Gazes

Yeah, so before defining the male gaze, I'd like to state that I agree with the arguments created by Berger/bell hooks, but at the same time there are some general contentious points that I may have a slight problem with.

From my understanding of the readings, the male gaze is the exhibition of power displayed through the simple act of looking/staring. Just through looking, males hold dominance over females, taking pleasure in the feeling of ownership of the female body. I emphasize taking because it is almost as though they are stealing something: the right of privacy. That being said I feel as though, I (the male), am being persecuted for ever looking and appreciating the beauty of any girl. I'm sorry, but sometimes a girl's beauty requires a double-take, and that's not society teaching me to oppress and objectify women; that's myself thinking, "Whoah, she is nice to look at." I also think it's natural to want to be appreciated for good-looks, even if one does find the shallowness of society stupid. I know we're not supposed to cite the readings we had due for the 17th, but as Susan Douglas says while looking through Vogue, "I want to look beautiful; I think wanting to look beautiful is the most dumb-ass goal you could have." I don't think this opinion is unique to women. I want to be presentable, I'd like to be be appreciated if on the off chance I'm looking good. Because of this, I don't think it's so much a male gaze but a dominating gaze largely used by males, but that can also be used by women. Looking is the most primal of urges, and I understand in certain situations it could be quite intimidating, but I don't think I've ever gone so far as to cause discomfort (nor do I think I am some perverted peeping-tom/voyeur).

Berger's Way's of Seeing goes into depth of how through out artistic history, women have been displayed in all types of pieces as subservient beings to the viewer; to be be only viewed as hot bods created just for the eyes of the male viewers. They're always posed to show every nook and cranny of the girl's body and give the most subversive facial expressions to hold dominance for the male audience. This is still very much apart of the mainstream media. I'm writing part of this at my the restaurant I work at. Just before, I had to go into the kitchen, and the cooks (all from Central America) were watching Univision or some Spanish-speaking channel. It was (and all it ever really is) pretty much just girls dancing in bikinis. As a result, the guys are always looking at girls in the most sexual manner possible, and to me, that is where intimidation starts and the line is drawn. When the gaze/stare's intentions are outwardly apparent. Of course I'm not speaking for all Latin American men as a whole (even though, I myself am half-Colombian), but as I spend more time with the cooks (and even befriend them), I notice that, like the TV shows they always watch in the kitchen, every female is sexualized to them. The women on the TV shows they watch appear just to be looked at, dancing for the male audience's delight, just as female subjects in the paintings were.

Though Berger's assessment about the male gaze does provide much insight on the (literal) views of men towards women, it's more specifically about how white women are gazed upon. The oppositional gaze described in bell hooks' "The Oppositional Gaze" is the alternative reaction to the media's portrayal of women. Instead of being upset by the lack of a black woman in any given movie/program, bell hooks encouraged black females to look passed that and very strictly critique the work in question. The gaze includes to intently find no identification between the viewer and white femininity displayed, which bell hooks described as the male's "desire and possession."

To me, this gaze is strictly a rebellion against the representation of marginalized female groups, particularly African American. It can be used by anyone who feels as though their gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, race or culture is constantly represented in the media through stereotypes, or not even represented at all. As a straight white dude, I must say it's hard to relate to being marginalized, because I'm at the proverbial top (not that I really believe that). But I do choose to associate myself with a culture that isn't necessarily persecuted, but certainly is not represented in mass culture. And because of this, I find myself using an oppositional gaze of sorts. For the most part, I hate white, mainstream culture. I find myself criticizing almost all TV (although I do love the History Channel documentaries and premium cable TV shows...), and it takes a lot for me to spend money on a movie.

These gazes counteract each other. The male gaze is way more prevalent in our society, but I believe a lot of people are using the oppositional gaze without realizing it. These people certainly do not define it as such, but it's natural to criticize what you can't relate to.