Are women still objectified? | Laura Mulvey Male Gaze theory explained!

[@hazelenglish9340]

Women grew up watching successful, "beautiful" women always portrayed through the male gaze and now that we ourselves are playing the role of the camera (selfies/instagram) we present ourselves through the male gaze!

[@TheMediaInsider]

Excellent point - very postmodern!

[@Ψυχήμίασμα]

"Women grew up watching successful, "beautiful" women always portrayed through the male gaze" Except they didn't. Unless their selection of viewing is so narrow that they somehow have missed every single Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, Gone With The Wind, Hunger Game movie, and COUNTLESS others throughout the ages. This supposition is utterly unfounded. I didn't not watch anything via a male gaze. If I did, I did so with equal amounts of female gaze on men. Literally everything from Little Women, Jane Austen, Magic Mike, Ricky Lake and Ellen Degeneres, the VIEW, the mother fucking VIEW, and every single Marvel movie pointlessly showing our male actors shirtless........just, stop it. It's not true. The theory was to critique the 70s and 80s B movie directors who made campy tropey things that nobody watched. But it does not apply to pop culture at large. And the reason women present themselves through the male gaze is the same reason men go to the gym and get ripped in order to present themselves on instagram through the female gaze. It's just gaze. A thoroughly natural human inclination. WE want what we want. Take one single look at a male hunk's instagram account and you get hundreds of thousands of female THIRST COMMENTS. Take a look at Pietro Boselli. You even have random news stories about him just because of his looks. And women have been presenting themselves like this since we were cavemen or since we worshiped at the temples of Astarte. It's a valid critique when it was too much in the early 70s, and even then it was only B or C caliber films.

[@ntothe8070]

@@Ψυχήμίασμα how the fuck is a woman being treated like a object/meat in society comparable to men who excercise. Wtf i swear you sexists are dumb as shit.

[@elmoworld850]

@@ntothe8070 sexist card

[@leeeastwood6368]

elmo world, but lots of women enjoy being objectified. hence very few women want to identify as feminist!

[@obsessive-compulsivekenobi7631]

J.J. Abrams: "Objectifying women in Star Wars is gross! I'm not doing that in MY Star Wars movies!" Also J.J. Abrams in Star Trek Into Darkness: "So we need a scene of the blond in her bra and panties..."

[@obsessive-compulsivekenobi7631]

@Keys andFood , the Transformers scene is definitely one of the worst examples. It just annoys me that J.J. Abrams was saying "I won't objectify Rey" and then had an arguably gratuitous scene in Star Trek. I mean, people can grow and change, but it seemed more like his decision not not objectify Rey was more because of Disney's policies than a genuine change of heart.

[@liampatrick3110]

What is a woman?

[@gabehorn3500]

is he a teacher because it looks like he’s filming this in his class room.

[@emmarevell6865]

i think he is

[@doccrowley3367]

i think the male gaze is the manifestation of an attitude that men have where they think "my aesthetic sensibilities are the top priority no matter what the situation and must be catered to. women HAVE to look good for me at all times"

[@TheMediaInsider]

Good way of putting it - it's male entitlement resulting from generations of patriarchy

[@doccrowley3367]

@mrlnwrld what about them

[@doccrowley3367]

@gjaddajg ok

[@Dennis-nc3vw]

The stench of phoniness and sycophantry on your words makes me want to puke.

[@doccrowley3367]

@@Dennis-nc3vw oo la la looks like someones gonna get laid in college

[@radostinaruseva8059]

Do you think that in 'Twilight' the roles are switched and Edward is rather objectified as the perfect man, than the woman in that film - Bella? Don't we identify with her and experience that 'female gaze'? Thank you!

[@TheMediaInsider]

Absolutely - and the reasons for that are twofold - Twilight is arguably more aimed at the female audience, who were not so frequently catered to when the theory was produced. But also, ideas towards sexuality have changed greatly in the past 20 years, so that most men will not (or at least should not) be insecure when presented with homoerotic material.

[@doevemenighedsyd]

@Radostina Ruseva Still the movies seem at least to me to tell girls, that their perfect man is dominant, looks at her while she sleeps, is very controlling and in fact a monster packed in a shiny shell. But that's got not just the way it's filmed, it's the way the source material was written -_-* But yeah, those shirts don't stay on for very long. Objectification of males are probably going to get more and more normal. Let's hope it's not gonna give men self esteem isues. Magazines commercials and media in general in our society makes girls think from a very young age, that looks are very important. And if everybody think that, it becomes normal for men to comment on girls looks, and normal for girls to accept that either as a compliment or just as normal, even though it can be phrased in very bad, objectifying and sexist ways. Oh I hope men wont suffer the same ill faith, though it's already starting. Women are photoshopped impossibly thin. Men are photoshoped to look more muscular and buff. I watched the Thor the Dark World commentary. "We needed a scene where he washes, though it's not relevant to the plot, because we saw his six pack in the first movie, now it's sort of a requirement." Sigh.

[@irrevenant3]

Yep, Twilight is definitely a female gaze film. Neither the male gaze nor the female gaze are inherently a bad thing, it's a matter of balance. Ideally we'd have a good mix of films with the male gaze *and* films with the female gaze *and* films with a mix *and* films from other perspectives such as non-heterosexual. There are many different types of gaze and it would be good to have an appropriate spread of all of them in our films.

[@kristin123a]

Yes, but it's worse. Just like 50 Shades it romanticises meeting an abusive man. Being a plain girl and having the most handsome man wanting you. It's not about you wanting him, it's about how unbelievable it is that he wants you. And note, an abusive man.

[@ldeue4837]

I'd argue that it goes both way's look at the majority of actor's who get to Hollywood....You are either funny and you make people laugh or you are attractive. There is few and far in-between.....People need to penalize that are brain's are wired for survival, that's how we were born that's how most animal's brain's work....the first priority is survival, please stop listening to these people that a demonizing "male gaze" like is this the point we've gotten too? blaming men for their biology and being human?

[@DivineDil]

... and where else can the male gaze still be found? ADVERTISEMENTS, obviously!

[@pedrorecomenda]

Manga or anime

[@BurningRubber454]

DivineDil you can also find the female gaze in advertisements

[@suemarie4203]

Beemans gum.... I'm a man, yes I am... And I love you so. Google commercial. Subliminal marketing of the 70s...very much targets men's view, ie. Male gaze

[@DivineDil]

@jay I didn't say that the products that are advertised through the male gaze are targeted at men. They targeted at both men AND women. 85%, very well - because women are pressured into maintaining predefined beauty standards (to please the male gaze (btw, men are often pressured into beauty standards as well)) and this is where ads come in: they convey the message that in order to reach/maintain this beauty standard, women need to buy a certain product. Here you see the link between sexism and capitalism.

