The Films of Celine Sciamma: Girlhood

 

                The third film in my analysis of the films of Celine Sciamma is the complicatedly intersectional film, Girlhood. The confluence of race, class, gender and sexuality are palpable in Sciamma’s final coming-of-age story that rounds out her disconnected trilogy. Yet, throughout the film, Sciamma seems to disingenuously vacillate between vigorously engaging in these ideas, to only finding interest in them as a performative aesthetic garnish. This brief paper engages in Sciamma’s attempt, success, and failure to engage with these sociological concepts both at a distance and at half measure, culminating in a story that attempts to subvert racially gendered classist and sexual stereotypes while simultaneously relying upon them.   

 

PLOT

            In a poor Parisian suburb, Marieme (Karidja Touré) is told that high school is no longer an option for her and seeks solace in the local gang led by the illustrious “Lady” (Assa Sylla). With this new crew, Marieme finds sorority, solidarity, and sisterhood. But when the realities of home and her surrounding community increase their pressure, Marieme must decide to fall into the stereotypical path that lays before her, or forge a new one, breaking the bonds that social institutions, family members, and community expectations have efforted to restrain her.

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            To understand Celine Sciamma’s decision to write and direct a film centering around the lives of Black girls, a contextual foundation of racial politics in the 2010’s needs to be laid. This then will serve as a backdrop for a discussion of the film’s production.

            Since the French Revolution of 1789[1], France has never had a significant identifier around race, only the State and “man” (intended to mean humans, ala, mankind, but also cisgender men). This leads to a lack of recognition of racial and ethnic minorities, which in turn leans towards the validation of whiteness through its association with capitalism and patriarchy. Because there is a lack of visibility and validation of ethnic and racial minorities, whiteness becomes the default, the norm. The appeal to human rights, or broad unspecified inclusion, has been a tactic of oppressive systems to obfuscate their domination. This is the discrimination of omission. Broad inclusivity without specification assumes that both the experiences and needs of all people are the same; each with the same level of access to opportunities and resources. It’s framing equality without an understanding of equity. This causes non-white people to be judged by white standards and minimizes the scope of institutional barriers, reducing perceived inequality and injustice; to be viewed only through the lens of individual choice and personal responsibility. This keeps an understanding of the complexities of race relations perpetually elusive to both the French Government, and its citizens.

            This country wide ignorance of the importance of race continues to obscure the normalization of whiteness even among its people. In the context of this film, this can possibly account for Celine Sciamma’s hypocritical statements during the Press tour for Girlhood.

In an interview for The Independent in April of 2015 Sciamma states that:

“…she intentionally cast Black actresses because of her concern over a lack of opportunities for Black women in France saying that she was shocked how Black people are never on screen [In France] and how there are no Black actresses famous in France.”

Incongruently, in an interview with The Observer that same year, fielding a question about being a white woman crafting and telling a story about Black girls, she states:

” I’ve always lived on the outskirts, [But] I wasn’t making a film about Black women, I was making it with them. It’s not the same. I’m not telling you what it’s like to be Black in France today. I just want to give face to the French youth I am looking at.”  

Additionally, in an interview with Indiewire, Sciamma stated that the film was not from a ‘White Feminist Gaze’ as the interviewer prompted, but from the vantage point of “…what it’s like just being a girl…it’s not about race or racism.” Yet, later in the interview she sates:

“With few [Black] representations [in film] [Girlhood] takes on a new responsibility…It’s a lot on my shoulders. But I knew that going into it. But, I mean, I didn’t know how messy it could get…I can tell this story and Black Female directors cannot.”

 

There is a lot to unpack here.

            Firstly, by doing a simple internet search anyone can easily find any number of famous Black French female actors that existed either before or contemporaneously with the actors in Girlhood; as well as a long rich history of Black French female actors and directors creating art since the 1950’s. Sciamma’s comments illustrates her obliviousness to the history of French Black Cinema and the centering of whiteness in French film culture.

A Variety article in 2021 corroborates this normalization of whiteness and ignorance of white feminism to the plight of Black creatives, recounting the backlash experienced by Aïssa Maïga after she counted aloud the few Black People in the audience at that years Ceaser Awards. The article goes on to discuss that of the few known Black directors at the time, their success was hard fought; and while several studios, under renewed pressure from the Black Lives Matter Movement, installed inclusion riders and greater diversity quotas, it hasn’t taken hold in part because of France’s reluctance to count race as an indicator. This skews the data and allows the industry to engage in Color-blind Racism in the film industry.

In this context, Sciamma’s hypocritic confluent commentary on race and racism during the press tour for Girlhood is understood as a symptom of the imbedded structural racism of Color-blindness in France. Unfortunately, this also frames her ignorance of Black cinema and willingness to tell Black stories (as a white woman) to be a gross invocation and specter of the history of French Colonialism in areas like Senegal and Haiti.   

SOCIAL ANALYSIS

Sciamma has stated that the inspiration for this film came from the girls that she would regularly see hang out in the Paris area or in shopping centers and train stations. This limited sample, and the original title “Girl Gang”, both points to her voyeuristic fascination with the culture of Black women without attempting to interrogate the failure of institutional mechanisms like the economy, education and the criminal justice system that shape those lives. Instead, she seems more interested in how girls adapt to these ever-constricting pressures and whether they recreate stereotypes, or rage against them.

Race, Class, and Education

The triptych of the demographic intersections with the clearest overlap is between race, class and education. Since the historic moral failure of the transnational slave trade, Black bodies have been given economic value in their ownership and exploitation. After emancipation (April 2^nd, 1848, in France Jan 1^st 1863 in the US), there was a period of sharecropping that was designed to return Black people to as close to the status of slavery as possible. This was the first in a long line of practices seeking to disempower Black people. Outside of the historic overt violence used to economically subjugate Black people at the turn of the 20^th century in the US (Tulsa Massacre) there have been efforts by various government agencies to eliminate the ability for Black people to accrue generational wealth. This lack of generational wealth translates to an inability to afford substantive education. The lack of education forces Black people to be reliant on low wage and often service industry jobs.

 According to Kendall (2020) this confluence of problems between race, class and education often gets ignored by a majority of social and political movements, even those that are well meaning. Consistently, there are social issues that exclusively affect Black people that are largely ignored or antagonized by the institutions of any cross-national society[2]. There is a lack of support that these issues receive when Black people are the focus, and a lack of understanding as to their amalgamated impact. Sin the US, since most K-12 schools are primarily funded by the property taxes of the surrounding neighborhoods, lower income area schools have less funding than those more affluent. Considering the history of systemic housing discrimination against Black people from emancipation forward, most of the poorly funded schools are the ones Black kids attend (Rothstein 2017, Kendall 2020). Meanwhile, many of the houses in these areas are “unfit for human habitation, (because they are zoned for commercial in addition to residential use) but Black residents have no other option” (Rothstein 2017 Kendall 2020:207). This negatively impacts the functioning of schools and the student’s ability to learn. Desmond (2023) reminds us that poverty can be both the cause and the result of institutional failures like education. This cycle of collapse is additionally obfuscated by the structure of an individualist society and the deflection of “personal responsibility” that gets unfairly leveed at Black people, particularly Black women, while framing it as a strength of character (Kendall 2020).

