“You” Season 3: Yet Another Representation of the White Male Gaze

by Isa Meyers //

The third season of Netflix’s thriller series You was released in October 2021. The season’s mere 10 episodes document the manipulative and murderous Joe Goldberg (played by Penn Badgley of Gossip Girl) alongside his equally violent wife Love Quinn (played by Victoria Pedretti) as they struggle to raise their son in the fictional Bay Area suburb Madre Linda. While this season received critical praise and a whopping 96% on Rotten Tomatoes (a higher score than both the first and second seasons), this next installment in the series involves largely the same themes and plot points: secret obsession, lots of sex, and murder. 

A Problematic Point of View: The White Male Gaze

Ultimately, despite being entertaining, You’s third season does little to confront the liminal perspective of Joe. In turn, the series perpetuates the undeniably white male gaze found in popular film and TV. Through silly gimmicks and satire, You attempts to be seen as “woke,” when, in reality, it merely tells the “tragic” story of yet another white man.

Joe is a perfect definition of an unreliable narrator. However, what makes the audience sit on the edge of their seats are not the bloody ax swings or the crime scene clean-ups, but rather the psyche of Joe. Using the second person point of view to address the audience as though they are the woman he’s currently obsessed with, Joe establishes a sense of narrative intimacy with each viewer. Additionally, while the real viewer may hate Joe and see him for his monstrous self, Joe’s character has control of this narration, which inherently positions the series to be seen from the white male gaze.

White Masculinity & Extremity

The intention of giving Joe this power is for the audience to feel as though they are in on it—as though they, too, are implicated in the countless murders of Madre Linda residents. This is for entertainment’s sake, but it also appeals to other “Joes” and their perspectives to make it feel as though the show is offering an astute critique of white masculinity. Joe is meant to give the audience a sense of superiority. You’s showrunner Sera Gamble states in an interview with New Musical Express Magazine that: 

Joe’s extremity offers viewers respite of knowing that we are not like him, that we don’t kill for love. 

“We’re just interested in being deeply in the point of view of this guy, because we’re trying to explore, whether in the misapprehensions that [viewers] detect, what are the things that he believes. Coupled with the unique propensity for crossing lines that are part of this particular character. A lot of us might be really screwed up about love, but most of us don’t go out and kill about it. So [Joe’s] just the most extreme example, which is what makes it interesting to explore.” 

Joe’s extremity offers viewers respite of knowing that we are not like him, that we don’t kill for love. 

The average viewer does not watch You because they sympathize with Joe. But his positioning as not only the protagonist but also as the narrator reproduces yet another fabled story. Cristina Escobar writes for Medium, “We get too much media from the white devil’s perspective—we don’t need more.”

The Danger of White Femininity 

Additionally, Joe’s white masculinity co-constructs something equally as harmful: the image of the delicate white woman. Escobar argues that love interest Beck (played by Elizabeth Lail) of Season 1 and Love capitalize on their fragility as white women, stating, “What these white girls have in common is the shared understanding of the preciousness of their femininity. They both see themselves as something to be protected, particularly by the men in their lives.” Beck allows Joe to protect her, and as Escobar puts it, ignores the mysteriously strange things occurring in her life to be loved. Love, on the other hand, uses “her femininity as a shield—both to avoid becoming a murder suspect as a teen and later to avoid Joe’s violence, thanks to the embryo growing inside her.” While Love proves to be Joe’s murderous match, her femininity allows for her to evade accountability. 

It is not until this third season that we are introduced to Joe’s first obsession of color. While he dated Karen Minty, a black woman, in Season 1, he never grew obsessed with her in the same way he violently stalked Beck, Candace, Love, and (briefly at the start of the new season) his white next-door neighbor Natalie. Then comes Marienne (portrayed by Tati Gabrielle): the sexy, haunted, intelligent, artist and head librarian at Madre Linda’s public library. To Joe and the audience, Marienne is a breath of fresh air in a white suburban nightmare. 

You Season 3’s Virtue Signaling 

The gimmicks deployed by You serve to distract the audience from the realities of Joe. They allow viewers to believe the show is making these vastly edgy social and political statements in the name of denouncing the very thing they’ve created: another white male narrative.

