WEBVTT

00:00:06.735 --> 00:00:08.890
It’s often said that cinema,

00:00:09.009 --> 00:00:12.799
by it's very nature, is voyeuristic,

00:00:13.012 --> 00:00:16.262
because film offers the audience a window

00:00:16.352 --> 00:00:19.442
into the hidden lives of others.

00:00:20.837 --> 00:00:22.647
Watching people’s stories on the big

00:00:22.737 --> 00:00:25.347
and small screen can indeed be

00:00:25.431 --> 00:00:28.290
fascinating and exhilarating.

00:00:29.709 --> 00:00:32.159
But the act of looking can also feel

00:00:32.249 --> 00:00:38.289
uncomfortable, invasive, even violating.

00:00:39.279 --> 00:00:42.309
Underpinning these uncomfortable moments

00:00:42.488 --> 00:00:45.158
we can find some alarming messages

00:00:45.248 --> 00:00:47.629
about the role of consent.

00:00:48.559 --> 00:00:51.240
To explain, let’s start here

00:00:51.525 --> 00:00:54.602
in the normal bedroom of a normal boy

00:00:54.732 --> 00:00:57.748
doing normal boy stuff.

00:00:58.898 --> 00:01:00.298
Normal stuff

00:01:00.408 --> 00:01:03.126
like spying on the girl next door.

00:01:04.117 --> 00:01:06.018
Popular culture is filled

00:01:06.118 --> 00:01:08.370
with scenes like this one

00:01:09.765 --> 00:01:11.582
Scenes in which one character,

00:01:11.682 --> 00:01:12.842
usually a man

00:01:12.922 --> 00:01:14.570
spies on another character,

00:01:14.650 --> 00:01:15.960
usually a woman

00:01:16.060 --> 00:01:19.499
without that person’s knowledge or consent

00:01:20.905 --> 00:01:23.075
To be clear, we're talking about secret

00:01:23.165 --> 00:01:24.730
surveillance of a person

00:01:24.832 --> 00:01:26.612
while they're alone

00:01:26.724 --> 00:01:28.994
in various states of undress

00:01:29.094 --> 00:01:31.524
or engaged in sexual activity.

00:01:32.421 --> 00:01:34.051
This is invasive looking

00:01:34.124 --> 00:01:35.524
that violates a person's

00:01:35.604 --> 00:01:38.525
reasonable expectation of privacy.

00:01:39.201 --> 00:01:40.841
In a staggering number of movies

00:01:40.931 --> 00:01:43.866
and tv shows, this type of spying

00:01:43.966 --> 00:01:46.106
isn't done by the villain.

00:01:46.855 --> 00:01:48.396
It is instead perpetrated

00:01:48.496 --> 00:01:49.946
by "nice guy" characters.

00:01:50.026 --> 00:01:51.809
"Slow down, baby"

00:01:52.259 --> 00:01:54.249
These are straight men, who are otherwise

00:01:54.329 --> 00:01:56.575
presented as decent.

00:01:56.919 --> 00:01:58.364
Or, at the very least,

00:01:58.460 --> 00:02:00.012
mostly harmless.

00:02:00.104 --> 00:02:01.629
"Hey! Hey!"

00:02:04.002 --> 00:02:06.126
This media patern is so prevasive,

00:02:06.229 --> 00:02:08.287
I thought it needed a name.

00:02:08.370 --> 00:02:10.162
"He's a peeping Tom!"

00:02:10.263 --> 00:02:13.108
So I call it "The harmless peeping Tom".

00:02:13.203 --> 00:02:14.847
"You know, it occurs to me,

00:02:14.937 --> 00:02:16.731
that you can see right into Donna's house

00:02:16.811 --> 00:02:17.716
from my driveway."

00:02:17.806 --> 00:02:18.886
"You don't say"

00:02:18.956 --> 00:02:20.036
(off-screen laughter)

00:02:20.136 --> 00:02:22.036
All of the boys on "That 70s Show"

00:02:22.126 --> 00:02:24.339
for instance, casually participate

00:02:24.409 --> 00:02:25.787
in spying behavior.

00:02:25.887 --> 00:02:28.266
"No, Anette! Not the robe!"

00:02:28.366 --> 00:02:29.328
(off-screen laughter)

00:02:29.418 --> 00:02:30.083
"Quick, somebody yell

00:02:30.153 --> 00:02:32.060
'pillow fight' in a girl voice"

00:02:32.166 --> 00:02:33.430
But the character of Fez

00:02:33.510 --> 00:02:35.410
is the quintessential example

00:02:35.493 --> 00:02:36.823
of a harmless peeping Tom.

00:02:36.893 --> 00:02:39.187
(off-screen laughter)
- "Oh my god, Fez!"

00:02:39.867 --> 00:02:41.322
"Nice honkers!"

00:02:41.422 --> 00:02:42.377
(off-screen laughter)

00:02:42.480 --> 00:02:43.909
"Get out of here!"

00:02:44.623 --> 00:02:45.417
"Fez?"

00:02:45.502 --> 00:02:47.324
There's a years long running gag

00:02:47.414 --> 00:02:49.765
about how he's always spying on women.

00:02:49.845 --> 00:02:52.129
Often hiding in their bedroom closets.

00:02:52.219 --> 00:02:54.237
"Oh my god, did you see anything?"

00:02:54.347 --> 00:02:55.557
"Not much, you should really think

00:02:55.607 --> 00:02:56.801
about a nightlight."

00:02:56.912 --> 00:02:59.623
And yet this pattern of intrusive behavior

00:02:59.934 --> 00:03:01.435
is just considered a minor

00:03:01.525 --> 00:03:02.543
nuisance on the show.

