Film and television has historically empowered patriarchal culture, weakening the feminist movement. However, the portrayal of female characters in film and television has since undergone an evolution, now representing women as complex and autonomous characters. Ella provides readers with powerful insights about ongoing injustices and prejudices surrounding women’s rights and the persistent gender inequalities across various sectors of society.
By Ella McLachlan
[This story was originally published in 2024]
According to French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir, “one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman” (Beauvoir, 2015). This assertion highlights the constructed nature of femininity, shaped not by intellect, biology, or psychology, but by a construction of civilisation. This concept underpins the representations of women in media, which reflect and influence evolving feminist ideologies. Through adopting Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure’s semiotic theory, an analysis of the cult-classic comedy series Fleabag (2016-19) and the James Bond franchise – specifically Dr. No (1962) and Casino Royale (2006) - it becomes clear how depictions of women have shifted over time in response to changing gender norms. While Fleabag serves as a subversive critique of traditional femininity, the evolution of Bond women demonstrates a more gradual, yet significant, transformation in mainstream portrayals of female agency.
Fleabag: A Satirical Subversion of Gender Stereotypes
The comedy television series, Fleabag, presents a radical departure from conventional
portrayals of women in media through its multidimensional protagonist. Fleabag redefines the
modern-day woman, presenting her as a witty and sexually potent individual who subverts the
expectations surrounding female sexuality (Holzberg & Lehtonen, 2021). The series
protagonist, Fleabag, embodies a deeply flawed, complex, and self-destructive character who
rejects these imposed standards, offering an unfiltered representation of contemporary
womanhood.
Fleabag stands as a testament to the power of satire and humour, achieving insight into the
intricacies of women's lives, touching on alienation and societal norms (Dove-Viebahn, 2023).
Fleabag’s frequent fourth wall breaks allow her unique narrative agency, inviting her viewers
into her inner world, simultaneously exposing her vulnerabilities and manipulating our
perception of the series of events. This self-awareness allows a critique of how women areexpected to perform their gender roles – both in society and within media narratives. As
Holzberg and Lehtonen (2021) observe, Fleabag’s self-proclaimed "bad feminist" identity
disrupts traditional markers of female virtue in favour of traits historically associated with men
– vulgarity, wit, and insatiable sexuality.
One of the most striking examples of the series feminist critique is its reversal of the traditional objectification dynamic. Unlike women in mainstream media who are often reduced to archetypes, which is a result of the marginalisation of women within a patriarchal society (Ott & Mack, 2014).
Instead, Fleabag applies these reductive labels to male characters. Men within the series are identified by their physical appearance or perceived personality traits – “Hot Misogynist,” “Bus Rodent,” or “Hot Priest,” mirroring how women have been portrayed. This deliberate inversion highlights the absurdity of such objectification and forces the audience to reconsider the gendered power structures at play in media representations.
Moreover, Fleabag’s relationship with her sister, Claire, is an insightful exploration of contemporary female experiences and competing feminist ideals. While Fleabag embraces chaos and imperfection, Claire represents the neoliberal feminist archetype, prioritising professional success and social status over personal fulfilment with her assertion that she has “two degrees, a husband, and a Burberry coat.”
Meanwhile, Fleabag struggles to reconcile her unconventional traits with mainstream feminism, questioning whether her behaviours disqualify her from feminism altogether. The overarching symbol of “innate femininity” manifests in the form of a golden statue which
is the embodiment of Fleabag’s deceased mother, throughout the series this statue is stolen, lost, and repeatedly exchanged between characters, ultimately reflecting the instability and fluidity of female identity. However, at the conclusion, Fleabag reclaims the golden statue conveying her newfound sense of autonomy as a woman.
James Bond: The Evolution of the Bond Woman
While Fleabag actively dismantles patriarchal conventions, the James Bond franchise has historically reinforced them. The early Bond films epitomised a hyper-masculine fantasy,
where women served as little more than ornamental side characters, existing primarily to gratify the male protagonist. This is certainly evident in Dr. No (1962), where Honey Ryder
(played by Ursula Andress) makes her iconic entrance – emerging from the ocean in a white bikini. This scene became emblematic of the “male gaze” (Mulvey, 1989), a term used
to describe how women in media are often positioned as passive objects of male desire. Ryder, despite her brief moments of autonomy, ultimately conforms to the trope of the “Bond girl” – a beautiful yet disposable love interest who serves as a temporary conquest for Bond (Funnell, 2015).
However, like all popular culture, the Bond franchise reflects the ideological climate of
their time (Funnell, 2015). By the time Casino Royale (2006) was released, significant cultural
shifts had altered the landscape of gender representation in film. Notably, Bond himself subverts traditional portrayals in Casino Royale, emerging from the water under the women’s gaze, an inversion of the iconic imagery typically associated with Bond girls, whereby he becomes the object of desire (Funnell, 2015).
Casino Royale’s Bond Girl, Vesper Lynd (played by Eva Green), can be compared to the Bond women of previous decades. Unlike her predecessors, she is not merely a passive love interest but a character with her own motivations, intelligence, and agency. Her involvement with high-ranking intelligence supervisors and formidable villains positions her as Bond’s equal, superior, and adversary. Therefore, Lynd’s multidimensional character challenges Bond’s worldview, particularly his perception of women as “disposable pleasures” rather than “meaningful pursuits” (Garland, 2009). Their relationship unlike the dynamic within Dr. No (1962) is intellectual and emotional, marking a departure from the superficial romance of the past Bond girl archetype and highlighting the cultural shifts in gender representation within the Bond franchise (Garland, 2009).
Another crucial development within the Bond franchise is the portrayal of M (played by Judi
Dench). As the head of M16, M occupies a position of power traditionally reserved for male characters. Her authoritative role disrupts the hyper-masculine structure of the Bond universe, offering a representation of female identity that operates outside of the confines of
the “male gaze.” Notably, M’s relationship with Bond is not one of seduction but mentorship, further challenging the franchise’s historical treatment of the Bond girl.
Shifting Gender Narratives
By comparing Fleabag with the James Bond franchise, it becomes evident that media
representations of women are not static but evolve alongside broader societal changes. While
Fleabag actively deconstructs and critiques traditional femininity, the evolution of the Bond
women in Dr. No (1962) and Casino Royale (2006) represents a more gradual transformation – moving from blatant objectification to more nuanced portrayals of female agency.
Both texts highlight the ongoing negotiation between feminist ideals and mainstream conventions while exploring the complexities of the female condition.
Fleabag refuses to present a neatly packaged feminist protagonist, instead offering an authentic depiction of the female experience – raw, witty, and deeply human.
Meanwhile, Casino Royale demonstrates that, despite the historically patriarchal nature of the franchise, progress is possible. The shift from Honey Ryder to Vesper Lynd and M illustrates the increasing demand for female characters to be fully realised individuals with their own narratives, reflecting both the struggles and triumphs of modern-day womanhood.
Ultimately, media both reflects and shapes cultural attitudes toward gender representation. As
feminist discourse continues to evolve, so too will the portrayals of women on screen.
However, a question remains: Will mainstream media continue to challenge gender norms, or will it regress into comfortable stereotypes?
Ella McLachlan is in her second year of a Bachelor of Communication (Journalism) at QUT. She is deeply passionate about a wide range of issues, including international and national politics, human rights, climate change, advocacy, and the court and justice system. In an ever-changing media landscape, Ella am committed to upholding truth, accuracy, and impactful communication throughout my career as a journalist.
References
Beauvoir, S. de. (2015). The second sex. Vintage Classics.
Beauvoir-The-Second-Sex-Jonathan-Cape-1956.pdf
Dove-Viebahn, A. (2023). Controlling the narrative, examining the self: The unruly femme
subjectivity of Fleabag. Sexualities. Sage Journals.
Funnell, L. (2015). For His Eyes Only: The Women of James Bond. Columbia University
Press. ISBN 9780231850926.
Garland, T. W. (2009). "The coldest weapon of all": The Bond Girl Villain In James Bond
Films. Journal of Popular Film & Television, 37(4), 179-188. ProQuest.
Holzberg, B., & Lehtonen, A. (2021). The affective life of heterosexuality: hetero-pessimism
and post-feminism in Fleabag. Feminist Media Studies, 22 (8). Taylor & Francis Online.
Mulvey, L. (1989). Visual And Other Pleasures. Palgrave. ISBN 978-1-349-19798-9.
Ott, Brian L., & Robert L. Mack. (2014). Critical Media Studies: An Introduction (3rd
edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Comments