While each season of You grapples with issues such as selfishness, toxic masculinity, social media, consumer culture, and what it means to connect with someone in the 21st century, its third season uses its mass viewership to call out vaccine skeptics and the media’s “missing white woman syndrome.” In its third episode titled “Missing White Woman Syndrome,” Joe talks about the ‘missing’ Natalie with Marienne and coworker Dante (played by Ben Mehl). Dante comments “Madre Linda has her own missing white woman,” to which Marienne responds: “Missing white woman syndrome is America’s favorite pastime next to porn.” Joe asks what this syndrome is, and remarks “Well, the media has a thirst for anything salacious, right?” Both Marienne and Dante cringe at his comment, informing him that he completely misunderstands what the message of this syndrome sends to women of color. In the words of Marienne, “White ladies deserve to be rescued. The rest of us can fend for ourselves.”

While calling attention to how the media disproportionately cares for the lives of white women helps to engage the audience in a relevant social issue, You does so only to pat itself on the back. Rather than seriously confronting what Joe’s role is in perpetuating white masculinity’s violence and white femininity’s fragility, the show uses buzzwords as a “Get Out of Jail Free” card. 

In this same episode, Love and Joe’s baby develops measles due to an anti-vaxx family in the community. The father of the unvaccinated children (Gil) approaches Love to apologize for causing the outbreak. He ultimately tells her that they “don’t believe in subjecting [their] kids to toxic injections they don’t need.” Love retaliates by hitting him over the head with a rolling pin before locking him away in their basement cage for all their murder victims. Set in a post-COVID reality, this season attempts to bring light to the dangers of anti-vaxx beliefs but only as a plot point to advance the series. Gil eventually takes his own life in the holding cell, allowing Joe and Love to use his suicide as a way to cover up Love’s murder of Natalie.

The gimmicks deployed by You serve to distract the audience from the realities of Joe. They allow viewers to believe the show is making these vastly edgy social and political statements in the name of denouncing the very thing they’ve created: another white male narrative.

Final Sentiments

Netflix’s third season of You certainly lives up to the gory expectations of its preceding seasons. Should you watch it? Yes, if only to keep up with the influx of memes, Tik Toks, and Tweets about it. Should you also think critically about which voices and stories this show chooses to showcase? Yes.

Sex Education Season Three: Gendered Difference in Character Development

by Hanna Carney //

The Netflix original Sex Education has been getting a lot of praise for its depiction of sex-positivity and its empowerment of teenagers and adults since Season One was released. Sex Education Season Three was recently released on September 17 2021, and its fan base remains enthusiastic about the series. The show revolves around Otis Milburn (Asa Butterfield) as he navigates high school, relationships, and sex. Otis, whose mother is a sex therapist (Gillian Anderson), forms a complicated friendship with Maeve Wiley. Together, they start a small business at their school, educating their peers (and the audience) on sex positivity, safe sex practices, and more. 

Although Otis and Maeve are the respectable main characters, the gems of this season were a few side characters: Adam Groff (Connor Swindells) and Ruby Matthews (Mimi Keene). It’s a running joke online that these two carried Sex Education this season. Adam, a bully-turned-sweetheart, is the boyfriend of Eric Effiong, Otis’ best friend. Ruby, one of the popular girls at Moordale Secondary School, is the fleeting love interest of Otis. We see these characters grow throughout Sex Education Season Three, and we come to forgive them for their shortcomings in earlier seasons. 

However, there is a key difference in the way these characters develop and “carry the season.” The directors give Adam more agency in his character arc, while the directors expect our sympathy for Ruby to draw from her relationships with men. Despite Sex Education’s feminist efforts to be inclusive of all identities, misogyny still pervades some of their plot lines—particularly Ruby’s.

However, there is a key difference in the way these characters develop and “carry the season.” The directors give Adam more agency in his character arc, while the directors expect our sympathy for Ruby to draw from her relationships with men. Despite Sex Education’s feminist efforts to be inclusive of all identities, misogyny still pervades some of their plot lines—particularly Ruby’s.

Adam’s Agency and Growth 

Adam starts out Season One as the school bully. He had an unhappy home life with a cold father. He would actually beat up his now-boyfriend Eric regularly until he realized and accepted his attraction for Eric. The directors offer up Adam’s complicated homelife and discomfort with his sexuality as an explanation for his outrage, and the directors hope we accept this explanation. Sex Education Season 3 was dangerously close to employing the toxic enemies-to-lovers trope and glorifying bullying. Remember Kurt Hummel and David Karofsky on Glee? Or, Mindy Krenshaw and Josh Nichols on Drake and Josh? But Sex Education’s deptiction of the bully turned romantic partner is slightly more thoughtful than these other shows. Alan Sepinwall writes in Rolling Stone,

 I’ve now mostly let go of my frustration that he [Eric] was paired off with Adam, who was introduced in Season One as a bully who relentlessly tormented Eric. Their stories this year, both together and apart, work very well. 

