This topic has been on my mind recently. Media critics occasionally condemn or criticize the use of the male gaze in modern movies. Why do so many people view this as a problem, in an era where many support if not glorify sexual media?
At least for me (m) it’s cheap. If you do it as a pov shot you might get a pass, but ultimately, with every shot you should always be questioning what it achieves. If it is just titillating half the audience then you can probably do better.
From a simple we live with other people point of view: Would you enjoy the male gaze shots if they targeted a form you don’t find attractive? Do you enjoy them the same if you are watching the film with your parents, your boss, a teacher?
Interesting. See this whole topic came to mind when watching a James Bond movie with my sister for the first time.
While titulation is cheap, some people like it, but I wonder why in an era where sexual media is glorified, a male gaza is viewed as bad, and why people don’t push as hard for a female or bisexual gaze. If only men are getting titulated, why not titulated the women as well?
Sadly, the male gaze tends to fall straight into misogyny, specially into treating women like objects. This is why there’s something called the Sexy Lamp Test, it checks if removing a female character significantly changes the plot
Would you say that sexual objectification of women in media is always misogynistic, and if so, sexual objectification of men is equally sexist, thus making all sexual media unethical?
No, it’s not always misogynistic. I don’t subscribe to puritan views of avoiding sexual content, it just has to be written well
So, the male gaze tends to treat women as purely sexual beings? That makes sense (after all this came to mind after I watched You Only Live Twice for the first time with my sister).
A perfect example of a well written male gaze movie is How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000)
Dang, I still need to see that movie
