Thread by @bluegreycloset, I was finally able to listen to @citizendamepod's latest episode on feminist [...]

I was finally able to listen to @citizendamepod& #39;s latest episode on feminist film criticism, which revolved largely around the topic of the Male/Female Gaze. I LOVED IT. I& #39;d like to expand on it a bit, if I may, coming from the perspective of a non-binary. First, a quick recap:

In @citizendamepod& #39;s conversation, Male Gaze was broken down as such:
The intended audience of the film is that of straight men.
The camera sees men as subjects, women as objects.
The women (objects) are put onscreen for the viewing pleasure of men, which is regularly sexual...

…even if not explicitly so.
As a result of almost every film being produced and shot with and through the Male Gaze, straight men are rarely required to identify with a film that is not “intended” for them, and often reject films that do this, which brings us to the Female Gaze.

The Female Gaze is less specifically defined, but the gist of it is as such:
The intended audience of the film is that of women.
The camera sees women as subjects, not objects.
Men can be portrayed as sexy/desirable, but the intent is to appreciate them, not consume as objects.

So when women, who have been perpetually forced without a second thought to identify with the men and male perspectives in films, are given a film that does not objectify them, but instead "subjectifies" them, the effect can be and often is a powerful and emotional response.

Again, this is all an extreme simplification of the lovely, nuanced conversation that @karenmpeterson, @lhbizness, and @kpierce624 had on the @citizendamepod that involved auteur theory, intersections with race, etc. PLEASE listen to the episode. Now for my two [queer] cents:

I’ve long had trouble with the idea of a Male/Female Gaze binary. Big surprise, I know. Now, it’s not that I don’t acknowledge the existence of either. It’s obvious that the Male Gaze exists, and there are many recent examples of films that I believe successfully eschew it...

…in favor of a Female Gaze (PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE comes to mind). However, just as a male/female gender dichotomy can be seen as false because people like me exist, I believe the Male/Female Gaze dichotomy can also be seen as maybe excluding all possible perspectives.

So what would a non-binary, or for the sake of simplicity, “Queer” Gaze entail? Short answer: I don’t know. But, after looking at media made by [openly] non-binary creators, I’ve maybe come up with a few things.
The Queer Gaze might be as such:

The intended audience of the film is that of non-binary people, or maybe more accurately, it doesn’t cater specifically to either a male or female audience.
No one is seen as an object, everyone is seen as a subject.
People can be portrayed as sexy/desirable, but the intent...

…is to appreciate them, not to consume as objects.
And, and this is key, people in the film are, instead of being viewed as either men or women, viewed as individuals representing various expressions of the gender spectrum. People will identify as cis-male or cis-female...

…or trans-male or trans-female or non-binary or genderfluid, and all of these people, while their identities are respected, will be seen as equally normal. Their identities would only influence the work in how the resulting institutional power dynamics (as society has...

…erected them) interact, and not how the camera views them.
Now, this sounds a lot like the camera being "objective," but that same conversation has been had re: the Female Gaze, so I think I can safely say that a camera with the Queer Gaze is also a subjective perspective,

and I think I can say that also because that is, to be honest, how I see things, and my perspective would obviously be a subjective one.
To begin to wind this thread down, I would like to reiterate that none of this is hard film theory, it’s speculation.

That said, I really do think this is something worth an exploration on a larger scale than Twitter. I’d love to see discussions on the topic of a Queer Gaze, papers written about it, and most importantly, I want to see films with a Queer Gaze!

To apply all of this to examples, I’ll list three pieces of film/television, each of which portrays a lesbian relationship, each in a very different way:
BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR - the Male Gaze
PORTRAIT OF A LADY ON FIRE - the Female Gaze
FEEL GOOD - the Queer Gaze

Netflix’s FEEL GOOD is the first thing I’ve seen (and I acknowledge that I& #39;ve seen far from everything) that made me feel “seen” as a non-binary. The way the show sees binary gender as this weird, almost awkward thing deeply resonated with me. A large part of that is thanks to...

…creator and star Mae Martin, who is non-binary, and gives an incredibly cathartic speech at one point about how they just DO NOT fit in as a woman or a man, and feel like a failure at being either. That hit me like a brick wall.

I put it to whoever is still reading this thread for some reason:
Do you think The Queer Gaze potentially exists?
If so, what does it look like?
What examples of The Queer Gaze have you seen, if any?
Is @citizendamepod one of the best podcasts? (it is)

Thank you for your time.

Latest Threads Unrolled: