I Want a Baby! Baby Hunger and the Desire for a Genetic Child

  • Lulu Le Vay
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Science and Popular Culture book series (PSSPC)


This chapter examines the desire for a genetic child through baby hunger that drives the narratives of American reality TV show Giuliana & Bill and British soap opera Coronation Street. How the surrogacy storylines emotionally connect (or not connect) with the audience sample through the varying genre techniques will also be explored. Furthermore, the disciplinary practice of reproductive technologies is addressed, primarily in relation to maternal identities that are rendered invisible in the texts through ideologies of class and race. A debate on American and British politics and contemporary capitalism in relation to the reproduction of the family (eugenics, sexual health care, reproductive rights) will also be explored here.


  1. Ahmed, Sara. 2006. Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, Sara. 2010. The Promise of Happiness. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, Anita. 1991. “The Black Surrogate Mother.” Harvard BlackLetter Journal (Spring): 17–31.Google Scholar
  4. Ang, Ien. 1985. Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination. New ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Arditti, Rita. 1997. “Commercializing Motherhood.” In The Politics of Motherhood: Activist Voices from Left to Right, edited by Alexis Jetter, Annelise Orleck, and Diana Taylor. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  6. Aslama, Minna, and Mervi Pantti. 2006. “Talking Alone: Reality TV, Emotions and Authenticity.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 9 (2): 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baraitser, Lisa, and Imogen Tyler. 2010. “Talking of Mothers.” Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture 44 (1): 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barrett, Michèle, and Mary McIntosh. 1991. The Anti-Social Family. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  9. Bell, Ann. 2010. “Beyond Financial Accessibility: Inequalities Within the Medicalisation of Infertility.” Sociology of Health and Illness 32 (4): 631–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benkov, Laura. 1994. Reinventing the Family: The Emerging Story of Lesbian and Gay Parents. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Berlant, Lauren. 2008. The Female Complaint. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Berlant, Lauren. 2011. Cruel Optimism. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Borisoff, Deborah. 2005. “Transforming Motherhood: ‘We’ve Come a Long Way,’ Maybe.” Review of Communication 5 (1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Braverman, Andrea Mechanick. 1997. “When Is Enough, Enough? Abandoning Medical Treatment for Infertility.” In Infertility: Psychological issues and counselling strategies, edited by Sandra Leiblum. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Briggs, Laura. 2017. How All Politics Became Reproductive Politics—From Welfare Reform to Foreclosure to Trump. Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Brooks, Peter. 1996. The Melodramatic Imagination. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Brundson, Charlotte. 1997. Screen Tastes: Soap Opera to Satellite Dishes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Brundson, Charlotte. 2000. The Feminist, the Housewife, and the Soap Opera. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bruzzi, Stella. 2001. “Docusoaps.” In The Television Genre Book, edited by Glenn Creeber, Toby Miller, and John Tulloch. London: BFI.Google Scholar
  20. Carroll, Noel. 1990. The Philosophy of Horror. 1st ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Carroll, Noel. 1996. Theorizing the Moving Image. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Carroll, Noel. 2008. On Criticism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Carson, Bruce, and Margaret Llewellyn-Jones. 2000. Frames and Fictions on Television: The Politics of Identity Within Drama. Bristol: Intellect.Google Scholar
  24. Cavalcante, André. 2014. “Anxious Displacements: The Representation of Gay Parenting on Modern Family and The New Normal and the Management of Cultural Anxiety.” Television & New Media 1 (18): 454–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ceballo, Rosario. 1999. “‘The Only Black Woman Walking the Face of the Earth Who Cannot Have a Baby’: Two Women’s Stories.” In Women’s Untold Stories: Breaking Silence, Talking Back, Voicing Complexity: Different Lives, Different Voices, edited by Mary Romero and Abigail Stewart. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Charlebois, Justin. 2011. Gender and the Construction of Hegemonic and Oppositional Femininities. Lanham: Lexington.Google Scholar
  27. Chodorow, Nancy. 1999. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Cohen, Cathy J. 1997. “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens: The Radical Potential of Queer Politics?” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 3 (4): 437–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Corea, Gena. 1985. The Hidden Malpractice: How American Medicine Mistreats Women. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  30. Corea, Gena. 1988. The Mother Machine. London: The Women’s Press.Google Scholar
  31. Coronation Street. 1960–present. Created by Tony Warren. TV programme. Manchester: ITV.Google Scholar
  32. Couldry, Nick. 2002. Media Rituals: A Critical Approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Crofts, Stephen. 1995. “Global Neighbours?” In To Be Continued… Soap Operas Around the World, edited by Robert C. Allen. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Daniluk, Judith. 1996. “When Treatment Fails: The Transition to Biological Childlessness for Infertile Women.” Women in Therapy 19 (2): 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Davitz, Lois. 1984. Baby Hunger. 1st ed. Minneapolis: Winston Press.Google Scholar
  36. Dhoest, Alexander. 2005. “The Pfaffs Are Not Like the Osbournes: National Inflections of the Celebrity Docusoap.” Television and New Media 6 (2): 224–245.Google Scholar
  37. Dow, Bonnie. 1996. Prime-Time Feminism: Television, Media Culture, and the Women’s Movement Since 1970. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  38. Dow, Bonnie. 2001. “Ellen, Television, and the Politics of Gay and Lesbian Visibility.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 18 (2): 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Duden, Barbara. 1993. Disembodying Women: Perspectives on Pregnancy and the Unborn. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Edge, Brook Weihe. 2014. “Infertility on E! Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Reality Television.” Feminist Media Studies 14 (5): 873–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. El Nasser, Haya El, and Paul Overberg. 2007. “Fertility Rate on Upswing’ USA Today. December 19, 2007.
  42. Ellis, John. 1999. Seeing Things: Television in the Age of Uncertainty. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  43. Engels, Frederick. 2001. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  44. Engwall, Kristina, and Helen Peterson. 2013. “Silent Bodies: Childfree Women’s Gendered and Embodied Experiences.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 20 (4): 376–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Faludi, Susan. 1993. Backlash: The Undeclared War Against Women. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  46. Farquhar, Dion. 1996. The Other Machine: Discourse and Reproductive Technologies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Feasey, Rebecca. 2013. “From Soap Opera to Reality Programming: Examining Motherhood, Motherwork and the Maternal Role on Popular Television.” Imaginations: Journal of Cross-Cultural Image Studies 4 (2): 25–46.Google Scholar
  48. Feasey, Rebecca. 2015. Mothers on Mothers: Maternal Readings of Popular Television. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Feasey, Rebecca. 2017. “Good, Bad or Just Good Enough: Representations of Motherhood and the Maternal Role on the Small Screen.” Studies in the Maternal 9 (1): 5, 1–31,
  50. Feuer, Jane. 1983. “The Concept of Live Television: Ontology as Ideology.” In Regarding Television, edited by Ann Kaplan. Frederick, MD: University Publications of America.Google Scholar
  51. Finkelstein, Joanne. 1990. “Biomedicine and Technocratic Power.” Hastings Center Report 20: 13–16, Scholar
  52. Fosas, N., et al. 2010. Sharing Motherhood: Biological Lesbian Co-mothers, a New IVF Indication. Human Reproduction 25 (4): 938–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  54. Franklin, Sarah. 1990. “Deconstructing Desperateness’: The Social Construction of Infertility in Popular Representations of New Reproductive Technologies” In The New Reproductive Technologies, edited by Maureen McNeil, London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Franklin, Sarah. 1997. Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Geraghty, Christine. 1991. Women and Soap Opera: A Study of Prime Time Soaps. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  57. Geraghty, Christine. 1994. “Social Issues and Realist Soaps: A Study of British Soaps in the 1980s/1990s.” In To Be Continued… Soap Operas Around the World, edited by Robert C. Allen. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Giuliana & Bill. 2009–2014. “Meet The Duke.” Season 5, Episode 18. Executive Producer Robert Sizemore. TV programme. November 20, 2012. Los Angeles, CA: E!.Google Scholar
