Slash Theory

[permetaform]

Well, so I was thinking of putting off writing about this but trinityofone is doing a paper on slash (she needs help and she has interesting and different survey questions...) and she's doing it from a totally sympathetic viewpoint and that's just COOL yo.

So, my thoughts on why I slash (and it is a multi-part reason, this is just one of many) has recently dovetailed with fannish thoughts on gender in SGA and thoughts on Feminist representation of the female body in visual language and I wrote this paper where I'd addressed slash sideways, with some realizations that I'd come to over the course of a month of discussions here and there, online and off.

I'd wanted to post this as meta on LJ, but I'd written it out mostly for a class assignment and was wincing at translating into LJ-speak 'cause I haven't the time right now, but I ended up doing it anyways. ::shrugs::

But, long story short:

1) Male coding of Female bodies = pervasive, entrenched, and historic

2) Male codes Female body as The Other

a) The Other heavily features fears the Male has about himself, his role in life, what he is trying *not* to be, what he denys knowing about himself, and what he *doesn't* know about himself

b) Because the Male codes the Female body as The Other, the Male is constantly positioning the Female body relative to himself in *representational* media.

i) media = plural medium

ii) this includes various forms of visual arts such as painting and sculpture, some forms of literature and even some forms of dance.

c) Because the Male POV is so very pervasive in our culture, (ex. Fandom and Male Privilege by cereta), in mainstream media the Female body is constantly representing aspects of the Male

3) That last point is important so let me restate: The mainstream media normally codes Female bodies as fe-MALE.

a) This means that Female bodies are constantly, in mainstream media, posed in relation to the the Male body. As non-independant of Male.

b) Restated: The most media represents Female bodies as indivisible from and dependant on Male bodies. ("dependant" is here used in terms of math termionology rather than it's sociological meaning; ie. it's a variable "dependant" on the whims of another variable)

4) Because the Male POV is so pervasive, even feminist representations of the Female body becomes problematic.

a) Manichean dichotomy: where, no matter how good the qualities one might possess, if one is on the negative dichotomy the end balance will still be negative.

i) Example:
Men are logical, Women are illogical. But also! Men are intuitive, Women are mechanical and cold.
Logical = mechanical, except not. Illogical = intuitive, except not.
End result? Women get the short end of the stick no matter their representation.

ii) Example: The token female on a all male cast.

iii) Example: If Men Had Periods

b) Seeing the female body in a certain way has become so entrenched in our society that visual depictions of the female body, even if attempted to be displayed in a progressive manner, is STILL on display = is still objectified.

5) Simultaneous displacement of the female onto the male body and the male body onto the female (ie. a f/m reversal of m/f) is STILL PROBLEMATIC. (see 4a)

a) Their interactions will still be loaded with gendered power dynamics.

b) On the surface level, there's no visual change from the usual m/f. ie. Situation Normal

6) ...But what if one displaced the Female onto the male body, and have them interact with other male bodies?

a) ...like with Slash!

b) ...and to a lesser extent (reason why with link forthcoming perhaps), yaoi.

c) ...and perhaps explaining the popularity of Will and Grace, Oz, and Queer As Folk, amoung women? (a statistically significant portion of the audience, via viewer surveys, to people's great surprise)

Comments? Discussion?

(note: I WILL answer every comment to this post, I just can't do it today for OMGPAPERDUE reasons. _{I hate finals week. hateithateithateit...})


In other news I'm giving in and making SGA my default icon. (Holy shit, I sorta feel like I changed my username...)


Also?

World AIDS Day: http://www.lighttounite.com/

Light a "candle" on the their map and they'll donate $1 to charity for you.

Comments

[elspethdixon.livejournal.com]

You've got some really thought provoking points here that, but responding intelligently probably would require more knowledge of gender-theory and feminist-theory than I possess ^_^. I like slash, het, gen, poly, everything, as long as it seems "in-character" for the people concerned, so I put more thought into "why these two particular guys?" than I do "why two guys at all?"

The whole “male gaze” debate in media has always vaguely bothered me, though. As a bisexual woman, I can derive the same pleasure out of looking at those “eye-candy” magazine photos/camera angles/whatever that put women on display that men obviously do (obviously because if men didn’t find it attractive, it would be shown so prominently). Does that mean that I’m simply in touch with my sexuality, or that I’ve internalized the media’s male-privilege-inspired values to the point that I sympathize with them in order to vicariously enjoy the privileges my gender is denied. Because if you carry the second line of thought far enough, you can get a sort of Freudian penis-envy-type argument that completely invalidates bisexuality/lesbianism as simply a female attempt to obtain the privileges of the male by assuming his sexual role (i.e. “woman desire the penis so much that they want to possess it themselves and therefore pursue other woman as if they in fact possessed it, as a sort of sexual wish-fulfillment”).

