“(Un)Being a Mother” Media Representation of Motherhood and Female Identity

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper provides an updated study of how contemporary television series portray motherhood and female identity.

Abstract:

The abstract references Smart (1996), Abrams (1999), Garwood (2014), and Takseva (2018), yet these sources are absent from the main text of the paper, although they appear in the bibliography.

Theory:

The paper's conceptualization of the five mother types, which is central to the discussion, lacks conviction. The differentiation between "intensive mothering" and "good mothering" requires further development. While "intensive mothering" cites Hays (1996), the theoretical foundation for "good mothering" remains unclear. Additionally, this framework overlooks other maternal types such as the "bad mother" or "comic mothering" found in German TV sketch comedy shows, as discussed by Smart, K. (2016) in "Comic Revisions? Motherhood and Women's Comedy in Contemporary Germany" (Feminist Media Studies, 16(6), 1014-1028). Andrea O'Reilly (2021) introduces "empowered mothering," which she describes as adopting a maternal feminist approach that resists patriarchal definitions of motherhood, similar yet distinct from the "Good Enough Mother" model.

Missing Relevant Sources:

1. Feasey, R. (2012). "From Happy Homemaker to Desperate Housewives: Motherhood and Popular Television."

2. Feasey, R. (2017). "Good, Bad or Just Good Enough: Representations of Motherhood and the Maternal Role on the Small Screen,” Studies in the Maternal, 9(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.16995/sim.234

3. Feasey, R. (2019). "Infertility and Non-Traditional Family Building: From Assisted Reproduction to Adoption in the Media."

4. Padnieks, E. (Ed.) (2012). "Mediating Moms: Motherhood in Popular Culture."

Methodology:

The choice of "media ethnography" as a methodology in this context of media representation analysis is unconvincing. Although highly relevant for media production or audience studies, its application here lacks clarity. I encourage the authors to elucidate the relevance of this methodology and provide a detailed explanation of how it was implemented in their analysis.

I wish the authors success in further developing this project.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

I attached here the answers to your comments.

Thanks a lot

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear author,

Your study deals with an exciting issue: TV series representations of non-mothers. Although the subject is important and interesting, the paper in its current state is very confusing and unorganized and sometimes doesn't include correct or relevant references. It was difficult to understand what the method was, why there was namedropping of many un-relevant theories (such as Technological Determinism in a study about TV content and images of motherhood). 

The literature used was sometimes relevant and useful but sometimes not. 

This paper needs a lot of work in order to organize it and make it clear. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

I attached here the answers to your comments.

Thanks a lot

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

 ·      I think it is good to praise in your abstract the innovative nature of your methodology insofar it integrates different fields of study. I think your methodology chapter would benefit from briefly explaining what previous methodological approaches have been used to study the representation of motherhood in films and series (I believe this can be easily included in 2.1.).

·      Pointing at TV series as a primary source of influence is a reasonable argument, especially with the arrival of on-demand and streaming platforms; but, precisely because of that, it is striking that most references to validate such argument date back to a time before that major change occurred. Thus references in the first three-four paragraphs of 1.1 need updating.  

·      Methodologically speaking, I believe that further explanations on the categorization of motherhoods are required: is this a set of categories built by you on the works of other (it looks like it, but state it more openly)? Is it taken from others? (if so, mention whom these others are). On a side note, Giddens (line 128) does not reference a year.

·      In 2.2.1 I find it difficult to justify that the analysis of motherhood can be dispatched by analysing just three episodes of the show (especially bearing in mind that some shows only have one or two seasons and others, up to six). This requires further justification.

·      2.2.2. is rather valuable, but further explanations on the choice of TV shows would be useful. Why those nationalities? Why that amount and distribution?

·      In the results chapter, I would like to see table 3 presented differently: not sure that the data visualization helps to understand better what is stated in written.

·      The article avoids the IMRD classical structure, which I am not opposed to, but I feel that chapter 4 mixes up the Discussion and the Conclusion. Further clarification should be made on what discusses the result, presenting interesting connections, showcasing the findings in a clear manner; and what reflects upon those results (the Conclusion).  

