clevermanka | Rush job

Entry tags:

opinion

Rush job

Quickly because I am swamped:

I'm more upset that LJ is being sold again than I am it being owned by somebody in Russia. How many more acquisitions before LJ folds completely? I very much regret purchasing a permanent account, back in the Golden Years.

The phrase "the male gaze" really really really fucking irritates the shit out of me. Because only men view only women as sexual objects on occasion? And when they do, it's always bad? Give me a break. And then, for god's sake, go get laid by someone who knows what they're doing, because your S.O. or vibrator obviously aren't doing something correctly.

I shall never purchase anything more expensive than a spool of blank CDs from Office Depot. They suck sweaty, hairy donkey balls.

~~How can an entire office be completely out of transparent tape?~~ The front desk secretary had a roll stashed in her desk. Thank gods.

bestill is an amazing teacher--I had a private lesson Saturday on making art journal pages. I'm completely hooked. I want to start a new hobby now. It's beyond awesome.

I bought some amazing lime green fringe for a bellydance costume.

anerys will be seduced to the Dark Side of cabaret-style costuming if it kills me.

The fact that it is December 3 terrifies me. 1.) I have less than two weeks to get all my ducks in a row for the trek to Indy. I really have stop procrastinating on getting Daddy's present done. 2.) The deadline for grad applications is less than a month away.

On the other hand, the solstice is within hollering distance from here. Hooray for the return of the light.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I love this post!

=D

I could write a scathing diatribe on the whole concept of "male gaze" and the subtly destructive stance of non-sex-positive feminists, but alas. No time.

Glad I could make you grin, though!

Ha to "Male gaze".

I'm gonna Female Gaze all over this icon now, baby.

I know *I* always do when he wears the shirt I put that on! :) Same thing when he wears the shirt I made him of me looking like so:

(http://photobucket.com)

When he wears *that* one, I always have to reach out and pet it! I go from Female Gaze to Inappropriate Touching!! ha!

Obviously we are very, very bad feminists. =D

(http://photobucket.com)

You should see me beaming when someone says to Jim "whoa! nice shirt!"... I practically have to knock people out of the way to his side so I can pipe up with "THAT'S ME!!"

It's making me laugh out loud just thinking about it. Ah well, maybe some day I'll manage the enlightenment that obviously must be required before I stop being so hepped up and thrilled about my own awesome femininity!

I'm a sex-positive feminist, and I think there's definintely some value in thinking and talking about the male gaze as a point of deconstruction. We talk about patriarchy with the understanding that women participate in it, and it's the same for the male gaze. It's a reference to a certain way of viewing the female body, and is not supposed to suggest literalness. If someone is saying that the male gaze is only about men looking at women, then they don't understand it very well. You can talk about the male gaze in a piece of art, created by a woman, if you want to. It's pervasive and political, not stuck on biology/gender.

Goobs can use anything and make it irritating and meaningless.

You can talk about the male gaze in a piece of art, created by a woman, if you want to.

Then pick a different name. Call it "the sexual-object gaze" or something. By specifically using the word male, the term automatically incriminates an entire sex.

It's pervasive and political, not stuck on biology/gender.

Why, then, did the creators of the term pick a gendered name for it?

For the same reason we talk about patriarchy.

The male gaze oppresses the feminine, it objectivies it. I agree that the term is problematic, and perhaps the "masculine," or the "patriarchal" gaze would be better. But taking the gender out of it defeats the purpose of calling attention to the dichotomy.

Academically, "male" should NOT equal a individual. It should not indicate blame. It should be recognized as a perspective that any oppresser can take.

It still doesn't jibe. Sorry.

But taking the gender out of it defeats the purpose of calling attention to the dichotomy.

What dichotomy? I notice you still use "masculine" or "patriarchal" gaze. Do women not do the exact same thing with men?

I'm not saying that looking at any group of people as purely sexual objects is good. I'm saying that assigning any sort of gender/sex to the action is reactionary and serves only to drive another wedge between men and women. edit: And another wedge between women and women. This is the sort of thing that causes women to pipe up with the "I'm not a feminist, but..." line.

It should be recognized as a perspective that any oppresser can take.

That's exactly why I dislike the use of the masculine as a pejorative. "Any oppressor"...that includes women. By using "male" as an adjective to describe a negative action, it automatically places blame on one sex and places the other in the role of victim. Bad. Combo.

Edited 2007-12-03 21:05 (UTC)

Let me be amused -- it is one of the things that terrified the homophobic part of the military -- that some lustful guy might looks at a male ass with that same gaze.

I don't think you hear it so much about Lesbians. I find that the homo component actually emphasizes the fact that males, also, fear this behavior, and fear being objectified by persons not of their orientation.

