In Defense of "Boobs"

At first, I was tempted not even to do this assignment. Not for lack of interest or ideas—though there was that—but because, if we're really basing our work off the readings, and particularly our class discussions, as the sidebar at right implores us to do, then advertising is inevitable and indomitable, and there's nothing we can do about it, so why bother. Instead, I could read a book or, hell, read another blog post. Edify myself. Turn off the TV and, more importantly, the Internet, and ignore the 3 trillion ads for a minute. Now wouldn't that be something. After all, it's all so inescapable. Look at the horrible successes and wonderful failures Ms. had running advertising (Steinem). Advertising has become (has always been?) a necessary evil. (Kilbourne: "Advertising is the foundation and economic lifeblood of the mass media," 121.) Now, FINALLY, it's ad-free, and yet how many of us have ever read an issue, or even an article, notwithstanding the fact that it's all now pretty much free online. Does it matter that the magazine has managed to turn out more screenplays than any other publication? It's all just more commercial product.



And so, I've turned to a brilliant piece of commercial product, the "Save the Boobs!" PSA we watched last week in class. While I agree that there are certainly terrible, misogynistic ads out there, particularly on that site we saw with the terrible D&G gang rape ad—I still like the St. Pauli Girl ad, though—there are also good ones. Sort of (more on that later). In fact, after repeat viewings (don't get any sick ideas—it was with my fiancé, who says, "It's for the right things, it's not just exploitation. If every ad with breasts was about breast cancer, we'd be in a different place.") I've found that there is much to like about this ad. To help give you an idea why, watch the following Making Of spot:



Now consider for a minute the diversity of that spot. Yes, everyone is pretty white, but our protagonist, according to her Facebook, is of Persian, African, and Indian descent. More importantly, though, she's not some androgynous runway Valkyrie but a fully figured woman with curves and jiggles who's a touch on the short side. Is she being lusted after? Yes, but by all types. The waifish models with their dogs gawk, the "sailors," the nerds, the hunks, the babes—this ad speaks to everyone, including lesbians. As Clark alludes to, lesbians, like everyone, appreciate advertising as well. "Lesbians too are consumers," (142) for whom "fashion becomes an assertion of personal freedom as well as political choice" (145). In this ad, Sovani's sexuality is unclear. She is a pretty person with wide appeal. Is it problematic that that is all she is? Well, who is saying that, or even assuming that (I argued as much in my last blog post, that we all gaze). Sovani makes a strong declaration to the contrary on her MTV profile:

I've fought for respect. It's been hard for me to get away from the "Playboy" stereotype. There have been times when I've been judged, and pressured to be "the smart girl" OR "the pretty girl". I'm here to kill the bullsh*t. I want every girl to know she has the ability to be both beautiful AND accomplished.

As we saw with the behind-the-scenes clip, Sovani was the creative director, a producer, not a product, of media. She's delivering an honorable message, albeit one perhaps freighted with complexity—yes, the emphasis should be on saving lives, not boobs, but in a culture so saturated with images, we have to fight to get through with what we can. That is why I believe the ultimate take-away is not better advertising but better media education. As the recent, terrible Supreme Court decision on corporate spending in political campaigns proved, it will be almost impossible to stifle "corporate speech," so we would be foolish to try. Instead, we must be sure our children can tell the difference between good ads and bad. (I know I've read articles about how surprisingly savvy kids are in this department but can't find any at the moment.) After all, the related videos that show up on YouTube with the above ad are pretty deplorable. Our kids are bound to watch them. They just have to understand them for what they are, or, really, aren't. The ultimate problem is that there is so much advertising out there that it's all got to be screaming for our attention. It's only going to get worse. We've just got to think about it in a better light.

Life and Lemons

It is disturbing that some of the ads such as the Dolce & Gabanna ad presented in this blog and the one shown in class last week appear in mainstream media.

In accordance with the First Amendment of the US Constitution, these depictions are acceptable. However, they should be limited to magazines that are read by an older demographic. The legal age requirement of the models portrayed in such ads should be at least 25; the models in the Dolce & Gabanna ad below appear to be younger. We have a drinking age restriction. Why not impose similar parameters to advertisements so that they are viewable only in certain venues and to mature readers?

The British Journal of Developmental Pyschology (2009), published a study conducted by Moniek Buijzen on the importance and effectiveness of parental communication in modifying the relation between food advertising and children between the ages of 4 -12. 234 parents were surveyed and the study showed that explaining the nature of advertising and its purpose, and also restricting its exposure, reduced the impact of younger children's food consumption; whereas, the same did not prove to be effective among the older children. These results suggest the importance of parental guidance and supervision as an effective tool in which to counter the impact of food advertising.

Yes for Alternative Advertising

Alternative advertising is a technique that uniquely grabs a target audience’s attention. The uniqueness of alternative advertising can either come in the way it is presented or in the message that the ad conveys. Alternative advertising can be a great asset to businesses because of the way that this kind of advertising grabs the attention of the consumer.
Today people are bombarded by tons and tons of advertisements on a daily basis and it is up to businesses to create new ways of connecting with their consumers. Kenneth Cole’s 2008 alternative advertising campaign called “We all Walk in Different Shoes”, was a way to celebrate individuals with identities that are not considered mainstream or common.