  59. Giuliana & Bill. 2009–2014. Executive Producers Alastair Surprise, Robert Sizemore. TV Programme. Los Angeles, California: E!Google Scholar
  60. Gledhill, Christine. 1987. “Speculations on the Relationship Between Soap Opera and Melodrama.” Quarterly Review of Film and Video 14 (1–2): 103–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Gorton, Kristyn. 2009. Media Audiences. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Gray, John. 2010. “‘Coming Up Next’: Promos in the Future of Television and Television Studies.” Journal of Popular Film & Television Studies 38 (2): 54–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Grindstaff, Laura. 2002. The Money Shot: Trash, Class and the Making of TV Talk Shows. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  64. Guglielmo, Jennifer, and Salvatore Salerno. 2003. Are Italians White?: How Race is Made in America. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  65. Hewlett, Sylvia Ann. 2002. Baby Hunger: The New Battle for Motherhood. London: Atlantic.Google Scholar
  66. Hill, Annette. 2004. Realty TV Audience and Popular Factual Television. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Hill Collins, Patricia. 2006 “Black Women and Motherhood.” In Motherhood and Space: Configurations of the Maternal through Politics, Home, and the Body, edited by Caroline Weidmer, and Sarah Hardy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  68. Hirsch, Marianne. 1997. Family Frames: Photography, Narrative, and Postmemory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Hobson, Dorothy. 1982. Crossroads: Drama of a Soap Opera.. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  70. Hobson, Dorothy. 2002. Soap Opera. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  71. Hochschild, Arlie. 2003. The Managed Heart. Commercialization of Human Feeling. Anniversary edition. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  72. Hollows, Joanne. 2012. Feminism, Femininity and Popular Culture. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Kaplan, Anne. 1992. Motherhood and Representation: The Mother in Popular Culture and Melodrama. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  74. Kavka, Misha. 2008. Reality Television, Affect and Intimacy. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  75. Klein, Renate. 1989. Infertility: Women Speak Out About Their Experiences of Reproductive Medicine. Melbourne: Spinifex Press.Google Scholar
  76. Lam, Carla. 2015. New Reproductive Technologies and Disembodiment. 1st ed. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  77. Lehr, Valerie. 1999. Queer Family Values: Debunking the Myth of the Nuclear Family. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Lemert, Charles. 2016. Social Theory: The Multicultural, Global and Classic Readings. 6th ed. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  79. Littler, Jo. 2013. “The Rise of the ‘Yummy Mummy’: Popular Conservatism and the Neoliberal Maternal in Contemporary British Culture.” Communication, Culture and Critique 6 (2): 227–243. Scholar
  80. Mulvey, Laura. 1989. Visual and Other Pleasures. 1st ed. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Mumford, Laura. 1991. “Plotting Paternity: Looking for Dad on Daytime Soaps.” Genders 12: 45–61.Google Scholar
  82. Mumford, Laura. 1995. Love and Ideology in the Afternoon: Soap Opera, Women, and Television Genre. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Nash, Kate. 2011. “Documentary-for-the-Other: Relationships, Ethics and (Observational) Documentary.” Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26: 224–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Nelson, Fiona. 2007. “Mother Tongues: The Discursive Journeys of Lesbian and Heterosexual Women into Motherhood.” Journal of GLBT Family Studies 3: 223–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Nelson, Fiona. 2009. In the Other Room: Entering the Culture of Motherhood. Nova Scotia, Canada: Fernwood Publishing.Google Scholar
  86. Nichols, Bill. 1983. “Myth and Narrative in Documentary.” Film Quarterly 41 (1): 9–20.Google Scholar
  87. Nichols, Bill. 1991. Representing Reality. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  88. O’Donohoe, Stephanie. 2006. “Yummy Mummies: The Clamor of Glamour in Advertising to Mother.” Advertising & Society Review 7 (3): 1–21.Google Scholar
  89. Oliver, Kelly. 1989. “Marxism and Surrogacy.” Ethics & Reproduction 4 (3): 95–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Park, Shelley M. 2006. “Adoptive Maternal Bodies: A Queer Paradigm for Rethinking Mothering?” Hypatia 21 (1): 201–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Park, Shelley. 2014. Mothering Queerly, Queering Motherhood. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  92. Petchesky, Rosalind. 1987. “The Power of Visual Culture and the Politics of Reproduction.” Feminist Studies 13 (2): 263–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Rich, Adrienne. 1980. “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 5 (4): 631–660.Google Scholar