00:03:02.613 --> 00:03:03.345
"Ouch"

00:03:03.415 --> 00:03:04.135
"You okay?"

00:03:04.185 --> 00:03:04.717
(camera click)

00:03:04.784 --> 00:03:05.524
"Fez!"

00:03:05.614 --> 00:03:06.853
(off-screen laughter)

00:03:07.673 --> 00:03:09.153
"With this, you can see

00:03:09.223 --> 00:03:10.531
through a lady's clothes"

00:03:10.621 --> 00:03:11.680
(off-screen laughter)

00:03:13.186 --> 00:03:15.235
"Okay, Jackie, prepare to be ogled"

00:03:16.575 --> 00:03:17.774
Fez even ends up

00:03:17.774 --> 00:03:19.057
in a romantic relationship

00:03:19.057 --> 00:03:20.299
with one of the women

00:03:20.299 --> 00:03:21.129
he's spied on.

00:03:21.129 --> 00:03:24.809
Over 8 seasons of prime time television.

00:03:25.959 --> 00:03:28.654
Scenes in which boys secretly spy on girls

00:03:28.777 --> 00:03:30.296
were a staple of so called

00:03:30.296 --> 00:03:31.628
"teen sex comedies".

00:03:31.731 --> 00:03:34.828
In the late 1970s and early 80s.

00:03:35.721 --> 00:03:38.731
But the media pattern didn't begin or end

00:03:38.821 --> 00:03:41.489
with Animal House, Porky's

00:03:41.924 --> 00:03:43.599
or Revenge of the Nerds.

00:03:43.809 --> 00:03:45.399
"Oh! Yeah!"

00:03:46.345 --> 00:03:48.520
Alfred Hitchcock was famously obsessed

00:03:48.600 --> 00:03:49.918
with voyeurism.

00:03:49.996 --> 00:03:51.685
And included peeping scenes

00:03:51.775 --> 00:03:54.616
in several of his most notable films.

00:03:56.529 --> 00:03:58.069
Since then, we've seen

00:03:58.169 --> 00:04:00.097
Harmless Peeping Toms pop up

00:04:00.177 --> 00:04:02.287
in practically every genre.

00:04:02.997 --> 00:04:06.567
From action movies to horror films.

00:04:07.307 --> 00:04:08.997
From romantic dramas

00:04:09.097 --> 00:04:11.047
to science fiction adventures.

00:04:13.467 --> 00:04:15.777
And it's not uncommon for video games

00:04:15.847 --> 00:04:18.422
to present players with interactive

00:04:18.502 --> 00:04:20.418
peeping opportunities.

00:04:21.292 --> 00:04:22.392
"Look at this, come here"

00:04:22.452 --> 00:04:24.572
"There's a naked woman across the street"

00:04:24.902 --> 00:04:25.602
"Where?"

00:04:26.500 --> 00:04:27.720
"Second floor from the top

00:04:27.750 --> 00:04:28.920
see the window on the left"

00:04:28.960 --> 00:04:29.729
"Wow"

00:04:29.782 --> 00:04:32.006
The trope has also been a mainstay

00:04:32.042 --> 00:04:33.759
on TV sitcoms.

00:04:33.853 --> 00:04:36.552
"Oh my God, that's Rachel naked!"

00:04:36.894 --> 00:04:38.554
Usually as a one-off gag

00:04:38.554 --> 00:04:39.934
in a handful of episodes.

00:04:40.014 --> 00:04:41.224
"Would you have opened the door

00:04:41.224 --> 00:04:42.234
if you knew it was me?"

00:04:42.284 --> 00:04:43.275
"Not since I found out

00:04:43.275 --> 00:04:44.246
the teddy bear you gave me

00:04:44.246 --> 00:04:45.816
had a webcam in it!"

00:04:46.932 --> 00:04:48.212
While we may typically think

00:04:48.212 --> 00:04:50.313
of peeping Toms as a stranger

00:04:50.313 --> 00:04:51.876
hiding in the bushes,

00:04:52.393 --> 00:04:55.133
spying can take many different forms.

00:04:55.234 --> 00:04:56.844
"Did I miss anything?"

00:04:56.904 --> 00:04:57.897
"Oh my God"

00:04:57.924 --> 00:04:58.724
"Oh!"

00:04:58.773 --> 00:05:01.074
"Oh, thank you, God, for this wonderful,

00:05:01.074 --> 00:05:01.924
wonderful day"

00:05:02.234 --> 00:05:04.514
Occasionally, spying is presented

00:05:04.584 --> 00:05:06.374
as a part of man's job.

00:05:06.974 --> 00:05:08.792
Like a cop on a stakeout.

00:05:09.059 --> 00:05:10.389
"Oh, wow, oh yeah"

00:05:10.474 --> 00:05:12.244
But in many of those scenarios,

00:05:12.314 --> 00:05:13.774
the Harmless Peeping Tom trope

00:05:13.844 --> 00:05:14.844
still applies.

00:05:14.924 --> 00:05:17.064
"To protect and to serve"

00:05:17.164 --> 00:05:21.354
"Ooh, ooh, ohh, I love my job so much, oh"

00:05:21.464 --> 00:05:23.386
In espionage themed media,

00:05:23.476 --> 00:05:24.806
the guy might have access

00:05:24.886 --> 00:05:26.926
to high-tech spying gadgets.