This series of advertisements are in my opinion very compelling and for sure grabbed my attention because it was a very “out of the box” idea for a fashion campaign. Fashion ads usually dehumanize women and force images of ideals that are not real. Fashion advertisements typically come in the form of offensive or provocative, but Kenneth Cole opted for the alternative. In the essay "Constructed Bodies, Deconstructing Ads: Sexism in Advertising" it is stated that "Because traditional gender roles are so easily recognized by consumers, they figure conspicuously in the imagery of mass media. Gender images hit the heart of individual identity. What better place to choose than an arena of social life that can be communicated at a glance and that reaches into the core of individual identitiy?" Fashion advertisements have a lot to say about gender and power, just take a look at the Gucci and Dolce and Gabbana ads below.

I believe that a brand can sell their “product” or “name” in non traditional ways that are neither insulting nor hateful. Creativeness can go a long way, and it can also make a positive difference. An ad can be "cutting edge" without "cutting down" entire groups of people, especially women.

"Don't look back."

What struck me the most about Berger’s “Ways of Seeing” was the line near the beginning of our reading, “To be born a woman has been to be born, within an allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men.” This statement both embodies the treatment of women as a fragile object and the later sexual aspect, that women are aroused in a third-party position. Although I agree with this to a certain extent, I would argue that it is actually men who need to perceive women this way because of their fascination with women. Men are programmed to think that they are in charge and – like the story of Adam and Eve— a woman’s role is to tempt that power away, but a real man never gives in. In actuality, the dynamic is more like the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. The story goes that Orpheus has a gift of music so strong, that he can make the gods themselves weep. Orpheus’s wife Eurydice dies suddenly in a fatale accident and Orpheus decides to use his gift to convince the gods of the underworld to allow Eurydice to come back to earth. His plan works, but with the condition that he must walk in front of her and not look back until they both had reached the upper-world. Despite the warning, he looks back and loses the love-of-his-life. Over thousands of years of retelling the reasoning behind Orpheus’s choice has morphed into concern for Eurydice because he hears her scream or the gods trick him into looking back by creating a cave-in directly behind him. The real moral is that men need to watch women. They derive their self-worth from it, and then ashamedly try to convince women it is solely that other way around. In reality, no matter how talented, intelligent, beautiful, and skilled society says you are, we still have to look back.

Female Broadcasters

A link to the photos we will be talking about:
http://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd93427j_77frpvhpg6

Here are a few links to videos we will be showing in our presentation:

Katie Couric and Ellen DeGeneres talks about body image and beauty:
http://www.youtube.com/user/katiecouric?blend=3&ob=4#p/u/19/BdxItFu5dsg

Katie Couric CBS News Promo:
http://www.youtube.com/user/katiecouric?blend=3&ob=4

A clip from The Women's Conference 2009:
http://blip.tv/play/_0aBrv9hAA.swf

Other videos--Katie Couric's interview with Shakira:
http://www.youtube.com/user/katiecouric?blend=3&ob=4#p/u/52/2rsJfN43z8k
http://www.youtube.com/user/katiecouric?blend=3&ob=4#p/u/53/ErTW7DwLrx0
http://www.youtube.com/user/katiecouric?blend=3&ob=4#p/u/53/ErTW7DwLrx

-Matt, Anne, and Michelle

Check out Activity Grrrls' Radio Revolution!

Hey guys, if you get a chance check out the show I co-host on Hunter Radio.

Stream Activity Grrrls' Radio Revolution with Danielle and Steph, live at whcs.hunter.cuny.edu every Tuesday at 2pm.

Join our new Facebook group here:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=331037703392

Check out past shows here:
http://tuesdayfall09.tumblr.com/post/326063502/activity-grrrls-radio-revolution
http://whcsdjs.tumblr.com/

WHERE TO GO FOR YOUR WEEKLY DOSE OF ROCK 'N' ROLL

Women as The Other

When it comes to analyzing and discussing the “male gaze”, I cannot help but think about the concept of “the other”. Women being “the other”, an object that is foreign yet intriguing and exotic to the man, who is the observer. The portrayal of women in European art and in advertisements today is not reality, but is the viewers/man’s idea and perception of her. This is similar to Bergman’s idea that men act and women appear, “Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at (Berger, 47)”. Throughout history women have been aware of being seen, which in turn has given men the power, the power to decide what is beautiful, sexual, and acceptable.

There is a great need for social change when it comes to viewing women. Women are so used to being submissive and accepting of men’s “looks”. Women are not here to flatter men or live up to their ideals, women are beautiful even when not being watched by men. Like in European art, in advertisements today women still look at the camera as if it is a potential suitor, a man in which she needs desperately to be accepted by sexually. Women identify with these models, as well as see these women (themselves) being watched by men. Laura Mulvey also talks about how women are the individuals being observed while the men are the “bearer(s) of the look.” (Mulvey, 837). Women indeed play the passive role while men take on the active role.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but who is the beholder? Is the man the only one that can determine what is beautiful? The male gaze will forever be part of women’s lives, but it is the woman that needs to choose to not be passive and refuse this absurd ideal of what is means to be a woman.

male gaze versus female gaze

“woman as image, man as bearer of the look” The Oppositional Gaze, 123, Bell Hooks
For me the problem with the male gaze is that our men are learning that the woman are like an object and I don’t want to be general - to say that every men are the same - but it is true that the way that men see women is like an object because this society is dominated by men, even if women have power, men still have more power than them and the knowledge that the society receives is that women have to be beautiful all the time, but not beautiful inside, first outside and then inside, and we are all the time fighting to be perfect for this society : be nice, be intelligent, be a good worker, try to get this ideal of womanhood but we can’t because we are not perfect, we are only human, but it is really hard to accept that, to renounce this ideal. For this, I think that the biggest problem is that we have to deal with our own insecurities. Moreover, these insecurities increased with time and we feel like we are "not enough" for this society.
For me, you can find many illustrative examples in magazine like Vogue or Glamour that are selling to women that they have to have a perfect body, wear the perfect clothes. If you are not as it is willing at the moment, they try to teach you how to get it, not only that but they make you feel like to have to get it to be accepted. In reaction to this insecurity feeling, we have to create an oppositional gaze to fight against it. For this I agree with Bell Hooks, that we need this to break the stereotypes that this society has shaped. The oppositional gaze means that we have to no accept the "normal", and to create a new critical gaze in reaction to that.

