• Home   /  
  • Archive by category "1"

Male Gaze Essay

In feminist theory, the male gaze is the act of depicting the world and women in the visual arts and literature from a masculine and heterosexual point of view, presenting women as objects of male pleasure.[1][2][3] The male gaze has three perspectives: (i) that of the person behind the camera, (ii) that of the characters within the representation, and (iii) that of the spectator.[4][5]

The term male gaze was coined in 1975 by the feminist film critic Laura Mulvey;[6] it has been contrasted with the idea of the female gaze.[7][8] The male gaze is comparable to scopophilia, with females in the passive role of the observed.[6]:815

Background[edit]

The concept was first developed by feminist film critic Laura Mulvey in her 1975 essay entitled "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema".[6][9] Mulvey posits that gender power asymmetry is a controlling force in cinema and constructed for the pleasure of the male viewer, which is deeply rooted in patriarchal ideologies and discourses.[6] The concept has subsequently been prominent in feminist film theory, media studies, as well as communications and cultural studies. This term can also be linked to models of voyeurism, scopophilia, and narcissism.

The male gaze[10] occurs when the camera puts the audience into the perspective of a heterosexual man. It may linger over the curves of a woman's body, for instance.[citation needed] The woman is usually displayed on two different levels: as an erotic object both for the characters within the film and for the spectator who is watching the film.[citation needed] The man emerges as the dominant power within the created film fantasy. The woman is passive to the active gaze from the man. This adds an element of "patriarchal" order, and it is often seen in "illusionistic narrative film".[6]:14 Mulvey argues that, in mainstream cinema, the male gaze typically takes precedence over the female gaze, reflecting an underlying power asymmetry.[7]:127

This inequality can be attributed to patriarchy which has been defined as a social ideology embedded in the belief systems of Western culture and in patriarchal societies. It is either masculine individuals or institutions created by these individuals that exert the power to determine what is considered "natural".[11] Over the course of time, these constructed beliefs begin to seem "natural" or "normal" because they are prevalent and carry out unchallenged, thus arguing that Western culture has adopted a dyadic, hierarchical ideology which sets masculinity in binary opposition to femininity thus creating levels of inferiority.[11]

Mulvey describes its two central forms that are based in Freud's concept of scopophilia, as: "pleasure that is linked to sexual attraction (voyeurism in extremis) and scopophilic pleasure that is linked to narcissistic identification (the introjection of ideal egos)",[6] in order to demonstrate how women have historically been forced to view film through the "male gaze". It also suggests that the male gaze denies women their human identity, relegating them to the status of objects to be admired for physical appearance and male sexual desires and fantasies.

In "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema", Mulvey discusses several different types of spectatorship that may occur while viewing a film. They can involve unconsciously or, in some cases, consciously engaging in the typical, ascribed societal roles of men and women.

In relation to phallocentrism, films may be viewed in "three different looks"; the first refers to the camera as it records the actual events of the film, the second describes the nearly voyeuristic act of the audience as one engages in watching the film itself, and the third refers to the characters that interact with one another throughout the film. The main idea that seems to bring these actions together is that "looking" is generally seen as an active male role, while the passive role of being looked at is immediately adopted as a female characteristic. It is under the construction of patriarchy that Mulvey argues that women in film are tied to desire and that female characters hold an "appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact". The female actor is never meant to represent a character that directly affects the outcome of a plot or keep the story line going, but is inserted into the film as a way of supporting the male role and "bearing the burden of sexual objectification" that he cannot.[6]

In other words, the woman is passive to the active gaze from the man and can be linked to scopophilia (or scoptophilia), which can be described as pleasure derived from looking. As an expression of sexuality, scopophilia refers to sexual pleasure derived from looking at erotic objects: erotic photographs, pornography, naked bodies, etc. In sum, according to Mulvey, the categories of pleasurable viewing are twofold: voyeurism, which derives pleasure from viewing a distant other, and projecting one's fantasies, usually sexual, onto that person, and narcissism, a form of recognition of one's self in the image of another we are viewing. Mulvey also believes that in order to enjoy a film as a woman, or any gender other than male, we must learn to identify with the male protagonist.[6]Wendy Arons adds that hypersexualization diminishes the symbolic threat posed by violent female characters in action films, "The focus on the body—as a body in ostentatious display of breasts, legs, and buttocks—does mitigate the threat that women pose to 'the very fabric of... society' by reassuring the (male) viewer of his privilege as the possessor of the objectifying gaze."[12]