00:05:27.006 --> 00:05:28.606
"Nine different enhanced visions modes

00:05:28.706 --> 00:05:30.633
every little boy's dream:

00:05:30.967 --> 00:05:33.328
the penetrating mode"

00:05:33.928 --> 00:05:35.828
"And would you look at that"

00:05:35.888 --> 00:05:37.148
In superhero stories

00:05:37.228 --> 00:05:38.978
or supernatural plot lines

00:05:39.068 --> 00:05:41.118
the guy's powers may be used

00:05:41.188 --> 00:05:42.568
as a way to gain access

00:05:42.658 --> 00:05:43.970
to a woman's body.

00:05:44.140 --> 00:05:45.205
(woman screams)

00:05:45.335 --> 00:05:48.004
"And He saw, that it was good"

00:05:48.254 --> 00:05:50.074
Superman, for example

00:05:50.164 --> 00:05:52.464
is often upheld as a paragon of good

00:05:52.464 --> 00:05:53.804
decent manhood

00:05:54.254 --> 00:05:56.624
and yet even he steals a quick peek

00:05:56.624 --> 00:05:58.304
from time to time.

00:06:00.472 --> 00:06:01.924
Harmless Peeping Toms

00:06:01.924 --> 00:06:03.894
aren't always the hero.

00:06:03.974 --> 00:06:06.404
But, they're not the villain either.

00:06:06.494 --> 00:06:08.364
"I wind up seeing a lot more of Ava

00:06:08.434 --> 00:06:10.208
than I bargained for"

00:06:10.484 --> 00:06:12.549
Even if the protagonist has, let's say

00:06:12.659 --> 00:06:14.383
questionable morals

00:06:14.503 --> 00:06:15.504
or is involved

00:06:15.604 --> 00:06:17.514
in other criminal activities

00:06:17.604 --> 00:06:20.424
the spying itself isn't framed as a strike

00:06:20.514 --> 00:06:22.444
against his character.

00:06:22.908 --> 00:06:23.858
And critically

00:06:23.948 --> 00:06:25.079
the audience is still meant

00:06:25.139 --> 00:06:28.588
to indentify with HIM as he's peeping.

00:06:29.151 --> 00:06:30.091
"What?"

00:06:31.145 --> 00:06:32.214
It's not unusual

00:06:32.324 --> 00:06:34.394
for invasions of privacy

00:06:34.494 --> 00:06:36.746
to be framed as endearing.

00:06:37.167 --> 00:06:37.877
"Excuse me?"

00:06:37.947 --> 00:06:38.641
"Oh!"

00:06:39.088 --> 00:06:40.160
"I think you're in my bath..."

00:06:40.240 --> 00:06:41.581
"Close your eyes!"

00:06:41.654 --> 00:06:43.294
or just the innocuous behavior

00:06:43.364 --> 00:06:45.293
of a guy with a crush.

00:06:47.818 --> 00:06:49.712
Even when peeping is called out

00:06:49.792 --> 00:06:53.382
as pathetic, annoying or a little creepy

00:06:53.482 --> 00:06:54.643
"It was an accident."

00:06:54.753 --> 00:06:56.058
"You're an asshole!"

00:06:56.157 --> 00:06:58.453
his actions are, more often than not,

00:06:58.543 --> 00:07:01.100
quickly forgiven and forgotten.

00:07:03.176 --> 00:07:04.575
A good way to illustrate the deeper

00:07:04.645 --> 00:07:07.027
problem here can be found in the

00:07:07.127 --> 00:07:09.025
"no peeking" plot cliché.

00:07:09.123 --> 00:07:09.981
"How did you see it?

00:07:10.041 --> 00:07:11.591
You said you wouldn't look!"

00:07:11.748 --> 00:07:13.906
"Sorry, as I told you the hero

00:07:13.996 --> 00:07:15.456
always peeks."

00:07:15.856 --> 00:07:17.871
The set up is a familar one: a woman

00:07:17.941 --> 00:07:20.025
needs to change clothes for some reason.

00:07:20.085 --> 00:07:22.547
But her guy friend is standing right there

00:07:22.617 --> 00:07:23.821
"You're not bothering me."

00:07:23.911 --> 00:07:26.497
So naturally she asks him to turn around

00:07:26.587 --> 00:07:28.833
or close his eyes while she undresses.

00:07:28.923 --> 00:07:30.361
"Would you please turn around?"

00:07:30.451 --> 00:07:31.271
"Why?"

00:07:32.006 --> 00:07:33.336
"Just turn around."

00:07:34.404 --> 00:07:35.106
"Just look,

00:07:35.106 --> 00:07:36.537
look over there for a second."

00:07:36.537 --> 00:07:37.254
"Yeah."

00:07:37.254 --> 00:07:38.600
"Just turn around and look at the

00:07:38.600 --> 00:07:40.150
waterfalls Skippy all right, please?"

00:07:40.150 --> 00:07:40.730
"Fine."

00:07:40.770 --> 00:07:42.315
"Stay in guard, no peeking."

00:07:42.425 --> 00:07:45.096
Does our protagonist respects her wishes?

00:07:45.391 --> 00:07:46.914
Of course not.

00:07:47.087 --> 00:07:47.920
"Don't look!"

00:07:47.990 --> 00:07:50.091
"I said your eyes have to go over there!"

00:07:50.287 --> 00:07:53.395
Most of the time, he peeks anyway

00:07:53.496 --> 00:07:54.988
"Turn around!"

00:07:55.989 --> 00:07:56.961
"Now!"

00:07:57.978 --> 00:07:59.243
"Turn around."

00:07:59.427 --> 00:08:02.400
and there are rarely any consequences

00:08:02.500 --> 00:08:04.658
for violating her trust.

00:08:05.646 --> 00:08:07.478
In fact his trangression

00:08:07.558 --> 00:08:10.138
is likely to be rewarded.

