Gender in horror films

The horror film genre is a movie genre containing multiple subgenres. A goal of this genre includes invoking responses of trepidation and panic from the audience. [1] Critics and researchers claim that these films depict graphically detailed violence,[2] contain erotically or sexually charged situations which verge on becoming pornographic,[3][4] and focus more on injuring or killing female as opposed to non-female characters.

Multiple horror film stars' face molds displayed at The Hollywood Museum, located on 1660 N. Highland Ave (at Hollywood Blvd), Hollywood, California, USA.

Subgenre

Slasher
Main article: Slasher film

Slasher films are a subgenre of horror films featuring acts of violence portrayed in graphic detail. [5] In his book entitled Going to Pieces: The Rise and Fall of the Slasher Film, 1978-1986, author Adam Rockoff states, "The slasher film typically involves a killer who stalks and graphically murders a series of victims in a typically random, unprovoked fashion. The victims are usually teenagers or young adults who are separated from mainstream civilization or unable to easily access help.

These films typically begin with the murder of a young woman and end with a one female survivor who manages to subdue the killer, only to discover that the problem has not been completely solved". [6] Carol Clover's Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film is generally thought of to be the cornerstone work of studying gender in slasher films.

Slasher films can include "scenes of explicit violence primarily directed toward women, often occurring during or juxtaposed to mildly erotic scenes".[7] Research has been unable to show if female characters are killed more often in an explicitly sexual way than male characters in this genre.[8]

Torture films

Some critics suggest that the torture represented in the torture horror genre reflects contemporary U.S. society. The methods of torture in these films are adapted from the discussion of terrorism.[9] During the "War on Terror", the film industry had trouble distinguishing between the characters of "torturer, victim, villain, and hero." Writers and directors of horror films had difficulty allowing their torturers and villains to survive after doing such heinous acts. Mashia Wester sees films such as The Descent, Saw, and High Tension as depicting "average Americans both as tortured victim and torturing hero."[9] The heroes within these torture films do not actively torture but contribute to their own and others' suffering.

Eli Roth, the creator of the Hostel films, taps into an "undercurrent of anxiety about the place of gendered bodies in relation to torture as well as the connection between gender equality, torture, global capitalist venture, and the passive American consumer."[9] Maisha Wester's states in her article, "Torture Porn And Uneasy Feminisms: Re-Thinking (Wo)Men in Eli Roth's Hostel Films", that the popularity of the Hostel films makes the questioning of gendered dominance "both elusive and inescapable in the face of capitalism since, within such a system, we are all commodifiable and consuming bodies."[9]

Female roles in horror films

The treatment of women in horror films can be associated with the fear of the abject.[10] Julia Kristeva explains the abject as "something rejected from which one does not part, from which one does not protect oneself as from an object. Imaginary uncanniness and real threat, it beckons to us and ends up engulfing us." Kristeva asserts that we are horrified by the abject because "it is something that disgusts us, yet comes from us or from which we come."[11] We are taught what we should view with disgust and what we therefore must conceal in shame.

Women and the female body as monsters

Horror films use the female body as a form of an abject. Aviva Briefel states in her article, "Monster Pains: Masochism, Menstruation, and Identification in the Horror Film," that menstruation is the start of monstrosity. Once a girl has reached puberty she is seen to be monstrous.[12] Horror films feed into the female monsters identity through her menstruation, since this is a point of contrast from male anatomy and physiology. Motherhood and menstruation become things which society is taught to find disgusting. [10]

Additionally, Briefel separates the suffering of gendered monsters in horror films into two types: masochism and menstruation. Masochism is central to the identification of male monsters "who initiate their sadistic rampages with acts of self-mutilation." By contrast, female monsters do not commit acts of self-mutilation out of pleasure but instead "commit acts of violence out of revenge for earlier abuse by parents, partners, rapists, and other offenders."[12] Female monsters will engage in masochistic acts when coerced or attempting to terminate her monstrosity. Briefel provides examples of such masochistic acts by female monsters with films like Carrie (1976), The Exorcist (1973), Stigmata (1999), The Hunger (1983), and Alien 3 (1992).[12]

Shelley Stamp Lindsey states "Carrie is not about liberation from sexual repression, but about the failure of repression to contain the monstrous feminine". Audiences are not supposed to identify with Carrie White whilst she becomes the monster, instead they are supposed to be scared of her ability and destructive potential. Carrie is purposely portrayed in this manner because the character Carrie White demonstrates what happens when women gain power and are no longer repressed. Carrie ultimately tells its audience that they must live in a patriarchal world, and if they fail to successfully integrate then this is what will come of it.[13]

Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight reiterates these stereotypes in present-day filmmaking, styling the major female character, Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), as a blood-soaked twin of Carrie,[14] or as the glutinous slimy monster of The Thing. Daisy is imaged arbitrarily as a monstrous force, rather than being human. There has been much debate about the conservative nature of this symbolism and the openly negative attitude to women in The Hateful Eight.[15]

Harvey Weinstein and others have vigorously defended the filmmaker from these charges,[16] given that the film has received mixed reception and has not matched the commercial success of Tarantino's previous titles, whilst discussion about the treatment of Daisy has opened up criticism of the film that was unforeseen by both producers and director. Though her portrayal as "Female Monster" is no doubt deserved due to her committing multiple acts of murder both during and before the film's story, turning her eventual death at the hands of Warren and Mannix - two men - into well-deserved punishment.

Final girl
Main article: Final girl

The final girl is the "first character to sense something amiss and the only one to deduce from the accumulating evidence the pattern and extent of threat; the only one, in other words, whose perspective approaches our own privileged understanding of the situation."[17]

Clover concludes that the final girl is "an agreed upon fiction [for] male-viewers' use of her as a vehicle for his own sadomasochistic fantasies."[17]

The final girl is one of the most commonly seen tropes in slasher films. The final girl is always female, usually a virgin and according to Carol J. Clover, who first identified this trope in 1992. She is the lone survivor of the slasher villain.[18]

Male roles in horror films

Repressive patriarch

In every horror film the repressive patriarchal form of a monster is either "symbolically castrated, pathetically lacking...or he is overly endowed and potent". The real sexual interest that occurs in horror films comes from the monster. "The monster's power is one of sexual difference from the normal male. In this difference he is remarkably like the woman in the eyes of the traumatized male: a biological freak with impossible and threatening appetites that suggest a frightening potency precisely where the normal male would perceive a lack."[19]

Men only stay on the screen long enough to show their incompetence, unless they are seen to be a true form of patriarchy.[20] The repressive patriarch is often dressed as a female and because he does not exemplify patriarchy at its finest, the final girl is his "homoerotic stand-in".[17]

The "masochistic monster" revels in acts of self-mutilation before the audience sees the harming of others being done. Briefel looks at films like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931), The Fly (1986), Hellraiser series, A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), and Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991). All these horror films show examples of masochistic monsters that take pleasure in the pain they inflict on themselves; it is something they must endure to be monstrous.[12]

Sexuality

The horror film emphasizes the idea of female sexuality being something that needs to be punished or come with negative consequences. It shows that once a woman acts in a sexual way she will be killed. The American fantasy of women continuously being sexualized is completely taken away in horror films. Once a woman is related to sex, her sexuality is punished.[21] Klaus Reiser argues, "It is not so much the girls' sexuality per se...but the fact that they have sex with other boys". Sex is considered to be a masculine trait because it is a form of power over someone, and if a woman tries to take control of this power, she will instantly be punished. Her sexual freedom is not within gender-norms, and the patriarchal society does not accept it.[22] Only "male domination is natural and follows inevitable from evolutionary...or social pressures".[23]

Chase

The chase often consists of a sexualized and degraded woman running for her life as an assailant hunts her down and kills her, unless she is termed the "final girl". Often, The Chase will feature the woman in various states of undress and lecherous camerawork that focuses on her body before she is killed in an attempt to mix sex and violence. Female victims in slasher films are shown to be in a state of fear five times as long as males, specifically occurring during "the chase".[24]

Phallic weapons

A phallic weapon, such as a sword, gun, or chainsaw, takes on masculine characteristics, even in the hands of a monster, or a woman.

Mystical pregnancy

Attaching even further onto the fear of women's bodies, there are multiple cases of female bodies become mere vessel for the monster. A female character is violated and is mystically inseminated, and then endures an excoriating pregnancy or an almost non-existent one, passing without any repercussion. The child is then either a monster that must be killed, or is taken away from the character presently.

This trope reduces a women down to the biological, and degrades the emotional and physically complex aspects of bearing and giving birth to a child.[25] The women often have no say in what happens with the baby or even with their own bodies, becoming little more than an object. In horror films such as Rosemary's Baby (1968), Rosemary spends the whole film being told what to feel about her pregnancy by her husband and others in the apartment complex. She never gets a say in the subject of her baby, even after it is revealed to be the spawn of Satan. She remains the vessel for others to take advantage of throughout the film.

Audience

The audience first identifies with the monster until there is a shift in point-of-view camera narration, and allows identification with the final girl once the monster is after her.[20] The audience relates only with masculinity and disdains femininity.[26] Horror films resemble a mirrored object. They gaze back at the audiences' who are unsuccessful in hiding their own sexual desires.[27]

Aviva Briefel believes that pain is central to the audiences understanding of horror films. It is "the monster's pain that determines audience positioning in the horror film." "By gendering the monster's pain, the horror genre prevents the audience from losing control of its own."[12]

Male

Scholars such as Mulvey, Clover, and Creed have argued that we live in patriarchal society, where men dictate the rules and women have to abide by them. Clover looks at the notion that men might "elect to betray their sex and identify with screen females."[17] In slasher films, male characters are often killed quickly and easily leaving the audience to resonate with the strong female character left to kill the monster.[20] Clover seeks to suggest that masochistic impulses is seen within the male spectator who finds a "vicarious stake in" the "fear and pain" the final girl endures by the monster's torturous actions.[12]

Male gaze

The "male gaze," a term coined by Laura Mulvey in "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema", describes the depiction of female characters in a sexualized, de-humanizing manner. Mulvey states that, because the media depict women as they are observed through the male gaze, women tend to take on this male perspective. According to this theory, women largely appear on screen for men's erotic pleasure.[28]

Female

Linda Williams suggests it is supposedly honorable for males to gaze upon the terror shown on a movie screen while females hide, avoiding these screen images. She also suggests women have the right to feel as if they do not belong since they are shown as powerless "in the face of rape, mutilation and murder".[19] As Mulvey argues, the female character "exists only to be looked at."[28] When female audiences gaze upon the screen and when the women on the screen are involved in the gaze, they see "a distorted reflection of" their own image. "The monster is thus a particularly insidious form of the many mirrors patriarchal structure of seeing hold up to the woman." Linda William believes that the woman's gaze is "so threatening to male power, it is violently punished."[19]

Female gaze

Mary Ann Doane suggests that a woman can only actively participate in the gaze when it is "simultaneous with her own victimization." The woman's gaze is turned into "masochistic fantasy."[29] As soon as the woman feels as if she has power and tries to act on it, she is punished. In "When The Woman Looks", Linda Williams analyzes the terrified gaze a woman encounters when she looks at "the horrible body of the monster." In that very moment, as the monster and the woman gaze upon one another, there is recognition of "similar status within patriarchal structures of seeing." What the woman gazes at in horror is always first seen by the audience and then, seconds later, by the woman on the screen. This sequence "ensures the voyeur's pleasure of looking" and punishes the woman by "the horror that her look reveals". The monster and the woman's gazes are similar.

There is not "much difference between an object of desire and an object of horror as far as the male look is concerned." Williams is stating that it isn't an expression of sexual desire that is formed between the monster and the girl but instead "a flash of sympathetic identification."[19]

Race in horror films
See also: Racism in horror films

Women in general have poor representation in the American film industry, but its women from minorities who are infrequently cast or appropriated for the sake of furthering the plot, including in the case of horror cinema. [30] Horror films as a genre cater to a white, primarily young, male audience. [17][31] According to Harry M. Benshoff, "the vast majority of those films use race as a marker of monstrosity in ways generically consistent with the larger social body's assumptions about white superiority".[32]

Ariel Smith states that "by forcing the subconscious fears of audiences to the surface, horror cinema evokes reactions, psychologically and physically: this is the genre's power."[33] The genre holds a great amount of potential to not only explore violence against women and minorities, but also inform the public and show the extents of that violence in a powerful way."[33] However, instead of bringing these issues to the forefront of public discussion, films in this genre have neglected to cover these issues and provide gendered and racially prejudiced points of storytelling. [34] By reusing and creating trope images and plot devices like the "Indian burial ground" and "Mythical Negro"[35] these films trap entire minorities in set cinematic roles while also supporting erasure of their culture.[31]

Portrayal of women vs. men

Evidence produced from the Molitor and Sapolsky study on slasher films from 1980 to 1993 shows that "it takes women twice as long to die as men in these films" and "females are shown in terror for obviously longer periods of time than males".[3] Molitor and Sapolsky's data revealed huge differences between the treatment of men and women which indicate that females are singled out for victimization in special ways in these films. One of the studies they conducted examines the number of seconds that males and females display fear in these films. If a person watched all 30 films in the Molitor and Sapolsky study, they would see a total of almost five solid hours of women in states of fear and terror, which compares to less than one hour for males.[36]

Linz and Donnerstein state that slasher films single out women for attack.[36] They argue that the female body count in slasher films should be examined in the context of other film genres. Linz and Donnerstein affirm that "across most television and film content females are less often murdered and brutalized than males by a very large margin."[36] The study tested this assertion compared with the genre selected for analysis, which is popular action/adventure films containing violence.[36]

Gloria Cowan conducted a study on 57 different slasher films. Their results showed that the non-surviving females were more frequently sexual than the surviving females and the non-surviving males. Surviving as a female slasher victim was strongly associated with the absence of sexual behavior. In slasher films, the message appears to be that sexual women get killed and only the pure women survive. Slasher films reinforce the idea that female sexuality can be costly.[37] Films such as Fatal Attraction feature actresses sexualized for viewer pleasure. Liahna Babener examines the movie, arguing "Beth acts the perfect Total Woman, wearing clingy undershirts and bikini panties around the apartment, primping before the mirror in lacy black undergarments, making a voluptuous ritual out of the nightly bath and applying lipstick with sensuous strokes to the accompaniment of Dan's and the camera's admiring gaze."[38]

Sex paired with violence

Sex in slasher films is broken down into the following behaviors: flirting, kissing, petting, exposed breasts or genitalia, masturbation, intercourse, or forced sex.[37] In slasher films from 1980 to 1993, studies in Linz and Donnerstiens article have concluded that 33% of occurrences of sex were connected to violence (male or female). 14% of all sex incidents were linked to the death of a female. A slasher killed 22% of all "innocent" female protagonists during or following a sexual display or act.[36]

If a person watched all of the slasher films included in the Molitor and Sapolsky study they would have seen sex and violence paired 92 times. Sexual behavior included female characters shown in undergarments, partially or completely nude, or teasing or enticing male characters in a sensual manner. Couples seen kissing, fondling, or involved in sexual intercourse were also coded as acts of sex. According to Molitor and Sapolski, sexual behavior is considered linked to violence when one of three types of circumstances occurred. A partially nude female was shown being tortured by the central villain.

In other cases, violence immediately followed, or interrupted, a sexual act, such as when a couple was shown kissing passionately and the central villain then attacked both or one character. The third type of circumstance consisted of continuous cuts between two scenes, one sexual and one violent. This third type of sex and violence combination occurred to a lesser extent than the other two.[3]

Changing patterns

Molitor and Sapolsky looked at the mixture of sex and violence in films of the 1980s versus those of the 1990s. Films from the 1980s contained an average of 9.3 instances of sexuality and 3.1 of these were linked to violence. However, films during the 1990s contained a low number of instances where sex was combined with violence, so a comparison between the 1980 and 1990 samples was not conducted.[3] The data do suggest that while the amount of sexual content in the most popular slasher films of the past two decades has remained constant, sexual displays immediately before or during acts of violence have been reduced to a rare event in slasher films released in the 1990s.[3]

The study also reported that the number of violent acts against males increased across the 1980s, but tended to decrease for females. Apparently, the producers were criticized for the depiction of women as victims in slasher films, so they toned down such attacks.[3]

Effects on viewers

Linz and Donnerstein conducted a study on the way viewers reacted to sex combined with violence in slasher films, and found that "Studies show that pleasant, mildly arousing sex scenes that are paired with graphic violence can be expected to diminish aversive reaction to violence in the long run." [36] The combination of sex and violence is shown to grab viewers' attention, making it a more "depthful" process.[36]

Carol J. Clover argues in her article that "horror and pornography are the only two genres specifically devoted to the arousal of bodily sensation. They exist solely to horrify and stimulate, not always respectively, and their ability to do so is the sole measure of their success: they 'prove themselves upon our pulses".[4] Exposure to scenes of explicit violence combined with sexual images is believed to affect males’ emotional reactions to film violence. It has also shown to lead males to be less disturbed by scenes of extreme violence and degradation directed at women, claims the Molitor and Sapolski article.[3] Carol Clover states that the implied audience for slasher films are "largely young and largely male".[39]

Studies show that the most popular slasher films of the 1990s are more violent than the most commercially successful slasher films released in the 1980s. Specifically, according to this article, there was a 44% increase in the number of violent acts suffered by innocent victims in the 1990s crop of slasher films. Slasher films of the 1990s portray an act of brutal violence an average of once every two and a half minutes. Also, characters are shown in terror an average of three and a half minutes longer in slasher films in the 1990s.[3] According to Gloria Cowan and Margaret O'Brien, experimental studies have been done to show the effects of viewing R-rated violent films have found "increased acceptance of interpersonal violence and rape mythology". These studies have also found desensitization with "carry-over attitude effects" towards victims of violence. These studies have shown, that after viewing slasher films, college male students have less sympathy for rape victims, see them as less injured, and are more likely to endorse the myth that women enjoy rape.[37]

In their article, James B. Weaver and Dolf Zillmann explain "watching horror films is said to offer viewers a socially sanctioned opportunity to perform behaviors consistent with traditional gender stereotypes and early work on this topic found that males exposed to a sexually violent slasher film increased their acceptance of beliefs that some violence against women is justified and that it may have positive consequences".[40]

See also

References
  1. "Film Genres: Horror films". Dartmouth Library. 25 September 2019. Retrieved 4 October 2019.
  2. Bass, Bass (19 March 1988). "Do Slasher Films Breed Real-Life Violence?". Boston Globe.
  3. Sapolsky, Burry S.; Molitor, Fred; Luque, Sarah (2003). "Sex and Violence in Slasher Films: Re-examining the Assumptions". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 80: 28–38. doi:10.1177/107769900308000103. S2CID 143908234.
  4. Clover, Carol J. (1987). Film "Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher" Check |url= value (help). Representations (20): 187–228. doi:10.2307/2928507. JSTOR 2928507.
  5. King, Neal (2005). "Boy Jokes: Content Analysis Of Hollywood Misogyny In Mean Girl And Slasher Movies". Conference Papers: 1–20.
  6. Rockoff, A (2002). R Going to Pieces: The Rise and Fall of the Slasher Film 1978-1986. NC: McFarland & Company, Inc.
  7. Linz, D.G.; Donnerstein, E.; Penrod, S. (1988). "Effects of long-term exposure to violent and sexually degrading depictions of women". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35 (1): 758–768. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.55.5.758.
  8. Weaver, James B. III (1991). "Are 'Slasher' Horror Films Sexually Violent? A Content Analysis". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 35 (3): 385–392. doi:10.1080/08838159109364133.
  9. Wester, Maisha (2012). "Torture Porn And Uneasy Feminisms: Re-Thinking (Wo)Men In Eli Roth's Hostel Films". Quarterly Review of Film & Video. 29 (5): 387–400. doi:10.1080/10509201003719258. S2CID 191339016.
  10. Kilker, Robert (2006). "All Roads Lead To The Abject: The Monstrous Feminine And Gender Boundaries In Stanley Kubrick's "The Shining". Literature Film Quarterly. 34 (1): 54–63.
  11. Kristeva, Julia (1980). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. New York City: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0231053471.
  12. Briefel, Aviva (March 2005). "Monster Pains: Masochism, Menstruation, and Identification in the Horror Film". Film Quarterly. 58 (3): 16–27. doi:10.1525/fq.2005.58.3.16. ISSN 0015-1386.
  13. Lindsey, Shelley Stamp (1996). "Horror, Femininity, and Carrie's Monstrous Puberty". In Grant, Barry Keith (ed.). The Dread of Difference: Gender and the Horror Film. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. pp. 279–95. ISBN 978-0292772458.
  14. Peers, Juliette (January 24, 2016). "'Elaborately justified misogyny': The Hateful Eight and Daisy Domergue". The Conversation. The Conversation US. Retrieved 5 March 2016.
  15. Bogart, Laura (January 18, 2016). "Hipster Misogyny: The Betrayal of "The Hateful Eight"". RogerEbert.com. Ebert Digital. Retrieved 5 March 2016.
  16. Tapley, Kristopher (December 26, 2015). "Claims of 'Hateful Eight' Misogyny 'Fishing for Stupidity,' Harvey Weinstein Says". Variety. Los Angeles, California: Penske Media Corporation. Retrieved March 7, 2016.