“The Strong Black Woman” has been a trope in the media since Black women began gracing screens. Along with other racist and sexist stereotypes like the “Mammy” and the “Jezebel”, “The Strong Black Woman” has been created as an archetype for Black women to be judged by the white supremacist patriarchy. Yet, unlike the other tropes, “The Strong Black Woman” is consistently internalized by Black women themselves, further obscuring the need for systemic solutions and minimizing the acknowledgement of systemic racism altogether.

According to Jones Harris and Reynolds (2020): “The Strong Black Woman” has been characterized by three components: emotional restraint, independence, and caretaking. In this trope, Black girls and women must hold back their emotions to avoid appearing weak, portraying themselves as strong and independent while being responsible for the problems of others. They are supposed to have a psychological resistance to the oppression within society; therefore, under this framing, Black women aren’t supposed to get tired or ask for help.

Kendall (2020) reinforces the dangers of this trope:

“Being strong or being fierce or whatever appellation is usually applied to the ones who get brutalized, who sue, who wind up on the ground with those she leaves behind begging the world to #sayhername, sounds great, but the labels are cold comfort if we don’t do more to solve the problems they are fighting… This becomes “a millstone around the neck [of Black Women], dragging them down and endangering their chances at survival.” (Kendall 2020:133-134)

The trope of “the Strong Black Woman”, a racist caricature built from the roots of cataclysmic injustices that forced Black women to “do it themselves”, has now been weaponized against them in the media that they consume, especially those pieces of content that are said to be about them.

In Girlhood, Sciamma leans into the stereotypes associated with the interlocking mechanisms of race, class and education, while exalting “The Strong Black Woman” trope in the most whitely feminist way possible. When we first meet Marieme, she is playing football for her school and embraced by a sorority of her fellow teammates and students. As they all walk back to their respective houses (various apartment complex high-rises), each of the girls taper off in different directions toward their dwellings. Finally, Marieme is left alone and when she gets back home, we see that she is mostly responsible for the care of her two younger sisters because their mom is constantly working. Immediately, this is invoking flavors of the “Strong Black Woman” trope in the way that Marieme finds ways to feed and bring money into the home to supplement her mother’s income. Later, in a conversation with the school counselor, we learn that even though she is 15, Marieme is still in “middle school” looking to finally make it to “high school” despite already being held back to repeat the grade. This is regardless of the clear fact that her poor grades are not a symptom of ignorance or laziness, but because of her mounting family obligations, and living within a generally racist and sexist system. The counselor denies her another chance to improve her grades or take the grade a third time, and instead, suggest vocational schools[3]. This systemic failure is the catalyst for her finding solace in the gang. Throughout the rest of the film, at every barrier, Marieme triumphs, when she experiences a setback, she does not fall to the dangers of vice all around her. On the contrary, she perseveres and charts her own path.  

In this depiction, Sciamma is clearly valuing the bootstrap pulling ruggedness of “The Strong Black Woman” trope and framing it as individualistically feminist, messaging to the audience that “empowered women can do anything despite the economic and social realities that they face” (Kendall 2020:131). As Kendall (2020) rightly assesses: what about the people who can’t? From the images that Sciamma gives us in Girlhood, those are stories that are not worth telling. Additionally, when tropes like these are reproduced by self-described feminist filmmakers, it continues the unnecessary internalization of these ideas in their audience. White women see this film and they accept the trope as truth. Concurrently, Black women feel even more compelled to follow these assumptions making them more likely to reject various forms of self-care and accept support lest they be criticized and socially sanctioned for not being superhuman. In this regard, Sciamma is the typical “Karen” who believes they can tell Black girls and women how they should exist. Never falter, never succumb, or surrender. Yet, what makes this seemingly empowering message racist when applied to Black girls and women is that it assumes equal access to resources, thereby judging Black women by white feminist standards. Sciamma, however, goes a step further and presents a racially transcendent feminism which posits that regardless of the social conditions and a variety of systemic barriers, “girls will [still] get it done”. This is a white feminist’s racist benevolent sexism that focuses on the messaging of empowerment without an interrogation of the harm these distorted images could cause.  

  

 Gang Subcultures

            One of the basic concepts of Sociology, peer groups, are an endearing and necessary part of the process of social learning called socialization. They are unique out of the other “agents” of socialization that shepherd individuals through various life-course “rites of passage” in that they are the individuals that help understand and shape reality by going through it with us contemporaneously. An understanding within the same social, historical and political context is a rare and precious resource. Unfortunately, this also means that individuals are judged by following a menial trajectory of the life-course as determined by the average. Anyone who doesn’t reproduce the same narrative arc is in danger of being sanctioned. Marieme invites this sanctioning when she is unable to follow her cohort into “high school”. The loss of this peer group creates a void which Marieme fills with the gang she sees outside of school.

Gangs, in the sociological sense, operate as a counterculture in most societies, often with a hint of religious flair mixed in.  A Sociological “subculture” is a microcosmic group within a dominant social group that holds their own ideals, values, beliefs and norms along with their own hierarchy structure, competitions, and clothing. Typically, a “subculture’s authority is superseded by the dominant culture’s authority when applicable (regardless of your subcultural status). A counterculture is a specific type of subculture that is characterized by the challenging of the dominant culture’s authority by simply existing against the norm, or actively seeking the supplication and removal of the dominant culture’s structural supremacy, replacing it with their own ideals and values. This is commonly referred to as benign and malignant countercultures.[4] Commonly, both subcultures and countercultures express some attitudes and behaviors that are reminiscent of religions. Both gangs and religions ritualize becoming members, have their own sacred text and special garments that distinguish them as being different than other groups.

In order to be a part of the gang, Marieme has to slowly break herself of the norms of general socialization to adopt the goals and ideals of the group through the incremental but escalating breaking of social and cultural rules as well as established laws. Through these behaviors (intimidation, stealing, and violence) a sense of solidaric camaraderie is formed. By participating in these ritualized behaviors Marieme becomes a gang member, and a lasting sisterhood is created.

The romanticized version of gangs depicted in Girlhood is a part of the legacy of cinema constantly depicting disreputable denizens duplicitously doing despicable deeds; reframing these deplorables into the anti-hero because protagonists are humanized, and the audience often doesn’t want to follow “a bad guy” without redeeming qualities. Yet, Marieme, Lady, and the rest of the gang never fall into this trope laden trap; they always skirt the surface of something darker, rightfully not getting in too deep.

This gang glorification in Girlhood also carries within it an element of racialization. Racialization is the process by which nonwhite groups are consistently discriminated against for different purposes throughout history. From the annihilation of native people and slavery, to separating children at the border, flying migrants to Martha’s Vineyard and removing Black Studies as a discipline on college campuses, every nonwhite group has been racialized and systemically discriminated against for a variety of purposes; whether that be for: property[5], profit, politics, or popularity. This exercise in power has been an aspect of race and foreign relations since its inception. The media representation of nonwhite races has been a valuable tool in this process given its penchant for leaning into racist stereotypes and depictions that allow certain groups to be racialized and then discriminated against. To that point, Celine Sciamma’s use of Black girls to tell a story about criminality and poverty adds to the racialization of the criminally poor as being exclusively Black. This criticism is compounded by her use of an all-Black cast, expressing, intentionally or not, that crime and poverty in France is an entirely Black problem. Thus, through the narrative, we are supposed to revel in the way that Marieme avoids the pitfalls of her peers, or works a situation to her advantage, which further removes her situation from being properly perceived as a systemic social problem. Instead, Sciamma wants us to marvel at the perseverance of her protagonist without contemplating its contribution to the larger context of the racialization of Black girls and women.    

    

Gendered Restrictions  

            There is a consistent consolidation of the feminist movement around a white ideology. This normalization of whiteness is diffused in such a way that the desires and needs of white women became ubiquitously synonymous with feminism itself. This solidification assumes that the needs and struggles of Black women are the same as white women. This myth echoes the central tension that threatened to break up the solidarity of Black and white feminist during the second wave feminist movement. This tension still exists today as we continue to establish a unifying emulsification of feminisms that represent every demographic. Hubbard (2022) mentions that even Black feminist have a difficulty accepting all demographic groups into the fold, specifically those of the LGBTQAI community[6]. Because of these deficiencies in acceptance, there needs to be focus on restorative justice frameworks. As a part of this restorative justice, there needs to be a harm repairing stage between all demographics, but especially between white and Black women for the isolation and appropriation of the feminist identity into whiteness. During this stage, there needs to be sincere apologies, the taking of responsibilities, and reparational support for Black women’s struggles by white women (Hubbard 2022, Kendall 2020). Once there is restoration of what is “broken”, only then can there be a reintegration of feminisms into a cohesive movement that is all inclusive.

            Sciamma’s portrayal of the intersections of race gender and sexuality in Girlhood are still coming from a colonialist framework; painting the experiences of Black teens from the standard white feminist perspective (with a dash of the white savior complex mixed in). She only hints at Mariene’s burgeoning sexual expressions for Lady and her experimentation with gender nonconformity (through binding) as mechanisms to propel the plot or relationships forward rather than fully explore them as aspects of Mariene’s character. Because of this, the audience is left to infer intention through brief montages and single lines of dialogue that Mariene’s sexuality might be more complex than originally thought. While some might look upon this misguided attempt as genuine inclusion, the lack of interrogation of these ideas on the part of the writer/ director not only reinforces the otherness of gay and trans representation of Black girls, but by using it as a simple narrative device, it demonstrates a lack of compassionate creativity by the filmmaker.  

 

CONCLUSION

            Girlhood is a faux-feminist film that consolidates the Black feminist ideology down into a reproduction of the individually focused “Strong Black Woman” trope. This sadly continues the long history of judging Black women by the appropriative white colonialist standards without contemplating what makes the Black experience different. At the same time, Sciamma praises herself for helping to elevate Black voices, even though Black female directors have been doing the same thing, with little recognition, for over a generation prior. This is yet another example of a white woman co-opting Black women’s experiences in order to be praised as an ally, rather than a racially exploitive opportunist.    

 

REFERENCES

Desmond, Mathew 2023. Poverty, By America New York: Crown Publishing

Kendall, Mikki 2020. Hood Feminism: Notes From the Women that A Movement Forgot. New York: Viking Press

Hubbard, Shanita 2022. Ride or Die: A Feminist Manifesto for the Well-being of Black Women New York Legacy Lit Publishing

Jones, Martinique K., Keoshia J Harris, and Akilah A. Reynolds 2020. "In Their Own Words: The Meaning of the Strong Black Woman Schema among Black U.S College Women". Sex Roles. 84 (5–6): 347–359. doi:10.1007/s11199-020-01170-w  

Rothstein, Richard 2017. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How the Government Segregated America New York: Liveright Publishing   

---

[1] A water shed moment for the development of Sociology as a discipline. It is often cited as one of the rapid social changes that August Comte used to determine that there needed to be a new type of science that studied society and its social changes.

[2] Kendall exclusively looks at the Feminist movement in the United States and the way it has left Black women behind. This paper and its author see value in extrapolating Kendall’s point to a broader focus

[3] Vocational schools are often the two tier systemic split that helps to minimize institutional racism  

[4] In is important to note that regardless of the cancerous analogy, the use of the adjectives refers only to the desire for a change to the dominant cultural and structural system, and should not be implied that Benin is benevolent and malignant is infernal.

[5] Of which it is either about or adjacent to

[6] Looking for a great film about Queer black Teens? I recommend Dee Rees’ Pariah

The Films of Celine Sciamma: Tomboy

                

              The second film in my analysis of the films of Celine Sciamma is the genderbending film, Tomboy. The sophomore film in Sciamma’s coming-of-age trilogy encompasses the ideas of gender nonconformity and the fluidity of gender expression; during a time when neither were embraced by the mainstream as acceptable identities, or even concepts. This paper is a brief look at the film’s place in the cultural conversation and undo criticism of nonbinary gendered bodies and identities while attempting to interrogate the film’s impact beyond indie French cinema. 

 

PLOT

            Arriving in a new town after changing schools, Laure decides to introduce themselves as Michael to the local group of kids, especially Lisa. As the summer progresses, and friendships are forged, Michael tries to navigate both worlds: their home life and the life they have built with the community of children and fellow teenagers. Everything begins to unravel when Michael’s sister is the flashpoint for an altercation that Michael has with another local boy. When the civility of parental surveillance intercedes in the resolution of this conflict, Michael’s world crumbles; swallowed by the resiliency of the gender binary.

 

TERMINOLOGY

            For clarity and reference:  I will be using Helena Darwin (2022)’s terminology found in the book Redoing Gender: How Nonbinary Gender Contributes to Social Change. In her text, Darwin (2022) defines the terms “Transgender”, “Cisgender” “Nonbinary” “Genderqueer” “AFAB” and “AMAB”

Transgender: These are individuals who move away from the gender that is assigned to them at birth. This is usually used in conjunction with trans men and trans women, who transitioned woman to man and or from man to women; but this also includes all gender variant people. This usually includes individuals who’s gender identity is not represented by their sex assigned category at birth.

Cisgender: These are individuals who’s gender identity fit the sex assigned categories at birth often reinforced and represented by the gendered social norms that are often learned through a binary gendered attitude infused in the process of socialization

Nonbinary: Nonbinary people are the inclusive range of individuals that do not fit within the strict, and often hierarchical structure of the male/masculine, female/feminine binary. Some nonbinary people identify as both, some neither, some as fluid, others as changing

Genderqueer: This term is sometimes used interchangeably with Nonbinary but whereas nonbinary is a broader umbrella term, Genderqueer can include agender, bigender, gender flux, gender fluid, pangender, polygender, and gender variant. For some individuals the distinction between these two terms is the difference between gender and sexuality.

AFAB/AMAB Assigned Female/Male at Birth (Sometimes DFAB for Designated Female/Male at Birth) This is to distinguish the difference between the Binary sex/gender category was officially applied (imposed) through a variety of social institutions (p7)

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            In 2012, around the time of the film’s production, France removed gender identity disorder as a diagnosis. Yet, as indicated by a variety of trans rights groups, this was done only for lip service rather than create any type of substantive change. It is against this backdrop that Sciamma decides to engage in crafting a story about the liminal space between the gender binary.

            Production

            All of the limited information that can be gathered about the development and production of this film reveals that Sciamma’s intention was for this film to be read as a story either cis gender girls or trans boys could identify with. She exclusively wanted to keep Laure/Michael’s gender identity and sexual orientation vague so that the film could speak to as many people as possible. While this seems to be motivated by capitalism in not wanting to alienate a segment of a potential audience, it could also be a form of protection. This way Sciamma does not have to worry about her film being a definitive representation of the trans experience. Yet, even if that was the goal, certain cinematic choices Sciamma makes tips her hand.

            Early in the film, we are introduced to a nameless child looking like they are in the age range of pre-teen to early teens. By binary gender norm convention, and the way that the child presents their gender, it is easy to assume a male/masculine sex and gender identity. Yet, as the child stand up out of the bath you see a glimpse of female genitalia. The choice to show visible sex organs of a child is dangerous due to the way that those images can be used (child pornography), and while Sciamma shoots the scene in a non-sexually mundane way to minimize its potential sexualization, the belief in the necessity of the scene also has the potential to reinforce the binary. This reveal at the beginning of the film is necessary for the tension and conflict to follow, and thus, undercuts a trans inclusive interpretation of the film for the sake of the narrative. The gender binary is so ingrained in our understanding and functioning of almost every aspect of life, that presenting Michael’s naked body to the audience can be perceived as making the audience feel like they know “the truth” of Michael's gender identity.  This can fuel a sense of biological determinism and minimizes the possibility of a positive a trans/ nonbinary representation. Therefore, Michael’s behavior becomes more reminiscent of the gender bending that takes place in Kabul, where the “Bascha Posh” allow for young girls to experience what it is like to be a boy in their culture rather than an actual trans inclusive narrative (Nordberg,2014). Through this lens, Sciamma’s film becomes functionally inert when it comes to Trans Rights.      

Brief History of Trans exclusion by Progressive Groups

The history of Trans rights is longer and more intricately complicated that most would assume. In 1952, the trans rights officially started with the foundation and publishing of  the journal Transvestia: The Journal of the American Society for Equality in Dress by Virginia Prince. Christine Jorgensen was one of the first trans women who, after Danish medical care, became fully accepted into mainstream society. Unfortunately, this was only successful because she not only distanced herself from others that were considered sexually deviant at the time (Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, sexual explicits), but she also reproduced whiteness and cultural norms of femininity. She was invisible because of the patriarchal gender structure she perpetuated. This started to establish hypothetical gender norm cues that people could use to both identify and police gender identities. These norms usually fell back on biologically deterministic criteria centered around genitalia and reinforced through an acceptable gender performance.

The policing of gender identities also began the entangling of Trans rights and Gay rights. In 1969, several trans individuals were involved in the Stonewall riots that sparked the beginning of the Gay Rights movement. Prior to this landmark event, there were two other altercations with police (also mislabeled as riots) that stemmed from harassment and false arrest. The first was in 1959 at Cooper’s donuts in Los Angeles where after repeated harassment police falsely arrested three patrons. Secondly, in 1966 in the tenderloin district in San Francisco when a Trans woman resisted arrest by throwing coffee in a police officer’s face. In all three cases, there was an amalgamation of trans rights with gay rights: a conglomeration of similar but different identities.  These incidents also illustrate that police did not perceive or care to understand the distinction between the two civil rights movements, their goals, or their platforms. Additionally, while there is an overlap and solidarity that can exist between gay and trans rights and those that support them (many people supporting both) There are several instances where Feminists, gays, and lesbians have alienated and discriminated against those who are trans.  

The exclusion of trans rights by other civil rights activists have been historically common beginning with the alienation of trans individuals from the feminist movement. Some Radical feminists during the third wave feminist movement did not recognize trans women as women. The origin of this could be a backlash to Christine Jorgensen not identifying as feminist and her role in reproducing the patriarchy and binary gender norms. Additionally, Janice Richmond’s book The Transexual Empire equates the trans experience to that of sexual violence; thereby invalidating what it means to be a woman. This transphobia was crystalized with the acronym “TERFs” (Trans exclusionary Radical Feminist) in the late 2000’s to describe these individuals and practices. Since then, the term “TERF” has gained in recognition and popularity[1] often being used as a slur against anyone who is not being (or is perceived to not be) trans inclusive. This exclusivity of trans individuals continues in some gay and lesbian communities.

 The exclusion of Trans individuals from Gay and Lesbian communities is consistent. Several trans activists have expressed that, of the umbrella categorization of LGBTQAI+, it is those identities and practices that are further removed or outside of a binary structure that receive less attention, support and inclusion, specifically trans and bisexual individuals. Bisexuals being criticized for their sexual attraction, they are  admonished for the false perception that they are in denial of being gay or straight. With trans folks, trans men specifically, are alienated because some cis gendered lesbians find it difficult to support “women morphing into men”. This exclusive attitude supports a popular criticism of people in the LGBTQAI+ community, that regardless of their sexual orientation, many gays and lesbians are still operating under the heterosexist binary parameters established by cis straight white men. Much like how early Sociology attempted to model itself after more established natural sciences for validation, Trans and bisexual exclusion in the Queer community can be traced back to the foundation of Gays and Lesbians looking for societal validation. However, as several trans scholars have stated, a validation based on a gender/sexual model that is exclusionary for any group is not valid. Instead, it reproduces the same kind of inequality and discrimination just directed at a different group.

 

SOCIAL ANALYSIS

            The social analysis of Sciamma’s Tomboy centers around the structures of childhood and gender performance. The understood purpose of childhood is that family and and other social institutions impact not only the child’s gender performance, but the perception/ acceptance of that performance based in if the family (a macrocosm of society) internalizes rigid or fluid gender norms.

            Childhood and a Trans Identity

            Childhood is a period of transition that is designed to foster a sense of identity and prepare children to be law-abiding productive members of society. This process is a spectrum that attempts to both protect children during their physical and mental development as well as further their social development through the process of socialization. In Sociology, this is discussed as the balance between prepared and protected childhood. Prepared childhood consists of all those behaviors that children need to learn to become productive adults. This includes something as basic as learning to change a tire and paying bills, to sex education and an understanding of democracy. Protected childhood are the behaviors that both shield children from the physical and emotional dangers the reality of adulthood imposes, while also encouraging imagination and creativity.  Most children on this progressive spectrum are rarely at its polls. This variability is not just what makes us diverse, bordering on unique when compared to others, but it allows for a space for experimentation.

