The Female Gaze

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

The only thing I'm sure of is the title of my previous post: "I probably can't respond intelligibly without being labeled a sexist trog."

It's weird to me that opening up and truth-telling like I did would immediately be denigrated (or at best satirized), but that's the world we live in.

You haven't been labeled a sexist trog - at least not by me. There was nothing sexist about your posts.

It was, however, a post all about your conviction that people everywhere you go find you so incredibly physically attractive that they suddenly don't know how to handle themselves. "Opening up" generally means you're exposing some vulnerability, and talking about what a stud you believe yourself to be generally doesn't count. "Truth-telling?" Perhaps you view it that way.

I assure you, though, that nothing about my response had anything to do with your gender or the gender of those you believe to be hopelessly entranced by your looks.

 

[MetaBob]

You haven't been labeled a sexist trog - at least not by me. There was nothing sexist about your posts.

It was, however, a post all about your conviction that people everywhere you go find you so incredibly physically attractive that they suddenly don't know how to handle themselves. "Opening up" generally means you're exposing some vulnerability, and talking about what a stud you believe yourself to be generally doesn't count. "Truth-telling?" Perhaps you view it that way.

I assure you, though, that nothing about my response had anything to do with your gender or the gender of those you believe to be hopelessly entranced by your looks.

Naw, I'm no stud. That'd be a totally different thing. Do I think that

people everywhere *I* go find *me* so incredibly physically attractive that they suddenly don't know how to handle themselves

? No, I don't. Sometimes it happens, and it's always weird for me when it does, but sometimes it happens. It's real. Reverse the pronouns in my original post and realize how creepy it would then sound, but it comes from the same place, I think: visual objectification. A "Gaze."

Have people been

hopelessly entranced by *my* looks

, as you claim? I have no idea, though I expect your criticisms are deliberate exaggerations. I certainly never claimed that anyone was "hopelessly entranced by *my* looks", I only wrote my true personal experiences, which I've never done about this subject, or anything like it, before. Are they generalizable? I have no idea, but I suspect so, for some. 'What is the Female Gaze?' was the thrust of the OP's post, and if so, how's it different from a "Male Gaze"?

What do you think?

was the OP's question. I answered with real-life experiences of what I believe to be examples of the "Female Gaze." Yes, I regard that as "truth-telling." I obviously didn't expect to not be doubted or even vilified.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

Naw, I'm no stud. That'd be a totally different thing. Do I think that ? No, I don't. Sometimes it happens, and it's always weird for me when it does, but it happens. It's real. Reverse the pronouns in my original post and realize how creepy it would then sound, but it comes from the same place, I think: visual objectification. A "Gaze."

Have people been , as you claim? I have no idea, though I expect your criticisms are deliberate exaggerations. I certainly never claimed that anyone was "hopelessly entranced by *my* looks", I only wrote my true personal experiences, which I've never done about this subject, or anything like it, before. Are they generalizable? I have no idea, but I suspect so, for some. 'What is the Female Gaze?' was the thrust of the OP's post, and if so, how's it different from a "Male Gaze"?

was the OP's question. I answered with real-life experiences of what I believe to be examples of the "Female Gaze." Yes, I regard that as "truth-telling." I obviously didn't expect to not be doubted or even vilified.

"Vilified" is a bit grandiose. I poked a bit of fun at your vanity about your appearance. It has nothing to do with your gender and I was not addressing your take on the "female gaze."

I think you're mistaken about what's meant by "female gaze," as what you're describing would be the masculine gaze but held by a woman. That would be true even if you ruled out the possibility that you're projecting a masculine gaze on the women you believe pay so much attention to your appearance. Masculine and feminine gazes are not mirror images of each other, as the OP pointed out.

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not women respond to you in the way they say you do. It doesn't matter. I will explain why I poked fun at your vanity. It started in the second sentence of your post, in which you say you are used your seeing your landlady "go slack-jawed and unable to speak upon seeing me in my shorts and running shoes, still shiny from sweat." From there, we go on to bringing her "female friend" over so that they can both ogle you. Then there's the knockout volleyball player who undresses you with her eyes, not to mention several other women who suggested they wanted to have sex with you after seeing you play volleyball.

Then we go all the way back to the popular cheerleader in high school hitting on you, leading to the NFL cheerleader who came onto you. No convenient segue this time, but from there, it's the woman in the elevator literally stopping the elevator and throwing herself on you. There are the female cyclists who race up to you just to start a conversation. It doesn't end there. Everywhere you go (the grocery store, the parking lot, restaurants, shops), you have to run a gauntlet of women deliberately blocking your path and staring at you.

