The Flip Side: Sexualized Spaces and the Privileging of Heterosexuality
There is an undeniable power held by societal norms. These norms have gradually created an association between spaces and masculinity as they have pushed the heteronormative idea that the male should express masculinity while the female expresses femininity. This perilous idea marginalizes individuals who do not identify with masculinity or femininity in a way that their perceived gender is expected to. As if this wasn’t enough, societal norms have shown to dictate more than just the individual. In society, one can see that public spaces like the locker room have fallen victim of the heteronormative views held by many, creating a dangerous atmosphere in these spaces as it can transform the emphasis of power and masculinity into forms of aggression.
If the correlation of masculinity to public spaces is examined in closer detail, it is evident that this correlation has become prevalent. The film industry, for example, has done well in making such an association prevalent as various films utilize locker rooms to highlight what society defines as masculinity. Such instances can be seen in popular works like Glee, Friday Night Lights, and Remember the Titans to name a few in which male figures are characterized with machismo, power, strength, and sexual tendencies as expected from society. In Remember the Titans, there is a presence of machismo in the locker room as can be seen through the way in which the players taunt one another about having spent the night with the other’s mother. As can be seen, the connection between gender and spaces has been pushed for by society in a way that makes it seem that every male must act in this same masculine way and uphold the power, strength, and sexual attributes often associated with the male.
In the 2016 multimedia installation titled Head in the Game, artist and sculptor Alexander Glass depicts the way society has developed a mode of exclusion, as society members often marginalize individuals who do not fit the set heteronormative standards. In this essay I will talk about Glass’s abstract depiction of the ways in which, as described by Slobhan B. Somerville’s definition of “Queer” in the book Keywords for American Cultural Studies, “heteronormativity is a form of power that exerts its effects on both gay and straight individuals, often through unspoken practices and institutional structures.” Glass utilizes specific art elements like images to depict the implications of heteronormative ideas in society through depictions of strength that reveal to the viewer that society often ties masculinity to spaces therefore leading to an unfair correlation of masculinity to the locker room that excludes those who don’t show masculine attributes.
Glass’s installation is a vibrant display that takes on the appearance of a locker room. At the center of the installation, the viewer finds a bench and a hanging rack with four t-shirts, a gym bag placed upon the bench, and tube socks on the floor. These objects help characterize the area as a locker room. Glass’s installation is predominantly white with small bursts of color. In addition, not once in the installation is the entire human body depicted. By doing so, Glass’s use of abstraction is, as described by David Getsy in the chapter “Appearing Differently Abstraction’s Transgender and Queer Capacities” from Pink Labour on Golden Streets: Queer Art Practices by Erharter et al, “a way of thinking about the varieties of identification that operates for individuals. With regards to gender, abstraction’s avoidance of the figure offers the possibility to at least partially circumvent the tendency to read bodies as if they signify simply the gender of the person with that body.” In other words, Glass’s avoidance of using complete bodies gives him flexibility with what the body parts he uses will represent. This abstraction avoids having the viewer read the body based on appearance and form conclusions about sexuality, as is commonly done.
Glass’s emphasis on the correlation of masculinity to the area is best depicted in the frames hung throughout the room. To the side of the bench, Glass places an image of an arm holding a towel. The abstraction of Glass’s image leaves room for the viewer to conclude whether the arm is flinging the towel or picking it up. This image emphasizes two things. First, the locker room area to some individuals is an area of comfort as the individual can be ridding himself of a towel which is commonly used to conceal. With this, Glass highlights the fact that areas like the locker room, are seen as areas where men can flaunt their bodies and their masculinity. However, the viewer is additionally prompted to think about the flip side. The arm can also be interpreted as picking up the towel and thus the complete opposite message is depicted. Rather than having the locker room be an area of comfort, it can be an area of discomfort and thus the towel is used as a way of concealing the body making it unreadable to those who wish to “discern gender from a quick glance at a person or a body” (Getsy 48). Glass’s use of abstraction then allows the viewer to decipher and think about the two distinct ways of feeling in a locker room.
Furthermore, the complexity of Glass’s installation is further revealed in the ambiguity of the second image which depicts what appears to be a male chest with his arms placed upon the buttons of a dress shirt. With this image, Glass once more creates uncertainty in the viewer. Close examination of the image can leave the viewer wondering as to whether the male individual is buttoning up or buttoning down his shirt. Once more, Glass encompasses two distinct feelings within his installation. On the one hand, the buttoning down of the shirt can depict the idea of comfort, the idea that the male can be free and thus indulge in their masculinity. On the flip side, however, the buttoning up of the shirt could highlight the discomfort felt by those who choose not to or do not feel comfortable with the expression of masculinity. As a result, Glass once more sheds light on the way that those who do not identify with masculinity, and those who do not fit into the set standard of a heteronormative world, might feel out of place in public locations that over emphasize masculinity.
One thing to note within the installation is Glass’s choice of colors. Glass chooses to stick to a palette of three colors; blue, white, and orange. While some might think that colors are just colors, the viewer might find that color in art is seldom coincidental and so examination of Glass’s color choice can present some deeper meanings. According to Paul Stella’s book Chromophilia: The Story of Color in Art, “Blue is the invisible becoming visible.” The viewer can see that Glass may be highlighting the invisibility of the flipside and the over masculinity commonly stressed in the locker room with the experience of those who do not fit the standards expected for their perceived gender. As noted in the article “Color Wheel Pro: Color Meaning”, “In heraldry, orange is symbolic of strength and endurance.” Thus, the viewer might see that Glass’s color choice might not be a complete accident. The use of blue allows the viewer to think about what is invisible while the orange creates the emphasis of strength commonly associated with the locker rooms. In this way, Glass might be fortifying his argument by providing commentary, with color, on the way that locker rooms have a correlation between strength and masculinity while also showing that there are those who do not identify with this masculinity. Additionally, Glass chooses to have the surrounding area completely blank, creating a mood of exclusion as it helps emphasize the solitude of the objects in the room. Glass’s color scheme thus allows for further possible interpretation that once more highlights the role of masculinity and the feeling of exclusion that is created because of it.