Childhood is a space where you are allowed to question who you are, and part of this transitory period involves experimentation. We develop our own attitudes, style, beliefs and behaviors through attrition in different stages of childhood. Yet, the polymorphous parenting possibilities often get synthesized into behavior and attitudes that reflect the expressions of already established socio-cultural norms through an elaborate system of policing tactics. The result is a limiting of self-expression until it is little more than a regurgitation of what children have learned from their parents, minimizing introspection. This is childhood under the gender binary.

The gender binary is biologically determined through chromosomes and genitalia. Parents collectively want to know the sex assignment of their children so that they can “properly prepare” their children for gender socialization; thereby reinforcing being cisgender. This becomes an ouroboric process of perpetuation. Parents promote cisgendered heteronormativity because it was what they were taught, they do not want their children to experience the social consequences of not being accepted or they don’t know how to challenge it. Sure, there is some boundary breaking that is allowed, usually among sex assigned girls, because of the irrational valuing of masculinity and a long cultural history of misogyny. But once puberty hits, that acceptable subversion is rescinded and policed.

An example of this gender policing is the backlash against Algerian Olympian Imane Khelif.  During the Summer 2024 Olympics in Paris, Khelif defeated Angela Carlini from Italy in the opening 46 seconds of the second round of competition, after just two blows. The latter stating that it “wasn’t fair!” This sparked online debate as to Khelif’s sex despite being born female, was registered female, lives her life as a female, boxes as a female, and having a female passport”. The resulting outcry was not only transphobic, but it also smacked of sexist paternalism against Carlini. This also speaks to the idea that identity, especially gender, is a social construction that is, in part, validated by others within society. The stability of one identity is secured through the acceptance of social institutions and the community they live in. Khelif has never been seen as nor identified as trans. However, that identity was then put into question because of the power of social media as an agent of socialization. She functionally became trans in the eyes of a segment of the public; therefore, she was discriminated against as a trans person regardless of not identifying that way. The danger lies in the media’s ability to shape public perception without evidence nor understanding. For instance, some on the internet have “reported” that Khelif had higher than average levels of testosterone, without understanding that A. Women also have testosterone. And B. That a person’s testosterone and estrogen levels are different among people. Some self-identified cisgender women have higher testosterone than some self-identified cisgendered men. Yet, most of these ignorant internet imbeciles base their determination of gender identity upon a cis gender performance, visible secondary sex characteristics, and cherry-picked “scientific” data that reinforces their point. Thus, Khelif almost became trans because society deemed it. Regardless of the accuracy of the label, the social consequences can be very real, as the backlash against her illustrates.       

Sciamma’s Tomboy elucidates the ease at which childhood could be a fluid space of self-expression and adult preparation if we would just be able to rid ourselves of the pestilence of biologically deterministic categories, and a reliance on reproduction as a tool of validation. The conflict and anxiety that Michael experiences in their summer of gender nonconformity stems from the stress of having to pass, and not having their family find out. If they would just be allowed to be themselves, there would be no need for conflict. Imagine if they had supportive and understanding parents who protected and supported their self-expression. When the other kid came to the door to apologize for their behavior in starting the fight, the parents would have stayed on the issue at hand, rather than being distracted by Michael’s nonconforming behavior. Instead, Michael’s parents out them to everyone just so that they are not inconvenienced and have to field intrusive questions about their child once school starts in the fall.

Michael’s parent’s response to their gender deviance is indicative of the overwhelming desire for convenience, which promotes the reductive tendency to provide simple explanations to complex social issues. They don’t want the complication. Therefore, rather than having clear communication with Michael about their underlying desires and reasoning for their behavior, the parents choose the hard line of disciplining them, reinforcing Michael’s behavior as morally wrong. However, Michael’s punishment is not a simple reprimand.  Micheal is forced to participate in their own ‘outing’. Unfortunately, the United States is bifurcated on this issue with some states classifying Michael’s parents behavior as a hate crime (California), and others enshrining the practice in State law for public education (Florida). As an advocate for Trans rights, I tend to subscribe to the former, rather than the latter. Plus, there is an element of selfishness that has yet to be addressed. Given the trajectory of the film, the parents don’t also want to be publicly policed by their neighbors as being poor parents. This sense of failure they may feel in the face of their child’s nonconformity can be perceived as a reflection of them as parents, regardless of a lack of evidence to support that position.  The irony of course being that the very thing the parents do as a corrective measure to “set Michael straight”, which they believe is them being good parents, is the very symbolic form of violence that solidifies themselves as the opposite.

In this review, I have made a conscious effort to use they/them pronouns when referring to Laure/Michael. Sciamma leaves it ambiguous as to whether Laure is using this summer as a benchmark test to gauge the complications of the coming out process, or if this gender bending is temporary sojourn. As stated earlier, this was an attempt to reach and embody the broadest audience possible. However, the hedging of bets here just seems disingenuous. Laure not using Michael anymore at the end of the film seems like a cop out; a way to smooth over the ruffled feathers of less progressive film patrons. Granted, it could just as easily be interpreted that Laure was experimenting and had no intention of a permanent identity shift. Yet, because that choice was taken away from them, the audience is left to contemplate Sciamma’s actual intentions and stance on trans politics.

CONCLUSION  

            Tomboy is a richly contextual film that questions gender norms and promotes nonconformity for the purposes of experimentation and expression. As with Water Lillies, Sciamma’s interrogation with gender, and identity in Tomboy is ambivalent.  Whereas in Water Lillies she reinforces cultural male gaze through the erotic capital of the female lens, with Tomboy, they allow for the gender nonconformity to take place but then immediately sanction them without an interrogation of the consequences. Sciamma’s use of biological determinism to create conflict undercuts any positive message this period of childhood nonconformity creates. This solidifies for the audience the sex/gender divide rather than leaving it ambiguous and allowing the audience to get comfortable within the grey area of the gendered spectrum.

 

REFERENCES

Darwin, Helana 2022. Redoing Gender: How Nonbinary Gender Contributes Toward Social Change New York: Palrave Macmillan

Nordberg, Jenny 2014. The Underground Girls of Kabul: In Search of a Hidden Resistance in Afghanistan New York: Crown publishing   

---

[1] More on this in Social Analysis

The Films of Celine Sciamma: Water Lilies

 

The first film in my analysis of the films of Celine Sciamma, is the coming-of-age drama, Water Lilies. In this debut, Sciamma’s shot composition weaves a cinematic tapestry that heralds her as an up-and-coming auteur. Inter-stitched with a gender and sexually fluid color palette, Sciamma constructs a female gaze that captures the tumultuously turbulent acrimony of adolescence, where bourgeoning desire threatens to unravel fragile friendships. Water Lilies is the first in a loose trilogy about the slow transition out of childhood (along with Tomboy, and Girlhood). The production of this freshman film supports the consistent albeit mixed feminist messaging the director will be known for; however, upon greater reflection, some of the film’s specific sequences and overall choices may not have aged well in hindsight.

 

PLOT

When young Marie goes to a synchronized swim meet to support her best friend, she unexpectedly becomes enthralled with Floriane (Adele Haenel). As Marie gets more and more drawn in by Floriane’s charm and attention, she begins to question her sexuality, straining the relationship she has with her best friend who is also on a journey of sexual discovery. This film reminds us that regardless of the romantic path one takes, no matter how many twists and turns it makes, all roads lead to heartache.

 

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

            To understand the historical impact of Water Lilies, both the production and the film’s setting need to be interrogated. Due to films being a human cultural product, movies become infused with the time period in which they are created. This can be seen in the technology that is used on screen, filming techniques, pop cultural references used, all the way down to the film grain and sound mixing. Each of these aspects of the industry, perceptibly or imperceptibly, leave a trace as to the film’s historical affect, like a smudgy fingerprint on glass.  Depending on the type of film being made, this can either be an avenue or a barrier to the story being told. Sciamma’s first film taking place contemporaneously with the time period of the film’s production, allows it to avoid any complicated temporal anachronisms that are possible in period pieces or future (set) films. Thus, Water Lilies production and the film’s setting represent French Independent cinema, and the sexual politics of the late 2000’s

            Gay and sexual politics of the late 2000’s

During the writing and the development of Water Lilies there were transformative events in the LGBTQAI+ community. Sciamma, herself a lesbian GenXer, understands the difficulty in navigating the sexual politics of an identity that, during the time that she was a teenager, was not only less accepted, but abhorred. Thus, given this context, Water Lilies is both subversive for the time, and a beacon for the rights, representation and acceptance that was to come.

            The gender and sexual politics of the late 00’s was a period of growing pains. The white heterosexual hegemony was weaning slightly. Thus, fearful of losing that power, there was an attempt at the clawing rollback of gay rights in the states (California passing Proposition 8 making Gay marriage illegal) and abroad. In France, civil partnerships had been made legal in 1999 which, at the time, felt like a segregationist tactic of “separate but equal.” On the surface, these bills would give those that filed for domestic partnerships the same rights as a heterosexual couple outside of the name. However, these exclusionary policies were not only used as a social buffer between gays, lesbian and “the straights”- it outwardly misrepresented a cultural tacit rejection of anything that was non heterosexual.

            In Sociology, there is a term called cultural lag. This is the understanding that when a behavior, object or idea is introduced or implemented into a society or culture, there is an unspecified amount of time during which cultural acceptance is developed before it is implemented into the Bureaucratic processes of the social structure.  Technology is usually the easiest example of this: the internet existed before it became a cultural necessity. Yet, because of the power imbalance between those who hold high status positions in valued social institutions (military Governments and Economy) and the people whom they are supposed to serve, there is an extra barrier to the implementation of change regardless of its cultural acceptance. This is the impasse that sexual politics found itself in during the late 2000’s.

 Even in 2007, most of the world’s population was either supportive of or neutral towards another person’s sexuality. Yet, those in power were resistant to the will of their people and consistently pushed back against the efforts of sexual equality. This pushback was usually couched in the same rhetoric of neutrality using it to keep individuals in the proverbial “closet” or “on the DL" to limit public presentations of their identity; effectively using the rhetoric of ambivalence as a shield from criticism. Though, it is hard to accept that anyone who goes out of their way to deny the personhood of another group is uncaring. Therefore, the 2007-2008 resistance to gay rights was the product of the powerful’s persnickety perniciousness to shore up their worldview in the levees of institutional authority, indicating not only their discrimination but admitting to the fragility of their own values.

This tug of war against the people and the powerful over sexual politics has caused a “seesawing” effect on the validation of Non heterosexual identities and everything under the LGBTQAI+ banner. In addition to the 2008 California law mentioned above, the US federal government was also under the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law back in 1997 that defined marriage as only between one man and one woman. This was later attempted to be codified by the Bush administration in 2004 with the Marriage protection Amendment that died in congress. Later, the Obama Administration supported bills in congress that would weaken DOMA, eventually being reversed through the US Supreme Court decision in Obergefell V. Hodges that saw Gay marriage legalized in 2015. It was with this landmark decision that there was finally an alignment between the law and the cultural acceptance of sexual identities outside of the vanilla hetero/cis normativity.

 However, as the United States has flirted with fascism with the presidency of Donald Trump, we’ve witnessed the end of federal protections for reproductive rights for women. Roe v. Wade being repealed just shy of its 50-year anniversary. The court (with 3 new Trump appointees at the time) ultimately overturned the 1973 decision by questioning its rationalization around privacy. A rationalization that was also used in Obergefell due to the precedence established in Roe; making the former now vulnerable to appeal. This is happening while a majority of Americans still support Gay rights and same sex relationships. Yet, recent and relentless Conservative attacks have fueled public skepticism and waned support for trans and nonbinary people in the US.  

Being of French nationality, it is reasonable to assume that Sciamma wasn’t impacted by these contradictions in the States. Although, historically France has been far more progressive than the US when it comes to issues of sexuality and gender, still, between 2012 and 2013 the battle between the conservative and socialist parties in France were ambivalent about same sex marriage; ultimately solidifying France as a liberal nation with the passage of the Gay marriage bill in 2013, 6 years after the release of the film.

As mentioned at the beginning of this section, because Water Lilies drew upon the director’s own experiences, the revelation of attraction and expression is inherently framed from a Gen X perspective during a far more conservative time, even in France. Thus, a lot of the film, especially the intimacy between Marie and Floriane, happens behind closed doors, in locker rooms, and secret places in public parks. While this is typical of youthful sexual transgressions regardless of identity (in part because young adults do not have access to many private spaces without parental or adult supervision) these practices were necessary in the gay and lesbian subculture during times when expression of such an identity was met with criminal prosecution, violence and even death. Sciamma deftly illustrates not only the confusion of an emerging unbridled sexuality, but the added vexation of navigating the underground codes of sexual identities and behaviors that are not accepted by the cisgendered vanilla sex breeders.

            

            Production

           The inspiration for Water Lilies came from Sciamma’s experiences with the sport of synchronized swimming. The original French title, which translates into “birth of the octopus” was later changed for an international release. Sciamma felt that the term ‘water lilies’ was an insightful analogy to the way that female synchronized swimmers need to present themselves: athletic and strong but with a performative femininity. Water lilies being both of the soil and water, thriving in the silt of rivers and lakes, with resiliency hardy enough to break the surface tension of the water to flower above. In either case, with water lilies or French synchronized swimmers, the real labor underwater is never seen.  

            Being an independent and a considerably low budget film, not much else is known about the production of the film, beyond the knowledge that, sometime after this film wrapped, Sciamma and Haenel began a romantic relationship. In hindsight, considering that Sciamma and Haenel met on the set of Water Lilies, and the age gap between them (Sciamma was between 29-30 and Haenel was 17-18 years old at the time they met), calls for a reexamination of the film through the framing of power.

