CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITIES
How the spectator perceives a character that deviates from the
illusionary gender core
MASTER THESIS
Name: Niek Tönissen
Date: 09 Juli 2014
Supervisor: Dr. Catherine Lord
Second Reader: Dr. Sudha Rajagopalan
Course: Media Studies (beroepsgeoriënteerde specialisatie)
2
CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITIES
How the spectator perceives a character that deviates from the illusionary gender core
Content
Content ................................................................................................................................................... 3
ALTERING THE ILLUSIONARY GENDER CORE ....................................................................................... 5
THE HUNGER GAMES: A GAME OF GENDERED ACTS ........................................................................ 15
COOL KIDS DON’T CRY: A STRONG FEMALE AGAINST THE BOYS ...................................................... 25
THE COGNITIVE RECEPTION OF A CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITY ............................................... 35
A NEW APPROACH............................................................................................................................. 47
Literature.............................................................................................................................................. 49
3
4
ALTERING THE ILLUSIONARY GENDER CORE
Akkie, a twelve year old blond girl is shown in medium close-up, her eyes are directed to her left side
in disbelieve. Her classmate Joep, a tough and tall boy, just claimed in front of the class that their
team will not be able to win at the upcoming final soccer tournament, since the rule is that every
team that is submitted must have as many boys as girls and he adds, addressing the words to Akkie
specifically shown through an over-the-shoulder from Akkie to Joep, ‘girls cannot play soccer!’.1 The
comment stirs up the emotions in class, the last class of elementary school, and especially Akkie who
is actually good at playing soccer is insulted and protests. Joep silences her by another mockery:
‘Why don’t you just draw some more of those dolls together with your little boyfriend?’,2 making
Laurens, a small blond boy that sits opposite of Akkie, also target of his jokes. Joep celebrates his
successful pun with his friend. When Miss Ina, the class’ teacher, asks why he thinks that girls are not
capable of playing soccer, Joep is not able to name a specific reason, but his aggressiveness and
unmistakeable disappointment in the tournament rules expresses a true belief in his opinion. Joep’s
apparent reason is that according to him girls are ‘different’. Another boy, Bram, tries to emphasize
this difference by grabbing his shirt at the level of his nipples and pulling it forward, imitating to have
breasts. He comically agrees that girls are different since they have breasts, resulting in laughter from
his classmates. The class falls silent again when Joep offensively remarks that ‘flat boards’3, indicating
that his female classmates do not have the feminine bodily curves yet, are equally incapable to play
soccer.
This scene shows that the class’ dynamics in the Dutch film Cool Kids Don't Cry (Achtste
Groepers Huilen Niet; Dennis Bots, 2012) are mainly based on a gender hierarchy, in which the male
and associated masculinity frequently tries to exercise their dominance over females and
subordinate males. In this scene Joep, as representation of masculinity, explicitly attacks the females,
especially Akkie, and the subordinate male, in this case Laurens, with his verbal mockeries to exercise
power over the considered weaker categories. The gender hierarchy is naturalized by cultural
hegemony, a concept that is addressed frequently in Gramsci’s work, who mainly focussed on
political theory with a Marxist line of thought. The term describes the relation between culture and
power, and is defined as ‘the ‘spontaneous’ consent given by the great masses of the population to
the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group; this consent is
‘historically’ caused by the prestige (and consequent confidence) which the dominant group enjoys
1
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Discussion in class about the soccer tournament, translation from Dutch: ‘En
meiden kunnen helemaal niet voetballen!’ (00:04:36)
2
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Discussion in class about the soccer tournament, translation from Dutch: ‘Ga
jij maar lekker poppetjes tekenen met je vriendje he.’ (00:04:44)
3
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Joep ridicules Akkie, translation from ‘platte planken’ (00:05:05)
5
because of its position and function in the world of production’.4 The sexual jibes and name-calling in
student cultures, as is explicitly shown in the scene from Cool Kids Don't Cry, defines the
‘appropriate’ from the ‘inappropriate’, the ‘normal’ from the ‘deviant’, the ‘moral’ from the
‘immoral’ and thereby produces ‘complex and dynamic heterosexual hierarchies in which the lives of
subordinate males, girls and young women were most open to sexual scrutiny especially from more
dominant male students’.5 Soccer, as a contact sport, is seen as a definite symbol for masculinity
(Connell and Messerschmidt 2005: p. 833) and therefore considered inappropriate for girls by the
dominant group. Cultural hegemony explains that the ruling group imposes a direction on social life
and manipulatively persuades to board the dominant fundamental norms (Lears 1985: p. 568),
simply because in the cultural discourse females and femininity are considered inferior and
oppositional to males, as is emphasized by Joep’s mentioning that girls are ‘different’. It shows that
the term ‘masculinity’ does not exist except in contrast with ‘femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 69) and
that ‘masculinity’ is actually defined as ‘non-femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 71). Hegemonic masculinity
tries to force females and subordinate men to accept these hegemonic masculine norms, which are
not merely posed on considered appropriate behaviour, but also on appropriate bodily appearances,
as the breast imitation and Joep’s final insult about ‘flat boards’ portrays.
In The Hunger Games (Gary Ross, 2012) and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (Francis
Lawrence, 2013) a dominant, fundamental group is explicitly shown to have the power to formulate
and even naturalize gender norms for subordinate groups. The Capitol’s residents, as representation
of the wealthy and dominant, desire lead character Katniss to be a feminine beauty and desire Peeta
to be the protective masculine man. Simultaneously the dominant Capitol practically forces the
sixteen year old boy and girl to get involved into a heterosexual love affair. It is ironic that when it
comes to the sense of altered self-presentation, men and women in the Capitol seem to live
according to the exact same rules and use the same gendered markers (Mitchell 2012: p. 12). Their
drag presence, including for instance colourful clothing, golden tattoo’s and make-up for women as
well for men, blurs the distinction between femininity and masculinity. However they desire the
inferior groups to conform to, what Judith Butler describes in her book Gender Trouble (1990) as, the
heterosexual matrix, in which the categories of sex, gender and desire are supposed to conform to
the social construction of compulsory heterosexual norms (Butler 1999: p. 42-43). Through cultural
hegemony a man has to be masculine and desire heterosexuality, while a woman needs to behave
feminine and also desire heterosexuality.
4
Gramsci in Lears, T.J. Jackson. ‘The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities’. The American
Historical Review, vol. 90, no. 3 (Jun. 1985): p. 568.
5
Nayak, Anoop, Mary Jane Kehily. ‘Gender Undone: Subversion, regulation and embodiment in the work of
Judith Buter’. British Journal of Sociology of Education (20 nov 2006): p. 461.
6
In young adolescent books and films the heteronormative representation is often present
where ‘males are under pressure to conform to expectations that they be powerful, handsome,
muscular, capable, and unemotional while females are to be attractive, fragile, slim, caring, and
emotional’.6 Parsons, a literature scholar with an expertise in children’s engagement with fiction,
states that historical and cultural contexts constituted the heteronormative representation of gender
in reality and in fiction narratives, and since the spectators itself are products of those hegemonic
contexts, the spectator has the habit of accepting this gendered discourse as natural, essential and
conclusive (Parsons 2004: p. 136). The embeddedness of standardized, appropriate gender acts
disguises the fact that the stories represented in fiction films are created and reproduced through
the dominant discourse and therefore conform to the heterosexual matrix (Parsons 2004: p. 136).
The continual portrayal of these power relations in the gender hierarchy are closely related
to the term ‘iterability’ which is introduced by Judith Butler, an American philosopher with a large
contribution to the field of gender theory. Iterability is a complex term that has been interpreted in
multiple ways. It describes the regularized and constrained stylized repetition of norms which are not
performed by a subject (Butler 1993: p. 95), but ‘this repetition is at once a reenactment and
reexperiencing of a set of meanings already socially established; it is the mundane and ritualized
form of their legitimation’.7 In Butler’s book Gender Trouble it was mistakenly understood that the
performativity of gender was a simple and willed form of cross-dressing (Campbell, Harbord: p. 231).
As Butler wrote in her preface of her 1999 revised edition of Gender Trouble, the book may read ‘as if
gender is simply a self-invention or that the psychic meaning of a gendered presentation might be
read directly off its surface essential to the naturalized and denaturalized forms that gender takes’,8
but in her next book Bodies That Matter (1993) Butler made increasingly clear that performativity is
not a singular ‘act’, ‘for it is always a reiteration of a norm or set of norms, and to the extent that it
acquires an act-like status in the present, it conceals or dissimulates the conventions of which it
is a repetition’.9 Butler argues that there is no ‘doer behind the deed’, but that the ‘doer’ is variably
constructed in and through the deed (Butler 1999: p. 181). As she clarifies in an article that she wrote
before Gender Trouble, entitled ‘Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in
Phenomenology and Feminist Theory’:
6
Taber, Nancy et al. ‘’She’s more like a guy’ and ‘he’s more like a teddy bear’: girl’s perception of violence and
gender in The Hunger Games’. Journal of Youth Studies, vol. 16, no. 8 (Feb 2013): p. 1025.
7 Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 526.
8
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xxv.
9
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 12.
7
The act that one does, the act that one performs, is, in a sense, an act that has been going on
before one arrived on the scene. Hence, gender is an act which has been rehearsed, much as
a script survives the particular actors who make use of it, but which requires individual actors
in order to be actualized and reproduced as reality once again.10
Butler therefore believes that gender identities are fabrications manufactured and sustained through
corporeal signs and that the gendered body is performative, since it has no ontological status apart
from the various acts which constitute its reality (Butler 1999: p. 173). She states that ‘acts and
gestures, articulated and enacted desires create the illusion of an interior and organizing gender
core, an illusion discursively maintained for the purposes of the regulation of sexuality within the
obligatory frame of reproductive heterosexuality’.11
As powerful cultural agents, fiction films influence the construction of, by cultural
hegemony determined, appropriate gendered behaviour and thereby enabling the production of
such behaviours by creating positions to occupy (Parsons 2004: p. 136). In the past few years a
handful of filmmakers produced films aimed towards children that tried to break with the traditional
heteronormative representation of gender. The films did not directly ‘attack’ the representation of
the established gender norms, they rather ‘challenged’ the boundaries separating masculinity and
femininity. Films as The Hunger Games, its sequel The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and the Dutch
film Cool Kids Don’t Cry evolve around a female character that lively shifts between feminine traits
and masculine traits, depending on the specific situation she experiences and, even more important,
depending on the character’s own choices. In the above mentioned children’s films, the established
heterosexual norm is challenged, not by an obvious exaggerated, radical flip of gender, but gradually,
by internalizing a mix of feminine and masculine traits within the female character.
The term ‘children’s film’ has a broad definition. Ian Wojcik-Andrews dedicated a whole
chapter in his book Children’s Film: History, Ideology, Pedagogy, Theory (2000) to describe the term
‘children’s film’ to conclude in the end that ‘there are in fact many ways of thinking about the “idea
of cinema for children” including the way in which we might define a children’s film. It’s a
complicated issue and involves a range of personal, pedagogical, critical, textual, institutional, and
cultural/imperial points of view. […] There are “children’s films”, but there is no such thing as a
“children’s film”’.12 Wojcik-Andrews argues that defining the term ‘children’s film’ is an impossibility,
but instead he mentions a list of textual characteristics that describe the idea of cinema for children
(Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 7) of which I will name a few applicable ones for my thesis. One criteria
10
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 526.
11
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 173.
12
Wojcik-Andrew, Ian. Children’s film: History, ideology, pedagogy, theory. New York: Garland Publishing Inc.,
2000: p. 19.
8
that is mentioned states that children’s films are adapted from children’s literature, which is the case
for The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Wojcik-Andrews
however argues that defining children’s literature brings forth the same problems as finding criteria
for children’s fiction; does this include literature written by children, literature read by children, or
literature written for children (Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 6)? The most important characteristics for
my use of the term is that it evolves around young adolescent characters, and that in general the
adults -like parents, teachers and coaches- only play minor roles in comparison to the young
adolescent characters. My chosen films are, mainly for economic reasons, aimed towards a broader
audience, for example by addressing to the young spectator’s parents too. The films however do not
have mere entertainment value for young adolescents, the young adolescent are, on top of that, able
to engage with the characters in such a way that they can learn and acquire from the characters. The
last important aspect mentioned by Wojcik-Andrews that applies for my thesis is that ‘playfully or
seriously, mainstream and/or countercinematic children’s films contain moments of self-awareness
or self-discovery that lead to equally important moments of choice’,13 which creates a character
which is a source of exploration, discovery, and transformation (Wojcik-Andrews 2000: p. 10) as is
seen in The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and in Cool Kids Don’t Cry.
Katniss Everdeen and Akkie van Vliet as characters blur, transcend and challenge the
established representation of the dominant heterosexual matrix. For these characters the margins of
the categories as ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ are not fixed and the characters show
the malleability of those by cultural hegemony determined boundaries. Although Katniss mainly does
conform to the considered feminine bodily appearance and does have definite protective, maternal
feelings, her remaining gendered traits seem explicitly not feminine. She is a hunter, not emotional
or expressive of her feelings and is decidedly uncomfortable with romance or physical intimacy. Also
Akkie considers herself feminine, but the tough, blond girl does not conform to the traditional
portrayal of a female. She loves to play soccer, she keeps her feelings to herself, she wants to act
independently and actively seeks to compete with boys in considered masculine behaviour. Katniss
and Akkie do not want to occupy the position of the passive object for the male gaze, neither for the
male characters within the screen story or for the male spectator within the auditorium, as British
feminist theorist Laura Mulvey describes in her article ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’ is seen
frequently within traditional Hollywood films. This to-be-looked-at-ness, as it is termed by Mulvey,
creates a sexual imbalance in Hollywood narratives, with a split between the active/male and
passive/female (Mulvey 1975: p. 11).
13
Wojcik-Andrew, Ian. Children’s film: History, ideology, pedagogy, theory. New York: Garland Publishing Inc.,
2000: p. 9.
9
The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don't Cry are not the first
films that try to defy the heteronormative representation of gender identities and gendered acts, but
they do show a new approach to do so. By creating believable female characters which inhabit
internalized feminine and masculine traits, the filmmakers produced a much more subtle and
effective manner to undermine this dominant hegemonic masculinity. In the past two to three
decades a few exceptional heroines were created, who had the almost impossible task to attack the
dominant masculine film industry by representing the tough, independent woman. The heroines
tried to function as role models for women by embodying considered masculine traits, traits that in
reality also for the term ‘masculine’ felt a little overdone. The question arose if over muscular,
fighting, even murdering women, waving around with guns and swords, were the appropriate
characters for women (or men) to relate to. The simplistic role reversal, as Parsons argues, usually
presents ‘a comedic rather than an empowering, realistic view of possibility and lack the subtlety
that is most effective in challenging stereotypes’.14 Film critics righteously remarked that male film
heroes which embody the complete package of masculine appropriate behaviour and therefore fit
most neatly in the box of the illusionary categorical ‘Strong Male Character’ are usually most boring
and for that reason the critics wondered why filmmakers and its spectators expected the heroines to
live out their lives in this claustrophobic little box (McDougall 2013). Was it even possible for women
to identify with the established stereotypical ‘Strong Female Character’ and could the representation
of women in the end, cause a change in the production and perception of the heterosexual gender
norms?
The filmmakers of Cool Kids Don't Cry, The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching
Fire got rid of the idea to break with the stylized repetition of hegemonic masculine acts by
completely replacing feminine by masculine behaviour by female characters. Katniss and Akkie
portray a new ideology of female heroism, by internalizing feminine and masculine traits within the
female character to create a believable, compelling and strong character which challenges the
heteronormative representation in Hollywood film, and which ultimately could more effectively
function as role models for women. The female heroines challenge not only the normative
representation of female characters in Hollywood films, but also within the film’s narrative they use
their challenging internalized characteristics to rebel against hegemonic powers. Katniss’ protests are
mainly addressed towards President Snow, the Capitol’s dominant ruler, while Akkie tries to
undermine Joep’s dominance in class. Both authorities try to exercise their powers to force both lead
characters to fit in the hegemonic heterosexual framework. This new ideology concerning the
14
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate behavior’.
Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 35, no. 2 (June 2004): p. 139.
10
portrayal of female heroism tries to achieve the same effect as drag, since, according to Butler, ‘drag
is subversive to the extent that it reflects on the imitative structure by which hegemonic gender is
itself produced and disputes heterosexuality’s claim on naturalness and originality’,15 but the
challenges at the boundaries of masculinity and femininity by the new female hero is far more subtle
than drag. The internalizing of oppositional gender behaviour is an implicit form to challenge the
heteronormative idealizations frequently shown in films and therefore is more easily perceived as
natural and even original at itself. It is true that this new ideology does not open fields in film for
homosexuality, transsexuality and other expressions that for a large part attack the obligatory
heterosexual matrix, but this new ideology of female heroism does open a field of possibilities within
the female gender category itself. Akkie and Katniss show that it is possible to deviate from the
traditional image of the female film character as submissive and beautiful, and still have a successful
film character with which the spectator is able and attracted to engage with.
As already mentioned shortly, Judith Butler emphasizes that acts, gestures and desires create
the illusion of an interior and organizing gender core, an illusion that regulates sexuality within the
obligatory frame of heterosexuality (Butler 1999: p. 173), but nonetheless an illusion. She argues that
‘there is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively
constituted by the very “expressions” that are said to be its results’,16 and these expressions are
nothing more than the reiteration of previous ‘expressions’ that become intelligible as gender norms
(Nayak 2006: p. 467). Since this gender core does not exist outside of its doings and is therefore
illusionary, I am aware that it is risky, not to say a misperception of Butler’s readings, to write about
‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculinity’, ‘femininity’ and their separating boundaries as if these were somehow
fixed or real. However, I will refer with these terms to the heteronormative gender norms that are
constituted through cultural hegemony. Like Butler, I use the term ‘normative’ as pertaining to the
norms that govern gender, as well as it ‘also pertains to ethical justification, how it is established, and
what concrete consequences proceed therefrom’.17 Gender is a fantasy, but this does not mean that
there are no perceptions as the ‘reality’ of gender. The spectator thinks that he knows what reality is,
and takes a secondary appearance of gender that does not conform to the hegemonic representation
to be mere artifice, play, falsehood, and illusion (Butler 1999: p. xxii). When Katniss and Akkie
question these categories of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ through their performances, it is shown
that what we take to be ‘real’ is the naturalized knowledge of gender, and that this is in fact a
changeable and revisable reality (Butler 1999: p. xxiii). Butler states in Gender Trouble that ‘if the
truth of gender is a fabrication and if a true gender is a fantasy instituted and inscribed on the
15
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 125.
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 33.
17
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xx.
16
11
surface of bodies, then it seems that genders can be neither true nor false, but are only produced as
the truth effects of a discourse or primary and stable identity’.18
A paradox arises in which gender is a fantasy, an illusion, but nonetheless cannot be
understood as a mere illusion since the observer’s perception of gender is in fact real. Gender is not a
fact and the various acts of gender creates the idea of gender, but it cannot be denied that ‘genders
are part of what ‘humanizes’ individuals within contemporary culture; indeed, those who fail to do
their gender right are regularly punished’.19 What is right is defined by cultural hegemony and what
Butler calls ‘Realness’, which is the ‘standard that is used to judge any given performance within the
established categories’.20 These perceptions of gender reality on basis of hegemonic gender norms
has real consequences, including the creation of our sense of subjectivity (Butler 1988: p. 522). It
makes our subjectivity constructed, but that does not make it any less real. To say that gender is only
a fantasy, indicates that it is in fact a role we play and that it can be stopped at any time, but this is,
as already argued, absolutely not the case for gender. So to subvert the current hegemonic thoughts
it is necessary to change the traditional representation of females within Hollywood films, but for a
real revolution it is even more important, as Butler states, to radically shift one’s notion of the
possible and the real (Butler 1999: p. xxiii).
Although the rules, or laws, of the dominant hegemonic masculinity may be a fantasy, unreal,
still it cannot be denied that these rules are in fact tangible within our cognitions. These are not fixed
artefacts, but as by iteration and performativity established laws that can be inhabited and
reappropriated, but still tangible, to say so. The notions of possibility, the real and the spectator’s
attitudes towards gender are captured within the spectator’s brain and have real consequences in
real life. By bringing in the cognitive paradigm this research will study how characters as Katniss and
Akkie, who I will call ‘Challenging Gender Identities’, can be of influence on the cognitions of young
adolescent spectators. In order to make a change against the ‘reality’ of gender, it is the brain with its
hegemonic views on considered appropriate behaviour and appropriate gender acts, filmmakers
need to address. I am aware that it is a risky turn within the previous writings about gender,
especially within Butler’s theories, since she states that there is no ‘doer behind the deed’ and that
gender is an imitation without an original, but I want to argue that bringing in the cognitive paradigm
can open a field of possibilities to change our original view on gender, but especially on thoughts on
how films can make a change against the current hegemonic gender norms.
As Butler already emphasizes in her preface to Gender Trouble, as a writer it is almost
impossible ‘to oppose the “normative” forms of gender without at the same time subscribing to a
18
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 174.
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 522.
20
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 129.
19
12
certain normative view of how the gendered world ought to be’.21 Still it is not my intention to give a
feministic view on both films, although it is hard not to approach this field since both films can be
considered feministic texts. I, however, want to research young adolescent’s perception of these
children’s films that do not conform to the heteronormative representation of gender seen in
traditional films. Daniel Kahneman’s theory about the fictious cognitive System 1 and System 2
elaborated in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011), together with the Elaboration Likelihood
Model developed by Petty and Cacioppo will form the basis of my cognitive approach to examine the
conscious and unconscious perception of gendered behaviour performed by the film characters and
the ultimate influence on attitudes towards gender within the young adolescent spectator. The
Elaboration Likelihood Model states that the probability of attitude change and the eventual
durability of this attitude change is mainly determined by the nature of elaboration and the intensity
of the spectator’s engagement with the observed information and observed gendered behaviour that
is presented to the spectator through a mediated message (O’Keefe 2002: p. 137). Kahneman’s
cognitive System 1 and System 2 mainly describes through which fictious system, consisting of an
automatic/effortless system and a conscious/effortful system, certain information is perceived by
the spectator’s brain and in what way the spectator is engaged with specific observed attitudes,
beliefs and behaviour.
In the first chapter of this thesis the portrayal of the characters in The Hunger Games and The
Hunger Games: Catching Fire, and in special Katniss Everdeen’s portrayal of a Challenging Gender
Identity will be researched, followed by the second chapter in which the portrayal of Akkie van Vliet
in Cool Kids Don't Cry as Challenging Gender Identity will be studied. In what way are the characters
challenging towards the conformity of the hegemonic heterosexual matrix? How do the films portray
these characters as challenging? As will be argued Cool Kids Don't Cry also shows a separation
between femininity and masculinity through the mise-en-scene, while The Hunger Games and The
Hunger Games: Catching Fire mainly deviate from the traditional representation through the
narrative and shown behaviour. How is it possible that the three films were received as exceptionally
successful, while young adolescents primarily appreciate representations that are known to them
through the cultural discourse? This research will take a look at how the characters are perceived in
general and on which level the characters invite the spectators to engage with them. With help of
Gramsci’s theory about cultural hegemony and Butler’s ideas about iterativity and performativity will
be explored how Akkie and Katniss in fact are part of the iteration of gender norms, since they
reappropriate and re-enact the set of meanings associated with gender, but that they deviate from
21
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xxi.
13
the traditional stylized repetition of gender behaviour in such a manner that they do not conform
and maybe even oppose previous hegemonic gender representations.
In the final chapter the cognitive paradigm will be discussed, and the manner in which the
spectator’s cognition perceives the challenging gendered behaviour presented in the films, and how
this perception influences the spectator’s attitude towards gender will be researched. Kahneman’s
cognitive System 1 and System 2 and Petty and Cacioppo’s Elaboration Likelihood Model will give
new insights in how mediated messages and the contained gendered behaviour will be perceived by
young adolescents and in what ways these Challenging Gender Identities may cause a possible
attitude change within the spectator’s cognition. With these cognitive theories as basis it will be
researched to what extent the films, and in special Katniss and Akkie, are capable of starting a
revolution that shifts the notion of the possible and the real, and to what extent it is possible to
expose the illusionary characteristic of gender and show that even hegemonic gender norms are an
imitation without an original.
14
THE HUNGER GAMES: A GAME OF GENDERED ACTS
Critics have critiqued that in Butler’s work ‘reiteration becomes a static rather than temporal act
where the reproduction of the sex-gender system involves a ceaseless reinscription of the same’.22 It
is this ceaseless reinscription of the same that is often seen by female characters within Hollywood
films. As Mulvey states, females in these film narratives mainly represent the passive object for the
male gaze as the physically desirable, sexually submissive female (Laughey 2007: p. 103). Katniss, as
lead character of the two successful Hollywood films The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games:
Catching Fire, deviates from this static iterable practice where females are expected to be attractive,
fragile, slim, caring, and emotional (Taber et al. 2013: p. 1025). As will be argued, this does not mean
that she does have any of these characteristics, but Katniss is able to shift between behaviour that is
considered appropriate feminine and masculine behaviour. The hegemonic power of the Capitol
however tries to force Katniss to conform to the obligatory heterosexual matrix.
The two Hunger Games films that have been produced so far are adopted from the first two
books from the Hunger Games trilogy written by Suzanne Collins. The narrative is set in a dystopian
future located in North America, which has been renamed to Panem. Panem is divided into thirteen
districts governed by the wealthy Capitol. All districts are obliged to participate in the annual Hunger
Games, where a boy and girl from each district are randomly selected during a reaping. The selected
tributes are sent into a televised arena to fight to the death, leaving only one survivor as the victor.
The female lead character of the film, named Katniss Everdeen, becomes a tribute after she
volunteers to replace her younger sister Prim. Katniss is joined by the male tribute Peeta and is
mentored by Haymitch, a previous Hunger Games’ winner for district 12. Haymitch encourages
Katniss to pretend she and Peeta are ‘star-crossed lovers’ and therefore gaining the audience’s
approval and additional sponsors, increasing her probability of survival. At the end Katniss and Peeta
are the only two survivors left and they decide to simultaneously end their lives, leaving no winner
for its audience. However before they can continue with their plan, they are stopped by the Game
Makers and therefore both are ultimately declared as winners of this year’s annual Hunger Games.
In the second film, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, it becomes clear that Katniss and
Peeta’s performance within the arena and the cleverly escape from death had an impact on the
districts, and signs of uproars are shown through Panem. This year President Snow is allowed to
make a change to the annual games, since it is Quarter Quell, an event happening every 25 years,
enabling him to give an edition where previous winners need to compete again in an arena. Katniss
22
Mills, Catherine. ‘Efficacy and vulnerability: Judith Butler on reiteration and resistance’. Australian Feminist
Studies, vol. 15, no. 32 (2000): p. 278.
