Second-wave feminism, a period of feminist activity beginning in the ’60s and spanning roughly two decades, was influential in kickstarting the fight against patriarchal institutions prevalent in broader sects of society. This included the treatment of women in cinema. Since the gender bias present in Hollywood cinema at the time involved portraying women as the subordinate and men as the superior, studying and critically analyzing patterns in films and elements of cinematic storytelling concerning the representation of women became an issue of great importance for feminists.

 Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema is an essay written in 1973 by highly acclaimed British feminist film theorist Laura Mulvey and published in 1975 in the influential British film journal Screen and, later, other anthologies including a collection of her essays titled Visual and Other Pleasures. Highly influenced by the works and theories of Sigmund Freud and Jacques Lacan, in her essay, Mulvey steers the perspective of film theory towards a more psychoanalytic framework.  She uses psychoanalytical theory to attack the male-dominated viewpoints deeply embedded within old Hollywood cinema. Her essay was the first to intersect the three concepts of film theory, feminism and psychoanalysis. 

Although his essay was written in 1975 regarding misogyny in old Hollywood cinema, we can see the hegemonic continuation of male dominance in Hollywood and regional films today. Further in this article are cited several examples of films subservient to male-centric viewpoints. Mulvey’s essay was written to recognize and dismantle the filming strategies that exist to provide narrative pleasure to men alone.

Male Gaze

Mulvey intends to use psychoanalysis to make the argument that the visual and anthropomorphic components of film storytelling are dictated by a male-dominant viewpoint, exploiting the female form to provide the audience with a pleasurable experience. This is where the term Male Gaze comes into play. First introduced by Laura Mulvey in her essay, this key term in feminist film theory refers to a sexualized way of looking that objectifies women whilst simultaneously empowering men. In the male gaze, women are framed to appear as hypersexualized objects of the male desire. Her thoughts, emotions, ideas and needs are secondary to his, and her highest desire is to be ‘wanted’ by the male. 

“In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female.”

Laura Mulvey

Mulvey’s ideas of male gaze and fascination with the female form are very closely tied to the Freudian concept of scopophilia. Scopophilia was defined by Freud as a deep-seated sexual pleasure derived from looking at others, subjecting them to a controlling and curious gaze. In extreme cases, scopophilic desires could manifest into voyeuristic behaviour, producing Peeping Toms who derive sexual pleasure from witnessing and actively controlling an objectified other. Essentially an active process, fetishistic scopophilia leads to women being erotically objectified in film, coding them so that they connote ‘to-be-looked-at-ness’. Moreover, the experience of watching a movie in the cinema nurtures this desire by providing an environment that allows the viewer to remain anonymous, shrouded in darkness, introducing a voyeuristic element in watching something that was created to be watched.

Jacques Lacan’s idea of the mirror stage, where infants identify themselves in the mirror, also influenced Mulvey’s theory. She claims that the narrative is manipulated in such a way that the audience finds themselves identifying with the main male character. They feel and see what he feels and sees. They empathize with him since he is the ego ideal or ideal self, evoking emotions of compassion, admiration and jealousy thus creating a love-hate relationship between viewer and character. For example, in John Hughes’ critically acclaimed 1985 American film The Breakfast Club, the main character John Bender (Judd Nelson) is the main character. The audience, although aware of his deviant behaviour, sympathizes with him since he is framed to appear likeable despite his flaws. Molly Ringwald’s character, Claire Standish, is the ‘princess’- unattainable, perfect and out of Bender’s league, and by extension, the audience’s as well. As the narrative progresses, she falls in love with Bender, and since the audience at this point identifies with him, they can possess this glamourized woman too.

Apart from being an extremely sexist representation of women in film and mainstream media, the male gaze has proven to be a significant contributor to sexism in the real world. By portraying women as the weaker, fairer and, in several ways, the inferior sex, the idea that their purpose is limited to becoming a supporting role in the life of a male is enforced. Impressionable young girls, exposed to this narrative from the very beginning, grow up being very aware of their potent sexuality, which is both demonized and deified by the male population. Male children too are raised with the notion that they are the more powerful sex, and these archaic gender roles and stereotypes are reinforced by the media. Not only is the male gaze prevalent in mainstream cinema, but it can also be seen in commercials, music videos, television shows and a host of other media where women have little to do with the subject matter. This sexualization, commercialization and objectification of female bodies exists due to the assumption that the male-centric viewpoint is the norm and that in order to sell a product, a movie or a song, one must visually appeal to the masculine audience.