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are problems with hyphens in different passages (i.e. “analyti-cal” instead of “analytical” -line 10- “Buo-nanno” instead of “Buonanno” -line 29- or “dis-course” instead of “discourse” -line 38-), and punctuation would benefit from a last proofreading (see, for instance, the comma in line 43 that should not go there). Generally speaking, I believe English is not a major problem in this paper, though a last professional proofreading could help it sound more idiomatic.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

please find attached the answers to your comments.

Thanks a lot

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed the main concerns raised in the previous review, resulting in a significantly improved manuscript. Their diligent efforts are appreciated.

 

However, two issues require attention:

1. Major concern:

   - I believe the authors were asked(probably by another reviewer) to explicitly define their hypotheses and address these in the conclusion.

   - Recommendation: Integrate the discussion and conclusion sections.

   - Current issue: The responses to the hypotheses appear technical, lacking in-depth discussion to explain the conclusions.

 

2. Minor concern:

   - The abstract cites three sources (Smart, 1996; Abrams, 1999; Garwood, 2014; Takseva, 2018) that do not significantly contribute to the analysis.

   - Recommendation: Consider removing these citations from the abstract.

 

Overall, with these adjustments, particularly a more substantive discussion of the hypotheses and findings, the paper will be strengthened considerably.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Please find all answer to your request.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have addressed the main concerns raised in the previous review, resulting in a significantly improved manuscript. Their diligent efforts are appreciated.

 

However, two issues require attention:

1. 1. Major concern:

   - I believe the authors were asked(probably by another reviewer) to explicitly define their hypotheses and address these in the conclusion.

   - Recommendation: Integrate the discussion and conclusion sections.

I believe, and I sincerely hope, that this final version has improved the conclusions while maintaining continuity with the previous paragraph discussion. Thank you for your suggestions

   - Current issue: The responses to the hypotheses appear technical, lacking in-depth discussion to explain the conclusions.

I’ve added a discussion for each point and also expanded other sections for further commentary.

Here the copy of the discussion and the new conclusion:

Discussion

Some interesting details emerge from the results:

1. From the perspective of authorship, both Anglo-American and Italian products feature strong female leads, while Hispanic shows often have male creators capable of challenging gender stereotypes related to motherhood. Spanish productions, particularly those showcasing biographies of women who confront traditional female roles, can disrupt patriarchy more decisively (e.g., La casa de papel) than the predominantly female Italian authorship, which struggles to introduce new discourses on motherhood. This is not to diminish the importance of authorship; provocative series like Fleabag and Vida perfecta exemplify women positioned far from stereotypical societal roles.
2. In terms of networks and distribution, Italy produces only one male-authored series, Gomorrah, which presents the female mafia boss archetype globally. The rest are RAI productions, reflecting a pedagogical tradition that preserves convention. The significant disparity between Italian and international products indicates that challenging gender stereotypes requires creating successful content that resonates with audiences accustomed to diverse on-demand series and that their preferences can rapidly determine a series' success.
3. Many of the female characters depicted are ‘well-rounded’ as defined by Bernardelli (2017), evolving throughout the narratives. In contrast, the mostly flat characters in Italian shows—such as Mina and Imma—are simplistic and predictable, limiting viewer engagement. Well-rounded characters always maintain an aura of mystery, inviting audiences to delve deeper into their complexities. This aligns with Bernardelli’s conception of the antihero, where some protagonists defy feminine expectations; Fleabag, friends from Vida perfecta, and figures like Annalise and Kim exemplify this.
4. The analyzed shows frequently employ narrative devices to encourage immersive audience participation in the protagonists' stories. For instance, Tokyo in La casa de papel and Fleabag function as narrators, breaking the "fourth wall" to engage viewers. This promotes the female gaze (Jacobsson, 2011) in contrast to the traditional male gaze (Mulvey, 1989). Other devices that explore women's lives include personal confessions (as seen in Workin’ Moms) and therapy sessions (Maria in Vida perfecta), effectively inviting viewers into the female perspective
5. Should we celebrate the emergence of the Good Enough Mother? This seems plausible, particularly in competition with the childless woman, another well-represented model given the scarcity of depictions of women without children. This interpretation risks reinforcing a notion of innovative imagery that better reflects the multifaceted female experience, characterized by priorities beyond motherhood, wherein women often navigate identities as either Good Enough Mothers or Non-Mothers desiring children. Conversely, one might argue that being an imperfect mother is preferable to remaining childless.

