Hello teacher and classmates,
We would like to submit you our video project on niggling and normalised sexism.
We are already 2 in the team - Adil and Soléanne - and we are looking for 2 (or 3 ?) other enthusiastic colleagues. Here is the project in a first (and imperfect) trial to explain it.
According to personal observations, most of the people in our social environment only acknowledge an "official" sexism, that is to say a discrimination based on gender which you can statistically quantify (ie : the difference in wages, the difference of representation in institutions...) or which is "objectively" marking an inequality between people of two different sex (ie : who is usually bearing the domestic tasks). But a wide part of the sexism-iceberg is often ignored, for example the symbolical and psychological issues (ie : mental workload). Some practices still need to be acknowledged as a manifestation of representations based on gender (ie : mansplaining, manterrupting) ; many beliefs, representations, and practices are structured by our gender and our representation of it (ie : idea of "the man", of "the woman", injonctions, dictats, images, influence of language...). Many situations have not been explicitly identified as sexism, then denying the repetitive structure of some sequences which are setting a genre oppressed by a representant of the other genre (ex : nowadays’ discourses, mainly from feminine voices, witness that many sexual intercourses would happen because the partner insisted a lot. There is then a violence, even if not using force but symbolical power… Situation which might itself be the symptom of sexist representations).
⇒ We want to talk about mansplaining, manterruption, we want to talk about so-called innocent insults which are actually gendered and discriminative. About the symbolical power of men, about the gendered representations of men and women, harassment, gendered language, « dictats », sexual abuses…
These are not always obvious oppressions, at least not for everyone. You need to be concerned and to watch it closely to understand how it shapes our society, our relationships, our perceptions. As a victim, you may not detect why some things make you feel bad. As « the other », you may not acknowledge that your behaviour is wrong and can hurt. This is what we want to make sensible.
In order to illustrate the fact that sexism, as niggling and normalised, may not be obvious at the first sight, we would like to use the symbol of the FABRIC. Indeed, in our everyday frequentation of fabric, we perceive it as something uniform, simple, singular, - it is one and unique thing. But if you look closer, if you pay attention to it, then you will start to see the weave of it. If you come even closer, you’ll see a plenty of strands. And if you’re very close to it, you will see that these strands are substantial, and that they determine the fabric itself.
We can draw an analogy with sociology and feminism issues : it invites you to come closer to social practices and to realize how they are shaped and determined by representations… and how they actually determine representations themselves.
This image of the “fabric” will go through the video and bind its sequences together.
About the sequences themselves : we would like to stage some situations, niggling violences, discriminations, language uses, which are based on sexist representations. The aim is to present the situations with the gendered aspects erased. The scenes then would be allegedly neutral. To achieve that, the characters won’t have any sex, any gender : they are mere human with a neutral communicative ability. (use of masks + voice modifications)
The purpose is that the spectator would automatically and almost unconsciously bind the situation and dialogue with a genre – woman, man, queer -. Then, it would prove that the situations staged are oppressive and based on sexist representations. The experiment does not have a scientific aim (the results won’t be collected by us, producers) but a pedagogical and reflexive aim : the spectator would be put in a situation where he can become aware of gendered representations and discriminations, by himself, and for himself. In other words, we want to make people aware of sexism, especially niggling and normalised sexism. And to do so, we want to show them that some apparently neutral situations are actually not neutral at all but determined by gendered representations. And the spectator will understand it, in realizing that the video’s character, even if he seems anonymous, non-gendered, is recognized as gendered, even without any physical clue. And so, it means that this oppressive situation is a situation of sexism. And so, it means that sexism is effective.
omg sorry I’m still struggling in explaining it, but it will get clearer !
About the media : why a video and not an essay ?
We chose to use a free and “artistic” expression. Indeed, an essay states some facts, some concepts, it has a conclusion. But with « art », the conclusion is formulated or at least felt by the spectator, since art structurally preserves a fundamental ambiguity.
Of course, our project is definitely tackling some concepts (normalised sexism, gendered representations...). But the video goes from the setting of some sexist and gendered situations to the production BY THE SPECTATOR of a self-definition of it.
The staging of neutral scenes is also a way to avoid caricatures and “right-thinking” : we have an interrogative approach, purposefully ambiguous, so the spectator does not feel like he is obliged to think in a way. We don’t want to make a indictment, neither to give answers in a dogmatic way. We really want the spectator to find the answers by himself.
We also chose to make a video because of the universality of this media, its ability to spread in every layer of the society, and its ability to hold people’s interest : it does not ask much effort to be watched, so we can really spread our “message” to a potentially broad public.
As you can see, the project is mostly based on intuitions and some leading ideas so far. We still need to research a lot on these issues in order to produce something serious and complete. We will read the works of some authors, authorities, scholars, who already dealt with our problematics. We will also get inspired by some artists who already worked on queer and feminist issues.
⇒ information, documentation, theoretical ground
Also, we still need to write properly the scenes. Of coooourse, we already have a few ideas, but we will need a lot more in order to give a great insight into the issue. Btw I did not write everything everything : we have a more complete structure, but it would be too long to explain it here.
⇒ writing, setting
Then, we are of course very open to constructive criticism. If you have some advices, some knowledges, some corrections to do, don’t hesitate. Whether you want to take part in the project or not ! Really, don’t hesitate. An external point of view is always good, most-of-all at the beginning of the project, when it is still a little clumsy.
⇒ criticism, advices, improvements, changements
Eventually, we will PRODUCE it. Here comes the aesthetic and technique part
⇒ film, acting, montage
So, if you are motivated and have some skills (or want to acquire some) in :
-
either : videomaking and scenography (montage, filming, setting, staging, acting, cinephile)
-
either : feminist and queer scholar issues (readings, articles, debates, author, artists)
… Then welcome in our team !
And if you have any questions, it would be a pleasure to answer.
Don’t hesitate to send a message at : soleannedh@gmail.com
Thanks for reading !