The Female Gaze?

[LucyStone]

So, I've been re-reading my notes from my course, when it struck me how often I commented on the poor portrayal of women in media. I've recently started reading up on the male gaze, which explains a lot of this poor portrayal; the default setting for film and television producers seems to be to meet the male gaze.

Now, the term "male gaze" was coined in 1975, by Laura Mulvey, who argued that films showed typically male protagonists, and assumed a heterosexual, male audience was the default.

36 years on, do you feel that films still conform to the male gaze? Are there any films, or even TV shows, which you feel stray away from the male gaze, assuming an androgynous gaze?

That is a fascinating question.

I think Pan's Labyrinth (maybe not what you're thinking of) does assume an androgynous gaze, maybe even a female gaze. IMO it certainly gets across a very strong sense that the audience will emphasize with the fears of women/children. But I wonder if a film with a child protagonist is maybe a bit different anyway.

Fringe (American sci-fi series) has a strong female lead. It's a little worrying just how rare it is to find a heroine who isn't either a sexy femme fatale or just the average butch male character with tits bolted on.

But do you think a strong female lead equates to a female gaze?

I haven't watched Fringe or Pan's Labyrinth yet, but was wondering how realistically the characters are written?

Anon, I think a child protagonist would bring about a different gaze to a film with an adult protagonist. But then, that's something that needs elaborating on, and my head's gone to sleep... (helpful, eh?)

I'm not a James Bond fan, but went along with some friends when Casino Royale with Daniel Craig in the lead came out. I don't think it applies to the whole film, but it was the first time that I noticed a prominent male character stylised for what might be described as the "female gaze," and/or the gay male gaze.

There were the slow mo shots of Craig with shirt open, clothes coming off, in swim trunks, etc., and no opportunity was missed to shoot him getting wet - coming out of the water, getting into the shower fully clothed, I think even getting wet from a water sprinkler or something (I can't remember - been a while.)

I think though that even through the "female gaze" (if you can call it that,) the male isn't objectified in the same way that women are objectified through the "male gaze." For example, Craig was I think deliberately styled to be sexually attractive to women, but not as a passive "object."

With the male gaze, the point is to depict a woman as something that can be possessed, controlled, used, etc. by the man.

Great question.

I dunno . Am still using the "this isn't really aimed at me, is it?" lens, although that now applies to stereotypical "female" programmes too. I don't watch much TV anymore...

Hmmm, I was wondering during the first episode of Misfits whether that's begun to shift towards a female gaze?

I remember, initially, that Alisha's power was highly sexualised (she could touch anyone and they'd get violently turned on by her), whereas the rest of the cast held more useful powers; Kelly, who my ex described as the "dog ugly one" had mind reading - perhaps they were saving the sexualised powers for the one everyone was supposed to fancy? The others had more useful powers - mind reading, immortality, invisibility and time control.

Then, during series 2, we saw Simon become more sexualised, and his fan base grew quite considerably. It also struck me, during this weeks episode that Lauren Socha (Kelly) isn't a twig like so many female leads... And it's bloody refreshing! I actually don't find myself watching it and focusing on how slim she is, how pretty she is... I find myself focusing on her storyline instead. (Although, so far she's taken a backseat to Alisha, so that point is a bit defunct so far)

this is really interesting. I always notice the male gaze used in perfume/fashion ads where the women look glassy eyed and open mouthed (basically vacant and porny).

I've never thought about it in reference to other tv/films stuff, so I will now.

However, I'm just about to carry on with The Pacific boxset which is quite 'male' with few women characters at all so, that's not helpful

oh and Ayeda, I agree with the, "I'm not really the target audience" thing, MASSIVE example being Loose Women

if that is aimed at the female gaze then...

Also, the Twilight stuff is interesting from this perspective. On the one hand, he is totally dreamy and so addicted to her that it becomes overwhelming and dangerous she is ultimately controlled by him and under his spell.

I'd say no cos we live in patriarchy. Showing sexy pictures of men does not equal the female gaze as it is female sexuality as constructed through male sexuality. We can't know what the female gaze is whilst we live in a world constructed through the male gaze.

Lucy - I don't really know how realistic the child in PL is, I don't have children.

