Core Post - Sabrina Sonner

Throughout Dyer’s chapter on Monroe and sexuality, he refers to the multitude of ways different attitudes towards sex manifest themselves in the star image of Monroe. Near the end of the chapter, he summarizes his main points writing, “time and again, Monroe seems to buy into the ‘progressive’ view of sex, a refusal of its dirtiness – but that means buying into the traps of sexual discourses discussed above: the playboy discourse, with women as the vehicle for male sexual freedom and the psycho discourse, with its evocation of the ineffable unknowability of sexuality for women” (Dyer 58). Understanding both these progressive and regressive discourses (that is, the ones Dyer describes as the playboy and psycho discourses) helped me to better understand Monroe’s appearance in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Throughout the film, though having an outwardly sexual demeanor and constantly being sought after for this sexuality, Lorelei herself has no apparent interest in sex for herself. In fact, she scolds her friend as being foolish for having sexual interests in the men aboard the ship. In this film, we see Dyers arguments for how Monroe could appear both at once as naturally and unapologetically sexual, and as a woman with no apparent interest in sex due to this “playboy discourse” that he more thoroughly defines earlier in the chapter: “women are to be sexuality, yet this really means as a vehicle for male sexuality. Monroe refers to her own sexualness.. but read through the eyes of the playboy discourse, she is not referring to a body she experiences but rather to a body that is experienced by others, that is, men” (Dyer 39). While sex is guiltless for her character, its ultimate purpose is the serve the men in the film.

Though Dyer’s presentation of Monroe “as a vehicle for male sexuality” explains the dichotomy in her character in a way that takes into account cultural context (and in a way that is likely what explained her appearance at the time), it had a somewhat different resonance for me watching it in 2018. While watching the film, I couldn’t help but find something oddly asexual about the performance of this woman so known for her sexuality. To clarify, I use the word asexual to describe the sexual orientation, that of a person who does not experience sexual attraction. She exudes sexuality, but it is entirely a tool, a means rather than the end. To me, it seemed that it was the use of sex as someone who does not actually feel the attraction herself, if not also the performance of sexuality by a person who does not experience that attraction. And textually her character constantly states that her interest in men is not due to an attraction to them for any reason other than their money. While taking the cultural context Dyer brings into account, the reason for this seeming asexuality is likely due to the focus on male sexuality over female. This relates to the element of the psycho discourse he describes, “the psycho discourse makes female sexual pleasure dependent on male sexuality, while denying the autonomous sexuality of the clitoris” (Dyer 58). But looking at Monroe’s performance from 2018 where so many films I see have women madly attracted to men regardless of if it makes narrative sense, I found something almost freeing in this arguably asexual portrayal of a woman.