Perhaps what's truly amazing is that "Every single one of these women was young and flat-out gorgeous..." Only young, gorgeous women are attracted to you? So we're not really talking about the female gaze, then. We're talking about the gaze of women you find attractive, and you believe that gaze to be turned approvingly on your looks. Of course, you mention that you were on the front page of a dating service, too, presumably because you are so attractive, but I'm not sure how that's even tangentially related to the "female gaze."

Is it vilifying you to give you a hard time about your perception that you're the object of (attractive) female desire everywhere you go? I don't think so. There's nothing that rises to the level of villainy here. It's comedic or disturbing, depending on one's take. Even if everything you said were one hundred percent accurate, it would be a bizarrely boastful recitation.

This is Lit. We can all present ourselves any way we choose. If you do choose to present yourself the way you have, you should probably be prepared for some ribbing over your ego. It's got nothing to do with your gender. It's got nothing to do with what your attitude towards women might be.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think you're mistaken about what's meant by "female gaze," as what you're describing would be the masculine gaze but held by a woman. That would be true even if you ruled out the possibility that you're projecting a masculine gaze on the women you believe pay so much attention to your appearance. Masculine and feminine gazes are not mirror images of each other, as the OP pointed out.

That's an interesting subtlety. I wrote this a couple of days ago in my latest:

My eyes narrowed ever so slightly as I processed the surety in her look. She was a woman used to the male gaze, and a woman who gave it right back.

which catches the same idea.

The thing I quite like about the female gaze, especially from older women, is that it can be very frank and unabashed. They declare a visual interest without stuffing about. Although, based on this commentary, that might not be a feminine gaze as seems to be defined here.

And what was it, when as a young, blond, blue eyed surfer boy, I got the occasional look from older gay men? Those days are long gone - but I got chatted up in a uni bookshop once and ended up talking about Marianne Faithfull's Broken English, hahaha.

 

[stickygirl]

The expression female gaze was a play on words taken from Laura Mulvey’s essay written in 1975 Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. It should have been apparent that simply flipping the gender means it falls into its own trap. In another post I link to a video where the author uses a title Feminine Gaze, but I’m not sure that’s right either.

Hanging a gender label onto this is intentionally provocative: it’s a generalisation. It is not a generalisation to note that in 2018, 90% of film directors were male.

Men are not being asked to change their creative process or the way they work or make films, because men have done some good work . They are being asked to stop assuming their way is the only way, to the exclusion of female creativity. In all the interviews and reading I’ve researched, women are not sulking or being petulant: they’re frustrated that their offer of exciting and innovative perspectives are being lost in the Hollywood juggernaut, where the money goes on safe, well-tried formats. There’s a better party up the street.

What about writing? Do we need more fiction written from a female point of view. Should frowning authors tap their pen to their lip and ask “Is that chapter female gaze enough?” No, unless it were a challenge for academic purposes. We write from the hip and to attempt to write proscriptively is likely to appear disingenuous. The gender balance amongst authors is in line with demographics and so is the readership.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

The expression female gaze was a play on words taken from Laura Mulvey’s essay written in 1975 Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. It should have been apparent that simply flipping the gender means it falls into its own trap. In another post I link to a video where the author uses a title Feminine Gaze, but I’m not sure that’s right either.

Hanging a gender label onto this is intentionally provocative: it’s a generalisation. It is not a generalisation to note that in 2018, 90% of film directors were male.

Men are not being asked to change their creative process or the way they work or make films, because men have done some good work . They are being asked to stop assuming their way is the only way, to the exclusion of female creativity. In all the interviews and reading I’ve researched, women are not sulking or being petulant: they’re frustrated that their offer of exciting and innovative perspectives are being lost in the Hollywood juggernaut, where the money goes on safe, well-tried formats. There’s a better party up the street.

What about writing? Do we need more fiction written from a female point of view. Should frowning authors tap their pen to their lip and ask “Is that chapter female gaze enough?” No, unless it were a challenge for academic purposes. We write from the hip and to attempt to write proscriptively is likely to appear disingenuous. The gender balance amongst authors is in line with demographics and so is the readership.

Odd that success of female novelists hasn't reassured Hollywood that investing in projects by women is safe.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

That's an interesting subtlety. I wrote this a couple of days ago in my latest:

which catches the same idea.

The thing I quite like about the female gaze, especially from older women, is that it can be very frank and unabashed. They declare a visual interest without stuffing about. Although, based on this commentary, that might not be a feminine gaze as seems to be defined here.

And what was it, when as a young, blond, blue eyed surfer boy, I got the occasional look from older gay men? Those days are long gone - but I got chatted up in a uni bookshop once and ended up talking about Marianne Faithfull's Broken English, hahaha.

I think you can look at it from different angles, but the way the concept came about was to examine how art was created when it was created by women, thus capturing things the way a woman looked at them. I think the concept shifts the emphasis to the act of observing and interpreting through cinematography, art, writing, ,etc. - the process that goes through the artist's mind - rather than the way subject of the observation or the interpretation of the artist.

In your example, I think capturing the female gaze would mean describing the man in your example the woman saw him and would describe him, and the same would be true of interactions. If she is looking at him the way a man would look at a romantic interest, she is arguably replicating male gaze. Women can generally mimic or even adopt male gaze quite easily because we're quite well instructed in it. So, I guess the question would be whether the female character is adopting the mannerisms of a man, such as duration and type of eye contact, and continuing to actually see him in a way that might be more typical of women, or if she has adopted both the mannerisms and the point of view.

The way I apply the male gaze is writing is that when I'm writing the thoughts of my male character, I'm writing them based on how men express themselves in my personal experience, what I've seen on TV and in movies, and what I've read. I don't stop and think about it. I'm very familiar with it and that's just how I write it naturally. It's most apparent in sex scenes, not surprisingly. I do find that when trying to describe thoughts about emotions, I sometimes resort to writing internal dialog about things I've never heard a man discuss. So, I'm guessing at the thoughts. They're probably pretty good guesses because I have a lot to base them on, but since there are some things that men rarely discuss, I have blind spots in my male gaze.

Trying to take the concept and apply it to individual examples tends to reduce it to something that's not terribly useful. It is based on generalizations and is therefore more suitable for application in the general sense.

In the part you cited, I was doing a poor job of explaining what I meant. I was trying to say that even if that was an example of male gaze/female gaze, he would have it wrong because one isn't the mirror image of the other. But I don't think that's really the sort of thing the concept is intended to encompass. He was talking about his interpretation of how women purportedly look at him. Whether their behavior is masculine or feminine is really not addressing female gaze because we are not seeing him how the women see him. We are seeing how he thinks women see him.

I think that as a concept, it's very useful for understanding that there are differences in perspectives and that it does matter who is put behind the camera. I think it's easy to stretch it too far. I definitely don't have a firm handle on it myself. I just recognize that the differences exist.

 

[AlinaX]

I find that labelling things as 'male' or 'female' is inevitably unhelpful. Even describing certain traits and behaviours as such is a recipe for injury.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

I find that labelling things as 'male' or 'female' is inevitably unhelpful. Even describing certain traits and behaviours as such is a recipe for injury.

I don't disagree, but then, how do we refer to it? How do we say there's a perspective that's not being shown because women are missing from the equation?

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think that as a concept, it's very useful for understanding that there are differences in perspectives and that it does matter who is put behind the camera. I think it's easy to stretch it too far. I definitely don't have a firm handle on it myself. I just recognize that the differences exist.

In my Madelyn Chapters series I gave myself the challenge of describing my male character (who had featured in earlier stories) only as the women protagonists saw him and discovered who he was.

As I was writing in close third person I suspect the narration was informed by me being a male author and thus most likely having a male voice. I have no idea how I went, other than several women described the story as "hot" - but whether that was in reference to the story, the man or the two women, I have no idea. "Hot" just by itself is a bit vague.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

In my Madelyn Chapters series I gave myself the challenge of describing my male character (who had featured in earlier stories) only as the women protagonists saw him and discovered who he was.

As I was writing in close third person I suspect the narration was informed by me being a male author and thus most likely having a male voice. I have no idea how I went, other than several women described the story as "hot" - but whether that was in reference to the story, the man or the two women, I have no idea. "Hot" just by itself is a bit vague.

"Hot" alone is economy of words taken much too far.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'm used to being objectified by women. I'm used to coming home from a run, removing my shirt in a sheltered, private space to cool off while gardening, having my landlady drive up to talk about something and seeing her go slack-jawed and unable to speak upon seeing me in my shorts and running shoes, still shiny from sweat. I'm used to that same landlady bringing a female friend on her next visit, both of them nodding to each other and telling me I look good.

I'm used to seeing an absolute knockout of a woman playing volleyball on a different court from mine, making frequent and sustained eye contact, and having friends (male *AND* female) say how obvious it was that we were mentally undressing each other. I met my partner that way, actually, along with several other women who were quite forward in their attentions even though we'd never met before, to the point of intimating sex, or in two cases several meetings later being much more explicit. Several of these women were friends with each other, which still puzzles me.

Or one of the most popular cheerleaders in school asking me out when I'm just a random introverted nobody geek, albeit one with scholar cred. Or an NFL cheerleader who wanted me to come to her room after our first, brief meeting. Or a woman I'd never met before actually stopping the elevator we were riding together alone in, pulling me down for a kiss and pressing herself close, her hands behind my neck. Or signing up for a dating service in New York City and immediately seeing my video and profile featured on their front page. I got a lot of hits from that.

I'm used to female bicyclists overtaking me to start a conversation or ask directions to somewhere they already know how to go, then when they realize that I have a little gray in my hair, sprinting away in what I later realized was embarrassment for having mistaken me for a man their age -- from behind while I'm wearing a helmet there's not much visual difference.

I'm used to women in the grocery store, or in a parking lot outside, or in a restaurant or shop, stopping in my path in a place where there's no way for me to get past them without asking. Usually with very intentional, challenging eye contact. I actually included a scene from life in one of my pieces, where my protagonist meets a "Chilean girl" about halfway down the first page. (Note that while the first paragraph of that scene happened exactly as described, the rest is fantasy.)

Every single one of these women was young and flat-out gorgeous, so it wasn't like they couldn't have just about any man they wanted. Many, including my partner, have complimented me quite explicitly on my appearance, telling me it was what attracted them in the first place.

I can't accept that these experiences are unique to me: a hetero, athletic, well-educated, considerate, not unattractive man. My experiences have taught me that women can also be visual in their choices, at least for the short-term. I actually started a new piece three days ago exploring similar themes, again based on a real-life encounter I had this week. I hope to have it ready for this year's Summer Lovin' contest.

I think it's much more sexist to believe that there's no such thing as a female gaze, though I would certainly agree that among my gender it's more prevalent.

 

[AlinaX]

I don't disagree, but then, how do we refer to it? How do we say there's a perspective that's not being shown because women are missing from the equation?

Perhaps it's better described a hierarchical (e.g., patriarchal) gaze in which people are reduced to objects of desire without agency.

Otherwise the diet coke man and Chris Hemsworth in Ghostbusters get described as male gaze for women (?) and the whole thing starts sounding pointless.

I've seen it argued that Patty Jenkins's Wonder Woman is a good (or at least interesting) example of 'female' gaze.

 

[SimonDoom]

"Male gaze" makes sense to me, as a term to use, because, while it doesn't describe how all men see things all the time, and while it does describe how some women see things some of the time, it nevertheless describes a certain way that many, many men see things so often and so much more often than women seem to that I think it's fair to say it's a "thing."

I'm not sure if there really is a corresponding female gaze to match it. My sense is that there are many ways of seeing things and there's no one way that dominates the way women see as there is for men.

But I'm not a woman, so I'm speculating.

We're probably better off pushing the envelope forward on how men and women are seen in stories and movies and worrying less what to call it.

 

[AlinaX]

We're probably better off pushing the envelope forward on how men and women are seen in stories and movies and worrying less what to call it.

My point was that 'male' and 'female' are so heavily loaded as descriptors that they get in the way of pushing the envelope. I've seen so many calm discussions devolve into bitter fights because of differing assumptions about the implications of 'male' and 'female'.

 

[vanmyers86]

All the different perspectives here are so interesting to read!

Here's a little something to chew over:

I am a woman. In my last story, my narrator is a man. In the following passage, I was deliberately trying to capture the male gaze. Did I succeed, or does the writing reflect my own gender in some way?

She stood once more and pulled the dress over her head. I sat there, hardly daring to breathe, entranced at the sight of Gabriela revealing herself to me at last.

As a man, I can and have reduced a woman to her sexiest components in less than a second, but at this moment, it didn't even occur to me to try that. It wasn't the sight of her full breasts nearly bursting from the lacy bra that took my breath away; or the hips, curved and enclosing something vitally important; her shapely legs I had admired at the restaurant; or her slender arms, gracefully falling to her sides as she stood quietly, taking in my admiration. My gaze flickered all over the exquisite body before me, but I kept returning to Gabriela's lovely eyes, dark and deep.

 

[AlinaX]

"One lump or two?" she asked.

Lost in her eyes, I'd quite forgotten why she was here. "Huh?" I said, then, "Oh, right. Just the one, my dear."

 

[stickygirl]

Here's a little something to chew over:

I am a woman. In my last story, my narrator is a man. In the following passage, I was deliberately trying to capture the male gaze. Did I succeed, or does the writing reflect my own gender in some way?

She stood once more and pulled the dress over her head. I sat there, hardly daring to breathe, entranced at the sight of Gabriela revealing herself to me at last. [edited]
~~ My gaze flickered all over the exquisite body before me, but I kept returning to Gabriela's lovely eyes, dark and deep.

I'd say you nailed it, but women experience so much objectivizing every day, we could roll this out in our sleep. ( Didn't mean that as a critique of your words here! )

My point was that 'male' and 'female' are so heavily loaded as descriptors that they get in the way of pushing the envelope. I've seen so many calm discussions devolve into bitter fights because of differing assumptions about the implications of 'male' and 'female'.

I agree - it'll end in tears. I saw feminine gaze in the video I linked, but that comes loaded too. By calling it female gaze it sounds like we're sticking our flag to it, even if in general it is female creators who access that gaze language more intuitively than men.

As Nyx reminded us, it is the objective/subjective dynamic at the heart of the gaze.

I am sure vanmyers86 would have describe her scene entirely differently from a subjective pov: instead of listening to her male viewer and nodding, we could have have been asked if she knew how much he desired her and how that desire made her feel ( I'm not sure I've got that quite right, so please suggest something better ). Surely going that extra step, creating that extra emotional layer adds to the characterisation; it challenges us to give the scene more thought from an emotional and not purely visual standpoint? It allows the 'gaze' or the flow of reactions to travel in both directions.
Maybe empathetic gaze is better? Not as snappy though

 

[SimonDoom]

All the different perspectives here are so interesting to read!

Here's a little something to chew over:

I am a woman. In my last story, my narrator is a man. In the following passage, I was deliberately trying to capture the male gaze. Did I succeed, or does the writing reflect my own gender in some way?

She stood once more and pulled the dress over her head. I sat there, hardly daring to breathe, entranced at the sight of Gabriela revealing herself to me at last.

As a man, I can and have reduced a woman to her sexiest components in less than a second, but at this moment, it didn't even occur to me to try that. It wasn't the sight of her full breasts nearly bursting from the lacy bra that took my breath away; or the hips, curved and enclosing something vitally important; her shapely legs I had admired at the restaurant; or her slender arms, gracefully falling to her sides as she stood quietly, taking in my admiration. My gaze flickered all over the exquisite body before me, but I kept returning to Gabriela's lovely eyes, dark and deep.

I'd say both. The description, in its detail and in its survey of Gabriela's body, seems male, but two items suggest a female author: one is the introductory clause that begins "As a man . . . " which describes self-awareness about and a hint of apology over his way of looking at a woman, when most of the time men are un-self aware of what the are doing and simply reveling in it without consciousness; the other is the line about returning the gaze to her eyes. If I were watching a woman strip I might glance at her eyes to see her expression as she did it, but my gaze probably would be focused on the body of the woman being revealed to me.

 

[SimonDoom]

My point was that 'male' and 'female' are so heavily loaded as descriptors that they get in the way of pushing the envelope. I've seen so many calm discussions devolve into bitter fights because of differing assumptions about the implications of 'male' and 'female'.

True. It touches on some of our most deeply held beliefs, and our own sense of identity.

 

[stickygirl]

I'd say both. The description, in its detail and in its survey of Gabriela's body, seems male, but two items suggest a female author: one is the introductory clause that begins "As a man . . . " which describes self-awareness about and a hint of apology over his way of looking at a woman, when most of the time men are un-self aware of what the are doing and simply reveling in it without consciousness; the other is the line about returning the gaze to her eyes. If I were watching a woman strip I might glance at her eyes to see her expression as she did it, but my gaze probably would be focused on the body of the woman being revealed to me.

How interesting! Same words, differing reaction. I love it!

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

How interesting! Same words, differing reaction. I love it!

I suspect that most men would have a slightly different reaction if they were in love with the woman being described. I think that's where you start seeing things like appreciating a woman's eyes when her body is on display. I'm still not sure eyes would win the contest for attention, though.

If I'd been writing to copy male gaze, I don't think I"d have made it as self-analytical. I think I'd have described in more in terms of what he saw and what his reaction was to what he saw. I don't think he would be thinking about what he was thinking. Of course, if he was describing it retrospectively, the additional shading might come in.

