Thursday, July 12, 2012

A Feministic Approach to Male Dominated Media



Gender inequalities exemplified and perpetuated by today’s overly abundant and highly pervasive mainstream media have been central to the themes of our studies thus far.  It’s apparent that many studies have attempted to analyze a variety of content, both subtle and explicit, for unrealistic or disproportionate representations of gender specific elements of sexuality. Despite slightly different coding and measurement practices, most research ultimately tends to confirm and reinforce the general ideology that media portrayals of gendered sexuality, which appear with great frequency in both television and movies, tend to cultivate unjustly stereotypical or inaccurate public discourse, with a specific emphasis on both the objectification and subjugation of female characters.
Considering the easily accessible and widespread nature of modern media, there is an arguably innumerable plethora of content capable supporting the aforementioned conclusions.  That being the case I thought it might be interesting to seek out and analyze sources that deviate from the norm or function in opposition to the typical, male dominated, gender roles characteristic of most media; devoid of or lacking instances of female objectification, demoralization, or implied inferiority.  The best case scenario would be finding content not just lacking negative connotations, but works that might ultimately cultivate predominantly positive and more feministic views amongst observers.  While searching for any existing literature pertaining to my investigation, I stumbled upon a few publications pertaining to the matter.
The book Feminism and Film, by Maggie Humm, borrows on concepts and ideals of a feministic approach, as opposed to the usual dominant “male gaze” inherent of most content.  Humm’s emphasis on the importance of feministic approaches to thinking about film is rooted in cinema’s potential for drastic misfiguring of traditional female characters.  Later she elaborates on feminist theory, claiming that “all variants of feminist theory tend to share three major assumptions: gender is a social construction that oppresses women more than men, ‘patriarchy’ fashions these constructions; women’s experiential knowledge best helps us to envision a future non-sexist society” (Humm, 1997).  Her writing focuses on two primary intentions: attacking gender stereotypes and the necessity to construct new more desirable models of femininity in cinema.  Unfortunately, feminist acknowledgement and criticism of the “male gaze” only identifies a problem, ultimately exacerbating the perceived binary opposition between men and women without offering any productive solutions to the problem.  Humm often draws on the works of author, Jeffery Brown, which explore how “recent action films challenge both cinematic and cultural assumptions about what constitutes natural or proper female behavior,” as well as making the claim that “the modern action heroine confounds essentialism through her performance of traditionally masculine roles.”  Accordingly, I sought to identify and analyze cinematic works of recent decades in which women assume empowered protagonist roles usually reserved for male actors.
Additional details regarding how these newly empowered or heroic female roles can be broken down and characterized by one of five female archetype variants.  The five archetypes he discusses are as follows: the dominatrix, the rape-avenger, the mother, the daughter, and the Amazon.  He explores each of these archetypes in detail, explaining how the dynamics of female empowerment embodied by each category are associated with the male castration complex that powerful female heroes evoke in their male counterparts.  Later he expands the scope of these non-traditional archetypes to include what he and others refer to as the “Final Girl,” or the strong persistent female character that struggles to survive an ordeal in which other characters often all die off by the end.  Each of these archetypal categories is designed to help female characters avoid provoking the male castration fear.  The extent of female toughness or heroism can vary within each specific category.  In some cases the masculine qualities applied to heroic or powerful female characters can completely eliminate any lingering hints of femininity, essentially mirroring the tough male persona typical of male action icons.
Numerous films released over the past few decades exemplify this dichotomy of female hero archetypes and how each one helps female actors to overcome the limitations usually imposed on their gender in accordance with the notion of the “male gaze” discussed by so many feministic theorists.  One of the earliest and most widely examined examples of this phenomenon can be seen in the film Alien, starring Sigourney Weaver as the main character.  None of the Alien films portray her character, Ripley, as particularly feminine or sexually appealing.  In the first film of the series, her archetypal role is that of resourceful “final girl survivor,” sole survivor of the catastrophic events of the film.  She plays the lead role amongst a cast otherwise comprised of men and subverts the usual complications inherent of the male castration complex by avoiding elements of excessive sex appeal, essentially becoming just another one of the guys, simply fighting for survival in an isolated hostile environment.  Interestingly, in the sequel, Aliens, the director, James Cameron, chose to take her character in a different more extreme direction, ditching her former archetypal role of the “Final Girl” that barely escapes with her life from the first movie.  Instead Ripley is transformed into a badass, giant gun-toting, alien massacring machine, not just merely surviving the ordeal but completely annihilating the eminent threat.  This role falls under the mother archetype, reinforced through the presence of a child she feels obligated to protect.