I am not sure we can't know what the female gaze is. I'm not sure we know it in the sort of automatic, clear way we know the male gaze, but I think it's something we know in a sort of 'corner-of-the-eye' way, as if we'd recognize it if we glimpsed it. Or I'd like to think so!

Very true about sexy pictures of men not equaling the female gaze though - that drives me nuts! Especially since IMO a lot of ideas about what women find sexy in men seem to me more reminiscent of what gay male friends of mine find attractive - not what women I know do.

Good point Anon re differences between male and female turn-ons.

When I've asked what men find sexy about women, it's the usual 'boobs', 'legs', 'bums', etc with the occasional classier/more obscure 'nape of the neck', 'brushing hair over ears'.

When I've asked women for what they find sexy in a man, it's usually about moments or specific clothing, e.g. 'rolled up shirt sleeves', 'a look of deep concentration', 'a grunt from exertion'.

That said, there was of course cross-over on both sides, but ime women are less disposed to be turned-on by a picture of a scantily-clad man.

I always wonder what our turn-ons would be like if we'd always lived in a really gender-neutral, non-patriarchial society.

What I find actively unappealing (but very frequently found in films that think they're appealing to women) is men with steroid-ish, very hard and over-developed musculature. It really turns me off.

I wonder if this stuff is why I enjoy children's films (eg. the Studio Ghibli ones) so much - they tend to be a bit less obviously dominated by male gaze.

I keep meaning to get round to the Studio Ghibli stuff, but never do.

Depressingly, as a gamer, I'm beginning to realise the distinct lack of a female gaze in gaming. No, we don't all want pets, and to be teachers, or cutesy little animals to rescue... I want a female detective solving murders, or more male victims, or women who can save themselves...

As to turn ons... I wonder that myself. I've never found muscly men a turn on, whereas a slightly vulnerable, geeky man... yeah... I'm more likely to drool over Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory than I am to drool over Taylor Lautner...

I agree with AlwaysWild:

"We can't know what the female gaze is whilst we live in a world constructed through the male gaze."

I think you're right Amor.

I was watching The House of Elliot the other week (1990ish?) and thinking how wonderfully woman-centric it was. And Tenko. And neither of those would be made today.

stuff that is aimed at women these days.... Desperate Housewives? Sex and the City? I've never seen Sex and the City but it certainly sounds like a men's idea of what women are like / want to watch.

Desperate Housewives is utterly utterly 'handmaiden of the patriarchy' IMO.

Bits of SATC can always be defended (bits of it were quite important for me when it came out, re. sex). I'm not defending it overall though.

I was talking to DH about this and he initially though I meant a man's gaze - it's interesting how different the two are, isn't it? There's a subtle-but-coersive pressure on men to be stereotypically male too. Something that often rings false for me in films/TV is the utter and unrealistic lack of adult male friendships that are really friendships, not teenage-style 'we exist in the same space and hunt girls' style pack-animal action. Leo and Bartlett in the West Wing is a good positive example of male friends, but it's quite rare IMO. I find it unsettling - not in a 'what about the menz' way, but in that without male friendships men are that much more focused (in film presentation) on sexual relationships with women.

I am really, really struggling to think of anything remotely close to what I think a female gaze would really be like.

I would like to come back to this tomorrow... marking my place

Oh, I loved Bad Girls! I know now it looks horribly dated, but at the time I thought it was amazing and very exciting (I was a sheltered teen, can you tell?).

Grey's anatomy I'm watching with DH atm. It's ok.

But none of these IMO are actually designed for women are they? They're expecting a hefty male audience too, and/or the makers just assume women will put up with a lazy repackaging of the same ideas about what 'everyone' knows women like.

Kids films, the ghibli ones aside, are become very boy centric.

You just have to look at the fact Tangled was rewritten and renamed to appeal to the boys as well, to see that.

I'm going to have to look that essay up later, as I can't remember if it was solely based on LA Noire, or just general.

LA Noire? Film Noir. FFS...

I believe that "womens" shows are often produced by gay men not by women such as SATC (SJP only because exec P after a few seasons), Lipstick Jungle, Cashmere Maffia etc.

I agree that these is little that is designed especially for women which is a shame.

Not specifically about female gaze but when do they stop producing shows for women? I can think of lots of teen tv shows that seem to be specifically for girls/young women but little after that.