CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Gender issues, sexuality and violence in the X-Men series
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gender issues, sexuality and violence in the X-Men series

post #1 of 100
Thread Starter 
Disclaimer: This isn't about Bryan Singer (or Ian McKellan, or Alan Cumming) being gay. The subtext was already there, transferred over from the comics. That may have been an attraction for Singer in the first place, but by the third movie the consequences are unavoidable even without Singer's presence.

With the attention given to the upcoming Wolverine movie, it occurred to me that, while that movie will likely be fun, it will probably lose the grace and elegance of the first two (even parts of the third) X-Men movies.

A lot of that grace and elegance stemmed from the implication of what super powers meant for the characters as sexual beings. I'm going to get into weird Watchmen territory here, so bear with me.

Along with mutation working as a metaphor for racial prejudice, I'm arguing that it also works as sexuality. Not in the obvious "Bobby coming out scene" kind of way, but in a more subversive way.

I always got the impression that Xavier and Magneto were ex-lovers. The comics go out of their way to have long lost children show up to prove that the two men have had sex with women at least a few times, but the movies seemed to purposefully leave that out. What's left is two spurned lovers, with Xavier seemingly neutered by his past with Magneto.

Confined to a chair, Xavier is impotent in body and encourages it of his students. Both Jean and Cyclops are forbidden to let loose with their powers, and their physical relationship is seemingly chaste. Rogue can't touch anyone. Storm is constantly paired with asexual companions (Nightcrawler, Beast). They are all, however, encouraged to dress up in bondage gear and take out their aggression with violence.

When Wolverine shows up, however, he is sex on two legs. He epitomizes masculinity, with his hair and muscles and phallic symbols jutting out of his knuckles. Strange, however, that he pursues virginal Jean for three movies and is then taken aback when she finally comes onto him. He never even pursues casual sex with Storm. As well, the only person that can control him is Magneto, who controls metal, the secret hidden beneath Wolverine's surface.

I'm arguing that, as presented in the movies, Wolverine is troubled sexually. In the first two movies his big fights are with women (the fight with Sabertooth is, ahem, premature as Cyclops blasts him out): Mystique and Lady Deathstrike. Although Mystique struts around naked, she appears to have no private parts and can be both genders. For half the fight she looks like Wolverine. When Wolverine finally does put her down, it's by impaling her with his phallic symbols, and she looks like Storm at the time. Deathstrike, by comparison, is a female Wolverine that is killed by being injected with seminal-esque fluid.

It's as if Wolverine loathes his own confused sexuality and lashes out at these women that are mirror images of himself, in order to punish himself. This is highlighted in X-Men 2 when Mystique comes onto Wolverine in the tent, turned on by him having penetrated her, and he rejects her. She asks him "what do you really want?" morphing into Jean, then Storm, then Rogue, and finally settling on Stryker.

Speaking of Rogue, notice how she only ever absorbs men in the movies? Her boyfriend, Wolverine and Magneto in X-Men, Bobby and Pyro in X-Men 2, and Colossus in X-Men 3. The scene when she absorbs Wolverine's healing ability is especially troubling: she's young, it's in a bedroom, they're both half-naked, he's penetrated her, there's blood. Ewww.

Finally, the aforementioned Jean. Her initial experiments with great amounts of power in the first two movies show her as if in mid-orgasm, and she's pretty much a horn dog in the third movie. Xavier had tried to prevent this, however, for fear of insatiable female sexuality. Combine that with X-Men 3's talk of the "cure," and one can't held but think of the so-called gay gene and female genital mutilation.

IN CONCLUSION, Wolverine will probably unintentionally come across as homo-erotic along the lines of Predator, but it won't analyze or dissect that homo-eroticism the way the X-Men movies (unintentionally may) have.
post #2 of 100
That's some interesting analysis. I think the issue of assexulaity mainly comes from the fact you're trying to appeal to a mass audience and not necessarily a desire to see these guys fuck on camera.

However, I get the feeling how long Wolverine's been around and invulnerable to VD. You bet your ass he's had some.
post #3 of 100
The X-Men Homosexual subtext is not particularly subtle, though you may be reading too much into it.
post #4 of 100
good write up, now I wont be able to watch the X-Men films the same way..I will now only think of Prof. X and Magneto as past lovers.
post #5 of 100
I really don't believe that. I think that's reading way too into it. And moreso because of McKellan.

Sometimes I get really tired of reading or hearing about how if two guys have a deep friendship that it automatically means they had a thing going on.
post #6 of 100
Thread Starter 
My inspiration for this thread came from, of all things, Bladerunner. I'd seen several times before how Deckard only kills women in that movie.

I know I'm reading too much into this. Don't think I'm going to try to teach a class or anything. I just think there's some interesting playing around with gender roles in the movies. For instance, Jean's tearful farewell to Cyclops in X-Men 2 is said through Xavier.

