Can gender be removed completely from anthropomorphic character designs?

Ultimately I think the answer to this question, at this time, is no. We still exist in a society where gender is assumed immediately upon either seeing a person/character or hearing their voice regardless of situation. If gender isn’t immediately identifiable people often become confused and fixated on this unknown, and are unable to move past it; within animation this can work to break the “realness” of the story and push viewers out, inhibiting them from connecting fully with the story. However I do hold hope that its within our capabilities to push and move towards a more open and unrestrictive society where gender does not only become inconsequential but perhaps something irrelevant entirely. 

The Chuck Jones quote “Bugs Bunny is a glorious personification of our most dapper dreams.” for example, conveys to me that people are aware somewhere deep down that we are restricted. To explain, I think the key personality trait Bugs Bunny displays throughout his animations is his confidence and freedom. Bugs is rarely (if ever) the butt of the joke, even when crossdressing for gags, rather, its the bumbling man he’s fooled thats humiliated. Bugs Bunny is shown to be time and time again unapologetically himself; unrestrained and ungoverned by societies conventions of sexuality and gender. Chuck Jones in acknowledging this sentiment by declaring Bugs Bunny “a glorious personification of our most dapper dreams” proves to me that perhaps deep down people are aware that we’re limiting ourselves with false gender constructs and traditions borne from years of mindless imitation. There is, rooted deep within public consciousness, a desire to be more free in how we present ourselves and how we govern and label ourselves. The more gender roles and stereotypes are challenged and shown to be restrictive in main stream animation the easier this concept of gender as a performative act, imitation of an imitation, can be integrated into mainstream social consciousness. Once this is achieved the removal of gender stereotypes and gender as a whole from animation and film alike can perhaps begin without breaking “realness”. 

The concept of gender is still very firmly cemented not only in societal thinking but also in our language; although post-gender pronouns such as they/them are beginning to come into public awareness, people for the most part still seem largely unused and/ or uncomfortable with using them. Therefore in this next post I’m going to be looking at what I believe to be good anthropomorphic character designs, ones that are moving away from its more sexist roots and progressing towards something more feminist/ post-gender. 

 
An animated film that immediately comes to mind is Dreamworks Kung Fu Panda (2008). The character designs for this movie were created by French-American character designer and animator Nico Marlet. He’s currently employed by Dreamworks and has worked on many successful films such as Kung Fu Panda, How to Train Your Dragon, Madagascar and many more. His designs are beautiful, fluid and well balanced; from what I can gather from studying them, he seems to favour traditional mediums and use a combination of pencil crayons, alcohol markers and watercolour. All his designs are full of action, the movement of the characters is captured beautifully, and his drawings contain this angular, stylistic quality that I really love. I also find, particularly in his designs for the movie Kung Fu Panda, he subverts a lot of the classic anthropomorphic tendencies; not feeling the need to exaggerate gender dimorphic features in order to gender his characters one way or the other. 

 

Disneys animation style is instantly recognisable and loved by millions. As the most influential animation studio in the world their stance on gender has enormous influence over the societal understanding and acceptance of gender norms. Disneys stance on gender is very much in keeping with the accepted norm for us, the general rule is women are feminine, small and slight, with lots of the most popular Disney princesses displaying almost infant like faces. Men conversely are large, powerful and strong, many of the Disney designed men have huge chests, chiseled jaws and gigantic hands. This is particularly noticeable when compared with their female counter parts. 

 

“Sometimes a normative conception of gender can undo ones personhood, undermining the capacity to persevere in a liveable life.” (Butler, Undoing Gender, 2004)

 

What Judith Butler points out is that not all people can be boxed and confined under these restrictive stereotypes resulting in a persons social exclusion should they choose to pursue their own definition and desires for their gender. Should they choose to repress themselves and attempt conformity they may experience intense mental duress and be “living beside of themselves” playing a constant role in order to better assimilate with society. Representation in media is important for marginalised people in helping them feel secure and validated within themselves. It also exposes the general public to these lesser known issues and helps resolve some of the negative prejudice that surrounds gender nonconformity. Currently steps are being taken to be more inclusive of different races in media and I believe this should expand to non typical expressions of gender as well.

 However gender dimorphism used as a tool in animation not only causes issues and pressure for gender non conforming individuals but also puts pressure on seemingly cisgendered people too. The sociologist Philip N Cohen explains that “people feel a strong pressure to perform gender according to cultural norms.” However not all women are short petite and feminine and not all men are large muscular and dominant. Seeing these stereotypes exaggerated and presented to billions of people creates a standardisation for what the ideal man/ woman should look like; this leaves many people feeling undesirable and pushes many others to reach for a standard that is ultimately unachievable.  

 

Upon further reading and discussion of the subject I came across the book “Reading The Rabbit” which is a collection of essays on Warner Brothers animation edited by Kevin S.Sandler. The essay titled “Gendered Evasion: Bugs Bunny In Drag” brought up many points about Disney and about why perhaps their stance on gender has remained so firm. I’ll be addressing this essay in more depth within my next post. Ultimately Disney has always offered escapism within their films and breaking social norms and biases deviates from this escapist goal. Therefore in order to create truly immersive, escapist cinema Disney must assimilate our cultural and societal norms in an effort to create a believable reality in which viewers beliefs and prior knowledge aren’t challenged. However in doing this Disney has reached a stage where believability for women regularly includes characters whose wrists are thinner than their eyes and also whose waists are thinner than their heads. 

