The idealized, commodified version of a woman is not a woman at all, but an object for consumption and a sight to behold. This has been proved to be true throughout history, seen in renaissance paintings, 70s commercials, and Instagram comment sections. John Berger’s Ways of Seeing was written in 1972, containing expanded, albeit outdated, ideas from the show (with the same name) about women and the traditions of oil painting. It is a collection of essays that contains two chapters, specifically chapter two and three, that focus on the objectification of women, their transformation into commodities, and the consumerism that these commodities entail – all values that modern day pornographic companies uphold and endorse. He argues that to be nude is to be on display and links this to the perception of women, where the ideal woman is simultaneously a sex object and a work of art.
Berger’s chapter two, an entirely illustrative chapter, presents photographs of an idealized and commodified version of women’s bodies. He simply presents, without text, a series of photographs of an idealized version of women which was made to sell products and themselves. Selling sex is a concept which is more popular in this day and age, and we cannot thus blame Berger for shortsightedness. However, current readers may add onto this idea with context from over 50 years after this text was written. The time when selling sex online became easier, more accessible, and more personalized than prostitution and magazines. A time where one may hide behind a screen and unleash their darkest desires in incognito search mode. This, to Berger’s disappointment, leads to the reinforcement of the sexualization of a nude body and specifically that of a woman – where any sign of “immodesty” or showing skin is assumed to mean a “for sale” sign.
Chapter three expands on this tradition with older examples, mainly renaissance, of the male spectator, or what is nowadays referred to as “the male gaze.” Berger criticizes artists for condemning women for vanity and exhibitionist traits through paintings that were made for the sake of male pleasure. Nowadays, men tend to loathe, degrade, and assault the same women who fulfil their sexual desires. They condemn sex work and pornography while actively consuming it, keeping pornographic websites like “OnlyFans” in business, and feeding the same culture that objectifies these women in the first place. In the same way, they criticize women for being shallow and vain while actively praising an idealized version of a woman – the sex object. In a sex object’s performance, the woman sees herself as a sight to behold and a body for male fantasies, as “Women are there to feed an appetite, not to have any of their own.”
Berger also brings up the story of Adam and Eve, where nakedness was not even considered until they “bit the apple.” At that moment, woman became subservient to man, and two naked bodies became predator and prey. And thus, shame was born. Shame on the woman who sells her body online but thank you to the man who buys it from the website. Berger maintains that the nude stopped being an art form and started being an object for consumption, but I will argue that as long as shame for women and desire from men have existed, the nude has always been endorsed by men for men to varying degrees. Men commissioned paintings by other men to paint their favourite object – the nude woman.
In fact, allegorical renaissance paintings such as those of Titian and Tintoretto portraying Venus being adored, Danae dreaming, and Lucretia being raped all share one undeniable quality – the front-and-centre nude woman facing the viewer. Whether aware of the viewer or not, the woman looks picture perfect, ready for the lingering eyes of the man who is only looking for “academic purposes” or for the “skill of the artist.” Rather than commissioning a painting of simply a nude woman, these paintings were commissioned in the name of art – merely telling the story of Venus, Danae, and Lucretia. Adding to that, it is valuable to consider that, at the time, nudity was strictly forbidden, and these three women were not real. Thus, assigning a nude body to these characters was a loophole, since most women would not want to be associated with such a painting out of fear of being… stoned to death.
Titian. Venus with an Organist (c. 1555, oil on canvas, 148x217cm, Museo del Prado, Madrid)
Titian. Danae (1553-54, oil on canvas, 120x187cm, Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg)
Tintoretto, Jacopo. Tarquin and Lucretia (c. 1578-80, oil on canvas, 175×151.5cm, The Art Institute of Chicago)
Mass media and internet culture has exponentially increased the “by-men-for-men” dynamic.Pornographic institutions claim to liberate women from their traditional submissive roles while helping them reclaim their independence and sexuality. In reality, this only further adheres to the male gaze and brings in more money for these corporations led by, you guessed it, men In a society where sex work is advertised as a sweet escape from boring, low-paying desk jobs, young women are being encouraged to engage in such work. Normalizing being a “bop” and advertising it to young women around the world for capitalistic reasons only uplifts The Man and allows for the degrading of women. The independence gained through monetary gain is used by these corporations to glorify sex work and advertise it to children as an opportunity to take when they are “freshly 18.” In addition, sex work is portrayed as an escape from the patriarchal capitalist system, where women are likely underpaid. Thus, sex work seems to become an empowering tool for women, but the result on the feminist movement is more harm than good.
Finally, Berger brings up a certain type of nude which allows for a woman to reclaim her agency, and that is when the painter and sitter’s relationship does not allow for the spectator to be a part of it. However, I would argue, again with insight from this day and age, that a man with desire will not care for a relationship in which he is not involved. In any case, he sees himself as at least a spectator if not an active participant, as well as enforces the male gaze upon them. This is true even in relationships which do not involve a man- imagining himself between mother and daughter, two best friends, and between two female lovers. Lesbian relationships are fetishized by men – even when the relationship purposefully does not contain any attraction towards men, they find a way to make it about them. They bring a male presence, assumed to be the stronger presence, and co-opt the spaces made for women, even when they were not considered in the production of these spaces. They assume lesbian couples in public are out for attention, or that they can “straighten” a sapphic woman by giving her what she says she does not want. And what is sexier than a woman who does not want it?
I did not think Berger from the 70s had much to say about OnlyFans, but much of his arguments stand to this day. It is a shame to see the idealization and objectification of women extend and worsen, perpetually uplifting the man and funding The Man. Berger highlights what I call the pipeline from “shame on Eve” to “paint with an invisible male spectator in mind” to “women are sex objects to be sold online.”
Edited by Edna-Carla Rashid and Amin Kharrat