The Female Gaze

[Kumquatqueen]

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. ... That doesn't make it wrong, the problem is that it crowds out other perspectives.

Exactly - no reason not to have films showing a male protagonist's perspective, but they get tedious. It's especially jarring when there's a male and female lead who are allegedly equals, until they inevitably get it together, at which point the camera takes only his point of view. When was the last time a Hollywood movie showed the man's face during orgasm rather than the woman's? Or lingered on his arse and legs and hips rather than her torso? Or acknowledged the concept of foreplay and that getting a cock into a vagina isn't actually the immediate priority for most women. If a director wanted to convince.women that a man is god's gift as a lover, a shot of him grinning with a raised eyebrow from what is clearly her looking down and seeing him between her legs, would be a PG way of proving it. But generally mainstream sex scenes are convincing the male audience the guy is a stud because he can have a woman screaming from his cock in a few seconds.

There's an untapped market for more eye candy for women - in the late 80s/90s Kevin Costner managed to make some terrible films very profitable simply by getting his arse out in each of them (Waterworld...)

Female-made porn tends to put more of a body in the frame, so the genitals are in context - the close-up shots of disembodied vulvas or cockends seem to be a male thing. I find them off-putting myself. It may be a general female thing to take more of a holistic view of attractive bodies rather than the detail - I mean, there may be some women who like dick pics out there, but unless they're of their partner, I don't know any. Whereas men who like cock clearly like them or gay personal ads would look very different!

 

[HectorBidon]

So, on that note, does anyone have recommendations for stories here at Literotica that in your opinion illustrate "the female gaze?"

I'm not sure I fully understand what is meant by the term, but I think it is perhaps what can be found in TarnishedPenny's A Clutch of Mermaids.

This is a wonderful story, exciting and sexy. It's part a buddy story---two young women, Rachel and Sarah, just graduating from university sign up for an adventurous and risqué summer job acting as mermaids at a posh Carribean resort. And it's part an adventure story---they stay on for an extracurricular session that is essentially an extended, no-knickers-on capture the flag game, boys vs girls, set on an uninhabited tropical cay.

The story has sex, but it would be a great story even without it. The camaraderie between the girls as they learn to deal with the day-to-day aspects of the job. The excitement as they search for a hiding place along the sea cliff, as they sneak back ashore to try to find something to eat.

One key aspect of the story's "gaze" is its sincere interest in the inner lives of the characters, even the minor ones. The thoughts and feelings of Rachel and Sarah are portrayed directly through the limited-omniscient point of view. But the thoughts and feelings of the other characters are very important as well. They are an essential part of the way that Rachel and Sarah perceive and interact with the other characters.

"I like it when you look at me like that, William," she whispered and saw his eyes fill with warmth.​

Another key aspect of the story's gaze is that it sees carnal pleasure not so much as an end in itself but as a part of something bigger, something even more wonderful, something that has to do with intimacy, affection, tenderness, and trust. There is plenty of sex in the story, but it's wrapped in these extra layers that make the eroticism warmer and more deeply contenting,

Rachel, still in her fin, sat beside William, leaning against him and feeling completely cherished.​

Overall the story has a great generosity of imagination. It is in many ways a coming-of-age story about Rachel. It contains real, heart-thumping excitement; real, deep-running emotions; real life lessons learned. But it is set in a wonderful tropical paradise in which Rachel is ultimately safe and ultimately cherished. This perhaps is part of the "femininity" of the gaze, it imagines its characters with a mother's love.

Anyway, these aspects of the story, whether you label them "feminine" or not, certainly made this story richer and more engaging to me than a lot of the fare typically found on this site. They are aspects I try to include in my own writing.

 

[Ginlover]

So, on that note, does anyone have recommendations for stories here at Literotica that in your opinion illustrate "the female gaze?"