[@nunyadambidniss]

@mrlnwrld Raquel Welch &That Chick from Star Trek. YES !!! :D

[@alastaircrawford2383]

Great explanation, especially of the historical context of the theory, and such apt choice of film clips! This explainer doesn't explain one aspect of Mulvey's theory of male gaze, which is that the male viewer identifies with the strong, active, decision making male protagonist of the film.

[@haleyv5961]

thank you. i hope perhaps you can add about the stereotypical roles of the sidekick, or how some people become the figurative female in a film. that was a more difficult idea to grasp in the essay without seeing examples.

[@robertbench5187]

Imagine being a little boy and seeing adult men being sexualized in front of your eyes? Now imagine that thousands of little girls have already seen a lot of naked adult women since the early days of media cause the industry is always promoting women objectification. That's how inappropriate it is and it needs to be Stopped!

[@liampatrick3110]

Your point being?

[@robertbench5187]

@@liampatrick3110 My point is the objectification of women must stop now cause it's very inappropriate and damaging to the young viewers especially to young girls.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@robertbench5187 kzbin.info/www/bejne/jGHRZ35pgdx7d8k kzbin.info/www/bejne/gHu4i5mZiLh0pq8

[@robertbench5187]

@@liampatrick3110 Bruh that's not male objectification. That's just muscle and abs appreciation and the men are still in the position of power instead of being in a submissive position unlike in their female counterparts.

[@paulmark992]

@@robertbench5187 so must the objectification of men

[@fegu]

But can we pinpoint the origin of Hollywood's male gaze and dominance? Did the 1930's code have something to do with narrowing women's roles and intimidating them from being behind the camera as well?

[@TheMediaInsider]

Yes, but that goes far beyond just film making - women were exempt from most business back then!

[@herbertrude1689]

Superb, accessible explanation of MGT, thank you MI!

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thanks HR

[@ChesyreFrog]

The concept of a person being objectified in the media is a troubling one, as objectification implies that the humanity of the presented individual is stripped away. Objectification only works then if the individual being viewed is regarded as a non-person by the audience. The lens of the camera is a tool and is used to direct the audiences' eye through which the narrative plays out. I would wager it is still the audience who then interprets what is seen. This then does not force the audience, or the characters being viewed, into any position of power, but directs the audience to read the scene as it is interpreted by the individual through whose lens we see the world. As sexuality is inherent to the majority of the human species, it should not be divorced from the interpretation of any given scene and should be given weight when analyzing a character's motivations. The clips of Chris Pine in the Star Trek films, for example, are used as visual shorthand to show where his eyes are moving, and to what his motivations are in that present moment. These help flesh out who Capt. Kirk is a character. Likewise the full context of the scene with Emily Blunt from "Edge of Tomorrow" is one where Tom Cruise's character is in awe of the grace and control she exerts in the training room. She is a beautiful mystery but is still very much a person. The concept of gaze theory needs to be overhauled to include the many different perceptions of audience members, or to seperate itself from gender and be recognized as part of the directors vision fro the telling of a narrative.

[@nunyadambidniss]

The only people who seem troubled are the ones no one wants to look at....

[@truth_seeker5]

If you think superman's body is glorified and Megan fox's body is objectified. Just think Henry cavill was repairing the car in transformers and megan fox was saving the world in superman. Now what do u think? If u still think Megan fox was objectified in superman and Henry was glorified. Then the problem is with you.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@truth_seeker5 "Just think Henry cavill was repairing the car in transformers and megan fox was saving the world in superman." Feminists would undoubtedly APPLAUD that! -_-

[@annaleahmarinelli9853]

Hi there! It's been a while since you posted this video. I hope you are still checking these messages. My students and I were having a debate in class about nudity in Game of Thrones. It occurred to me that they would benefit from learning about the male gaze. Even in TV series with lesbian characters, all the sex scenes seem to me to be directed or for the benefit of male viewers. What do you think?

[@BurningRubber454]

Annaleah Marinelli there’s a lot more female gaze in game of thrones

[@liampatrick3110]

Might I ask what your thoughts on the scenes in Magic Mike are?

[@doncorleole2356]

@uravrgYTr Who is the bigger audience? Men or lesbians?

[@trollgaminguk8046]

Maslow's hierarchy and young Rubicam's theory about different types of people, great video btw!

[@TheMediaInsider]

I'm working on it!

[@taperhunter8671]

The music is to loud

[@TheMediaInsider]

How embarrassing!

[@ivdi293]

Not only loud, but also horribly chosen.

[@elainemcdonald6690]

I loved your presentation and explanation. Students will find this helpful!

[@lisapulliam5391]

I agree that it is still happening and I question the concept of it being a harmless process of growth. If women are presented and shown as objects without men being educated, then men are learning that women are just objects. My sense is there is no educational system in place to show that women are more than just a visual object or combat the visuals presented in society.

[@TheMediaInsider]

Agreed - although I do think attitudes are slowly changing thanks to the likes of the #metoo movement

[@adamheeley285]

We are not learning they are objects, it is wired into our genetic code. A more attractive women has a higher succes rate of their children being attractive and therefore has a higher chance of passing on our genes. It is the masses that are uneducated and bored that come up with all these gender bias, sjw, bla bla bla.

[@ntothe8070]

@@adamheeley285 people like you will always find a excuse to gaslight people.Atrractive women has nothing to due with the way women are treated in society and in the media. .

[@adamheeley285]

@@ntothe8070 Bahaha women are sexual objects and so are men. Saying they arent doesnt change natural law, but good luck with that.... There are attractive men in media with huge biceps and six packs but you dont hear men complaining about it. Cause we arent whiny babies and understand that is how the world works. Sorry if you dont like it. Grow up.

[@ldeue4837]

HELLO LOSERS that could be the most humorous thing I've seen all year.

[@carlosw1687]

The question is: is presenting female beauty harmful for society? I don't think it's any harmful. Female beauty is natural and must be celebrated. Nature is full of beauty. There is nothing wrong with beauty. Beauty is a necessity of the soul and the mind. Imagine a world without beauty? Imagine a world where females never show their beauty. There would be no inspiration for poems, literature, music, photography, films, painting, philosophy, etc.

[@bobcoughlan929]

If a lesbian would watch such a movie and admire the female form on display, possibly even becoming aroused by it, possibly even fantasizing about having sex with the beautiful movie character, does she do so with only pure and virtuous intent, or is she also objectifying and thereby dehumanizing the character? And regardless of what intent an aroused lesbian moviegoer has during such a movie, are such lesbians being absolved of any such intent because it's purportedly inherently male, or are lesbians being misgendered as males to allow this theory to hold water? And we haven't even started on movies which contain plenty of eye candy for heterosexual females. Or is it only lascivious objectification when men are looking at women?