Conclusion

Discussing Motherhood and Non-Motherhood inherently involves a consideration of gender. In contemporary society, gender occupies a central role in public discourse and political agendas, often also in light of the fluctuating birth rates.

That’s way conclusions begin by taking into consideration The Handmaid’s Tale, a ‘dystopian text with a prophetic nature’, as noted by Tabuyo-Santaclara (2024). The series effectively highlights the relationship between narrative and motherhood policies, portraying women as reproductive machines. Its impact is evident in the flash mobs in Ohio, Texas, and Missouri, which protested restrictive abortion laws and challenged Trump's stance on these issues. Furthermore, The Handmaid’s Tale exemplifies the interplay between cultural artifacts and society/politics: Atwood's original novel emerged amidst Reagan's anti-abortion policies, while the recent television adaptation was launched in the context of Trump’s policies. Thus, the political dimension of popular culture in this instance is both clear and explicit (Tabuyo-Santaclara 2024; Riva, 2021) Talking about Motherhood or Non Motherhood means talking about Gender. Gender is in contemporary days at the centre of public discourse and political Agenda, so as the birthrate swinging. 

This double reciprocal interdependence and circular influence between society/politics and popular culture is not always easily recognizable and is influenced by a variety of factors, which are outline here to address our three research questions.

1. Digitalization has rendered specific content a key component of successful media offerings. The analysis shows that successful media production increasingly hinges on breaking gender stereotypes through engaging content. For instance, productions like La casa de papel and Fleabag effectively resonate with audiences accustomed to on-demand viewing. The algorithms of streaming platforms play a crucial role in identifying and promoting narratives that address contemporary issues, such as (alternative) motherhood and (alternative) identity (Ortega 2023; Shapiro 2020; Lotz 2017). Additionally, they play an important role in experimenting with innovative narrative techniques—like breaking the "fourth wall"—that further engage viewers and enhance their immersion in the story, demonstrating a shift towards dynamic storytelling that reflects current societal norms.

On the other hand, it is still important to consider the identity of production companies. The Anglo and the Spanish series are mainly produces by streaming production companies. In Italy, although series are distributing through streaming services, they are produce from the Italian Public Television (RAI), that reflect a cultural context that emphasizes traditional models of femininity (see § 2.1 for the Gender Equality Index).

2. The inclusion of women in television production teams promotes a more diverse and realistic representation of motherhood, although female creators in Anglo-American, Spanish, and Italian television impact their cultural contexts in different ways. Shows like Fleabag and Vida perfecta showcase complex female characters that challenge traditional stereotypes and illuminate the multifaceted nature of femininity. Thus, having women in creative roles is essential for enhancing diversity and expanding the portrayal of motherhood on screen. However, while Italian series often feature strong female leads, they are usually produced by networks like RAI, which adhere to conventional values, resulting in a less progressive exploration of maternal identities.
3. The analysis reveals a significant absence of representations of women who choose not to become mothers, particularly in Italian media. Although non-mothers are present in the narratives, they are often portrayed as deprived, lacking the experience of motherhood. In contrast, Spanish and Anglo-American productions offer a broader portrayal of non-mothers, including childfree women who embrace their choice and thus embody completeness as individuals. This lack of representation highlights the influence of cultural context on the visibility and complexity of female identities depicted on screen, emphasizing the need for a more diverse representation of non-motherhood paths. Addressing these gaps can foster a deeper understanding of the societal implications and cultural narratives that shape women's experiences today.