Another great example of female empowerment in cinema in recent decades is exemplified in the film Terminator, also the work of James Cameron.  Linda Hamilton is cast as Sarah Connor, the future mother of a man destined to lead the entire human race to victory in global war between man and machine, ultimately preventing the extinction of the human race.  Initially she exemplifies the traditional female role of most films, perhaps initially just a “Final Girl,” but as the plot escalates her archetypal role is more representative of the strong willed heroine and mother.  By the end of the film her male protector counterpart dies leaving her to vanquish the unstoppable murderous robot all by herself.  Ironically, just as Ripley’s character in the Alien series undergoes a dramatic transformation in terms of toughness between films, we can see a very similar transformation of Linda Hamilton’s character in the second terminator film.  She sheds almost every remaining feminine characteristic present in the first film, and instead has become an extremely muscular and masculine figure.  Everything about her appearance from her clothing selection to her buff, masculine physique, tells the viewers that she is “one tough bitch” not to be trifled with.  Suddenly her character is a tactical weapons expert, almost never without some intimidating guns or utilitarian military apparel.  Again her archetypal role is that of the protective mother willing to stop at nothing to ensure the survival of her offspring, the future savior of mankind.

Both Sigourney Weaver and Linda Hamilton’s characters undergo a radical transformation between films.  This can be attributed in part to increased acceptance or even preference of viewers regarding female action stars over time, suggesting a progressive acceptance of tough heroic female protagonists among spectators.  Alternatively, these transformations and the advancements they represent occur under the vigilant watch of the male director, James Cameron.  This helps to demonstrate and reinforce the idea that cinema is an industry predominantly shaped by males.  However, in this situation James Cameron could be viewed as an advocate of the empowered female role in cinema, attempting to challenge conventional practices of film and the associated stereotypical view of women.
Continuing with the idea that male directors can act as advocates for the progression of feminist cinema, another individual, Quentin Tarantino, is well known for featuring strong and empowered women in his films.  The best examples of this are the Kill Bill films for which he is best known.  His choice to cast Uma Thurman as the main character and hero of the films was extremely deliberate.  In both volumes of Kill Bill, Uma is a remorseless killing machine hell bent on revenge.  Her character is an archetypal hybrid, a combination of the rape-avenger and mother, topped off with certain dominatrix qualities.  While her role may challenge the conventional role of women in cinema, it simultaneously incorporates certain traits encompassed by the “male gaze.”  Although her behavior infers both power and vengeance, the intended function of her appearance does not diminish her physical female attributes.  Her costume, usually a skin tight leather jumpsuit, consists of bright and contrasting bold colors.  While these qualities are not relevant to the overall story line, they partly reinforce some level of female objectification.  One could argue that these seemingly contradictory characteristics cater to both sides of feminist film theory simultaneously challenging the usual paradigm and while still partially adhering to and reinforcing long established practices of spectatorship.

                  While certain films are considered to positively challenge stereotypes and push the limits of conventional content, there exists a genre of films featuring powerful and heroic female protagonists that many consider harmful to the feminist cause.  Anybody can blame the patriarchal film industry for the exaggeration of the “male gaze” and other inaccurate stereotypes, but unfortunately as long as demand for such content exists; it seems likely that a supply of content will exist to fulfill such demand, especially when there is potential for significant financial gains.  Capitalizing on opportunities of this nature will not simply go out of style even if females dominated the film industry, an unfortunate result of the production of exploitation media.  Some potential examples might include Charlie’s Angels and Tomb Raider.  Both films feature supposedly empowered women; however their portrayals in these films also rely heavily on sex appeal and commodity fetishism. The desire for easy money often times results in film remakes and cinematic reimagining of popular games.  Unfortunately, this practice still generates profits and therefore probably isn’t going away anytime soon, but rather has begun to occur more frequently.
Hopefully, in the not to far away future, emergence and dissemination of empowered female cinematic content can help facilitate the cultural changes necessary to one day dismiss or lessen the stereotypical “gaze” of male viewers and any other negative associations resulting from current masculine dominance of the film industry.  Could these problems potentially be resolved through the integration of females into the film industry in which they hope to affect change?  Perhaps, but even with women fully represented in the film industry, unless somehow convinced otherwise, both sexes will likely continue to produce content that coincides with their own particular stereotypes or spectatorship practices.  Overall, it would appear that a combination of challenging traditional stereotypes with new content and understanding how both male and female viewers derive meaning from what they see is the most important mediating factor in determining the future discourse of cinematic equality across gender divisions.

No comments:

Post a Comment