[@PiqiMiqi]

thank you ! great point

[@liampatrick3110]

Preach

[@Reign14forever]

Compare harley quin in suicide squad vs birds of prey

[@liampatrick3110]

Both are equally mediocre.

[@iCanHearUrHeartbeatx]

This has helped me out a lot so thank you so much! Really interesting topic to explore, I find myself doing this with everything I watch now haha

[@Lunairium]

I think you explained this topic well and gave a ton of good examples of camera movement. I was wondering if you could expand on this topic because what I think it’s missing is the impact it has on the female viewers. You briefly mentioned the effects it had on the male viewer but I think it’s important to explain the effects it has on women to see themselves so frequently represented through the male gaze when it comes to films.

[@TheMediaInsider]

Excellent idea - I'll add it to the to-do list! Thanks

[@pincmin]

I was watching a tv live performance from the 60s, and from time to time the camera would show the audience to focus on attractive women and stay there until she realizes she's being captured by the camera, and I asked myself "are there even hot men in the audience and why can't we take a look at them?) This is what makes me mad, the inequality. I don't see anything wrong against sexualization; the problem with the sexualization of women in fiction is the objectification, the male gaze. They are accessories to the stories, they are there only for pure male entertainment. I think there was only one time I saw a successful sexualization of women where they still kept their agency and power, and it was in Faster Pussycat, Kill Kill. Tura Satana is the most voluptuous, powerful character in the movie. Her sexual power is intimidating, and of course, I see why that's problematic. When it comes to sexualized men in movies, it's hard to find them. When they have muscles, they're also cool and in control, idealized men for the male audience. There's only on example of this I can think of and is Kathryn Bigelow's Point Break, with Keanu and Patrick Swayze. They are sexualized as they should be, but they're also full rounded characters and not tame objects of desire. Before we cancel sexualization completely I would ask the industry to give some space for male sexualization, half of the population would appreciate it. thanks.

[@pincmin]

@@grimm3972 (the length and outrage in my original comment, I'm cringing). but yeah, good point, I've haven't noticed they do this on tv shows.

[@m.h.jafari8017]

I think Mulvey's theory goes beyond your social-ethical interpretation, It's more about cinematic form which has been dominated by male gaze, things like upward tilting or close ups or decoupage in general. Mulvey's only film (in cooperation with Peter Woolen) deploys some camera movements and cinematic effects which are obvious derivations from classic cinematic language and try to admit her views.

[@Krassoutsider]

So after your explanation the male gaze theory has been applied wrongly in the last two seminaries that I visited. I was confused on how some personal trainer referring to his clients' progress could be dismissed as "the male gaze", since the women chose to become fit in the first place. I guess you could dismiss the wrong application of the theory with: "If you don't want men to think you're sexy, then you don't have to appeal to the 'male gaze'." The second time it happened was after a video where the former president of Egypt Gamal Abdel Nasser laughed about the demands the Muslim Brotherhood made that the state had to legislate mandatory headscarfs for women. He basically said that he couldn't, even if he wanted to, referring to the outrage it would cause among the population (especially the women) at that time. He was accused of the "male gaze", because he had his own liberal ideas whether women should be forced to wear a headscarf or not. I mean, sure, criticize Egypt for not allowing women to vote around 53 and have a man that no woman could vote for make decisions for all women, but don't use a theory that doesn't apply. It could confuse people. Apart from that I disagree that "placing the men in the driver's seat" referring to the male characters in the movies reacting to arousing activities gives them any power. You can see that they are confused and often act stupid afterwards, which is clearly no basis of power. It's rather a tool for the woman to excercise her power over men. But yeah, of course it is pleasurable for a man to see this and you couldn't make this argument in the scenes without character interaction - There, it's simply eye candy. But then again, if you can equate male and female sexuality, then there are also plenty of examples where you can see a sexualized male body on screen which could lead to "enforce a 'matriarchal society'". If you can not equate them, then you obviously need another analytical tool, because the current one is rather lacking in that regard.

[@TheMediaInsider]

Totally see where you're coming from, but the truth is every single text has its own context, and application of this theory needs to be done while considering the unique elements in each text. For every valid example you can find of male gaze in action, there are just as many examples which contradict it - hence you get so many inaccurate applications of it I think!

[@danaaala-student4262]

Very helpful video. Should be shown in schools.

[@tricheh2323]

are there any ugly women playing lead roles ? ok then that explains it all unless talent only comes with attractiveness or maybe sexual appeal is in itself a talent

[@dekippiesip]

To be fair, they're not a whole lot of ugly guys playing lead roles either. Only in movies like Quasimodo where their ugliness is the primary part of the plot.

[@lorad.722]

@@dekippiesip false, 90% of lead actors look average.

[@umut967]

@@lorad.722 false. Also %90? Really? Sounds like butthurt. You can find the most handsome men in the Hollywood but if you want to see most beatiful women then you need to check supermodels,victoria secret models or instagram.

[@readmore4363]

@@umut967 not really I can name a lot of talented and beautiful women and men who are actors or directors in Hollywood, though whether someone is attractive is kind of a matter of opinion, and can vary from person to person.

[@umut967]

@@readmore4363 Yeah but %90 of lead actors don't look average for sure.

[@eduardopantoja9115]

Why not have a male protagonist who gets objectified to see what it would be like?

[@RapidBlindfolds]

Eduardo Pantoja Magic Mike

[@eduardopantoja9115]

Really how was the movie

[@joshs7160]

When men are objectified there aren't other sexist factors at play, an attractive man being looked at it is not in a vulnerable position, and women have no reason to believe they have a sense of entitlement over a man's sexuality, because the opposite is mostly true. When women are used as eye candy for men, it sends a very different message, that female sexuality is something that exists for a man's benefit, this is demeaning and cheapens her sexuality. It's the reason that we see female sexuality as inferior to that of a man's, women get fucked, men do the fucking, she's on her knees or with her legs wide open, while the male is in control, there's still a very sexist perception of women when it comes to sex, even to this day.

[@Nice-sz4ee]

Interested to hear your take on this. What about the female gaze (men being objectified in films and other forms of media)? Is it the same with the male gaze or does it lack some of the implications (men are in power when the women's presence is used as mere visual pleasure)?

[@TheMediaInsider]

Check out Van Zoonen - she argues that male objectification is more about glorifying male strength than sexual objectification

[@joshs7160]

Men are rarely sexually objectified in film, since other men don't want to see that, and even in something like Magic Mike, men simply aren't seen through the same kind of sexist lens that women are when they are displayed as sex objects for male pleasure. The same kind of social power than men have over women just doesn't exist when women do the looking toward men.

