Issues of Gender in Pinku Eiga

The manner in which issues of gender are articulated and contested in the media.

The first question to consider is what are the issues of gender? The definition of gender itself is an issue. Its attributes are rigid and it works on a basis of binary opposition which represents one as normality and one as the other which gives an problematic and false interpretation of individuals according to their gender identity. Also gender is sometimes misinterpreted as sex or even sexuality, even theorists have different opinion of gender and its attributes. Gerda Siann’s book ‘Gender, Sex and Sexuality’ gives a good definition of between sex and gender:

“Sex is defined as the biological differences between males and females and gender is the manner in which culture defines and constrains theses differences…but also differences in the manner in which individuals view both themselves and others, in terms of the female/male dichotomy.” (Siann:1994:3)

Siann also suggests that this collective culturally consideration of gender is not measured as problematic as it should be. We employ the roles and aspects of gender regularly, freely and easily sub consciously conforming to the patriarchal framework that gender exists within. Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble (1990) is influenced by Jacque Derrides theory of performativity, which in her deliberation of the issues of gender suggests that gender is a process of acting either masculine and feminine, and through the individual’s choice they construct there own gender.

“The view that gender is performative sought to show that what we take to be an internal essence of gender is manufactured through sustained sets of acts, positioned through the gendered stylization of the body” (Butler: 1990: XVI)

For Butler sex does not define gender but the performance of gender by an individual who make their own choice of their identity, whereas Catherine Mac Kinnon’s suggests that gender is the construction of sexism:

“Stopped as an attribute of a person, sex inequality takes the form of gender, moving as a relation between people, it takes the form of sexuality. Gender emerges as the congealed form of sexualisation of nequality between men and women.” (Mac Kinnon (1987) qt in Butler: 1990: XV)

MacKinnon implies that gender is merely the form of an ideological categorisation of inequality, which defines one sex superior to the other. As gender is culturally constructed within a patriarchal society, then it is considered biased, unrealistic and misogynistic. It seems that feminist theories all have a different determinate of gender. The main issue of gender is that its attributes are transgressive, questionable and complex. Post modern Femininity and masculinity are not the solid, strong structurally framework as the past consideration of gender. The Gender attributes of one category was defined by the other, this use of binary opposites is extremely problematic, as it uses masculinity as the norm and femininity is its opposite. As gender is considered a cultural construct then if the culture that constructed it is progressive and transgressing itself then gender itself begins to change with it. The borders of what determines femininity from masculinity have blurred with certain movements such as post feminism, the Gay Liberation Front and the progressive acceptance of transgender have all played a part in the transgression of gender. Androgynous portrayals of gender have become increasingly more visible within mainstream media. The horror genre reflects on this concept and continuously plays with gender roles. The new sub genre of horror which has become known as Torture porn deals with the issues of gender with a hard hitting approach which its audience will not forget.

“…a new subgenre of horror films which are so dehumanising, nasty and misogynist that they are collectively known either as “gorno” (a conflation of “gory” and “porno”), or, more commonly, as “torture porn”.” (Cochrane:2007)

The conventions of the Torture porn originate from the Japanese film genre Pinku Eiga or Pink Cinema. Pinku eiga which started as soft pornography in the 1960’s which transcended into a more extreme political cinema from the 1980’s onwards with its sadomasochistic imagery used metaphorically of the
socio-cultural problematic tendencies of its culture. Andrew Crossman in his article “The Japanese Pink Cinema” (2002) talks about how for decades the West’s knowledge of this particular cinema was non existent.

“Donald Richie once remarked that the “West knows nothing of these pictures, nor should it” (Crossman: 2002)

The West awareness of these particular films is from Western Directors adapting the extreme visual conventions of pinku eiga. It seems Richie’s warning of the West’s acknowledgement of pink cinema was coherent, as evidence of western horror film series such as Saw and Hostel suggests the main and originally point of pinku eiga is misinterpreted by the West. The political aspect of pink cinema seems to have become lost in translation for western directors and audiences. Considering the general consensus of western societies is that the western female is more liberated then her eastern sisters, it
seems quite ironic that western production companies can not deal with the issues of gender that Pinku Eiga does. It seems to be a dismissal of the problems with patriarchy. The main issues western spectators/critics and directors have with Pinku Eiga is that its message is too real for them.
.
“Sexual violence became a convention of the genre, so much so that a sub-genre, the torture film emerged” (Colette Balmain: 2010: 250)

However the western torture porn film does not deal with the same themes of eastern torture films. Maybe the western directors feel that the issues of woman subordination and rape can only be addressed in cinema if it has only been sanitized, and made more comfortable for the audience to watch. Pink and Torture Porn films should purpose should be for endurance not entertainment. Pinku Eiga, progressed in to more explicit and controversial cinema.

The notorious Guinea Pig films are a series of films from 1985 – 1989. There are 7 films in the series with the finale one acting as a best of Guinea Pig known as “Guinea Pig: Slaughter Special “(1988). The production of a film under the title of ‘Guinea Pig’ was banned in Japan after the series of films were found in an infamous serial killer house, who carried out crimes similar to the content of the films. The plot of this particular film series is the imprisonment and torture of a female by male aggressors, nothing more. The films visuals are extremely realistic and it is hard not to believe that the torture is not actually being inflicted on the female. There is an urban myth that Charlie Sheen watched Guinea Pig 2: Flower of Flesh and Blood (1985), mistaking it as a real snuff film and reported the film makers to the FBI. The production team of Guinea Pig started to produce ‘making of’ videos to show evidence that the film series were not snuff films, but even “Flower of Flesh and Blood: The Making of Guinea Pig” caused controversy over its authenticity. In the first Guinea Pig: The Devil’s Experiment, the abusers are unidentifiable young males dressed in black with their young female victim dressed in white. There is no explanation of how/who/why or when, just the graphic exploitation of the female. As the title of the films suggests the female victim is
treated as a piece of meat that is experimented on, for the enjoyment and curiosity of the young men. The films violence is progressive, becoming more extreme as the film climaxes. The films appearance of pseudo documentary gives an unsettling voyeuristic notion to the film and leaves its audience questioning the reality of what they just watched. The realness of these films gives an emphasised mirror image of the real life problems faced by the issues of gender in a patriarchal society.

Torture porn’s victim is usually female, films such as Pascal Laugier’s Martyrs (2009) which uses this as main basis of his plot, whereas other torture porn films such as Danish film Antichrist (2009) and Japanese film Gurotesuku (2009) have started to use the male victim. This emergence of the male victim
could be considered as a reflection of post modern masculinity and the threat it has on the hegemonic masculinity displayed on the cinema screen. Koji Shiraishi’s Gurotesuku is an interesting text in reference to the gender roles of the male and female victim. The plot of the film is about the entrapment, sexual violence and physical torture of a young couple, by a sadistic sadomasochist surgeon. So does a film that deals with a male and female victim which renders them weak, inferior and passive, still incorporate the stereotypical gender roles?

The film has two flashbacks which are the couple’s collective memory of their first date, the first flashback gives a sense of the characters traits. The male victim, Kazuo, is quite a feminine character in his looks and mannerisms, he does not conform to the appearance or personality of a stereotypical male
protagonist. He is a gentlemen, nice natured and shy. The female, Aki is very feminine in appearance she seems to more calm and collected than her partner, there is also suggestions that she is successful and dominant force in the workplace. In the second flashback. this takes place moments after the first one, shows the couple walking down the street seconds before they are captured. Aki asks Kazuo if he would die for her, Kazuo is shocked and worried by this question, Aki reassures him she is only joking. On contemplation, Kazuo says that if the time comes he will do his best, which is the point where they are brutally hit on the head with a sledge hammer. This piece of dialogue is key to the film especially in the analysis of gender roles, as the surgeon asks the male if he would die for the female. The surgeon also gives Kazuo the opportunity to save Aki from his abuse if he endures the torture without resistance. Kazuo choice to endure extreme pain from his eye being gouged out to his penis being castrated is a masculine choice, as he chose to save the damsel in distress. Kazuo does not fit the stereotypical criteria of either the role of hero or victim. His appearance and personality are quite feminized, his actions are masculinzed yet the role of victim is a feminine concept. I think this may reflect the transgression of masculinity itself, and how the deep rooted attributes of masculinity which defines a man has become transformed and questionable. Transgression could also be considered to be predominately feminine, This suggests that post modern masculinity has transgressed to incorporate feminine connotations, which is reflected within cinema as the male takes the role of the woman, the feminized role of the victim. James Mudge’s film review of Grotesque (English title) describes the victim’s role as equal:

“Still, the film is nihilistic rather than misogynistic, as the maniac is as equal opportunities type guy, dividing his attention fairly between his male and female captive” (Mudge: 2009)

The only thing that is equal within this film is that it has both male and female in the same position as victims, but this is where equality in the film begins and ends. Through the torturer asking Kazuo to die for Aki, implies old power structures of gender, not equal opportunities as he is putting one gender before the other. The male seems to be punished for his masculinity and sexuality rather than the usual horror formula of the female being punished for her femininity and female sexuality. Another aspect of the film which is certainly not equal is how the film focuses on either the female or male considering the type of torture. The first part of the torture is sexual, during this the camera, thus the audience focuses on the
female. The scene of sexual abuse is one of the longest scenes in the film and both the female and male are put through this ordeal, yet the female is watched more, whereas the scenes of physical torture seem to be executed on to the male more. This seems to punish the two characters for the attributes of gender: the female being a sexualized object for the male, and the male being the figure of physical strength. The
male is watched considerable more than the female through most of the film, as the torture is mostly of the physical sense, the camera looks at the female in a sexualized manner or as the damsel in distress. This could be linked to Mulvey’s spectatorship theory in ‘Visual Pleasures and narrative cinema”(1989)
with the identification with the male, the masculinzation of the audience and the male gaze of the female.

“Each is associated with a look: that of the spectator in direct scopophilic contact with the female form displayed for his enjoyment (connoting male fantasy) and that of the spectator fascinated with the image of his like set in an illusion of natural space, and through him gaining control and possession of the woman within the diegesis.” (Mulvey: 1989:21)

A basic application of Mulvey’s theory could be plausible to an extend, with links to female body being sexualized and the identification with the male, yet Mulvey’s framework does not fit comfortably with this particular text. As Mulvey text focuses on classic Hollywood cinema, and it was first published in the
journal Screen in 1975 the application of Mulvey’s theory to an East Asian film which is over 30 years after Mulvey’s essay is awkward.

“…rigid theoretical paradigms of old, where texts would come out bearing the inevitable stretch marks of well-worn interpretative patterns (Oedipal trajectories, machinations of the “Other,” class struggles, etc.),” (Toraro: 2002)

One of the reason‘s Mulvey is problematic is when she specifically focuses on the position taken by the female spectator in ‘Duel in the sun’ (1989) she still considers male dominance and female’s lack of sexual liberation. Therefore the male is considered by Mulvey’s as the normal spectator and the female
spectator is judged as subordinate to them. This binary opposition is frequently used and still as problematic as ever. It seems old spectatorship theories, like the consideration of gender itself has become outdated yet it is still frequently used.

Another theme of Gurotesku is the voice of the victim. The torturer gags them at first but soon removes them as long as they do not speak out against his actions; he makes them silence themselves through fear and submission. Aki attempts to speak to her torturer in which she is punished for, he deters her
from speaking by cutting her arm off with a chainsaw. This notion of silence, especially of the female is similar to the work of post structuralist feminist Helene Cixous around female speech.