Regardless of when the romantic relationship between Sciamma and Haenel began, the initial cultivation of their relationship was not one of equal power. And while these power dynamics are indeed fluid and can change, a relationship that has a foundation of an imbalance of power is hard to disrupt, especially when that imbalance of power in a professional relationship is reinforced by the imbalance of the age gap between them. Consider the difficulties in the shift in power dynamics between parents and children, and how even adult children kowtow to parents and their desires when that subjugation is no longer required, nor beneficial. This imbalance became foundational in the initial relationship between Sciamma and Haenel that complicates a feminist reading of the film. An example of this is Sciamma’s thoughts on the sex and nudity of the characters that are supposed to be below the age of consent (even though all of the actors portraying the teens were over the age of 18):

"In the casting, I told each girl the whole scenario, including that scene in which one girl deflowers the other. You can't just say to a girl, 'if you're naked, that's your character.' No, it's her body. So I was always honest. I said that I would not betray them, that I would not take anything from them, that they should give me something. By itself. If they wanted to participate, they knew how far they had to go. I was surprised that they were immediately excited. But the story was really about them, they felt connected to it. And those parents were just as excited. They even helped me to lie to the government because I had given them a clean version of the script to convince them. The parents supported that story," Sciamma recalled.[1]    

 

On the surface this is very inclusive and provides the girls with the agency and autonomy to collaboratively create the story that Sciamma wanted to tell. However, reframe this statement with the knowledge of Sciamma’s and Haenel’s subsequent relationship, and through this lens, these statements seem predatory.

            Additionally, using the framing of Sciamma’s and Haenel’s relationship, the praise for the film becoming the template for a feminist female gaze in filmmaking is also tainted. Throughout the film, Floriane (Haenel) is the subject of Marie’s desire, often illustrated through the lens of the camera. Yet, because it is Sciamma behind the camera, and she is the person whom inevitably chooses which shots to use from hours of footage, any image that presents Floriane’s sexuality, regardless of the presumed agency that is presented, again seems predatory. It is difficult to believe, given both the final product and the history of filmmaking, that Sciamma wasn’t sexualizing Haenel well-before they became a couple. Thus, it is odd for a film to be praised for its depiction of girls, women and the agency afforded to them to express their sexuality, when the person who was ultimately responsible for constructing that narrative was objectifying one of them at the same time.

If I can be afforded some latitude for speculation, one of the reasons that this framing isn’t more commonly lauded at this film is due to the same sex nature of the relationship. Currently, as of this writing, allegations of sexual misconduct have been leveed against author Neil Gaiman. Gaiman (similar to Sciamma and Haenel) began a relationship with a 20-year-old victim after meeting them at a book signing 2 years prior. Almost instantaneously, Gaiman is “being canceled.”, and rightfully so. Yet, Sciamma remains a pillar of feminist filmmaking. A partial explanation for this could be the simplicity of popularity. Gaiman is more popular than Sciamma and thus garners more public attention. Additionally, the relationship between Sciamma and Haenel began and ended without attention or fanfare before social media became a factor in a majority of celebrity lives. Finally, one cannot discount the additional factor of the common age gaps and complicated entanglement of same sex relationships; many of which are based in a foundation of sexual mentorship. In this context, we can understand how Sciamma’s possible transgressions are made invisible, but no less problematic.

 

SOCIAL ANALYSIS

            Water Lilies is a story about the blossoming of sexuality in teenage girls and the emotional torrent that accompanies its revelation. Many of the sociological themes that this film encircles are ones of learning, self-discovery and introspection. Each of the three protagonists have to navigate this new (to them) gender and sexual landscape, coming to different solutions, conclusions and revelations between them, themselves and the rest of the world. To understand this further, the concepts of gender socialization, the eroticization of youth and the intersections of love and sex need to be examined.

            Gender Socialization

             Socialization is rudimentally defined as a social learning process, begins before birth and contains multitudes: the learning of both the self, and society; its rules, regulations and ways of acceptable behavior. This process needs to be engrossingly all-encompassing because it is used as a mechanism of social control. The internalization of its process and learned socially acceptable behavior(s) maintains the social order by constructing a law-abiding productive member of society. Yet, since most societies value patriarchal and white supremacist rule, the social order that emerges, and the learning process that is developed to ensure its reproduction, becomes inherently racist and misogynistic.

            Gender Socialization: the process by which individuals understand what it means to be male, female, and trans, along the gender spectrum within a particular society. Some societies see and expand upon the gendered spectrum, while others, most others, organize around a traditional, exclusionary binary.  Through the gender binary, gender stereotypes and assumptions emerge as concrete facts: boys are boys and girls are girls, to eventually become men and women.  Girls get the message that their value is chiefly located in their body and their relationship with boys and men; learning to cultivate their bodies, dreams and desires around the needs of others. It is from this that they are convinced they only find worth. If they dare to dream for themselves, they are consistently sanctioned and pressured to return to behaviors of subservience.

 Under such surveillance women lose their identity, becoming strangers to themselves (de Beauvoir 2011). Any identity outside of the roles of being wives and mothers is an identity which is perceived as one that a girl/woman steals for themselves. However, if these two identity conditions are mandatory and must be fulfilled prior to anything else, what is then framed as stealing, is instead a conditional perk of incarceration. Female childhood and adolescence are seething with the rage against their imprisonment in these roles, often thrashing themselves against the bars of their social prison, inflicting self-harm (de Beauvoir 2011).              

Because girls and women are valued in their bodies through the binary, the detention of society’s daughters begins around the subject of sex.  Beyond the simple objectification of women as sex objects or vessels for the next generation (through reproduction) this valuation frames women’s existence as being in service to others, typically men. Therefore, all these mechanisms by which girls and women are policed, are for the benefit of men. Laura Carpenter (2005) discusses this through the prism of virginity loss.

According to Carpenter (2005), girls and boys are socialized to perceive virginity differently. While boys are socialized to see their virginity as a stigma, something that needs to be gotten rid of as soon as possible, girls are socialized to see their virginity as a gift. However, it is not a gift that the girls give to themselves, to indicate body autonomy and agency, but a gift to their (presumed) heterosexual partner. This places undo attention and value on female virginity to the point that the perception of a girl/women’s morality is tied to whether or not they have had sex (Valenti 2009).

Sciamma inverts this importance of virginity in the film through Floriane, who is a virgin but has a slutty reputation among boys. When she is no longer able to delay the advances of one of her many male suitors, and to avoid the humiliation of being discovered as a virgin, she convinces Marie to deflower her through digital stimulation/penetration. This non heterosexual act is done in the service of men, specifically to give Floriane access to male power. Floriane does this without any reluctance or consideration for Marie’s feelings, which end up being hurt through Floriane’s emotional manipulation and lack of compassion.    

