Beyond the female gaze?
Saturday, August 22, 2009 by adonohue26
This post is on Filament magazine (warning: links in this post may contain nudity), which I think provides an interesting contrast to Suicide Girls.
Filament is a new magazine that, in addition to printing articles, features photography of scantily-clad and nude men. The magazine's makers claim these photos portray the sorts of body types, facial features and physical/emotional contexts that women prefer, and that these images are made for “the female gaze”. This is quite different to the tactics employed by Suicide Girls, which essentially asks heterosexual females to derive pleasure from erotic depictions of their own gender.
I find this idea of “the female gaze” quite interesting. On the one hand, it can be seen as a radical notion. It allows the appropriation of the phallic symbol, challenges the traditional male gaze of much pornography by actively “looking back” and allows the exploration of female desire. It seems these potentially radical connotations have been picked up on by the magazine’s printer, which has refused to print an issue that features a nude model with an erect penis (the cited reason of potential offense to "the womens/religious sectors" seems a little flimsy).
On the other hand, the notion of a “female gaze” is problematic because all it essentially does is flip an existing power structure (the male gaze), making it focus on and objectify a different gender. The objectification of males may be politically and ideologically potent in the current societal climate. In the long term, however, the practice could become ethically objectionable, especially considering that other publishers may lack Filament's devotion to non-exploitative sexuality (as outlined in their FAQ).
The “female gaze” also seems to create a heterosexual space that refuses queerness and excludes those of homosexual or bisexual orientations. Interestingly, there has recently been some controversy when an article about Filament was filed in the "Gay" section of a pornography news website. This perhaps suggests that the notion of “the female gaze” lacks the flexibility necessary to survive in today’s sexual world.
So while Filament may be an interesting and worthy experiment, I think it ultimately highlights the need to create new discourses and models of sexuality that are entirely independent of, rather than derivative of, current patriarchal models.
Filament is a new magazine that, in addition to printing articles, features photography of scantily-clad and nude men. The magazine's makers claim these photos portray the sorts of body types, facial features and physical/emotional contexts that women prefer, and that these images are made for “the female gaze”. This is quite different to the tactics employed by Suicide Girls, which essentially asks heterosexual females to derive pleasure from erotic depictions of their own gender.
I find this idea of “the female gaze” quite interesting. On the one hand, it can be seen as a radical notion. It allows the appropriation of the phallic symbol, challenges the traditional male gaze of much pornography by actively “looking back” and allows the exploration of female desire. It seems these potentially radical connotations have been picked up on by the magazine’s printer, which has refused to print an issue that features a nude model with an erect penis (the cited reason of potential offense to "the womens/religious sectors" seems a little flimsy).
On the other hand, the notion of a “female gaze” is problematic because all it essentially does is flip an existing power structure (the male gaze), making it focus on and objectify a different gender. The objectification of males may be politically and ideologically potent in the current societal climate. In the long term, however, the practice could become ethically objectionable, especially considering that other publishers may lack Filament's devotion to non-exploitative sexuality (as outlined in their FAQ).
The “female gaze” also seems to create a heterosexual space that refuses queerness and excludes those of homosexual or bisexual orientations. Interestingly, there has recently been some controversy when an article about Filament was filed in the "Gay" section of a pornography news website. This perhaps suggests that the notion of “the female gaze” lacks the flexibility necessary to survive in today’s sexual world.
So while Filament may be an interesting and worthy experiment, I think it ultimately highlights the need to create new discourses and models of sexuality that are entirely independent of, rather than derivative of, current patriarchal models.