Joey Soloway on The Female Gaze | MASTER CLASS | TIFF 2016
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 фев 2025
- In this keynote address, Joey Soloway takes on the critical feminist concept of the female gaze and asks what it would take to bring it the forefront of film, art, and culture. By making space for women to take the lead in shaping female protagonism, can we get one step closer to igniting a revolution to overthrow the patriarchy?
Joey Soloway was born in Chicago. They are a writer, producer, and director. Their directorial work includes the short Una Hora Por Favora (12) and the feature Afternoon Delight (13). Their television series Transparent (14- ), has won two Golden Globes and five Emmys, including one for directing.
This is simply amazing. It contains aspects of what I have tried to relay during my discomfort while attempting to watch certain movies that my male friends recommend. As I leave the room, I am told that I am too sensitive and too closed. So great to feel that I am not alone.
@is da vog
Agreed: watching Feminists deny nature and reality is the essence of illogical insanity.
@@lockandloadlikehell Incel, right?
@@lockandloadlikehellWomen deny nature every time they birth a mal3 and let them breath for more than 30 seconds.
hi TIFF, could this be amended to joey soloway on the female gaze? they changed their name last year
Oh shit I wish I could boost this comment more
Hopefully if enough of us comment they will fix this!
yesss, please change their name to joey soloway
Boost
+
Thank you for this incredible talk. I think you'll be surprised at how many people watch this. It's worth watching. As a white, CIS female I'm deeply grateful for everything you've given me to think about.
I watch this at least once every 3 months and I have passed it on to everyone I know. Pure gold.
Pure garbage. If you fall for this nonsense then you are either and idiot or an enabler.
Women are never shallow or lusty or romantically deluded. They never objectify men. They never indulge in all manner of female centric fantasy. The film and television business does not cater to these fantasies, neither does the romance novel industry. (Fabio Lanzoni) Oh no, says the lesbian feminist with a deeply narcissistic personality style and an axe to grind. Language was created to destroy goddess culture and the Matriarchy. The oldest language in the world is Sanskrit which comes from India the land of goddess culture. Sanskrit is over 10,000 years old by some estimates. The great epic the Mahabharata was written in Sanskrit. I digress I'm being logical it probably comes across as pedantic being a White CIS Male. Yes, The Female Gaze is there to perpetuate white female privilege! (Bridgerton) and a duck is actually a cat that has just been misidentified. I am sure with a degree in convoluted logic and irrational thinking that anything can be true if I pander to my audiences "unconscious bias" and sound very convincing. Fancy sounding academic degree following!
i'm really blown away by this talk, it truly is a masterclass. Full of amazing quotes "Art is propaganda". She is such a delightful speaker, has great charisma and a truly wonderful mind. I loved Transparent and I'm gonna watch I love Dick this weekend. Thanks so much for putting this on YT.
News flash, not all art is propaganda! If you intend on seeing it that way then I'm sure you can manufacture some line of logic that would support your a prior assumption.
Women are never shallow or lusty or romantically deluded. They never objectify men. They never indulge in all manner of female centric fantasy. The film and television business does not cater to these fantasies, neither does the romance novel industry. (Fabio Lanzoni) Oh no, says the lesbian feminist with a deeply narcissistic personality style and an axe to grind. Language was created to destroy goddess culture and the Matriarchy.
The oldest language in the world is Sanskrit which comes from India the land of goddess culture. Sanskrit is over 10,000 years old by some estimates. The great epic the Mahabharata was written in Sanskrit. I digress I'm being logical it probably comes across as pedantic being a White CIS Male. Let me redefine the female gaze and then use it to further my bullshit spin on art and culture.
The Female Gaze is there to perpetuate white female privilege! (Bridgerton) and a duck is actually a cat that has just been misidentified. I am sure with a degree in convoluted logic and irrational thinking that anything can be true if I pander to my audiences "unconscious bias" and sound very convincing. Fancy sounding academic degree following.