Moreover, it is essential to celebrate the emergence of a different discourse illustrated by characters who begin to occupy varied spaces in our collective imagination. This shift often starts from a niche perspective but serves to ignite discussions and elevate the ongoing evolution of genre definitions.

 

However, this analysis indicates that the non-mother remains an underrepresented category among women in contemporary serialized media. The series examined in this research can serve as a crucial platform for redefining women's roles, moving beyond traditional portrayals of motherhood and the supportive female figure subordinate to male characters, instead positioning women as protagonists in their own right. These characters often navigate the complexities of work, career, and family, while also seeking alternative perspectives that are not bound by the myth of motherhood. Among these representations, the "Good Enough Mother" emerges as the most commonly depicted figure in television series. Interestingly, the POGE (Principle of Good Enough) from software development appears relevant to the discourse on motherhood as well. The POGE (Principle of Good Enough in software construction)^[1] seems to fit to maternity too

2. 2. Minor concern:

   - The abstract cites three sources (Smart, 1996; Abrams, 1999; Garwood, 2014; Takseva, 2018) that do not significantly contribute to the analysis.

Recommendation: Consider removing these citations from the abstract.

Thank you. We removed them from the abstract, but we have kept the references in the text because, while they may be of little use for television series, I agree that they are relevant for studies on motherhood.

   -

Overall, with these adjustments, particularly a more substantive discussion of the hypotheses and findings, the paper will be strengthened considerably.

Hope now it is ok

 

^[1] Collins WR, Mr KW, Spielman BJ, Wherry P. How good is good enough? An ethical analysis of software construction and use. Commun ACM. 1994;37(1):81–91

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Thanks for the second review. The paper is much more clear and explicit, and that's great, but I still see some points that need improvement:

1 - The abbreviations (p. 3) "New OTT platforms, (SVOD, TVOD, AVOD)" need explanations.

2 - "Regarding motherhood, "digitalisation and the distribution of streaming content have led to an…" (p. 3) – This is a new issue – please start a new paragraph.

3 - Keep references according to ABC between the parentheses.

4 - "Finally, good mother discourses are shown to shape the identities of mothers and the meaning of mothering for individual women, constructing and defining how mothers feel." (p. 5) – This claim must be referenced.

5 -

2.2 The series’ titles and stories

"Content: we focused on types of motherhood or content that originally or critically present motherhood-related issues (motherhood and work, motherhood and crime… " (p. 9) – I'm sorry but I still don't understand why the author decided to select TV series by these terms and not others. It was not clear before (I asked that same question also in my first review) and also now.

6 - I still believe that the Discussion (and now Conclusion – p. 17-19) could benefit from a more thorough interpretation of the findings that will deepen and develop their significance. It will surely improve the paper as a whole. The author should go back and use more of the literature to give a fuller understanding of the researched phenomenon.

 

Good luck.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Please find all answer to your request.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 Thanks for the second review. The paper is much more clear and explicit, and that's great, but I still see some points that need improvement:

1 - The abbreviations (p. 3) "New OTT platforms, (SVOD, TVOD, AVOD)" need explanations.

Thanks. A footnote has been provided

2 - "Regarding motherhood, "digitalisation and the distribution of streaming content have led to an…" (p. 3) – This is a new issue – please start a new paragraph.

Done, thanks a lot

3 - Keep references according to ABC between the parentheses.

Hopefully now they are ok.

4 - "Finally, good mother discourses are shown to shape the identities of mothers and the meaning of mothering for individual women, constructing and defining how mothers feel." (p. 5) – This claim must be referenced.

Done, thanks a lot.

5 -

2.2 The series’ titles and stories

"Content: we focused on types of motherhood or content that originally or critically present motherhood-related issues (motherhood and work, motherhood and crime… " (p. 9) – I'm sorry but I still don't understand why the author decided to select TV series by these terms and not others.

It was not clear before (I asked that same question also in my first review) and also now.

