90 Day Fiance has exploded from a documentary-esque reality show, showcasing the K-1 visa process as experienced by a variety of couples, to a reality show empire with six spin-offs. Most couples in the 90 day fiance sphere meet one of three ways: online, through a dating app or Facebook; while the American partner is on vacation, often at a bar or club; or during the American partner’s Mormon mission trip. Regardless of the method, they all share the desire to get married fast.
Considering that, as of 2018, the average engagement length is a little over 13 months and that many of these people have known each other for less than that, with many never having met in person, the K-1 visa requirement of marriage within 90 days presents a prime opportunity for potential chaos. This isn’t the sweet TLC content of the early 2000s; the goal is drama and that is the rotten root of the show. TLC keeps audiences watching by highlighting stories that are captivating and that involves using a specific formula that has an imbalanced power dynamic at its core.
The majority of the spin-offs follow TLC’s method of watching a family as it grows, but the most popular series are the original and the two spin-offs that mirror its structure. These three shows profile a set of couples who are trying to reach happily ever after. Beyond the length of their relationships, many of these couples face a set of shared traits that make their relationships even more stressful.
First, there are the age gaps which range from two to thirty nine years, with the American partner almost always being the older one in the case of the larger gaps. Older men seeking younger, foreign-born women to partner with is an obvious red flag. Older women potentially being scammed by younger men is also a familiar narrative. Where the series differs is in calling attention to the additional pressure placed on women to birth children. A well known instance is that of fifty-three year old Angela Deem who, when faced with the expectation to have a child with her thirty-one year old fiance Michael Ilesanmi, had to reckon with her probable infertility after learning she had one egg left, a fact that became a running joke for fans. Both the difficulty this news caused in Angela and Michael’s relationship and the jokes that erupted from viewers pinpoint how fertility can be used to shame or devalue women. Still, youth and perceived naivety draws the American partners to their lovers abroad.
Then there’s the language barriers, with the American partner rarely speaking a second language. Several couples have had to use translation apps to communicate during fights because neither partner knows the other’s native tongue but otherwise communication has to be in English, even when the American partner decides to visit or live abroad.
The most glaring imbalance is rooted in a desire for a proximity to whiteness and the West. More so than access to the visa, it’s a proximity to whiteness and the West that’s heralded both by couples and the structure of the show itself. Season 7 of the origin series is the most diverse so far but a majority of the couples across spin-offs feature a white American partnered with someone from the Global South or eastern Europe.
For the American men, there is an expectation of wealth, although a lot of the American men featured aren’t well off. The most drastic example is Paul Staehle, who has been featured in three seasons collectively and didn’t make enough money to sponsor his pregnant wife when they did get approved for the K-1 visa. Images of wealth and western comfort are used by the men to seem more attractive but then become a burden when they can’t match their partners’ expectations. For the women, younger men are drawn to them for the bragging rights of saying they’re partnered with a white woman. That want leads them to partner a woman going through menopause even though they still desire the birth of a child.
But while the American partner might face embarrassment or empty savings accounts, the power and privilege in being American is wielded over the foreign-born partners. There is the immense expectation of the foreign-born partner to leave their entire life behind in order to be folded into the American’s. Add on top the threat of deportation if the relationship fails, which two women have tried to do, and the power in the relationship is firmly in the hands of the, often white, American partner. The exceptions to the norm are always extraordinary (like the man who fell in love with a sex worker, having sent her over $5,000, while not realizing that he’s just a client or the woman who fell in love with a gambling addict turned burglar who robbed his momma’s house) but mostly we’re shown the same power dynamics again and again.
Since TLC has dropped its moniker as “The Learning Channel,” it has shifted from producing educational content to more reality-style shows. After joining Discovery Inc in 1991, TLC’s science based content started to move to other channels within the company. By the late 1990s, the network’s remaining educational programs were more reality-style while new programs were to be focused on lifestyles. In 2008, TLC debuted a new slogan, “Life Surprises,” to further distance the channel from the past and with it a slew of programming meant to highlight unique family dynamics. The shift worked. Within a year TLC saw record breaking numbers of viewers. The network found a form of storytelling that reinvigorated audiences, resulting in TLC’s rank as #1 against competing networks.TLC has rebranded to be a network that centers the value of sharing personal stories but whose stories are shared and how is where the network makes its money. What do viewers gain from watching flawed relationships in which Americans are seeking foreign-born partners with the expectation of dependency?
On one hand, there’s the lesson of an excess of supply of relationships like these. This dynamic is shown the most because it’s the one that exists the most. And that’s a consequence of larger systems of power that overlap across societies, which is the greater moral we are supposed to learn.
But on the other hand, we’re being presented with a specific, targeted message. Romance reality shows thrive off the idea that love triumphs over all obstacles. 90 Day Fiance suggests that the greatest obstacle to overcome is immigration to the States. For the relationship to succeed, we’re told that the best option is always to move to the US, even though the foreign-born partner would be living without their support network, vulnerable due to their dependence on their fiance. Evelin Villegas, for example, was expected to be overjoyed at the chance to move into her fiance Corey Rathgeber’s family compound. She rejected being isolated to his social circle in favor of moving back home, shocking Corey who doesn’t understand why she would want to move back to a town “covered with pigs.” American exceptionalism is baked into how these people, who often don’t understand why their partner wouldn’t want to move across the world when they are unwilling to do the same, approach their relationships and in the way the show functions.
Other countries are shown as difficult to navigate or as distant, destitute lands. In the episodes where the American travels, we are meant to pity them, as they struggle to figure out an often more conservative culture where they don’t speak the language. The point of view is rarely in favor of the foreign partner, who in contrast are shown as not adapting enough. The end message is the same, that America and the life they could lead here is the better option. Sometimes that message is used against the foreign-born partner, with edits and confessional interviews used to suggest that they only want to get married for a visa. Whether we’re meant to be laughing at the American partner or disparaging the foreign-born one, 90 Day Fiance makes it clear that the absurdity isn’t in the length of their relationships, but in their belief in living in the “greatest country in the world” and what they’ll do to maintain or achieve that.
In the 90 Day Fiance franchise, couples are shown as determined to find their happily ever after but the relationships also often share unequal power dynamics. The Americans featured use their age, language, citizenship, whiteness, western privilege or a combination to position themselves as the more dominant partner. Even more unsettling is that this flawed distribution of power is necessary for the show to continue. Beyond a search for love, the entire series is built off of glamorizing unequal relationships.
{Originally written for ForHarriet}