00:08:12.586 --> 00:08:14.451
Now sometimes the women character will

00:08:14.541 --> 00:08:17.445
explicitely ask not to be looked at,

00:08:18.317 --> 00:08:20.746
while in other examples it's just implied

00:08:20.876 --> 00:08:23.192
that the guy shouldn't be staring.

00:08:23.575 --> 00:08:26.015
It's incredibly rare to see a man who,

00:08:26.094 --> 00:08:29.313
given the opportunity, doesn't peek.

00:08:32.599 --> 00:08:33.621
"Don't look."

00:08:34.803 --> 00:08:35.413
"Okay."

00:08:35.472 --> 00:08:41.603
If it’s a romantic story, the transgression is
often presented as a sign that he’s attracted to her.

00:08:43.137 --> 00:08:44.380
In reality though,

00:08:44.480 --> 00:08:49.876
if a man demonstrates a deliberate disregard for consent or women’s boundaries

00:08:49.993 --> 00:08:53.610
that should be a major major red flag.

00:08:54.971 --> 00:08:56.881
"Drop dead, dirtbag."

00:08:59.322 --> 00:09:05.652
Even though Invasive spying is often considered
just a nuisance crime by law enforcement,

00:09:05.737 --> 00:09:10.639
being spied-on isn’t a minor inconvenience for the victims

00:09:10.922 --> 00:09:11.872
"Hello"

00:09:12.013 --> 00:09:15.329
it can cause real lasting emotional harm.

00:09:15.438 --> 00:09:16.751
"Someone there?"

00:09:17.189 --> 00:09:18.992
"That's it, I can almost see it."

00:09:19.528 --> 00:09:23.346
Sometimes peeping scenes are
filmed in a family-friendly way

00:09:23.426 --> 00:09:24.706
"There she is."

00:09:24.797 --> 00:09:28.628
while in other media it can be much more explicit.

00:09:29.756 --> 00:09:31.573
In fact throughout this video essay

00:09:31.659 --> 00:09:35.931
I’ve had to use a lot of creative editing techniques
and strategic blurring

00:09:36.032 --> 00:09:38.279
just to make the footage appropriate for YouTube.

00:09:38.370 --> 00:09:41.719
"Oh, you imp. You've got nudity in there!"

00:09:43.842 --> 00:09:47.501
Despite what some conservative groups
would have you believe,

00:09:47.604 --> 00:09:53.027
the problem here is not the depiction
of sex or nudity on-screen.

00:09:53.618 --> 00:09:59.921
Depending on how it’s framed, sex and nudity can be represented in all kinds of ways.

00:10:00.138 --> 00:10:01.215
"Should be fine."

00:10:02.189 --> 00:10:04.840
The real issues with the
“Harmless” Peeping Tom trope

00:10:04.963 --> 00:10:07.123
stems from the lack of consent

00:10:07.222 --> 00:10:10.316
between the characters in the story

00:10:12.390 --> 00:10:16.756
and how those violations
are framed as “no big deal.”

00:10:16.866 --> 00:10:19.674
"Did you see me change 
out of my clothes by the Jacuzzi?"

00:10:20.739 --> 00:10:22.472
"I thought that you were catatonic."

00:10:24.616 --> 00:10:30.505
There’s a common misconception that voyeurism is,
by definition, looking without permission.

00:10:31.095 --> 00:10:33.138
But that is not true.

00:10:33.884 --> 00:10:39.646
Voyeurism can, and I’d argue should, be a consensual act.

00:10:44.056 --> 00:10:49.651
It is, of course, possible to film scenes,
even voyeuristic ones,

00:10:49.761 --> 00:10:54.126
where characters look at each other
in consensual ways.

00:10:55.987 --> 00:10:56.984
"Steve..."

00:10:59.037 --> 00:11:02.090
But cinematic depictions of consensual gazing

00:11:02.167 --> 00:11:08.535
are not anywhere near as prevalent as scenes
where permission has not been granted.

00:11:09.816 --> 00:11:14.758
Up until this point, we’ve been discussing
the perspective of characters on-scene

00:11:14.900 --> 00:11:19.267
but there’s another critical perspective
we haven’t yet considered.

00:11:19.869 --> 00:11:23.299
And that is the perspective of the camera.

00:11:24.342 --> 00:11:28.429
Let’s return for a moment to that
“normal” boys bedroom from earlier.

00:11:28.528 --> 00:11:32.101
Although, it’s not a “normal” bedroom, is it?

00:11:32.384 --> 00:11:34.552
It’s really a movie set.

00:11:34.669 --> 00:11:37.567
And that’s not really a “normal” boy either,

00:11:37.661 --> 00:11:40.884
that’s an actor working from a script.

00:11:40.977 --> 00:11:46.204
In fact, everything we see here is
a deliberate choice by the filmmakers.

00:11:46.580 --> 00:11:49.272
The woman is being put on display by the director

00:11:49.356 --> 00:11:54.119
who is careful to position her body
so the protagonist can get a good look.

00:11:54.225 --> 00:12:00.201
But the shots are also designed so
the audience gets to peek along with him.

00:12:00.723 --> 00:12:02.003
"Mr. Bishop, do you mind if I take a look?"

00:12:02.088 --> 00:12:02.788
"Carl..."

00:12:02.883 --> 00:12:06.016
This then makes the viewer complicit.

00:12:06.146 --> 00:12:11.734
We are made to vicariously participate
in the act of non-consensual looking.

00:12:11.837 --> 00:12:13.707
"Really, 007?"