One thing about intersectionality, in the way that the word was conceptualised by Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, it was specifically to do with race and how different oppressions intersect with racism. Although the word has been more widely understood as different oppressions intersecting like e.g. gender and disability, the original concept was: race and disability, race and gender, race and religion, race and age etc. race always being part of the equation.
Absolutely brilliant! She's a great speaker and presence on stage
All the comments in this comment section literally seem like bots. Ive never seen such a complete commitment to the most cliche comments by an entire comment section. Its fr absurd lmao
I changed that though with my comment which I just posted
She is a genius. Brave. Honest. Puts words to feelings all women have had, if they are honest with themselves.
Bravo!! Ole, ole y ole!! We are many-visual artists, filmmakers, writers, and women in general-creating from the female gaze. This is not an isolated case; it's a movement. We create out of the need to speak about ourselves, from the permission we are learning to grant ourselves to desire the other, to desire because the other exists, to desire in order to understand ourselves, as Hegel would say, to desire simply because we can.
I hope many women watch this and take a second look at their own role, are you complicit or are you claiming your space? In the 21st century I hope the latter.
I put this on just to listen to in the background but I ended up taking notes. The mention of not just collaboration but *corroboration* particularly hit home, because when talking about film/tv with my mom or my female/queer friends, I feel like my frustrations and criticisms are validated in a way that general society seems to make me doubt. It's like those conversations reassure me and empower me to be confident while discussing media without the fear that I'll be labelled as "oversensitive," "picky," "annoying," etc. I know that this is more in the context of receiving art rather than creating it, but I still found it to be really relevant.
Thank you Jill for putting into clear words how I have been creating for the last 20 years. I knew about the male gaze and it is what made me choose to work with self-portraiture but I had never realized the importance of my voice as an artist.
Women are never shallow or lusty or romantically deluded. They never objectify men. They never indulge in all manner of female centric fantasy. The film and television business does not cater to these fantasies, neither does the romance novel industry. (Fabio Lanzoni) Oh no, says the lesbian feminist with a deeply narcissistic personality style and an axe to grind. Language was created to destroy goddess culture and the Matriarchy. The oldest language in the world is Sanskrit which comes from India the land of goddess culture. Sanskrit is over 10,000 years old by some estimates. The great epic the Mahabharata was written in Sanskrit. I digress I'm being logical it probably comes across as pedantic being a White CIS Male. Yes, The Female Gaze is there to perpetuate white female privilege! (Bridgerton) and a duck is actually a cat that has just been misidentified. I am sure with a degree in convoluted logic and irrational thinking that anything can be true if I pander to my audiences "unconscious bias" and sound very convincing. Fancy sounding academic degree following!
Ugh, I love good speakers/story tellers. Its such an art
22:55 That already exists. It's called boxing. They see you and you see them seeing you seeing them. The question is who has the correct picture. Who will be standing and who will be on the canvas.
In boxing, we will see who is the "subject" and who is the "object", who will hit and who will get hit.
17:32
19:32
20:18
21:03 part 1 &2 female gaze
22:55 part 3 female gaze
39:26
44:05
I clicked on this video coming from a video on the Bleach anime and its (unintentional) use of the female gaze. I haven't watched this one yet at the time of me typing this comment but upon looking up Joey Soloway it turns out today is their birthday so happy birthday to them!
Thank you so much. You have such clarity.
Jill speaks so much truth, she’s amazing
A refreshing perspective on film. I read many book writers and prefer books to film precisely because I can choose the former with a "female gaze".
I love that you touch contentious ideas with a sense of humor, makes it easier to extend curiosity for more.
My only lingering contention is that you still end up framing social gender dynamics as Contentious.
Like...language? More realistically incidentally disrupted Right Brain Eternity, while its Purpose was to Enhance Intimacy between Family members, to broaden Comprehension of Lived Experience.
Like, too much "Feminist Theory" presumes an engine of Control motivates men.
When it is actually Cooperation and Collective Harmony that makes men Do things.
"Control" is only one tool towards that end.
Literally, "Peace" IS the Engine of Male Endeavoring.
Not aggression, dominance or conflict.
