Publicizing the Double Standards within Media

Author note: This article uses female and womxn interchangeably (as an identifier)

Double standards arise when similar, if not identical, behaviours are perceived differently, often negatively, for certain groups. Frequent topics that hold double standards when discussing womxn compared to men include: music, occupation, success, hobbies, entrepreneurship, and work ethic. This article will focus on gender affiliated double standards, specially, those that are placed on youth and young adults.

Unfortunately, these double standards can be found across several settings, both physical and virtual. Workplaces and educational institutes exemplify common physical settings, but what defines virtual settings? These settings include social media platforms, online forums, and articles, along with any other platform that publicly shares content.

Fan behaviour and music preferences are major sources of criticism, by both media and peers. Although most people are familiar with the popular “fangirl” image that defines fans as obsessive and even “unhinged” (for a lack of better words), this concept has existed for decades. For instance, female-identifying fans in the 1960s were described as “degenerates” and “hysterical” while watching The Beatles. These adjectives were and continue to be used almost exclusively for womxn, which reinforces the predisposition that females are extremely irrational emotional beings. In contrast, men who display excessive emotions during sporting events or political debates are perceived as patriotic and intelligent. Let’s break this down… why is one group of screaming and cheering people viewed so drastically differently from the other? Why is there a clear double standard for these harmless acts?

It all goes back to how hysteria was exclusively used to describe womxn fans. This description resulted in an implicit bias, which without previous research, would be considered a harmless connection. However, this bias actually builds itself into a double standard that differentiates behaviours by gender rather than the action itself. For instance, screaming is perceived differently when it is affiliated with men vs. womxn, despite the action being affiliated with support and indulging in things you enjoy—for both groups! The differences in perception can also result in the dismissal of feelings and passions for womxn, which may discourage these individuals from sharing their passions due to social mockery.

Double standards are also notable in male dominating fields. An example of this can be seen in the film and music industry, where there is a stark difference between the interviews of male vs. female nominees and winners. This is evident when comparing Brad Pitt and Youn Yuh-Jung’s backstage interviews, after winning an oscar. Most of Pitt’s questions revolved around the winning speech he delivered at the Oscars; meanwhile, Youn’s questions focused less on her achievements and more so on her opinions of fellow cast members and if she would like to work with them in the future. Moreover, Youn’s win is a historical feat being that she is the first Korean to win an oscar for the best supporting actress, so the interview’s focus on her costars falls on suspicious eyes as she should have been the main subject of focus.

Overall, it is important to recognize the unconscious biases that one, as well as society, upholds, but it is even more important to find solutions to correct these biases since they can result in discriminatory or hypocritical judgments. This is exhibited by the double standards that are affiliated with fan behaviour. Sex-based biases can also unmotivate and downgrade the achievements of womxn, as shown with the comparison of post-Oscar winning interviews. This suggests that double standards do not necessarily highlight men above womxn, but they do influence interactions and social behaviour. Thus, it is crucial that we, as members of society, reduce this bias by perceiving actions the same, no matter the sex of who carries them out, to promote equality and individuality.

by Harshdeep Dhaliwal '23 (Blog Subcommittee Member)