9 ms·

Just because you say it's wrong, doesn't mean it's wrong. Let's use Stanford's Plato pages as a definition of the gaze: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/femi

Just because you say it's wrong, doesn't mean it's wrong. Let's use Stanford's Plato pages as a definition of the gaze: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-aesthetics/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-aesthetics/ "The phrase “male gaze” refers to the frequent framing of objects of visual art so that the viewer is situated in a “masculine” position of appreciation. By interpreting objects of art as diverse as paintings of the nude and Hollywood films, these theorists have concluded that women depicted in art are standardly placed as objects of attraction" This clearly aligns with my definition of the gaze as essentially male attraction to women. Fine, you can add some additional constraints that it's positions that the woman that conform to "masculine" definitions of beauty, but I certainly would disagree that it's necessarily negative for a female in that position or as a whole. Would you argue that women who produce sexualized content like from OnlyFans or Twitch streamers wearing scantily clad outfits, are not part of the male gaze? It's intellectually dishonest to keep saying, "it's different" despite not addressing any of my statements.

PierceJoy 4y ago
You started out saying that women staring at men in the gym is the female gaze. That is wrong, because the male gaze isn't about the actual act of gazing. It's about perspective. Your whole argument is centred on the act of gazing, not perspective in art. Let me give an example. I'm sitting on park bench gazing at a woman walking by me. I am a male, and I am gazing, but that it not the male gaze.
- ablatt89 4y ago
  The male gaze is a representation of male attraction towards women in art. In my original post, I clearly state there ARE representations of female "gaze"/attraction of men, such as various female shows like The Sex Lives of College Girls. You're performing a strawman or being overly pedantic and dishonest, when my original post clearly states female gaze/attraction of men in the context of art, a TV show. Whether you like it or not, the gaze is in the context of film and not just static art.
  - PierceJoy 4y ago
    > You're performing a strawman or being overly pedantic and dishonest, when my original post clearly states female gaze/attraction of men in the context of art, a TV show. That's not true. The first two sentences in your first post: > Has the creator never been to a gym full of attractive men with fit bodies, and observed women oogling at the men? Has the creator never observed how straight women will oogle at men with handsome faces? What you are describing is the literal act of gazing. Your next two sentences are about media, but still mostly about the act of gazing. They had nothing to do with how men are portrayed by women directors, which would be the actual female gaze. > Whether you like it or not, the gaze is in the context of film and not just static art. I agree. But it's not about the literal act of gazing, which is what your original post was referring to.
    - ablatt89 4y ago
      > What you are describing is the literal act of gazing. Your next two sentences are about media, but still mostly about the act of gazing. They had nothing to do with how men are portrayed by women directors, which would be the actual female gaze. The literal act of gazing is what "the gaze" in the context of art is referring to, whether it's in media form or performed in real life. It makes no sense for "the gaze" to purely exist in the context of art, without some representation in the real world independent of art, given "the gaze" is a representation of an individual "gazing" at someone else due to their attraction. In modern contexts, it's clear criticism of "the gaze" is criticism of the objectification of women. It's argued that it's "harmful" in art, as it represents objectification of women. > I agree. But it's not about the literal act of gazing, which is what your original post was referring to. "The gaze" as a term in art, only exists because the act of checking someone out and objectifying them exists independent of the art context, and people have strong opinions about it. You cannot define "the gaze" without the concept of objectifying them in the real world as then, it wouldn't make any sense.
      - PierceJoy 4y ago
        > The literal act of gazing is what "the gaze" in the context of art is referring to, whether it's in media form or performed in real life. No, it is not, and this is why you're having a hard time understanding the purpose of this project, because you've decided that male gaze means something it doesn't, and are arguing from that perspective. > In modern contexts, it's clear criticism of "the gaze" is criticism of the objectification of women. It's argued that it's "harmful" in art, as it represents objectification of women. Again, no. The male gaze is a specific term that refers to how women are portrayed in visual media. Let's also keep in mind your example of the Sex Live of College Girls is 2 years old. The art used by this project is much much older. These time periods are not comparable.

PierceJoy 4y ago

You started out saying that women staring at men in the gym is the female gaze. That is wrong, because the male gaze isn't about the actual act of gazing. It's about perspective. Your whole argument is centred on the act of gazing, not perspective in art. Let me give an example. I'm sitting on park bench gazing at a woman walking by me. I am a male, and I am gazing, but that it not the male gaze.

ablatt89 4y ago
The male gaze is a representation of male attraction towards women in art. In my original post, I clearly state there ARE representations of female "gaze"/attraction of men, such as various female shows like The Sex Lives of College Girls. You're performing a strawman or being overly pedantic and dishonest, when my original post clearly states female gaze/attraction of men in the context of art, a TV show. Whether you like it or not, the gaze is in the context of film and not just static art.
- PierceJoy 4y ago
  > You're performing a strawman or being overly pedantic and dishonest, when my original post clearly states female gaze/attraction of men in the context of art, a TV show. That's not true. The first two sentences in your first post: > Has the creator never been to a gym full of attractive men with fit bodies, and observed women oogling at the men? Has the creator never observed how straight women will oogle at men with handsome faces? What you are describing is the literal act of gazing. Your next two sentences are about media, but still mostly about the act of gazing. They had nothing to do with how men are portrayed by women directors, which would be the actual female gaze. > Whether you like it or not, the gaze is in the context of film and not just static art. I agree. But it's not about the literal act of gazing, which is what your original post was referring to.
  - ablatt89 4y ago
    > What you are describing is the literal act of gazing. Your next two sentences are about media, but still mostly about the act of gazing. They had nothing to do with how men are portrayed by women directors, which would be the actual female gaze. The literal act of gazing is what "the gaze" in the context of art is referring to, whether it's in media form or performed in real life. It makes no sense for "the gaze" to purely exist in the context of art, without some representation in the real world independent of art, given "the gaze" is a representation of an individual "gazing" at someone else due to their attraction. In modern contexts, it's clear criticism of "the gaze" is criticism of the objectification of women. It's argued that it's "harmful" in art, as it represents objectification of women. > I agree. But it's not about the literal act of gazing, which is what your original post was referring to. "The gaze" as a term in art, only exists because the act of checking someone out and objectifying them exists independent of the art context, and people have strong opinions about it. You cannot define "the gaze" without the concept of objectifying them in the real world as then, it wouldn't make any sense.
    - PierceJoy 4y ago
      > The literal act of gazing is what "the gaze" in the context of art is referring to, whether it's in media form or performed in real life. No, it is not, and this is why you're having a hard time understanding the purpose of this project, because you've decided that male gaze means something it doesn't, and are arguing from that perspective. > In modern contexts, it's clear criticism of "the gaze" is criticism of the objectification of women. It's argued that it's "harmful" in art, as it represents objectification of women. Again, no. The male gaze is a specific term that refers to how women are portrayed in visual media. Let's also keep in mind your example of the Sex Live of College Girls is 2 years old. The art used by this project is much much older. These time periods are not comparable.