I had a different appreciation for it as a person in her late twenties (having experienced, is experiencing, or having close friends experiencing the stages of life the six friends go through over the course of the show), but at the same time, I felt a hyper-awareness for the super-prevalent gender stereotyping that dominated sitcoms of that era and beyond.
To be sure, the show was not devoid of feminist moments and had some progressive moments for its times (most notably, the "lesbian wedding" episode aired years before same-sex marriage became a viable public policy issue). However, there are too many moments when laughs are drawn from gender stereotypes or traditional notions of gender. Such tropes include repeated assaults on beta males Ross and Chandler's "masculinity," the women's constant demand for romance from attractive guys, and the women playing "mind games" with the guys they like. A VICE article summed it up bluntly but quite accurately in a subheading: "Men Are Pathetic; Women Are Bitches."
When I was younger, I found the "battle of the sexes" brand of humor a lot funnier than I do today. I partly blame my lack of imagination, but there was also the fact that many of the popular sitcoms I was exposed to were based on the idea that men and women are different creatures who will always have irreconcilable differences. The different perceptions that two people with different experiences have in a relationship can be a great source of humor. Every day, we see husbands misinterpreting wives and girlfriends misinterpreting boyfriends due to the different social experiences of men and women (mind you, I'm not saying that every misunderstanding between significant others of the opposite genders are due to these differences--just that misunderstandings attributable to this factor exist). Such misunderstandings are familiar, and when presented in the right way, it's funny. At the same time, owing the misunderstanding to gender differences can be presented in a lazy way that relies on harmful stereotypes derived from an individual's gender per se rather than the way in which he or she has been treated in society because of gender.
Today, there have been sitcoms on both major broadcast networks and cable that have shown us that humor about gender does not need to be based on lazy stereotypes. That humor can celebrate--rather than mock--gender differences. And that sitcom story-lines and characters can be interesting without relying on gender-based characteristics (and even produce role models). (Parks and Recreation is an obvious example of a show that does all of this, and I can go on and on about how amazing the show is, but let's save that for another day.)
But back to Friends. I wouldn't characterize the show as sexist (and if we're pointing out problems, I would say it's more problematic in its catering to a white, middle-class urbanite fantasy of a friendship among totally self-absorbed young people). Over all, it is still primarily focused on friendships, some of which becomes intertwined with romance. But everything still takes place against the backdrop of socially accepted gender-stereotyping. Laughs are drawn when the male characters are revealed to have engaged in "girly" or "non-masculine" activities (for example, Chandler not making the cut for the synchronized swimming team or Ross having spent one summer trying to make it as a dancer). When one of the female characters starts an endeavor and gets themselves in over their heads, a male character would often come to the rescue (by "manning up!") to save the day in a "sweet" gesture (for example, Chandler is the one who ultimately convinces the surrogate to give her baby to him and Monica after she realizes there was an identity mix-up). And the real problem is that gender non-comformity is very rarely treated as empowering and the female characters don't really do anything dramatic enough to be considered "saving the day" when a male character gets in over his head.
I don't know. In the end, it may just be that I didn't like the way in which Rachel got off the plane. There's no "wrong choice" in the feminist rulebook, so long as the choice is made by the woman herself. But it still bothers me that she chose Ross (her love but a man she had not dated in years) over her new job in Paris she was so excited about when she had been fired from her job. It would not have bothered me if she had chosen to stay because Ross (her child's father) was in New York. On top of that, the show just lacks a female protagonist who ultimately chooses something that is not based on a traditional notion of what women want. Obviously, there's nothing wrong with women who want those things, but what's wrong is that that's the only representation of female characters available to the viewers of the show. Monica has a job but she's into domestic things and always wanted to be a mom, and Phoebe was the non-conventional one but she gets married (to an awesome guy but still) when she hadn't really thought of herself that way. Again, nothing wrong with their individual decisions, but everyone's stories get wrapped up neatly with a conventional bow.