Until Feminist thought-framers pivot towards That Truth, it will only further embed gender Conflict.
Also, one's Intersectional matrix does not subject the individual to increasing degrees of "Suffering" from the perceived "privileged" community, rather it presents each individual with a varying "Array of Challenges".
The entire philosophical Frame of gender studies is distorted beyond social utility.
The dubious scholarship behind the field of gender studies has enabled an Entrenched while fundamentally flawed Central Perspective. Widely advanced in academia despite its demonstrably nonacademic structure, a "science" which is rooted in NO form of Scientific Inquiry, proposing no empirically testable and refutable hypotheses and brokering no competing counterhypotheses, and which patently eschews developing any procedure of "academic calibration" runs a risk of fomenting a cloistering of viewpoint diversity, as Corrective Argument is exchanged for the sloppy ego-validation of Confirmation Bias, from where the Theoretical Framework degenerates into pedagogical practices that better resemble indoctrination over education.
A very welcome and insightful presentation otherwise.
I just pray that Wisdom quickly prevails so we can further develop the harmonics of our society.
You speak fluent gobbledygook
@@_Sakidora_ nah just flex your brain a bit harder and you'll see actual Ideas strung together.
They're just big and shaped funny, by most standards, and the un-exercised minds of modern language use have real hard times with that.
@@Lu11abi There might be ideas hidden behind the thicket of tortuous (and torturous) prose but who, besides your good self, can be bothered to hack through so much pretentious waffle to get to them?
TMTR. Brevity is the soul of wit.
Please try again. We want to understand.
I have only been watching films recently. I soon realised that they were all, in my words, "male fantasy" films. I'd put another one on - "oh no, not again". The women don't seem to "do" they are "done to" - the men do all the "doing" and the females fall in love with them for that. The men "graciously" accept this adulation. Then I began to wonder why it was that all these actresses agreed time and time again to act in these "male fantasy" movies. Why didn't they just call time? Where where the female script writers, the female directors, the female film critics? So thank you, Jill Soloway, for explaining the sense that most people are stuck in this kind of Plato-like "cave" which appears to be normality. -- And I for one also also enjoy listening to feminists (male or female) arguing!!! BTW I don't really describe myself as cis-male, I am not 'male' enough for that term to fit.
Such a great talk! ❤
Thank you, RUclips algorithm, for bringing me here. This is great. 👍
Sports: I wanna throw up. I'm tired of it being shoved down my throat (like religion in the 70s). Thank you, Jill!!
34:06 that made me cry right there. Wow
So empowering, so brave, you motivate me! No more shame; more realness. Thank you
So grateful for this highly inspiring talk!
AND I would call it the Sacred Masculine - Sis male who get it!
"Everyone is writing propaganda for themselves."
"Protaganism is propaganda for privilege."
These are great points to make ... against Jill. I am thankful she brought up intersectionality, but it was the hugest cop out to say "I won't be talking about that."
That's kinda not how it works. You can't say, "I acknowledge non-white, able-bodied, aneurotypicals struggle different from me ... but this talk isn't about them."
Whenever I see talks like this, I imagine a white person, like Jill. Talking to an audience filled with white people ... Like Jill Soloway. Which, usually is something I champion [as a black person, a black man, I acknowledge that in order for white oppression to end...white people need to educate other white people].
BUT, this is the creator of Transparent, the hit show centering a white family starring a cismale playing a trans character. It would have been cool if Jill could have acknowledged that more.
Finally, the female gaze is indeed racialized. White women, traditionally, "see" black men differently. As do non straight whites see non straight blacks/latinxs/indigenous/asian.
PLEASE. DO BETTER JILL.
The toxicity of white patriarchal tendencies is strong here and when I read my comment over and then read your comment again [because I wanted to be considerate] I wondered what I said that "brought the conversation back to my injustice." So, by pointing out that dodging the intersectional conversation AND not confronting the issue of her own work [featuring a non-trans white male in a trans role] I am perpetuating straight white man power?
By pointing out that the white woman gaze affects, quite harmfully, non-white people and that THAT is something that needs addressed is centering my own injustice? Okay, sure, let's go with this line of thinking. Because in essence you are saying that white feminists can only be advocated for by not pointing out flaws when it comes to intersectional feminism. And I would retort, again, that's not how any of this works.
Isn't the best form of advocacy to set aside time to care enough to be critical? I, in no snarky terms, want Jill to do better. She has an incredibly powerful voice with an incredibly powerful platform -- and I think she's more than capable to address these issues.
As someone who is more-than aware of the misrepresentation of black women in media. It is my responsibility -- at every turn, to point out that women suffer differently the darker their skin is [especially non-white transwomen]. So to say "females of all colors have been misrepresented..." is generalizing and perpetuates that white feminist like Jill are doing WoC a favor by even speaking for women to begin with.
I'm good on any and all of that.
Rj Samson this caping for white women in 2017 isn't necessary. Especially when you realize that Soloway has been open to the critique I brought up.
also, I am and do make my voice heard in a variety of ways. It is quite possible to make your own work and be critical of others. a.k.a having more than one thought in your brain. thanks tho.
Finally, this isn't a "nitpick" this is me bringing up the central focus of a character on her show. If you are cool with more Jill Soloway's hand waving intersectionality and casting non-trans people in trans role, then we fundamentally disagree on any major and minor "nitpicks." I would prefer we just leave it at that.
Rj Samson scapegoating? I'm not asking for homegirl to be tarred & feathered. I'm not comparing her to Trump, I'm holding her accountable for casting a straight white dude in a trans role. This is actually something she herself as been okay with being called out on.
Isaiah Taylor - the 'propaganda for privilege' comment put her square in her own sights. What was she, a protagonist in this video, doing the whole time she was up there? You can't say that is what the cismale culture does but YOU don't when you get the chance. ...so much intellectualizing. I wish she would have stuck to the cinematic concepts that I thought this piece was supposed to be about.
Can we maybe just say that everyone sees everyone differently based on their race, gender, or otherness? Because that's pretty much how the world actually works, and the only way you will ever change it is to fundamentally change the way the human brain works.
This talk is TRUTH.
Re "hard to sell a story with a female protagonist...because men won't watch it" @54:52 - true - some males won't, but those that might may have given up on watching films, because the format it so predictable. Over to you, producers, to find those males?
It was lovely to watch this. There is so much cr@p about what female gaze is, that sounded mostly like female revenge and didn't sit right with me. I'm still not 100% sure what it means, but I feel (in my body) that this video took me one step closer to understanding. Thank you
The male gaze is equally valuable as the female gaze. Instead of blaming, this could be more of a call to arms for artists and creators to shift culture to include the female gaze as well. Popularity dictates how culture shifts and it is not like it hasn’t shifted, at least within America, towards the female gaze and other “gazes,” those which have not been previously popularly exposed/explored within pop culture.
Don’t tell men not to express themselves how they desire or say how wrong we are for expressing stories the way we write them. Our perspective, although maybe ignorant of the female gaze, can be very effectual at exploring other ideas and complex ones at that. One wrong depiction that is considered normal does not degrade the art/function of an entire story.
Many men who may see things through the male gaze do not necessarily not want to see things the way a woman does, they just don’t understand. Rather than demean the unconscious norm, just present your alternative narrative/perspective and watch as it clicks amongst those who really care. If they don’t care to see your perspective, there is another issue at hand that cannot be solved by simply presenting the female gaze.
Despite the feeling that there is so much control by men that you cannot make a choice to see things the way you want/consume art that you want, you can mostly choose what you consume. So choose. Make that cultural shift collectively, but don’t force people to consume the art you consume, then you become the villain you condemned so harshly.
Art may be propaganda but what art one enjoys is also expression and relatability. One half of the world right now is still cis men so you have to consider what art they enjoy. The way we enjoy art is not something to attack, the way we think and feel outside of art is. Enjoying art is vulnerability. It’s your likes and wants.