I'll offer up a very short story of mine. What is Power Exchange? It's a non PIV sex scene. Female first person but she is trying to understand what he is seeing so you get female gaze trying to inturrpret the male gaze. Thou I honestly had no clue of even the terms when i wrote it.

https://www.literotica.com/beta/s/what-is-power-exchange

 

[stickygirl]

Perhaps the 'empathy gaze' is not between the subject and author, but between character and reader? The writer or director presents an incomplete story, or one than requires us to complete, and encourages us to interpret in our own way by giving space to the viewer. We feel more engaged, we are compelled to bring our own emotions, using our individual experiences, so the scene becomes more powerful. If the male gaze or story telling is prescriptive, a female or empathetic one, leave questions unanswered throughout the storyline as though the author were saying "I'm not going to hold your hand - it's up to you."

Melissa rightly steered us away from sex, to consider a wider scope for female/male experience, because "the sex scene" only occupies a few moments of a 90 minute film. It's the main body of the film that informs the sex and never the other way round.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Exactly - no reason not to have films showing a male protagonist's perspective, but they get tedious. It's especially jarring when there's a male and female lead who are allegedly equals, until they inevitably get it together, at which point the camera takes only his point of view. When was the last time a Hollywood movie showed the man's face during orgasm rather than the woman's? Or lingered on his arse and legs and hips rather than her torso?

I remember one exception to this being Crimson Peak - the sex scene shows vastly more of Tom Hiddleston's "English countryside" than of Mia Wasikowska. From the interviews I've seen, that was very much a conscious decision, to reinforce that Mia's character is the protagonist.

As for the man's face, this is hard to top.

 

[Ginlover]

As for the man's face, this is hard to top.

Lol...OMG.... bring back the male gaze!

Okay I'll take the not just sex challenge. I will put the Bourne films on the table. Full of action, always do a car or motorbike chase up or downstairs, lots of female almost heros die. Very typical male gaze.

Then we look at Bourne. We see his pain and confusion, we know he is tormented by the past but tries to ignore it. We see the various alternative characters assuming Bourne wants revenge and retribution, they assume he has a male gaze. Yet us the viewer see him have a female gaze his indecision wishing for peace. Yet by accident his actions are seen as intentionally going for revenge as his motivation.

Or hell I could through the empathy card in again not the sex of the gaze.

 

[AlinaX]

Bourne not so much, but Bond is absolutely male gaze.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Bond is absolutely male gaze.

Classic Bond films, absolutely. The books give Bond's POV and are more complex.

Then you get the Casino Royale reboot film and efforts to appeal to the female audience as well as male, and see Bond through Vesper's eyes. Possibly because Barbara Broccoli is now in charge as well as needing to appeal to 21st-century audiences. QoS was just too dark and gruesome (and tedious) for the Bond audience, but then Skyfall was again aiming for mixed-gaze attracting all audiences, and mostly succeeded (the explosion of 00Q and other Skyfall-inspired fanfic is testament to that), which made that shower scene exceptionally jarring - Bond knows he's dealing with a victim of sex trafficking yet surprises her in the shower and she freezes. He's supposed to be good at seducing women so it's an implausible misstep, to women watching - and to many men, Giles Core wrote a scathing article on it. Bond being fucked-up and being a rapist would make sense; Bond raping by accident just looks like the film editors didn't consider the point - ie male gaze.

For female gaze, fanfic is the place to go (though it's written not filmed). Huge contrast in how Bond (for example) comes across. I may have spent much of the last four months reading Bondfic when too ill to do anything else. The fic is often more realistic and better plotted than the films, though equally likely to have me groaning "no, you can't drive from there to there in that short a time".

 

[stickygirl]

Bourne not so much, but Bond is absolutely male gaze.

Thinking back on the Bourne film series, I'd say they had a stab at empathy as a device to make the action engaging, rather than to develop the character. Popping into my head is the Moscow flat scene where he confesses his crime to the terrified daughter of his victims, as though we were expected to empathise with his guilt - we can't.
The mysterious non-girlfiend Nicky Parsons never makes it past accessory status. Then there's Marie, who helps him and is almost three-dimensional and takes the Bourne empathy award.
Finally, because this is Lit: Marie and Jason in the bathroom of a cheap Parisian hotel does it for me every time: the hottest scene ever and she doesn't get her top off.