The homosexual subtext isn't subtle, but I'm arguing that there are implications of sexual repression, gay and straight, leading to violence in these movies.

Don't you think it adds a fascinating layer to their relationship to have Xavier and Magneto be ex-lovers? With no biological heirs, as well, they've surrounded themselves with artificial families.
post #7 of 100
I guess in this instance, like TDK, I don't think there's meant to be direct corelation to the topical concerns it raises. Mutant qua homosexual is not even really that hidden a concept ("Have you ever tried not being a mutant?"), but more that the filmmaker has put some interesting concepts and corelaries into the subject. Taking it further as a 1:1 thing I think is kind of missing the point, because the filmmaker has already signaled his interests.

Where I think Death of the Author comes in is when that subtext is more apparent to the viewer, though not directly stated. Madagascar strikes me as a film about the love of two gay men who are forced to deal with a world outside of New York where their love is considered unnatural. But gaying up a story that's already fairly gay is kind of like putting a hat on a hat. That being a mutant is compared to being a homosexual, and the films are about tolerance doesn't mean that all X-Men are gay. Though the McKellen Stewart ex-lovers thing I think came up before from the makers.
post #8 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
My inspiration for this thread came from, of all things, Bladerunner. I'd seen several times before how Deckard only kills women in that movie.
That's not necessarily subtext. I think it just happened that way.
post #9 of 100
Thread Starter 
Deckard only kills women. He practically rapes Rachel. He seems oddly attracted to Batty's sensuality.
post #10 of 100
Deckard killing woman, I mean, what is the Zhora's death but watching something beautiful painfully die. Since the film is about getting to the ending where Roy makes you feel empathy for him, that Deckard kills women stacks the deck.
post #11 of 100
Interesting thoughts. I think some of that is reaching (although I love the idea that Wolvie is injecting Deathstrike with metaphorical baby batter), but the idea of young people struggling to control powerful forces emerging from within definitely works more than one way in movies and in their source material. I'd bet that Singer intends for there to be some (unfulfilled?) sexual history between Gandalf and Jean Luc, but you do raise an interesting question as to what sexual message(s), if any, Singer was trying to send with Wolverine.*

*I mean, the actor's name is JACKMAN, do we need to draw a map?
post #12 of 100
And that Batty is a slave, and they are a slave class, known for their strength, etc., arguably BR is more of a commentary on race than sexuality.
post #13 of 100
Thread Starter 
Ahhh yes, but wasn't one of the big fears of a slave revolt in the U.S. that African-American men would go around raping all the women?

Deckard kills a stripper and a prostitute. Rachel, the virgin, kills Leon, who was just about to penetrate Deckard. Batty kisses Tyrell, then penetrates him.

You can tell I've got phallic symbols on the brain. A professor once told me that everything is about "sex, death, and religion," so the three are intertwined in my mind.
post #14 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
Ahhh yes, but wasn't one of the big fears of a slave revolt in the U.S. that African-American men would go around raping all the women?
Not really, that's more of a disgusting sterotype about black men.
post #15 of 100
Tyrell is God (Fucker/father), so most of the symbolism there I think has to do with that. I mean, if you have a read go with it, but I tend to think some subtexts are more on point than others. But when dealing with a text that is about creating empathy for the other, whatever outsider you can think of can likely be placed in without too much work. As Hampton Fancher said, the answer is irrelevant, it's the question that's interesting.
post #16 of 100
Thread Starter 
Yeah, but that's what I'm talking about: stereotypes. The notion of the Impotent white man representing authority that is threatened by strength and sexuality. Whether it be mutants or replicants.
post #17 of 100
I think what's also interesting in terms of the X-Men universe is that the powers depicted always have some great positive and ergo you have your superiority. You never really see or rarely see the mutants who either have useless or negative mutations (As in the case with the huge majority of them in real life).
post #18 of 100
sometimes and adamantium claw is just an adamantium claw.
post #19 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
You never really see or rarely see the mutants who either have useless or negative mutations
Porcupine kid from The Last Stand ranks up there as the most useless of mutant abilities shown in the films. And he actually tried to take on Storm! So not only does he have a useless power but he's also dumb as shit.
post #20 of 100
Thread Starter 
Wolverine also smokes cigars. Eh? Eh?

Something else to mention. I remember reading an early draft of X-Men (very similar to the finished product, except Wolverine was in that machine at the end because his adamantium powered it...or something). In that draft, during the scene when Senator Kelly first meets Magneto & co., Magneto and Mystique (as Gyrich) kiss. Would have made an interesting visual.

Also, I read a review of an early draft of X-Men 3 at AICN that said Wolverine and Storm, in Jean's absence, DID have a relationship.

I'm just saying.
post #21 of 100
Another potential problem with this reading (in addition to Dre's good "puttina a hat on a hat" point) is that it's still dealing in sort of strict, binary interpretations of sexuality. There's this sort of either/or mentality that emerges when we interpret the characters as being specifically gay, subtextually. The examples given might not suggest repression as much as fluidity.

For instance, the fact that there's all kinds of sexual imagery surrounding Wolverine (some of which might indicate strong heterosexuality, some of which might indicate forced penetration of both male and female victims, some of which might indicate homosexual urges) may be meant to represent that he's a sexual being, no preference necessary. Plus, the idea that he's deeply closted doesn't really work with the character, overall. It's not repression that's the chief driving force behind Wolverine's character, but, rather the lack thereof. It doesn't really make sense that a near-feral animal-man type would play down his sexuality to conform to social conventions.
post #22 of 100
Thread Starter 
But being around the X-Men has "tamed" him, as sexpot Jean says in X-Men 3.
post #23 of 100
In the comics, the Morlocks were a kind of attempt to represent mutants as freakier or less "super". Not that the movies did much with the concept.
post #24 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post
though you may be reading too much into it.
This doesn't sound like the Andre who so fervently defended a certain text reading of WALL*E or FERRIS BUELLER.
post #25 of 100
The problem, as I said, and though I know you're joshing, is that the homosexual subtext is already there. Again, with the other texts, I was reading them in a completely different way than most people do, but found evidence in the text, which may or may not have been intentional, adn then applied the real world to help show what I was saying. When a text states mutants = homosexuals, to then keep going strikes me as missing the point.
post #26 of 100
Right, and it also means Magneto and X don't have to be lovers to be lovers.
post #27 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Kimbell View Post
Right, and it also means Magneto and X don't have to be lovers to be lovers.
How can they be lovers, if they can't be friends? How can they start over when the fighting never ends?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post
The problem, as I said, and though I know you're joshing, is that the homosexual subtext is already there. Again, with the other texts, I was reading them in a completely different way than most people do, but found evidence in the text, which may or may not have been intentional, adn then applied the real world to help show what I was saying. When a text states mutants = homosexuals, to then keep going strikes me as missing the point.
Understood.
post #28 of 100
I was talking about Magneto and Jason X.
post #29 of 100
I thought Prof. X had a thing with Moira McTaggert.
post #30 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
I thought Prof. X had a thing with Moira McTaggert.
Beard.
post #31 of 100
This is actually the kind of shit my friends and I talk about in the middle of the night, but I had to praise Dellamorte for this statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post
Madagascar strikes me as a film about the love of two gay men who are forced to deal with a world outside of New York where their love is considered unnatural.
I can't believe I missed that one, especially after getting into a rather large argument with someone about Ice Age being all about why men don't need women.
post #32 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
Something else to mention. I remember reading an early draft of X-Men (very similar to the finished product, except Wolverine was in that machine at the end because his adamantium powered it...or something). In that draft, during the scene when Senator Kelly first meets Magneto & co., Magneto and Mystique (as Gyrich) kiss. Would have made an interesting visual.
I always assumed Magneto and Mystique were occasionally lovers. McKellen's delivery of "You have no idea" in X2 just sounded way too deliberately sly for them to not be fucking.

Thing is, just because I could, I also always assumed Mystique morphed herself into a male for that purpose. Take that for what it's worth.

Also, the Blade Runner thing...not to go too far off topic, but Deckard doesn't rape Rachel. Since he's a Replicant, he's unable to empathize enough to go about sex and romance the "right" way
post #33 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post
Also, the Blade Runner thing...not to go too far off topic, but Deckard doesn't rape Rachel. Since he's a Replicant, he's unable to empathize enough to go about sex and romance the "right" way
Depending on the version you watch, I suppose...
post #34 of 100
I like the reading of the X-Men as puritanical and Magneto's Brotherhood as hedonistic. Wolverine's got a foot in both worlds. Jean goes to the wrong side by giving in to the sexuality/power. I do think this sexual subtext exists apart from the homosexuality supertext, though.
post #35 of 100
Thing is, none of that is really unique to the X-Men, though, is it? Generally, with archetypical heroes, the good guys are sexless, or at the very least, their sexual/romantic entanglements are within the most conservative definitions of the terms, the villains have no moral limits. The only thing different with the Brotherhood is that these stories partially justify their hedonism. The film portrays them as right in ideology, wrong in execution.
post #36 of 100
No, it's pretty unique here. The villains and the heroes have the same power source - one group is trying to 'control' that while the other is exploiting it.
post #37 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by devincf View Post
I like the reading of the X-Men as puritanical and Magneto's Brotherhood as hedonistic. Wolverine's got a foot in both worlds. Jean goes to the wrong side by giving in to the sexuality/power. I do think this sexual subtext exists apart from the homosexuality supertext, though.
Definitely. And Scott, being somewhat repressed, is destroyed when confronted with this power...