On the topic of masculinity, strength is cultural and natural. Men are physically stronger than women, statistically. We naturally fight and kill, not to say women can’t, but it is much more ingrained in our nature, violence. However, so is the desire to peaceful and parental. To be loving and kind and teaching, the same way a woman has these things. Women have strengths naturally and so do men. The way to change this dynamic between men and women is not to change perspectives entirely but to have understanding of one another. And when men try and write women a certain way, it’s the way they understand them. The solution is not to tell them to stop trying to understand and depict that understanding.
I enjoyed watching this and it has enhanced my understanding I think of the way I see women and how I should act towards them and how I consume art. It was very intriguing.
THIS. It's so annoying that she says that the Female Gaze is an empathy generator but then simply attacks and condemns men for presenting their own views. We need real empathy, where we genuinely try to understand one another, not by assuming but by asking.
I think my issue/question about all of this is that, assuming art is (and needs to be) a product of capitalism, then why isn't there a market for the female gaze? Like, the answer to "why aren't there stadiums for feminists to argue with each other every week" is "because no one would pay enough money for it". Sports are so damn popular that most universities are really just sports programs with education on the side. I refuse to believe that there's just a secret cabal of men who kill any project that would appeal to women. So to me, it comes down to: either the 'female gaze' is already present in entertainment such that most women don't feel its absence, or women aren't willing to pay money for entertainment in the way men are (or maybe they just aren't paid enough or put all their money towards children or something idk), or there's just a huge hole in the market that everyone's too dumb to fill (which seems unlikely, but apparently no one knew black people wanted their own superhero until 2018).
Have you ever sat through a class lecture and been so lost that you can't even come up with any questions to clarify the topic for yourself? Sometimes we simply don't know what we don't know (or what we're missing), or we can't vocalize it
There is a market for the female gaze, though. South Korea has skyrocketed a good majority of their nation’s economy off of the female gaze and catering to that with Kpop and Kdramas. I think we’re a bit so far gone in the west, that a lot of media catering to women has to do with SJWing and progression, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but has little to do with female desirability (which is what most of the lecture was about).
Sports are popular because men fantasize about putting themselves in the position of the world’s most physically superior men (or men seeing themselves in the subject of the desired; the same reason women like beauty pageants , fashion shows, ect). Yeah, people might not pay for a stadium full of feminists but they will use their off time to binge watch videos, or movements, or watch movies/shows with this subject matter (which I think is pretty similar energy compared to the energy people put towards sports).
I agree with Kara too, though. Sometimes you don’t know what you don’t know. Or things have been a certain way for such a long time, that anything else feels “other” or “unknown”.
11:39 That is true. An alphabet to the brain is completely different from a glyph language like Chinese.
Just watched Afternoon Delight and loved it...Talking about the female gaze..she's really put it in this film
Don't forget she's a lesbian tho, during my read in the comments I see a lot of males being annoyed. But remember this, her gaze is so different from others too, she can't speak for all of the woman but I bet Magic mike did get seen by a lot of girls as '' feminine gaze ''. I like Jill a lot and her concern about the male gaze, yet I don't feel like she's looking at it from a objective perspective which I find as a pity cause she makes strong arguments and valid points. Yet again... I feel like she's trying to diss the male gaze :').
Also if you listen carefully she speaks in a lot of ''we'' and ''us'' which is misleading, she can't represent all the females. and it's engaging the sense of you belonging there.
Amazing speech. Story is an empathy machine and art is propaganda. Side note to TIFF Talks, if you see this - PLEASE CORRECT JOEY’S NAME!
Yessssssss!!!
love her!!! we need more people like her in this world!
"Feminist Theory" presumes an engine of Control motivates men.
When it is actually Cooperation and Collective Harmony that makes men Do things.
"Control" is only one tool towards that end.
Literally, "Peace" IS the Engine of Male Endeavoring.
Not aggression, dominance or conflict.
Until Feminist thought-framers pivot towards That Truth, it will only further embed gender Conflict.
Amazing talk... gives me a lot to reflect.
yup this is great!