Bond? It's like a MacD's - something you do when you're drunk.

 

[SimonDoom]

Then you get the Casino Royale reboot film and efforts to appeal to the female audience as well as male, and see Bond through Vesper's eyes. .

Casino Royale is my favorite Bond movie, and one of the reasons is that his relationship with Vesper is more interesting and complex than his relationship with any other Bond woman I can think of. I think you're right that for once the movie gives us a glimpse into how she sees him as well as how he sees her.

There's that scene, too, where Bond emerges from the ocean in a tight skimpy swimsuit, where it's very clear he's being presented as eye candy. Is that female gaze, or is it just the male gaze, turned the other way? There's nothing complex or layered about it -- it's just Bond as a sex symbol, probably the most obvious such scene in any Bond film.

The scene where Bond and Lynd meet each other on the train strikes me as female gaze-ish, if I understand the term (I"m not sure I do). They're both sizing each other up. Both make effective quips. But both are shown to be vulnerable. They are looking at each other as attractive people, but also as vulnerable people. In fact, Bond is repeatedly shown to be very vulnerable in the movie, more so than in any other Bond movie. I think it's fair to say Casino Royale does a better job moving beyond the male gaze than any other Bond movie.

 

[jehoram]

Thinking back on the Bourne film series, I'd say they had a stab at empathy as a device to make the action engaging, rather than to develop the character. Popping into my head is the Moscow flat scene where he confesses his crime to the terrified daughter of his victims, as though we were expected to empathise with his guilt - we can't.

I think that was the point of the scene. He's looking for an absolution he knows he can never find. It's his way of trying to make something right that will never be right, and he's trying to make peace with the fact that he is an assassin and not a person anybody can empathize with.

The mysterious non-girlfiend Nicky Parsons never makes it past accessory status.

Which is a shame, in a way. Nicky is really a female version of Bourne in her secrecy. You see her smile when she gets out of a car. The smile disappears when she sees Abbot in the second movie, and doesn't return until she hears of Jason's survival at the end of the third one. You wonder about the training she's had, and whether her lack of emotion is due to a strict discipline that's been instilled in that training. By aligning with Jason in the third movie, she's declaring her independence from the CIA, but that discipline is still locking her in. She's never free.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

There's that scene, too, where Bond emerges from the ocean in a tight skimpy swimsuit, where it's very clear he's being presented as eye candy. Is that female gaze, or is it just the male gaze, turned the other way? There's nothing complex or layered about it -- it's just Bond as a sex symbol, probably the most obvious such scene in any Bond film.

I'd say that in many cases, female gaze is simply the male gaze the other way round, eg the camera pans up Bond in his swimsuit just like it did with Ursula Andreas. But in others, it would have to be filmed differently - so rather than showing a man (say Connery or Moore as Bond) with his face obviously looking someone up and down, a woman would generally eye someone up differently, maybe just a small smile and sip her drink again.
Or the example of a character going home on a very late train - filming a man falling asleep is fine, having a woman happily fall asleep just looks unrealistic to women because they're so used to staying alert - a female gaze would show the woman trying to stay looking all 'dont mess with me' before failing.

 

[MetaBob]

I'd say that in many cases, female gaze is simply the male gaze the other way round, eg the camera pans up Bond in his swimsuit just like it did with Ursula Andreas. But in others, it would have to be filmed differently - so rather than showing a man (say Connery or Moore as Bond) with his face obviously looking someone up and down, a woman would generally eye someone up differently, maybe just a small smile and sip her drink again.
Or the example of a character going home on a very late train - filming a man falling asleep is fine, having a woman happily fall asleep just looks unrealistic to women because they're so used to staying alert - a female gaze would show the woman trying to stay looking all 'dont mess with me' before failing.