Mulvey's essay also states that the female gaze is the same as the male gaze. This means that women look at themselves through the eyes of men.[7] The male gaze may be seen by a feminist either as a manifestation of unequal power between gazer and gazed, or as a conscious or subconscious attempt to develop that inequality. From this perspective, a woman who welcomes an objectifying gaze may be simply conforming to norms established to benefit men, thereby reinforcing the power of the gaze to reduce a recipient to an object. Welcoming such objectification may be viewed as akin to exhibitionism.[7]

The possibility of an analogous female gaze[13][14][15][16] may arise from considering the male gaze. Mulvey argues that "the male figure cannot bear the burden of sexual objectification. Man is reluctant to gaze". Describing Wide Sargasso Sea (1966), by Jean Rhys, Nalini Paul indicates that the Antoinette character gazes at Rochester, placing a garland upon him, making him appear heroic: "Rochester does not feel comfortable with having this role enforced upon him; thus, he rejects it by removing the garland, and crushing the flowers."[7]

From the male perspective, a man possesses the gaze because he is a man, whereas a woman has the gaze only when she assumes the male gazer role—when she objectifies others by gazing at them like a man. Eva-Maria Jacobsson supports Paul's description of the "female gaze" as "a mere cross-identification with masculinity", yet evidence of women's objectification of men—the discrete existence of a female gaze—can be found in the "boy toy" ads published in teen magazines, for example, despite Mulvey's contention that the gaze is property of one gender. Whether or not this is an example of female gaze or rather an internalized male gaze is up for debate, along with the other ideas on this subject. In terms of power relationships, the gazer can direct a gaze upon members of the same gender for asexual reasons, such as comparing the gazer's body image and clothing to those of the gazed-at individual.[7]:127

With respect to her essay, Mulvey stressed in a 2011 interview with Roberta Sassatelli: "First, that the 1975 article "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" was written as a polemic, and as Mandy Merck has described it, as a manifesto; so I had no interest in modifying the argument. Clearly I think, in retrospect from a more nuanced perspective, about the inescapability of the male gaze."[7]:128

Criticizing the male gaze[edit]

Matrixial gaze[edit]

Bracha Ettinger criticizes this notion of the male gaze by her proposition of a matrixial gaze.[17] The matrixial gaze is not operative where a "male gaze" is placed opposite to a "female gaze" and where both positive entities constitute each other from a lack (such an umbrella concept of the gaze would precisely be what scholars such as Slavoj Žižek claim is the Lacanian definition of "The Gaze"). Ettinger's proposal doesn't concern a subject and its object, existing or lacking. Rather, it concerns "trans-subjectivity" and shareability on a partial level, and it is based on her claim concerning a feminine-matrixial difference that escapes the phallic opposition of masculine/feminine and is produced in a process of co-emergence. Ettinger works from the very late Lacan, yet, from the angle she brings, it is the structure of the Lacanian subject itself that is deconstructed to a certain extent, and another kind of feminine dimension appears, with its hybrid and floating matrixial gaze.[18]

Ways of Seeing: viewing women in Renaissance paintings[edit]

John Berger, in his book Ways of Seeing, stated that "according to usage and conventions which are at last being questioned but have by no means been overcome—men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at."[19]

This ties into Lacan's theory of the alienation that results from the split between seeing oneself and seeing the ideal. In Renaissance nude painting this is the split that comes from being both the viewer, the viewed and seeing oneself through the gaze of others.[20]

Women and the gaze[edit]

