that time.

Mcrobbie, Angela. "Postfeminism and Popular Culture." Feminist Media Studies 4.3 (2004):
255-64. Print.
In the 1970s and 80s, there was a second wave of feminism that received the term backlash as
feminism had become something that was expected and known, so to oppress a woman as if in
an older time, it would be thought to be with the knowledge that its not sexist, because the
enlightenment of feminism was there. This article goes on to explain how this backlash then
turned into the third wave: post-feminism, and gives some pop-culture examples of how post-
feminism is failing us. Using the example of Bridget Jones Diary, the article explains that using
feminism ironically does not exclude the act as non-feminist. Angela Mcrobbie, a professor of
communication at Goldsmiths, University of London, is a culture theorist and feminist who
comments regularly on the combination of youth culture and politics of cultural theory. I chose
this article because it highlights post-feminism and the way pop-culture can sometimes use it to
its disadvantage and make its product sexist, in order to highlight that Mad Men does not do this,
and knows that what its showing is to show how far we are/should be in the current day.



Coombs 8

Levine, Elana. "Remaking Charlie's Angels: The Construction of Post-Feminist Hegemony."
Feminist Media Studies 8.4 (2008): 375-89. Print.
There is no argument that sexism has come a long way in the past 30 years. This article uses the
1970s television show Charlies Angels and compares it to its movie remakes in 2000 and 2003,
to show how feminism has changed, but is now more difficult to champion. It explains that in the
1970s, feminism was at a precipice and the show Charlies Angels was a breakthrough show in
that it had three leading actresses that would break the mold of what was expected of a woman
during that era, on a weekly basis. It explains that they would blend both being strong women
with career in mind, but also sex appeal. It then explains that the movie remakes fail to capture
this, as feminism is much different than it was back then. The movies tried to replicate the same
feel, but because it fell to the troupes of needing a man to be happy, it failed to keep the strong
feminist attitude of the original show. Elana Levine is a professor of journalism, advertising, and
media studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where she studies the effects media,
advertising have on American culture. I chose this article, because it shows a wonderful
difference in feminism between the 1970s and now. To understand the sexism being shown in
Mad Men, you need to understand where feminism stood at the time, and now.

Tudor, Deborah. "Selling Nostalgia: Mad Men, Postmodernism and Neoliberalism." Society 49.4
(2012): 333-38. Print.
If you are to watch Mad Men, you need to understand that you are viewing it through a lens of
time-warp. It is fairly accurate in depicting the time it is set, but because we have seen what
transpires from then until now, we can view what happens and frame it differently, often to
issues that are important now. This article explains how using nostalgia, Mad Men successfully
demonstrates how neoliberalism and postmodernism are suppressed in the current day. It goes on
to state several examples of the business that is shown being run on the series as examples, and
directly links them to how despite neoliberalism, it is still suppressed in the modern day.
Deborah Tudor is the Associate Dean of Mass Communications and Media Arts at Southern
Illinois University Carbondale, where she regularly contributes work regarding media and how it
effects politics. I chose this article because it shows an understanding of how well fine-tuned
Mad Men is written. It shows that the writers write everything knowing the time difference we
see doesnt restrict us from drawing connections to our current time and issues faced today.

Kahlor, Leeann, and Matthew S. Eastin. "Television's Role in the Culture of Violence Toward
Women: A Study of Television Viewing and the Cultivation of Rape Myth Acceptance in
the United States." Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 55.2 (2011): 215-31.
Print.
Television is often a great place to get a feel for politics and culture as a whole. If you have been
living under a rock, television is a great way to get up to speed on what is considered common-
place in the current day. Often, it can even be a trailblazer and sway public opinion one way or
Coombs 9

another on a given topic. This article discusses how rape myth is perpetuated through television.
It goes on to explain rape myth and the different groups and percentages believe in it. It then
gives a scientific method to produce results in a group of people that believe in rape myth, giving
a final analysis of the data. Finally, it states that non-victims are actually persuaded away from
rape myth as a result of more television viewing (of certain genres), and that victims perpetuate
rape myth more than television does. Leeann Kahlor is a professor of advertising and public
relations at the University of Texas at Austin. She does research in health and environmental risk
information seeking and processing and media effects. Matthew S. Eastin is an associate
professor in the advertising and public relations at the University of Texas at Austin. His
research focuses on new media behavior. From this perspective, he investigates message
development, information processing, and the social and psychological factors associated with
the use of newer technology. I chose this article to show the effects television can have on the
opinion of individuals, and how the show Mad Med can influence people that sexism is still
around, if not as rampant as it once was.

Vint, Sherryl. "The New Backlash: Popular Culture's "Marriage" with Feminism, or Love Is All
You Need." Journal of Popular Film and Television 34.4 (2007): 160-69. Print.
As mentioned, we are now in whats believed to be a third wave of feminism. The second wave
brought a large backlash, as anytime someone thought something was feminist, they were put in
place because there was supposedly nothing to fight- feminism had won. This article explains
that now, in this third wave, where feminism is no longer pushed aside, it is still not properly
shown. It uses the show Star Maidens to show in the first wave of feminism how breaking away
from the norm of being a housewife and needing a man was acceptable, and then uses the movie
remakes Bewitched and The Stepford Wives to show that we now use feminism as a comedic
element, where we believe we are in a postfeminist gender utopia. Sherryl Vint teaches English
at Brock University and is a founding coeditor of the journal Science Fiction Film and
Television. I chose this article because it is another example of the differences between what was
considered feminist in the 1970s and now, which is important to know when analyzing the
sexism shown in a show that takes place in the 70s, viewed by people today.

Agirre, Katixa. " Whenever a Man Takes You to Lunch around Here: Tracing Post-feminist
Sensibility in Mad Men." Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies 4.2
(2012): 155-70. Print.
Previously mentioned, post-feminism has several different meanings depending on who you ask.
This article goes off the belief that post-feminism is a sensibility present in contemporary
popular culture, that post-feminism is neither a movement nor a theory: it is rather a tone, a
mainstream media tendency based on a number of interrelated themes that together form a
sensibility. The article first goes on to explain the importance of self-indulgence and nostalgia in
identifying the tone in which sexism is shown in Mad Men, explaining that time dislocation is
key to enjoying the liberating jokes that are the social injustices shown in the series. Katixa
Coombs 10

Agirre has a Phd from the University of the Basque Country and has been doing research on
audience studies for the past 4 years. I chose this article, because it properly frames post-
feminism as it pertains to Mad Men and how with this in mind, the sexism shown can help better
feminism in the present day.

Coombs 11

Self Assessment

Ive come to understand that I both love and hate it. I hate the process, but love the
feeling I have when Im done. And I always feel so great about my finished project, even if its
not as perfect as I would like. Im very much a procrastinator, which I knew already, but this
class kind of made me feel worse about it.
My writing process is a very sporadic one. Sometimes, its a natural flow where
everything is wonderful and spot on. Other times, I need to mull it over and digest it more. And
then other times I need to diagram my ideas and see how they will interact in an unorganized
way before Im comfortable putting them on paper.
Ive learned that most things have rhetoric behind them, even if just in a very subtle way.
I just need to use the tools that Ive learned here, and I can figure out what it is they are trying to
persuade who of, and how they are trying to do it. These tools of course are ethos, pathos, logos.
If I had to describe my growth as a writer due to this class in one word, it would be
subtle. Most of the things that are being focused on in the papers Ive written are things I either
already know, or have a vague understanding of. So even when the things are concentrated and
made more obvious to me, it feels like a more subtle growth instead of a revelatory experience.
Something Ive come to appreciate is the review of peers. They often are able to look at
the piece Im writing from a distance and point something out I couldnt have seen otherwise, so
I can revise and make the paper better. Often, after a peer went over my papers, they would offer
different word choice or sentence structure to better convey my point.
As stated before, most of the things Ive come to learn in this class havent been beyond
my realm of knowledge, but have been things Im aware that I dont have specific scholarly
vernacular of. Normally when I consume media, written or otherwise, I have a strong grasp of
Coombs 12

what it is that the writer is trying to accomplish and persuade me of. But now, Im able to name it
after Ive identified which tactic is being used.
A very strong rhetorical tool Ive always had is that of pathos, and that has not changed
over the course of writing these three papers. The strategy that I think I have had the most
development with is ethos. Ive never been terrible with it, but it was never my strongest tool. I
feel like Ive really been flexing that muscle while doing the assignments, working to better
understand it. Im a little disappointed I didnt work with logos, as its one that unless very overt,
I have a difficult time spotting and using. In my papers I tended to stray from logos a little more
than I would have liked.
The purpose I had for the Reflection Essay was to successfully analyze the relationship I
had with writing, while also showing that I had a pretty firm grasp of what I was doing. Call it
showing off, if you will. My purpose of the Visual Analysis was to try and use ethos, logos, and
pathos as much as I could. After learning the terms of each and what they entailed, I wanted to
concentrate on using this new knowledge and reinforce that I comprehended them. For the
Rhetorical Analysis I did a lot of what I did in the Visual Analysis, but tried to hard to pull tons
of material away from minimal source material. I didnt want to work something that was too
heavy-handed. I was trying to prove how well I comprehended rhetoric by doing it on a harder
piece than was necessary. My purpose for choosing the Mad Men/Feminism topic is because
both topics are ones that intrigue me very much, and I wanted to see how I could analyze the way
they interact with each other.
I learned a lot more about feminism than I had previously known. There is an extremely
convoluted and storied past to it that I knew was there, but had no idea of the importance of the
specifics. And I learned that a lot of people dont take things for face value. There is a lot of
Coombs 13

adding meaning behind things that is not intended and making a monster out of something
because it does not fit their agenda.
Ive changed mostly the things that you noted on the papers, including revising any
thoughts I feel could be communicated better. With the first two papers, I feel like they are very
strong with little revision needed, where the third is a little weaker and could use more revision.
If timing were better, I would probably revise it very dramatically then what you see now, as was
the case when I wrote it.
I learned that I dont really like researching on things Im uninitiated in. It felt like I
crammed for an entirely different class just so I could write this paper. There was so much to
digest and sift through that it was difficult to remember what the purpose of the paper was.