Media Representation Of Jame Gumb

Gender and gender identity are best described as personal thought towards an individual’s idea of self that is projected into the larger and more public social sphere. How an individual presents their concept of gender identity can be validated or ignored, based on how the public reacts to the expression of gender and preconceptions of how one gender should be presented based on social and cultural norms. In current times, media representation is another vehicle used to present and establish new social norms regarding gender expression. Media inclusivity of unconventional or underrepresented identities and states of being and perception could bring awareness and inclusion of marginalized individuals and identities. In this essay, the focus

As the film progresses, Jame Gumb who is dubbed “Buffalo Bill” is described as a psychotic serial killer that has the delusion that he is “transsexual”, which drives him to victimize specifically women in his serial killings. The women that he murders are skinned and used as pieces to create what Gumb considers to be his conception of what he would look like as his ideal feminine identity; and through the act of creating his idealized self, Gumb will finally become the woman that he desperately aspires to be. Going beyond the grotesque skin-deep overview and onto answering the first question which is: within the context and course of the film, how is gender and gender identity defined. When looking at gender through the eyes of Gumb, gender appears as something that is ill-fitting and needing to be changed. In an article written by Judith Halberstam, she proposes that “[Jame Gumb] skins his victims because he suffers a kind of gender dysphoria that he thinks can be solved by covering himself in female skin”; which is in agreeance with the presumption that Gumb does not feel as if he is within the correct body; which in turn aligns with the motive for his serial murders, which is framed as a “perverse consequence of gender

How can the characterization of Jame Gumb be harmful to the larger queer community? To me, the most obvious answer to this question is: stereotyping. To speak about stereotyping in this film, we must apply it to a larger social context. The clearest way I can explain why I chose stereotyping is by speaking about terms such as “gaydar”. We, as individuals think we have this innate and irrefutable ability that can identify other individuals that are queer by using common stereotypes that have been popularized whether it be by media or by social interaction. We think that there are “giveaway” identifiers that immediately mark someone as queer, as trans, as this or that. These stereotypes of “flamboyant = gay” (among many others) are harmful and reductive, however they are still extremely popular. Now think of this in terms of the film. What message is being pushed? The message I extracted from the film was “the denial of self or the denial to exist, whether at the hands of an individual or by an institution is conducive to extreme and destructive measures.” However I am approaching this with an analytical and observant lens, and I am solely focusing on how queer individuals are represented. Think about it in a different way, perhaps a more “conservative” way, and less like a sociologist. There is the ability to argue that if viewed through a political or “moralistic” lens, this film could propagate the