Before reading this, I felt that did not like the way that the media represent women but this reading help me to have concrete explanation about it. In my personal case, I live in a country (Spain) that cares about how the women look, but when I arrived in the USA, I realized that here it is even worst, the image of the women is more exploited in the way that you have to be nice and perfect all the time. I really admire the women that are living here, in this country because it is really hard to survive!

The Gazes

It is natural that any species with eyes look around in order to take in what is in their environment. Being on the top of the list in terms of brain development, we humans not only see what is surrounding us, but also have the ability to judge in detail what we perceive. In her essay, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, Laura Mulvey, a film theorist, believes that only men, survey women. In addition, John Berger states in his paper, Ways of Seeing, that women watch the men as they look at them. Bell Hooks, however, argues in her article, The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators, that women can also observe.

The male gaze is the way a male spectator views a woman. As Laura Mulvey stated, women are the figures being observed while the men are the “bearer[s] of the look.” (Mulvey 837) The females play the “passive” role: they do not take physical action; they only “watch themselves being looked at”, (Berger 47) while the males take the “active” role: the ones doing the looking. Mulvey feels that women are here to serve the purpose of “to-be-looked-at-ness,” where the females are responsible to pleasure the desire of the males.


The male gaze is a pervasive form of vision in popular culture because the mass media constantly creates, displays, and maintains this idea. Many movies, television shows, commercials, and books today provide proof of this. The concept of the male gaze was present even as far back as the 1500s. In William Shakespeare’s play “Romeo and Juliet,” Romeo claims to be “in love” with a woman simply because she is beautiful. However, the woman does not love him back, and Romeo’s cousin, Benvolio, advises Romeo to look at other women to forget about the pain of the heartbreak. Another example is when Paris asks Capulet for permission to marry Juliet, and Capulet answers by requesting Paris to look at other girls first before he sets his mind on Juliet.

The song Beep by The Pussycat Dolls (PCD) featuring Will.I.Am of the Black Eyed Peas further exemplifies this concept. In the song, The PCD represent the women who are being checked out by the men, portrayed by Will.I.Am. Together, they sing about how most men see women, but the women not caring that they are taking pleasure in looking at their body, even though they are more than they appear to be. This shows how the media identifies our behavior to be and reinforces this way of thinking.

Yet another instance is from the movie She’s the Man. Sebastian, who is really Viola pretending to be her twin brother at the time, was sitting at lunch with his guy friends, and when the “hottest girl in the school” came in the cafeteria, s/he exclaimed, “Check out the booty on that blondie!” Viola assumes that looking at girls and making such comments is what boys do, so she does so as a guy. This demonstrates that we have learned that it is the role of the men to look at women, and the society deems this to be the norm for our gender roles.

The oppositional gaze, or the “overwhelming longing to look, a rebellious desire,” (Hooks 116) is the notion that black women can also be spectators. As Bell Hooks wrote, we were told not to stare when we were younger, and slaves were not allowed to stare at their masters. Hooks brings forward the topic that black women are not represented enough as white women are in the media, and that white men do not take as much interest in watching black women in movies. The “desired look at body is white.” (Hooks 118) Because of this unjust conduct, “or the insertion of violating representation,” the oppositional gaze was developed. (Hooks 122)

Sometimes I feel like I do not fully connect with movies that contain mostly black people. It is not that I am being racist. I think I have difficulty associating myself with these movies because I am more accustomed with movies that predominantly control Hollywood, and that is movies played mainly by whites with “white” storylines. However, there are now more movies and television shows that are about blacks, such as Girlfriends, Madea Goes to Jail, and Precious. As I am writing this, I am now realizing that the “black cinema” storylines have the same basic concepts as the “white supremacy,” although there might be some minor differences. With more diverse characters emerging in the media, I feel I am able to interrelate more with what is being put on show. (Asians are still underrepresented though!)

From as far back as I can recall, women always seemed to be the ones that are the objects of appeal; men occasionally were. In mainstream media, whether it is movies, music videos, or magazines, women are the main focus, and they are usually presented in a sexual manner. Sex sells because it is desirable and pleasurable; it is always either what the viewer wants or wants to be. I remember when I was younger and first saw an advertisement of a really thin woman with huge breasts, wearing only a bikini, which was practically next to nothing, I felt uncomfortable. I thought, how do the people who created this know that this is what I want to look at? Do they just assume that the observer is a man (this was before I knew about homosexuality) and finds satisfaction in seeing this? I was offended that they were being unfair like that, that they only show what men wants and likes to see but not what women desire.

However, one thing always appeared to be true for both men and women is that only the beautiful and attractive people were showed off. But how do we describe what “beautiful” is? There is no set rule for what exactly is good looking. As the saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We as individuals dictate who or what has a pleasant appearance, and whatever the majority, the spectators being both women and/or men, believe is pretty will be what beautiful is.