Then you watch portrait of a lady on fire and just feel the female gaze and gays upon you
Absolutely! I need to study the shit out of that movie
@@eranavni-singer9189 I did and its really worth it.. I love the layering and how well its written. truly a master piece
ugh my hero. what a genius. they're amazing.
Amazing - funny, erudite, insightful and true.
Troian Bellisario Brought me here :)
Monica Gadsden me too, the curiosity
game changing discussion.
LB3806 yes for the DSM-V
Thank you for the thought provoking discussion on art and culture! Your brilliant!
I have a comment, as probably the creepiest misogynist male, cis male, hold on a second, let me control my seething rage for a second. I am still very feminine. But you're not going to like this comment. Basically I would drop the whole "gaze" bit. You have a different method of making films, apart from the subject matter being different the whole approach to everything is different. The gaze thing was invented by a cis male. I heard people trying to make gaze into a new word before. Its a silly word, I hope it never catches on. The gaze bit is distracting anger away from my true bitter misogynist feelings. Still, it was a welcome interruption from 8 hours of watching the A-Team
Excellent, eye opening presentation, even though I don't agree with some of her views.
Me too but she speak professional and you want to just listening
the whole concept of male and female gaze is very cis/heteronormative, why can't it just be patriarchal gaze vs feminist gaze, because its not actually as gendered as people act like it did. women perpetrate these toxic ideas as well, and some men don't so it really has nothing to do with gender.
Preach!!!!!!!!!
hey tiff, the sound and the image are not in sync - would it be possible that you re-upload this talk again? Would be really important! Thank you!
i disagree with telling cis white dudes to stop making films. and im a female film student. everyone has the right to make films regardless of their appearance or identity.
I agree. I think cis men just need to be EXTRA conscious of the stories they are telling and how they tell them. And if possible they(I) need to use their power and platform to amplify non cis male voices
@@eranavni-singer9189 I think non cis men are perfectly capable of amplifying themselves. As a female I don't need to be amplified by anyone other than myself.
@@splashymothtv9952 ideally yes of course! And I really didn’t mean to be condescending or patronizing at all. Don’t you think that part the reason non cis males have been silenced for so long is because the cis males with the money haven’t been giving platforms? The world is certainly changing and there is less reliance on such powerful cis males but we’re not like there yet it seems. I don’t know just my thoughts
@@eranavni-singer9189 I believe that no one is entitled to other peoples money or platforms.
@@splashymothtv9952 ya I agree with you. I think it would be hypocritical to suppress art in any way, because likewise, the same could be done to you for the same reasoning...which i think is silly.
Art is art, some people will find it offensive because all art is subjective, and art is also very complicated. Movies like Spring-breakers, is a good example of how some films aren't as straight forward as "Tits, Pina Colada's," because the art might be a critique of that behavior, and in the case of that movie it indeed is.
"Bombastic daddy's got this!!!"🤯
mind blown.
Protagonism is propaganda that protects and perpetuates privilege... _sometimes_.
Other times, it's just people writing what they know (i.e., writing about people like them, because they know how to write about people like them).
Think about who has had the majority of public influence over media, laws, language, religion, which would be?...so what we know is still an internalized version of male (mainly white, at least as far as Western culture is concerned)
Beatrix Blaise brought me here. This is phenomenal x x x x x
Hannah Gadsby bought me here...
well worth listening to !
Enlightening. Thank you!
@Tiff Talks, the sound and video are synced. :(
I had to watch this for college and I wanted to run my head through a wall. I feel very otherized myself.
Men's theme is - see how I struggle in life, followed by - see how I suffer terribly, followed by - see how I gloriously overcome. This theme is seen from the Jesus scenario, 2,000 years ago, to every spaghetti western, right up to today. It causes male-centric films of violence to be made such as dwelling on the horrors of the first world war. However, no film is made about the over 800 women who die each day from pregnancy and childbirth. Were such an equivalent film made, no-one would want to watch it, and if people did watch it, they would see clearly how truly pornographic such overdwelling on suffering is. Creating a responsible documentary on such themes would be a different matter. Yes, men obsessively watch men and identify with who they watch. But in a world where women's history has been erased, and where murders behind closed doors are not generally reported nationally, who do women have to identify with? Only fantasy women created by men and presented in the film and media world. What is the first thing conquerors do to those they conquer? They erase their history and replace it with the narrative of the conqueror.
is the audio out of sync for anyone else?
same here
Is a transcript available? Thanks.
