Duchess Meghan funded a Moms First study into TV portrayals of mothers

Geena Davis runs her own Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media. She started it after she starred in Thelma & Louise, because it was so groundbreaking at the time to have two female characters go on a crime spree and eschew men, and the reaction to that film stuck with Davis. She partnered with Moms First, a nonprofit activism group focused on making life/the economy/marriage better for American mothers. The Geena Davis Institute and Moms First partnered with Archewell, and Archewell funded a study about how motherhood is portrayed in television and streaming shows. Would you believe that TV moms are overwhelmingly white, young and thin, and married to men who are the breadwinners and they always live in clean homes? Shocking!

The Duchess of Sussex is teaming up with actor Geena Davis and Moms First, a longtime charity partner of the Archewell Foundation, to raise awareness about the ways television depicts characters who are mothers, backed up by data gathered from programming across 2022.

On Thursday, Moms First and the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media shared the results of a study that shows how those portrayals don’t always reflect reality, and argues that a change is necessary if we want to shift public attitudes and policy. The study, funded by the Archewell Foundation, found that though TV moms have become slightly more diverse, they are still underrepresented as earners and are still largely young, white, and thin. In 2022, when a couple with kids under 18 had a clear breadwinner, it was male 86.5% of the time. The study found that childcare and the realities of keeping a house running are largely erased.

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Davis says she was surprised by how “dated” the various portrayals of TV moms seemed. “The representation of motherhood seemed like such a throwback,” she says. “It didn’t reflect modern reality anywhere near as closely as I had hoped or imagined.”

In a statement, Meghan explained her reasoning for signing onto the project. “My past experience as an actress, and now today as a producer and mother, have amplified my belief in the critical importance of supporting women and moms both behind the lens and in front of it,” she said. “This report about the portrayal of mothers in entertainment highlights the gaps we need to fill to achieve true representation in the content we create and consume, and I’m honored to support this work through the Archewell Foundation.”

Davis has been working on issues of women’s representation since she founded the institute in 2004, based on the idea that presenting producers and film executives with the numbers about gender disparity in media could lead to tangible change. “Images have a profound impact on people’s perceptions of themselves and others, and therefore the images can be used to create good,” she says. “I saw that children’s movies and TV made specifically for kids seemed to have a huge gender disparity…. What if we’re training kids from the beginning to have unconscious gender bias by showing boys as more important and taking up more space in the world?”

Davis mentioned that she hasn’t had the chance to catch the duchess’s role in Suits, but she is thankful for the support from the Archewell Foundation. “We love having her support and the support of Archwell,” Davis says. “We can’t do it without financial support like that, and it’s obviously a subject that’s very near and dear to her heart.”

Moms First’s Reshma Saujani thanked Meghan for the work she has done since the pandemic to support the charity and make issues like paid leave a central part of her platform. “She had a line she would say, and I always steal it from her: The most important title I have is mother,” Saujani says. “The one ask is to show our multidimensionality. Show us both as moms and workers, don’t just show one or the other. Show us as we are: both.”

[From Vanity Fair]

This is sort of why the original Roseanne was so groundbreaking, they showed a working-class family with a dirty house, and a mother and father who both had to work low-paying jobs (and I think Dan and Roseanne both only had high school educations, right?). This is also why Modern Family was sort of groundbreaking for network television as well – showing a Latina mother/stepmother, a gay couple raising an adopted daughter, etc. While this study reveals just how antiquated the current landscape is as far as representing the huge scope of American families, I also think television has moved away from traditional family sitcoms and everything is just very glossy, everyone is rich and everyone has a nice, clean house.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

41 Responses to “Duchess Meghan funded a Moms First study into TV portrayals of mothers”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Yes Dan and Roseanne were just high school graduates. I think this is a good thing. There are all sorts of moms out there that don’t get represented. There are a lot of singles moms out there of all colors and financial situations. There are many two mom house holds that represent gay/lesbians. So many kinds of moms.

    • TIFFANY says:

      I remember the episode where Roseanne was on the phone to the electric company and lied about the check being in the mail to avoid a disconnection.

      Felt that one in my bones.

      • Purley Pot says:

        Or the one where she didn’t sign the check to gain time. I learned that from her.

      • Elizabeth says:

        I don’t think it was Roseann, but I remember one shoe or movie where a character put two checks in the wrong envelopes to buy time.

    • Angel says:

      So Thelma was inspired to help the cause after the movie. Meanwhile, Louise (Susan Sarandon) helped to ensure we would not have our first woman president after over 200 years as a country when we could literally taste it. Thanks, Geena. Susan, you suck

  2. Eurydice says:

    Interesting study. I don’t watch a lot of TV so I’m surprised to hear that shows with thin, white, SAHMs and breadwinning husbands still exist.

    • Eurydice says:

      Also, Lainey has an interesting take on this, from the point of how programming has become aspirational.

  3. Crystal says:

    My mother was stellar my friends also had stellar mother’s for other reasons, I’ve always wanted to do a memoir dedicated to all the woman especially Mother’s who helped form my understanding of my journey into motherhood! 14 years later I’m a boy mom of a teen! Years flow by roles change and I loved every stage❤️The things I included and wanted to portray! Beautiful idea Meghan. Holy grail!

  4. Jaded says:

    Hollywood is still the purview of men (mostly), and the women who have managed to break the glass ceiling there still have a tough time getting *real* stories made, not some fever dream of the perfect, sexy stay-at-home wife in designer clothes and a fresh blow-out sipping a martini and secretly lusting after the pool boy. This is a great partnership for Meghan and Gina, may it bring much awareness and success!

  5. Jais says:

    Okay, this is a v cool study to fund. Will be curious to see what comes next after the study.

  6. Sue says:

    I read a great article a few years ago that was basically about how too many sitcoms have a shrewish wife because they need make the husband more sympathetic. Basically the idea being that the “shrew” role upholds the husband while secretly putting the woman “in her place”. If these studies can ever do something about this then this TV watcher would be very grateful!

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      I believe that. Those shows also have husbands who use weaponized incompetence to get out of doing things that responsible parents do. The husband is some schmuck with a hot wife but she’s a “shrew” so then everyone feels bad for the *husband* instead of the hot wife who is getting no support from her husband unless she has a meltdown.

      This is why I can’t watch most sitcoms. They are so anti-women.

      • Becks1 says:

        King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond….it was definitely a very big formula for a long time.

      • smlstrs says:

        My biggest frustration w Chuck Lorre shows – so great at hitting the beats of the genre, but there’s an attitude towards women that sneaks through and sets my teeth on edge.

        As someone who hates being nagged and feeling like a nag, I really appreciate seeing healthy relationships where I can learn from how they communicate.

        Off the top of my head, Claire and Phil Dunphy was a really positive example that I could identify with (two working parents, at least for most of the show, multiple kids in the household, etc). They might be what my parents were aiming for, yet they communicated so much better than my parents did and I learned from them without feeling judged or judgey. Appreciated that whole show, honestly.

  7. Phlyfiremama says:

    And the Meghan awesomeness just keeps rolling…

  8. Lau says:

    Might I add Lois from Malcolm in the Middle ? I remember watching it on tv all the time with my sister and we would love the fact that the actress looks so much like our mom while also having the same job.

    • Crystal says:

      Hope she starts with TCM silent films and does kinda an eras things to boomers then the changes and reflected in art till we get to that shrew like mother. From divine feminine to feme fatal roles boxes and class divides exceptions and expectations of a working mother, loved watching the kid based family sitcoms when my son was small now 14. Don’t know how they have changed. But that’s so raven was an awesome single mom silly but loved it! Friends struggling in together rasing kids together my province this is real! Like everywhere else a housing crisi inflated rent and crazy market for buyers and bank of Canada won’t steady for the borrowing market people are at a limbo moms carry so much weight to provide Safety and Security. Then all the projections on what we are supposed to be like. Great thoughts Meghan

  9. Brazen Archetyped Phemonenal Woman says:

    Talk the talk, and be willing and able to walk the talk. Two phenomenal women joining forces and addressing women’s issues as they pertain in the media. I’m glad to see Meghan continue to work with Geena Davis and her foundation.

  10. mary Pester says:

    There is a long running soap called Emmerdale in the UK. It’s one of the very few, that even from it’s beginning MANY MANY years ago, it was about family. A large farm and village it was attached to. The head of the farming family was a very strong woman and even today, there are strong female leads, unmarried mum and family trying to make ends meet. Some of the story lines are absolute dross, but, it’s one of the few programmes that allows strong women to shine.
    Well done meg and all of you. Let’s show them a woman’s worth.

    • Iolanthe says:

      Women supporting women . How powerful that is . Meghan is so genuine .

    • Crystal says:

      Babe love it! I catch it after 7 and weekends on our OneTv the workout channel in Canada! Xo 😘 reminds me of my mother’s 1960 upbringing by her grandmother 1921 born down a village of many hardworking single moms and matriarchs reason I pile my own wood grow a garden and farm work with elderly

    • Shoegirl77 says:

      Spot on @Mary Pester with Emmerdale. It’s the only soap I’d really watch because of all of the reasons you’ve mentioned. Some really good portrayals of real women. They’re also streets ahead of most other shows when dealing with some heavy topics. Haven’t watched it in a bit but the last time I did, there was also great LGBTQ+ representation.

  11. sevenblue says:

    I don’t think it is possible to fix this without fixing social media. When an actress who isn’t thin goes on a show, she gets bullied relentlessly by trolls on social media. I remember Lena Dunham got so much sh*t from men for not looking like a model and daring to show off her body on her tv show “Girls”. So did Amy Schumer who actually made a very cool episode about it on her show: “12 Angry Men Inside Amy Schumer”. I know both of these women are very problematic right now, but when they first got their shows, the social media backlash was horrible just because how they looked.

  12. Sarah says:

    This is a small thing but I get annoyed about how many mothers on TV are serving their families a cooked breakfast on weekdays! That nobody eats! As if real parents have time to cook elaborate breakfasts before everyone heads off to work and school.

    • Kathleen says:

      @Sarah
      the whole “nobody eats” thing is driving me NUTS in American shows! They never eat! 99% of eating scenes are people taking 1 bite, getting into an argument, tossing a fork and storming out. I think that also merits a study! Compare that so Downton Abbey or some French shows, where they actually show people eating and enjoying eating. But yes, week day breakfasts are particularly egregious, more so than uneaten dinner during a bad restaurant date.

      • smlstrs says:

        What a fantastic observation!

        Now I’m curious how that correlates with eating disorders in American teens and American attitudes towards weight …

        Similarly, Smallville drove me crazy bc these kids were always showing up at each other’s rural houses (fully styled, full hair and makeup, etc.) to exchange sometimes 2-3 sentences.

        Over those distances, before school (usually starts around 8:30 when I lived in Kansas), and everyone has their own car?

        They also tried to outrun a tornado at least once (don’t!) and I don’t think anyone ate in that show either. 😉

      • Eurydice says:

        There are logistical problems with filming people eating. There are issues of continuity between takes – there has to be the same amount of food on the forks or plates from one take to the next and the same with beverages. There’s the problem of actors having to keep eating, take after take. There are problems with keeping food from going bad under lights and over a long time.

  13. Kathleen says:

    This is actually one of the coolest things I’ve heard Meghan do! She’s super qualified for this study, this is her wheelhouse from every angle. I’m surprised it generated so little curiosity and commentary.

  14. GDubslady says:

    I’m gen x so my mom who was a teacher cooked breakfast every weekday morning without fail. My Dad made breakfast on the weekends. When my mom passed, I would spend three evenings a week with father. He always cooked dinner. On Fridays He would have seafood or fried oysters. Food was how that generation showed love. I’m my Dad’s caretaker now and every day I make sure he has a hearty cooked breakfast but low in sugar and sodium.

  15. Thera says:

    So how much money was spent to discover that water is indeed wet ?

    • QuiteContrary says:

      Was it your money? Is that why you care?

      Studies into gender roles in media are actually very helpful in effecting change.

    • sevenblue says:

      lol. Someone didn’t go to the university. You understand what research means, yes?

      • Col says:

        “the university”- There’s only one? Not everyone is privileged enough to go to university, nor do you need higher ed to have a valid opinion.

        This is the kind of thing Kate gets criticized for here. And yes, I think this study does pretty much state the obvious and the funds could have actually changed some people’s lives if spent elsewhere.

      • sevenblue says:

        @Col, umm, I am living in a country where people can get free university education. So, it isn’t a “privilege” to go to university where I live. It is fine if you didn’t get higher education for whatever reason, but then you don’t get to talk about things you don’t know anything about.

        Research isn’t a waste of time or money. If you want the society to move forward, to get better, you need to fund people who are doing these works. Archewell Foundation is already donating money to people in need, this is just another donation for them. To say that funding research isn’t necessary is the rejection of societal progress. We can all talk and comment about what we see on our screens, but it only becomes a fact when researchers study the data and write & communicate the information. The money donated isn’t going to waste, it is funding researchers who are so undervalued in our society and in some countries very underfunded.

        “the funds could have actually changed some people’s lives if spent elsewhere.”
        You don’t even know how much money this study required. How do you know it is life-changing amount? Also, the researchers aren’t some rich people living in mansions. They are the ones who are getting these funds.

    • Eurydice says:

      There have been lots of “water is wet” revelations about the entertainment industry – like how women are paid much less than men, how there’s sexual harassment and abuse, lack of diversity, etc., etc. Everybody knows it’s happening but nothing ever gets done until the results of “water is wet” research get published so everyone can see them.

    • SisterMadly says:

      So here’s the deal – when you tell people you think tv shows are full of thin, white mom stereotypes, the comeback is going to be ‘well that’s just your perception, all tv moms are black lesbians now’. But when someone actually has the data, now you have numbers to back up your argument. It’s anecdotes versus facts.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Thora & Col, LOL, I’m not sure if you actually believe what you’ve written, or if you’re annoyed because you’re afraid roles may change in tv and movies. Studies are done to base the work on for change. That’s why they study things. I didn’t need to go to college to know that.

  16. Lulu says:

    I wonder if the study shows the percent of tv show writers are women? Probably 5-10%.

  17. tamsin says:

    Facts and figures help to drive, organize and effect change. If people have a “feeling” or have observed certain things, it’s nice to have proof. That’s what studies do.