Sunday, September 4, 2011

Post One: The Male Gaze

     For my first post I decided it would be best to talk about 'The Gaze' in visual media (its homophone caused such an uproar, after all.) This is a popular topic when discussing gender or its role in media and dates back to 1975, and was first recorded by Laura Mulvey.

      The Gaze, also called The Male Gaze, has everything to do not only with what is being looked at in media but who is doing the looking. Members of the media consuming public are very diverse, and one could easily assume they have different wants in what they're presented with. What I want to see in an advertisement or a film is probably nothing similar to what you'd prefer to see. Yet every day we are presented time and again with someone's viewpoint meant to stand in for our own.
      If your wondering who, the answer is a (highly stereotyped) heterosexual white man. Interesting to think about. You go around most of the day looking at things with your own preconceptions, societal values and beliefs coloring what you see-- but when you look at that sneaker ad, you're probably using the eyes of a 18-40 year old male WASP.




That seems like a totally believable position to paint a motorcycle in, right?

      Is that how you look at things? I noticed a startling difference when I first started paying close attention to what I was seeing in media (especially hollywood films and advertisments.) I don't waste several seconds lingering on a models curves (or lack thereof) yet when viewing an ad or a film you don't have a choice.
      What's the big deal? Why should I care that these women, who are being well paid mind you, are being objectified? Good question-- especially if you are of the members of the audience that enjoy viewing that kind of material.
      The problem lies in that when the woman's body is made into an object, often shown headless, without any dialoge, it renders a person into little more than a piece of meat. It may be much more subtle than it was twenty years ago, but just because it has been diminished does not make it right.
      I would also point out that this mythical '18-40 year old white, heterosexual, middle income male' is not even real to begin with. The definitions that the media places on you for selling purposes are far too vague to be of any real use.
      I used to argue; "Fine. --but I want to see a sweaty male body for every female one I have to look at!" It seems, however, that over the last five to ten years that very trend has been increasing. Did anyone see the Amityville Horror remake?

http://youtu.be/8d6vwgWOCl4 (Embed was disabled for this clip)

      This happens several times throughout the movie, very reminiscent of how female leads are often treated in horror movies. "Whelp. I gotta go investigate that noise-- in my underwear." (Interestingly, if you watch the whole film you notice the camera seems much more interested in Reynolds than George, the female lead.)
                                     
Let's not forget the inescapable 'Bodman' commercials from the late 90's!
      Is this objectification of the male body a good thing? Are we now basking in equality at last? I honestly don't have an answer for that.
      Anecdotal evidence points to a rise in everything from eating disorders to cosmetic surgery and even 'manscaping' in the male population. To be sure there are complex reasons for the growing trends, both economic and social, but in some small part this new 'improved' man may be the product of the self consciousness that goes along with knowing you're being looked at, and judged.

3 comments:

  1. I think that this is an interesting start for your blog. I agree that there has been a rise in the objectification of men in advertising. I also think that we are not as aware of this happening as we are of women.

    We also forget that men can image issues. I think this rise in objectification of men in advertising and movies has contributed to men being more self conscious and there being a rise in men with eating disorders.

    I think that when we look at advertising, we equate ourselves with those people. They look happy and we want to be happy. But, what we forget is that the people in movie and on TV are not an accurate sample of the norm of our population. These people are abnormal.

    We need to remember that we do not need to look like movie stars or models to be happy. As a society and as individuals, we could all use a big boost of self-confidence.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I feel like this issue is touched on a lot, and although it is an issue, in my opinion it is not a huge one.

    Yes, objectifying women is bad and it can be upsetting when we see things like your examples. It does cause problems in society, like you said, with eating disorders and body image.

    But, in my opinion women are strong enough to overcome the stereotype and realize it is just a commercial, or a scene in a movie not real life. As Paige said, the actresses and actors in those movies are not the norm of people in our society.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sorry I took so long to reply-- bad blog writer, bad!

    Bailey; I understand your point. Society at large is getting more and more media savvy with every generation, and I think we will (eventually) be at a point where it's a well developed skill from children to the elderly.

    My only issue is that I don't think we are there yet as a culture. Kids, by and large, don't have the sophistication to parse out the undercurrents of racism, sexism, sexualization etc. that may be present in an ad.

    Lastly, just because we can rise above it, men and women, does that me we should have to just so BodyFantasies can sell cheap body spray?

    ReplyDelete