00:12:14.420 --> 00:12:18.139
This is true, incidentally,
even when the character doing the peeping

00:12:18.237 --> 00:12:20.846
is clearly meant to be a creep.

00:12:22.204 --> 00:12:27.164
There’s another important conversation to be had
about what film theorist Laura Mulvey called

00:12:27.270 --> 00:12:29.194
“the male gaze”

00:12:29.283 --> 00:12:35.557
especially as it relates to how the camera moves
and frames women’s bodies in a sexualized way

00:12:35.657 --> 00:12:39.214
independent of the protagonist’s point of view.

00:12:39.650 --> 00:12:45.287
But for our purposes here,
we’re mostly focusing on the characters in the story.

00:12:45.705 --> 00:12:50.423
The audience for movies is, of course,
made up of people of all genders,

00:12:50.538 --> 00:12:54.587
but the male character’s perspective
is the one we are sharing

00:12:54.703 --> 00:12:59.554
and therefore it’s his lurid excitement
we are meant to identify with.

00:13:01.176 --> 00:13:06.448
Just to reiterate, narratively speaking,
these women don’t know they’re being watched

00:13:06.571 --> 00:13:09.053
and therefore haven’t given consent.

00:13:13.341 --> 00:13:15.266
Not to put too fine a point on it,

00:13:15.364 --> 00:13:19.124
but the reason these scenes are
supposed to be titillating to the viewer

00:13:19.251 --> 00:13:24.256
is precisely because the looking
is being done without permission.

00:13:25.130 --> 00:13:28.190
"It's like we're seeing something
we're not supposed to be seeing

00:13:28.453 --> 00:13:30.956
which is kind of why it makes it so f***ing hot."

00:13:31.813 --> 00:13:36.051
All the actors involved in these productions have,
presumably,

00:13:36.147 --> 00:13:40.189
agreed to be represented in the ways we see on-screen,

00:13:40.277 --> 00:13:45.317
but fictional representations can still help
normalize non-consensual behavior.

00:13:45.410 --> 00:13:46.776
"Good afternoon!"

00:13:47.921 --> 00:13:51.232
It’s worth quickly noting
the particular type of actress

00:13:51.325 --> 00:13:56.144
that filmmakers like to cast as the object of
men’s voyeuristic attention.

00:13:57.597 --> 00:14:02.984
Usually she’s young, thin, white,
and conventionally attractive.

00:14:03.941 --> 00:14:06.902
It’s such a well established pattern in Hollywood

00:14:06.991 --> 00:14:11.161
that whenever the victim differs from
that very specific expectation,

00:14:11.401 --> 00:14:12.521
"Gotcha!"

00:14:12.862 --> 00:14:15.384
the scene is used as a gross-out punchline

00:14:15.499 --> 00:14:17.764
"A man!"

00:14:19.215 --> 00:14:21.318
or a transphobic joke.

00:14:21.860 --> 00:14:24.260
"That dude looks like a lady."

00:14:24.792 --> 00:14:27.405
"Hey, wow! Look in that window!"

00:14:27.535 --> 00:14:31.857
Scenes where boys surreptitiously
spy on girls or women

00:14:31.979 --> 00:14:35.699
are especially common in coming-of-age stories.

00:14:36.507 --> 00:14:41.046
In these type of narratives spying is
often presented as a rite-of-passage,

00:14:41.170 --> 00:14:43.605
"Holy Christ!"

00:14:43.712 --> 00:14:48.175
as just an inevitable part of
young men’s sexual awakening.

00:14:53.484 --> 00:14:55.573
The boys may be initially presented

00:14:55.702 --> 00:15:00.252
as shy, awkward, or cowardly
where women are concerned.

00:15:01.011 --> 00:15:06.438
And it’s through their peeping behavior
that they’re able to gain self-confidence.

00:15:08.625 --> 00:15:11.089
According to the visual language of cinema,

00:15:11.195 --> 00:15:15.791
spying on girls is a formative experience for boys,

00:15:15.956 --> 00:15:20.862
so much so that it takes on an almost
spiritual significance.

00:15:21.141 --> 00:15:24.914
In this way the transition
from boyhood into manhood

00:15:25.025 --> 00:15:28.837
is built on a violation of women’s bodies.

00:15:29.866 --> 00:15:34.455
"She was really deep in thought because
she left herself unguarded a few times,

00:15:35.381 --> 00:15:41.450
and I got to see halfway up her thighs that
led up to the golden palace of the Himalayas."

00:15:41.940 --> 00:15:45.912
Sometimes the boys are presented
as melancholy loners,

00:15:45.993 --> 00:15:51.187
but in other scenarios peeping is
framed as a social activity.

00:15:52.412 --> 00:15:54.856
" Her hands are moving down."
"I gotta see this!"

00:15:55.712 --> 00:15:57.854
The act of objectifying women

00:15:59.201 --> 00:16:02.545
then becomes a bonding experience for young men.

00:16:02.762 --> 00:16:07.263
An experience that also reinforces their shared
sense of male dominance.

00:16:07.384 --> 00:16:09.559
"Bag it and spank it, boys."

00:16:11.074 --> 00:16:12.136
"Shit, get down!"

00:16:15.970 --> 00:16:20.239
Now, don’t get me wrong,
sexual curiosity is completely normal,

00:16:20.344 --> 00:16:22.929
however non-consensual behavior

00:16:23.016 --> 00:16:27.313
should never be confused
for healthy sexual exploration.

00:16:28.173 --> 00:16:32.423
The default should always be
an expectation of privacy.

00:16:32.575 --> 00:16:33.747
"Dude, I'm changing."

