Here are some elements for discussion week 6

Apects for discussion

I must say I agree with Jessica on the confusion part of the text. And I would like to follow-up on that during the discussion.

How I read the text personally is that it’s about control and who is in control of the situation. It can either be male gazing spectators (exploiters) or women who take control of their webcams and try to teach men right behaviour. For me this doesn’t sound right. I mean it is then still about the gaze – and I question the whole concept of the gaze – perhaps it’s a disease and is it then more right for women to take advantage of it than for men? (That’s how I read the gaze in this article)

Some of the other arguments are also confusing for example White gives an example through Ali (2002) who: “states that here webcam site is as an ‘opportunity for me to work on my html skills’” and she “enjoys designing the site and coming up with more features more than I do having the cam. The cam is just a way to get people to come to the site” (p 17)

I personally wonder why Ali needs a webcam to get people interested in here design – for me that would have be a unnatural thing to do. (I don’t need a webcam to practice my Html skills)


This entry was posted in tp0910 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Here are some elements for discussion week 6

  1. Jess says:

    I think you make some interesting points, Thomas. It never occurred to me to question the individual who is doing the gazing and to speculate on it. I wish we had discussed this more in class. I feel that in relation to my own post, it is stereotypically men that are considered to objectify women, so for you to question if it is “…more right for women to take advantage of it than for men” leads me to wonder if women objectify themselves, or at least put themselves knowingly into situations where they are going to be objectified?

    We are all objectified to a point every time we step out of our doors into the public’s eye, so what makes these cam girls so different? I think you answer that question for me with your point that if her webdesign (or html skills) where so interesting, would she really have needed a web cam on her site in order to draw an audience, or for that matter, once she had a following, why not stop the use of the web cam and switch to just an online journal?

    I do understand that at the time web cams were the latest technology and thus the latest fad, but there is no mention of this in our article; rather, the cam girls’ justification is simply limited to displaying html skills and drawing a sort of confidence from being in the public eye while still within the privacy of their own home (I really do enjoy Jacob’s analogy of a domestic peep show). These cam girls were doing something new and can be considered a part of the feminist movement, but at the same time, if White’s article is to be believed and some of the cam girls were in reality just opening up another sphere of objectivity for women by having sex, stripping, and taking sexual requests (flashing, etc) is that really a step forward for feminism?

    Thanks you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s