Yep. Though I'm used to her falling asleep with me. One of my favorite things, actually.

 

[stickygirl]

I think that was the point of the scene. He's looking for an absolution he knows he can never find. It's his way of trying to make something right that will never be right, and he's trying to make peace with the fact that he is an assassin and not a person anybody can empathize with.

That was kind of you - I never join the dots first time, but it's fun trying!

Which is a shame, in a way. Nicky is really a female version of Bourne in her secrecy. You see her smile when she gets out of a car. The smile disappears when she sees Abbot in the second movie, and doesn't return until she hears of Jason's survival at the end of the third one. You wonder about the training she's had, and whether her lack of emotion is due to a strict discipline that's been instilled in that training. By aligning with Jason in the third movie, she's declaring her independence from the CIA, but that discipline is still locking her in. She's never free.

She was certainly a slow burn character.

Because of their training/mental-abuse, they will always be dysfunctional. Bourne's struggle to be normal has too many obstacles ... and that's why Marie was such an important character because she was the only one to throw him a lifeline: love.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

I'd say that in many cases, female gaze is simply the male gaze the other way round, eg the camera pans up Bond in his swimsuit just like it did with Ursula Andreas. But in others, it would have to be filmed differently - so rather than showing a man (say Connery or Moore as Bond) with his face obviously looking someone up and down, a woman would generally eye someone up differently, maybe just a small smile and sip her drink again.
Or the example of a character going home on a very late train - filming a man falling asleep is fine, having a woman happily fall asleep just looks unrealistic to women because they're so used to staying alert - a female gaze would show the woman trying to stay looking all 'dont mess with me' before failing.

I'm not too sure the male gaze the other way around qualifies as the female gaze. (I'm also not sure it isn't!) I think it may still be what we're calling the male gaze. Just because the camera is showing subject matter that might be appealing to women who are attracted to men doesn't mean that it's showing that subject matter in a way that reflects how a woman "typically" looks at it. It's not that you never see women being direct in their visual appraisals of men, but it's atypical enough in most settings that it stands out when you see it.

Trying to get too far into specifically what is male gaze and what is female gaze is where we start running into huge issues with the problems inherent to labeling one thing masculine and another thing feminine. It's all arbitrary, and trying to define it obscures the point, which is just that there is a qualitatively different perspective being lost.

This particular example and the inherent difficulties it brings up demonstrates why it might be more helpful to consider the female gaze turned toward non-sexual subjects, where the subject of the gaze doesn't end up taking over the conversation, and it's easier to focus on the gaze itself.

 

[stickygirl]

My first thought and I'm sticking with it, I think , is that anyone emerging from the water half naked is very likely objective and so 'male'. Likely because we have to ask if it advances the storyline. Without recalling the scene exactly, it sounds "Hey girls - time for your eye candy too. See - it's equality!"

That doesn't mean there's no place for it, but the movement promoting 'empathetic story telling' is suggesting we give more space for them, not to censor the existing format.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

My first thought and I'm sticking with it, I think , is that anyone emerging from the water half naked is very likely objective and so 'male'. Likely because we have to ask if it advances the storyline. Without recalling the scene exactly, it sounds "Hey girls - time for your eye candy too. See - it's equality!"

That doesn't mean there's no place for it, but the movement promoting 'empathetic story telling' is suggesting we give more space for them, not to censor the existing format.

I've gotten that impression frequently with male nudity in a movie. They just kind of slap it up there on the screen, which feels very half-assed. (There's a pun there, but I can't make it work.) It's like they take men's clothes, dyed them pink, and expect them to fit women.

 

[stickygirl]

...and remove the pockets

 

[davet_1_1]

My first thought and I'm sticking with it, I think , is that anyone emerging from the water half naked is very likely objective and so 'male'. Likely because we have to ask if it advances the storyline. Without recalling the scene exactly, it sounds "Hey girls - time for your eye candy too. See - it's equality!"