Eye Candy

Mulvery tells us that the male gaze is when a woman is not seen as a human being but rather an object which needs to be observed. There is clear evidence of this in popular culture; movies, music videos and advertisements all play their roles in portraying woman as sexual objects and nothing more. For any product there is always a target audience, you find that targets weakness and you expose it to entice them purchase from you. The media found what makes men spend, sexy women. What do they do get custumers? Budweiser’s ads are a wonderful example, along with the trademark name they throw in a voluptuous female wearing only a bikini, in the ad above they improvised but read closely on her leg, it says "You can twist anything into a swimsuit." In the ad along the side, the womans make the label, symbolizing that they come as a package deal. So Budweiser, are you telling me that if men buy your beer, woman in bikinis will come running to cater to the big spender? No! Budweiser if they can’t get woman like the ones in your ads when their sober, a beer will not change their luck. “…the woman is blamed and is punished by being made subservient to the man.” Now what if Budweiser hired me to make an ad for them, I’d expose reality. There would be a before and after: man sitting at the bar, across from him sits an average woman he pays no mind to her, after a few beers he gazes over at the same female and now she looks like the girl in the ads.

Sex will always sell! Men are not ashamed to gaze and woman as well are conscious and also judge the woman in the eye of media in one way or another. We are so exposed to sexual images we don’t even think twice about the who, what or why. A woman would think: Who is this woman? What are her interests? Why did she make this career choice? For men only the physical is relevant: Who are you and where have you been all my life? What do I have to do to speak to you? Why do you not want me like I want you! The 1988 film Who framed Roger Rabbit stars Jessica Rabbit who leave both men and cartoons in a trance. She is a sex symbol in the animation industry and children are not even aware that they are being exposed to the beauty of a womans body.

The gaze is a way of making someone else ashamed, Bell Hooks in Oppositional Gaze tells how white slave owners would use the gaze to punish by instilling fear into the African Americans. “Afraid to look but fascinated by the gaze. There is power in the look.” There is deep truth in this. I work with children and I always give them “the look” as a warning and it always works! For me the gaze is the power of the eyes to communicate through unspoken words. Every day I am exposed to the male gaze. I get on the train and there is will some guy that is violating me with his eyes. The funny thing is they want you to see them looking at you, they show no shame. Even our president was caught gazing at something that he could not have, its human nature to feed into something as intising as "eye candy." These silent words speak to me every day and they make me want to be invisible. I am aware of the male gaze, before it would make me feel shameful but now I use it as power. A man can no longer hurt me with their gaze because I know I am not an object. Men will always look and I have seen myself being looking at. I feel as though I am rambling so I am going to let Hooks speak for me, “… I thought again about these connections, about the way power as domination reproduces itself in different locations employing similar apparatuses, strategies, and mechanism of control.”

Deconstructing the Gazes

“Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at.” This line is at the heart of what John Berger calls the male gaze. If you look at virtually any form of media—whether it be a magazine, film, television—almost everything published has been influenced, imprinted, and sometimes tainted by a phallocentric, male perspective. When a girl walks down the street and a construction worker looks her up and down—this is the male gaze in action. When a woman is in danger and a man rescues her, (and then he feels more macho because he has rescued a damsel in distress) the stereotypes here are enforced by the male gaze.

Berger’s article really made me think. I agree with a lot of what he says, but I also keep pondering about what he doesn’t say. He constructs his argument as if it should apply to all women, but it doesn’t—it specifically concerns white, straight women and he ignores “The Other(s),” namely women who aren’t white, homosexual women, etc. He just lumps all women together, but things aren’t so cut and dry. In the heterosexist, male-dominated world we live in, it is difficult to construct an argument which critically analyzes every aspect of mankind. Even that word I just used—mankind—and the fact that all humans collectively are referred to as “mankind,” perfectly illustrates the male gaze.

And what about those behind the male gaze: the men themselves? Some people would attribute male aggressiveness, for example, to biology. But when a guy gets mad and punches a hole through a wall, I don’t believe this is entirely due to his high testosterone levels; it is because he knows he is male and is aware of his maleness. Notions of masculinity and femininity have less to do with biology and more to do with socially constructed notions and norms. When a man is effeminate, some would perceive him as “girly” or less of a man; when a homosexual women gets angry, a sexual essentialist (one who believes all “varieties” of sexuality can be traced to DNA), would say this is due to a chromosomal imbalance which is making her behave like a male. Others would say she is simply imitating a male and taking on “male characteristics.”

Berger writes: “The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female” (47). When reading this, it is important to realize that the surveyor of a woman in herself in not innately biologically male, but that this surveyor has been influenced and brainwashed by the propagated male gaze, which is a product of environmental factors. Berger later mentions femininity. “[Women] survey, like men, their own femininity”(63). It should be noted that femininity is a social construct created by men to describe a woman’s fragility. And women need to be fragile, so men can be more macho in comparison and in turn dominate women and possess them.

Bell Hooks writes from an entirely different perspective. She discusses a pair of eyes that sneak a peak when they are “not supposed to,” a viewpoint that co-exists with the male gaze, but challenges it: this is the oppositional gaze, the gaze of the black female.

