Mulvey’s male-gaze theory still explains media power despite critiques

Evidence

A number of critics (including Mulvey herself) have modified their position regarding film consumption and the male gaze since 1975. Today, most film theorists understand that sexuality, race, class, education, ability, and nationality may all alter spectators’ identifications with the look of the camera, making it impossible to say what a viewing experience ‘means’ for every viewer. Yet as contested as it has become, Mulvey’s theory of the gaze still explains much of the psychological power film has on viewers, even in the age of new media. Jason’s comments about camera control, quoted above, recall a long history of feminist efforts to ‘take back the gaze’ in their avantgarde filmmaking practices. — Theresa M. Senft, Camgirls, 323

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Mulvey theorized three layered voyeuristic gazes subjugating women in cinema — Theresa M. Senft, Camgirls: Celebrity and Community in…, 317; Formal balance and impartiality in media mask real dominance of prevailing interpretations; Gendered norms proscribed the male gaze on women in public street space — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 675 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Formal balance and impartiality in media mask real dominance of prevailing interpretations #corroborates (0.82)
• Gendered norms proscribed the male gaze on women in public street space #exemplifies (0.78) — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 675
• Media reproduce dominant ideology through impartial professional norms rather than overt bias #corroborates (0.76) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 920