That doesn't mean there's no place for it, but the movement promoting 'empathetic story telling' is suggesting we give more space for them, not to censor the existing format.

This reminds me of something JJ Abrams said on the press tour for Star Trek Into Darkness. The movie was getting flak for the gratuitous shot of Alice Eve in her underwear for no plot-specific reason. He said they'd shot a scene of Benedict Cumberbatch in the shower but ended up cutting it, as if the fact that they'd objectified him as well somehow 'balanced it out'.

 

[SimonDoom]

My first thought and I'm sticking with it, I think , is that anyone emerging from the water half naked is very likely objective and so 'male'. Likely because we have to ask if it advances the storyline. Without recalling the scene exactly, it sounds "Hey girls - time for your eye candy too. See - it's equality!"

That doesn't mean there's no place for it, but the movement promoting 'empathetic story telling' is suggesting we give more space for them, not to censor the existing format.

It's worthwhile keeping in mind that Bond movies are by nature fetishy and visual and sexually objectifying, and those elements ARE part of the story -- the women, the Martini, the cars, the gadgets and weapons, the suits. Without these elements it wouldn't really be a Bond film. What was interesting about Casino Royale is that it presented Daniel Craig/Bond himself in this way, reminiscent of the way Ursula Andress's Honey Rider emerged from the sea in Dr. No. But if that's "female gaze" then female gaze is simply male gaze in reverse, and my sense is most contributors to the thread think it suggests something else.

 

[davet_1_1]

Also the discussion of the differences in perception between male and female brought this to mind...

 

[SimonDoom]

Also the discussion of the differences in perception between male and female brought this to mind...

That's pretty good!

 

[stickygirl]

It's worthwhile keeping in mind that Bond movies are by nature fetishy and visual and sexually objectifying, and those elements ARE part of the story -- the women, the Martini, the cars, the gadgets and weapons, the suits. Without these elements it wouldn't really be a Bond film. What was interesting about Casino Royale is that it presented Daniel Craig/Bond himself in this way, reminiscent of the way Ursula Andress's Honey Rider emerged from the sea in Dr. No. But if that's "female gaze" then female gaze is simply male gaze in reverse, and my sense is most contributors to the thread think it suggests something else.

Totally - you get exactly what it says on the box and I don't have a problem with that.
I've read few books by Peter Fleming, his brother, and he was a much more interesting man. Apparently, Ian's family used to snigger behind his back when he first was published, but I suspect they kept quieter when the money started rolling in.

Also the discussion of the differences in perception between male and female brought this to mind...

Priceless

 

[capnjs]

I have no idea how you got that from what she wrote.

Because nuance and critical thinking aren't popular these days.

Sticky's post was rather thoughtful and well worded. Far more rational than the some of the "male gaze is inherently bad" arguments that I have read.

 

[stickygirl]

Wow... I go to have supper and look what happens. It probably wouldn't be helpful for me to engage with the poster directly so I have a useful summary link for male gaze theory: not one that I invented or accept without question, but like all discussions, it's a good starting point.
"...
Laura Mulvey is a feminist film theorist from Britain, best known for her essay on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. Her theories are influenced by the likes of Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan (by using their ideologies as “political weapons”) whilst also including psychoanalysis and feminism in her works. Mulvey is predominantly known for her theory regarding sexual objectification on women in the media, more commonly known as The Male Gaze” theory.

Being one of the most notable film theorists in the world, her ideas and clear proof of misogyny in film opened up the eyes of many, and in 1975, something that people simply accepted was finally questioned. Although Mulvey‘s theory has helped identify issues with gender in film, why do we still have the same issues decades later? Why do we still see the same roles for women in film and television regurgitated over and over again?..."

Mulvey's essay started a conversation, and is still quoted today. Cinema and fiction are not documentaries or sworn statements, but neither can they be wrenched from our timeline.