Griselda Pollock, in her article, "Modernity and the Spaces of Femininity" argues that the female gaze can often be visually negated.[21] Pollock claims Robert Doisneau's photo Sidelong Glance supports this argument.[22] In the photo, a middle-aged bourgeois couple are looking around an art gallery. The spectator view of the picture is from inside the shop but the couple are looking in different places than the view of the spectator. The woman is commenting on an image to her husband, while the husband is being distracted by a nude female painting. The nude female painting is hung within view of the spectator. The woman is looking at another image, but it is out of view of the spectator. The man's gaze has found something more interesting and he has chosen to ignore the woman's comment. According to Pollock, "She is contrasted iconographically to the naked woman. She is denied the picturing of her desire; what she looks at is blank for the spectator. She is denied being the object of desire because she is represented as a woman who actively looks, rather than returning and confirming the gaze of the masculine spectator".[21]

Lorraine Gamman has suggested that a female gaze can be distinguished from that of a male through its displacing of scopophilic power, not simply the inversion of the male gaze, which creates the possibility of a multiplicity of viewing angles. In fact, for Gamman, "the female gaze cohabits the space occupied by men, rather than being entirely divorced from it".[23] Thus, for Gamman, the role of the female gaze is not to appropriate the traditional male form of "voyeurism;" its purpose is to disrupt the Phallocentric power of the male gaze by providing for other modes of looking.

Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin suggest that Mulvey's "male gaze" coincides with "the desire for visual immediacy", the erasure of the medium for uninhibited interaction with the object portrayed, which feminist film theorists treat as "a male desire that takes an overt sexual meaning when the object of representation, and therefore desire, is a woman".[24]:79 However, Bolter and Grusin consider their term "hypermediacy", the drawing of attention to the medium (or media) and the mediating processes present in a work, to be a manifestation of Gamman's female gaze because it "is multiple and deviant in its suggestion of multiplicity—a multiplicity of viewing positions and a multiplicity of relationships to the object in view, including sexual objects".[24]:84 According to Bolter and Grusin, then, hypermediacy, much like the female gaze, works to disrupt the myopic and monolithic male gaze by offering more angles of viewing.

At the 2016 Toronto International Film Festival, Jill Soloway, in her keynote address, tried to define the "female gaze" in film-making (available on YouTube).

The Indian photographer Farhat Basir Khan attributes the female gaze to anything that's been photographed by a woman which according to Khan is actually breaking the stereotypical view created by "male-constructed" photographs that have shown women in a certain light throughout the history of visual arts. [25] The idea of female gaze was central to the exhibition curated by Khan titled 'Feminography' at the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts in January 2017.

Oppositional gaze[edit]

Bell Hooks, in her essay titled "The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectatorship",[26] argues that Black women are placed outside of the "pleasure in looking" as an imaginary subject to the male gaze.[26] In reading Mulvey's essay "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema",[27] hooks states,"...from a standpoint that acknowledges race, one sees clearly why black women spectators not duped by mainstream cinema would develop an oppositional gaze".[26] In relation Lacan's mirror stage, during which a child develops self recognition and thus, the ideal ego, Hooks takes up the oppositional gaze as a form of looking back, in search of the Black female body within the idealization of cinematic white womanhood.[26]

The absence of racial relations in the context of feminist theory around the "totalizing category [of] women" engages in a process of denial which refutes the reality that many feminist film critics structure their discourse around white women.[26] As a working-class Black woman interviewed by Hooks replied, "to see black women in the position white women have occupied in film forever...", is to see a 'transfer' without 'transformation'.[26] The oppositional gaze, therefore, encompasses resistance as well as an understanding and awareness of the politics of race and racism via cinematic whiteness inclusive of the male gaze.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Eaton, E.W. (September 2008). "Feminist philosophy of art". Philosophy Compass. Wiley. 3 (5): 873–893. doi:10.1111/j.1747-9991.2008.00154.x. 
  2. ^"Feminist Aesthetics". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Winter 2012. Retrieved May 13, 2015.  
  3. ^That it applies to literature and the visual arts: Łuczyńska-Hołdys, Małgorzata (2013). Soft-Shed Kisses: Re-visioning the Femme Fatale in English Poetry of the 19th Century, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 15.
  4. ^Devereaux, Mary (1995). "Oppressive Texts, Resisting Readers, and the Gendered Spectator: The "New" Aesthetics". In Brand, Peggy Z.; Korsmeyer, Carolyn. Feminism and tradition in aesthetics. University Park, Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press. p. 126. ISBN 9780271043968. 
  5. ^Walters, Suzanna Danuta (1995). "Visual pressures: on gender and looking". In Walters, Suzanna Danuta. Material girls: making sense of feminist cultural theory. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. p. 57. ISBN 9780520089778. 
  6. ^ abcdefghMulvey, Laura (Autumn 1975). "Visual pleasure and narrative cinema". Screen. Oxford Journals. 16 (3): 6–18. doi:10.1093/screen/16.3.6. 