The movies definitely amplify the notions of sexuality in this regard. In fact, the homosexual stuff that seems so very obvious in Singer's movies (and Ratner's by inheritance) is barely even subtextual in the comics. The racial overtones get a lot more play there.
post #38 of 100
Also, the Brotherhood is far more hedonistic in the films. Mystique tries to seduce Wolverine (apparently not as strategy, but for fun), Magneto makes knowing references about Mystique, etc. In this way, they're almost a hybrid of the comics version of the Brotherhood and the more overtly hedonistic Hellfire Club.

In the comics, Magneto is arguably just as principled and restrained as Xavier. It's a simplistic version of the Malcolm X/MLK dichotomy. He's not about corrupting at all, but about convincing other mutants that his political ideology is more appropriate.
post #39 of 100
Anything to the notion that Professor X, in his wheelchair, is effectively neutered? Or that Nightcrawler represses himself through his religion?
post #40 of 100
Yeah, post one on the wheelchair.
post #41 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
Storm is constantly paired with asexual companions (Nightcrawler, Beast).
... who represent religious chastity/purity and clinical intellectualism respectively. Both with blue balls.

EDIT: Alan beat me to the Nightcrawler analysis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan "Nordling" Cerny View Post
Anything to the notion that Professor X, in his wheelchair, is effectively neutered?
Further exemplified by his "baldness".

Also, X3 isn't handled with the subtle mastery as the other 2, as seen with the large, helmeted (obviously phallic), and mysoginistic Juggernaut (BITCH!) busting through walls to get to a little (innocence/virginity) girl. An unstoppable force that needs to be restrained. How very Grimm's fairy tale.
post #42 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan "Nordling" Cerny View Post
Or that Nightcrawler represses himself through his religion?
Definitely not an accident the one scene where he lets loose with the full force of his powers is underscored with a classical music piece about begging forgiveness for one's sins before God's wrath.

Nightcrawler enjoyed that attack more than he would ever admit.
post #43 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post
Definitely not an accident the one scene where he lets loose with the full force of his powers is underscored with a classical music piece about begging forgiveness for one's sins before God's wrath.

Nightcrawler enjoyed that attack more than he would ever admit.
God, now I love that scene even more.

Didn't Nightcrawler totally forgo his religious beliefs pretty early in the Claremont run and have all kinds of implied sex, or was the Catholic angle just not pushed back then?
post #44 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe Powers View Post
God, now I love that scene even more.

Didn't Nightcrawler totally forgo his religious beliefs pretty early in the Claremont run and have all kinds of implied sex, or was the Catholic angle just not pushed back then?
Not all Catholics spend their time in confession booths and self-flagellating. Some even *gasp* have sex before marriage. Nightcrawler, at least when I was reading in the 80s, was always an interesting mix of spirituality and swashbuckle-y fun. Claremont played up both of those aspects of his personality pretty regularly.
post #45 of 100
I wasn't implying that it was normal for Catholics to all "spend their time in confession booths and self-flagellating." In both the movies and the animated series (which has been re-running on cable every night) Nightcrawler's religious beliefs were very hard lined, and I couldn't really remember what I'd read in the '80s. I was simply trying to find a short hand way to write that. Sorry if I somehow offended.
post #46 of 100
I think it just depended on who was writing the comic at the time, hell Chuck Austen had Nightcrawler renounce his religion and leave the priesthood and gave him two dicks on top of that.
post #47 of 100
TWO DICKS! Sounds like I missed something good.
post #48 of 100
Clearly you are not familiar with Chuck Austen's writing.
post #49 of 100
Thread Starter 
Yeah, but Chuck Austen also had Nightcrawler as the son of Satan, and said that mutants are angels/demons. Best to forget he ever existed.

Chris Claremont was, however, fully aware of the homosexual subtext in the 80's. It's pretty public that he wanted Mystique to be be Nightcrawler's father (yep) and Destiny to be the mother, and for Storm (during her punk phase) to have a relationship with Yukio, Wolverine's one-time fling. Marvel wouldn't allow it. Claremont seems to be like Joss Whedon with his love for lesbians.

Thanks for pointing out Nightcrawler and Beast's religious/logical chastity better than I could DARKMITES.

I think I unintentionally emphasized the homosexual subtext more than I wished. I know it's already there. My intention was to focus more on what Devin mentioned, the fact that the X-Men repress their sexual urges while the Brotherhood embrace them. On the side of the X-Men that creates a lot of confusion and anger, whether or not the characters are gay or straight.

Another instance of gender role reversal: Jason Stryker. In reality he's a whithered away young man, but in his illusions he's a little girl.
post #50 of 100
Why can't a hero be hedonistic? I'm seriously wondering that. Will we ever see one? God forbid it's a WOMAN on top of that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Gender issues, sexuality and violence in the X-Men series