15
and Peeta are again selected and are forced to fight their way through the Games. This time an
unusual collaboration arises and the Games seem to be more a rebellion against the established
order outside the arena rather than an individual struggle for survival within the arena. When Katniss
forces her way out of the arena at the end of the film, it becomes evident that the events within the
arena had once again a large effect on the situation outside of the arena.
Besides the attractive and innovative narrative of the Hunger Games, the books and films are
interesting and have been praised mainly because of the themes Suzanne Collins incorporated in her
work. It sketches a futuristic world named Panem that at the same time does not seem to have any
similarities with our present world, but when inspected closer Panem precisely looks like our present
world. The idea of a televised arena where children have to fight to their deaths, the literal
subdivision of the nation in districts on basis of people’s professions, the enormous power of the
Capitol over those districts, but also smaller aspects like appearances of buildings, vehicles and
people, are not similar to the spectator’s idea of reality. Although the futuristic dystopian world of
Panem seems to be unknown to its spectator, it is believable since the films certainly do give a
representation of our world. The Hunger Games and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire 23 explicitly
reveal through an attractive Hollywood narrative the present division in class, wealth, gender and
power. The present hegemonic powers gravest achievement is that it submerges the oppressed
human beings’ consciousness about the oppressive reality (Freire 2000: p. 51). Collins however
seems to allow the oppressed characters, as well as the spectators, to see the truths about the
hegemonic authorities and their oppressive powers. Think about the districts portraying the social
divisions in class; think about the arena showing media’s dominance and the constant surveillance;
think about the Capitol representing the one percent of financial wealthy owning and repressing the
remaining percentages. Suzanne Collins exposes underlying forms of crisis and presents them
through a fiction narrative to young adolescents. It is fair to wonder if it is responsible or necessary
to face young adolescents with problems of such kind, which are generally still too complicated for
them and which they cannot control yet. Although this is more than an interesting question, the
main focus of this thesis will be on Katniss’ portrayal of a gender identity and her challenge against
the hegemonic representation of gender in films.
Panem’s dystopian future is hardly a gender utopia. Still The Hunger Games addresses
challenges towards the established gender norms, and playful shifts between gender roles are
evident within the narrative. Although the Capitol does function as the hegemonic power which tries
to exercise their power over the district’s residents to control their conformity to the heterosexual
matrix, in which the categories of sex, gender and desire are supposed to conform to the social
23
In the remaining part of my thesis, I will use The Hunger Games as referent to the Hunger Games book trilogy
and the two films in general, unless stated otherwise.
16
construction of compulsory heterosexual norms (Butler 1999: p. 42-43), the Capitol’s residents
themselves are the first mark of an attack against this same matrix. As already mentioned the Capitol
residents’ drag presence, including colourful clothing, golden tattoo’s and make-up for women as
well for men, blurs the distinction between femininity and masculinity. When it comes to the sense
of altered self-presentation, men and women in the Capitol -in the films mainly represented by Effie
Trinket, Caesar Flickerman, President Snow and, Cinna, Octavia and Flavius- seem to live according
to the exact same rules and use the same gendered markers (Mitchell 2012: p. 12). Butler argues that
the body is a social construction on which cultural meanings are inscribed and that ‘the body is
figured as a mere instrument or medium for which a set of cultural meanings are only externally
related’.24 The Capitol’s residents portray this malleability of the body, literally by applying
exaggerative make-up and undergoing plastic surgery (to keep a young looking appearance), but also
by severing the typical gendered connotations between body and gender (Mitchell: p. 12-13). The
uncoupling of the sex and gender categories within the Capitol, without having consequences or
being punished for the non-conformance with the heterosexual matrix, shows that gender norms of
the dominant cultural discourse are closely related to hegemonic powers. As Lears, an American
cultural and intellectual historian, remarks about Gramsci’s term cultural hegemony, the ruling group
maintains their hegemony ‘by giving their domination an aura of moral authority through the
creation and perpetuation of legitimating symbols’.25 Symbols that define the social order of values,
norms, perceptions, beliefs, sentiments, and prejudice (Lears, 1985: p. 569). In The Hunger Games is
shown that the Capitol as hegemonic power can determine and naturalize their own gender norms. It
deviates from the gendered norms that are known to the spectators and therefore has the effect of
creating alienation between the Capitol’s residents and the spectators. This effect is deliberately
emphasized by the filmmakers, since the spectator is supposed to empathize with Katniss and the
remaining people from the districts, who are oppressed by this hegemonic authority. It must be
noted that the Capitol’s breakage with the heterosexual matrix only exists within the Capitol itself,
they however force the subordinate groups to conform to the heterosexual matrix.
The residents of Panem’s districts show therefore far more sexual conformity with what the
spectator believes to be appropriate gendered behaviour. Although their clothing obviously
represents the poor conditions in which most districts live, there is clearly a large distinction between
men and women’s appearances. Women wear dresses, shoes with little heels and have long, often
braided, hair, while men wear trousers, shirts or blouses and have in general short hair. The districts,
24
Butler, Judith. Gender Troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 1213.
25
Lears, T.J. Jackson. ‘The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities’. The American Historical
Review, vol. 90, no. 3 (Jun. 1985): p. 569.
17
at least as far as the spectator is shown, also conform the established social gender construction
when it comes to the professions the people occupy. The professions are exclusively separated on
basis of their sex and corresponding masculine or feminine traits; men do the heavy work, like coal
mining in district twelve, while women take care of the home or sell goods on the market. Nothing
within the districts seem to challenge the heterosexual matrix as the Capitol does, which is a result of
continual power over the districts, of which the Games itself are the best example. Effie Trinket, the
Capitol’s escort for district 12, announces before the reaping a ‘very special film brought to you all
the way from the Capitol’.26 The propaganda film shows that there has been an uprising in the past,
in which the thirteen districts rebelled against ‘the country that fed them, loved them, protected
them’,27 and that they do not tolerate another form of treason. Therefore the Capitol decided that
annually every district must offer a male and female tribute, and as the voice-over claims, ‘that
serves as a reminder of our generosity and our forgiveness. This is how we remember our past, and
this is how we safeguard our future’.28 The short trailer is a way for the Capitol to repeatedly show
their dominance, since the Capitol ‘is produced by power and must continually reiterate that power
in order to maintain its own social existence’.29 The repetitive nature of this propaganda film is
demonstrated through Gale, who imitates the words of the voice-over before the words are heard
over the speakers. The film not only demonstrates the Capitol’s power, but simultaneously wants to
create a deeply belief within the oppressed that the rulers are indeed legitimate, which is according
to Gramsci one of the most important factors for the established order to keep their cultural
hegemonic position (Lears 1985: p. 569).
Although a large part of district 12’s people are submissive towards the hegemony of
heteronormative standards, Katniss and Peeta both represent an interesting and challenging way of
embodying gender roles. They do not only rebel against the scripted hegemonic social conventions
and ideologies forced on them by the Capitol, but they therefore also challenge conventions that are
perceived as natural in traditional Hollywood narratives. Katniss as character blurs, erases,
transcends and challenges established representations of the dominant heterosexual matrix
(Mitchell 2014: p. 2). One of her powers as the heroic female seems the ability to perform,
consciously and unconsciously, various forms of gender. Categories as ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculine’
and ‘feminine’ are explicit parts that she plays and performs while in her district or during the Games
26
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Effie Trinket presents a special film to district 12 (00:12:59)
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Voice-over special propaganda film (00:13:27)
28
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Voice-over special propaganda film (00:14:00)
29
Mills, Catherine. ‘Efficacy and vulnerability: Judith Butler on reiteration and resistance’. Australian Feminist
Studies, vol. 15, no. 32 (2000): p. 266.
27
18
(Mitchell 2014: p. 3). The structure of the Games itself, but especially Katniss, portrays the
malleability of a gender identity.
In the film Katniss’ feminine bodily appearance does conform to the hegemonic
representation of females within traditional Hollywood films. The fact that Jennifer Lawrence, the
actress that plays Katniss, was chosen as the most sexy women by the British men’s magazine in 2014
(Waller 2014) already indicates that the actress does conform completely to the ideal beauty, which
can be seen as a form of hegemonic oppression since it is based on a time-related norm that
determines if a female suits the term ‘beautiful’. Despite Katniss’ feminine bodily appearance, with
her long, dark braid and her feminine characteristics, Katniss’ other gendered traits are explicitly not
feminine in The Hunger Games. Katniss is a hunter, killing animals in the woods with her phallic bow
and arrow, wearing a manly leather jacket and hunting boots. She is not emotional or expressive of
her feelings and is decidedly uncomfortable with romance or physical intimacy (Dubrofsky and Ryalls
2014: p. 11). These characteristics are in general accepted as masculine within Hollywood narratives.
As Mulvey states about the traditional representation of the female in film, ‘in their traditional
exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded
for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness’.30
Katniss however explicitly tries to deviate with this dominant representation, which becomes evident
in the way she acts when Peeta declares in front of the camera’s during a television show that he has
had a crush on Katniss since the first time he saw her. Katniss watches the whole interview from
behind the stage, but when Peeta finally shows up backstage, she aggressively pushes him against
the wall, asking him in disbelieve why he would say something like that. Katniss did not react in anger
solemnly because she thought it was a lie and because of her disappointment in Peeta since he tried
to perform according to the Capitol’s norms and values; it however irritated her that Peeta’s
declaration made her look desirable and she was definitely not content with this desirability or to use
Mulvey’s terms, to-be-looked-at-ness. At the end she reluctantly agrees with Haymitch, her mentor,
to go along with the plan to be ‘star-crossed lovers’ during the Games, in order to gain support from
sponsors, simply because of the fact that this would increase her chance of survival. Again a way of
securing the Capitol’s dominance, since the tributes can increase their probability of surviving by
conforming to the desired heterosexual matrix.
In contrast, Katniss has certain traits that can be categorized as feminine. Especially her
relationship with her little sister Prim can be characterized as maternal. In fact, the first scene in The
Hunger Games in which Katniss is presented, shows her comforting her sister, who has had a
nightmare. She is rocking her gently, rubbing her hair and assuring that everything will be fine
30
Mulvey, Laura. ‘Visual pleasure and narrative cinema’. Screen, vol. 16 (Autumn 1975): p. 11.
19
(Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 11). Although the cognitive paradigm will be saved for the last
chapter, I would like to refer shortly to Edward Thorndike’s theory, called the Halo-effect. In general,
the Halo-effect describes the tendency to judge everything about a person or situation, including
things you have not observed yet (Kahneman 2011: p. 82). This results in the fact that the first traits
of film character that are shown, will change the very meaning of the traits that appear later on.31 So
to start the film with this maternal imagery is a clever way for the filmmakers to keep Katniss yet to
be introduced masculine traits in context with her motherly characteristic. When Katniss volunteers
to take Prim’s place in the Hunger Games, it not only shows a masculine form of heroism, but in
context with what the spectator has seen earlier, it is an act of maternity. The same applies for killing
another tribute when protecting Rue and taking care of Peeta when he is hurt. Those are not only
actions to increase her probability of survival, but it shows her natural feminine, maternal side.
Katniss’ strength, for pushing at the boundaries of the heterosexual norm, is the way in
which she naturally performs her feminine and masculine gender identity. As Butler argues,
‘performativity is not a singular act, but a repetition and a ritual, which achieves its effects through
its naturalization in the context of a body’.32 As Dubrofsky and Ryalls state, Katniss’ performance is
not-performing and thereby she authenticates her challenging gender identity. Her naturalization, or
authenticity, occurs through a refusal to perform gender rituals, causing the non-performance to be
the feminine gender ritual (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 10). This might read as if gender is a radical
choice or a merely individual choice as Butler argues is not the case, but gender is also neither
imposed or inscribed upon the individual (Butler 1988: p. 526). As Butler states ‘surely, there are
nuanced and individual ways of doing one’s gender, but that one does it, and that one does it in
accord with certain sanctions and proscriptions, is clearly not a fully individual matter’.33 In The
Hunger Games however is shown that Katniss is not able to forcibly perform a typical feminine or
typical masculine gender, she rather embodies a naturalized identity, with feminine and masculine
traits, depending on the situation she is in. Katniss’ iterated gendered acts deviate from the
31
A classic example to demonstrate this effect is shown in Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow (p. 82):
What do you think of Alan and Ben?
Alan: intelligent-industrious-impulsive-critical-stubborn-envious
Ben: envious-stubborn-critical-impulsive-industrious-intelligent
Most people favour Alan more than Ben, although both have the exact same characteristics. It is simply
because the order of traits can change the interpretation of later introduced traits. The stubbornness of an
intelligent person is justified and may actually evoke respect, but intelligence in a stubborn person makes
him more dangerous.
32
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. xv.
33
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 525.
20
traditional representation of females, within the narrative but also towards the spectator. She is
however able to approximate and shift the spectator’s notion of ‘Realness’, which is ‘a standard that
is used to judge any given performance within the established categories. And yet what determines
the effect of realness is the ability to compel belief, to produce the naturalized effect’.34 This effect is
itself the result of an embodiment of norms, a reiteration of norms (Butler 1993: p. 129), which is in
Katniss’ case the effect that is accomplished by the repeated performance of not-performing.
Dubrofsky and Ryals, two scholars in cultural studies of communication and feminist media
studies, argue in their article about the not-performance and authenticity of Katniss, that this
appears to be most explicit when she is supposed to perform before the Capitol’s residents. Katniss is
very uncomfortable when she needs to undergo a complete makeover when she is about to be
presented to the Capitol and she is confused when she is complimented multiple times with her
remarkable beauty. Later on, in the scene when Katniss is interviewed by the Hunger Games’
presenter Caesar Flickerman for a television show, it is explicitly highlighted that Katniss’ actions are
unplanned and that she behaves instinctively and authentically (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 10).
Before the show she points out to Cinna, her dresser, that she doesn’t know how to make people like
her. Cinna responds: ‘You made me like you’. Katniss confesses: ‘I wasn’t trying’.35 Katniss is
uncomfortable in situations when she is required to perform and conform to the Capitol’s desire,
where women need to act feminine, highlighted by the shaky camera-use when Katniss walks on
stage. Her shaky point-of-view, a perspective from behind her towards the audience and several
quick inserts of audience members give the impression of Katniss’ unease. The audience’s cheers and
Flickerman’s voice mutes at first, suggesting her blood to rush to her head. Katniss slowly adjust,
indicated by the return of sound and the steadied camera, but her body betrays her nervousness,
showing that she in incapable of performing in front of an audience. Her answers to Flickerman’s
question continue to show Katniss’ instinctive responses. When Flickerman asks about her entrance
in the Capitol a few days earlier, where Katniss showed up in a dress that made it look like she was
on fire, she instinctively answers: ‘Well, I was just hoping that I wouldn’t burn to death’.36 The
audience bursts into laughter, but Katniss does not join and seems startled by the response,
indicating her answer to be genuine and without forethought. At the end of the interview she offers
Flickerman to show him her flames once again. She stands up, by spinning and twirling her dress
ignites and bursts into flames. This performance is not something Katniss thought to do on her own,
it was Cinna, her dresser, who came up with the idea to help her make people like her in order to
gain sponsors (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 5). Her uncomfortableness and her inability to perform
34
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 129.
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Katniss and Cinna before interview with Caesar Flickerman (00:54:0200:54:15)
36
Gary Ross. The Hunger Games. Katniss during interview with Caesar Flickerman (00:56:34)
35
21
this desired gender act is a push against the boundaries of the heterosexual norm, because it shows
the malleability of gender and the inability to forcibly embody a gender. Although Katniss expresses
the desire to perform, trying to make people like her and therefore gaining her sponsors, she is not
capable to do so. This makes Katniss ‘an authentic self […] one that does not intentionally perform, or
performs without premeditation’.37 This authenticity in Katniss is one of the main strengths of The
Hunger Games for challenging the heteronormative representation of females, since it makes it
possible for Katniss to perform a certain considered masculine act, as for example rescuing a man,
without denaturalizing it, causing the audience to accept the situation, not feeling alienated at all
from the character or the narrative.
Another definite challenge against the established heterosexual norms in The Hunger Games,
is Katniss’ male opponent, Peeta. Katniss’ position as Challenging Gender Identity is strengthened by
Peeta’s presence by defying the established gender roles in traditional Hollywood films. Peeta has
the muscles, the square jaw line and his total physical appearance is masculine, but as with Katniss
the bodily appearance does not match the considered expected gendered traits. Peeta is the one
who tries to encourage Katniss to talk about her feelings, share herself with others. He falsely
promises that her indifference does not hurt him, that she owes him nothing and he will be waiting
when she comes to her senses. Peeta is ‘better than she is, but softer. He’s less knowing than she is.
He’s less cynical than she is. He’s just as tough and as brave as he can possibly be with the skill set he
has, and she’s responsible for mopping up when that’s not enough’.38 Peeta, as well as Katniss, is an
attempt to break through the circle of repetitive heteronormative gendered acts predominantly
represented in Hollywood films, by embodying characteristics that are considered feminine. It works
for two reasons. The first is that Peeta also breaks with the hegemonic male-masculine-heterosexual
matrix and secondly, it helps to create a contrast with the real lead character, Katniss, which
therefore stands out even more. The cohesion between this contrast and Katniss’ ability to naturalize
multiple forms of gender, makes her undefinable as neither the typical Weak Female Character or
the typical Strong Female Character. This contrasts helps to make Katniss the complicated, flawed
and compelling character. If Peeta would have embodied considered ‘masculinity’, he would have
been Katniss’ masculine opponent to which Katniss was obligated to level with in order to inhabit an
internal mix of masculine and feminine traits, as will be argued in the next chapter is the case for
Akkie in Cool Kids Don't Cry.
37
Dubrofsky, Rachel E., Emily D. Ryalls. ‘The Hunger Games: Performing notperforming to authenticate
femininity and whiteness’. Critical Studies in Media Communication, (2014): p. 5.
38
Holmes, Linda. ‘What really makes Katniss stand out? Peeta, her movie girlfriend’. Npr.org. 25 nov 2013. 2105-2014. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2013/11/25/247146164/what-really-makes-katnissstand-out-peeta-her-movie-girlfriend?>
22
Katniss pretends not to conform at all to the heterosexual norm, but as Dubrofsy and Ryalls
already warn in their article’s conclusion, this observation only makes sense on the surface. On the
surface Katniss does not resemble the female characters from films with a traditional Hollywood
narrative; as discussed above she is active, physically strong and indifferent to romance and
motherhood (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 12-13). She uses these characteristics to rebel against the
Capitol’s hegemonic power, to protect the weak and to fight the good fight. However, a closer
reading of Katniss’ behaviour and narrative shows that still some crucial social gendered behaviour is
rusted in The Hunger Games.
Although it would be exaggerated to state that Katniss is a female glamorous sufferer or
victim as is the case with most females in traditional fairy tales and Hollywood narratives (Parsons
2004: p. 137), it can be argued that much of Katniss’ behaviour and her challenging portrayal are
dictated by external factors instead of that she is able to freely and consciously make her own
decisions. To begin with, her protective and maternal instinct over her family can be said to originate
from her father’s death and her mother’s inability to handle that truth, which eventually forced her
into her independent role and her role as parent over her sister Prim. Instead of walking away, her
maternal instinct made her look after Prim, but still this was a necessary, obligatory choice forced on
her by external factors, pushing her into this role. As explained earlier on, the Halo-effect causes
many, later introduced choices to feel related to her previous introduced character traits. When
Katniss volunteers to take Prim’s place in the Games it does not give an impression of toughness,
independence or heroism, it rather seems to be an act of her maternal, protective instinct. During
the Games and the whole preparation before, Katniss is the victim of the Capitol’s dominance and its
desire she is enforced to fulfil in order to survive. In the arena her direct killing of other tributes, so
not the indirect killing through for example the engineered wasps called Tracker Jackers, comes also
forth out of her motherly nature. When Rue, a definite similitude of her sister Prim, is attacked,
Katniss sees no other choice than to protect her through killing. Although the similar black suits for
every contestant do presume that no difference between male and female is initiated during the
Games; there is however a clear distinction between the performed behaviour within the games.
During the Games the female competitors mainly kill through indirect ways or for maternal reasons,
while the male tributes are explicitly shown to kill others bluntly. As Dubrofsky and Ryalls formulate:
‘The implications are significant, suggesting good women are always already mothers, and their
value, strength and heroism stem from their maternal instincts and conventional heterosexual
femininity’.39
39
Dubrofsky, Rachel E., Emily D. Ryalls. ‘The Hunger Games: Performing notperforming to authenticate
femininity and whiteness’. Critical Studies in Media Communication, (2014): p. 12-13.
23
Many external factors -varying from her forced substitution of her parents to take care of
Prim to her obligatory participation in the Hunger Games, and from the compulsory fulfilment of the
audience’s desires to increase her probability of survival to her acceptance of the fact that she needs
to live up to President Snow’s wishes- all mould Katniss to who she is. Nevertheless, Katniss is able to
shift between roles and naturalize these roles to act appropriate to different situations, which is, as
is discussed earlier, one of her powers, but still she is submissive in the sense that she is obliged to
act out a specific role in order to obey or satisfy an external factor. Although Katniss for this reason
implicitly seems like the submissive pawn in a larger dominant whole, she tries to stretch or defy her
boundaries whenever is possible to attain independence and definitely opens a field of doing gender
differently. She is not constantly shooting aggressively with big guns, or waving around with large
swords; The power of Katniss Everdeen is shifting between gender roles and naturalizing this
performance, in order to increase her probability of survival and rebel against the established
hegemonic authorities. As Challenging Gender Identity she rebels against the hegemonic powers
within the narrative but also against the representation of females in films dictated by the
hegemonic Hollywood industry. Katniss became a model, and simultaneously a representative of the
new ideology of female heroism for young adolescent girls and boys because of her attractive
characteristics and The Hunger Games’ narrative, and therefore, although to many young
adolescents probably unconsciously, showing a gender identity that breaks with the traditional
iterative practice of heterosexual gender norms.
24
COOL KIDS DON’T CRY: A STRONG FEMALE AGAINST THE BOYS
Cool Kids Don’t Cry is a film based on the Dutch children’s book with the same title, written by
Jacques Vriens, a successful and well known Dutch writer for children who won multiple awards for
his children books.40 It is about Akkie, a twelve year old girl, who is in the final year of elementary
school and who loves to play soccer. Joep, a tall and tough boy, claims that girls are not able to play
soccer properly, but Akkie could not care less and she is convinced that she is as good as Joep. The
main important events during the last year of elementary school are the final exam, school camp and
the closing soccer tournament. Unexpectedly Akkie is informed that she suffers from leukemia and
that she is supposed to be treated in the hospital. Every day she gets visits in the hospital from her
friends and together they arrange the team line-up, until she is able to join class sporadically. After
multiple pleas she is even allowed to go on school camp, but during a game of hide-and-seek she
becomes unwell. At the hospital the test results show that the disease has entered Akkie’s brain and
that the hope for healing has vanished. The class organizes a soccer match on a grass field near the
hospital, which Akkie beholds from behind the hospital’s window. During the narrative Akkie and
Joep become closer friends and even kiss at the end. When Akkie eventually dies, the cool kids from
the last grade of elementary school cannot prevent from crying and dedicate the tournament’s
soccer match to Akkie by means of banners, her name on their shirts and Elise’s winning goal.
The synopsis implies a dramatic and tragic narrative, but director Dennis Bots choose not to
emphasize Akkie’s journey to her deathbed but rather choose to tell a story of a dynamic group of
classmates which deal with Akkie’s, but also their own, problems. The film begins with a scene that in
a great way preludes this general atmosphere and gender relation that is seen through the largest
part of the film, which mainly consist of a traditional separation between ‘female’, ‘male’, femininity’
and ‘masculinity’. The dynamics in classroom life in Cool Kids Don't Cry includes a form of hegemonic
masculinity including patterns of resistance and bullying among boys, which is often seen in real life
(Connell 2005: p. 833). Appearances and behaviour performed within the group are expected to
conform to the norms cultural hegemony set and according to Butler’s obligatory heterosexual
matrix, in which males behave and dress masculine and females behave and dress according to the
feminine rules, and whoever tries to defy these gender norms are punished by insult or ridicule. In
Cool Kids Don't Cry Joep represents the dominant hegemonic force exercising his power over females
and subordinate males. Elise, in contrast, functions as the absolute representation of femaleness.
Only Akkie and Laurens deviate as characters from the traditional representation in Hollywood films.
40
Jacques Vriens. 2013. Unieboek. 08-07-2014 <http://www.jacquesvriens.nl/biografie.htm>
25
The first scene of Cool Kids Don't Cry preludes in a great way the general atmosphere and these
gender relations within the film.
The openings shot of the film is shot through the net of soccer goal and shows the spectator
the twelve year old, blond Akkie, who kicks the ball with a firm kick in the goal. Three tough boys
from the opposing team, including Joep, the other lead character, grumble. Akkie is congratulated by
her female team members and her only male team member Laurens, a blond boy who is not
considered particular masculine. A wide angle from a bird-eye perspective shows the spectator a
park with an improvised soccer field, where a mix of female and male classmates are playing a soccer
match. On the side of the imaginary playing field, three passive groups are observing the game,
notable divided on basis of their sex -one group consisting of only boys, two groups of girls- which
literally separates the category ‘male’ from the ‘female’. The evident division within the use of colour
in clothes and attributes even further divides the categories. The boys of the opposing team wear
mainly black, grey or blue clothes (representing masculinity), while Laurens wears a bright red vest
and all the girls wear pink shirts (representing femininity); except for Akkie, who wears clothes that
are suspiciously reminiscent of Joep’s clothes: a grey hoodie and dark training pants. Although the
girls try their best to participate actively in the game by tackling and intercepting the ball, they
succumb under the dominance of the masculine boys, literally shown by Joep’s pulling at Elise’s
feminine long, brown hair. Only Akkie is not impressed by the boys’ dominance and is not afraid to
oppose it. Without thinking she bashes into Joep, making him trip over, and dribbles across the field
avoiding multiple tackles and once again scores a goal. Joep protests loudly. When Akkie accuses
Joep of pulling Elise’s hair, Joep responds with an insult attacking the girls on their femininity and
inability of playing soccer: ‘Whining chicks with long hair cannot play soccer, do they?’.41 Although
Elise tells Akkie to leave it alone, Akkie cleverly replies to Joep, resulting in laughter from Akkie’s and
Joep’s friends. Before the game continues Akkie convinces Elise that she certainly is good at soccer
and after Joep demonstrates his dominance over a little boy who keeps count of the game, Akkie
once again shows that she is not afraid of Joep and makes openly fun of the fact that Joep cannot
stand losing. Those comments and insults aimed towards the other sex, the considered appropriate
behaviour and the children’s urge to proof themselves, indicate the need to separate the
male/masculine from the female/femininity.
It is important for Joep as hegemonic power within the class’ gender hierarchy to keep
masculinity defined as ‘non-femininity’ (Connell 1995: p. 71). This exclusive contrast between
masculinity and femininity, and the continually reiterating of his power will maintain Joep’s own
social existence as hegemonic power (Mills 2000: p. 266). Joep performs the most heteronormative
41
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Joep and Akkie playing soccer in the parc, translation from Dutch:
‘Jankwijven met lang haar kunnen helemaal niet voetballen, hè?’ (00:02:10)
26
masculine part in the film. He is tall, loves to play soccer, looks tough and tries to exercise his power
over his friends and especially the girls in his class. Repeatedly Joep tries to (verbally) harm his
female classmates on basis of their femininity, or other classmates who do not conform to the
heterosexual matrix. He grabs Elise by her ponytail causing her to fall on the ground, he teases Akkie
because of her long hair and calls the girls ‘whining chicks’. When the girls do not conform to the
heteronormative representation of girls and when they try to join in considered masculine
behaviour, Joep is the first to point out their inability and their incompetence to do so. In the film it
becomes evident that Joep embodies the continual reiteration of hegemonic power, since he as
individual ‘is both an effect of power and the element of its articulation’.42 He regularly punishes
those who fail to do their gender right to maintain his hegemonic position, as Butler states, is
frequently seen in contemporary culture (Butler 1999: p. 178).
In Cool Kids Don't Cry Joep seems to symbolize castration anxiety in the Oedipal scenario, a
psychoanalytic theory developed by Freud and frequently cited in Butler’s works. Although it may
read as quite a sidestep from this thesis, the Oedipal scenario will help to understand Joep as the
power that reappropriates and re-enacts the hegemonic norms, and will therefore help to
understand Akkie’s subversive role within the film. Freud’s theory claims that the male child grows a
sexual desire towards his mother, during one stage of his psychosexual development, resulting in
emotional rivalry with the father, because he is the one who sleeps with the mother (Sarnoff and
Corwin 1959: p. 374). The child has the urge to kill the father, but he is aware that the father is
physically stronger and has the better chance to compete over the possession of the mother.
According to Freud this eventually results in a fear of castration. By identifying and adopting the
personality traits of the parent with the same sex, the child reduces his castration anxiety since he
believes that the likeness to the father will protect him from his father’s fury. In Cool Kids Don't Cry
this is shown through the relationship between Joep and his father. Joep’s father is definitely
dominant over Joep and Joep obeys, although reluctantly, his father’s orders. When things do not go
as the father wants, he reacts in anger. This wish for dominance and the urge to control others is
adopted by Joep and he repeatedly tries to project this power over his classmates. Joep therefore is
an effect of his father’s masculine power and also the element of articulation since Joep repeatedly
projects this hegemonic dominance over his classmates. As already mentioned, Joep especially
desires to dominate the girls and Laurens as subordinate male, which is a phenomenon that is also
explained by Freud’s theory. Since females do not have a masculine phallus, males consider the
‘feminine position […] as the figural enactment of that punishment, the very figuration of that threat
42
Nayak, Anoop, Mary Jane Kehily. ‘Gender Undone: Subversion, regulation and embodiment in the work of
Judith Buter’. British Journal of Sociology of Education (20 nov 2006): p. 465.
27
and, hence, is produced as a lack only in relation to the masculine subject’.43 The Oedipal scenario is
based on its threatening power and causes resistance to identify with masculine feminization and
feminine phallicization (Butler 1993: p. 97). Joep feels threatened by Akkie’s wish to perform
masculine traits and Laurens considered feminine behaviour, and therefore feels the urge to insult
and alienate the performed behaviour in order to maintain its hegemonic power within the gender
hierarchy.
Although Joep tries to hold on firmly to the heterosexual conformity, Akkie deviates from the
heteronormative representation with her subversive gender identity including numerous masculine
characteristics. Akkie is female and has a female body, but she has many masculine traits and she
does not want to portray herself as particular feminine. She does not have the wish to be an object
for the male gaze, or a passive objectification as seen in Mulvey’s to-be-looked-at-ness, instead she
wants to compete and be considered equal with boys in what is considered masculine behaviour.
Bold Akkie is a tough, blond girl who loves to play soccer and who fought herself in a position that is
equal to boys. She rather keeps her feelings to herself and wants to act independently. When her
parents withhold information from her, she gets irritated and actively seeks for answers. This is for
example the case when her parents are reluctant to tell her what the term ‘oncology’ means to
protect her from the bad news and Akkie suddenly stops the elevator to get informed by one of the
nurses who she randomly approaches. When her physician eventually tells Akkie she has cancer cells
in her bloodstream, she is not put off and therefore shows that she is not in need of her parent’s
protection. As she is instinctively driven to find answers to her question, she is also instinctively in
her other behaviour, for example literally expressed in the film when Akkie states: ‘I am going to play
soccer, because I happen to feel like it!’.44 Continuously she has the urge to proof herself, for
example physically during a wheel chair race or intellectually during a game of hide-and-seek. Her
clothes and appearances through the whole film portray Akkie’s personality with a mix of feminine
and masculine characteristics. She often wears a green jacket with on the back feminine flowers, but
on the front and sleeves different badges are sewn that are linked with masculinity, for example a
football, a dragon and the symbol of ‘route 66’. Akkie’s schoolbag is literally divided in the colours
pink and blue, mostly an edge of the colour pink is present in her clothes and Akkie’s necklace which
she wears during the whole film, also symbolizes her personality and Akkie as person. The necklace,
which in Western cultures is considered a feminine sign, bears a small, metal football as decoration, a
sign of masculinity.
43
44
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 102.
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Akkie tells her mother in the hospital that she is capable of playing soccer,
translation from Dutch: ‘Ik ga voetballen, want daar heb ik toevallig zin in!’ (00:36:38)
28
Cool Kids Don't Cry plays and reveals the malleability of the body and the socially determined
gender norms. As Butler states ‘sex is made understandable through the signs that indicate how it
should be read or understood’.45 The daily habit of cultivating secondary sex characteristics, for
example someone’s haircut, causes these various bodily indicators to formulate how the sexed body
is to be read (Butler 2004: p. 87). Akkie’s struggle with the decision if she wants to wear a wig, gives a
clear insight in how society is bounded to gender norms. When in the hospital the cancer cells in
Akkie’s blood are detected, she must be treated with chemo therapy. The longer Akkie undergoes
the various treatments, the more hair she loses, resulting in what Akkie calls ‘Coupe de Chemo’, a
bald head. Long hair is however constructed as a secondary sex characteristic for the female body.
Akkie struggles, because the wig is uncomfortable, but her surroundings urges her to conform to the
established gender norms. Her nurse, called Afida, tries to convince Akkie that wearing a wig is ‘not
that bad’ and that is even a ‘little cool’. Akkie protests, claiming that it itches. She is uncomfortable
that bystanders, as Afida and her mother, try to make her fit in the heteronormative norms. When
Akkie is alone in front of her mirror she puts on her wig, but she pulls the back to the front, showing
her aversion towards her modified feminine appearance. Multiple times Akkie is confronted with
alienation, when other people face her baldness. In a scene Akkies crosses a street in her usual green
jacket and, although she wears a white, undefined hat, it is obvious she has no hair, a passer-by on
bike, a camio role for Jacques Vriens, shouts: ‘Hey boy! Watch out, will you?!’. Akkie replies: ‘I am not
a boy! I am a girl!’.46 Akkie feels offended when she is called a boy, but still feels uncomfortable
wearing a wig only to conform to hegemonic gender norms. This scene shows, as Butler states about
the secondary sex characteristics, that ‘the body does not become sexually readable without those
signs’.47 Furthermore a secondary school student’s horrified look when Akkie’s hat is grabbed of her
head in a fight and the first time when Akkie shows her bald head in class show a deep-seated urge
towards the established norms about secondary sex characteristics and the social punishment when
deviating from the constructed image of an appropriate gendered body. Even the filmmakers
apparently felt it necessary to dress Akkie in a pyjamas covered with heart shapes, which seem not to
conform to Akkie’s appearances or personality shown in the rest of the film, when the spectator is
introduced to a bald Akkie as to compensate for her ‘removed’ femininity.
Akkie does not want to subvert masculine dominance, but she strives for equality between
boys and girls. She does not tease or bully Joep, the heteronormative image of masculinity, she
rather reacts to Joep’s initial insulting remark, trying to raise her to the same level as Joep. She does
45
Butler, Judith. Undoing gender. New York: Routledge, 2004: p. 87.
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Akkie is shouted at when crossing a street, translation from Dutch: ‘Hey
jongen! Kijk een beetje uit ja?!’, ‘Ik ben geen jongen! Ik ben een meisje!’ (00:50:13-00:50:20)
47
Butler, Judith. Undoing gender. New York: Routledge, 2004: p. 87.
46
29
not bash into Joep or convince Elise that she can play soccer in order to dominate the boys on the
field, she just wants to aim for equality on the field; also made explicit with Akkie’s envisioned team
line-up, where she put herself, together with Joep, as strikers. Akkie’s last attempt to create equality
between men and women is symbolized when she challenges her physician, called Dokter Snor
(which can be literally translated to Doctor Moustache, a nickname that the physician got due to his
large, bristly moustache), to promise her to shave his moustache when he is not capable of healing
her. It is not only a clever way to eventually tell the bad news in a child friendly manner to the
spectator, but the removal of the moustache for a man is in this sense the counterpart of losing head
hair for a female; the moustache is a secondary sex characteristic for masculinity, while long hair is a
sign for femininity as is explained. The removal of the moustache symbolizes the reduction of the gap
between masculinity and femininity, and shows that it literally can change someone’s identity, since
Dokter Snor without a ‘snor’ (moustache) is not Dokter Snor anymore. When in the end Dokter Snor
shaves his moustache, Akkie’s and Dokter Snor’s bodies grew together. Ironically the bald characters
therefore have similar appearances at the end of the film.
Akkie is a strong character as the German title of the film already literally appoints: Starke
Mädchen Weinen Nicht (in English: Strong girls do not cry). For a lively and believable portrayal the
filmmakers must prevent their characters to become the stereotypical Strong Female Character and
Akkie is on the verge of becoming this stereotype. She is not shooting with big guns or waving around
with swords, but because of her overly masculine traits and in comparison with the other characters,
she definitely stands out as strong character. During the narrative Akkie does not really develop her
personality or views towards gender, from the first scene until the last scene she fights to be the
tough, independent girl. Akkie’s experiences change at the end, but this is mainly because of the
development within the other characters and especially Joep, who at the end accepts Akkie and
considers her as equal. Akkie, through the whole narrative, is who she is and does not change, but it
is also hard for her to truly naturalize her gender performance. This is mainly because the film aims
for a young target audience, specifically from nine year olds to twelve year olds, who especially
struggle for an identity or gender identity, where particularly the not acting like the other sex plays a
big part in these young adolescents’ lives (Galambos, Almeida and Petersen 1990: p. 1906). The
filmmakers clearly wanted to address this phenomenon, but by doing so, they explicitly emphasized
the gender identities in the film. Akkie however deviates from the heteronormative portrayal, and as
strong, tough, independent girl is emphasized in such a way that it is hard for the audience not to
notice Akkie as the Strong Female Character. Perhaps it could be stated that she even has too few
considered feminine traits not to approach the stereotypical. A strong gender challenging character
is complicated, flawed and compelling. Akkie, however, wants to be considered equal to a boy and in
the end she is always able to match boys in their masculine behaviour. She is evenly good, if not
30
better, at playing soccer compared to most boys; during a fight with Joep she shows she is equally
strong as him; she is always able to come up with clever replies to insults, resulting in laughter, and
eventually wins a game of hide-and-seek. In other words, Akkie is able to achieve everything she
wants, the only thing holding her back at the end is the leukemia, which can be considered an
external factor. Akkie therefore approaches the stereotypical Strong Female Character, and it seems
to imply that woman can only be strong if they equal in considered masculine behaviour and thereby
lose most of their femininity. The main problem, however, is that Akkie is not supported by other
female challenging gender identities. The remaining characters, except for Laurens, all conform to
the heterosexual matrix.
While Joep is the embodiment of the heteronormative male, Elise is the clear representative
of considered femaleness. Elise as character fits in Mulvey’s to-be-looked-at-ness as the passive
object for the male gaze as the physically desirable, sexually submissive female (Laughey 2007: p.
103). Elise is concerned with her female appearance, wearing pink feminine clothes, and she
wonders if she can become a model. She is mainly passive, does not dare to step up against the boys
and is very maternal over her cat. She is not confident about her own skills, does not dare to engage
in considered masculine behaviour and repeatedly confirms her desire for heterosexuality; not only
for a relationship for herself but she also feels the urge to encourage Akkie and her teachers to
engage in a heterosexual relationship. The scenes were Elise and Akkie have a conversation are
mainly about Elise who wants to try to bring Miss Ina and the gym teacher together in a love
relationship, or about Akkie who should kiss or start a relationship with Laurens. The way in which
Elise thinks about a relationship are also confirmative with the traditional norms. When the boy likes
or loves the girl, the girl only needs to passively accept to start a relationship, and Elise cannot
understand that when Miss Ina is a nice person and the gym teacher is single, they do not get
together. Akkie, however, is only interested in playing soccer and school camp, she does not
recognize love and she considers boys as mutual friends; nothing more, nothing less.
Elise is not the only character that creates a clear contrast with Akkie. Akkie’s mother is
overly concerned and very maternal over Akkie, while Akkie tries to be independent and wants to
make her own choices. Also nurse Afida conforms to the traditional representation of females in film.
Although Afida is very understanding towards Akkie, she convinces Akkie to wear a wig and tells
Akkie a story about her first lover in order to encourage Akkie to find a boyfriend. Until the end of
the narrative Akkie seems not interested in participating in this heteronormative behaviour, which
causes to create a stark contrast between Akkie and the other female characters. It definitely makes
Akkie stand out as lead character, but simultaneously divides the characters as on one side the
traditional, passive ‘Weak Female Characters’, and on the other side the ‘Strong Female Character’.