It seemed like an eternity before blacks were depicted in the media, and when they finally were, they were portrayed in unflattering lights, like in Amos ‘n Andy, which was rife with stereotypes. The oppositional gaze asserts that blacks shouldn’t settle for such contrived representations of themselves. Hooks writes: “Even when representations of black women were present in film, our bodies were being there to serve—to enhance and maintain white womanhood as object of the phallocentric gaze” (119). In our racist, heteronormative society, representations of blacks (or any group of Others), put forth by those who have been influenced by the male gaze (which is racist in itself), aren’t going to be presented accurately. Such portrayals aren’t actually concerned with blackness at all. They exist to promote and preserve the “purity” of whiteness.

Exploitation of blacks and black females is nothing new. The Hottentot Venus is a prime example. In the 19th century she was displayed like a circus freak because she had an enlarged buttocks and labia (http://www.heretical.com/miscella/baker4.html). After she died at age 26, her brain and genitals were preserved and displayed in museum, where they weren’t removed until the 1970s.

Black women throughout history have been portrayed as freakish, sexual objects and threatening. If you look closely at magazine ads, black women are often clothed in animal prints. This enforces the stereotype hat black women are animalistic and threatening—they may as well be from the jungle.


I don’t think we will ever live in a time where it will be the norm for a black woman to save a white man in distress—but you never know. One thing I take from these articles is that it’s important to think critically. But we shouldn’t just think this way, we should live critically as well.

STOP STARING

“Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at,” (Berger 47). John Berger explains the male gaze perfectly with this sentence. The male gaze is part of the patriarchal structure of Western culture, like mentioned in class, the patriarchal structure that was set up by Judeo Christian views. Deeper than a structure the male gaze dominants the way a female sees herself, again quoting Berger, “The surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female,” (Berger 47). The male gaze suggests that women do not have much agency or say in what they do. What women do is controlled by this underlying structure that they learn from childhood, a structure that molds women into what men want from them. Taking this understanding of the male gaze and applying it to modern media, different from what Berger does in his text it is now apparent to me that when models are glaring at the audience in an ad, magazine or even in movies, they are really looking at the men staring at them. Furthermore, these readings directly spoke to me as a woman, when I look at magazines, on websites, and ads those empty glares on the faces’ of the models have never been there for me! I was never supposed to identify with them, because they were appealing to men! Knowing this now within the perspective of the readings, I feel like I always knew this. I knew that when I looked at a model and what she was selling, I felt like “oooh that’s cute, look at how pretty that make-up makes her look” I would want to “look” pretty too and being pretty meant people would look at me and recognize this beauty.

However when I looked at billboards or any form of media I could not identify with the models not only because I was not suppose to, she was only there for the male gaze. But I could not identify with them because most of the time they are White models and actresses. As a Dominican-American woman my identification with the media is through some Hispanic or African-American female figures in media. My lack of identification in the media is due to the limited representation of women of ethnic backgrounds. Bell Hooks examines this limited representation in her reading, titled “The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators.” The oppositional gaze developed as a way to resist the lack of representation of African-Americans in the media, and more specifically the absence of black women. Hooks argues that the oppositional gaze was constructed as a tool to resist not only the lack of representation of black women and men, but also the negative representation of blacks in the media. According to Bell Hooks the oppositional gaze was what responded to the negative representation of blacks by developing black independent films, (Hooks 117). One of the things that I related to in her reading was her statement in regards to the absence of black women in films:
“Black female spectators have had to develop looking relations within cinematic context that constructs our presence as absence, that denies the “body” of the black female so as to perpetuate White supremacy and with it a phallocentric spectatorship where the woman to be looked at and desired is white,” (Hooks 118). These lines reminded me of the scene in “Precious” where the protagonist is getting ready to go to school in front of the mirror, and her reflection is of a young white, blonde hair, blue eyes girl and not herself. Hook’s emphasis on the lack of black positive representation forced me to wonder whether this denial of the black female body is what allows the media to portray women of ethnic backgrounds as animals, body parts, or caricatures and not people! Interesting enough Bell Hooks also mentions that when black women watched films they needed to forget and not look too “deep” into the negation of black characters, in order to enjoy the film.

These readings compel me to think about the male gaze in modern media and about the oppositional gaze for Hispanic women. Not that we have awareness what is the next step, how do we take this understanding and do more than just think. I am pretty sure that the male gaze affects all women of different races and socio-economic statuses, but how can we still be sexual, confident and assertive without doing it for anyone else, but ourselves. Not for the female surveyor who is male, but for the female surveyor who is female. I’ll leave you guys with a picture of Kanye West and Amber Rose who is idolized for her voluptuous body. What do you think about the picture does she have ownership of her sexuality, is the male gaze present in this picture? Picture found on WeddingPros.com

The Male Gaze and the Oppositional Gaze

(This image is taken from Marilyn Monroe's Official Web site)

It might be hard to define the male gaze today because it has been sitting there when we realized it and we don’t know where it came from.

According to John Burger, women are born to be looked at by men. Because how they appear to others especially to men means a lot in their life, they become obsessive to survey themselves. Burger notes simply but precisely, in his book Ways of Seeing, “…men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at”. The idea that women are objects to be looked at has often been seen in European oil paintings. Women have often been depicted in nude by male painters to be served for male owners. One of the paintings he mentions as the example is The Judgement of Paris, and this painting signifies the nature that female beauty is determined by the male gaze. The idea of judging female beauty is all around us today; Miss America, Miss Universe, sexiest females of the year contests, Idol competitions, and even on the street, men observe women and tend to say, “She is damn hot.”