Since women get the message that their value is in their bodies, girls and women often conclude that one way to glean power, autonomy and authority is through the patriarchal bargain- when women lean into patriarchal, and ultimately unequal systems of power for the stability and security that behavior will provide. This is done in part through girls and women recognizing their body as currency. Yet, while girls and women can wrestle away power from men and the patriarchy in general, this behavior, even though it is framed as a subversion, or a rebellion, it is still in the service of men. The control that women assert over their heterosexual partners and the general domestic sphere is purposefully designed to provide men with women to support them. The patriarchal system conditions men to not be socialized to a variety of basic domestic duties while sanctioning women more harshly for those same behaviors. Thus, to avoid being sanctioned by others (and perceived as a “bad” wife and “mother” the roles from which Society draws girls and women’s value) many women feel pressure to exhibit control over the home and participate in this patriarchal bargain; convincing themselves that it is the only way to access power. This is contrary to the truth that the patriarchal structure conditions boys and men into a state of arrested development (often framing girlfriends and wives as “mothers they can fuck”) which then conditions women to fill/exploit that weakness to gain power that they were denied by virtue of being girls/women. Then, because this system is also misogynistic, even when women do the very things society tells them they need to do to gain value, they are still sanctioned for it. This is typically done through slut shaming or framing their behavior as manipulative and controlling.

Water Lilies shows Floriane as beginning to understand the patriarchal bargain and her body as currency. Not only does she understand the value of a sexual reputation in getting interest and attention from men, from which she can gain status, but the way that she uses access to her body as “payment” for services rendered (Giving Marie a kiss after she deflowers Floriane for the purpose of male attention). Also, by framing this as a transaction, she keeps an emotional distance from these behaviors and unfortunately does not recognize or care about the emotional fallout of her actions; for Marie, or anyone around her.  Floriane’s use of erotic capital is the mechanism by which these misogynistic traps of false consciousness, learned through the process of gender socialization, hurt everyone around her, regardless of gender or sexual identity.

Uses of the Erotic and The Lesbian Existence

            Because women have been taught to use their erotic capital and their bodies as currency for the support of men, this strips the inherit power of the erotic that women can use to validate themselves. According to Audre Lorde (2007) part of the social control of women in a misogynistic patriarchal system is the suppression and appropriation of the erotic, ignoring it as a source of information and power in women’s lives.  (p 53-54)

            [Women] have been warned against [the erotic] all [their] lives by the male world, which values this depth of feeling enough to keep women around in order to exercise it in the service of men, but which fears this same depth too much to examine the possibilities of it within themselves

This is especially true when looking at the way the patriarchal system discourages female friendships, often framing each other as competition for male attention. This is born out of the fragility of masculinity at the core of any misogynistic patriarchy. Because the culture has organized the value of women to be in the service of men, the latent fear that underlines this domination and oppression is the lack of value and importance men have in women’s lives. Women become instrumental to men’s lives and their livelihood (part of the mechanism to control men too) especially in heterosexual relationships to their benefit; men who are married with children report higher rates of happiness and wellness. Yet, cis/het women consistently report higher levels of health, happiness and wellness when they are unmarried and childless. This not only shows that men and women are socialized into norms and behaviors in opposition to their overall happiness, but it also consciously separates women from the source of their power; each other. The alienation and competition of women is a socially constructed mechanism of social control, because empowered women are a danger to the patriarchal social order. Their erotic power is a lifeforce that can be cultivated through girls and women’s relationship to each other (Lorde 2007).

    The erotic empowerment of women through their relationships was coined by Adrianne Rich as “The lesbian Existence.” As I explained in a previous essay:

Rich exclaims:

“The Lesbian existence comprises both the breaking of a taboo and the rejection of a compulsory way of life. It is also a direct or indirect attack on male right of access to women. But it is more than these, although we may first begin to perceive it as a form of nay-saying to patriarchy, an act of resistance. It has of course included role playing, self-hatred, breakdown, alcoholism, suicide, and intrawoman violence; we romanticize at our peril what it means to love and act against the grain, and under heavy penalties; and lesbian existence has been lived (unlike, say, Jewish or Catholic existence) without access to any knowledge of a tradition, a continuity, a social underpinning. The destruction of records and memorabilia and letters documenting the realities of lesbian existence must be taken very seriously as a means of keeping heterosexuality compulsory for women, since what has been kept from our knowledge is joy, sensuality, courage, and community, as well as guilt, self-betrayal, and pain”

As the term "lesbian" has been held to limiting, clinical associations in its patriarchal definition, female friendship and comradeship have been set apart from the erotic, thus limiting the erotic itself. But as we deepen and broaden the range of what we define as lesbian existence, as we delineate a lesbian continuum, we begin to discover the erotic in female terms: as that which is unconfined to any single part of the body or solely to the body itself, as an energy not only diffuse but, as Audre Lorde (2007) has described it, omnipresent in "the sharing of joy, whether physical, emotional, psychic," and in the sharing of work; as the empowering joy which "makes us less willing to accept powerlessness, or those other supplied states of being which are not native to me, such as resignation, despair, self-effacement, depression, and self-denial.” (p54)[2]

            In Water Lilies, it is heavily implied through genre conventions (of the coming-of-age story tropes) that Floriane, like Marie, is trying to understand and navigate her own sexuality; her eroticization by cis/het boys and men allowing her to experiment. This “freedom” is afforded to her because she is a cis/het fem presenting female. An identity whose sexuality, and its exploration, has been co-opted and appropriated by both cis/het men and the porn industry. Because of this, girls and women can more easily experiment with non-heterosexual behaviors openly and in public without much sanction, as long as it is framed as being performative for male attention. This causes many gay and bisexual girls to go through a period of trying to pass as straight (Orenstein 2016). It is possible that this is what Floriane is contemplating and working through in the film, without an understanding of how her actions are affecting others around her. It comes down to whether the audience interprets her actions as being with calculated malicious intent, or as confusion, ignorance and oblivion to her own charisma.

  

CONCLUSION

            Celine Sciamma’s debut film, Water Lilies, is the opening volley in a coming-of-age trilogy that investigates social, gender and sexual development through an attempted feminist lens using the female gaze. Sciamma mostly achieves this with dialogue, genuine reactions from actors and shot compositions that try to get inside the mind of teenage Parisian girls as they navigate the trials of gender socialization and tribulations of their “flowering” sexual identity. Yet, Sciamma’s later relationship with one of the film’s stars, reveals that like the history of the male gaze in cinema, the female gaze can also be predatory.

 

REFERENCES

de Beauvior, Simone 2011. The Second Sex New York: Vintage Books.

Carpenter, Laura M. 2005. Virginity Lost An Intimate Portrait of First Sexual Experiences. New York: New York University Press.

Lorde, Audre 2007.  Sister Outsider Essays and Speeches by Audre Lorde Berkely: Crossing Press

Orenstein, Peggy 2016. Girls and Sex: Navigating the Complicated New Landscape. New York: Harper Press

Valenti, Jessica 2009.  The Purity Myth: How America’s Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women Berkely: Seal Press.  

---

[1] https://www.filmkrant.nl/av/org/filmkran/archief/fk297/sciamma.html

[2] Compulsory Heterosexuality and the Lesbian Existence