[permetaform]

Does that mean that I’m simply in touch with my sexuality, or that I’ve internalized the media’s male-privilege-inspired values to the point that I sympathize with them in order to vicariously enjoy the privileges my gender is denied. Because if you carry the second line of thought far enough, you can get a sort of Freudian penis-envy-type argument that completely invalidates bisexuality/lesbianism as simply a female attempt to obtain the privileges of the male by assuming his sexual role (i.e. “woman desire the penis so much that they want to possess it themselves and therefore pursue other woman as if they in fact possessed it, as a sort of sexual wish-fulfillment”).

*Exactly*. I brought this up in class and argued several round with my professor until I realized to my heavy embarrassment that she was just trying to make sure we understood the founding article...there was an article the next week that argues against the "male gaze" concept. Part it was that there are multiple reading stances available to the audience; Mulvey (ie. "male gaze" original author) was postulation from an audience that is fully submerged with the text.

However, if the audience holds itself slightly 'away' from the text (such as reading it tongue-in-cheek or with a grain of salt) then there are several other possible positions to take. This is part of why I love pastiche so much because the text inherently doesn't take itself completely seriously; the text is in my usual audience position.

Going back to the taking pleasure from the text; I think it's completely valid to take pleasure from any visual representation, however there was a heavy slant towards female objectification without a simultaneous male objectification going on there that made the whole thing unbalanced. Not only is there slightly more balance going on (and not only do we, as fandom, help supply male objectification aplenty) but Mulvey herself has gone back and altered her article to include viewpoints from straight female and variously queer-identified audiences. =)

To some extent, feminist arguments always make me squint in dismay. I'm slowly coming to a conclusion that it's doing so because the debates and theory are SO wrapped up in the male POV that they forget finding a female POV. They forget to stake out their own place because they're so busy disavowing the patriarchy and being "different" from them that they're constantly pointing back at the penis and yelling in disgruntlement.

And dude, me?

I'm *okay* with the penis. I am at *one* with the ejaculation of the penis and various penis representations thereof; because I have balls myself, they just hang higher. I do not want to castrate the penis to destroy it, I do not want to remove the penis from my sight; rather, keep it nearby, as, say a cockring.

yes.

[guede-mazaka.livejournal.com]

I'm *okay* with the penis. I am at *one* with the ejaculation of the penis and various penis representations thereof; because I have balls myself, they just hang higher. I do not want to castrate the penis to destroy it, I do not want to remove the penis from my sight; rather, keep it nearby, as, say a cockring.

yes.

I don't think I've ever loved you so much. *glomps*

[permetaform]

=D ::glomps back::

[retrofit88.livejournal.com]

To some extent, feminist arguments always make me squint in dismay. I'm slowly coming to a conclusion that it's doing so because the debates and theory are SO wrapped up in the male POV that they forget finding a female POV. They forget to stake out their own place because they're so busy disavowing the patriarchy and being "different" from them that they're constantly pointing back at the penis and yelling in disgruntlement.

Very totally yes. And yet, I consider myself very much a feminist. I've gotten into heated arguments with other women about this - "you can't be a feminist unless you admit that all women are potential victims, all the time!" Screw that, no thanks. I'll kick 'em all in the head.

I read Robyn Roberts' Sexual generations : "Star trek, the next generation" and gender - only time I have literally thrown a book across a room. Wanted to like it. But couldn't, and couldn't exactly express why. You got it exactly right.

[permetaform]

::nods:: the victimization angle never much worked for me, 'cause then I'm all like, "good for you for realizing that. Now what?"

[elspethdixon.livejournal.com]

I do not want to castrate the penis to destroy it, I do not want to remove the penis from my sight; rather, keep it nearby, as, say a cockring.

*giggles* Yes, yes, I second that motion. Although Ann Bishop's Black Jewels trilogy has somewhat spoiled cockrings in fiction for me--I never realised until I read it that cockrings could be overused to the point of being boring.

[permetaform]

::blinks:: huh. I know someone's doing an SGA crossover to the Black Jewels...that makes more sense now actually!