
Today GLAAD and the Human Rights Campaign teamed up on an op-ed on Huffington Post’s Gay Voices, and an ad was placed in Variety to educate the media industry and the public about the potential harm caused to the LGBT community by the upcoming ABC sitcom “Work It.” At right is the ad. Here’s an excerpt of the guest post by HRC’s Joe Solmonese and GLAAD’s Mike Thompson, who also called for ABC not to air the show:
The so-called “comedy” of Work It is based on the premise that people who were born male but encounter challenges in presenting themselves as women is inherently funny. The problem is that some transgender women may find themselves in this situation, at least temporarily, during the early stages of their transition, due to the prohibitively high costs of transition-related medical care and widespread insurance inequities. Transgender Americans — who can be legally fired in 34 states today just for being who they are — face an inordinate amount of workplace discrimination that images like those on Work It perpetuate.
The premise of this show is repulsive, and ABC — a network that routinely scores highly in GLAAD’s annual TV reports and whose parent company, Disney, receives a perfect 100-percent score from HRC’s Corporate Equality Index — should know better than to air it. ABC is a network that has brought us groundbreaking shows featuring LGBT personalities, like Modern Family and Brothers & Sisters, and it is the network that most recently featured Chaz Bono on Dancing with the Stars. LGBT community members and youth have often looked to ABC’s programming for positive images that build acceptance, not images that make jokes of our lives and the challenges that many in the community face. ABC’s own “Stand Together” project, featured on Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, aims to put an end to bullying nationwide. But all the goodwill in the world doesn’t justify putting images like Work It in the living rooms of millions.
By encouraging the audience to laugh at the characters’ attempts at womanhood, the show condones similar treatment of transgender women. Unfortunately, such behavior needs no encouragement: 97 percent of self-identified transgender people reported being mistreated at work, and 26 percent — that’s one in four — reported losing their jobs because they are transgender.
Though characters who challenge traditional gender norms have the potential to expand how an audience thinks about itself, the clumsy, offensive portrayals and marketing of this series are clearly not accomplishing this. By trying to create humorous scenes of these characters putting on makeup and feminine clothing, for example, Work It makes similar implications about transgender women’s identities and their ways of expressing them, while also reinforcing the erroneous notion that transgender women are not “real” women.
It’s not just the LGBT community that will be insulted by the show, either. Besides spreading the dangerous misconception that it’s easier for a woman to get a job, the show resorts to some of the most outdated and sexist stereotypes about women you’re likely to find on television. Work It isn’t above racism, either, as demonstrated when the main character’s best friend Angel remarks, “I’m Puerto Rican. I would be great at selling drugs!”
My guess, with the investment made, ABC will air “Work It” rather than shelve it. I haven’t seen the pilot, so I cannot comment on the content, other than to say that it sounds like something that will get the cancellation hook fairly quickly. The real discussion is how/why this got all the way to production in the first place at ABC? Who greenlighted this, expecting no blow-back from the LGBT community? I think it illustrates that trans issues are still poorly understood, and gender issues still receive ham-handed treatment in the media. We’ll see how ABC responds.
Related:
* Work It (by Autumn Sandeen)




14 Comments


Does anyone have a thought on the ABC Do Not Air the Sitcom “Work It” petition?
Is there one? Do you have a link?
I thought a direct link would be a violation of the terms of service.
When I enter in the string
ABC Do Not Air the Sitcom “Work It” petition
into Google, it’s my first hit. I suspect it would be one of your top 5.
The way some GLBs are acting about this, I can’t help but experience some deja vu about Ticked Off %&$*^* With Knives.
…isn’t this just the premise of “Bosom Buddies” being recycled?
Tootsie, One of the Guys, Kids in the Hall, Milton Berle, Dame Edna, Torchsong Trilogy, Priscilla, To Wong Foo, RuPaul’s Drag Race, any gay bar on a Friday night… there’s quite a lot of entertainment out there featuring men in dresses, why is this show in particular being singled out as offensive?
I transitioned several years ago and I don’t get the uproar over a show that’s not even on the air yet. Given how volatile the market is and how ratings obsessed network execs are I doubt this show will last more than a few weeks. So to me this is much ado about nothing. We should save our ammo for more important issues than this, more blatant attacks. For example that Saturday Night Live sketch about Estro-Maxx; now that was vile.
On a related front… everyone had nothing but positive comments when Candis Cayne was cast in Dirty Sexy Money despite the fact she was portraying a stereotype (more or less a sex worker/mistress). So if you’re going to be angry about Work It, at least show some balance and be angry about Candis playing a stereotype. Oh, and nobody remembers that in the first episode of Dirty Sexy Money that they wanted Candis to lower her voice to sound male in the scene she first appeared. She refused, but that didn’t stop them from changing her voice in post-production. And yet we didn’t here anyone crying foul over that.
Come on people, we need to pick our battles and Work It isn’t worth it.
I have the same question as you. And, would also like to see it related to a discussion defining each of these terms: transgender, transsexual, transvestite, cross-dresser, drag queen and any others I may be forgetting. Could you produce a movie or TV program about a transvestite or cross-dresser without offending transgenders? We do know with “Drag Race” you can have a show about drag queens without a problem. We also know that LOGO can put a show like “A-List Dallas” on that is filled with nothing but negative stereotypes about gay men without a single peep out of HRC or GLAD in response.
Cristan Williams did a better job than I could about why this show is so offensive. http://www.cristanwilliams.com/b/2011/12/19/about-work-it/
She maintains, and I agree, that it’s a show about cis people’s idea about what being trans is all about, thus making it the equivalent of a blackface minstrel show. This may have been acceptable in the past, as we saw in the TV shows and films mentioned by wewannawii but it is not acceptable anymore. The trans community is fighting for their dignity and the respect they deserve as equal members of this culture and society. Shows like “Work It” promote opposition to this battle.
“Transface” is an excellent way to put it, and simple substitution is a good way to show it.
If you’re interested in standard definitions of some of the terms you mention, I’d go to GLAAD’s media guide:
The Transgender page: http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender
I’m afraid I can’t comment on the movies/shows you reference; the only one I’ve seen was Tootsie, and I barely recall it.
I did as you suggested and imagine my surprise when I found there that even though transvestites are not a part of the transgender community and vice versa, the transgender community has proclaimed that the term transvestite is derogatory. How does that work?
If transvestites are perfectly happy using the term transvestite and they are not claiming to be part of the transgender community where does the transgender community come off demanding that transvestites not be able to use the term?
My understanding is that it is considered derogatory by a significant percentage of people – but not everyone. If someone self-identifies as such, I wouldn’t dispute their self-designation. However, “Cross-dresser” is the more commonly preferred term.
To answer your previous question, I personally wouldn’t be offended by media that portrays cross-dressers with some accuracy – particularly if they note that a cross-dressing experience is different from the experience of someone who is transitioning.
I guess I’m really wondering why GLADD is discussing two non transgender terms (cross-dresser and transvestite) on their page titled Transgender Glossary of Terms. And, worse, they have listed them under the sub section titled “Transgender-Specific Terminology”
These two terms are NOT transgender specific. In fact they are specifically NOT transgender. If GLADD felt it necessary to include those terms, they should have been listed in the general terminology section and defined as having nothing to do with the transgender community.
Go back and read the definition of “transgender” again. It is an umbrella term that covers many diverse groups. Transgender does not equal transsexual. You are not alone, a lot of people get the two confused.