 

[Ginlover]

I personally think men have the female gaze, it is just not acknowledged. I think they become more self aware of it as they age.

As mentioned on a different thread I do a lot of research by talking to people, as a woman talking about sex I have more men willing to engage (I'm not going to say who's gaze triggers that).

I've formed several close friendships forged over time with men. This means nothing is off the table for discussion. Inevitably the first time I ask how does that make you feel or what are you thinking about, their first reply is 'I dont know'. Either I rephrase the question or they go away then come back after thinking about it (it could be anything but one recent example was how does an orgasm feel).

Then they start to find the words, they describe the physical reaction and the emotional response. That's when I get a consistent comment from each male frien. "I've never thought about it like that before." One friend actually thanked me for getting him to breakdown, consider then understand something he just knew, now - as result of my interrogation - he understands why he might find one person more attractive to another.

I apologise if I am making this sound to simple but to me the female gaze is actually a more introspective gaze. My example on the first page of my friend who is with a man who makes her feel beautiful still stands. It is not because he tells her in words or tries grab her for sex all the time, it's the way he looks at her and no one else.

If I ask a man who trusts me and sees me as a close friend why he loves or stays with a particular woman he would eventually be able to verbalize how she makes him feel as to the reason and he would be seeing her and himself through a female gaze as he did it.

Therefore I ask, is it male and female gaze or is it a more mature, self aware gaze that for ease we are calling a female gaze?

 

[MelissaBaby]

I suppose it's natural, given the venue, that this discussion of male/female gaze has been entirely about sexual content, But that's only part of the issue. Female gaze is different from male in other ways. Women, generally, will take note of different things in their environment than men will, and that is reflected in a female pov in literature or film.

Take safety, for an obvious example. How many movies have we seen in which a male character rides a subway train alone late at night? Sometimes it conveys loneliness, at other times, he might be happy after meeting the girl of his dreams. To women, riding a subway alone in the middle of the night is a very different thing, and its unlikely any female filmmaker is going to think such a scene is romantic. No, she is going to be thinking about the danger inherent in the situation.

And yes, there is a wide spectrum of "gazes". If you have seen JoJo Rabbit, for example (and if you haven't you should), you will notice how often the camera is low, close to the ground, reflecting the perspective of the child protagonist. It can be something that simple.

In matters of sex, the differences may seem more pronounced, but it's a much bigger issue than that.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I personally think men have the female gaze, it is just not acknowledged. I think they become more self aware of it as they age.

As mentioned on a different thread I do a lot of research by talking to people, as a woman talking about sex I have more men willing to engage (I'm not going to say who's gaze triggers that).

I've formed several close friendships forged over time with men. This means nothing is off the table for discussion. Inevitably the first time I ask how does that make you feel or what are you thinking about, their first reply is 'I dont know'. Either I rephrase the question or they go away then come back after thinking about it (it could be anything but one recent example was how does an orgasm feel).

Then they start to find the words, they describe the physical reaction and the emotional response. That's when I get a consistent comment from each male frien. "I've never thought about it like that before." One friend actually thanked me for getting him to breakdown, consider then understand something he just knew, now - as result of my interrogation - he understands why he might find one person more attractive to another.

I apologise if I am making this sound to simple but to me the female gaze is actually a more introspective gaze. My example on the first page of my friend who is with a man who makes her feel beautiful still stands. It is not because he tells her in words or tries grab her for sex all the time, it's the way he looks at her and no one else.

If I ask a man who trusts me and sees me as a close friend why he loves or stays with a particular woman he would eventually be able to verbalize how she makes him feel as to the reason and he would be seeing her and himself through a female gaze as he did it.

Therefore I ask, is it male and female gaze or is it a more mature, self aware gaze that for ease we are calling a female gaze?

I don't think that's wrong, but I think it's off track.

Whether or not men and women think alike, or are equally introspective or whatever, is not the point. "Male gaze" shouldn't be assumed to be the natural state of things. Men don't automatically possess the male gaze. It's a construct, created and perpetuated by a system that has historically held male perspective at a higher value than female.

If a film director shoots a scene in way that we think exemplifies male gaze, it is less about his own perspective than it is about filming it the way he has learned from viewing the work of previous directors. It's an institutionalized point of view. That doesn't make it wrong, the problem is that it crowds out other perspectives. The male gaze is the "correct" way to do thing, all other ways are considered deviations.