Female appearance as objects has played a key role in a variety of media. Laura Mulvey analyzes the function of women in film. As she says in her essay, Visual Pleasure And Narrative Cinema, “active/male and passive/female”, female figure in film is represented as a sexual object to be looked at by male protagonist and the male spectator to give them visual pleasure in the screen. I thought it is very interesting that Mulvey argues two kinds of pleasures in looking, which are fetishistic scopophila and voyeurism, and the relationship between women’s presence in film and the sense of castration. I have realized the female role as the impact of sexuality in film before reading her essay, but I have never thought the sexy and attractive heroines can be the threat against men’s pleasure of looking.

Bell Hooks develops a different point of view from Burger and Mulvey’s, which is the gaze consisting of both elements of race and gender. According to Bell Hooks, the oppositional gaze is a way of resistance. Under the domination by white society, suppressed black people came to know that the “gaze” open the door for resistance against the dominating white. Bell Hook, in The Oppositional Gaze, defines the oppositional gaze as “an overwhelming longing to look, a rebellious”.

As film and television came to black people’s life, their gazes became “interrogating gazes” as the spectators. It contained their critical attitudes toward the stereotyped and dismissive representations of black people by the white in movies and TV shows. However, only black men could be the critical black spectators because “racism” was the only subject, which means “gender” could not even become a controversial topic in the phallocentric society. Thus, black women were just the backdrop or there to make black men look good. When they look at movies, they saw their presence as absence, objects of male gaze, or foil to white women. There was no other choice.

With the awareness of how they have been represented in film, black female spectators have begun to develop the oppositional gaze. Hooks says, analyzing Laura Mulvey’s Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema, “placing ourselves outside that pleasure in looking, Murvey argues, was determined by a ‘split between active/male and passive/female.’ Black female spectators actively chose not to identify with the film’s imaginary subject because such identification was disenabling”. With not identifying themselves as the victim of male gaze in the phallocentric society like white women do, they have found the room to resist constructed inequality of looking between women and men.

Whenever I watch Hollywood movies or I go to the magazine section of Barnes & Nobel, I always see women who look so attractive and actually recognize they are looked at. To be honest, I find them attractive, and then I blame myself for being not as attractive as they are. Even I recognize this is the structure established by media and the phallocentric society, it seems difficult to ignore the media and throw away the concept of how women should be look like today.

The Gaze

Media representation on women is one that shows varies ways that women are depicted by an audience. Women are seen as not only a figure of entertainment but present an idea of a gaze.In John Berger idea of the "male gaze", women are depict on what the male gender see them as. Women are not worry on what they are seen as by others of their gender but what the male gender see them as. Today the male gaze is a pervasive form of vision in popular culture because the idea to sell a product is to focus on what is the male point of view. We live in a world where a male view strongly dominant how things are to sold in today. In an Axe commercial, they show a male figure putting on this fragrance and being wanted by all women. Though the idea is to sell the fragrance to men , you must pay attention to the women in the commercial, these women are not women of every body type, but mostly women of what i like to call the "perfect body". These women are tall, slighter women....model material. Men sees that this product is to attract thes women, and women sees reads this as a way they should be seen to the men who not only buy it but wear it.


The oppositional gaze descibed by Bell Hooks is about how afirican american women is described by media. Hooks uses the idea of that "to look" is something that is what people want. This idea to look for african americans is critical to learn and to know what is happen. It help one's knowledge expand.

The Male Gaze and the Oppositional Gaze

Women and media have had a love and hate relationship with the representation of women in most main stream media. Women in media continue to be depicted in the male gaze. The theorist that coined the male gaze John Berger does his analysis strictly on Western renaissance art. John Berger’s male gaze is translated to modern media and how women are socialized as well. Although there is counter theory the oppositional gaze, where theorist as Laura Mulvey and Bell Hooks develop a more comprehensive criticism on the male gaze.

John Berger’s male gaze that haunts women in media to this day, the male gaze is simple put that women are objects of pleasure for men. Women are constantly being looked at by men in a sexual nature. “Men look at women; Women watch themselves being looked at.” (Berger, page 47). This simple quote explains exactly how women feel and how women are socialized as well. Women according to Berger are defined by the male gaze. I personally agree because it is how I was socialized definitely and in movies why is it that the women needs saving constantly. Women are socialized to want to be the desire of the male gaze and it all starts even with our fairly tales. My personal favorite Snow White, Snow White lived with seven dwarfs, even though they themselves were helpless they were her keeper. Of course Snow White is beautiful and saved by the prince. Even in my favorite fairytale there is the male gaze in the mere fact that Snow White needed to be saved is depicted as beautiful and very white as well. Another aspect of John Berger’s theory on the male gaze is the guilt that is transferred over to women. As if she is the blame that men look at her. “You painted a naked women because you enjoyed looking at her, you put a mirror in her hand and you called the painting vanity, thus morally condemning the women whose nakedness you had depicted for your own pleasure” (Berger, page 51) this citation clearly illustrates how men not only objectify women but also want to blame her for the desire men have in wanting to look at her. I personally identify with this part of Berger’s theory because many times I have been told by my father that I shouldn’t wear anything that might attract attention because then it is my fault. It is the same argument made when women dress in a certain way and men are insulting and then say do you blame me, you asked for my offensive come on by the way you look. In the end of the day the men are the ones that are behaving incorrectly and they should feel guilty for their actions but even in that women become the burned of the male guilt.