 

Anthropomorphism is massively popular and used widely throughout all animation, animal characters have been present in animation since the early 1900’s with characters such as Micky Mouse gaining massive fame and popularity that still exists to this day. Within this blog post I want to discuss how many animation studios use anthropomorphism in a way that not only enforces human gender roles but also perpetrates them in a highly sexist way. I’ll be looking at what I believe to be good and bad examples of its usage and perhaps explore how it can be adapted to be more gender neutral. 

Why anthropomorphism works

After reading the essay titled “Gendered Evasion – Bugs Bunny in Drag” by Kevin S. Sandler I became aware of the concept of “realness” and how it relates to animation. Within this essay S. Sandler goes onto explain using the theory of Judith Butler defining “realness” as:

“Animated films ability to compel belief that is above suspicion, to embody and reiterate norms.”

 

What this means is that for animated films to be compelling and believable to audiences, audiences need to be able to recognise their own cultural and societal beliefs; see our own world mirrored back at us in a way that doesn’t challenge our perception of reality. Disney is cited in this essay as a massive perpetrator of this belief. Their ability to appeal to the masses and dominate the animation industry stems from this ability to offer totally immersive escapist viewing experiences, that don’t call for in depth or critical thinking. They’re specifically designed for easy viewing. S. Sandler describes this by stating “The mess audience can assimilate and legitimise social assumptions and cultural norms- that is, social performance- without ever having to interrogate or repudiate their phantasmatic construction.” What this results in is a multitude of media that perpetrates societal norms exclusively rarely ever challenging them, unless these believes are being challenged already in a way that favours their change. Whilst I can understand why large companies would utilise this strategy from a marketing, money making perspective; I take deep issue with it as it feels soulless and pandering to the masses doesn’t result in change. We live in a society that advocates and pushes “compulsive heterosexuality”, yet we live in an age now where we know this to be incorrect. We’re in a transitory period where 100’s of years worth of bigotry and misrepresentation is being brought to light, the concept of sexuality has evolved to be understood away from binaries and better viewed as something deeply personal that exists within spectrums. Gender theory is also moving and evolving in this direction, with masculinity and femininity being exposed as human constructs unrelated to our sex and much more flexible than mass media would have us believe. My issue therefore stems from extreme frustration that public conception is moving forward yet being hindered by these huge corporations that wish to continue perpetrating harmful out dated stereotypes for money.

 Moving on from this point I wish to talk about how anthropomorphism is used harmfully to perpetrate outdated gender stereotypes. I’ve been looking into Warner brothers use of anthropomorphism, particularly in regards to their original Looney tunes series. A key point that was brought to light within Kevin S. Sandlers essay on gender, is that Warners brothers (and many other companies) use of anthropomorphism follows one rule, male until proven female. Within the essay the statement “Gender, therefore, is an imitation of an imitation.” Is made. As gender is a human construct, there is no original source for it, therefore we’re just repeatedly preforming certain acts and set characteristics that have been presented to us by early generations. However from studying anthropomorphised characters, especially after realising the male until proven female rule, what this demonstrates is that the scope for what can make a character read as male is infinitely big whereas what makes a character female is conversely small. 

 

 The story is told through a jarred, stop and start, dialogue between a mother and her child. The child is revealed through the dialogue to be a young transgender girl, she’s clearly attempted to come out to her mother but is being thwarted in her attempts to be recognised. The film starts in a prolonged silence with mother and daughter sat across from each other at their dining table, the mothers face is cropped out of screen preventing us from seeing anything above the nose. It’s clear immediately that there’s a disconnect between them, what we experience in this film is not the “big reveal” but the transitory period that comes after a persons coming out. The characters are rarely seen in frame together, on the couple of occasions when they are we only see the daughters face. Through this we share this feeling of disconnect with her, we cannot see the mother therefore we cannot connect or understand her. Even when hugging and pressing a kiss to the others cheek in goodbye there is a wall between the characters preventing them from connecting.
 The mother is shown throughout the film to be incredibly uncomfortable and also bigoted in her opinions of transgendered people, however she’s not outwardly violent or immediately suppressive. Instead the film explores a much more realistic and pervasive attitude which is one of denial and blatant refusal to even try to begin empathising or understanding her child. This leaves their relationship in a limbo like state where neither can connect or speak to the other; as the young girl attempts to move forward and push for acceptance as a girl, the mother continues to try and live in the past where the topic of gender remains untouched and she still has a perceived son. This dissonance between the two is painfully realistic and relatable and you find yourself watching almost holding your breath as both characters circle the other with neither quite managing to push hard enough to address the issue.

- References

 

This research will inform how I go about designing characters for future animated projects; I’m planning on continuing looking into gender as the main theme of my final year project so the work researched here will directly influence my designs for that. When designing characters from this point on I’ll be more inclined to consider where I’m submitting to social norms and what I can do to alter these designs to make them more inclusive for gender divergent people and also people of less accepted body shapes. I think I could continue to develop this work further by researching more films that explore gender in both “socially accepted” and socially subversive ways and perhaps look into how gender expectations damage not only transgendered people but also people who are cisgender but don’t fit into the expected stereotypes (for example butch lesbians). 

 

- Kung Fu Panda. (2008). [film] Hollywood: Mark Osborne & John Stevenson

- Les Lèvres Gercées. (2018). [short film] France: Kelsi Phung & Fabien Corre

- Purpleboy. (2019). [short film]. Portugal: Alexandre Siqueira

- Gender Revolution. (2017). [documentary]. USA: Katie Couric

Books

-Sandler, K. S. (ed.) (1998) Reading the rabbit: explorations in Warner Bros. animation. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press.

-Butler, J. (2004) Undoing gender. New York ; London: Routledge.

--Halberstam, J. (1998) Female masculinity. Special Edition. Durham: Duke University Press.