“tear her away by means of this research, this job of analysis and illumination, this emancipation of a marvelous text of her self that she must urgently learn to speak” (Cixous: 1971)

Where Aki struggles to have a voice throughout her torture at the end of the film she finally speaks and the torturer finally listens. She laughs at him, ridicules the way he smells and even pity’s him because no- one in his life loved him enough to tell him of his body odour. This bizarre yet much needed flip of power is essential, Aki seems to say to her torturer that he is the victim of society not her. She does not submit to his wishes for her to beg for her life or as her role as victim towards the end of the film. Like Cixious suggests:

“The future must no longer be determined by the past. I do not deny that the effects of the past are still with us. But I refuse to strengthen them by repeating them, to confer upon them an irremovability the equivalent of destiny, to confuse the biological and the cultural.” (1971: 875)

Aki seem to no longer accept her past for her future, she decides to speak out against it, changing the power structures of the film. The torturer decapitates her for this, but the suggestion is that Aki actually willed for this to happen. The tone of the film turns more comically in this particular scene as Aki’s decapitated head attacks the torturer, biting into his neck, gaining her revenge… It could be argued that Aki’s words at the end of the film were in vain, as she was punished for them through decapitation and the film ends with the Torturer in his van waiting to pounce on his latest female victim. However before he makes his move he sprays himself with deodorant, suggesting that Aki’s words have left an impression on her attacker signifies that he has finally listened to the voice of his victim, the feminine voice.

Guinea Pig and Gurotesuku both emphasis the issues of gender through their extreme visual violence and disturbing realistic imagery. Guinea Pig is reflective on femininity and the woman in a patriarchal society, whereas Gurotesuku is reflective of masculinity in its state of crisis, as well as femininity.
Gender’s main issue is that it can not be fixed or rigid but it must be flexible and adaptable to the culture it exists within. If it does not change with its culture it becomes problematic, old, stereotypical and incorrect, which is why post modern gender is in crisis. If the culture is patriarchal, which globally it is, then the culturally construction of gender will always be biased and subordinate towards woman. Cixous’ suggestion of new frameworks of language, gender and culture, seems to be the key to a new and realistic representation of gender. This will enable women to freely define their own identity through their own words and language. Also like Cixous suggests we need to as a global culture to break free from old paradigms of the patriarchal be it in the mass media, literature, language and cinema. Hollywood cinema usually conforms to patriarchy, whereas Japanese Pink cinema seems to confront patriarchy. The
portrayals of gender on the silver screen in the West especially, need to break free of their stereotypes. More importantly the way scholars and film critics write and apply old spectatorship models need to re considered. The notion of the female spectator which is not based on the binary opposition to the male
spectator is essential. If we are in a phase of gender crisis, it is due to the framework that gender exists in his old and unrepresentative of post modern gender.

Filmography

James Wan (2004) “Saw” Evolution Entertainment, USA
Eli Roth (2005) “Hostel” Hostel LLC, USA
Pascal Laugier (2009) “Martyrs” Canal Horizons, France
Lars Von Trier (2009) “Antichrist” Zentropa Entertainments, Denmark.
Koji Shiraishi (2009)“Gurotesuku” Ace Deuce Entertainment, Japan.
Satoru Ogura (1985) “Guinea Pig:The Devil’s Experiment” Sai Enterprise, Japan
Hideshi Hino (1985) Guinea Pig 2:Flower of Flesh and Blood” Sai Enterprise, Japan
Hideshi Hino (1986) “The Making of Guniea Pig” Sai Enterprise, USA
(1988) “The Best of Guinea Pig: Slaughter Special” V & R Planning Co Ltd, Japan and International.