00:16:33.884 --> 00:16:34.944
"Ah, sorry!"

00:16:36.201 --> 00:16:40.974
In John Berger’s 1972 TV series “Ways of Seeing”

00:16:41.074 --> 00:16:44.523
he observes that the act of looking isn’t passive.

00:16:44.900 --> 00:16:46.350
It’s active.

00:16:47.324 --> 00:16:49.392
Men dream of women,

00:16:49.484 --> 00:16:52.857
women dream of themselves being dreamt of.

00:16:53.373 --> 00:16:55.052
Men look at women,

00:16:55.162 --> 00:16:58.369
women watch themselves being looked at

00:16:58.962 --> 00:17:03.550
I don’t want to deny the crucial part
that seeing plays in sexuality,

00:17:03.647 --> 00:17:05.733
but there’s a great difference in being seen,

00:17:05.833 --> 00:17:08.843
as oneself naked,
or being seen by another in that way,

00:17:08.943 --> 00:17:11.613
and a body being put on display.

00:17:11.716 --> 00:17:16.738
Berger was talking about society
as reflected in European oil paintings,

00:17:16.829 --> 00:17:21.075
but the observation could just as
easily be applied to cinema.

00:17:22.465 --> 00:17:25.405
The male characters are active and fully dressed,

00:17:25.503 --> 00:17:27.925
while the women are passive and exposed,

00:17:28.012 --> 00:17:33.152
unprepared to be seen,
and therefore framed as vulnerable.

00:17:34.500 --> 00:17:40.192
This sets up an automatic power dynamic
wherein the man has the upper-hand.

00:17:42.166 --> 00:17:45.065
The message these scenarios
send to women and girls

00:17:45.181 --> 00:17:48.964
is that being spied on should be taken
as a compliment,

00:17:49.060 --> 00:17:50.341
"So you were watching me."

00:17:51.538 --> 00:17:54.214
"But for how long? Just tonight?"

00:17:54.567 --> 00:17:57.371
"A week, two weeks since I moved in?"

00:17:57.481 --> 00:18:02.016
because men’s sexual attention is
always supposed to be flattering,

00:18:02.126 --> 00:18:05.414
regardless of whether or not
those feelings are reciprocated.

00:18:05.527 --> 00:18:07.287
"That's either the creepiest

00:18:10.045 --> 00:18:14.022
or the sweetest thing I have ever heard."

00:18:18.364 --> 00:18:22.479
In her essay “Intrusions”
author Melissa Febos explains that

00:18:22.598 --> 00:18:28.928
"Just as these productions encourage men to believe
that stalking and peeping are acceptable forms of courtship,

00:18:29.039 --> 00:18:30.960
likely to resolve in a love match,

00:18:31.066 --> 00:18:35.773
so do they prescribe to women
a desire to be the object of such behavior.”

00:18:36.773 --> 00:18:38.520
"Think maybe I ought to pull this curtain.

00:18:38.520 --> 00:18:40.832
There seems to someone staring
at you from across the court."

00:18:40.832 --> 00:18:42.468
"Oh, no. Don't do that.

00:18:42.507 --> 00:18:44.462
My girlfriend and I,
we never pull the curtain."

00:18:44.578 --> 00:18:46.058
"We just have a ball with him."

00:18:46.197 --> 00:18:48.776
In the movies and tv shows
we’ve been discussing

00:18:48.874 --> 00:18:51.992
it’s not uncommon for the woman
who is being sped on

00:18:52.093 --> 00:18:57.351
to indicate to the audience
that she secretly enjoys this violation.

00:18:58.700 --> 00:19:02.003
The underlying implication is clear,

00:19:02.115 --> 00:19:04.190
to be desired by men

00:19:04.286 --> 00:19:06.768
is what gives women value.

00:19:06.855 --> 00:19:08.499
"Well, I think you should call the police!"

00:19:08.609 --> 00:19:11.198
"Oh, no! That would spoil everything."

00:19:11.268 --> 00:19:13.430
"After all, he's been so patient,

00:19:13.430 --> 00:19:14.808
it only seems fair.

00:19:15.518 --> 00:19:16.871
That dangerous message is

00:19:16.967 --> 00:19:21.118
compounded by another idea
baked into these scenes:

00:19:22.852 --> 00:19:29.307
that when it comes to sexual desire, men and boys
“just can’t control themselves.”

00:19:31.383 --> 00:19:35.462
As if men are compelled by
some invisible force of nature

00:19:35.555 --> 00:19:38.422
to infringe upon women’s bodies.

00:19:38.725 --> 00:19:41.207
The myth is not true, of course.

00:19:41.334 --> 00:19:44.937
Men and boys can in fact control their urges.

00:19:45.053 --> 00:19:46.113
"Hold up!"

00:19:47.540 --> 00:19:50.574
Still, media reinforces the myth that

00:19:50.683 --> 00:19:53.830
“men aren’t responsible for their own actions,”

00:19:53.926 --> 00:19:56.986
occasionally by transforming the peeping tom

00:19:57.086 --> 00:20:01.840
into a hapless victim
of the woman’s seductive trap.

00:20:02.154 --> 00:20:05.664
Here’s Melissa Febos again
from her essay “Intrusions”

00:20:05.874 --> 00:20:08.449
“It is also a narrative that exonerates men.

00:20:08.556 --> 00:20:12.397
The more plausible it seems
that women are always performing,

00:20:12.497 --> 00:20:15.321
the less indictable the watching.”

00:20:15.430 --> 00:20:18.629
"Next thing you know, 
she starts deliberately undressing

00:20:18.719 --> 00:20:21.092
in front of the window, with the lights on."