 The stories are always catered to the heterosexual male- forcing the audience to view the story from this perspective, regardless of their heterogeneity. By restricting itself to this rigid mise-en-scene reflecting the dominant ideological concept in cinema, Hollywood plays into the male fantasy that women are meant to be looked at and men are to do the looking.  

“The determining Male Gaze projects its view onto the female form which is styled accordingly.”

Laura Mulvey

Every part of the woman- from her characterization, her personality, her clothes, her behaviour down to the smallest detail- is manufactured to imply and maximize her sex appeal and erotic nature. Women adopt a “traditionally exhibitionist role” in cinema and, function as passive erotic objects of desire for both the characters on screen as well as the audience. It is within this narrow narrative that her characterization takes place, and thus she is limited to remaining an evoker of response from the male lead. The seamless unification of the looks from either side of the screen allows for the story to continue ‘logically’ with no explanation needed for the convenient sexualization of the woman. While some filmmakers attempt to avoid characterizing women as mere sexual objects by providing them with a complex backstory, more often than not the writing pales in comparison to the portrayal of her sexuality. 

For example, David Ayer’s 2016 American superhero film Suicide Squad introduces Harley Quinn, one of the only female members of the team, in a scene where she strips down to her underwear in front of a group of soldiers. This scene involves close-ups of her body and long shots of her revealing more skin, focusing on her breasts and genitalia. This scene offers nothing to the development of the storyline, neither does it provide any insight into other aspects of her character. It was put there to please the viewers. She is portrayed as a hypersexualized object, meant to elicit a response from the men onscreen and in the audience. None of her male counterparts had anything remotely close in terms of displays of sex appeal in their introductions.

Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie) has personal motives influence her decisions- mainly her relationship with Jared Leto’s Joker (her actions being motivated by her ties to a man). However, her backstory is barely explained and so poorly written that it’s clear that she was put on screen to be looked at. The explanation offered for her overt sexuality- that she is ‘clinically insane’- makes it seem like it is okay to derive pleasure from her presence. Whilst her male teammates like Deadshot (Will Smith) and El Diablo (Jay Hernandez) are clothed in some form of protective clothing, Harley waltzes around in a skimpy torn T-shirt, a pair of booty shorts and high heels. Although Robbie’s performance received high praise, the movie was rightfully criticized for relying heavily on her characterization as a ditzy sexpot. 

Suicide Squad isn’t the only superhero film guilty of perpetrating this narrative- most superhero blockbusters are rife with the objectification of female characters to cater to male fantasies. Catwoman (Anne Hathaway) in The Dark Night Rises (2016) and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) in the Avengers movies are portrayed to be powerful, strong female superheroes…in skintight latex suits that cling to every curve. This creates an illusion of the ’self-actualized warrior female’ within the framework of the patriarchy. She has qualities that the male lead can respect like being skilled in combat or physical prowess, but she is also sexually desirable.

Phallocentricism

Mulvey’s theory was also influenced by the concept of phallocentrism, i.e., the ideology that the phallus or the male sexual organ is the central element in the organization of society. Man exists first as a person of the world, and woman is then created and defined by her lack of a penis. Mulvey stated that the narrative intentions of the director, the interactions between the characters on screen and the experience of the audience are guided by an entirely phallocentric view. The audience is always provided with the option of fulfilling a pleasurable desire, albeit a male-centric one, since women on screen are coded for extreme erotic, sensual and visual impact. 

“The meaning of a woman is sexual difference, the absence of a penis as visually ascertainable, the material evidence on which is based the castration complex..”

Laura Mulvey

Due to women’s lack of a penis, Mulvey stated that men saw them as strangers, and this led to castration anxiety, i.e. metaphorical and literal fear of emasculation. Therefore, women could never be looked at as equals lest they are considered dangerous, instead, they were deemed beautiful, mystical creatures, slaves to their own sexuality. According to the patriarchal rules, the male figure is the one forwarding the story and the one the spectator identifies with. The woman is subject to his actions and by extension to the audience.

