![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccaelizabethWatching Hollywood movies recently I've started thinking, there isn't really much diversity in casting even among white men. Like, some days it seems they all got stamped out of the same plastic, then decorated to taste. It's sort of weird.
It's also weird that fashions in pretty seem to change from decade to decade. People look samey but in different ways. And then you start wondering who decides that? Like, if it was all down to the same handful of casting people, that would make sense. They have their own sense of pretty. Everyone does. But when it's wider than that?
And it's kind of noticeable too because British TV casts look very different than US TV, let alone blockbuster movies... even when someone has been both. They must polish them up more for the one than the other. And I end up wondering why.
We get taught what to want. Sounds daft, doesn't work as a theory when it's stuff like sexual orientation, but if it works for stuff and things it probably works a bit for people. Car shapes vary by decade but the latest are always meant to be the most desirable. There's a whole industry dedicated to shaping our opinion on that one. And TV kind of does the same with human bodies. Because it's not just who they cast, it's how they're portrayed once they're up there. I've seen the hottest people looking epic rough, though usually only for an episode or so. And it's funny how prettied up comedians can get, when they've got entire departments reshaping them. But beyond that there's the lights, the camera angles, and the stories they get given.
Line up a random handful of actors and you can pretty much guess who is going to get cast in the romance, or to play the action hero. And it's not the same people who tend to end up as the unthreatening best friend, or the jealous guy, or the slightly off one who turns out to be evil.
Which is stupid, because you can't tell from looking what stories are going to happen to people.
I mean, most people manage romance at some point in their lives. It might take a bit of polish to make it story shaped, but it happens to a great many people. But then it gets retold, and it's amazing how pretty 'plain' turns out to be once the movies get hold of it.
And it's foolish, and unfair. And heavily gendered. And quite a lot often about race.
When you're looking at movies about straight white men, you will find ones that are about the ugly ducklings. Fat, old, a whole lot of mileage, a face that leads to the first question new people ask being 'what's wrong with them', you do find all kinds of everyone up on screen, albeit rarely, if they're also white men.
It's the old thing about the gaze of the assumed audience: if they're trying to appeal to straight white men, they give them someone to identify with, not just pretty to look at.
But in doing so they make a case for us to actually desire them. The way the camera treats them, the things they do on screen, it adds up to saying, this person is worth looking at. You want to see them. This is someone you should desire.
So men can be attractive when they're all sorts. All the ages, anyway. The entire industry gets right behind the idea that the average white middle aged underachiever slob is actually worth your time.
The rest of us?
What the subliminal ad campaigns have to say about variety in all the other groups rather pushes the other way.
It's not as simple as 'white men can just be themselves', they get the propaganda too. The usual sort of hero has a gym membership, a personal trainer, and a tendency to wax all the places. And we're all supposed to want that? Odd species we would be if we were that narrow. But it's capitalism at work: Be yourself, as long as it's the most expensive to maintain version of yourself. Don't just figure that surviving and having a generally nice time is sufficient, you might start thinking you don't need to spend all that money.
Blergh.
But even in the genres where we can step away from all the rules, we still put the power fantasies on some very standardised bodies. There's no particular reason that superstrength should go with a body like Superman or Steve Rogers, and actually quite a lot of reason it shouldn't. Where are they getting the kind of weights that would challenge them? Superman, or at least his clone, uses tactile telekinesis to lift with - why does he need meat muscles at all? He could be a stick figure and do the same sort of stuff. Tiny Steve Rogers with all the same power makes exactly as much sense, compared to MCU's instant growth version, anyways. being basically an optimized human would obviously lead to him looking like an Olympian. But even there, have you seen those photos of all the different sports? Bodies optimise differently for different tasks, but the bodies in movies all seem optimised for... looking like other bodies in movies. Who use the same workout machines.
Watching X-Men, it does make sense for Professor X to be a smaller guy, but it makes the same amount of sense for Magneto. I prefer both of them as older men, actually, for the sake of storytelling, but I do admit I'd rather stare at younger versions. But their powers are all mind and concentration, so why house that in so much hotness? Why combine the fantasy of power with the fantasy of pretty?
In the movies, pretty has a tendency to be good. It's a problem. The ugly or differently formed ones turn out to be team evil. Daft. But the kind of daft that tangles with the moral model of disability and gets nasty.
But I guess it's supposed to be that we're meant to want these people on a lot of different levels at once. Over here, team good, attractive! Hang out with them for two hours at least! Want to be them! ... ignore those ugly spuds over there, bad guys doing bad things, don't want that, nope, nuh uh.
Gets really awkward when combined with actual disability or race.
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of attractive people of any race. Actually my personal theory is damn near everyone is attractive if you spend enough time with them and can see the reasons why. The exceptions being really objectionable people, usually the ones who don't think I'm a person. But apparently I'm weird? And I don't mean I'm going to fancy everyone, eventually, just that so far I tend to fancy characters for what they do and who they seem to be, and then notice that particular... subset of pretty out of a generally pretty cast. Hmmm. Theory might need some work.
But when beauty is in the eye of the beholder, can't you just learn to use your eyes?
But we get taught a whole visual language of beautiful-human along with the camera angles and so forth. Some people they treat as worth looking at. And such people can be weirdly samey.
It's also weird that fashions in pretty seem to change from decade to decade. People look samey but in different ways. And then you start wondering who decides that? Like, if it was all down to the same handful of casting people, that would make sense. They have their own sense of pretty. Everyone does. But when it's wider than that?
And it's kind of noticeable too because British TV casts look very different than US TV, let alone blockbuster movies... even when someone has been both. They must polish them up more for the one than the other. And I end up wondering why.
We get taught what to want. Sounds daft, doesn't work as a theory when it's stuff like sexual orientation, but if it works for stuff and things it probably works a bit for people. Car shapes vary by decade but the latest are always meant to be the most desirable. There's a whole industry dedicated to shaping our opinion on that one. And TV kind of does the same with human bodies. Because it's not just who they cast, it's how they're portrayed once they're up there. I've seen the hottest people looking epic rough, though usually only for an episode or so. And it's funny how prettied up comedians can get, when they've got entire departments reshaping them. But beyond that there's the lights, the camera angles, and the stories they get given.
Line up a random handful of actors and you can pretty much guess who is going to get cast in the romance, or to play the action hero. And it's not the same people who tend to end up as the unthreatening best friend, or the jealous guy, or the slightly off one who turns out to be evil.
Which is stupid, because you can't tell from looking what stories are going to happen to people.
I mean, most people manage romance at some point in their lives. It might take a bit of polish to make it story shaped, but it happens to a great many people. But then it gets retold, and it's amazing how pretty 'plain' turns out to be once the movies get hold of it.
And it's foolish, and unfair. And heavily gendered. And quite a lot often about race.
When you're looking at movies about straight white men, you will find ones that are about the ugly ducklings. Fat, old, a whole lot of mileage, a face that leads to the first question new people ask being 'what's wrong with them', you do find all kinds of everyone up on screen, albeit rarely, if they're also white men.
It's the old thing about the gaze of the assumed audience: if they're trying to appeal to straight white men, they give them someone to identify with, not just pretty to look at.
But in doing so they make a case for us to actually desire them. The way the camera treats them, the things they do on screen, it adds up to saying, this person is worth looking at. You want to see them. This is someone you should desire.
So men can be attractive when they're all sorts. All the ages, anyway. The entire industry gets right behind the idea that the average white middle aged underachiever slob is actually worth your time.
The rest of us?
What the subliminal ad campaigns have to say about variety in all the other groups rather pushes the other way.
It's not as simple as 'white men can just be themselves', they get the propaganda too. The usual sort of hero has a gym membership, a personal trainer, and a tendency to wax all the places. And we're all supposed to want that? Odd species we would be if we were that narrow. But it's capitalism at work: Be yourself, as long as it's the most expensive to maintain version of yourself. Don't just figure that surviving and having a generally nice time is sufficient, you might start thinking you don't need to spend all that money.
Blergh.
But even in the genres where we can step away from all the rules, we still put the power fantasies on some very standardised bodies. There's no particular reason that superstrength should go with a body like Superman or Steve Rogers, and actually quite a lot of reason it shouldn't. Where are they getting the kind of weights that would challenge them? Superman, or at least his clone, uses tactile telekinesis to lift with - why does he need meat muscles at all? He could be a stick figure and do the same sort of stuff. Tiny Steve Rogers with all the same power makes exactly as much sense, compared to MCU's instant growth version, anyways. being basically an optimized human would obviously lead to him looking like an Olympian. But even there, have you seen those photos of all the different sports? Bodies optimise differently for different tasks, but the bodies in movies all seem optimised for... looking like other bodies in movies. Who use the same workout machines.
Watching X-Men, it does make sense for Professor X to be a smaller guy, but it makes the same amount of sense for Magneto. I prefer both of them as older men, actually, for the sake of storytelling, but I do admit I'd rather stare at younger versions. But their powers are all mind and concentration, so why house that in so much hotness? Why combine the fantasy of power with the fantasy of pretty?
In the movies, pretty has a tendency to be good. It's a problem. The ugly or differently formed ones turn out to be team evil. Daft. But the kind of daft that tangles with the moral model of disability and gets nasty.
But I guess it's supposed to be that we're meant to want these people on a lot of different levels at once. Over here, team good, attractive! Hang out with them for two hours at least! Want to be them! ... ignore those ugly spuds over there, bad guys doing bad things, don't want that, nope, nuh uh.
Gets really awkward when combined with actual disability or race.
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of attractive people of any race. Actually my personal theory is damn near everyone is attractive if you spend enough time with them and can see the reasons why. The exceptions being really objectionable people, usually the ones who don't think I'm a person. But apparently I'm weird? And I don't mean I'm going to fancy everyone, eventually, just that so far I tend to fancy characters for what they do and who they seem to be, and then notice that particular... subset of pretty out of a generally pretty cast. Hmmm. Theory might need some work.
But when beauty is in the eye of the beholder, can't you just learn to use your eyes?
But we get taught a whole visual language of beautiful-human along with the camera angles and so forth. Some people they treat as worth looking at. And such people can be weirdly samey.