[@joshs7160]

@Robert Raghav their stimulation can definitely be physically oriented, depends on the guy, but you make a good point about bisexuality, women are as conditioned as men are to be attracted to women's bodies, including their own

[@ArthurD]

@@TheMediaInsider then so-called "male gaze" is simply glorifying of the female beauty! Why overcomplicate things? Why to look for someone guilty?

[@truth_seeker5]

Majority of men in this world are masculine and majority of women are feminine. Masculinity is connected with strength and feminity is connected with beauty. That's why men are objectified for their muscles and women are objectified for their boobs. The Ellen show is best at objectifying men, if you think all that is glorification of male strength, let Jimmy Kimmel glorify a female guest's body like how Ellen does with her male guests. Then there will be outrage from the feminists saying "women are not sex objects".

[@echelon2k8]

This is feminist theory, not actual science.

[@irrevenant3]

It's certainly culture studies rather than science. Do you disagree with the general point, though?

[@irrevenant3]

@Fried Vegetables I'm not sure what you mean. What's all speculation?

[@irrevenant3]

@Fried Vegetables Everything we experience has the potential to influence what we think to some extent or another. That's not speculation, it's well-established psychological knowledge.

[@nightshade7111]

It's pretty much a fact that most media, or the vast majority is produced by and for men. You'd have to live in a box not to see it.

[@irrevenant3]

@@nightshade7111 That's an oversimplification but largely true. A lot of people are at least *trying* to be inclusive, but when an industry is dominated by men (or people from a particular background, or...) then certain norms and expectations are gonna arise just by default, unintentionally. . The studies seem to be showing that businesses become better and more successful if they employ a wide variety of people. No specific actions required beyond that - new, inclusive and effective ideas and approaches seem to just naturally result from a wide variety of people interacting...

[@judahwainwright5829]

Media revision causes enough tension now this! im gonna have to buss rq before i move onto Van Zoonen

[@wendigodeadpatterson2514]

I don't think the "male gaze" in media has any affect on how women are treated or percieved. In fact there is an inverse correlation between sexualized media and poor treatment of women. Not only are crimes going down across the board, but all crimes against women are going down, nothing is stopping women from obtaining high responsibility roles in the workplace, men see women as equals.

[@emapple8298]

this comment tells me you're either really sheltered and ignorant, or a man

[@ArthurD]

@@emapple8298 did you just use "man" as an insult or as a label that means "you're insensitive to problems you can never feel"? Lol what a sexist piece of shit.

[@bethclarke8532]

Can the male gaze be applied to how men are objectified in the media?

[@startmakingsense2071]

Absolutely! Whether you pick either the sexualisation of womxn or the hyper-masculinisation of men, it serves the same purpose.

[@sircasino614]

My girlfriend wont stop gazing at thor whenever he's shirtless on screen... am I oppressed in a matriarchal society now? Or am I just being insecure like women are over the "male gaze"?

[@TheMediaInsider]

lol

[@bonoplayer99]

Cheers to that!

[@irrevenant3]

Is your girlfriend producing the vast majority of films and including shirtless Thor characters in most films whether it makes sense or not? If not, you're probably pretty safe from being oppressed by a matriarchal society...

[@nightshade7111]

Thor is still male gaze. He's a power fantasy for men to aspire too. The camera does not ogle him in a way to make him submissive. Plus, that's one (very bad) example out of literal thousands in reverse. There's a massive inbalance.

[@kellymanning3714]

:D

[@daredevilpwn]

I don't agree that this is objectification. Objectification is a form of dehumanization. Can anyone explain to me how portraying women as hot and desirable dehumanizing them in any way? Or here is an even better question. Does emphasising certain physical traits reduce them to only those traits? When the camera emphasis a woman's sex traits then it "reduces" them to only those traits. But if we apply this type of thinking to any other physical trait then the idea becomes stupid. If the camera emphasis a mans tallness then does that reduce him to a tall object? What if a character in a movie has a unique eye color and the camera lingers on the eye? Are they now reduced to just that trait now? Sounds stupid to me, and yet somehow when it comes to emphasizing a woman's breast or ass they are "reduced" to only being those things. This makes no sense to me. 3:15 This point is also something i disagree with. How exactly is a man doing nothing but looking at someone he likes putting him in a position of power? The clip that plays when you say this point shows both the dude and the girl looking at each other so why is the man the one in the position of power? 3:35: This seems like bullshit to me. Portraying women as desirable in media reinforces a patriarchal society? How? This makes no sense. This is almost on the same level as saying watching and playing violent media reinforces violence.

[@daisyc1741]

It reduces them because they are often not allowed any complexity or character development and only exist in order to show off their 'physical traits' like a walking cardboard cutout. A notable exception is Rey from the Star Wars sequels. She shows a range of emotion, struggle and backstory. Contrast this with Black Widow from the Marvel series of movies who is nothing but a 'sexy spy'. The problem with this is also that, whilst women's attractiveness is often emphasised in the media (e.g. camera lingering on breasts / butt), it is not done as often for men (how many times have you seen a shot linger on a man's ass?). This treats the heterosexual male perspetive as the most important, thus putting men in a position of power by reinforcing patriarchal ideals.

[@RapidBlindfolds]

Yep and at the clip in 3:12 she has clearly disarmed the man. He’s in a vulnerable position while she’s fixing HIS car. Instead of the male mechanic fixing the woman’s car. But I guess the MAN making this video was also too distracted by Megan Fox’s ass to notice that gender role subversion ;)

[@nunyadambidniss]

@@daisyc1741 Boy You'd HATE all The Titfuck Toys We have now :P Reducing A Female to just A HUGE PAir Of Tittys &making a PLEASURE Object out of'Em !! THE HORROR !!!

[@purusharthbhatt4374]

Saved me a day before test. thanks man

[@TheMediaInsider]

Hope it went well

[@ArthurD]

So, bullshit like this is the part of the education system somewhere in the world. I can only laugh, this era of politicized puritanism won't last long.

[@TheChannelofaDisappointedMan]

Matthew McConaughey must be a woman, given he completely meets the definition of a thing that speaks (occasionally).

[@nancyslator7444]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/jYGnmWljhbxjqrs

[@imajikui27]

I wanna ask you, what the different gender subjectivity and sexual difference? Please tell me.