Considering it’s supposedly a depiction of a more advanced, technologically and intellectually superior society, sci-fi in Hollywood often fails dismally in its appropriate representation of women. Luc Besson’s 1997 cult classic sci-fi film The Fifth Element is the most quintessential example of this. In the film, Leeloo (Milla Jovovich) is constantly referred to as the saviour of the human race, due to her being a product of genetically engineered human cells that were spliced together in a lab along with the essences of four other classical elements. From her very creation in the lab, she is portrayed as a sexual object on display, isolated and glamourized. As her body is being manufactured, the camera slowly pans up her legs, while her genitalia remain hidden by conveniently positioned machinery. The scientists in the laboratory watch her body being created with their mouths agape, even exclaiming that she’s ‘perfect’- no doubt referring to her physical appearance. The camera’s focus on the men actively viewing her passive body is exactly what Mulvey examined in her essay. 

Leeloo, although supposedly the all-powerful key to saving humanity, is depicted as naïve and innocent but simultaneously framed in a sexualized manner. Throughout the movie, there are several sequences where she is under the mercy of Korben Dallas (Bruce Willis) and he takes advantage of her naivety under the pretense of helping her. Since the movie explains that she was technically ‘born yesterday’ with no knowledge of human morals, rules and basic social interaction, her unawareness of her inherent sexuality can be brushed aside, and her actions are supposed to be considered whimsical rather than provocative. For example, the scene in which she undresses in front of two men- Cornelius and David, who are extremely flustered by her nudity- is completely unnecessary to the storyline, showing how “innocently oblivious” she is to her own physical attractiveness, and is present so the audience can derive pleasure from it. 

Even though Leeloo is the one who saves humanity at the end of the movie, her actions are prompted by Dallas confessing his love for her, ultimately making him the main figure who progresses the plot. Along with more recent culprits in the sci-fi genre like Tron Legacy (2010) films reinforce the idea that no matter how powerful the female character is, she is still a woman and needs a man to save her, either from her overpowering emotions, a villain or unfortunate circumstances.

While it’s been made evident that egregious examples of the male-centric narrative are still present in Hollywood films, Bollywood is also full of similar culprits. Item numbers, ever so popular in Bollywood films, exist solely to cater to the male gaze. These songs check all the boxes outlined in Laura Mulvey’s definition of the male gaze- from framing the female character in a sexualized manner, limiting her characterization to that of an object of erotic desire, making her a passive player in her relationship with the male lead and providing extreme close-up, cut up shots of segments of her body namely her posterior, exposed belly and cleavage. The provocative lyrics further sexualize the woman. The word ‘item’ itself suggests that the woman isn’t a person, but an item being advertised and sold to the audience.

In the song Munni Badnaam Hui from the 2010 Bollywood film Dabanng, Malaika Arora’s character sings about her oozing sex appeal and how she was left powerless, captivated by the hero. She lists off her physical attributes in a way to make her seem desireable- her cheeks, her eyes, her figure and even her stride. She repeatedly says she’s unattainably sexy, yet she “turned from special to normal” for the hero. 

In the song, the lyrics directly address the audience. So to the viewer, it sounds like this extremely attractive, mature woman, who has so far been untamed and unattainable, is intoxicated by you, is in love with you, and wants to sleep with you. After the film’s release, the song was compared to Sheila ki jawaani from the movie Tees Maar Khan released in the same year, yet another provocative item number featuring actress Katrina Kaif. These comparisons saw a huge amount of online debates over which woman was sexier and which one people would rather sleep with, reducing both women to mere objects to be won and possessed.

Criticism

Although written over 40 years ago, Laura Mulvey’s essay continues to influence several discussion about film theory, and still provokes strong reactions. Most common of which is that both men and women are sexualized in cinema. 

While this is true, the argument fails to note the regularity, intensity and normalization of the sexualization of women in cinema. While some theorists insist that men and women receive equal treatment in the media, a satirical Tumblr page called The Hawkeye Initiative was quick to debunk these claims. The Hawkeye Initiative involved replacing female superheroes in movie posters with Hawkeye, a male superhero from the Marvel Comics, in the same pose. This was done to highlight how the female characters were made to pose in highly sexualized ways, often to emphasize their buttocks, breasts and face. Although this yielded hilarious results, it also brought to light how female bodies were sexualized to such a degree that our society accepted it as normal.

Other theorists argue that, if a Male Gaze exist in cinema, surely so does a female gaze. As far as a direct equivalent goes, I don’t think there is a female gaze, nor do I think there ever will be. Since the power dynamics between the sexes are such that women have always been under the power and control of the patriarchy, a female gaze will not have the implications and consequences of the male gaze, since it would require heterosexual women to be considered the dominant sect of society.