Another analysis of the male gaze would be the oppositional gaze. One way to introduce the oppositional gaze would be through the theorist Laura Mulvey. Laura Mulvey analysis is based on Freudian concepts. Laura Mulvey starts with understanding the need for the male gaze in reference to women. The reason according to Laura Mulvey is the unconscious of the men anxiety of castration causes men to objectify women. “Ultimately, the meaning of woman is sexual difference, the absence of the penis as visually ascertainable, the material evidence on which is based the castration complex essential for the organization of entrance to the symbolic order and the law of the father.” (Mulvey, page 840) the quote illustrates how the male gaze is inevitable because of the male unconscious constantly having an anxiety of castration in contrast to women. Women bring this anxiety on according to Laura Mulvey and one way for men to gain control is first being in control of the gaze and the male gaze causes to devalue the object or turning women in fetishes. These concepts for me do not complete the picture to the oppositional gaze. Laura Mulvey has some valid points but then does not offer anything to counteract the male gaze in media. Mulvey is only explaining why it is there to begin with for me that isn’t enough.

Another theorist that completes the theory of the oppositional gaze is Bell Hooks. Bell Hooks adds another dimension to the oppositional gaze which is race. Media rarely represents women in favorable light but black women have almost never had strong and beautiful characterization of their gender and color. “They resented the way these screen images could assault black womanhood, could name us bitches, nags.” (Hooks, page 120) here Bell Hooks illustrates how the main stream media particularly has been degrading to black women. Bell Hooks adds “..much feminist film criticism disallows the possibility of a theoretical dialogue that might include black women’s voices” (Hooks, page 125). According to Bell hooks not only has main stream media have depicted black womanhood in an offensive manner but feminist who are there champion for women have left out black women in the criticism. I personally agree with Bell Hooks here because not only in film critic is this fact but in many other fields black women are not accounted for at all. Bell Hooks continues to state that the way media will be bale to change is if women especially black women continue to be critical of films, books, etc. In turn directors, screen writers, writers, every media maker will eventually and hopefully keep in mind to create more media that is a fully representation of women and black women.

All the theorist I have read have made criticism that media is sexist and racist. The point that there were criticisms on media is a positive sign of moving forward. To me dialogue creates media makers that are more conscientious to women in their media.

This is Miss Universe 2003 a.k.a. Miss Dominican Republic. In a country where
73% identify as mixed and 11% as black we have historically sent very light skinned Anglo-Dominicans to the Miss Universe pageants. I highlight Miss Universe in order to narrow the focus of my post. I will be focusing on the Dominican gaze as it pertains to Dominican women.

Back to the male gaze. John Berger identifies the structures in place that account for the engendering of "seeing." The gaze is distinctly male, that is, one that appeals to the male audience or the male conventions. Consequently, the ways women see is distinctly colored by the influence of the male gaze. Women don't see things, they see themselves being seen (to paraphrase).

He uses example in Art History, pornography and advertisements to illustrate the pervasiveness of this gaze. There is an example of a female nude renaissance painting juxtaposed with a woman in a porn magazine. The context of the pictures are radically different but the form of the woman is the same

The male gaze casts a pervasive and incessant influence on all manners of media and art. So much so that is has engendered the way we as human beings interact. The role of that gaze is not with out its realistic counterparts. Women go to great lengths to "look" a certain way. But what is this looking without its audience? Berger would suggest that this audience is distinctly male.

Conversely, Bell Hooks argument for the oppositional gaze is an indirect antidote to to Berger's claim. Hooks writes in the 90s, more than 20 years after Berger writes Ways of Seeing. Her work on the oppositional gaze builds on top of decades of feminist writing on the male gaze. Hooks identifies an alternative way of seeing that is not only gendered but racial. The predominant way of seeing is not only male but white. Hooks would argue that the gaze is FIRST white and then male, because of the saturation of white superiority in culture. The oppositional gaze is a response and adaptation to the way non-whites, particularly black women, consume media.

Hooks speaks of her experience as a young girl watching Amos and Andy (racist TV show from the 50s)and how it shaped the way she view the world. The show didn't completely shape her perception of blacks in the U.S. but rather is showed the way white culture saw blacks. It perpetuated that way of seeing by being "entertainment" and therefore completely innocent to charges of racism.

Back to Miss Universe. As a Dominican-American the gaze that I have always encountered is one grounded in the colonial history of the Dominican Republic. Despite the statistics that contradict the images of Dominican people we as Americans are exposed, 90% of Dominicans have some West African ancestry. Dominicans, in some fascinating feat of black-denial, claim any trace of dark skin to some cooked up long lost Indian ancestry--despite the fact that the natives of the Hispanola were decimated in the 16th century.

My experience as a light-skinned, afro-haired Dominican has always been in direct opposition to a lot of my Dominican paisanos. My hair is a topic of political discourse because it hasn't been chemically altered to be straight. My lips are an "embarrasing" African ancestry appendage. And my light skin is the "compensation" to the affliction imposed on me. Translation: Zoila you got bad hair and damn you half black? But at least you light skinned."

People have actually said this to me, in the 21st century.

The way Dominican people see (pardon the gross generalization) is an example of the careful and deliberate denial of anything African. Our models, celebrities and representatives are careful to note their lilting Spanish, our deliberately non-African hair and light skin. The question remains is this the way we want to be seen or what others want to see of us?

Despite the fact that Dominicans and Dominican-Americans are an increasing presence in sports, entertainment and media there is a difficult renegotiation who and what we are. This process of how we are seen and how we see is new and treacherous because our numbers are increasing in the states. Nevertheless, we must take notice of the simplicity of the ways of seeing as it pertains to Dominicans.