You're making the same argument that administrations used against women's studies as an academic discipline. Don't women rape men, or men rape men sometimes? Yes, but the majority of the time it's men doing it to women. That's what makes it a women's issue. A feminist issue. That's what makes the designation of a specific "male gaze" important and necessary.

In the history of our civilization, men oppress women.

The argument I'm trying to make here has everything to do with academia and feminist analysis. When talking to somebody outside of that, I would not ever use the term "the male gaze" because nobody would understand what I meant. But within feminist analysis and politics we are simply not in a place where we can possibly do away with it.

Academically, "male" in "the male gaze" is not a pejorative. It's a discriptor of a very specific historical, cultural, and political perspective, or way of viewing a thing.

The argument I'm trying to make here has everything to do with academia and feminist analysis.

Which is probably why I don't hang out with many academic feminists, present company excluded. =) Too often, academics (of any field) present theories that seem perfectly acceptable to their own, and cannot understand why the general populace treats them with derision/antipathy. The point of academic research is to influence/change/discover things about our society/surroundings/universe--isn't it? If one is attempting to achieve equality (of a sort), why continue to use masculine terms that are inflammatory/derogative?

within feminist analysis and politics we are simply not in a place where we can possibly do away with it.

To which I would ask the question: are any efforts being made to make a place where that is possible? It seems to me, nearly forty years after the first women's study program was founded, the discipline should have reached a point where it could attempt to find gender-neutral terms for negative and positive theories.

Well, one of the reasons I *don't* have my MS is because most WS departments are still being headed and taught by second wave feminists who refuse to let go of the terms they created to stick it to the patriarchy. ;) And it's their way or the highway! I do believe that gender-neutral is the wave of the future, and a lot of the current. But for a few more years we'll have feminists who refuse to accept anything that removes women from the center.

(For the record, I didn't run into that here at KU so much.)

The argument we're having is the same argument feminists (and others) will have about calling what we do in academia gender studies or women's studies. Do we keep the gendered term for the power it holds in the discourse? Or do we make it more welcoming? Does gender give up the focus on women that is/was the most important part of what we're trying to accomplish? Is using the term "women's studies" disingenuous?

Personally, I think it should be called Feminist Studies. But then nobody's take the courses. ;)

This, also, is why I like the word queer so much. We need a word like that for gender, specifically. You don't have to talk about Gay Studies or Lesbian studies, because you can have Queer Studies - and that's everything AND NOTHING! (The and nothing part is the best.)

I think it should be called Feminist Studies.

That would be awesome. But it would scare off all the "I'm not a feminist buts" I mentioned earlier.

*sigh* Peers at F-list

I have the feeling that in the eyes of several/most Women's Studies departments, we're most of us very bad feminists around here.

You mean because we regularly objectify ourselves by slapping on the makeup and shoving our tits up to our chins? And glorifying that oppressive bastion of corruption and objectification, prostitution? :p

(Among other things...)

Well...yes. And other things.

=D

Laura Mulvey (sp?)in her "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" coined the term based on some writings of Foucault. She is essentially saying that the creator of a piece of cinema (or other art by extrapolation) positions the VIEWER into the viewpoint of a heterosexual male. She was not being specifically pejorative, she was just pointing out that the viewpoint, rather than only the subject can be influenced by the text. This is a extremely important part of critical (let alone Feminist) methodology. Since her book, many misguided, and yes anti-male, folk have leapt upon the idea and used it in pejorative ways. The concept, on its own, is simply a way to further discourse.

*gives

chernobylred a penetrating example of The Male Gaze*

*waggles eyebrows*

*makes disturbing hooting noises*

One more ludicrous stereotype fulfilled! My work here is done.

Heh. Heh-heh. You said "penetrating."

Of course I said penetrating. I don't see why we should bend over backwards to avoid saying uncomfortable things. I mean, being straightforward is a great way to stick it to the man.

I will not lay down for any attempts to stifle my free speech! The flag at the top of the big pole of freedom must ever fly! We must never take it down!

Ah. Brings a tear to my eyes. Visualizing it blowing in the wind.

Well, that's all I have to say. Nothing like a good climax to a long-winded commentary, eh?

This entire post made my day.

.. and it was a very Bad Day.
I'll be glad to go home and get me some Male Gaze, because yes, it makes me feel Good and Powerful and Happy.

Awesome. Happy to help you out, hon!

Oh geezus I might as well give in considering Satowi and I's evil plan for....a secret surprise thing.

Next time I come over I'll bring my dirty secret.......

\m/ >_< \m/

What is THAT?

It's me throwing you the horns, baby.

Good one!

... and I love that you went out for red fringe and came back with lime green, even if it was In Addition To. Such a great dichotomy.

At least the lime and red weren't for the same costume.

That makes me think of Carmen Miranda!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Rush job

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

You'll have to flag this "adult "now!

no subject

Ya think?

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject