Representation of male sexuality in Cinema

In the 1980’s a new style of gay and lesbian focused films emerged that came to be termed as the ‘New Queer Cinema’ to distinguish between earlier classical gay and lesbian films. The formula that these films took were to provide pleasure and escapism for gay and lesbian audiences. Another central element of much New Queer Cinema was the re-appropriation and reform of previously negative representations of male and female sexuality. The film Swoon (Tom Kalin,1992) exemplifies the New Queer Cinema’s quest to place male sexuality of the characters at centre stage. The film Swoon is about is about the relationship of two young men which results in the kidnapping and murdering a small child. It recounts the Leopald-Loeb crimes of the 1920’s. However this film was released in 1992 at a time where the Hayes code was loosened in the 1960s and 1970s and onwards which also saw the emergence of the gay rights movement. However in terms of representation, gays and lesbians were becoming more visible and vocal in public life yet disappointingly their representation in films was becoming even more homophobic. An example would be the 1980 film Cruising (William Friedkin,1980) with Al Pacino. The film is about a killer who murders homosexuals and a cop Steve Burns, Al Pacino’s character goes undercover as a gay man in hope to lure the killer to himself. The undercover operation is clearly a examination of the representation of male sexuality: the homosexual world. The representation of male sexuality will therefore be explored in the two films Swoon and Cruising.

Male sexuality in the film Swoon is represented as having a mutual relationship with unlawful acts and sadism. Loeb and Leopold kill Bobby Franks a young 13 year old child in the film. On the other hand the film also represents Loeb and Leopold as guilty criminals who murder the child together as they bound together in love. Leopold’s and Loeb’s sexuality places them both outside the law: their homosexuality exiles them to a world of criminality. It appears that male sexuality is therefore represented as sharing a communal bond with crime and violence. Furthermore , homosexuality appears to represent the exchange of misdeeds for sex. As a critic helps to suggest “Leopold accepted Loeb’s criminality endeavours and received in return opportunities for certain twisted biological satisfactions”(Francis Xavier Busch, 1992:169). The character of Loeb even supports this further in the film when his diary entry give evidence to this truth. The diary entry states that “killing Bobby Franks together will join Richard (Loeb) and I for life” (Tom Kalin,1992). The act of crime for sex can be further explored in the film Deliverance (John Boorman,1972), most notably the infamous male rape scene. The film deliverance contextually is a film about the hillbillies who contextually are often characterized by excessive or deviant sexual behaviour such as rape and sexual violence and therefore “sexual deviance is seen as endemic to the region and its people”( William B. Thesing, 2009:199). Deliverance compares to Swoon’s take on male sexuality as an act of law-breaking, as the hillbillies in this film rape another man in order for sexual gratification and as an act of crime.

Male sexuality is also represented as some form of sexual deviant in the film Swoon and Cruising. Cruising uses montage in one scene to depict how male sexuality is a sexual abnormality. One scene shows a fashion designer being stabbed in a porn movie cubicle. This is edited and juxtaposed with the orgasm of a man getting spanked in the porn film he was watching before his death onscreen. This is then spliced with the fashion designers own death. Therefore the moral of this scene is clear. As a critic helps to put forth, male sexuality is represented as equating “sin with death” (Lewis Jacobs,1968:139).The relationship between Loeb and Leopold is displayed onscreen as one of a married couple. The mise en scene of jewellery and ‘rings’ suggests some sort of binding between the two. According to actual court records , there are reports that Loeb was a “willing partner in crime only because he was offered sexual treatments” (Hal Higdon,1999: 78) Leopold in the film also goes on to say after they exchanged rings earlier that, “I'll do what you want,” and a unconcerned Loeb replies, “And I'll do what you want.” We also watch Loeb, relaxed and smiling in bed, calling out “I suppose you want your payment now” before giving himself in payment for crimes committed after they kill the young child Bobby. Also later, as they prepare to bury and lay to rest the murdered boy Bobby, Leopold stops to kiss Loeb, who at first returns the kiss and then shoves him away. Clearly the positive aspects of male sexuality in terms of love, affection and compassion are represented as a transaction between friendliness and love which ultimately becomes demonised and is represented as corrupted with violence.

