Why Realistic Views Are Compromised When Marketing Stereotypes

Some will argue that the portrayal of homosexuality on television means that our culture has opened up enough to accept gays and lesbians. While this may be true for some, one may also argue that it is the context in which they are seen, that truly determines that. If done so by marketing stereotypes, then a realistic view isn’t attainable.
During Season Two of the television sitcom “Two and a Half Men”, we see how dominant heterosexuality creates a false view of gay men by reinforcing demeaning stereotypes while maintaining heterosexual appeal. In episode 218, entitled “It Was Mame, Mom”, we see a variety of ploys executed by the main character, Charlie, at the expense of his gay boss.
Charlie, who lives with his brother Alan, and Alan’s son, works as a freelance “jingle” writer. His boss, who is gay, calls and invites him to a party. Upon picking up the phone Charlie’s voice softens, and his language becomes more complex. After being invited to the party he says “Oh goodie, an excuse to shop, like I need one” to his boss, attaching the homosexual lifestyle with “commodities instead of practices as an expression of the self”(Raymond 105). This is seen throughout the show many times. Alan, who is confused by his brother’s change in demeanor, inquires and immediately catches on that the boss is gay. Charlie tells Alan that he has been invited to a cocktail party and explains to him, that he has told his boss that not only is he gay as well, but that he and Alan are life partners. Alan, who harbors more effeminate gestures and has a broader ‘cultural’ scope made clear from the beginning, is decidedly the “wife”. It is also Alan who tries to curb this behavior of deceiving the boss, which could be looked at as a feminine trait. Charlie claims that when around a gay man, it’s like being around a southerner, in that you start to act like them, acclimating to their way of speech and vocabulary. He also goes on to say that he wants his boss to feel “comfortable” around him, giving us the implication that homosexuals may only feel comfortable around one another. This implication is further exacerbated when they both enter the cocktail party and its attendees are only well dressed gay men. Also, it is telling us that these heterosexual men think that they can fool the gay men into thinking they are “one of them”, indicating that gay men are too air-headed and naïve to see the blatant truth.
As the party goes on we are introduced to the boss’s ex-wife. This is a “re-inscription” of heterosexuality that Raymond points out in her piece, which “enables the viewers to distance themselves from the queer and thereby return to their comfortable positions.”(Raymond 100). Before the boss was gay, he was a normal, heterosexual guy, someone that was relatively relatable. Upon becoming gay, his mannerisms became feminine, his interests were localized to shopping and materialism, while his friend circle from what we see, is mostly comprised of other gay men. This depiction of homosexuality is false, offensive, and demeaning while it perpetuates and markets the stereotypes that compulsory heterosexuality sets into motion.
After the only female at the party is introduced, Charlie leaves his “life partner” to continue the night in conversation with her. Alan is left to discourse topics of interest to gay men, such as “apple-tinis” and sweaters. This may happen because as fore mentioned; Alan is the more stereotypical “gay” while creating this character. Alan creates an entire story elaborating on how the couple met, getting so into depth Charlie gets angry displaying to the viewer that this is all just an act and can only be allowed to be taken so far.
The next day, we see Charlie going shopping with his boss’s ex, and hitting on her. She is, of course, oblivious to this and makes several comments about “how easy it is to open up to a gay guy”, and how her emotional relationships with straight men are so much different. Because she feels so comforted by this “gay” mans presence she invites him into the fitting room, proceeds to try on a shirt, and by doing so, goes topless. She fails to notice that this “gay” man is no longer paying attention to her, and what she is saying, but staring at her chest lost in his own fantastical thoughts. When they emerge from the fitting room, he tells her he has been lying all along, and that he is straight. In an attempt to prove this to her, he brings her back into the dressing room and tries to have sex with her. His penis cannot become erect and therefore she views him as gay. Despite his attempts to reconstruct his sexual identity she claims that he is just trying to free himself from the discrimination and oppression of being a gay male. It is never suggested that she too may be gay now, or may have a more fluid sexual identity and that is the reason she finds comfort in gay men, or their sexual encounter fails.
Belittled by rejection and his erectile dysfunction he goes home to “watch girl-on-girl porn and drink beer”, a very conspicuous heterosexual male thing to do. It was painfully clear to me although this was the first time I viewed this sitcom, that Charlie’s character was a “super-hetero”, borderline misogynist male figure. Upon returning home, he finds his brother with his boss, learning later that his boss had come over to ask Alan to visit Big Sur with him despite his cover that he was there to discuss work with Charlie. This continues the stereotype that homosexual men are sexual deviants, going to whatever means necessary to obtain their sexual interests.
Comical homosexual innuendo was peppered throughout the episode and several times Charlie remarks “…but we’re not gay!” to his brother, almost as if he was reminding him. In the end, his boss offers him more money for his work as compensation for trying to steal his lover. Charlie accepts this and leads his boss out of their home. This indicates that homosexual relationships are not serious, or as serious as heterosexual relationships perhaps because marriage is still, mostly illegal among the gay community. Or more simply, because couples of the same sex cannot achieve the same things as heterosexual couples.
While some say that allowing these programs and characters into our homes on primetime, we are making headway towards a greater acceptance of diversity in our society. Through this analysis it is shown that if true headway is to be made one must look at these communities and try to market them without the stereotypes that they seem so dependent on.