[@maddiemorrismusic]

really helpful

[@Tipster49]

The Media Insider 🤔 LOTS of thoughts on this video! I scrolled through all the comments quickly and didn’t see any that mentioned what came to my mind immediately and throughout your video. I’m shocked 🙀 Okay, too many thoughts to probe and write here at the moment but I would love to send you a message as you mention in the video description box. Problem is, I don’t know how to message you?? I use my phone for everything. Perhaps on youtube in a browser on my macbook I would see a place to message a youtube content creator? idk 😏 btw subscribed 👍🏼😊 glad I came across your channel

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thanks! Curious to hear your thoughts - by all means, please post them on the video, and perhaps we can spark up some debate!

[@TheKlunk21]

Is there a female gaze? Could be an interesting topic to cover.

[@bazingaboosh]

a fish finger as big as a garage?

[@eloiseboutry8680]

Certainly is! kzbin.info/www/bejne/pp-lp6OmpNR3b6s

[@aliciadavey1484]

I believe mulveys wrote a follow up article to her original one that does talk about the female gaze. I think it was roughly women looking as they want to be the woman on screen, and women being forced to look at women in film through the male gaze

[@cybersphere]

The magic mike movies would suggest yes. Magic mike only cost $7 Million to make, yet collected $113 Million at the box office.

[@MirraHays]

cybersphere that was 1 movie...1... 1 movie. But how many movies contain females stripping?? Smh we need more movies like Magic Mike!

[@etsukoaurora]

i legit just got forced to watch this but i mean valid points

[@BurgahBoyy]

MDSA01?

[@mesmeriffic]

As if men aren't objectified either, e.g. all of sports, superhero movies, chick flicks like Magic Mike. Literally the first example with Barbarella has the men wearing even less. Boring feminist drivel.

[@joshs7160]

You literally don't understand anything about sexism if you think men being objectified is even remotely as harmful or problematic.

[@joshs7160]

@mrlnwrld I should not need to explain why it's clearly more demeaning to women than men, it's fucking obvious.

[@khugins]

women are also gazing at women, I would say you should add that to the gaze in films, because we always also notice the hyper sexualized woman

[@HollyCDesigns]

Brilliant, enlightening and balanced points.

[@AnastasiaBelova27]

Смотря эти фильмы, "мальчики учатся быть мужчинами", и в это же время девочки учатся быть объектами.

[@TheAnadromist]

Good explanation, bad theory. The whole 'male gaze' theory does nothing to explain the meaning of body itself. Nor does it help to explain either the beauty, nor the horror of the body. I think the more traditional distinction between lust and love is far more helpful.

[@joshs7160]

Male gaze is perfectly accurate, and while on an individual basis it's purely biology, going out of your way to show women in media as objects to be looked at sexually for male pleasure is blatantly sexist, and sends a very damaging message about female sexuality, it just perpetuates sexist ideals. Objectification is a society wide problem, not an individual problem, on an individual level it's just biology, sexism is the determining factor after that.

[@Pandemonius88]

Such a click bait title, do we even have to ask that? >_>

[@bobray7036]

If anyone's wondering if this has been overcome, look at the contrast between the audience reception and critical reception of Last of Us 2 lmfao. As a straight guy even I can see the bias of the gaze still has its hooks in it. Last of Us 2 is amazing, yet the harsh backlash from the audience because the females in it generally aren't fitting the hetero-normative narrative or visuals they like just show there's progress but we're not there.

[@jetqq7411]

Oh shut up sjw . You ruined the last of us franchise i hope you are happy now

[@elainenilsson5472]

Thank you so much for this video. It explains a lot without a lot of bla bla, shaming and finger pointing

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thanks for watching!

[@riahhhhh500]

This automatically made me think of Pam Grier nd how she was oversexualized in films even while being a gr8 example of a black woman who is v strong and fights against odds

[@alanhobbs5000]

What’s the game of the woman with the accent in the first video game he uses

[@bigTonyBalloney]

A bit hypocritical the whole video was sex sells

[@adamheeley285]

No it doesnt hurt anyone. There are movies for women that do the same thing to men. Magic mike or any chick flick. It is just what women find sexy is different then men. So yeah, if you look at movies you have to look at the full scope, not just James Bond.....

[@joshs7160]

It's very much harmful, it's literally institutionalized sexism.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@joshs7160 You are not as smart as you THINK you are.

[@ifrah9545]

@@liampatrick3110 neither are you

[@liampatrick3110]

@@ifrah9545 Look who's talking

[@OokyDaniel]

I don't accept Mulveys theory, because she completely rejects the idea of a female or queer gaze, which arguably exist in texts like Call Me by Your Name, Shortbus, Magic Mike etc. Also, Mulvey's theory discusses psychoanalysis with women being jealous of men's penises, and film studies is the only subject that stills accepts Freud as credible, psychologists don't even accept Freudian psychoanalysis...

[@loudmouthandall7261]

Mulvey wrote her original paper in the 1970s, way before the movies you posted.

[@nightshade7111]

The fact is those "gazes" are much, much rarer. We're talking about the system as a whole.

[@RapidBlindfolds]

Rose Bud exactly, it’s dinosauric and heteronormative. Should be taken off the feminist shelves!

[@liampatrick3110]

@@loudmouthandall7261 What difference does that make?

[@MrWatsonComeHere]

In the real world, real men are attracted to real women. They look, peek, glare, stare, linger and comment. But the big or small screen be different?

[@vince-1337]

The male brain has a sexual pursuit zone 2.5 times more active than the female brain. Take video games, the conclusion for studios is simple and quick to attract a large audience (most gamers are still men, despite the democratization of the subject over the last ten years). So I think the truth is not far from being the same for movies.

[@TheMediaInsider]

That’s a scary statistic! I wonder how it varies across male age ranges!?

[@vince-1337]

@@TheMediaInsider Yep, This is a study by Louann Brizendine (Professor of University of San Francisco) if you want more details

[@adrianafischetti_art]

Good video. No question the films of Hollywood reinforce patriarchy.

[@xxxmims]

Where does unrealistic body image fit in with this like the Barbie figure if it's not the female form then it can't be subjective to women or can it I'm not sure?

[@pedrorecomenda]

no your a hundered percent right

[@liampatrick3110]

No he isn't

[@dragonskunkstudio7582]

Men are driven by beauty of curves and shapes depicted in art like sculptures and design. And it's not for some strange coincidence that we do like such things and that women also have those appealing shapes as well.

[@TheMediaInsider]

Agreed it is genetic - a primal desire - but needs to work appropriately in modern society too

[@dragonskunkstudio7582]

Imagine a world where everyone were always appropriate, what a horrifying nightmareish world that would be.

[@sincethedawn8184]

Dragon Skunk That is an excuse for a lot of horrible things.

[@irrevenant3]

@@dragonskunkstudio7582 We're a looooooong way from such a world. That's something we should probably consider if we risk ever getting close to one, though.