00:20:21.099 --> 00:20:22.819
"It's like she knew I was watching her."

00:20:23.686 --> 00:20:26.093
It should be ludicrous on its face

00:20:26.186 --> 00:20:30.590
to blame women for men’s illicit spying

00:20:30.819 --> 00:20:34.009
but movies consistently leave us
with the impression

00:20:34.156 --> 00:20:38.685
that it’s the woman’s fault
for allowing herself to be seen,

00:20:38.793 --> 00:20:42.246
even when undressing
in the privacy of her own home.

00:20:43.011 --> 00:20:45.496
"Oh, god. You saw me?"

00:20:45.575 --> 00:20:49.213
"You weren't trying to entice me with your nakedness?"

00:20:49.592 --> 00:20:50.803
"No, no!

00:20:50.926 --> 00:20:55.274
And you actually thought I wanted
to have sex with you?"

00:20:58.580 --> 00:21:00.918
Everything we’ve been discussing in this video

00:21:01.014 --> 00:21:05.702
is part of a larger culture of male entitlement.

00:21:07.039 --> 00:21:09.690
Too many men in our society have been taught

00:21:09.774 --> 00:21:14.222
that women’s bodies should
always be available to them.

00:21:14.915 --> 00:21:19.687
Available to be evaluated,
to be judged, to be compared,

00:21:19.789 --> 00:21:24.811
and to be used as fuel in their personal fantasies.

00:21:25.753 --> 00:21:28.896
"I believe I'm going to think about her
before I go to sleep tonight."

00:21:29.028 --> 00:21:31.814
"Anybody thinks about her,
it's gonna be me."

00:21:32.150 --> 00:21:33.771
By this twisted logic,

00:21:33.869 --> 00:21:37.365
any woman who chooses not to put herself on display

00:21:37.484 --> 00:21:41.441
is then taking away men’s “right to look.”

00:21:41.539 --> 00:21:43.814
"Oh, come on.
Don't go in the other room!

00:21:43.902 --> 00:21:44.802
Oh, man."

00:21:44.902 --> 00:21:46.333
At the end of the day,

00:21:46.446 --> 00:21:50.688
the “Harmless” Peeping Tom trope
is anything but harmless,

00:21:50.829 --> 00:21:54.290
because it works to reinforce
that sense of entitlement

00:21:54.408 --> 00:21:56.482
by telling us again and again that

00:21:56.602 --> 00:22:00.676
“nice guys” deserve access to women’s bodies.

00:22:00.778 --> 00:22:04.242
"Did you sneak a peek
at my goods?"

00:22:05.139 --> 00:22:08.432
"I wouldn't be much of a hero if I did."

00:22:08.555 --> 00:22:11.430
"Yeah, but it's okay if you peeked a little."

00:22:11.556 --> 00:22:14.490
"You deserve a peek for 
all the good stuff you do."

00:22:15.026 --> 00:22:19.176
And that therefore
permission isn’t strictly necessary.

00:22:19.270 --> 00:22:20.835
"Better view of my room that I thought."

00:22:20.929 --> 00:22:22.444
"I've never seen you naked."

00:22:23.751 --> 00:22:24.878
"It's too bad."

00:22:25.549 --> 00:22:27.269
"I've got a great body."

00:22:27.749 --> 00:22:30.266
"Turn around. Turn!"

00:22:31.106 --> 00:22:33.436
"You're just a man,
like all the others."

00:22:34.404 --> 00:22:40.369
In recent years we have seen a rise in
gender-flipped variations of the trope.

00:22:40.871 --> 00:22:46.367
While these spying moments do invert
the expected subject/object dynamics,

00:22:46.905 --> 00:22:51.878
simply switching-up the genders where
non-consensual behavior is concerned,

00:22:51.976 --> 00:22:54.884
does not magically fix the problem.

00:22:56.432 --> 00:22:59.429
Because it still reinforces that worldview

00:22:59.581 --> 00:23:05.492
where respecting someone’s wishes in regards to
their own body isn’t important.

00:23:05.615 --> 00:23:07.684
As the old saying goes,

00:23:07.845 --> 00:23:11.216
two wrongs do not make a right.

00:23:12.856 --> 00:23:17.793
Learning about consent as it relates to looking,
and not just touching, is essential,

00:23:17.897 --> 00:23:19.436
"Oh, my god."

00:23:19.476 --> 00:23:20.356
"What?"

00:23:20.436 --> 00:23:22.916
especially given the reality of social media

00:23:22.987 --> 00:23:27.182
and the growing problem of intimate images
shared without persimmon.

00:23:27.288 --> 00:23:28.456
"I can have this?"

00:23:28.562 --> 00:23:31.173
"Yes. It's for you."

00:23:31.625 --> 00:23:35.372
"Because you're the only man
I ever want to gaze upon my body."

00:23:35.829 --> 00:23:39.993
In today’s digital world,
the private photos or videos of women

00:23:40.089 --> 00:23:43.147
can be a social currency among boys and men.

00:23:43.200 --> 00:23:45.760
"A picture's worth a thousand words."

00:23:45.899 --> 00:23:49.559
A currency that can grant a guy status
among his peers

00:23:49.634 --> 00:23:50.344
"That's hot!"

00:23:50.359 --> 00:23:54.736
by providing evidence of a woman’s submission
to his sexual desire.

00:23:54.854 --> 00:23:55.956
"It's not looking good, Tom."

00:23:56.086 --> 00:23:57.986
"I just sent it to one other guy, because

00:23:58.062 --> 00:24:00.142
he didn't believe that I'd had sex with Ruby."