Within Glass’s piece, the viewer can identify an individual being overly comfortable with themselves while also thinking about the individuals who is not. Clearly, Glass comments on the idea that being boastful about one’s masculinity within the locker room is something that not everyone identifies with. Glass is able to show that while the locker room has transitioned into an area of masculinity and power, there is the undeniable fact that not everyone who chooses to go into the locker room resonates with this atmosphere of masculinity.
As made clear through the piece, the locker room can become an area of discomfort as it can make an individual feel obligated to follow the expectations within this space. In recent conversation, even our now President utilized the aspect of masculinity correlated to the locker room to justify his actions. When a recording of, now President, Trump was released in which he was heard speaking about his behavior towards women where he forcibly touched them, Trump, justified his words claiming that it was simply “locker room talk”. This idea, of correlating masculine power and sexual tendencies to the locker rooms, is it creates expectations for what occurs within a locker leading to a questioning of the extent of the actions taking place within these spaces. If masculinity is supposed to represent power and strength, does the locker room then promote the use of this power and strength to exert dominance over others? Through his installation, Glass questions whether there is a need to have these binding expectations for what happens in a locker room instead of a space that allows for diverse behaviors. The idea of having expectations for what happens in a locker room, highlights the fact that the correlations between masculinity and spaces is a dangerous thing, as it can other those who do not identify with these characteristics while also creating misleading correlations of masculinity with these spaces.
As seen in the 2016 article, What exactly Is ‘Locker-Room Talk’? Let an Expert Explain, author Bill Pennington emphasizes the fact that Trump’s use of the locker room as a scapegoat cannot be justified because, given the author’s experience and familiarity with the locker room, he has never experienced this way of talking. As described by Pennington, President Trump’s excuse of locker room talk is an example of the way in which these spaces have become an area where the male is supposed to express these extreme forms of strength, power, and sexual tendencies. Glass’s installation thus prompts the viewer to see that this unfair correlation can make someone who is trying to use the locker room for its main purpose, feel discomfort or even marginalized because they themselves don’t express the characteristics tied with the locker room.
Not only do the ideas of masculinity tied with the locker room create discomfort, but it also gives off the generalized idea that males in the locker room all partake in the form of an aggressive expression of power that can excusably pass as simply masculinity. In response to President Trump’s statement The View host, Sara Haines, states, “That line right there, when he said that, it was just about power and aggressiveness.” In other words, this misleading correlation creates excuses for the male who is aggressive, it creates a power struggle not only for women but for those who must be in the locker room and choose not to take part in this machismo. For the male who chooses not to express this over masculinity, it can be difficult to have to live up to these expectations or even be surrounded by them. Glass’s abstraction allows the viewer to see that there is a correlation of masculinity and the locker room, and as evident through President Trump’s statements, this correlation is prominent. Glass’s installation allows the viewer to see that not everyone chooses to express themselves in that manner. One thing I believe Glass is trying to emphasize is that the correlation between machismo and the locker room is an unfair one, it is another way of excluding the individual who doesn’t go by what society thinks they should be like based on their appearance.
In his installation, Glass sheds light on the fact that these sexualized spaces have become yet another form of exclusion for the individual who chooses to go about life in their own way, for example, the male choosing not to display masculinity as expected by society but instead display femininity and vice versa. Glass’s installation allows the viewer to think about the locker room and reflect on what correlations we make with it while also emphasizing the parts of the locker room that most people don’t think about. I myself have fallen into the thought where thinking about the locker brings up the image of a built man who is strong. Yet Glass’s installation creates a room that allows me to think of the flip side and see that the generalized way of thinking of the locker room is a dangerous thing to do as it creates another form of exclusion that, like other forms of exclusion, should be eliminated.
Work Cited
Erharter, Christiane, et al. “Appearing Differently: Abstraction’s Transgender & Queer Capacities”. Pink Labour on Golden Streets: Queer Art Practices, Sternberg Press, 2015, pp. 48–51.
Hendler, Glenn, et al. “Gender”. Keywords for American Cultural Studies, New York University Press, 2014, pp.203–211.
Paul, Stella. Chromaphilia: The Story of Color in Art. Phaidon Press, 2017
Pennington, Bill. “What Exactly Is ‘Locker-Room Talk’? Let an Expert Explain.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 10 Oct. 2016, www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/sports/what-exactly-is-locker-room-talk-let-an-expert-explain.html.
The View. ‘View’ Hosts React To 2005 Video of Donald Trump’s “Locker Room” Talk”. Online video clip. YouTube. YouTube, 10 Oct. 2016. Web. 30 Nov. 2017.
“Color Wheel Pro — See Color Theory in Action.” Color Wheel Pro: Color Meaning, QSX Software Group, 2015, www.color-wheel-pro.com/color-meaning.html.
Version:1.0 StartHTML:000000195 EndHTML:000104857 StartFragment:000104677 EndFragment:000104775 StartSelection:000104677 EndSelection:000104775 SourceURL:http://www.easybib.com/cite/view
“Head In the Game”. Alexander Glass, ww.alexanderglasssculpture.com/head-in-the-game.html.