Bibliography

Balmian. C (2010) “Pinku Eiga/ Pink Cinema” in Berra. J (2010) “Directory of World Cinema: Japan” pp.250, Intellect Books Ltd , UK
Butler. J(1990) ‘Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity ’ pp XV Routledge, New York and U.K
Cixous. H (1971) ‘The Laugh Of Medusa’ Translated by Paula Cohen and Keith Cohen (1976) ‘Signs’ pp. 875 – 893, The University of Chicago Press.
Mac Kinnon.C.(1987) “Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law” qt in Butler. J(1999) ‘Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity ’ ppXV Routledge, New York and U.K
Mulvey. L. (1989) “Visual and Other Pleasures” The Macmillian Press Ltd, London. “Visual Pleasure and other Narrative Cinema
Siann .G. (1994) “Gender, Sex and Sexuality: Contemporary Psychologies Perspectives”, Taylor and Francis Ltd, USA and UK

The Japanese Gender Issue

The celebration of the female director has become paramount to film festivals globally. This years, The Japan Foundation dedicated their annual touring film program to the rise of involvement for women in the film industry, entitled ‘Girls on Film: Females in Japanese Film industry’. Whilst there is no denying that the global film industry is still considerably male dominated, the rise of the female director has always been one of endurance and perseverance, constantly fighting off the stigma of labels such as feminist film-makers or the more begrudging and derogatory categorization of their work as merely ‘women’s films’.

Although the consideration and appreciation of the Japanese female director is becoming ever more widely recognized, this has not always been the case. There have been countless examples of female directors in Japan since the late 1930s, with Tazuko Sakane accredited as the first with her 1936 film Hatsu Sugata. However, a sense of acceptance for the female film maker in Japan would only truly begin in the 1980s.

Female directors are often critically compared to fellow women in film, such as Momoko Ando herself being considered as Japan’s answer to Sofia Coppola. In this case, the comparison was not made because of correlating methods or recurring themes but due to both directors having extremely influential fathers in the film industry (Ando is the daughter of actor and director Eiji Okuda). However it is problematic to compare Ando to a Hollywood female director, as this marginalizes any consideration of the Japanese socio-cultural context (the imperial gaze strikes again!) The pertinent question this raises is why can’t female directors be compared and considered in relation to other directors with shared thematic concerns, regardless of biology or gender?

One possible answer rests upon a seemingly positivist common consensus that female film makers offer an alternative depiction of the portrayal of the woman in cinema, especially compared to the traditional and classical Hollywood studio analysis of Mulvey’s ‘male gaze’, and the inherent negative connotations this has for the representation of women on film. For example, Momoko Ando used particular scenes in Kakera to advocate a naturalistic and realistic representation of the female, such as the scene of Haru getting ready to go out, rejecting a mode of presentation which fragments and sexualizes the female body. Ando purposely includes scenes that depict her protagonist Haru getting ready in the morning, sitting awkwardly on the toilet and more notably openly dealing with her menstrual cycle. This scene in particular represents an attempt at a more natural and realistic representation of the femininity, an overt challenge to the the male biased myths of the sexualized women so prevalent in Japanese cinema.

During the London premiere of Kakera I was lucky enough to interview Momoko Ando on the behalf of CUEAFS, in which I asked her about these particular scenes and their purpose. She replied, “I just wanted to say fuck off to all of this. Boys have some kind of stupid fantasy towards girls and we are actually human.” Ando also revealed that she cast Hikari Mitsushima (she can also be found in the excellent Love Exposure [2008], also on release from Third Window Films) in the timid, self conscious role of Haru because the actress has a huge male following in Japan. Ando wished to subvert not only the representation of women in her film but also challenge the consensus of the female as a sex object.

It seems that female directors have always attempted to deconstruct the female as an object for decades. Rather than Coppola, Ando is more accurately following the footsteps of her Japanese female predecessors such as Sachi Hamano, who has made over 300 films in her life time. One of her most well-known, mainstream releases Lily Festival (2001) features elderly women who learn to re-explore their own sexuality when a male newcomer joins there retirement home. The film depicts how love, passion and sex are not confined to the young, but can also belong to an older generation of women. Both Ando and Hamano explore female sexuality, but also purposely chose to portray their female characters in a light that breaks male constructed images of the female, resulting in a more realistic representation.

Ando states that Kakera is “ about identity, it doesn’t matter if its boy or girl. It’s the person you should concentrate on”. Her debut is not explicitly about gender; it is about individualism and being free to express yourself as physically, emotionally or sexually as you may wish.