  94. Roberts, Dorothy. 1995. “The Genetic Tie.” The University of Chicago Law Review 62 (1): 209–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Roberts, Dorothy. 1996. “Race and the New Reproduction.” Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1154.Google Scholar
  96. Roberts, Dorothy. 2000. Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  97. Roberts, Dorothy. 2009. “Race, Gender, and Genetic Technologies: A New Reproductive Dystopia?” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 34 (4): 783–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Rose, Hilary. 1994. Love, Power and Knowledge: Towards a Feminist Transformation of the Sciences. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  99. Rose, Gillian. 2010. Doing Family Photography: The Domestic, The Public and the Politics of Sentiment. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  100. Katz Rothman, Barbara. 2000. Recreating Motherhood. 2nd ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Rules of Engagement. 2007–2013. Created by Tom Hertz. TV Programme. New York: CBS.Google Scholar
  102. Sandelowski, Margarete. 1990. “Fault Lines: Infertility and Imperiled Sisterhood.” Feminist Studies 16 (1): 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Sandelowski, Margarete, and Sheryl de Lacy. 2002. “The Uses of ‘Disease’: Infertility as a Rhetorical Device.” In Infertility Around the Globe: New Thinking on Childlessness, Gender and Reproductive Technologies, edited by Marcia Inhorn and Frank van Balen. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  104. Sawicki, Julia. 1992. Disciplining Foucault: Feminism, Power, and the Body. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  105. Schickel, Richard. 2000. Intimate Strangers: The Culture of Celebrity in America. Lanham, MD: Ivan R Dee, Inc.Google Scholar
  106. Scutt, Joceyln. 1990. The Baby Machine: Reproductive Technology and the Commercialisation of Motherhood. London: Merlin Press.Google Scholar
  107. Skeggs, Beverley, and Helen Wood. 2012. Reacting to Reality Television, Performance, Audience and Value. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  108. Smith, Murray. 1995. Engaging Characters: Fiction, Emotion and the Cinema. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  109. Smith, Gregg. 1999. “Local Emotions, Global Moods and Film Structure.” In Passionate Views: Film, Cognition, and Emotion, edited by Carl Plantinga and Greg Smith. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  110. Smith, Gregg. 2008. Film Structure and the Emotion System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Spencer, Amy. 2012. “Giuliana Rancic: How I Got Through the Tough Stuff.” Health, November 20.,,20637654,00.html.
  112. Taylor, Janelle. 1992. “The Public Fetus and the Family Car: From Abortion Politics to a Volvo Advertisement.” Public Culture 4 (2): 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. The New Normal. 2012–2013. TV Programme. Created by Elodie Keene, Max Winkler, Ryan Murphy. New York: NBC.Google Scholar
  114. Thompson, Clara. 1943. “‘Penis Envy’ in Women.” Psychiatry, Interpersonal and Biological Processes 6 (2): 123–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Thompson, Charis. 2005. Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  116. Throsby, Karen. 2004. When IVF Fails. Feminism, Infertility and the Negotiation of Normal. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  117. Tincknell, Estella. 2005. Mediating the Family: Gender, Culture and Representation. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  118. Todorov, Tzvetan. 1990. Genres in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Top of the Lake: China Girl. 2017. “Surrogate”. Season 2. Episode 3. Directed by Ariel Kleiman. Written by Jane Campion and Gerard Lee. TV programme. May 23, 2017. New York: Sundance BBC.Google Scholar
  120. Wacjman, Judy. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  121. Warner, Michael. 1993. Fear of a Queer Planet: Queer Politics and Social Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  122. Whittebols, James. 2004. The Soap Opera Paradigm: Television Programming and Corporate Priorties. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  123. Williams, Linda. 1984. “‘Something Else besides a Mother’: ‘Stella Dallas’ and the Maternal Melodrama.” Cinema Journal 24 (1): 2–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Williams, Linda. 1991. “Film Bodies: Gender, Genre, and Excess.” Film Quarterly 44 (4): 2–13. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lulu Le Vay
    • 1
  1. 1.LondonUK

Personalised recommendations