Friends remains one of my all-time favorite shows. It resonates with me in many ways, now that I am in my late twenties, am about to get married, and have a bunch of friends who are getting married and are starting to have children. As someone who has lived apart from her family since age nineteen and only sees them about once a year (not solely by choice), I understand the special, family-level bonds that can develop among friends. At the same time, my love of Friends has not blinded me from the fact that it is a relic (OK, maybe not the best diction but still not exactly up-to-date) that needs to be approached with a grain of salt, particularly when it comes to the presentation of gender.
When I was younger, I found the "battle of the sexes" brand of humor a lot funnier than I do today. I partly blame my lack of imagination, but there was also the fact that many of the popular sitcoms I was exposed to were based on the idea that men and women are different creatures who will always have irreconcilable differences. The different perceptions that two people with different experiences have in a relationship can be a great source of humor. Every day, we see husbands misinterpreting wives and girlfriends misinterpreting boyfriends due to the different social experiences of men and women (mind you, I'm not saying that every misunderstanding between significant others of the opposite genders are due to these differences--just that misunderstandings attributable to this factor exist). Such misunderstandings are familiar, and when presented in the right way, it's funny. At the same time, owing the misunderstanding to gender differences can be presented in a lazy way that relies on harmful stereotypes derived from an individual's gender per se rather than the way in which he or she has been treated in society because of gender.
Today, there have been sitcoms on both major broadcast networks and cable that have shown us that humor about gender does not need to be based on lazy stereotypes. That humor can celebrate--rather than mock--gender differences. And that sitcom story-lines and characters can be interesting without relying on gender-based characteristics (and even produce role models). (Parks and Recreation is an obvious example of a show that does all of this, and I can go on and on about how amazing the show is, but let's save that for another day.)
But back to Friends. I wouldn't characterize the show as sexist (and if we're pointing out problems, I would say it's more problematic in its catering to a white, middle-class urbanite fantasy of a friendship among totally self-absorbed young people). Over all, it is still primarily focused on friendships, some of which becomes intertwined with romance. But everything still takes place against the backdrop of socially accepted gender-stereotyping. Laughs are drawn when the male characters are revealed to have engaged in "girly" or "non-masculine" activities (for example, Chandler not making the cut for the synchronized swimming team or Ross having spent one summer trying to make it as a dancer). When one of the female characters starts an endeavor and gets themselves in over their heads, a male character would often come to the rescue (by "manning up!") to save the day in a "sweet" gesture (for example, Chandler is the one who ultimately convinces the surrogate to give her baby to him and Monica after she realizes there was an identity mix-up). And the real problem is that gender non-comformity is very rarely treated as empowering and the female characters don't really do anything dramatic enough to be considered "saving the day" when a male character gets in over his head.
I don't know. In the end, it may just be that I didn't like the way in which Rachel got off the plane. There's no "wrong choice" in the feminist rulebook, so long as the choice is made by the woman herself. But it still bothers me that she chose Ross (her love but a man she had not dated in years) over her new job in Paris she was so excited about when she had been fired from her job. It would not have bothered me if she had chosen to stay because Ross (her child's father) was in New York. On top of that, the show just lacks a female protagonist who ultimately chooses something that is not based on a traditional notion of what women want. Obviously, there's nothing wrong with women who want those things, but what's wrong is that that's the only representation of female characters available to the viewers of the show. Monica has a job but she's into domestic things and always wanted to be a mom, and Phoebe was the non-conventional one but she gets married (to an awesome guy but still) when she hadn't really thought of herself that way. Again, nothing wrong with their individual decisions, but everyone's stories get wrapped up neatly with a conventional bow.
Friends remains one of my all-time favorite shows. It resonates with me in many ways, now that I am in my late twenties, am about to get married, and have a bunch of friends who are getting married and are starting to have children. As someone who has lived apart from her family since age nineteen and only sees them about once a year (not solely by choice), I understand the special, family-level bonds that can develop among friends. At the same time, my love of Friends has not blinded me from the fact that it is a relic (OK, maybe not the best diction but still not exactly up-to-date) that needs to be approached with a grain of salt, particularly when it comes to the presentation of gender.
