The three sources provided depict how voyeurs existed in different architectural styles and times. From the beginning, when voyeurs used binoculars to observe the lives of their neighbourhoods to satisfy their curiosity, to the later when they used indoor surveillance and cameras all over the streets.
The use of surveillance has undoubtedly helped society reduce crime rates, but whether the presence of surveillance constitutes an invasion of citizens’ privacy is a question worth discussing. We despise the existence of voyeurs and want our privacy to be respected. However, few people protest when the government proposes to create a utopian, sin-free city, where cameras are widely installed on the streets for social security and stability reasons. One cannot evaluate which is more important, the privacy one gives, or the security one receives.
In the material, the voyeurs are male, and the women being voyeuristic are gazed at and objectified as commodities. This reveals the inequality of gender and power.
The “voyeur” is violating the privacy of others through power.
Zhang Zhuoran 3035836070
Good summary and commentary. I wonder if you have any real life example to help elaborate your understanding of the reading?