Content: we focused on types of motherhood or content that originally or critically present motherhood-related issues (motherhood and work, motherhood and crime, motherhood and adoption, motherhood and diversity, surrogacy, etc.).

Sorry if it was not clear. The reason of this choice is in paragraph 1.1.

Anyway it has been added this explanation without all references that are already in paragraph 1.1:

This choice is based on what was explained in section 1.1 regarding the increase in the early 2000s, which saw a significant rise in female-driven television narratives featuring women in traditionally masculine roles. The selected titles include empowered professionals, cultural leaders such as lawers and academics, as well as aggressive or criminal figures who challenge male dominance. These female protagonists exhibit power in diverse male-dominated fields (such as profession, academia, and crime) and/or explore alternative paths to motherhood (adoption, surrogacy). The aim is to prompt an inquiry into their effectiveness in addressing a new female identity or, conversely, in perpetuating restrictive stereotypes related to female identity tied to natural biological reproduction.

 

In paragraph 1.1 it is written:

Since the 2000s, there has been an increase in the production of female-driven television narratives (Buonanno, 2017) that emphasize paths of women’s empowerment. The protagonists are successful working females in masculine roles and professions (Hidalgo-Mari & Palomares Sánchez, 2020), eminent female, leading figures in the world of culture scientists (Steinke, 1998, Chambers, 2022, Soucy-Humphreys, 2022), but also wicked and aggressive women (Buonanno, 2017; Giomi & Magaraggia, 2017, Chappel & Young, 2017) who challenge the male dominance of violence (Bourdieu, 1998) with ferocity. Women of power, diverse and numerous, have begun to inhabit the screens of our TVs, computers, cell phones, and imaginations.

Despite these changes in media narratives, and thus the construction of an alternative, critical, renewed discourse on the feminine aimed at emphasising new facets of women’s biographies, there seem to remain just as many fundamental media narratives, representations, and discourses where specific biographical junctures reaffirm a close, direct and necessary connection between biological reproduction and female identity (Laqueur, 1986; Ginburg, Rapp, 1991, Ridgeway & Correl, 2004; Glenn, 2016, Gotlib, 2016,Rich, 2021).

6 - I still believe that the Discussion (and now Conclusion – p. 17-19) could benefit from a more thorough interpretation of the findings that will deepen and develop their significance. It will surely improve the paper as a whole. The author should go back and use more of the literature to give a fuller understanding of the researched phenomenon.

hope that I have been thorough in my response. Considering that the text has been significantly lengthened due to the additional references included in the first revision, the conclusions have nonetheless been enhanced and are now supported by a discussion that highlights the key themes revisited in the concluding section.Good luck. Fingers crossed!

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your modifications, I believe the text has been improved largely. There are some questions that I believe still need to be addressed, though:

- On p. 7 (sorry, I cannot see the lines in the new document uploaded) you say "deficient", when I think "deficit" would have less pejorative connotations. 

- I believe it is good that you attempt to explain your geographical selection, though paragraph 4 on p. 8 struggles to validate the points you are making. Can you reference, for instance, sources of authority (authors, statistics) to validate the assertion that Spanish and English dominate TV productions? English may be more obvious, but Spanish not so much to the general reader. Also, your comparison with Italy seems to feed from assumptions (I don't know if anticipated results as well), stereotypes even, rather than objectifiable assertions. The inclusion of Italy, in my view, needs to be better explained and drop the subjective ideological comparison with Spain (the predominance of right-wing parties it's a swinging factor, as it is in most Europe; and the reference to the Vatican seems out of place since they are different countries and its influence on Italian producers is, at least, debatable).

- Thank you for clarifying that you have watched the entire shows submitted to study even though you have only analysed three episodes per show, and for including that information in the article. Two question remains, though: does your analysis of three episodes per show benefit from the fact that you have watched the entire show? If so, you should explain that in full detail in the article. Second, it is still unclear why you think the analysis of three episodes can be representative of an entire show -plus, I struggle to understand, from what I read in the article, what criteria were used to choose those three episodes in each show. 