Overall, he overcomes his masculine outrage from Season One by accepting his identity as a gay man and working to grow as a person. Adam has our admiration, and we accept him with open arms. 

Fast forward two seasons later, and Adam comes across as an endearing young man with a kind heart. He cares deeply for his boyfriend Eric, writes him poetry, and tries harder in school. The fact that Eric forgives Adam helps us forgive him, too. And, if that doesn’t have audience members convinced, you can’t forget the scene where Eric does Adam’s makeup and Adam responds, “I look quite pretty.” Seeing Adam embrace femininity warms our hearts and seals the deal.

Like Sepinwall writes in Rolling Stone, the fact that Eric’s and Adam’s stories work “both together and apart” is a key element in Adam’s agency. He has a story outside of his boyfriend, and Adam puts in the effort to improve himself. He asks his teachers for help, practices sharing his feelings, etc. Overall, he overcomes his masculine outrage from Season One by accepting his identity as a gay man and working to grow as a person. Adam has our admiration, and we accept him with open arms. 

A Female Character’s Story Dependent on Men 

There’s another character that the directors clearly want us to sympathize with and accept—Ruby. Like Adam, Ruby also has a complex character arc. She’s one of the stereotypical popular, “mean girls” at school, and eventually the show presents her as an independent person that knows her worth. The directors want us to forgive Ruby like we did Adam. However, the directors don’t assign her agency as she grows as a character. Instead, her growth is contingent on her relationships with men.

Adam has a story “together and apart” from Eric. Ruby seems to only have a story “together” with Otis. The season opens by focusing on Otis and Ruby’s casual relationship. Ruby is embarrassed of her sexual relationship with him and spends much of Sex Education Season Three trying to change Otis—his behaviors, his clothing, etc. She is also standoffish about him going over to her house. The directors were purposeful in having the audience wait to find out why Ruby is acting this way.

“Tough Girl with a Soft Heart” Cliché 

Then, comes the “big reveal”—Ruby comes from a middle-class household, and her father has MS. How do the directors want us to feel about this? It seems like the directors are playing with a common trope: the beautiful, popular girl with a tough exterior has a secret to make us pity her—suddenly we see she has a heart. But in reality, living in a middle class household or having a close family member with an illness or disability is a normal thing. Why make her father’s experience central to her character? It seems like it should be more his story than hers. 

To make it worse, the directors seem to lose interest in Ruby’s character once Otis breaks up with her. She doesn’t really get a story of her own.

Immediately after this scene comes the vulnerable moment when Ruby tells Otis she loves him… and he doesn’t say it back. As much as we may feel for Ruby and her rejection, the directors over-emphasize her father’s role in this sympathy. They chose to place this scene directly after Otis meets Ruby’s father. As the directors imply, it is a big deal that she is sharing a secret part of her life with Otis, so we should feel even worse for Ruby. But I would argue that we should admire Ruby for other reasons—her confidence, her humor, and her ability to stand up to people. It’s a pity that the directors over-emphasize her relationships with men.

To make it worse, the directors seem to lose interest in Ruby’s character once Otis breaks up with her. She doesn’t really get a story of her own. We are expected to sympathize with her and move on. Her father’s disease and her relationship with Otis takes up too much space in her narrative.

Gender Differences in Character Arc 

@winterstxrk

best character development with them <3 #fyp #rubymatthews #adamgroff

♬ original sound – amber

It’s interesting that with Adam, we get to sympathize with his character for his personal struggles and his agency in overcoming them. For Ruby, the female character, we are expected to sympathize with her because of her association with men and their struggles. This pattern of giving male characters more agency than others is getting a bit old, don’t you think?

Sex Education did an amazing job in Season Three in its representation of all kinds of identities. We saw more non-binary representation, disabled individuals as love interests, and more. However, they fell a bit short when it came to Ruby’s character development. Let’s hope that if Season Four is in the works, the directors will give Ruby more space in the show’s narrative as she deserves.

Depicting Sexual Violence in Television

by Aditi Hukerikar //

Trigger Warning: This article contains mentions and descriptions of sexual assault. Please read with caution.

Disclaimer(05/2021): This article was written before season four of The Handmaid’s Tale and the events that occur in that season’s plot.

The CDC reports that in the United States, over 1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men have experienced sexual violence in their lifetimes (data for nonbinary individuals was not reported). So, with the prevalence of sexual violence in our communities, which can be extremely traumatizing for survivors, how should forms of popular media, such as television, handle the inclusion of sexual assault into their respective narratives?

Recently, the Netflix series Bridgerton has become widely popular, centered around the Debutante season in Regency-era England. The show follows the main character Daphne Bridgerton in her fake-turned-real relationship with Simon, Duke of Hastings, who she eventually marries. In the season’s sixth episode, Daphne realizes that Simon has lied about not being able to have children. In her desire for children, Daphne attempts to become pregnant by taking advantage of Simon during sex, after he withdraws consent. Though the continuation of a sex act after someone has withdrawn consent is considered to be sexual assault, this episode does not feature a trigger or content warning for sexual assault. 

Showrunner Chris Van Dusen acknowledges the controversy of this scene’s inclusion, which is included in the source material, Julia Quinn’s novel The Duke and I. Van Dusen tells Entertainment Weekly that “…we did discuss it a lot as far as how to approach it and how to handle it,” eventually including the scene due to its role in Daphne’s character development. 

Without addressing sexual assault in further episodes or implicating that Daphne’s actions were wrong, the show seems to brush aside sexual assault rather than addressing the gravity of the issue.

Despite the showrunners approaching Bridgerton’s inclusion of sexual assault with serious intent, Bridgerton still sends the message that sexual assault isn’t a significant issue. Daphne does not end up facing any major consequences for her actions, she and Simon remain in a relationship, and Simon even starts to believe that he deserves blame for the situation. Without addressing sexual assault in further episodes or implicating that Daphne’s actions were wrong, the show seems to brush aside sexual assault rather than addressing the gravity of the issue. Furthermore, men who are survivors of sexual assault already tend to be silenced, brushed aside, or stigmatized. Including the sexual assault of a man in the show without treating the assault seriously or showing his trauma in the aftermath contributes to the invalidation of real survivors’ trauma. 

In Hulu’s The Handmaid’s Tale, an adaptation of Margaret Atwood’s famous novel of the same name, viewers are also presented sexual assault on screen. Atwood’s novel includes the routine rape of handmaids by the Commanders they are assigned to, referred to as “The Ceremony.” The show chooses to include this depiction of sexual assault but also deviates from the source material during a scene in the tenth episode of the second season, titled The Last Ceremony. During this scene, Commander Waterford sexually assaults June (Offred) while Serena is restraining her in order to induce labor in June. This episode’s description does include a trigger warning for sexual assault in the episode description.

In essence, The Handmaid’s Tale treated sexual assault as something explicitly terrible, while Bridgerton did not. 

The presentation of sexual assault in The Handmaid’s Tale differs greatly from that in Bridgerton because of the seriousness with which the topic is treated. Waterford and Serena are presented as antagonists from the beginning of the show, and the Ceremony is portrayed as a means of subjugating women, including the protagonist June. In other words, sexual assault is clearly labeled as unethical. Furthermore, choosing to include an explicit warning for sexual assault in The Last Ceremony’s episode description sends the message that sexual assault is a serious issue and warns viewers who are survivors of the potentially triggering content. Bridgerton, on the other hand, depicts sexual assault in a lighter manner; Daphne, the perpetrator, remains the protagonist of the show, continuing to be cast in a positive light. Additionally, the narrative following the sexual assault takes no major steps towards labeling Daphne’s actions as cruel or immoral. In essence, The Handmaid’s Tale treated sexual assault as something explicitly terrible, while Bridgerton did not. 

At the end of the day, it is up to a television show’s creators to decide whether or not they want to include sexual assault as part of the show’s narrative. However, creators must be mindful of how the inclusion of sexual assault scenes will impact audiences. With sexual assault remaining a prevalent and dangerous issue, it is important that its depiction and discussion are treated with the necessary gravity. Fiction maintains the ability to significantly impact the real world, and handling sexual assault seriously in the media can ensure that we can continue working towards preventing and eliminating sexual assault in real life.