An interesting debate during the 1970’s was that American cinema was relentlessly “coding male rape as homosexuality” ( Harry M. Benshoff, 2004:310). In terms of context this draws parallels with the circumstances surrounding the 1970’s and 1980s where it was stereotyped by Tim LaHaye in his book The Unhappy Gays: What Everyone Should Know About Homosexuality in which he suggested that “gay men were prone to violence, sadomasochism and rape”(Tim LaHaye,1978:27). However Tim LaHaye comments that rather than equate male sexuality with violence, he argues that homosexual men are “prone to violence”. He therefore argues that male sexuality exists as being exposed to the world of violence , in that gay men are represented as vincible and vulnerable to attacks, most notably homophobic attacks. Yet what becomes challenging with the film Swoon, is that the two male characters are gay men, yet they refuse to be “prone to violence”(Tim LaHaye,1978:ibid). In fact the film completely subverts against this notion and in fact it is male sexuality itself that becomes a form of violence in itself. Loeb and Leopold are not prone to violence in the film but rather the film chooses to represent male sexuality as a resounding protest against the homophobic attitudes of the 1920’s or more significantly the violence towards individuals who shared queer elements. However the film Cruising plays into the hands of Tim LaHaye’s comments on gay men being “prone to violence””(Tim LaHaye,1978:ibid). The film is littered with images of males in leather black outfits. According to context the leather subculture denotes practices and styles of dress organized around sexual activities. In this film the sexual activity is male sexuality. Cruising rebukes the homosexual men by insisting that in allowing their male sexuality to be displayed by their leather outfits, they automatically take on a sexual representation that depicts them as vulnerable to attacks. Therefore male sexuality is represented as what Sigmund Freud coins as the “death instinct” (James Strachey, 1978:144) which pervades through sexual activity.

The “Death Instinct” ( James Strachey,1978:ibid) is explored further In terms of representation of male sexuality in the film Cruising which deals with this significantly. It is yet another film that draws on the comparison between male sexuality and crime. The film Cruising draws links between New York City’s urban gay scene juxtaposing it with the night life knife crime. It also appears that every time a character on screen engages in some form of a homosexual act whether it be gay sex or images on screen on gay men in leather gear. Whereever we are littered with homosexual icons, a murder would follow suit. An example would be the opening sequence of the film which features gay men . This film also puts forth that male sexuality can only be explored through violence and more importantly through homophobia. When the police cop Steve Burns mistakenly leads the police to investigate the waiter Skip Lee, he is intimidated, beaten, and forced to strip and masturbate in front of other detectives in order to provide them with a semen sample, the evidence they need in their police investigation. Steve Burns is disturbed by this police brutality . This scene confirms that the police are merely motivated by homophobia and therefore male sexuality becomes an undertone in the police force. This film also becomes problematic in terms of its representation of male sexuality because violence appears to out weigh the positive connotations of homosexuality. As one critic helps to explore further, “Gays who protested the making of the film maintained that it would show that when Pacino recognized his attraction to the homosexual world, he would become psychotic and begin to kill” (Vito Russo, 1981:238). Therefore Cruising implies that if one decides to explore homosexual desires, he will be killed or these emotions will be suppressed.

However in terms of spectatorship, both films draw upon what the psychiatrist Edward J. Kempf coined as “Homosexual Panic”(Vito Russo, 1981:200) Both the films Swoon and Cruising display many scenes whereby all we see on screen is two males in homosexual activities or a homosexual environment. In Swoon we have a shot of both the main characters Leopold and Loeb ducking into a corner and kissing onscreen. Leopold removes two rings from his mouth and places one on Loebs finger. In comparison, in the film Cruising the male sexuality that we are displayed with is much more aggressive. We are bombarded with a the character of Skip Lee, the waiter who is being interrogated yet intimidated, beaten, and forced to strip and masturbate in front of four police detectives. In terms of audience and spectatorship , These images of multiple men together on screen leaves a heterosexual male viewer with no one to identify with expect the gay man , and this situation can cause a strong discomfort in some male spectators. This discomfort is paralleled to “Homosexual panic”(Vito Russo, 1981:ibid) a term that refers to someone becoming highly agitated when confronted with his or her own potential homosexual feelings. Therefore when male audiences are confronted with representations of male sexuality on screen, male audiences are forced to react almost with shock to their own possible feelings of homosexuality. Male sexuality is therefore represented as affecting heterosexual spectators, cornering them into a situation where they themselves start to question their own sexuality, male sexuality to be specific.

To conclude gay characters in both the films Swoon and Cruising have been only defined by their sexual orientation, and the characters of Loeb and Leopold lack any complex character development. Swoon briefly touches upon the issue of love and relationships , but they always display acts of love through sexual deviance, exchanging crimes for sex and so forth. Swoon as a film subverts against Hollywood films and tells the story of male sexuality from a male sexuality point of view. The two films also put forward that male sexuality itself is a complex theme, it exists by paralleling acts of crime with sexuality. The gay characters all “function as both villains and frustrations of the heterosexual development” (Richard Dyer,2002:183). In other words , male sexuality corresponds to elements of evil and criminality which are all intertwined. Therefore it becomes impossible to view these two film texts without seeing male sexuality as harmonious, pleasant or even melodious. We will always be bombarded with acts of violence and aggressions towards and from gay males. Male sexuality is only able to exist as either a or a vessel or a act of violence.