Is There an Emerging Female Gaze in The Fashion Industry?
- Ella McCall
- Feb 15, 2021
- 10 min read
First used in Judith Butler's book, Gender Trouble in 1990 the ‘female gaze’ is a feminist theoretical term representing the perspective of the female viewer/creator. It is in response to feminist film theorist Laura Mulvey's expression of the ‘male gaze’. Coined in Mulvey’s 1975 essay 'Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, the ‘male gaze’ represents the act of depicting women in visual arts and written media from the heterosexual, masculine and often overly sexual, perspective. Mulvey argued that women in film and literature tend to be portrayed as passive, fragile, and sexualised objects envisioned to be looked at and subsequently used by the male audience, whether they’re present or just insinuated.
The interaction between fashion and society is tightly intertwined, with the role of fashion being an important aspect in moulding how people are portrayed and influencing the way society thinks and behaves. Therefore the use of the ‘male gaze’ within the fashion industry is still an extremely relevant topic of conversation within modern media. In this essay, I will be asking the question ‘is there an emerging female gaze in the fashion industry?’, and looking into the fashion industry in a general overview and also more acutely between the time period of 2000 to 2020.
Traditional media plays a vital role in representing genders and idealising certain aspects of them, usually enforcing the societal mindset that women are only considered beautiful if they embody certain physical standards. According to John Berger’s 1972 book ‘Ways of Seeing’ although advertising “can be regarded as a type of communication that is influential and effective” it also often uses the “‘sexploitation’ of the female body as an instrument”. Proof of this can be found in Erving Goffman’s 1979 study on the ‘gender display’ theory (Butkowski and Tajima) where samples of over four hundred magazine advertisements were collected and compared. From this, he identified the patterns of the previously aforementioned ‘gender display’ and concluded that the main way these gender posing techniques are usually presented can be seen in certain hand gestures, facial expressions and postures. Goffman summarised that whether it was a conscious effort or not, these stereotypes in media reinforce the hierarchies created to oppress women and privilege men.
As the majority of visual media tends to be created with a heterosexual male audience in mind, men are often seen represented as the active agents of situations, while women are depicted as simply the object of their desires. An example of this can be seen in figures 1 and 3. In the Santoni shoe advertisement campaign, your eyes are first drawn to the woman in the image, wearing little clothing and being held by a fully-clothed man covering her eyes. As Catherine Lutz’s article “The Photograph as an Intersection of Gazes” expresses, “the multiplicity of looks is at the root of a photo’s ambiguity, each gaze potentially suggesting a different way of viewing the scene”. It’s easy to discern that the gaze of the male model comes from the perspective of control and sexualisation, and while the gaze of the female model still suggests sexualization, she is passively portrayed the submissive agent of the image. The observer, therefore, views the advert through the lens of the ‘male gaze’, viewing the females’ objectification and the males’ dominance with an unconscious desire that the product may bring these results.
Another example of this can be seen in figure 2, the banned 2016 Marc Jacobs advertisement for the ‘Oh, Lola!’ perfume, in which actress Dakota Fanning is featured in a short dress with the perfume bottle positioned between her legs in a provocative manner. Prompting the viewer to subconsciously sexualise the model despite her being underaged (at 17 years old).
Whereas in the Emme Parson shoe advertisement campaign photos for example (seen in figure 3) the product stands out as the main feature of the image with a woman lying in the grass wearing a long dress and confidently staring right down the lens of the camera. In direct comparison to figure 1, this could be seen as an example of the ‘female gaze’. Another example of this can be seen in fashion photographer Charlotte Wales’ image in figure 4. Wales maintains that as a woman she is able to approach her images “with empathy” as “I can imagine what it’s like to be the model, I imagine the various incarnations of the woman I want to be”. She believes this makes her a more sympathetic photographer.
Both figures 3 and 4 represent the models in a very modest and traditionally feminine way, however, this doesn’t mean that using female and female-presenting bodies in fashion in more ‘provocative’ ways is going against the morals of the ‘female gaze’, nor is it an inherently bad thing. Embracing women’s sexuality in fashion is still possible to do in an empowering manner. The Fenty x Savage 2019 runway show is an apt example of this, using the gaze of female creators to curate a runway showing natural bodies of all sizes and ethnicities whilst not perpetuating a singular beauty standard (seen in figure 5). The show embraces female bodies and sexuality in a way where “everyone looked comfortable, happy and as if they had a part in what they were modelling” as one journalist who was there, describes the show.
Therefore, despite the ‘male gaze’ still being projected within media in modern society, you can still see the progress of an emerging ‘female gaze’ through these brands (previously mentioned) as well as in movements such as #girlgaze, which was created in 2016 by photographer Amanda de Cadenet to raise awareness about the pay gap between male and female photographers and in an attempt to combat the disparity in the number of female photographers compared to male photographers. Encouraging female and female-identifying photographers to submit photos of women, by women. Cadenet stated that “If the goal is for us to be accepted and embrace who we are, our flaws and all, we’re never going to see those pieces of ourselves depicted in media when taken from the perspective that doesn’t have an experience of those things”.
Cadenet’s take on the ‘female gaze’ is a common one, as although there is no concrete definition of the ‘female gaze’ it’s often used to mean “art by women”. However, a more accurate portrayal might be art with a ‘feminist sensibility', as women looking through the lens doesn’t always automatically cancel out the ‘male gaze’. The concept that a female photographer controlling the outcome of an image has the power to change the patterns of the ‘male gaze’ fails to recognise that fashion photography stems from a long history of bias based on gender stereotypes that were created predominantly by men. Therefore the patterns of the ‘male gaze’ cannot always be broken simply by a female photographer controlling the outcome. British author and photography curator Susan Bright states that “women are just as capable of a typically ‘male gaze’ and vice versa” and that “To suggest they are softer, more sensitive, more ‘feminine’ is totally essentialist”.
One of the most famous examples of female photographers taking images through the lens of the ‘male gaze’ is Deborah Turbeville’s Vogue fashion editorial “There’s More to a Bathing Suit Than Meets the Eye” from 1975. As Turbeville’s series was created for the purposes of advertisement, Goffman’s theory is able to be applied here. One example of this can be seen in figure 6, where the model in the foreground supports her head with her hand whilst leaning against the wall, subconsciously implying (according to Goffman's framework) that the female body is weak and needs help being held up, the same can be seen in the background of the image with the model leant against the wall. Despite Tuberville’s work being praised at the time for being what would become known as the ‘female gaze’, the models inhabit a certain fragility that is often seen in the ‘male gaze’.
Due to this, it’s argued as to whether the ‘female gaze’ really exists in the first place. Because media is so saturated by the male gaze its possible any conscious attempt to express the ‘female gaze’ would be inescapably affected by the 'male gaze’ or end up just being inversions of it. Therefore the ‘female gaze’ is not simply the direct opposite of the ‘male gaze’ as the ‘male gaze’ is a fixed set of assumptions about the world kept in place by power dynamics, whereas the ‘female gaze’ is more varied and intersectional.
On the other side of this theory is the argument of whether men could ever adopt the ‘female gaze’ in their own work. At the root of the theory, the ‘female gaze’ is holding an awareness of the imbalance between men and women and the double standards women face throughout life. While white men dominate most forms of media, including in the fashion industry, to argue that male creators are completely unable to adapt to the ‘female gaze’ suggests that we as humans cannot see past ourselves or beyond our own experiences. So, although a cisgender man will never know the true extent of the ‘male gaze' or be as directly aware of sexism as they don’t directly experience it themselves, it’s not entirely impossible to actively try to create more equalised content once the issue has been addressed.
Using high fashion brand Chanel as a case study, you can see in the images of figure 7 and 8 that from 2001 to 2019 there is a definite difference in how the models are portrayed and what the intention is in how the audience is encouraged to view the women. In figure 7 the model has half her body submerged in bubbles in a bathtub as she pouts at the camera. As there is no physical product shown in the image, the aim is therefore to sell an ‘idea’ of the women who wear Chanel as a brand to its audience. However, in figure 8, the models are actively displaying the product and standing in positions that imply confidence and strength. Both of these campaigns were shot by the late creative director of Chanel, Karl Lagerfeld. This implies that in the time between these campaigns, there was an established shift within the fashion industry in how brands wanted to portray their products. In a way, it is also an example of a male photographer using the lens of the ‘female gaze’ and displaying the models in the image in a dignified manner, as although there will still be aspects of the ‘male gaze’ there is a vast improvement from the earlier campaign.
Looking at Dior as another reference, in figures 9 and 10, it’s noticeable that there has also been a clear shift from their 2002 campaign in comparison to the 2017 campaign in terms of sexualising the models photographed and the consideration towards the female experience behind the images. Applying Goffman’s ‘gender display’ theory, in the 2002 campaign images the models display several aspects seen as stereotypically feminine in traditional advertisement. The models are smiling whilst canting their heads, are touching parts of their own bodies and are wearing little clothing. They are also sat down/leant back and are in very posed positions. However, in the 2017 campaign, shot by a female photographer, the models are making eye contact with the camera, have their faces displayed in a full-frontal manner and are stood up straight, as well as being slightly further away from the camera in one of the images. All of these being typically male positioning’s in print media.
A large reason for this is the appointment of Maria Grazia Chiuri as Dior’s first female creative director in 2016. In Dior’s podcast, ‘the female gaze’ Chiuri explains her outlook on the ‘female gaze’ and what that means in fashion - “We must not forget that fashion has a very big impact on how women are presented in the media and in photography. So, at Dior, I want to present a feminist point of view, I no longer want to present women as objects. I wanted to find female photographers who would understand what I want to do. I wanted to create a different image of women”.
Chiuri makes a point to hire female photographers and artists when creating campaigns and shows for Dior, stating her desire “to show women in many aspects-that they are strong but also fragile”. Through this we can see that, although in some cases having women behind the helm of a project doesn’t always mean eliminating the ‘male gaze’ in its entirety, in others, it is a large driving force behind campaigns.
Therefore to truly see an emergence of the ‘female gaze’ within the fashion industry the issue of the glass ceiling needs to be properly addressed and more women need to be seen in directive positions in fashion houses. Because despite a reputation as a female-oriented industry, 2018 report “Shattering The Glass Runway” found that the fashion industry is still run predominantly by men. One-hundred-ninety-one fashion companies participated in the study that spanned across multiple sectors of the industry, and it was found that although there is little gap in the ambition between male and female fashion students, and despite there being more female design students, there is still only 14 per cent of major brands that are run by women. Additionally, 100 per cent of the women interviewed about the study said there was a gender-inequality issue in the industry compared to less than 50 per cent of the men that were interviewed.
The report goes on to list areas in which the industry could improve to make the ‘female gaze’ within fashion a reality. Listing a ‘commitment to track and share companies gender-related key performance indicators’, an ‘increased transparency when it comes to evaluations; promotions and compensation’, ‘mentorship programs for women to provide opportunities to forge professional connections, and preparing them to assume top management positions’ as well as ‘family-friendly policies that provide adequate parental leave and smooth the transition back into the workplace for both men and women’.
Evidently, more women in the fashion industry are likely the only way a ‘female gaze’ and better female representation, in general, are going to increase. There has most definitely been an emergence of more women being recognised within fashion in recent years with the appointments of Virginie Viard at Chanel, Maria Grazia Chiuri at Dior and an unprecedented number of young female designers being awarded more opportunities such as Katrantzou, winner of the 2015 BFC/Vogue Fashion Fund and Johanna Senyk, winner of the 2016 ANDAM Prize (who’s design work can be seen in figure 11). As stated before, this expansion of women in fashion will almost certainly bring about a ‘female gaze’ in brands campaigns and designs, and although there is still a definite presence of the ‘male gaze’ within fashion, this steady emergence will likely continue to increase in the coming years as more women continue to break into the industry.