00:24:00.279 --> 00:24:04.429
Again we see how the act of exposing women’s bodies,
without permission,

00:24:04.536 --> 00:24:07.287
becomes a way for men to bond with each other

00:24:07.381 --> 00:24:10.508
over their shared sense of male entertainment.

00:24:16.584 --> 00:24:20.707
TV shows like Euphoria,
Sex Education, and Stargirl

00:24:20.818 --> 00:24:25.460
have all attempted to address the issue
of unauthorized image sharing.

00:24:25.591 --> 00:24:30.634
Unfortunately some TV writers
just can’t resist adding a big plot twist

00:24:30.731 --> 00:24:33.780
wherein it turns out the culprit is a “mean girl”

00:24:33.893 --> 00:24:37.307
rather than the far more common situation in real-life

00:24:37.401 --> 00:24:41.188
where the culprit is a current or ex-romantic partner.

00:24:42.347 --> 00:24:45.081
"Joseph Lyman showed us
the picture you gave him."

00:24:45.522 --> 00:24:46.181
"What?"

00:24:46.277 --> 00:24:48.358
"Oh, your nude self portrait.

00:24:48.479 --> 00:24:49.619
He showed it to everyone."

00:24:49.689 --> 00:24:50.955
"The whole town's seen it."

00:24:51.017 --> 00:24:52.962
"The freaking mayor saw it."

00:24:54.411 --> 00:24:56.225
The series Normal People

00:24:56.337 --> 00:25:00.703
includes a scene of a guy showing off
a naked picture of his girlfriend.

00:25:00.808 --> 00:25:05.370
Rather than being impressed,
the protagonist responds by saying it’s not okay.

00:25:05.486 --> 00:25:06.732
"You do not think it's a bit f***ed up,

00:25:06.732 --> 00:25:08.352
showing pictures of your girfriend like that?"

00:25:08.373 --> 00:25:11.475
The moment is brief
but it is notable for two reasons:

00:25:11.589 --> 00:25:13.182
first it’s a rare example of

00:25:13.304 --> 00:25:17.792
a man calling out another guy
for non-consensual behavior,

00:25:17.905 --> 00:25:24.041
and second because the producers chose
not to show that image to the audience.

00:25:24.522 --> 00:25:28.263
Even in media about how it’s wrong to share private images

00:25:28.379 --> 00:25:35.278
media makers will often ensure that the audience
gets a clear view of the photos or video in question.

00:25:35.386 --> 00:25:38.032
The inclusion of these shots are unnecessary

00:25:38.130 --> 00:25:43.387
and again make the viewers complicit
in non-consensual looking.

00:25:45.155 --> 00:25:49.478
Just as peeping is never the fault of
the person who’s being spied on,

00:25:49.595 --> 00:25:55.969
it’s also never the fault of the people whose
intimate images are distributed without their permission.

00:25:56.277 --> 00:25:58.420
The blame should rest entirely

00:25:58.538 --> 00:26:02.281
with those sharing or looking without consent.

00:26:02.400 --> 00:26:04.378
"You never should've sent him those."

00:26:05.062 --> 00:26:07.325
"He never should've shared them."

00:26:07.673 --> 00:26:13.251
It’s still very rare to see male characters in media
who honor women’s privacy.

00:26:13.362 --> 00:26:16.460
It’s even more rare to see men or boys intervening

00:26:16.559 --> 00:26:20.647
to prevent their peers from non-consensual looking

00:26:21.542 --> 00:26:24.802
but those are the types of representations
that we need.

00:26:24.913 --> 00:26:26.393
"All right, closing."

00:26:26.505 --> 00:26:31.075
If we are to build a culture of
affirmative and enthusiastic consent

00:26:31.178 --> 00:26:35.488
it’s critical to understanding the ethics of looking.

00:26:38.815 --> 00:26:40.318
I hope you enjoyed that video.

00:26:40.364 --> 00:26:43.348
As you might imagine,
these long-form video essays

00:26:43.400 --> 00:26:46.773
take an enormous amount of time
to write, edit, and produce.

00:26:47.313 --> 00:26:49.453
So if you like this kind of media analysis

00:26:49.491 --> 00:26:53.961
please consider going over to Patreon
and helping to support this project there.

00:26:54.061 --> 00:26:57.537
I've also left a link to Paypal
in the description below.

00:26:57.771 --> 00:26:59.935
There are no ads on any of this stuff

00:26:59.935 --> 00:27:01.935
and there's no sponsorships either.

00:27:02.075 --> 00:27:05.748
Everything is 100% funded
by viewers like you.

00:27:05.926 --> 00:27:08.308
Now, we've also got some other
exciting news.

00:27:08.350 --> 00:27:10.740
We have recently started a podcast

00:27:10.793 --> 00:27:13.793
called Pop Culture
Detective: Audio Files

00:27:13.825 --> 00:27:16.368
which is very similar
to the video essays

00:27:16.473 --> 00:27:19.457
only with more voices
contributing to the analysis

00:27:19.592 --> 00:27:21.602
in a slightly more casual format.

00:27:22.288 --> 00:27:25.907
You can listen and subscribe
wherever you get your podcasts from

00:27:26.077 --> 00:27:30.800
and I'll make to sure to leave some links
to that below as well, if you're interested.

00:27:30.910 --> 00:27:33.702
Now of course, we have some other
video essays in the works.

00:27:33.821 --> 00:27:35.291
So stay tuned for those.

00:27:35.391 --> 00:27:40.217
And sincerely, thank you all so much
for continuing to support this channel.

00:27:40.296 --> 00:27:44.100
It means the world to me, and none of it
would be possible without your support.