- Finally, the conclusions are far from being such. Rather than summarising the results and introducing loose wishful thoughts (such as "investing in future research is essential to further explore these themes", which can literally be applied to every discipline), conclusions should present reflections made apropos of the results found (and elaborating those arguments more than schematically say what hypotheses have been confirmed or not).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Please find all answer to your request.

 

Thank you for your consideration.Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your modifications, I believe the text has been improved largely. There are some questions that I believe still need to be addressed, though:

- On p. 7 (sorry, I cannot see the lines in the new document uploaded) you say "deficient", when I think "deficit" would have less pejorative connotations. 

Thanks, it has been changed

- I believe it is good that you attempt to explain your geographical selection, though paragraph 4 on p. 8 struggles to validate the points you are making. Can you reference, for instance, sources of authority (authors, statistics) to validate the assertion that Spanish and English dominate TV productions?

English may be more obvious, but Spanish not so much to the general reader. We are sorry in the sentence is not clear, but we wanted to say by ‘as both utilize widely spoken languages’.

This selection is based on the global prominence of Spanish and English television productions, as both utilize widely spoken languages.

It has been put in footnote:

(worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/english-speaking-countries; https://www.exteriores.gob.es/es/PoliticaExterior/Paginas/ElEspanolEnElMundo.aspx; https://www.britannica.com/topic/languages-by-number-of-native-speakers-2228882; https://www.idisc.com/en/blog/most-spoken-languages-in-the-world). Additionally, only Gomorrah is distributed outside Italy, as it is produced by a streaming platform, whereas all other Italian series are confined to domestic circulation).

 

Also, your comparison with Italy seems to feed from assumptions (I don't know if anticipated results as well), stereotypes even, rather than objectifiable assertions.

I’ve worked around these sentences bringing two important references, one Italian and one Europen: ‘Furthermore, comparing Spanish and Italian television series offers valuable insights due to the strong relationship between conceptions of motherhood and Catholicism in these countries’, the comparison among two mediterranean countries is still interesting, we think. Moreover if the two countries has demonstrated different degrees of acceptance of change and a commitment to inclusion regarding gender issues.

The inclusion of Italy, in my view, needs to be better explained and drop the subjective ideological comparison with Spain (the predominance of right-wing parties it's a swinging factor, as it is in most Europe; and the reference to the Vatican seems out of place since they are different countries and its influence on Italian producers is, at least, debatable).

We add Footnote for explanation

In the report "Gender Regime and the Development of Policies to Combat Gender Violence in Italy and Spain," published by the National Observatory on Social Policies on Welforum.it, it is noted that "the influence of organized religion on gender equality policies (Walby, 2009) is stronger in Italy than in Spain. In Italy, the Vatican has traditionally exerted significant political interference regarding issues of sexuality and reproduction through its political allies, such as the Christian Democracy party during the First Republic. While the Catholic Church has also mobilized against sexuality and reproductive matters in Spain, it has been less successful in producing significant political impacts, often only delaying progress. Furthermore, 'the appointment in 2022 of Eugenia Roccella, an openly anti-gender spokesperson, to lead the newly renamed “Ministry of Family, Birth Rate, and Equality” exemplifies these political connections.' The Gender Equality Index from the European Institute for Gender Equality (europa.eu) places Italy below the European average, with Spain ranked fourth after Sweden, the Netherlands, and Denmark. Notably, Italy's position has deteriorated since 2010, despite having a center-right government at that time. This inconsistency is likely influenced by the Vatican's presence and the political success of right-wing parties, providing significant context for our analysis

- Thank you for clarifying that you have watched the entire shows submitted to study even though you have only analysed three episodes per show, and for including that information in the article.

Sorry for this misunderstanding. We wrote: ‘We throughly examined all seasons and episodes, selecting three specific episodes per series for in-depth analysis (resulting in a total of 45 episodes) For each set of three episodes, the constant comparative method was employed to provide a clear analytical baseline. The use of this method, drawn from grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), slightly modified the categories of motherhood identified in the literature (see 1.1).

