Anderson 1

Chloe Anderson
Wilson
Writing 2
30 November 2015
WP3
Portraying Blue-Collar Women In Media: Does It Even Matter?
By The Onion
Are women misrepresented as working-class citizens in the media? Is there anything
wrong with the way they are portrayed, and the response it gets from viewers? Is there anything
that should be done to alter their image? Nah, probably not. But Joan Sangster seems to have a
different view, and a deadly feminist agenda.
In Sangers academic journal article Bomb Girls, Gender, and Working Class History
she examines the plight of the factory-working women in the media. Through her analysis of the
television show Bomb Girls, she claims that they have not been fared well in television, that
we seldom see the blue-collar working woman, and that they are often depicted as professionals
instead (Sangster 200). The only time these women are represented are in wartime set
productions, with women laboring on assembly lines in hazardous conditions. Bomb Girls was
cut off the air after two seasons, and we say, who cares?
In this day and age, this is no longer an apparent issue. Its 2015, by now prejudice of all
kinds is nearly extinct. Its rash to think that blue-collar women are underrepresented in media
just because they are only present in a specific time period. Its an outdated concept, literally. Its
not necessary for women to be represented other ways, whether its in a historical or modern
context.

Anderson 2

Feminism is seen as a rather cringe-worthy word these days. Women and girls are
hesitant to admit that they are feminists due to the stigma that they are women who are hell-bent
on destroying men and the patriarchy. When women are demanding about issues pertaining to
women, it is assumed they are overreacting. And when someone brings up the issue of women
being oppressed or discriminated, there are those who agree and those who will simply brush the
notion off.
Representation of women in media is lacking, and it has always been this way. How
women are portrayed and why are they shown that way in the media hasnt been brought enough
attention. In the case of Joan Sangsters analysis of Bomb Girls in her academic journal article
Bomb Girls, Gender, and Working-Class Women, she explores how the blue-collar female is
portrayed in media, and why theyre depicted in the same historical setting. Applying a satirical
approach to an academic article that had a feminist tone allows it to poke fun at those who dont
believe in or care about womens issues, and they way I saw fit to do this was by translating
Bomb Girls into an Onion article.
TheOnion.com is home to articles on the topic of politics, sports, to entertainment. What
sets them apart from the typical news website is that every single piece is written in satire. Satire
is ironic humor used to criticize or shed light on a particular issue, action, or type of people.
Their articles are funny, crass, and provide current social commentary. Its written in the style of
a typical news article, just with a sarcastic tone. Satire is the main convention of the Onion
article. In order to be able to read The Onion, one must have an understanding of what satire is
and how it works. If its not read it in that context, the article may seem ridiculous or completely

Anderson 3
ignorant. Or some may even agree with what is written at face value, but not take the extra step
understand what is being said.
The audiences that I am trying to reach with this translation are those who would not
usually read academic articles. Scholars, professors, and experts typically read academic articles.
Anyone does not typically read academic articles would not see Sangsters piece and therefore
never be exposed to her argument. The Onion is a widely popular website, and those that
understand the humor enjoy it. Its most likely more popular among a younger audience, since
its an online-based publication. An older generation may not have access to it, or may not know
how to access it. With this translation, I am also trying to reach those who are do not believe in
Sangsters argument.
Since I translated an article into another type of article, integrating Bomb Girls was
quite simple. My Onion article is criticizing Sangsters stance, but providing no real evidence
against it. It wasnt necessary for me to include a large amount of the original article because the
translation itself was like a response to it. Citing quotes and analyzing them through a satirical
lens gave me the freedom to write a new article without copying Sangster. I had to leave out
most of original article in order to keep my ironic tone. I couldnt seem like I was in favor of
Sangsters argument without deviating from the genre conventions of an Onion article. My
article was on the surface- a counter to Sangsters, but it still presented the same message to the
reader.
A challenge that came along with this translation was having a good grasp on the
meaning of the academic journal article. At first, I found it difficult to remember that the authors
point was more about the historical context of women in media. So I read it several times over
and every time I understood Sangsters argument more. This was an important step because the

Anderson 4
translation had to contradict it. I also had to confirm that the definition of satire I had initially
was correct before starting to craft my own. I read several articles on The Onions website to
familiarize myself with their genre. Every article is filled with heavy sarcasm that leads to the
reader coming to a conclusion about a certain issue, so I made to make sure that I would be able
to mimic that writing style. Another obstacle that came up in writing the translation was trying to
write something that went against my own views. I had to write the opposite of what I thought
about Sangsters article. I basically stated that I thought that feminism did not exist or that it was
no longer necessary to have that ideology in a prejudice-free present (which is absolutely not
the case). But in saying so my point had to one that can be detected under the surface of what my
article explicitly said.
In preparation for this writing project, I revisited some of the readings we went over in
class. One of the most helpful readings was How to Read Like a Writer by Mike Bunn.
Reading like a writer helped me identify some of the choices I would have to make in creating
my own Onion style article. I had to make sure that I was making the right choices in order to
translate the academic article correctly. According to Bunn, in writing we see the choices the
writer has made, and we see how the writer has coped with the consequences of those choices
(Bunn 75). The reading like a writer (RLW) technique helped me think about how these choices
would affect my audience.
Another reading that helped me was Reading Games: Strategies for Reading Scholarly
Sources by Karen Rosenberg. I found it quite hard to concentrate on Bomb Girls and really
understand what Sangster was trying to say, and I was unsure about my interpretation. A tip the
Rosenberg mentioned was pay close attention to the conclusion. I found it a lot more helpful and

Anderson 5
easier to understand than the introduction. This is because conclusions include limitations of
their work, unanswered questions, the horizons left unexplored (Rosenberg 218).
The process of translating an academic article into a satirical article was challenging, but
it allowed Sangsters work to be brought to a new audience. The unique style of an Onion article
seemed like an appropriate way to shed light on Sangsters argument, while adding a bit of
humor.

Anderson 6
Works Cited

Bunn, Mike. How to Read Like a Writer. 75. Print.

Rosenberg, Karen. Reading Games: Strategies for Reading for Reading Scholarly Sources. 210.
Print.
Sangster, Joan. "Bomb Girls, Gender, and Working-Class History." 11. Print.