A Directed Study and a Shared Love of Survivor
Emily: The idea for this reflection grew out of a directed study in a counseling masters program and a mutual love of the show Survivor. I met Lauren when she enrolled in my graduate course, Applications of Counseling Theories a couple years ago. She engaged with the material in an excellent way and wrote one of the most compelling final theory integration papers I’ve had a student write to date. Following that semester, she reached out to me about digging deeper into some of the theories she had explored in the class in a directed study in our program.
So, we set out to create an engaging learning experience that blended a deeper understanding of postmodern theories with our shared interest in reality television. Lauren took on a literature review that spanned from critical media studies and gender portrayals in television to women’s issues in therapy and Narrative Therapy and Feminist Therapy. She put together a robust literature review, but one of the most generative experiences in that directed study was our regular discussions about what Lauren was finding in the research and how it connected to clinical practice and our lived experiences.
Lauren: Totally! I loved Emily’s counseling theories class, as I found it to be a great space to dig into bigger questions like, what is therapy? What am I doing here in this role? How do we use theoretical ideas in a way that helps people? How is theory integrated with modern experiences such as art, media, academics, and parenting? Emily and I also connected right away over Survivor, a long-running reality show where contestants live stranded on remote land, battle physical challenges, and navigate social dynamics with hopes of being voted the sole Survivor by a jury of peers.
Our shared love for this stuff first became a big paper, but ultimately, we were struck by the rich and generative conversations we would have, and wanted to write it as more of an interactive piece. In and of itself, our discourse was such a model for therapy. We also intend for this piece to be an invitation to think critically about theory, to share clinical applications of exploring media (specifically Survivor) when working with people, to touch on what Survivor tells us about gender in our culture, and to explore the themes in reality TV in general as a metaphor for therapeutic process. There are layers of meaning here!
Emily: I watched the first season of the show on network television with my family when I was young and remember loving the adventure of it! I didn’t revisit it until the pandemic hit and my spouse and I were stuck inside parenting a new baby. We’ve watched every season since it re-aired in 2021 on Wednesday nights. It’s a bit of a ritual in our marriage and we still love the escapism, the low-stakes entertainment, and the hard challenges! I also reconnected with a friend from college who started a Survivor Fantasy League right when we were getting into the show. It started out with about a dozen people and the last season had over 50!
I have loved watching the show evolve over the last 25 years and appreciate the social commentary it offers. I also think Jeff Probst is a strong facilitator and non-anxious presence. He would make a great family therapist! I am always intrigued by the social dynamics that unfold on the show, and also the way the contestants present themselves in this unique social experiment. It’s often interesting to observe what parts of self they share and do not share, how their reflections in the private interviews differ from the interactions with the group, and what narratives they create about themselves in the context of the game. The players seem to be trying to create something that feels like trustworthy authenticity so the other players will work with them, but in most cases they are showing only a fraction of their true selves in a very strategic and intentional way. I wonder how this type of presentation is an exaggerated example of how many of us present in our day-to-day lives, and how we might talk about this intentional presentation with clients in therapy.
Lauren: Survivor is such a unique show! I watched it growing up too and was drawn in by the creativity of physical challenges and all the contestants endured. I also started watching again in the pandemic and was fascinated by the interpersonal dynamics in an ever-shifting game! I continued watching the show while I was in graduate school, and was intrigued by Jeff’s role as host and thought he would make a skilled group therapist. The way he would track behaviors and objectively reflect them to the broader group in tribal council was so eye-opening to me. Here are these people playing a game of course, but Jeff would bring in interpersonal functioning, how others may understand them and broader social issues like sexual identity, transgender rights, sexism, age, etc. and how they unfold in the game (and, I’d argue, beyond).
As I started practicing, I quickly noticed how often clients brought media and pop culture into the clinical space and how relevant some commentary on integrating our digital lives into therapy is. I thought about Survivor and how it both reflects cultural gender norms and messages, and also solidifies them in some ways; In that same week, a few of my clients brought up Survivor, and shared comments on women presenting clients they liked, didn’t like and why. This seemed both serendipitous and not random at all to me––people watch Survivor, and people come to understand themselves through media they consume.
Gender Dynamics and Portrayals in Survivor
Emily: Another component to the show that I always tune into is the roles that the contestants create for themselves amidst the group dynamic. I often observe female contestants taking on care-taking roles, and given the strategic nature of self-presentation in the show, I wonder how many of them are taking on those roles intentionally (perhaps to get in the good graces of other contestants or to appear non-threatening) and how often are they taking on those roles somewhat subconsciously, because that is what is familiar and expected of them in group settings?
Lauren: This is such a thoughtful question! Because of the nature of the competition, contestants are likely more intentional in what parts of themselves and parts of their gender roles are shown to their teammates. I think it’s really interesting to wonder how far that intentionality goes––to what extent are people aware of how they’re showing up, or are perceived by others? I’d also wonder if it’s different for men and women on the show.