31
There is yet another character that does not conform to the established, traditional portrayal
of the gender norms, but he belongs to the other sex. Laurens is one of Akkie’s male friends and has
characteristics that cannot be labelled particular masculine according to traditional film rules. He
mostly hangs out with girls, loves to draw, he is open to Akkie’s feelings, and even how he sits on the
luggage carrier of a bike does not seem manly. The multiple drawings he draws for Akkie, the
dedication of a strip hero to Akkie, and his posture and looks indicate that he has feelings for Akkie.
He is a soft, blond boy who seeks love, which is made plain multiple times, but one on of the most
explicit examples is Laurens’ enthusiasm when Elise proposes to start a group about love. Laurens
has too little screen time though to make a definite statement against the heteronormative
representation. Laurens as a character however shows that Akkie can be accepted the way she is,
including her masculine traits.
This becomes clear in one of the most important scenes in the film. In this scene Akkie did
undergo several chemo’s and is finally allowed to join class sporadically. Miss Ina decides to celebrate
this with a fashion show for all of her students. One by one the students may enter the improvised
catwalk, a row of clutched tables, and walk back-and-forth to show their fancy dresses, foolish hats
and decorations. At first sight, this scene does not seem that important narratively, but this scene
gives a clear insight in the characters and initiates a reversal within these characters. The girls dress
ultimately girlish and try their best to impress on the catwalk. The boys also take part
enthusiastically, but still try to make fun of the fact that they participate in a fashion show, by putting
foolish objects on their head, like for example a flowerpot, a bathing cap, a huge afro wig and a pair
of shorts. Only Joep acts reluctantly, calling it childish and he tries to convince the boys not to
participate. When the boys for the first time neglect Joep’s dominance, Joep draws a long face; only
when Akkie pulls her pink and blue schoolbag over Joep’s head and Miss Ina urges him to join, Joep
hesitantly finds the courage to join in the considered feminine act for the male gaze. When the whole
class applauds and shouts his name, Joep climbs the catwalk with Akkie’s schoolbag on his head and
is encouraged by the attention of his class. In the beginning the fear of castration, the fear of a
punishment, for performing a feminine act is evident within Joep, but by observing his class’
approval, Joep engages in an active dance. Next, Akkie sets foot on the tables and during her dance
she takes of her hat, revealing for the first time her bald head, making her classmates fall silent. The
classmates look with fright, girls bring their hands to their mouths and the background music stops to
emphasize the shock, until Laurens breaks the silence: ‘Cool bowling bal!’.48 Laurens seems to accept
Akkie as she is, despite of her change in bodily appearance. The class cheers and applauds. The scene
shows that boundaries between considered feminine and masculine behaviour can be pushed at and
48
Dennis Bots. Cool Kids Don’t Cry. Akkie on the improvised catwalk, translation from Dutch: ‘Gave bowlingbal!’
(00:44:25)
32
that it can even be fun to do so. From this scene on, the classmates cautiously begin to accept each
other’s (gender) identity. There is no real development within Akkie’s character since Akkie always
tried to be herself, the only difference is that Akkie begins to feel accepted and therefore she does
not need to stand up for herself, resulting in a more implicit form of a challenging identity and
therefore resulting in a naturalization of her gender identity.
Cool Kids Don't Cry starts as a film that mainly conforms to the heteronormative
representation of gender seen in traditional Hollywood narratives and can be considered as a
continuation of the stylized repetition of gendered acts. The boys are tough, dominant and they
condemn behaviour that is not considered appropriate based on someone’s sex; the girls are passive,
aware of their feminine appearance and do not dare to step up to the boys’ dominance. Only Akkie
and Laurens deviate from the heteronormative representation and form a Challenging Gender
Identity. Akkie as character is however dependent of the other characters in the narrative. It is only
when the other characters accept Akkie’s behaviour and change their view on the gender hierarchy
in class, that Akkie’s gendered behaviour is naturalized. Still Akkie repeatedly diverges from the
traditional heteronormative representation of females in films and therefore does gender differently
by challenging the boundaries that separates the categories ‘female’, ‘male’, ‘femininity’ and
‘masculinitiy’.
33
34
THE COGNITIVE RECEPTION OF A CHALLENGING GENDER IDENTITY
As Parsons states in her article ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella Stories and the Construction of Gender and
Appropriate Behavior’ about fairy tales and fiction as sites for the construction of appropriate
gendered behaviour, ‘fairy tales are certainly not solely responsible for the acculturation of children,
they are an integral part of the complex layering of cultural stories and influences that affirm and
perpetuate cultural norms’.49 Fiction narratives constitute a ‘script’ for acceptable forms of feminine
and masculine behaviour and thereby they create positions to occupy for its spectators (Parsons
2004: p. 135-136). The embeddedness of standardized, appropriate gender behaviour however
disguises the fact that the narratives in fiction films are created and reproduced through the
dominant discourse and therefore conform to hegemonic masculinity (Parsons 2004: p. 136). The
iteration of these standardized appropriate gendered behaviour made the spectator accept this
gendered discourse as natural, essential, and conclusive, and therefore spectators tend to identify
with those characters that reaffirm what they already know through the cultural discourse (Parsons
2004: p. 136). The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don’t Cry however
deviate from the traditional heteronormative portrayal with their lead characters, Katniss Everdeen
and Akkie van Vliet. In this chapter the perception of these Challenging Gender Identities will be
researched with help of the cognitive paradigm.
Butler argues that acts, gestures and desires create the illusion of an interior and organizing
gender core, an illusion that regulates sexuality within the obligatory frame of heterosexuality (Butler
1999: p. 173), but nonetheless an illusion. The gender core does not exist outside of its doings and is
therefore illusionary. However it cannot be denied that there is no perception as the ‘reality’ of
gender. The spectator thinks that he knows what reality is, and takes a secondary appearance of
gender that does not conform to the hegemonic representation to be mere artifice, play, falsehood,
and illusion (Butler 1999: p. xxii). A paradox arises in which gender is a fantasy, an illusion, but
nonetheless cannot be understood as a mere illusion since the observer’s perception of gender is in
fact real. Gender is not a fact and the various acts of gender creates the idea of gender, but it cannot
be denied that ‘genders are part of what ‘humanizes’ individuals within contemporary culture;
indeed, those who fail to do their gender right are regularly punished’.50 So although the rules, or
laws, of the dominant hegemonic masculinity may be a fantasy, unreal, still it cannot be denied that
these laws are in fact tangible within our cognitions.
49
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate behavior’.
Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 35, no. 2 (June 2004): p. 135.
50
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’.
Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 522.
35
These gendered laws expresses themselves as attitudes within our brain. The thoughts on
what is appropriate behaviour for a boy and girl are captured within the spectator’s brain as attitudes
towards gender. As Festinger stated with his Cognitive Dissonance Theory, the brain has in general a
preference for beliefs, attitudes and tastes that support its own view, since a person is averse
towards the emotional state of cognitive dissonance and therefore tries to avoid this dissonance
(O’Keefe 2002: p. 78). For this reason hegemonic masculinity in film is in general preferred and
maintained, since it is iteration of acts that support the cultural discourse that is accepted as
naturalized knowledge. Observing a stylized repetition of behaviour unconsciously has effect on our
attitude towards the observed acts. The Mere Exposure Effect, founded by Zajonc, claims that the
more people are confronted with previous unknown, or unconscious perceived, stimuli, the more
appreciation there is for the stimulus (Heuvelman 2011: p. 89). So when observing a stylized
repetition of appropriate behaviours, although not consciously knowing that these actions conform
to the hegemonic heterosexual norm, the observer automatically grows an appreciation for this
repetitive behaviour, thereby creating a norm for appropriate gender behaviour in real life and
within films. The spectator may therefore also re-enact the behaviour, because a spectator similarly
tries to avoid dissonance between its behaviour and its attitudes within itself (O’Keefe 2002: p. 78),
and since our attitudes are constructed through fictions that are produced by the dominant cultural
discourse, spectators are likely to act according to these hegemonic norms.
Although Butler argues that there is no such thing as a gender core, she acknowledges the
fact that the perseverance of a balance between attitude and behaviour seems to create an internal
core as she writes: ‘According to the understanding of identification as an enacted fantasy or
incorporation, however, it is clear that coherence is desired, wished for, idealized, and that this
idealization is an effect of a corporeal signification. In other words, acts, gestures, and desire produce
the effect of an internal core or substance, but produce this on the surface of the body’.51 According
to Butler the illusion of a gender core is created by the stylization of bodily gestures, movements and
styles (Butler 1999: p. 179), therefore it can be concluded that a person’s gender identity is
determined by its behaviour. This is in accordance with the Self Perception Theory, created by Daryl
Bem, which states that a person deducts his or her, or someone else’s, attitude from the actions
someone performs, or in other words someone’s behaviour. A person is only able to see what
behaviour is performed and based on this information, he or she is able to determine someone
else’s, but also its own, attitude; attitudes that in the human cognition form the ‘reality’ of gender.
Katniss and Akkie, as Challenging Gender Identities, deviate from the heteronormative
representation of gender identities and gendered acts in films. By creating believable female
51
Butler, Judith. Gender Troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge, 1999: p. 173.
36
characters which inhabit internalized feminine and masculine traits, the filmmakers produced a
subtle manner to undermine the dominant hegemonic norms. The characters blur, transcend and
challenge the established representation of the obligatory dominant heterosexual matrix. For Katniss
and Akkies the margins of the categories ‘male’, ‘female’, ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ are not fixed
and the characters show the malleability of those by cultural hegemony determined boundaries. To
research if this subtle manner is also effective in deconstructing gender as socially constitutive parts
as either masculine or feminine, and in the probable recognition that the seemingly knowable sex
categories of male and female are themselves fundamentally unstable discursive productions (Nayak
and Kehily: p. 460), the possible changes in attitudes towards gender will be researched with help of
the Elaboration Likelihood Model, developed by Petty and Cacioppo.
The probability of attitude changes towards gender within the spectator and the eventual
durability of this attitude change is mainly determined by the nature of elaboration and the intensity
of the spectator’s engagement with the information or observed behaviour, that is presented to him
or her (O’Keefe 2002: p. 137). The Elaboration Likelihood Model shows two important and strongly
related factors, that may cause changes in attitude among the spectator and the durability of this
attitude change. The first important factor is the specific cognitive route through which the spectator
perceives the different aspects of film, which will be elaborated on with Daniel Kahneman’s System 1
and System 2. The second factor is the elaboration or engagement with the film and its characters,
which will be studied with help of Murray Smith’s Structure of Sympathy.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model consists of two different routes, the central route and the
peripheral route to persuasion, which describe the persuasion processes involved when engaging, or
as used in the theory ‘elaborating’ with a specific media message. ‘Elaboration’ is defined as engaging
in issue-relevant thinking (O’Keefe 2002: p. 138). Elaborating can differ from extensive issue-relevant
thinking, which occurs when elaboration is relatively high, to unconscious processes that can
influence your attitude, which occur when elaboration is relatively low. When elaboration is high,
your brain follows the model’s central route. The central route in its extreme is the ‘careful
examination of the information contained in the message, close scrutiny of the message’s
arguments, consideration of other issue-relevant material […] and so on’.52 In other words, when a
receiver thoughtfully examines issue-relevant considerations, he or she passes along the model’s
central route (O’Keefe 2002: p. 139). The peripheral route consists of processes that occur when a
receiver encounters media messages and his or her elaboration is relatively low. Attitude changes
can occur when consciously, examining the information, but can also be caused by peripheral,
unconscious aspects, although the last mentioned will have less effect when the conscious
52
O’Keefe, Daniel J. Persuasion, theory and research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2002: p.139.
37
elaboration is high, but still have significant influence when these aspects are experienced
frequently.
Image 1: The Elaboration Likelihood Model by Petty and Cacioppo.
53
The peripheral route will be mostly addressed when engaging with gender thematics in
traditional films. This does not mean that young adolescent spectators do not engage intensively
with film; for film is at a complex level of elaboration since the various aspects within film addresses
both routes. As Petty and Cacioppo emphasized, the model does not consist of two distinct routes,
there is rather an underlying elaboration continuum of which the central and peripheral routes are
there simply to show two prototypical extremes on this continuum (O’Keefe 2002: p. 140). However
the gender thematics in film are most probable to be perceived through the peripheral route, since
gender behaviour in heteronormative representation are perceived as natural. Therefore these
53
The abbreviation P.A.R. stands for primary effective reactions. Reactions that occur unconsciously when
experiencing something (new), mostly linked to emotion and feeling.
38
gendered behaviours will not be consciously engaged with, resulting in the fact that the spectator’s
elaboration with gender in these films will be low.
Daniel Kahneman’s fictious cognitive System 1 and System 2, elaborated on in his book
Thinking, Fast and Slow, more specifically defines the conscious and unconscious perception of
observed behaviour. The terms ‘System 1’ and ‘System 2’ were originally proposed by psychologists
Keith Stanovich and Richard West, and have the following definitions:
System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little or no effort
and no sense of voluntary control.
System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand
it, including complex computations. The operations of System 2 are often
associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and
concentration.54
System 1 continuously processes the information that enters the human brain through its senses. It
automatically and effortlessly generates suggestions like impressions, intuitions, intentions and
feelings towards System 2. System 2, the system that can consciously construct thoughts in an
orderly series of steps and which is activated when a question arises for which System 1 does not
offer an answer, has the tendency to invest only a minimal level of effort that is strictly necessary to
respond to extern stimuli (Kahneman 2011: p. 24). The division of functions within the human brain is
highly efficient for it minimizes effort and optimizes performance (Kahneman 2011: p. 25). System 1
is programmed in such a way that it is mostly accurate in its models of familiar situations and in its
short-term predictions, and on top of that its initial reactions to challenges are commonly
appropriate (Kahneman 2011: p. 25), while the conscious System 2 is only activated intensively when
an automatic response is not sufficient or when unfamiliar situations cannot be understood properly
by System 1.
