The Freudian framework aged terribly but generally she's right. Men look and women are the looked-upon.
>>25503942>the basis of the theory is wrong, but is just feels right"Men look and women are the looked-upon". What does this even mean and why should I care?
The critique is around how woman is objectified, she is made for man to look at and an object of pleasure. From film centering visually on the woman, you see her literally via the male gaze sexually, or in literature, the text is masculine from a male writer's view. In male gaze media men are subjects and active, women are objects and passive. We develop our sense of self by seeing our reflection and identifying with images, and cinema encourages one to identify with the male. In castration anxiety of Freud, the male unconscious is anxious about the female body because it represents "lack" (no penis = castration = fear). Men fear woman, so they must tame her, and subjugate her. The female body, especially the maternal body, reminds us of our primal origins, which is both fascinating and disgusting to the (masculine) cultural order built on taming and controlling the female under social contracts. Woman remains trapped in the Symbolic order's language, always defined as Other, as Object, through masculine structures, never achieving full subjecthood, perpetually Other to the masculine norm that structures vision itself.
>>25503954I never understood why people in the humanities were so afraid of biologism, like no shit men objectify women, we desire sex more because its harder for us to obtain and if we don't we get blue balls. blue balls hurts. I will never take a woman giving birth seriously until she understands what it feels like holding cum inside for days on end expecting us to uphold civilized mores. which Freud does indeed extrapolate upon in Civilization And Its Discontents without getting into graphic detail.
>>25503954Men like to look at beautiful women because of evolution, not all this silly made up shit.
>>25503954If men get castration anxiety from looking at women (no evidence of this btw) why would they look at women at all? Why would exaggerating their secondary sexual characteristics reduce their anxiety? Wouldn't it increase it?
>>25503951I like feminism because of how misogynistic it is. Like the male gaze theory is:>women are so cucked by reality and mother nature that their entire ontological being is that of a visual object instead of visual subjectH-hot?
>>25503967Really, it manifests itself as incoherent, finger-wagging puritanism.
>>25503954Very trans post
>>25503942ugly people will invent all sorts of neat-o headcanons to distract from that fact
>>25503942>The Freudian framework aged terriblyDubious>>25503957You can accept the idea>men like to look at women because SEXand also accept the idea>men like to look at women because of SEX which necessarily involves/is wrapped up in many other things, concepts, ideaswithout contradiction or embarrassment
>>25503956>I will never take a woman giving birth seriously until she understands what it feels like holding cum inside for days on end expecting us to uphold civilized moresWhat a dumb take. Blue balls are a choice
>>25504012>DubiousWhich part of Freudianism aged goodly?
>>25503942then why do bitches look at me and laugh at me because im ugly
>>25504018sure lemme just go rape someone and take care of it right now. and no, masturbation isn't a substitute. masturbating isn't the same as touching a woman. that's precisely what Freud talks about in behavioral perversions caused by social pressure. Masturbation was barely a thing as marriage and sex were guaranteed in the ancient/medieval/early modern eras.
>>25504012The difference is that evolution has evidence.
>>25503954>cinema encourages one to identify with the maleDubious claim, maybe with one particular male, but certainly not any of the hundreds he murders to save the woman, for example. And god forbid you consider romcoms, where the male is nearly always an inchoate adoration machine.>Men fear womanMore than men fear other men? More than women fear men? More than women fear other women? I think it's a meaningless claim to make.>Woman remains trapped in the Symbolic order's language, always defined as Other, as ObjectJust decidedly untrue. Subject/object counterexamples are literally all over, and while even in their own power fantasies, women authors write women characters as relatively passive, the framing of subject/object is simply disingenuous. She waits, she receives, she accepts, rejects, submits, nonetheless, She is the subject, and the man is a mere automaton of desire, fully formed and without an independent perspective.