We put a footnote

This indicates that the three episodes served as the foundation for the coding activity. We used for coding the program NVivo. The coding categories were defined according to the categories of country of production, to the chosen motherhood categories, to what we define life contingencies.

Two question remains, though: does your analysis of three episodes per show benefit from the fact that you have watched the entire show? As said, it is the base for coding. Certainly, it was helpful to know all the episodes as examples to understand the evolution of the stories and, especially, the biographies and characters.

This is a note I put:

Three selected episods: the first episode, a middle episode, and the final episode. These serve as the foundation for coding and provide insights into the evolution of the stories, particularly regarding the biographies and development of the characters.

If so, you should explain that in full detail in the article.

Second, it is still unclear why you think the analysis of three episodes can be representative (it is not representative…it is the base to analyse the other episods. To code) of an entire show -plus, I struggle to understand, from what I read in the article, what criteria were used to choose those three episodes in each show. They were monitored at the beginning, middle, and end of the series (up to 2022) to verify the evolution of the characters and the stories.

- Finally, the conclusions are far from being such. Rather than summarising the results and introducing loose wishful thoughts (such as "investing in future research is essential to further explore these themes", which can literally be applied to every discipline), conclusions should present reflections made apropos of the results found (and elaborating those arguments more than schematically say what hypotheses have been confirmed or not). I believe, and I sincerely hope, that in this final version, the conclusions have been enhanced and that they flow well with the previous paragraph discussion (part of the final analysis as well). Thanks for your suggestions

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I believe the paper has increased its quality after the last ammends. There are two aspects that I would still work towards the final paper: a minor one referred to the presence of hyphens in unusual places, dividing words that should not be cut; and, more importantly, including in that final call in the conclusions to continue broadening the palette of female representation maybe an archetype that is also missing: those women that are convinced that do not need to become mothers to achieve self-fulfilment, but want to become mothers as a conscious decision as well -hence, moving definitely forward from all schemes of socially imposed motherhood.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Here our answer and thanka a lot for your precious suggestions

 

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I believe the paper has increased its quality after the last ammends.

Thanks!

There are two aspects that I would still work towards the final paper: a minor one referred to the presence of hyphens in unusual places, dividing words that should not be cut;

I contacted the editor regarding this issue; the hyphens appear when pasting the file, even though the original file does not contain them. The editor will take care of correcting it.

and, more importantly, including in that final call in the conclusions to continue broadening the palette of female representation maybe an archetype that is also missing: those women that are convinced that do not need to become mothers to achieve self-fulfilment, but want to become mothers as a conscious decision as well -hence, moving definitely forward from all schemes of socially imposed motherhood.

I believe that all women represented wish to become mothers through a conscious decision, with the exception of the handmaids (being The Handmaid’s Tale, the only drama that presents a socially imposed motherhood) and Jane from the drama Jane the Virgin (who became a mother due to a gynecological mistake). The other protagonists of the series are all mothers through a conscious decision.

The social construction of motherhood that we hint (explicitly or implicitly)  at the beginningof the text is not related to imposition; rather, it is a construction that all members of society build together (let’s revisit Berger and Luckmann’s thought, as well as Foucault and Bourdieu. None of them discuss direct imposition, but rather the work of culture and of its institutions. However, this is not our central point.) Of course, the States also influence this through concerning statistical results that indicate a reduction in births, but there is no imposition; this is evident as the birth rate continues to decline.

Moreover, and more importantly, we are not addressing this issue in terms of imposed motherhood, but rather the relationship between motherhood and female identity. In none of the research questions do we mention imposed motherhood, as it is not a focus of our text or any of the States we investigate in our work.

That said, your proposal to explore imposed motherhood and conscious motherhood could be an interesting topic to study comparatively in more diverse countries, perhaps through in-depth interviews. It is a good idea for future (and costly) research. Thank you very much.

 

 

 

Submission Date

19 July 2024

Date of this review

01 Oct 2024 16:58:5

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf