LET'S TALK: Sexism and Fifty Shades of Grey

(Source: opi.com)

Today's blog post is brought to you from a conversation in my brother's car over the new Fifty Shades of Grey film.

If you've managed to escape the Mr. Grey hype then well done to you, but also, where have you been? Here, in the north of England, it has been hard to escape the release of the book-to-movie adaptation of one of the best selling books of all time. From simply walking into my local cinema last Wednesday (I watched Selma in case you were wondering), I was met at the doors with "the [insert date & time] showing of Fifty Shades of Grey is sold out". I knew it'd be popular, cinema-goers could book tickets before Christmas! Since coming home from university for the weekend, my mum and dad have been telling me about all their work friends who went watching one of the first showings on its opening night. It seems like the whole film is actually a cinematic event for some people.

When discussing the film, the conversation got on to sexism. My dad and brother argued 'how come it's not sexist for women to go and watch a film just to oggle a man. If a man went watching a film about a stripper he'd be labelled a pervert by women.' (Referring to the only people they know wanting to see Fifty Shades being female.)

Whilst this argument may hold some truth, I hardly see its relevance. Their whole argument that the film objectified the man was completely backward. Audiences may express their desire to be 'taken away by Mr. Grey' and they may oggle Jamie Dornan's fantastic body, but that is not where the sexism lies within this film. Does that make this an objectification of the man? And, does this reinforce this warped idea they have that this is inverse-sexism and it should work both ways? My argument was no.

First of all, films like Fifty Shades and Magic Mike may play on the man's physique to gain viewership. Having not seen either film, but seeing trailers, Magic Mike certainly plays on this marketing ploy, is the film about anything else? I couldn't say. But films like this are few and little, and are only causing some men to see this as some warped idea of sexism because the man on screen's sexuality is so overt and women are so overtly saying those men on screen are 'fit', and for some reason it makes some men uncomfortable.

Now let's take every other bloody film on the planet and asses what has been called 'the male gaze'. Yes, this gaze does exist in most mainstream films. I'll provide a link here to more on the theory, but the outline is that the camera in the film comes to adopt the heterosexual man's point of view as it looks women up and down, with close-ups on certain assets. A standard trope of objectification. Films such as James Bond have played on this for years, you may argue it does the same to him, but it just doesn't, look at the poster for Goldfinger. The films play on this idea of the 'Bond girl'. Films today continue to adhere to this, Transformers and every bloody (n.p.i) horror film - they all use these techniques as the camera overtly objectifies the woman. If you're saying that it's not fair that these films present some obvious displays of male-objectification, just have a look at a catalogue of films that have done and still do the same to women, even if they are sometimes subtle in their execution. So, no, I don't think the argument 'if a man went watching a film about a stripper he'd be labelled a pervert by women' is an example of sexism because mainstream films focus on female sexuality all too often.

Next let's have a look at the topic matter of Fifty Shades. It, unless I'm mistaken, is about a young woman sent to interview business tycoon, Mr. Grey, who suddenly takes an interest in her and invites her into his world of fetishism and BDSM. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's the gist. The whole concept of this BDSM is placing the woman as the subservient, whilst the man has become the master. I'm not going to linger here, having little knowledge on the subject, but if it works on something that places the woman in the submissive role, then please explain how the film is just an objectification of man? Just take a look at that poster above, he's in a suit, she provides the illusion of being naked.

David Oyelowo and director Ava DuVernay on the set of Selma                                   (Source: Variety.com)

Finally, whilst one may argue the film is appealing to women, arguing they're just going to oggle Mr. Grey. In fact in cinema a protagonist is there for the audience to relate to them, so by that logic, the audience (of who they argued were female) are once again placed in this submissive role. Meanwhile the strong, handsome, masculine presence of Mr. Grey towers over them.

I guess objectives factor in, and that may have been a fact in their argument, that these women are going for the sole reason because Jamie Dornan is attractive. But are they really going to objectify the man? I doubt it. Whereas their argument on men doing the same falls apart when we look at the history of films that have so openly played on female sexuality to gain views, and no one bats an eyelid because its a trope of cinema.

So yes, argue that Fifty Shades of Grey is sexist towards men, but I'm going to have to argue the opposite. The film industry is sexist (and racist too - but that's an argument for another day), let's just have a look at the Academy Awards - no single woman nominated for Best Director? Ava DuVernay directed Selma, ironically nominated for Best Picture. Her place for Best Director instead has been taken by Bennett Miller - whose film, Foxcatcher, bizarrely isn't nominated for Best Picture. Sexism does exist in film today, but I have a hard time accepting that it's inflicted upon men.