Katniss and Akkie deviate from the traditional female representation in films and therefore
their gendered behaviour will not be understood properly by the spectator’s cognitive System 1. The
character’s challenging identity is not programmed as a familiar social situation in film within the
human brain, which causes System 2 to be activated in order to process the information consciously,
resulting in more elaboration from the spectator. Watching gender in films such as The Hunger
Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and Cool Kids Don't Cry make spectators’ elaboration with
gender shift from the peripheral route in the Elaboration Likelihood Model to its central route.
54
Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Group, 2011: p. 20-21.
39
Elise in Cool Kids Don’t Cry as the representative for femaleness with her long ponytail, her
wish to become a model to be the passive object for the male gaze, her feminine behaviour and her
desire for heterosexuality within her surroundings, may be a simplified and unilateral representation
for females, but still is the heteronormative portrayal that is most often seen in traditional film
narratives. The same counts for Katniss’ sister Prim in The Hunger Games who similarly is passive,
innocent, seeking for comfort, safety and mothering. Those representations fit in what the spectator
knows as the passive, submissive female in film narratives and these familiar representation are
perceived and processed by the unconscious System 1. If a representation however deviates from
the familiar, as Katniss and Akkie do, System 1 is not able to understand and process the information
properly and activates the conscious System 2. With representations of drag, transvestites and
transsexuals it sounds more reasonable that the spectator is not able to understand the situation
easily since these are considered more extreme examples. However Katniss and Akkie surely do
depart from the hegemonic representation of females, but do this in a more considered natural way.
From the research by Taber, Woloshyn and Lane it can be determined that when the female
children ‘perceived the characters of Katniss and Peeta in ways that defied traditional notions of
‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’, they also struggled to accept these unconventional traits and behaviors,
demonstrating the strength of societal gender norms with respect to not only their own agency but
also the ways they viewed the characters’.55 The conscious System 2 is constructed through the
iteration of heteronormative acts in such a way that it is difficult to accept the challenging behaviour.
So although Katniss and Akkie as Challenging Gender Identities make a shift from the peripheral
route to the central route within the spectator’s cognition by breaking with the traditional
representation, it is difficult to determine if System 2 will eventually accept and correspondingly
process this information in order for a significant attitude change within the spectator. The
normative gendered laws within our cognition that are stored as attitudes within our System 2 are
deep-rooted by the frequent repetition of hegemonic representations in such a way that it is hard for
young adolescents to accept challenging characters.
For Katniss however it is not that simple to determine to what extent young adolescents are
consciously aware of her Challenging Gender Identity, since she naturalizes this identity through the
whole film and therefore her challenges can be considered implicit. Katniss does in many ways
challenge the established heteronormative ideal, although children may not conceive this
consciously. In Taber, Woloshyn and Lane’s research the children for a large part seemed to become
only consciously aware of Katniss’ challenging character through the play of games, or the suggestive
55
Taber, Nancy, Vera Woloshyn, Laura Lane. ‘’She’s more like a guy’ and ‘he’s more like a teddy bear’: girl’s
perception of violence and gender in The Hunger Games’. Journal of Youth Studies, vol. 16, no. 8 (Feb 2013):
p. 1030.
40
directing of the researchers. The research was based on the book and it is fair to assume that visuals
in film more explicitly address the challenges in gender, since gender is a repetition of acts,
behaviours and bodily gestures perceived through visual images, as well in real life as in audio-visual
messages, but this can only be concluded through specific experimentation. However Katniss’
challenge against the traditional female representation still is naturalized through the embodiment
of a mix of feminine and masculine traits, what naturalizes her gender identity and consequently will
create a minimum of alienation between her and the spectators. This naturalization results in less
elaboration from children on the gender aspects and therefore may be accepted by the spectator’s
cognition. It however also means that the engagement runs mainly through the Elaboration
Likelihood Model’s peripheral route, since it is an unconscious perception, which causes less attitude
change and less durable attitude change.
It seems that if a filmmaker wants to create a strong, compelling and believable female
character, it is necessary to break with the vicious circle of heteronormative representations to
consciously perceive the character by System 2, but its gendered behaviour must be naturalized so it
will be perceived by System 1. Males are already portrayed in various manners in film, while females
mostly confirm to the traditional representation in film. It is necessary that various representations
of the female in film must be naturalized. Not the simplified representation as passive, submissive
female, but the female as complex subject must not feel alienated by the spectators and therefore
the gender aspects needs to be perceived automatic with System 1. However the character as a
whole with all its complexities, flaws and complications must be perceived by System 2, in order to
engage the spectators with the film character resulting in an attractive, unpredictable and strong, but
believable, character to watch.
For a significant difference in the attitudes within children for the naturalized perception of
Challenging Gender Identities, a repetition of challenging gendered acts have to be shown to be able
to naturalize the perceived behaviour for young adolescents (Butler 1999: p. xv). The problem for The
Hunger Games and Cool Kids Don't Cry however is that, except for Katniss, Peeta, Akkie and Laurens,
the remaining characters mainly conform to the heterosexual matrix. In The Hunger Games Prim is
passive, innocent and unable to care for herself, seeking for comfort, safety and mothering by
Katniss. This description mainly fits to Rue too, one of the other competitors in the Games. Katniss’
escort from the Capitol, Effie Trinket, is superficial and overly concerned with appearances and
manners (Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 3). Gale, a boy from district twelve, is muscular, a hunter and
attracted to Katniss. Haymitch, a Hunger Games mentor, is an alcoholic and apathetic, although
develops a soft spot for Katniss. The male main characters from the Capitol wear drag, but
nonetheless all comply to the masculine representation of a traditional male character. In Cool Kids
Don’t Cry Joep, the tall and tough boy, represents the dominant hegemonic force exercising his
41
power over females and subordinate males. Elise, Akkie’s mother and the nurse Afida, in contrast,
functions as the strong representation of femaleness. So all other characters seem to fit in the
established categories of ‘masculinity’ or ‘femininity’. Paradoxically, these other heteronormative
characters make Katniss and Peeta stand out and emphasize their Challenging Gender Identities, but
at the same time make Katniss and Peeta an exception to the rule. Only a reiteration of multiple
ways to embody femininity and masculinity will naturalize behaviour that deviates from the
heteronormative representation.
The second factor of the Elaboration Likelihood Model that determines the probability of
attitude changes and the durability of this attitude change, is determined by the spectator’s
elaboration or engagement with the film and its characters. Identification with a character, which is a
form of high elaboration, has the possibility to result in a durable attitude change. Butler, however,
argues that ‘identification is constantly figured as a desired event or accomplishment, but one which
finally is never achieved; […]. In this sense, identifications belong to the imaginary’.56 It is true, that a
spectator is never truly able to fully and finally identify with a film character, since it is not possible to
completely transform into a specific character -in that sense identification is imaginary-, but this
largely depends on the definition of the term ‘identification’ as Smith states. The term, in film theory
and criticism, always refers to a range of phenomena rather than a singular notion (Smith 1994: p.
34). Smith came up with his Structure of Sympathy in order to clarify the different levels of the term
‘identification’ and thus the forms of elaboration with film or its characters.
Although Smith did believe that the actual original use of ‘identification’ was possible,
implying that the spectator is not bounded to physical and spatiotemporal conjectures, and may
simulate internal states or values of the character, his Structure of Sympathy is mainly based on
‘acentral imagining’, which includes a for more indirect form of engagement with the film characters;
a form of sympathy instead of empathy (Smith 1994: p. 36). So Smith did not intent to reject the
term ‘identification’, he tried to found additional concepts to describe elaboration between the
spectator and character by narratological principals, resulting in three distinct levels of engagement:
recognition, alignment and allegiance. Recognition is the simplest form of engagement related
around the image of a body; characters are recognized by their looks and behaviour, provided that
these characters act as, and in, real-world experiences (Smith 1994: p. 40). The second form is
alignment, describing the process of access to a character’s actions and the character’s knowledge
and feelings, is divided into two subcategories, namely spatial attachment and subjective access
(Smith 1994: p. 41). Spatial attachment describes the capacity of the narration that defines the level
of restriction to the actions of a single or more characters. With subjective access, Smith means the
56
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 105.
42
degree of access that the spectator has to the subjectivity of one or more characters, which logically
can vary amongst the various characters (Smith 1994: p. 41). The final form of engagement,
allegiance, is the moral and ideological evaluation of characters by the spectators (Smith 1994: p. 41).
Allegiance is the level in which we can ‘identify with’ characters and their actions, which is most of
the time dependent of factors, including spectator’s attitudes related to class, nation, age, ethnicity
and gender.
Identification with characters and the spectator’s judgement of entertainment value are
strongly attached. Vorderer, Steen and Chan defined entertainment as a process that ‘involves the
exploration of relationships through simulations that permit individuals to identify with substitute
agents and thus create the subjective experience of relationships’.57 In other words, the basic need
for a spectator’s satisfaction is the need to come into contact with or relate to media characters
(Iguarta, 2010: p. 347). Other social researchers share this view, although in some cases they use
slightly different articulations. For example Gunter and Wober state that the level of involvement is
the crucial factor for appreciation; Lloyd and Nancy think entertainment value is the most important
factor for involvement; and Rolland declares that entertainment value is determined by the level in
which the spectator is carried away by emotion (Heuvelman, 2011: p. 87). These conclusions show a
back-and-forth collaboration between on one side appreciation and entertainment value, and on the
other side involvement with narratives, characters and its emotions. The results suggests that a spiral
is at work; the more you are involved with a film, the more you will enjoy watching the film, which
causes you to stay involved and possibly attracts you to become even more involved, which
positively adds up to the spectator’s evaluation of the entertainment value, and so forth.
So for filmmakers in general it is essential for economic reasons to create as much
engagement between spectators and characters as possible. Engagement will lead to a higher
evaluation of entertainment value, what eventually will result in more profit for the industry. In The
Hunger Games it is required that Katniss, as lead character, achieves the highest form of elaboration,
the level of allegiance. This, however, is not as obvious as with the more traditional Hollywood
female characters, since Katniss deviates from this heteronormative portrayal and children ´identify
with the characters, especially when those characters reaffirm what they already know through
cultural discourse´.58 The spectator expects the characters within the films to behave in what they
consider culturally appropriate ways and to avoid cognitive dissonance, they rather resist texts in
which characters do not so (Parsons 2004: p. 141).
57
Vorderer et al. in Igartua, Juan-Jose. ‘Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional
feature films’. Communications, vol. 35, no. 4 (Nov 2010): p. 347.
58
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate behavior’.
Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 35, no. 2 (June 2004): p. 136.
43
Katniss’ shifting between gender roles will be new for most children, but Katniss’
naturalization of her shifting gender identity and her desirability towards children will invite these
children to engage with her on the level of allegiance. In this case, with desirability is not meant
Mulvey’s passive female objectification for the male gaze, but rather the fantasy or idealization of a
better self, as Butler describes: ‘To identify is not to oppose desire. Identification is phantasmatic
trajectory and resolution of desire; an assumption of place; a territorializing of an object which
enables identity through the temporary resolution of desire, but which remains desire’.59 Katniss’
masculine adventurous, tough, rebellious personality in combination with her protective, maternal
features form a desirable character for its spectators, although it is rarely seen through the cultural
discourse. The interesting thing with Katniss is, that she not only has the ability to form a high level of
elaboration with girls, which is most expected since spectators rather identify with the own sex, but
also with boys. The young male spectator can engage with the teenage female hero since she is
portrayed in a film genre (post-apocalypic, action) that is conventionally associated with males
(Dubrofsky and Ryalls 2014: p. 12), and on top of that Katniss naturally embodies traits that are
considered masculine and therefore will also attract males to engage with her.
Since in Cool Kids Don't Cry the gender theme is recognizable for young adolescents and
made relatively explicit within the class dynamics, male spectators probably find it hard to identify or
engage in a high level of elaboration with Akkie. From the seventh till the ninth grade, the rated
importance of not acting like the opposite sex peaked (Galambos, Almeida and Petersen 1990: p.
1906) and therefore it is not likely that boys will intensively engage with Akkie, simply because she is
a female. Laurens on the other hand has too little screen time and his role does only require to
engage on Smith’s stated level of alignment, describing the process of access to a character’s actions
and the character’s knowledge and feelings (Smith 1994: p. 41). For a spectator it is enough to
understand Laurens’ actions; the spectator is not required to evaluated the character on the level of
allegiance. On top of that, Laurens lacks the desirability to engage with on a higher level, since he is
not that attractive narratively towards the spectator.
The male spectator is in a sense forced to engage with Joep, the somewhat stereotypical
heteronormative masculine representation of the Oedipal scenario. Only at the end of the film Joep
emerges as a caring, sympathetic boy, not particularly representing the traditional masculine image.
Through the narrative the spectator learns more about the reasons behind Joep’s masculine, unkind
behaviour and his urge to show dominance over girls. His ridicules and insults towards masculine
feminization and feminine phallicization are explained through his relation with his father and the
desire to be the reflection of his father’s behaviour, also seen in Freud’s theory of the masculine fear
59
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. New York: Routledge, 1993: p. 99.
44
of castration. Joep’s choice, not to visit Akkie, is clarified by an experience Joep had in the past. All
these explanations of Joep’s behaviour cautiously mould Joep as a victim of external factors and
therefore gains sympathy, especially when even Akkie, the one that does attract spectators to
elaborate with on a high level, in the end accepts Joep’s behaviour and ultimately kisses him. The
question arises if this turn in Joep’s character from the ultimate representation of the masculinity to
a sympathetic character does not come too late, since the primary affective reaction of the Haloeffect has the tendency to be irrevocable (Heuvelman 2011: p. 89). It is difficult to determine if this
last shift in character can still have a significant change in attitude towards gender.
Akkie approaching the stereotypical Strong Female Character can however be considered
more problematic. As Butler emphasizes, ‘just as metaphors lose their metaphoricity as they congeal
through time into concepts, subversive performances always run the risk of becoming deadening
cliches through their repetition’.60 Filmmakers must be aware that by repeatedly replacing femininity
by masculinity in a female character to create the so-called strong character, eventually the female
lead character will be categorized and stereotyped as the Strong Female Character, creating just
another stereotypical idea of a portrayal of women in film, although the portrayal may be against the
present traditional representation of women. Parsons warns for this phenomenon in her article:
‘Simplistic role reversals often present a comedic rather than an empowering, realistic view of
possibility and lack the subtlety that is most effective in challenging stereotypes’.61 A strong character
is not measured by its physical, intellectual or emotional strength though, it is however determined
by the versatility and depth of the character within the narrative; it is complicated, flawed and
compelling (Rucka 2012). A stylized repetition of acts of the Strong Female Character in film may
eventually lead to a simplified and universal representation, leading to a stereotype. When the brain
finally recognizes the character as a whole as stereotypical, the earlier discussed System 1, the
fictious cognitive system that operates unconsciously and automatically, will take over the brain’s
perception of the model, since it generally forms accurate models of familiar situations and thereby
creates adequately responses in a mainly automatic and unconscious manner that only requires a
comfortable level of effort (Heuvelman 2011: p. 67).
When the brain in a film encounters images of Strong Female Women again, the brain will fill
in knowledge about the character based on previous perceptions. This results in a simplified and
passive perception, while a strong character needs complexity and credibility. A perception of the
whole character by System 1 will ultimately lead to less engagement and elaboration from the
60
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 1999:
p. xxi.
61
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate behavior’.
Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 35, no. 2 (June 2004): p. 139.
45
spectator, which makes it harder to change a spectator’s attitude and may in the end lead to a
decrease in entertainment value according to the spectator.
It can be concluded that Katniss and Akkie open fields of doing gender differently, but that
young adolescent’s perception of these Challenging Gender Identities is complex and complicated. In
order for these characters to influence the spectator’s attitudes towards gender in general, but also
towards the representation of females in traditional films, they must take into account two factors:
the intensity of the elaboration with the character, and the conscious and unconscious routes
through which the character and its gendered behaviour is perceived. The continual reiteration of
hegemonic norms have embedded strong attitudes that conform to those heteronormative norms.
For young adolescents it is hard to accept a character that deviates from the traditional image of
male/masculinity and female/femininity, since in general they prefer images that support their own
knowledge about gender, which is based on norms that are produced through the dominant cultural
discourse. Only a reiteration of Challenging Gender Identities within film will naturalize females to be
portrayed in various manners. Females as gendered subjects must be represented through multiple
roles within film and therefore become natural. The female character as a whole, as the one who
carries the narrative, must be perceived consciously as a complex subject with all its complexities,
flaws and complications. The spectator should not wonder if the observed behaviour is appropriate
for a female or male, as if every character must be enclosed in a traditional category; the spectator
must accept the female or male representation and instead wonder what the character’s motivation
within the narrative is, to behave in the way the character behaves.
46
A NEW APPROACH
The field of cognition and its reception is a complicated area of research. This thesis shows the
beginnings of the approach to connect gender thematics with the cognitive paradigm. These are two
research fields that, as far as I could find, are not yet connected in the past by other scholars, while,
as is argued in this thesis, it is difficult to deny that these fields are not connected. Feminist’s texts
mostly have an ideology about the way specific representations must be accepted and therefore
write about how the gendered world ought to be. In this thesis I tried to emphasize that in order to
achieve a difference in the perspectives on gender, it is important that the field of cognition is also
addressed, because it is in the human cognition that attitudes towards gendered acts, behaviour and
expressions, are captured. Butler argues that gender is an illusion and an imitation without an
original, since there is no doer behind the deed. It however cannot be denied that this gender core,
although illusionary, creates a ‘reality’ of gender, consisting of gender norms that are determined by
cultural hegemony. Gender norms that set the laws of what is considered appropriate and therefore
are part of what ‘humanizes’ individuals within contemporary culture. This gender reality has real
consequences, since people are punished when they deviate from what others assume to be the
natural knowledge of gender. To say that gender is merely a fantasy, indicates that it is in fact a role
we play and that it can be stopped at any time, but this is absolutely not the case for gender.
Although attitudes towards gender are based on an imitation without an original, these attitudes still
form opinions about observed behaviour and acts. By bringing in the cognitive paradigm it can be
researched how representations and expressions can subvert established hegemonic attitudes and
how one’s notion of the possible and real can be shifted.
The films The Hunger Games, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire en Cool Kids Don't Cry have a
new approach in deviating from the traditional hegemonic portrayal. The lead characters, Katniss
Everdeen en Akkie van Vliet, portray a new ideology of female heroism, by internalizing feminine and
masculine traits within the female character to create a believable, compelling and strong character
which challenges the heteronormative representation in Hollywood film. At the end of the twentieth
century a few exceptional heroines were created, who had the task to attack the dominant
masculine film industry. The heroines’ feminine behaviour was completely replaced with masculine
traits which felt exaggerated, even for the term ‘masculine’.The new ideology of female heroism
however could more effectively function as role models for women. With their naturalized and
internalized mix of feminine and masculine characteristics Katniss and Akkie challenge the normative
representation of female characters in traditional films, as well as the hegemonic powers within the
narrative. The characters therefore reflect on the imitative structure by which gender itself is
produced and disputes the heteronormative claim on naturalness and originality. The new approach
47
to the female heroine opens a field of possibilities within the female gender category itself. Katniss
and Akkie show that it is possible to deviate from the traditional image of the female film character
as submissive and beautiful, and do gender differently, but still have a successful film character with
which the spectator is able and attracted to engage with.
Although Katniss and Akkie attract the spectator to engage with them in a high level of
elaboration, it is shown that it is very difficult to change young adolescent’s attitude towards gender,
since their cognition is constructed through the cultural discourse. Even though the characters are
successful and function as models for children, it appears that young adolescents do not simply
accept representations that do not conform to the traditional heteronormative portrayal. Only a
naturalization of various female representations, which can only be achieved by an iteration of
internalized challenging gendered acts, can eventually help young adolescences to accept female
characters that deviate from the traditional portrayal. In order to produce a strong, compelling and
believable female character, it is necessary that the gendered behaviour must be unconsciously
accepted in our cognition as natural; it is the character as a whole that must attract the spectator to
consciously engage with.
This thesis solemnly tried to describe the cognitive complications when experiencing a
character that does not conform to the present ideas about the ‘reality’ of gender, I tried to avoid
judgements that would claim how gender representations ought to be, although it is difficult not to
judge at all when researching these films with corresponding research fields. This thesis only
elaborates on a few cognitive theories and principals, which are connected with gender thematics. It
is only a first step in the approach to research gender with help of the cognitive paradigm. The
human brain is complex in such a way that it is complicated to give a simple and unified idea of how
the brain responds to experiences, especially when those experience are as complicated as gender.
More research and experimentation may show how young adolescents respond to observed
gendered behaviour and how they react towards gendered behaviour that does not conform with
what they know. The question arises if representations and expressions that are not considered
appropriate ultimately get rejected or that they still influence the human cognition. Future
experimentation may determine if the naturalized behaviour is consciously perceived by young
adolescents and what the exact attitude change may be. Although not wanting to repeat myself, the
gender thematics combined with the cognitive paradigm can open fields for research in how to
change the notion of a reality of gender, which is necessary since this reality is part of what
humanizes individuals within contemporary culture.
48
Literature
Butler, Judith. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits. New York: Routledge, 1993.
Butler, Judith. Gender troubles: Feminism and the subversion of identity. 2nd ed. New York:
Routledge, 1999.
Butler, Judith. ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist
theory’. Theatre Journal, vol. 40, no. 4 (Dec 1988): p. 519-531.
Butler, Judith. Undoing gender. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Campbell, Jan, Janet Harbord. ‘Playing it again: Citation, reiteration or circularity?’. Theory, Culture &
Society, vol. 16 (1999): p. 229-239.
Connell, R.W. Masculinities: Knowledge, power and social change. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1995.
Connell, R.W., James W. Messerschmidt. ‘Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept’. Gender &
Society, vol. 19, no. 6 (Dec 2005): p. 829-859.
Dubrofsky, Rachel E., Emily D. Ryalls. ‘The Hunger Games: Performing notperforming to authenticate
femininity and whiteness’. Critical Studies in Media Communication, (2014): p. 1-15.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the oppressed. Transl. Myra Bergman Ramos. 2nd ed. New York: The
Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000.
Galambos, Nancy L., David M. Almeida, Anne C. Petersen. ‘Masculinity, femininity, and sex role
attitudes in early adolescence: Exploring Gender intensification’. Child Development, vol. 61, no. 6
(Dec 1990): p. 1905-1914.
Heuvelman, Ard, et al. Mediapsychologie. The Hague: Boom Lemma uitgevers, 2011.
Holmes, Linda. ‘What really makes Katniss stand out? Peeta, her movie girlfriend’. Npr.org. 25 Nov
2013. 21-05-2014. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2013/11/25/247146164/what-reallymakes-katniss-stand-out-peeta-her-movie-girlfriend?>
Igartua, Juan-Jose. ‘Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional feature
films’. Communications, vol. 35, no. 4 (Nov 2010): p. 347-373.
Irving, Sarnoff, Seth M. Corwin. ‘Castration anxiety and the fear of death’. Journal of Personality, vol.
27, issue 3 (Sep 1959): p. 374-385.
Jacques Vriens. 2013. Unieboek. 08-07-2014 <http://www.jacquesvriens.nl/biografie.htm>
Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin Group, 2011.
Laughey, Dan. Key themes in media theory. New York: Open University Press, 2007.
49
Lears, T.J. Jackson. ‘The concept of cultural hegemony: Problems and possibilities’. The American
Historical Review, vol. 90, no. 3 (Jun. 1985): p. 567-593.
McDougall, Sophia. ‘I hate strong female characters’. Newstatesman.com. 15 Aug 2013. 26-06-2014.
< http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/08/i-hate-strong-female-characters>
Mills, Catherine. ‘Efficacy and vulnerability: Judith Butler on reiteration and resistance’. Australian
Feminist Studies, vol. 15, no. 32 (2000): p. 265-279.
Mitchell, Jennifer. ‘Of queer necessity: Panem’s Hunger Games as gender games’. In: Mary Clark,
Leila Pharr, ed. Of bread, blood and The Hunger Games: Critical essays on the Suzanne Collins
trilogy. Jefferson (North Carolina): McFarland & Company, 2012: p. 1-16. 19-05-2014
<https://www.academia.edu/5316318/Of_Queer_Necessity_Panems_Hunger_Games_as_Gender
_Games>
Moore, Suzanne. ‘Why the Hunger Games’ Katniss Everdeen is a role model for our times’.
theguardian.com. The Guardian. 19-05-2014
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/27/why-hunger-games-katnisseverdeen-role-model-jennifer-lawrence>.
Mulvey, Laura. ‘Visual pleasure and narrative cinema’. Screen, vol. 16 (Autumn 1975): p. 6-18.
Nayak, Anoop, Mary Jane Kehily. ‘Gender Undone: Subversion, regulation and embodiment in the
work of Judith Buter’. British Journal of Sociology of Education (20 nov 2006): p. 459-472.
O’Keefe, Daniel J. Persuasion, theory and research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2002.
Parsons, Linda T. ‘Ella Evolving: Cinderella stories and the construction of gender and appropriate
behavior’. Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 35, no. 2 (June 2004): p. 135-154.
Rosello, Mireille. ‘Stereotypes and iterativity’. In: Declining the stereotype: Ethnicity and
representation in French cultures’. London: University Press of New England, 1998: p. 21-40.
Rucka, Greg. ‘Why I write “Strong Female Characters”’. Io9.com. 22 may 2012. 04-06-2014
<http://io9.com/5912366/why-i-write-strong-female-characters>
Smith, Murray. ‘Altered states: Character and emotional response in the cinema’. Cinema Journal,
vol. 33, no. 4 (Summer, 1994): p. 34-56.
Taber, Nancy, Vera Woloshyn, Laura Lane. ‘’She’s more like a guy’ and ‘he’s more like a teddy bear’:
girl’s perception of violence and gender in The Hunger Games’. Journal of Youth Studies, vol. 16,
no. 8 (Feb 2013): p. 1022-1037.
Waller, Jordan. ‘The official 100 sexiest women in the world 2014: The full list’. FHM.com. 30 april
2014. 02-07-2014 <http://www.fhm.com/girls/news/1-jennifer-lawrence-85524>
Wojcik-Andrews, Ian. Children’s film: History, ideology, pedagogy, theory. New York: Garland
Publishing Inc., 2000.
50
Remaining text
The Hunger Games. Reg. Gary Ross. Lionsgate, 2012.
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Reg. Francis Lawrence. Lionsgate, 2013.
Achtste Groepers Huilen Niet (Cool Kids Don’t Cry). Reg. Dennis Bots. Bijker, Rinkel Film, 2012.
51