...would love to have one, too.
Is there a way I could contribute by writing Spanish subtitles?
Toda la comunidad hispana te lo agradece ...yes please
I feel like them criticizing cis people while casting a cis man to play a trans woman kind of trivializes their words... It's too bad because they're right on the surface. Maybe, act on your words next time? And don't come at me about how trans people worked on the show, I did my research beforehand so as to make sure I was not talking shit. It does not erase the fact that trans characters should be played by trans people. Nice work otherwise.
So who is the "they" who is forcing these poor women to be huge fans of Sex And The City, let's take them out together
Please fix the audio sync issue
Brilliant. Thank you. ❤
YAS QUEEN!!!!
Joey.
This was amazing. Thank you.
Excellent, amazing wow. thank you
min 36:00
Amazing
wow my comment is deleted? why?
it's funny that she had to ask if people know who cis men are, 2016... things have changed so much. Also, great talk Jill Soloway. Really well written and interesting ideas were presented
well she said back then "thanks GUYS" to the audience but we have to call her "they" now...
I guess not getting to the point is part of the whole thing. I really want to understand, but it just goes round and round. It drains me of attention
Sync problems.
I get some anger at "cis" males - but why - what have they done, is it because they indentify with their gender and their gender is male? I get the idea that they have a male gaze, but that does not mean that they all objectify women.
The problem is not cis males, but more that social systems privilege cis males in hugely disproportionate ways, and doing the work of acknowledging those systems and power differentials whilst trying to deconstruct them should be in large part the role of those privileged by the systems. The trouble is that those that benefit from privilege rarely want to acknowledge, let alone give up said privilege for the benefit of others. So yeah there's anger at the systems, and also at those who exploit the power afforded to them, often to the direct detriment of others. This isn't even a gender thing; it's a systems, power and privilege issue. Similar structures exist in racism with "white guilt" being an attempt to encapsulate the inherent responsibility white people have in creating and sustaining racist systems that disempower and abuse people of colour. No one is asking people to feel bad about being white and/or cismale, we're asking them to acknowledge the systems that privilege them and contribute to creating a more just society.
Read Laura Mulvey's original paper that coined the term 'male gaze' and it will make more sense to you:
www.composingdigitalmedia.org/f15_mca/mca_reads/mulvey.pdf
Anyone else here because of Troian?
one's Intersectional matrix does not subject the individual to increasing degrees of "Suffering" from the perceived "privileged" community, rather it presents each individual with a varying "Array of Challenges".
The entire philosophical Frame of gender studies is distorted beyond social utility.
The dubious scholarship behind the field of gender studies has enabled an Entrenched while fundamentally flawed Central Perspective. Widely advanced in academia despite its demonstrably nonacademic structure, a "science" which is rooted in NO form of Scientific Inquiry, proposing no empirically testable and refutable hypotheses and brokering no competing counterhypotheses, and which patently eschews developing any procedure of "academic calibration" runs a risk of fomenting a cloistering of viewpoint diversity, as Corrective Argument is exchanged for the sloppy ego-validation of Confirmation Bias, from where the Theoretical Framework degenerates into pedagogical practices that better resemble indoctrination over education.
OK so Jill is the protagonist in her speech and we are listening to her propaganda.
posterlion yes.and there lies thy point.
Joey said this wasn't art, it was a speech which is different from art art
Wow!! 👏👏👏👏
21:00
Can someone please summarise this?
Woke shite from a nasty misandrist bigot
I've only been to one strip club in my life. My friend hooted at the women on stage.