  17. Clover, Carol J. (1992). Men, Women and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691166292.
  18. Albuquerque De Boer, Raphael (July 2014). "Who is Going to Save the Final Girl?: The Politics of Representation in the Films Halloween and The Silence of the Lambs" (PDF). Repositório Institucional da UFSC: 71. Retrieved 18 September 2019.
  19. Williams, Linda. When The Woman Looks
  20. Foster, Gwendolyn (Summer 1995). "Men, Women, and Chain Saws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film by Carol J. Clover (review)". Prairie Schooner. 69 (2): 156–161.
  21. Rieser, Klaus (April 1, 2001). "Masculinity and Monstrosity: Characterization and Identification in the Slasher Film". Men and Masculinities. 3 (4): 370–92. doi:10.1177/1097184X01003004002. S2CID 145588307.
  22. Kimmel, Michael S.; Aronson, Amy (2008). The Gendered Society Reader (3 ed.). New York City: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199927494.
  23. McIntosh, Peggy (1998). "White Privilege and Male Privilege". In Anderson, Margaret; Hill Collins, Patricia (eds.). Race, Class, and Gender: An Anthology. San Francisco, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company. pp. 76–87. ISBN 978-0534528799.
  24. Molitor, Fred; Sapolsky, Barry S. (Spring 1993). "Sex, Violence, and Victimization in Slasher Films". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 37 (2): 233–42. doi:10.1080/08838159309364218.
    1. 5 The Mystical Pregnancy (Tropes vs. Women). Dir. Anita Sarkeessian. Perf. Anita Sarkeessian. Youtube, 2011.
  26. Clover, Carol J. (1996). In The Dread of Difference: Gender and the Horror Film (Grant, Barry Keith ed.). Austin, Texas: Univ. of Texas Press. pp. 66–113.
  27. Huddleston, Jason (2005). "Unmasking The Monster: Hiding And Revealing Male Sexuality In John Carpenter's Halloween". Journal of Visual Literacy. 25 (2): 219–236. doi:10.1080/23796529.2005.11674626. S2CID 192825579.
  28. Mulvey, Laura (1999). "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" (PDF). In Braudy, Leo; Cohen, Marshall (eds.). Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings. pp. 833–44. ISBN 978-0195365627.
  29. "Misrecognition and Identity," Ciné-Tracts, vol. 3, no. 3 (Fall 1980), pp. 25–31.
  30. Cipriani, Casey (February 10, 2015). "Sorry, Ladies: Study on Women in Film and Television Confirms The Worst". IndieWire. Los Angeles, California: Penske Media Corporation. Retrieved October 20, 2018.
  31. Smith, Arial (August 2014). "This Essay Was Not Built On an Ancient Indian Burial Ground". Offscreen. Melbourne, Australia: Kai Branch. Retrieved April 11, 2016.
  32. Benshoff, Harry M. (Winter 2000). "Blaxploitation Horror Films: Generic Reappropriation or Reinscription?". Cinema Journal. 39 (2): 31–50. doi:10.1353/cj.2000.0001. JSTOR 1225551.
  33. Smith, Arial (February 13, 2015). "Indigenous Cinema and the Horrific Reality of Colonial Violence". Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society. Retrieved April 15, 2016.
  34. Blackwell, Ashlee (February 10, 2015). "Black (Fear) On Both Sides: Thinking About Candyman, Blacula and Race in Horror Films". comingsoon.net. Retrieved April 11, 2016.
  35. Complex, Valerie (July 31, 2015). "Will It Get Better For Black People In the Horror Genre?". Black Girl Nerds. Virginia Beach, Virginia: Black Girl Nerds, LLC.
  36. Linz, Daniel; Donnerstein, Edward (1994). "Dialogue: Sex and Violence in Slasher Films: A Reinterpretation". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 38 (2): 243–246. doi:10.1080/08838159409364261.
  37. Cowan, Glora; O'Brien, Margaret (1990). "Gender and Survival vs. Death in Slasher Films: A Content Analysis". Sex Roles. 23 (3–4): 187–196. doi:10.1007/BF00289865. S2CID 143217961.
  38. Babener, Liahna (1992). "Patriarchal Politics in Fatal Attraction" (PDF). Journal of Popular Culture. 26 (3): 25–34. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3840.1992.2603_25.x. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  39. Clover, Carol (1992). Man, Women and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film. Princeton: Princeton DP.
  40. Zillmann, D.; Weaver, J. (1996). Gender-socialization theory of reactions to horrow. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 85–88.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.