[@Madi-dt7bo]

This guy looks like a young, skinny louis CK

[@smthngintherain]

Majority of 21st century films are still made with male gaze.

[@liampatrick3110]

And there's nothing wrong with that.

[@smthngintherain]

@@liampatrick3110 there is literally absolutely everything wrong with that, did you not see the video?

[@liampatrick3110]

@@smthngintherain I did, and everything said within it based simply off of FEMINIST THEORY.

[@smthngintherain]

@@liampatrick3110 bc feminism is correct. Do you understand how violent the male gaze could be not only towards women, but also men in our society?

[@liampatrick3110]

@@smthngintherain Feminism is TOXIC nowadays, and I'm saying this as an equalist.

[@Acropof]

Could it be argued that equality has been "achieved" (sorry for literal air-quotes) by the objectification of both sexes. Yes, comic-book movies hypersexualise the female form and act as unrealistic body role-models for women and titillate men, but the same is increasingly true of male characters. Chris Hemsworth et al have raised the bar for men to unattainable levels as well as raising expectations for women. Equality, it seems, has been reached by dropping to a lower common denominator. That said, films of this genre are fantasy and sexual fantasies are base-line instincts and as such profitable. Your videos, Mr. Insider, help to raise awareness and thus reduce susceptibility. I don't think you are suggesting that we cannot enjoy such films. in fact, your even-handed approach has no ethical commentary. But, for those who are not following a media studies course, the value of awareness could be to not allow their influence to spill into real life perceptions.

[@nikhil16796]

Super Video.Keep it up...

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thanks

[@Shadowrider1032]

Music list?

[@vitoyoung6198]

Could u please tell me what's the name of the video which starting at 2:20?

[@TheMediaInsider]

Who framed roger rabbit?

[@vitoyoung6198]

Thanks a lot.

[@nunyadambidniss]

Here Ya go Bro :) kzbin.info/www/bejne/jnLRf6mki859ptE

[@alisonrock2891]

Brilliant

[@TheMediaInsider]

You reckon?! Thanks!

[@squamish4244]

Hollywood producers should be told to back off on the objectification of women and throw some objectification of men in there that makes it about equal, but less for both.

[@yangatyobela2584]

Thank you sir ..that really helped me

[@TheMediaInsider]

Most welcome!

[@thehellinsidemyhead]

What's the movie at 1:09?

[@hamza.h2893]

Omari Obayashi Hannie Caulder

[@thehellinsidemyhead]

thanks.

[@unrequitedtoaster8658]

This happens vice-versa yet why do people feel less sympathy for men when being objectified?

[@liampatrick3110]

"It's only sexist when men do it." - Feminists.

[@joshs7160]

@@liampatrick3110 You understand literally nothing about sexism if you don't understand why one is very different from the other.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@joshs7160 Maybe I don't, but don't you dare disregard the reality that men have been objectified just as much (if not, more than) women have been.

[@joshs7160]

@@liampatrick3110 Men being sexually objectified is a worthless notion, given that men aren't seen as inferior just for being sexually desirable.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@joshs7160 Whatever, soyboy.

[@TheTheTheDarius]

4:43 What is name of this movie ?

[@WizKickzsports]

Star trek into darkness

[@gandydancer9710]

Movies and video games aren't "texts".

[@MichaelSOlan]

I find this topic very interesting! I'm not sure I fully agree but I would love to further this conversation if you're open to the communication

[@mycelialgoddess]

Do. Not. Bring the Witcher into this shit. Idgaf about any of this, but the Witcher is separate. On separate note, it’s the weirdest fucking thing to have a dude tell me about the dangers of the patriarchy and a chick tell me how spreading the idea of patriarchy is the only thing that actually perpetuates it.

[@heroprime7599]

It's just a game and people can talk about it all they want to. Grow up. BTW, it's not weird for a man to talk about this because it's not just something for women to be aware of.

[@tinelle100]

thank you sooo much for this

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thank you sooo much!

[@matthewwinnard9818]

Antineil Blackman but these celebs have agreed to be sexualized

[@nightshade7111]

@@matthewwinnard9818 Missing the point entirely. Men would too given half a chance. It's the sturcture, not the individual agreement.

[@necaacen]

its not hard to find a strong unsexualised leading female... yep thats true, and its not hard to find a half naked sexualised man in a movie or advertisement either. Try making a conscious effort to note every time you see a hunky guy with his shirt off in the media, when you start looking youll find that theyre everywhere. People are sexualised, the male form has been subject to this going all the way back to greek statues, it will never stop, and thats fine. The problem is when thats all women are there for, and thankfully weve made massive progress in that area.

[@joshs7160]

Men can't be objectified in the same way that women are because men hold the social power.

[@liampatrick3110]

@@joshs7160 Bullshit

[@joshs7160]

@@liampatrick3110 just common sense

[@liampatrick3110]

@@joshs7160 No, it's a double standard.

[@joshs7160]

@@liampatrick3110 It's not a double standard, it's just reality, men aren't objectified the same way women are because men are the hunters and women are the prey. How is this complicated for you, like at all?

[@psfreak333]

Think this guy is projecting his own thoughts....who walks away from movies and think that these women aren't "leaders, villains, heros"....sure there are sexual suggestive scenes but that can go both ways and its largely harmless. You get to see someone briefly half nude and then you move on....its not this profound statement that lingers throughout the movie. Also simply finding someone attractive and gazing at them is in a way putting them up on a pedestal so it only makes that character have one more additional trait that makes them great. Also even if you take it out of movies people still do it just walking around day to day......we like to look at things we find attractive just don't add more significance to it than just that. Its not reducing them to only that quality....if you think that's the take away people get from movies man your wayyyy off the mark.

[@xxxmims]

How come people never talk about male objectification does anybody remember He-Man the cartoon series how much clothing did he wear and that was a cartoon show for kids boy bands with their shirts open or male rock stars with tight pants on

[@irrevenant3]

People talk about male objectification. It's just far, far less common than female objectification - and it's that imbalance that people consider the problem, not just that male gaze exists. re: He-Man you also have to take into account how things are framed. Chris Hemsworth taking his shirt off in Thor is female gaze because both the character and the camera are checking him out - the overall feel of the scene is "Wow, he's *fine"*. Similarly the way the camera looks at Edward Cullen in Twilight is from a "Ooh, he's so pretty!" perspective. Conversely, Wonder Woman has an island full of scantily-clad women and it's not male gaze because the camera isn't checking their bodies out. Compare the way the camera looks at Wonder Woman in the Wonder Woman film vs the way it looks at the exact same character wearing the exact same outfit in Justice League or Batman v Superman. He-Man is similarly not a case of female gaze because the show doesn't *sexualise* the way he's dressed. His physique and outfit aren't portrayed in a sexy way, they're portrayed as representing physical strength and power. He-Man is there for the audience to look up to, and wish they were that physically powerful. He's not there for them to ogle. Lots of childrens cartoons have characters that are scantily clad or wearing tight outfits without it being sexualised for obvious reasons.

[@belenc.l9773]

I don't disagree but remember She-ra?

[@BasSoldaat]

There will always be difference. Just as men will never be able to give birth to a child or know what menstruation feels like, and women will never be able to know what an erection feels like or be physically equaly strong as men. These differences make it impossible to create a society that treats men and women exactly the same. Equal rights and wages, yes ofcourse this must be the same worldwide. It's terrible that this isn't the case. But please lets all not forget that men and women have completely different hormones. And this didn't just happen.. Look at history. Men hunted and fought wars, women took care of the family. Me and my wife, we both promissed eachother before mariage we would always make sure our relationship would always remain equal in all possible ways. This really helps.. Talk to eachother and most of all listen to eachother. We're now married for six years and have three great kids. Three boys, who all learn from us to treat people equal. But not the same. I'm not my wife, and she's not me. We both couldn't fill eachothers shoes.

[@nightshade7111]

What has this got to do with the male gaze? Women get aroused, our clits swell. You're acting like women don't have a sexuality without addressing the fact that our sexuality isn't encouraged but we're instead treated like a product. History is one thing, but it's an entirely different world now. They hold no necessity. We're more similar than different. That is a fact.

[@BasSoldaat]

@@nightshade7111 Yes, we are more similar than different. But we're not the same. We should be treated the same, we just are not the same. I hope you understand my point on that. I'm sorry if you, Kittens, feel treated like a product in your country/society.

[@joshs7160]

We can still be treated equally while not being the same, sexism is the reason for most forms of sexual objectification toward women, and a lack of respect toward female sexuality fuels things like slut shaming. If men understood why sexism still exists, and why a woman's role (assuming hetero couple) during sex shouldn't be any less valid than a man's, albeit different, then maybe we can actually get somewhere when it comes to social equality.

[@FeralLogic]

Women get treated as sexual object - fairly often and mostly during their youth. Men get treated as walking wallets more often and throughout their lives. Fair, right?

[@noelle5128]

I would disagree. I think it's a bit like comparing apples to oranges because they are both separate issues. I would argue that women are presumed to be eyeing men's pockets just as often as they are sexualized, giving women the shorter end of the stick.

[@FeralLogic]

@@noelle5128 They are in no way separate issues. It's all about what the sexes look at in a sexual partner. Man are hardwired to gauge a woman by her sexual potential. In truth a man really needs very little else from a woman. Similarly, women look at men in their capacity to provide. Unfortunately, that includes a whole laundry list of items from genetics to being a higher earner. The similarity comes thus: that the greater HER sexual potential and the greater HIS earning potential the more likely the respective opposite sex is to forgive a lack of other qualifying traits.

[@RapidBlindfolds]

Yep. I also imagine that the male corollary to the Madonna/Whore complex for women, where they’re easy if they put out but prudes if they don’t, would be the Bad Boy/Nice Guy complex for men. If a guy asserts too much masculinity and dominance he’s a douche but if he doesn’t assert any he’s not sexy, he gets kicked to the curb, and only ever seen as a friend.

[@joshs7160]

That logic is also in relation to sexism.

[@liampatrick3110]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/b6u8mWqPmJ2eq68

[@davemonika5009]

Does your thumbnail choice of two buxom, bikini-clad women (clic-bait?) in one of your most viewed videos help answer your question as to whether women are still objectified? 😉

[@NotStanley-td5nn]

As a man i wholeheartedly disagree. First of all if a woman wants to be unattractive to both men and women, she is absolutely free to do so - there is no law in any country that she would break by being ugly or unappealing; in fact there are places in the world where this sort of thing is even culturally encouraged, such as wearing a burqa, a hijab, etc - unfortunately (or fortunately) here in the more liberal society where people make their own choices women tend to not do this at all, they strive to look good instead. Imagine the audacity. However, not getting the acting gig in a movie as an unattractive person is a product of her not valuing herself as a woman worthy of being praised for her looks (the fact that women always try to look beautiful is not something that started in the 20th century, it is a biological fact, and as old as time) - if she values her intellect or something else above her looks, that's completely fine - she is completely free to write a book or draw a painting or do literally anything else, and stay away from the camera. That is not men being shallow, that is a severe lack of common sense and self-awareness on the part of this woman. I mean really.. are we really expected to believe that this historically male dominated field (as all others) has produced an overly sexualized view of women throughout media, and that this is some kind of a horrible outcome that misrepresents in media an otherwise completely unsexual creature (female (btw what even is that these days..?))? maybe we are to also think that all of these women playing along with this charade for a full century of film and photography with no voluntary nature of following their own appeal of good looking women, and trying to mimic a likeness that they enjoy? No? women liking other healthy good looking women and trying to be like them isn't a thing that exists? it's all just us disgusting perverted men that gave some kind of social value to only the good looking women? ah, ok, got it, thanks. I think this is yet another line in an already very long list of reasons why feminists are insane and slowly ruining the world. Here's another question for you feminists - why is it that young women (teenagers, young adults, and adults not in "professional dress") tend to dress in a way that exposes a lot of their body, even around their parents, and even when there's no camera in sight?! And when asked as to why they do this they always respond with "why not? i like it, what's the big deal? I look good and i want to show it off" rather than "well you see historically it's all the disgusting male perverts in media production and the whole patriarchy that have led to this, and now wearing barely anything is the only way i can make a living". It's kind of strange, but i've heard the former a damn near 100% of the time, and the latter I have yet to hear even once. I'm sure your equal rights feminist brains can come up with an explanation to this that can reasonably place all of the blame on men somehow as usual, and I for one am all ears, and I can't wait for if/when you will get yet another of these amazing theories.

[@reshmawinnymathew4955]

Great going...

[@gigapeut8810]

It really helped me to understand what male gaze is. I am Spanish and I dont have a really good english listening skills, but i could undetstand everything. However, i don't agree with you when you say that male gaze reinforces a patriarchal system, because it does not exist. And you talked about videogames ._. Do not touch videogames.

[@zeddy2284]

lmao

[@elenavitkovska1434]

*sighs*

[@ragerawke4818]

Objectification works more then just sexually. What about male 2 female death ratio on screen? how many men get injured as stunt double? can someone give me a number or % comparison on that

[@durkadurkdaniel5013]

What movie is 2:02?

[@cornishiron]

How could someone presenting themselves as an expert on film technique employ such a ridiculously irrelevant musical soundtrack.

[@Frosty-273]

Totally agree with this video, i do think this is a big issue in society since it was first introduced anyone that disagrees with this or thinks it is right are a beta version of humanity. Keep up the great content

[@robertbrownjr2123]

Oh my god our heads are far too big!!

[@leeeastwood6368]

so widen the doors!

[@timvb8671]

Men like looking to attractive females? Stop the presses!

[@MsSmashone]

Women like looking at hot men but there is a difference in appreciating the female anatomy and viewing women as objects for sexual use only.

[@juhanivirtanen3438]

Women objectify differently. Successful men are objects for women to climb on social ladder.

[@trigrrug]

@@juhanivirtanen3438 that doesn't make any sense. If that were true movies would be filled with successful, strong, leader type men... Oh wait.

[@irrevenant3]

Was that really the only thing you took away from that video?

[@nightshade7111]

@@juhanivirtanen3438 Completely different thing. That (if it were true) is entirely non-sexual or objectifying.

[@charlotterichardson653]

thanks very informative quick lesson was helpful x

[@TheMediaInsider]

Happy to help!

[@theninkyn0nk463]

I'm sorry but all you need to do is look at the new Tik Tok craze to see that men don't even need to be around for a lot of women to objectify themselves.

[@Krwler]

Oliver Coulon well said. And all the onlyfans accounts that exploded recently.

[@aabracadavra]

You've just presented the symptom of the problem. This is exactly why the male gaze needs to be "denormalized". Because those young girls on TikTok have been brought up in this very system that presents patriarchy and the male gaze as the default points of reference in most mediums of creation. Yes.. it's so bad and so ingrained in society that men don't even need to be around for it to happen anymore, because they've been doing it so consistently that teens and young adult females actually perceive themselves in that same manner.

[@theninkyn0nk463]

@@aabracadavra I don't think girls have been brought up this way. Take your grandmother, then your mother for example. I'm willing to bet none of them would have been twerking on tik tok if it was around then. It's not like men have made women have to appeal to them more as time has gone on, in fact I'd say the opposite. It seems that the more women are emancipated, the more they objectify themselves of their own free will. (obviously I can't generalize, but it's still a huge proportion of young women today). And will you really tell me that Cardi B's performance at the grammy's was female empowerment? Women are calling it that! Not men! Anyway we're bound to disagree. As a man, I can tell you that for me personally and every other man I know, we have no control over how women show themselves on screen or tik tok.

[@aabracadavra]

@@theninkyn0nk463Exactly... my mother and grandmother are appalled at this type of behavior AND at modern media. They were raised in communism, you would have had 0 chances of seeing a naked woman on tv, and promiscuity was barely heard of and looked down upon back then. After 1989, along with the rise of democracy, cinematography started implementing the male gaze more freely, and the internet was slowly becoming available to the general public which meant.. access to more male gaze driven media. Now it's almost impossible to watch something without seeing women being objectified and sexualized. And naturally.. it started showing in the modern behavior of young women, too.

[@theninkyn0nk463]

@@aabracadavra I would say to that that the proof is in the pudding people like yourself (I assume) and your mother and grandmother are not affected by the male gaze as you say you'd women nowadays are. Considering that not everyone, especially women respond to this makes me doubt that this is a social construct a century in the making. I feel like it's a gross over simplification to imply that some of today's youth act the way they do not of their own free will but of men and the way we make them think they should be. We mustn't forget that despite what people say, the average person has never been more free, has never had more rights and opportunities (there are of course exceptions but overall it's undeniable). Could this behavior not have something to do with libiterianism becoming more and more the norm? After all the male gaze when it started was literally just "eye candy for men". Nice dresses, societal roles that were expected from women at the time. It was a way to pleasure men, but not a way to disrespect women. I'm not denying that it has existed and does still now to a certain degree, just in a lot less objectifying and disrespectful way. (just wanna say I'm really enjoying this discussion, it's nice and civilized even though we disagree. So thanks!)

[@soko.7342]

Woah very good vid

[@TheMediaInsider]

Well thank you!

[@BingleFlimp]

Did you really try and use a clip of Emily Blunt in "Edge of tomorrow" to enforce your point of men asserting power over women? "Edge of Tomorrow"? Where there is a montage of Blunt's character killing the main character over and over again every time he fucks up? You're right that is one subserviant woman.

[@TheMediaInsider]

I never said that. I was using that example of a specific shot that panned across her body as if the camera was the heterosexual male eye. Also, I’m not Laura Mulvey, I just teach her theory in the media studies curriculum.

[@ottoman_reenactor_ct]

Jyn Erso as a stong lead Ahem but no princess leia!!??? well for return of the jedi yeah that golden bikini was a strange decesion :) by the way good thing you added Ripley. but remember the panties scene in the 1979. (however the edge of darkness scene does not fit) Video Games and Comics do makes sense since the characters are not real people and for most casses avarage humans :) Also Japanse made games do go that route because of the whole anime style

[@dvduadotcom]

The gold bikini was not a strange decision, she was a slave to Jabba the Hut who dressed her that way. It's not like it was just in the movie with no point.

[@ottoman_reenactor_ct]

Jonathan Berman well when you put it that way it is true :)

[@irrevenant3]

Princess Leia was progressive for the time, but she pretty quickly got relegated to being support for the men's plots after the initial rescue (as did Padme after TPM come to think of it. Hmm.)

[@somewherelongago]

The male gaze theory is generally true in 1920-50s Hollywood movies where the female characters are often written without any agency except being a selling point for male audiences. But the theory (or at least how it was interpreted) contains one major flaw, that sexualization doesn't equal objectification, nor does it even leads to so. This was extremely ironic since the theory was written during the New Hollywood movement when there were countless films with sexualized but authentic female characters such as Bonnie & Clyde, Cabaret or Carrie. Producers and directors might needlessly sexualize a female character to receive more male audiences, but that doesn't necessarily say anything about the depiction of the characters themselves (look at Khalesi). However, it can get complicated sometimes when the visual language completely overshadows the writer's intentions. Lindsay Ellis actually made a great video on this, she analyzed how Megan Fox's character in the Transformers movies was originally written with somewhat good intentions but ended up being a portrayed as a sex trophy instead. So, while I disagree with the male gaze theory, I do think that there is an extent (a very large one) in which it stands correctly.

[@joshs7160]

No, sexualization is more often than not going to be used as a tool to appease men, the same is still true today.

[@marcusstrayham]

They got paid $$ so fair play you got what you wanted which is money and I got what I paid for the oldest profession in the world

[@MrTheclevercat]

This was painful to watch.

[@TheMediaInsider]

Thanks for watching!