I came here because I detected an interesting and affective quality in **some** female directors that was different from most of the general population (male and female). She started to get into that discussion in the middle of this and it did seem she was getting close to what I (a 'cismale' by her definition) had noticed in some films (Across the Universe, Clueless, Big Little Lies to name a few). But after her 3-point description of the FG, she seemed to just get consumed by her beefs and digressed into a feminist rant. ...And maybe it is important to understand that rant to understand what I was looking for - but I just couldn't see it. I understand why an enlightened woman would become outraged by the warped view of herself that a male-dominated culture has insinuated into her. Call me your classic 'cismale' or whatever label you want, but it just seemed so strident to me. Yes, there is plenty of destructive, shallow, male-dominated drivel out there - and I don't think calling it 'propaganda' is a stretch in that one of it's effects is to reinforce stuff we should be fighting. And not that all of her rant was lost on me (I shared her disgust of the Rod Stewart 'Tonights the Night' and most of the other stuff he did in that period). I also hate the 'objectification' of ALL people - which I see as dehumanizing. But really, I would have been happier with a lot more analysis of the FG and a lot less of the feminist outrage. I'll still check out some of her work but she hasn't made me a fan through this performance..
nobody's a perfect human i think we should all allow a little wiggle space for people who are trying to make this world a better place. Also this may apply to you, to not be so strict about being right or perfect all the time but to be more flexible and gentle with yourself as long as you're on the path to becoming better.
Were you also put off by the "outrage" of black people in the Civil Rights movement, and the outrage of gay people, and did you call them "strident", or is it only women that can't be outraged and will be smeared and scolded for it?
It sounds like you wanted her to do a speech that spoke just to you and your interests, not a speech that spoke from her and for her interests. This expectation, in itself, is a by-product of centuries of the white-male/cis-male gaze.
This is a one hour talk that one person gave - it will not be everything to everybody and it didn't set out to be. For me it was PERFECT. Her talk is about *expanding* and *allowing* the diversity of perspectives and voices beyond the straight-white-cis-male that has dominated media and culture for centuries, and striving for *multiplicity*. Not all films directed by women will show the same gaze - that's precisely the point.
And i hope that there is much more to come on this discussion from *many* different voices, as well as her own - which was funny, insightful and entirely resonant for myself (a white cis-woman). I didn't feel it as 'feminist outrage' at all. It was descriptive, emotional, observant, personal and interpersonal - so many women know what she means when she says "enough rape scenes". If your response was that it was "feminist outrage" then perhaps it is because you are not comfortable with a woman who is expressing herself honestly. All in the eye of the beholder..!
I agree there is a distinctly different tone to films by women that you identified as an "affective quality". We do need to see many more of them tho before any accurate 'definition' of a female gaze can be 'proven'...but i think she nailed it on all three fronts. Acknowledging that there is a different feeling language to 'female gaze' films is also significant in the way we critique and assess films, which will have a big impact in the future. We can no longer continue to review and critique all films by the same sets of 'merits' - technical, narrative, or otherwise when new forms of storytelling are emerging, often in direct opposition to the rules that have been followed for a century. It's a brand new world - and there is a place for ALL of us in it this time... :)
Yeah I actually do agree with this comment so I'll reply. I feel like a lot of reasonable and interesting ideas got lost in feminist rhetoric that I'm not fully on board with as someone just learning about the female gaze. I also wasn't interested in the comedy bits mixed in either. Perhaps I need to read more literature instead.
Female gaze, we will be waiting for you!
I find this really annoying. I respect this woman, not sure if I'm just not getting her; but it seems bitter and looking for offence. There seems to be a giving of subjectivity to the masculine, not a claiming it for herself/ other women. She talks about 'the divided feminine', but I see and hear her dividing women from each other. It leaves me with an unpleasant taste in the mouth.
@jill single handedly made me hate all this shit. 40 years after reading about/from feminists. thanks for nothing.
LOVE IT
44:00
So many insecure chismaalé (cismale) in the comment section lolz.
Oof does she really think good writing is people just writing explicitly about themselves and their own experiences
For someone who has a lot to say about male thinking and that everything is male conditioned, the fact that she is addressing her audience with "you guys" is what baffles me ...just saying....
39:00
14:45
2:30