Although I felt this week's readings were challenging and a little difficult to comprehend clearly, I learned a lot through class discussion and defining all terms. For Mulvey's reading, she focused a lot on the "male gaze" and how it is portrayed through films, especially in the earlier 20th century. This goes along with our previous discussion on colonialism, and the male white dominance seen in America in earlier centuries, and still today. As a watch older films, I will begin to focus in on how the male gaze is representing by the language they speak, the position of their body, and other body language they might portray in the film and upon women. As we discussed if a "female gaze" is possible, I think as the film industry develops and expands upon the ways they portray men and women, it could be possible very soon. As for the Halberstam's reading, I am not too familiar with the concept of a "transgender gaze". I have seen another movie based upon transgender characters called "Transamerica" a few years ago. The movie stars Felicity Huffman, who begins to remissness upon her journey of changing genders before her final surgery of becoming a woman. She learns about parts of her pass, such as fathering a child, that raise conflict upon her decisions. I think that it is truly difficult to understand what "transgender" means, and how Halberstam tries to give the "gaze" a place in film. I also enjoyed the analysis Halberstam made of Mulvey's piece. I think his critics on her strong viewpoints of the existence of a single gaze in movies could be easily argued as we progress in society. I think it is always enriching to see critics challenge each other's viewpoints to strengthen their own argument, and make us rethink established concepts.