    Also available as: Mulvey, Laura (2009), "Visual pleasure and narrative cinema", in Mulvey, Laura, Visual and other pleasures (2nd ed.), Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire England New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 14–30, ISBN 9780230576469. Pdf via Amherst College.

  7. ^ abcdefgSassatelli, Roberta (September 2011). "Interview with Laura Mulvey: gender, gaze and technology in film culture". Theory, Culture & Society. Sage. 28 (5): 123–143. doi:10.1177/0263276411398278. 
  8. ^Jacobsson, Eva-Maria (1999). A Female Gaze?(pdf) (Report). Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology (Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan). 
  9. ^Weeks, L. Paul (2005), "Male gaze", in Ritzer, George, Encyclopedia of social theory, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, p. 467, ISBN 9780761926115. Preview.
  10. ^Streeter, Thomas; Hintlian, Nicole; Chipetz, Samantha; Callender, Susanna (2005). "This is not sex: a web essay on the male gaze, fashion advertising, and the pose".  Web essay about the male gaze in advertising.
  11. ^ abPritchard, Annette; Morgan, Nigel J. (October 2000). "Privileging the male gaze: gendered tourism landscapes". Annals of Tourism Research. Elsevier. 27 (4): 884–905. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00113-9. 
  12. ^Arons, Wendy, ""If her stunning beauty doesn't bring you to your knees, her deadly drop kick will": violent women in Hong Kong Kung Fu film", in McCaughey, Martha; King, Neal, Reel knockouts: violent women in the movies, Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, p. 41. 
  13. ^Felluga, Dino (April 2005). ""Modules on Lacan: on the gaze" Introductory guide to critical theory". West Lafayette, Indiana, US: Purdue University. Archived from the original on 15 April 2005. 
  14. ^Jacobsson, Eva-Maria (1999). A female gaze?(pdf) (Report). Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology (Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan). 
  15. ^Paul, Nalini (Spring 2004). "Other ways of looking: the female gaze in Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea". eSharp (journal run by postgraduates for postgraduates). University of Glasgow. 2. Archived from the original on 27 January 2009. 
  16. ^Kelly, Eileen (30 January 2003). "The female gaze". Salon. Salon Media Group. Archived from the original on 1 February 2003. 
  17. ^Ettinger, Bracha (1995). The matrixial gaze. Leeds, UK: Feminist Arts and Histories Network, Department of Fine Art, University of Leeds. ISBN 9780952489900. 
  18. ^Ettinger, Bracha (1996), "The with-in-visible screen", in de Zegher, M. Catherine, Inside the visible: an elliptical traverse of 20th century art in, of, and from the feminine, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 89–116, ISBN 9780262540810. 
  19. ^Berger, John (1973), "Section 3", in Berger, John, Ways of seeing, London: BBC Penguin Books, pp. 45, 47, ISBN 9780563122449. 
  20. ^Sturken, Marita; Cartwright, Lisa (2001), "Spectatorship, power, and knowledge", in Sturken, Marita; Cartwright, Lisa, Practices of looking: an introduction to visual culture, Oxford New York: Oxford University Press, p. 81, ISBN 9780198742715. 
  21. ^ abPollock, Griselda (1988), "Modernity and the spaces for femininity", in Pollock, Griselda, Vision and difference: femininity, feminism, and histories of art, London New York: Routledge, pp. 50–90, ISBN 9780415007214. 
    • Abridged version available at: Pollock, Griselda (1992), "Modernity and the spaces for femininity", in Broude, Norma; Garrard, Mary D., The expanding discourse: feminism and art history, New York, New York: Icon Editions, pp. 245–267, ISBN 9780064302074. Pdf.
  22. ^Vidani, Peter. "a collection on feminism and design: photograph: Robert Doisneau, Sidelong Glance (1948))". gorillagirls.tumblr.com. Gorilla Girls. Retrieved 23 January 2016. 
  23. ^Gamman, Lorraine (1989), "Watching the detectives: the enigma of the female gaze", in Gamman, Lorraine; Marshment, Margaret, The Female gaze: women as viewers of popular culture, Seattle: Real Comet Press, p. 16, ISBN 9780941104425. 
  24. ^ abBolter, Jay David; Grusin, Richard (1999), "Networks of remediation", in Bolter, Jay David; Grusin, Richard, Remediation understanding new media, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 64–87, ISBN 9780262024525. 
  25. ^"From her perspective". The Hindu. Retrieved 30 March 2017. 
  26. ^ abcdefhooks, bell. "The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectator". The Feminism and Visual Cultural Reader. New York: Routledge, 2003: Amelia Jones. pp. 94–105. 
  27. ^Mulvey, Laura. "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema". Media and Cultural Studies: Keywords. 2001; Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006: Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas Kellner. pp. 342–352. 