Berger's essay argued for the idea that looking is not an objective empirical enterprise, rather it is one that is cultivated and shaped to fit a certain male taste. Furthermore, Bell Hooks essay argued that looking is not only cultivated and shaped to fit a certain male taste but a polemic. They identified looking as more than a mere verb but a powerful cultural exchange in what we see, how we see it and why we see it.

I choose the example of Miss Universe 2003 to highlight a concern of mine that has come up after reading these essays. If women are to be looked at, and models are seen as symbols of beauty then why do we choose symbols that oppose what most of us look like?

Be Careful.....

Hey everyone I just wanted to let everyone know that if you take buses to school give yourself extra time, because they are reporting major delays because of the roads being icy and slippery, the trains are only reporting minor delays...be safe and see everyone in class.

The male gaze, the oppositional gaze, and me gazing at society

The male gaze refers to how women are portrayed in images and other media as objects of the desire of men, in positions or with a focus on how a man would like to see them. The result is not only that images of women are for the most part made with the male gaze in mind, but women consuming such media and living in the society are forced to view everything around them with a male gaze and to judge themselves against the portrayal. Women become passive objects of the male desire, and their personality and confidence are conditioned to fitting in with this script in order to validate their femininity, which includes constantly comparing herself against these images and other women and becoming an object herself that can "attract" a man (pursuing is frown upon) Thus, pretty much all the agency is in the hands of the male, and of the portrayal they choose to gaze upon.

Coming from a Spanish background, we are known for being a "hot blooded" and "passionate" culture. These, of course are keywords for sexual content, and if you glanced at any Hispanic TV channel, you'll notice by that lack of clothes that we come from warm weather. Telenovelas (Spanish for soap operas) are famous for featuring beautiful women fighting for a male lover, only to be subverted by the evil hot chick that's a little crazy. All these novelas show women in tight clothes, lately with extreme curves, which are often portrayed as commanding the desire of males, and who are given the power of making any positive female portrayal in show invisible and invisible. The camera doesn't apologize, it sets in on the hot girl and her curves, and everyone else in the novel is either doing the same thing (the men) or are shamed/reduced by it (the women).

The image is of a character from a current novela called "Hasta que el dinero nos separe" (Until money separates us), which centers around a guy working as a car salesman. The female pictured is also a salesman, and her character description from the website defines her as a very successful salesperson because of her looks (checked) that distracts the salesmen (checked) and who is not very intelligent but is known for causing drama (checked). So we have somebody that you don't need to struggle figuring out, who captures your gaze, and who makes other females feel less because she gets all the attention, even if she doesn't have any positive qualities besides her looks.

When I see this I find it amusing and almost laughable, specially because you are conscious that you are watching or viewing something for other reasons and the “male gaze” is totally unnecessary and doesn’t add any value. For example, I never understood the need to have women portrayed as superheroes in skimpy clothes, because unless it’s in the name of agility or her own personality (see Catwoman), there are no upsides for the superhero. While looking for images, I read online about the objectification of women in comic books and graphic novels (http://brokenmystic.wordpress.com/2008/05/03/the-objectification-of-women-in-graphic-novels/), and it never ceases to amaze me how obvious this is in comics. You could have great stories, great art, great characters, but it’s a given that you are going to get at least one female with extreme curves (mostly on their chest) and the artist will make sure you see them good and often.

And many times you’ll have plenty of contrasting female characters without the same appeal to basically glorify the female that grabs all the attention. And many times the contrast includes making the women who are not as attractive have all the positive traits a strong intelligent woman should. So in a sense, it’s basically telling guys: “if you get a smart thoughtful woman, she’s not going to be as hot…just letting you know.” I mean, seriously? Of course, we are all guilty of consuming media for the entertainment they give us first and then if we care enough we might recognize issues with what’s being presented (e.g. how the lack of minorities in certain media settings is jarring). The male gaze and the objectification of women (even if females don’t realize it – see Victoria’s Secret conversation) are issues so embedded within our society that I think women look forward to comparing themselves to the latest anointed Queen Bee that they should strive for and follow. If my instincts are any good, lately I see a lot of adult females gravitating towards someone like Lady Gaga, which gives them the chance to say “She’s talented, and yet she’s different” because of her flamboyant appearance, but she’s yet another blonde impossibly skinny pop singer that’s captivating our attention…while dancing in skimpy clothes. However, at least her outfits take the attention away from the curves a bit. And maybe that’s why a lot of females identify with her: they don’t have to constantly face her body and her good looks, because the focus is somewhere else. With the scarcity of female icons that are not objectified (Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey, to name two of the most popular ones) it must be a relief to set that gaze somewhere else.

The oppositional gaze is the idea that instead of shutting out conflicting or offending representations of females in films, you should actively critique and question them. This includes ignoring the fact that black women are severely under- or misrepresented in films, and more often than not unless it’s a genre film, non-existent at all. It developed because of the pervasive lack of identification with the white female or the portrayals themselves, and because to have pleasure it entailed a “regression through identification” since after the movie ended they had to come back to reality. There was no single image that accurately represented black females, and that yearning tipped over when she watched Imitation of Life and identified with the character Peola and her powerless struggle to have a voice. Thus the oppositional gaze became a way to find pleasure not in the looking or identification, or in the relationship to the male in the picture, but in questioning why the portrayals are that way and in being able to discuss the inherent flaws that are not meant to be the focus.

Peola and her mother