I was also struck by the gendered differential in who wins Survivor! A person can take many strategic paths to ultimately win Survivor, but essentially a person wins by not getting voted out, making it to a final pool of contestants and then getting voted by a jury of former players (who they may have had a hand in voting out!) as the person who played the “best game”. One group found a nearly even split in gender representation in the finals, however juries selected male winners at a significantly higher percentage. (1) I wonder about patriarchal values and bias at play in what we call the “best game”, and how women and feminism are left out of this.
Emily: That really is so interesting. Like women are “useful” and assist in bringing the male winners to the end of the game, likely because they are viewed as non-threatening and unlikely to take home the ultimate prize with the final jury vote. I’ve also observed that when some female contestants make it to the final level of the game, the narrative is because they were “brought along” to the final, not because they got there through their own actions or merits. They might be “rewarded” in the game for being loyal or “good”, but when women play “hard” or in a way that is perceived as overly intentional and aggressive, it is often viewed as more threatening than when men play similarly.
The most recent season, 49, had an all-female finale, and it was interesting to observe the paths the three contestants took to get there. Two of the finalists in particular were not very “likeable” and played the game more aggressively and strategically than many women often do. One seemed to intentionally embrace a “weird” and not-traditionally-feminine approach to her self-presentation that included a lot of discussion about bodily functions, and this seemed to throw off other contestants. They didn’t quite know what to make of her, and therefore registered her as less threatening and less serious than she really ended up being on the show, simply because she didn’t follow a typical female script.
Lauren: I noticed that too! Season 13 is coming to my mind––there was a man and woman working together within a larger alliance, and the woman contestant did more of the behind the scenes orchestrating and social labor. She and her male friend made it to the final three (with another male), and she lost with zero votes as the jury perceived her as having a weaker game with fewer dominant moves. I saw these two working very synonymously, though the jury attributed the big moves to her male counterpart and I have to believe some of that is due to gendered values of credit being given easily to men, and of “bigger, dominant” game play being most worthy of respect. I saw similar themes and patriarchal values playing out in season 1.
I have noticed commentary around certain women contestants who are perceived by viewers as “annoying”, perhaps for talking too much or being emotional/less “rational”. Additionally, there is controversy around women’s bodies on the show and that women who have won by being more seductive is a lesser win. Some women who participated in later years have intentionally avoided that archetype. Men generally are not concerned with being too sexual and what this says about their value. In general, I imagine women think a lot harder about how they are socially perceived and how that may impact their game.
Reality Show Edits and the Therapy “Edit”
Emily: Beyond the self-presentation of the contestants, I also think about the way the editors of the show distill down hours and hours of footage to present fairly punchy episodes that each have their own story arc. And some of the plot lines arc across the whole season. I wonder what goes into deciding which chunks of the individual interviews, footage from downtime at the camps, and angles of challenges make the final cut. I think therapy is in a sense an “episode” of the hours and hours of footage of our lives. How do clients determine which conversations, experiences, sensations, and thoughts make the final “cut” of what gets addressed in a therapy session?
When I’ve been in the client’s chair in therapy, I have found that “editing” process to be one of the most helpful parts of the experience. I often leave sessions being somewhat surprised at what I chose to focus on (often an indicator something needed more attention than I was giving it on my own) and I often feel like the thoughts are more organized and ready to be stored away as coherent memories.
As clinicians, perhaps we can explicitly discuss this self-editing process by way of use of the here-and-now in therapy. We might ask clients, “What is it like to talk about yourself and your experiences in this therapy space? How do you decide what to tell me? Are there things you intentionally do not bring up in therapy sessions? What would happen if you did bring those things into our sessions?”
I once had a long-term client who did not disclose a significant early childhood trauma until we had been working together for a very long time. When I asked why they didn’t share about it earlier they said something like, “I guess I just didn’t want to bring you to that scene.” That answer has always stuck with me, and haunted me a little bit. This client had come to revere me and my opinion of them, and they feared if I really knew what happened to them it might color my thoughts about them. So, they edited it out, likely at the expense of progress in therapy. If I had been incorporating this editing idea into our work together earlier, perhaps it would have felt safer for the client to voice this important and impactful event sooner.
Lauren: Wow, what an impactful example! There really is such a metaphor here in how clients present an edit of themselves in therapy, and therapists certainly do too. Clients share with us, both verbally and non-verbally, and a therapist acts as an “editor” to synthesize the information, distill themes or important observations and share it back in a meaningful way to guide the person and move the treatment forward. Part of our role in the relationship is to edit and share what’s being said and felt in the room, and to pull from our multi-faceted knowledge to intentionally intervene. We are actively editing in session.
There’s also the edit of ourselves as therapists. How does the therapist decide what parts of themselves show up in the treatment space? Another part of our role includes being thoughtful about how we as humans are edited in or out of the treatment, how it may help the person we are working with while also monitoring for our own stuff coming up. There’s a constant internal dialogue, and therefore editing process, going on for us!
Therapist Self-Disclosure and Feminist Therapy
Lauren: Feminist theory is a theoretical orientation that is also a form of therapy. It looks at power and hierarchies in a culture, and how they deprive and oppress women in terms of resources, value and health. (2) While feminism is broad and multi-faceted, a unified principle is that a woman’s personal problems cannot exist separately from social structures of oppression, an idea that seems very well suited to the clinical applications of this discussion.
From a feminist therapy lens, therapist self-disclosure itself is an intervention. It humanizes us as the therapist and also fosters a more equal relationship with people based more on values of mutuality, equality, respect, and collaboration. From a client’s perspective, this type of relationship with a person modeling secure attachment, being open and being intentional to mitigate power imbalances could be a profoundly new and transforming experience.
Emily: It really could. And perhaps disclosure about watching reality television specifically decreases hierarchy in the therapeutic relationship and builds on that egalitarian, mutual influence model the Feminist Therapy encourages. Reality TV is not an esoteric therapeutic concept that is out of reach. A clinician disclosing that they watch Survivor and have feelings about the show is a form of disclosure that increases humanness and relatability. In a sort of parallel process, I would say discussing the show had a similar impact on our faculty-student relationship!
Lauren: So right! Even disclosing seemingly small details about ourselves can be so impactful to the person and the relationship. I certainly felt that with Emily! It was like here’s this person with a PhD who is so experienced and cool (and you could insert other things people project onto therapists), and we both feel dedicated to this show and the escape it brings us! Our conversations about it were so generative and led to more than we could have each thought about individually.
Critical Consciousness and Feminist Therapy
Lauren: Another aspect of Feminist Therapy that feels relevant to Survivor showing up in a therapy space is around critical consciousness. The show is rife with content and examples of gender roles, inequality, social values, identity and power which offer tangible ways to explore and think critically about sociopolitical concepts. I can imagine using a feminist lens to explore some of these concepts with a frame for context around how a person has constructed internal stories. What a rich way to process how a person has come to understand themselves and the contextual world they live in!
I feel really passionate about historical implications for silencing anger in women and other disempowered groups of people. I could see a treatment goal here being exploring a person’s relationship with anger and building consciousness around power, expressing anger toward injustice and oppression, and integrating it as a motivator for action. Cool to think that exposure to Survivor (and in my experience people definitely watch this show and bring it up!) could be a catalyst for therapeutic work rooted in both internal narrative construction and external action.
Emily: Right! Increasing critical consciousness is a core emphasis of Feminist Therapy, and critical conversations about media broadly, and reality television specifically do offer a very tangible way to incorporate that treatment goal.
Another place I’ve seen this in my clinical work frequently is in my work with couples. I often hear folks referencing “the movies” or “media” broadly when deconstructing their ideas of what love, relationships, and romance are “supposed” to look like. The same is often true when we explore where their ideas of gender roles in romantic partnerships originate. It’s been helpful to bring those critical conversations directly into the therapy room. Those scripts (especially those surrounding romantic relationship progression and expectations, sex, and gender roles) are often very ingrained in the couples I serve, and calling out the origins of those narratives can be liberating and empowering.
Lauren: I mean, that’s a really good point—there’s so much relational content in reality TV that could come up. I also think about the relevance of pop culture and social media in my work with adolescent clients. It’s a way to enter their worlds a bit. Developmentally, we know that kids internalize gender roles and expectations from a young age, and I wonder how online messages contribute. I think about unrealistic beauty standards and body image expectations for women that are shaped online and also impact men’s perception. I see a trend emerging here in unrealistic, non-human standards being perpetrated through social media (and other forms), and I’m concerned about it.
Emily: Totally. I imagine it would feel relevant and tangible for an adolescent client if you referenced a shared knowledge of an influencer or meme, and then engaged in critical discussion about it. “What kinds of filters do you think they use?”, “What do you think the daily life is like for this influencer when they aren’t in front of the camera?” “What do you think the motivation is for this influencer to post these kinds of pictures?” I think critical consciousness is only going to become more and more essential for mental wellness as we move further into this AI-generated, digital world. Media is more and more the “where” and “how” of living and less and less a compartmentalized part of it. It’s no longer just a show we tune into on Wednesday evenings on network TV. “Edited” media content is ubiquitous, and we need good skills for interpreting it and being conscious of our consumption of it.
Bringing it Together
Lauren: I agree, I’ve noticed that people definitely bring experiences with media of all kinds into therapy sessions and it could be a useful time to look at those shared experiences together. One beautiful aspect of a therapeutic relationship is that it requires all people involved! We can’t engage in therapy without the person we’re working with, and ultimately what we co-create with them is more than the sum of its parts, or what could exist in either of our minds independently. Media lends an additional social dimension, and I think it introduces a rewarding way to think deeper about the human experience.
Emily: Right on––it really is an accessible and relatable tool clinicians could start using right away. And with that, I need to get this week’s Survivor Fantasy League predictions in for Season 50. It’s Wednesday and I can’t wait to see this week’s episode!
References
(1) O’Mara-Kunz, EM, Howell, JL & Beasley, N. (2023). Surviving Racism and Sexism: What Votes in The Television Program Survivor Reveal About Discrimination. Psychological Science, 34(6), 647-736. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976231165665
(2) Worell, J., & Remer, P. (2002). Feminist perspectives in therapy: Empowering diverse women (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Go Deeper in Your Practice
Get unlimited access to 350+ real therapy demonstration videos, CE, webinar replays, and more with a Psychotherapy.net membership.