Further reading[edit]

Evolving Theories of the Male Gaze

The advent of film media served humankind as a reflection of culture, art, and the state of the world. The development of feminist ideologies paralleled the emergence of film as the most prevalent entertainment media, earning the creative contingent of film the enmity of several feminist thinkers. Among the most prominent to write about the bias and misogyny in film were Laura Mulvey, Mary Ann Doane, and E. Ann Kaplan. The aforementioned feminist scholars wrote about the degrading phenomena of the male gaze, a theory involving the presentation of female sexuality as an object to be revered by a male-dominated society. More specifically, the male gaze was described as a means for men to denigrate the female identity. 

Women as sexual objects

The theory of the male gaze is based on the idea of a deprecating portrayal of women in culture. Supposedly female-centric and female-based images across a medium such as film are designed with male interests in mind. Women in film are stripped of their dignity, compromising their sexuality in order to sate men. Women are often portrayed without male counterparts, therein displaying themselves for a non-existent male. It is rare for men to exude as much sexuality as women in film today, primarily because a majority of men do not seek to possess or dominate other men. Desirable themes are women, especially women who exude the most sexual energy. Men, observing these images, thus objectify women as sexual possessions and nothing more. The woman ceases to exist in any other form outside that of the sexual realm. She exists solely for the man, a mechanism to serve his ego, his libido, and his sense of possession. In his book Cracks in the Pedestal: Ideology and Gender in Hollywood, Philip Green details Mulvey’s perception of the original theory of male gaze. According to Green, Mulvey portrays male gaze as a form of voyeurism used in an exercise of a man’s power. That voyeurism “as such is a double-edged indicator of male power,” which “is as much a way of reducing women as it is of desiring them, and so can often be satisfied by simply dismissing them from view” (Green pp. 41-42).  Scholars such as Mulvey hypothesize that the increasing amounts of sexuality in film coincide with the rise of feminism and the social realization that women are equal to men. In order to counter the steadily strengthening presence of women in traditionally male roles and characteristics, sexual objectification served as a means to alleviate male worries of a female assumption of superiority. Green’s statement parallels this trend, as “reducing” a woman through the male gaze demotes women from human equals to subordinate sexual objects. Powerful women were no longer as sexually desired as film and feminism evolved. Women who overcame their sexual niches were returned as society and film became more sated with sexual imagery.

While it is true that men became more sexual in film in recent decades, male gaze still dominates the media. Feminists countered film’s male sexuality, surmising that there existed a double standard that was “more than sexual”; the sexual double standard “has a meaning that can’t be reduced to either eros or psyche” (Green 44). Unlike the male gaze meant to return women to the niche with which men were familiar and comfortable, the sexual double standard was “about action [and] work in the world,” which Green states “all belong to men” (Green 44). After all, male sexual objects served as counterparts to elicit heightened sexuality in the female subject, thus propagating the male gaze. Feminists endorsing the male gaze theory argue that men are more sexual because of their need to assert power over women. Women, on the other hand, are said not to have as pronounced a sexual appetite.

The composition of the male gaze

The male gaze initially had three aspects:

  1. The Gaze of the Camera
  2. The Gaze of the Male Screen Protagonist
  3. The Gaze of the Male Viewers in the Audience (Green 10).

The gaze of the camera is the object representing male dominance over women in the world, since the camera decides what to portray. Women in film were limited either to the traditional domestic role of wives and mothers or they were reduced to objects eliciting sexual desire as outlined above. The gaze of the male protagonist, though sexually objectifying both male and female parties, serves to entice the male audience and only the male audience for the reasons previously mentioned. Finally, the gaze of the male viewers in the audience completes the triumvirate ideology in its image-ownership. Women come full circle through male gaze, evolving from humans to sexual objects through the course of the theory. Mulvey believed that “by reducing women to the objects of a look, the triple male gaze confirms the ideology of separate spheres as much or as even more than it satisfies male sexual desire” (Green 10). This phenomenon of male image-ownership of female identity thus serves to sate both lust and the need for men to remain the dominant gender.

The disfigured female identity and separating entertainment from social agend

Anne Smelik writes about Mary Ann Doane study of the male gaze as adversely affecting the female identity. In her And the Mirror Cracked: Feminist Cinema and Film Theory, Smelik details Doane’s conclusion “that female identification and subjectivity are negatively signified in emotional processes such as masochism, paranoia, narcissism and hysteria”; the “woman’s film, in spite of its focus on a female main character perpetuates these processes and thus confirms stereotypes about the female psyche” (Smelik 13). According to Doane, the male gaze has adverse effects other than those of male dominance. Female spectators watching the distorted female sexual identity conform themselves to the new culturally accepted norm. Where women were previously domesticated and left to a life of suburban servitude, the emergence of film and the male gaze warped their psyches into those struggling to keep up with the heightened sexual appetite imposed on women in society. E. Ann Kaplan corroborates Doane’s theory, stated in Sue Thornham’s Feminist Film Theory: A Reader:

“Within the film text itself, men gaze at women, who become objects of
the gaze; the spectator, in turn, is made to identify with this male gaze, and to objectify the women on the screen; and the camera’s original “gaze” comes into
play in the very act of filming” (Thornham 235).

Unlike her contemporaries, however, Kaplan diverges, questioning which aspects of film to take literally and which are meant for entertainment. Film, after all, cannot be solely a mechanism of male subjugation. She questions how “the two levels interact” and “to which [society should] assign priority” (Thornham 235).

Conclusion

From Mulvey to Kaplan, the barrage of feminist writing on popular cinema was one based on righteous indignation. While gender portrayal has altered, the three feminists argue that though men have been portrayed as vulnerable and have also been objectified on camera, the emergence of female sexuality has become a burgeoning spectre of antagonism, something to be feared or opposed. It is as if cinema and male society answered to the feminist calls for change by satirizing the figure of the empowered woman. The theories of male gaze have in turn changed throughout feminist history, altering from one of mere objectification to one of an understated, underestimated malice alienating powerful female figures as social pariahs. Society has not changed; according to many such as Doane, it has pandered to a pseudo-intellectual evolution, maintaining its hostility toward females, feminism, and female sexuality in a different light. 

Bibliography

Green, Philip. (1998) Cracks in the Pedestal: Ideology and Gender in Hollywood.    Amherst: U of Massachusetts Press.

Smelik, Anneke. (1998) And the Mirror Cracked: Feminist Cinema and Film Theory.    New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Thornham, Sue. (1999) Feminist Film Theory: A Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh U P.

Source: Essay UK - http://www.essay.uk.com/free-essays/english-literature/theories-of-the-male-gaze.php


Not what you're looking for?

If this essay isn't quite what you're looking for, why not order your own custom English Literature essay, dissertation or piece of coursework that answers your exact question? There are UK writers just like me on hand, waiting to help you. Each of us is qualified to a high level in our area of expertise, and we can write you a fully researched, fully referenced complete original answer to your essay question. Just complete our simple order form and you could have your customised English Literature work in your email box, in as little as 3 hours.

Linda Senior Lecturer in Economics, Essay UK Researcher Team.

One thought on “Male Gaze Essay

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *