Polanski’s Repulsion (1965) From The Perspective of an Asexual Woman

Trigger warning: sexual assault

What is Asexuality? 

I can’t give an entire crash course of asexuality if I want to actually get to the film, but it is important to have a basic understanding of sexuality before I continue. Asexuality is, in the most basic terms, the lack of sexual attraction.

The key concept here is that sexual and romantic attraction are two different things.

And while asexual and aromantic are often used interchangeably in common understanding, that is not the case.

They can and do come together quite often, but one can experience romantic attraction and desire without sexual attraction (and vice versa). You can find more information on asexuality at the Asexual Visibility and Education Network (or AVEN). 

An Asexual Woman Living in The 60s?

Contrary to popular belief, there are not more queer people now than there used to be. Instead, there is more of an understanding of queerness and its various forms, leading to people 1) feeling more comfortable coming out, and 2) actually being able to put words to their feelings and realize who they are. Asexuality is a good example of this as it is one of the more recently discovered identities. It’s also one that many people know nothing about, even if they’ve seen the word. I just discussed the difference between sexual and romantic attraction in my intro and that key concept is often wholly undiscussed and unknown. When I finally found a Tumblr post explaining the difference between sexual and romantic attraction, I was shocked and relieved. I suddenly understood who I was. But even in 2021, not everyone understands the difference or gets a chance to experience the same relief I did. And in 1965, it was much, much worse. 

Identification:

While watching Repulsion, I had a strong sense of identification with Catherine Deneuve’s Carol. Because not only am I asexual, I am also an anxious piece of shit with multiple types of anxiety. So, when the film seemed to be portraying her as needy, I felt nothing with identification and sympathy. And when her sexual repulsion became a theme, I clearly identified even more.

What made this film so hard to watch, besides the constant assault of sexual and violating imagery, was just putting myself in her shows. In 2021, I know what I am and how I feel. Not everyone like me gets to have that and not everyone tries to understand, but at least the word exists and there is a chance of knowing. But in 1965, I can only imagine how lost and terrified I would feel. I felt that way at age 15 before my ultimate discovery and it was hell. If I was constantly exposed to sexuality like Carole (with her sister frequently having sex with a married man and her co-workers talking about how men “only want one thing”), I too would be wholly and utterly terrified of any resemblance of romantic attraction.

But if such a relationship did not seem like the slightest possibility, if I only ever saw romance and sexuality come hand-in-hand, I would most certainly be like her.

I am not aromantic. I very much want to be in love and loved, and I am.

Language Surrounding the Repulsion Film:

Adding my anxiety into the mix, I couldn’t help but take the issue more with the language surrounding the film than with the film itself (for the most part). For example, my own asexuality-anxiety combo gave me a vastly different reading of certain scenes than even just the Wikipedia summary. I did not think Carole was hallucinating. The scenes of a man breaking into her room and raping her did not read as hallucinations but rather intrusive thoughts (thoughts and images that are often disturbing and difficult to ignore). I have most certainly experienced similar instances of intrusive thoughts. To explain a bit more, an intrusive thought can occur quite randomly and be pervasive. For example, someone could be eating lunch at the table and suddenly think “what would happen if my parents died on the way home from work” and suddenly be thrown into imagining the entire tragedy l that feels impossible to shake off as the anxiety continues to grow.

When Carole is experiencing these so-called hallucinations, all sound cuts out the images feel pervasive yet not tangible. To me, this feels less like a hallucination (that I imagine feels more real and present and would thus still contain the proper sounds) and more like an intrusive thought, a pervasive thought played out in her imagination and reminiscent of her deepest fears: violation.

But I think the accuracy felt, speaks to the validity of this reading, which also pairs better with her pre-established anxiety.

Perhaps I am biased, as I felt these scenes accurately represented how my own intrusive thoughts of the same events feel in the moment.

Additionally, and most prominently, the Wikipedia synopsis for the film states that Carole has androphobia (the pathological fear of interaction with men). I think that is wholly inaccurate. Carole does not show fear of men themselves, but rather their romantic/sexual advances. She can talk to Colin, even while aloof, but only becomes fearful when he begins making advances. That doesn’t read as a fear of men, but a fear of what men bring (sex, as Carole perceives). Similarly, I saw countless articles discussing her supposed “sexual repression.” However, just looking at the title alone, theories of “fear of men” and “sexual repression” already seem shut down.

“Repulsion” is a choice word, and obviously chosen as the title for a specific reason. And “Repulsion” does not imply a fear of men, and most certainly disagrees with “repression.” 

“Repulsion:”

This very title ‘Repulsion’ becomes even more fascinating in modern times. The asexual discourse was not at all prevalent in 1965 (I don’t even believe the term was properly coined yet) and thus the connection between “repulsion” and asexuality was not common understanding. But now, repulsion is actually a common descriptor to distinguish varying “types” of asexuality. While an asexual person may have a lack of attraction, they could still be okay with participating in sexual acts, even if they have no personal desire for them. Other asexual people, like myself, are called “sex-repulsed,” meaning we really don’t want to have sex. The thought is repulsive to us. So, for this film to use the word repulsion to describe her emotions… it feels distinctly asexual – and at odds with the common reading of childhood sexual trauma (as evidenced by the final shot of the Repulsion film).

Trauma responses are not usually thought of as “being repulsed by” but rather “being traumatized by.” Proclaiming that asexual people are the way we are because of some childhood trauma is a common and dismissive stereotype about asexual people (dismissive to both asexual people and people with sexual trauma). Of course, because this film was not made with asexual discourse in mind, it’s hard to say the film’s explicit encoding is reminiscent of this stereotype. But, when looking at the film in modern times, after over 50 years, it does start to twist. 

Conclusion:

When you factor in the language often used to discuss the film (as previously examined), the film’s existence seems to taunt asexual people. It’s almost certain that this film is not made with asexual people in mind. I believe that this film was meant to portray the aftermath of childhood sexual trauma. But as a viewer, I did not pick up on this until the very last shot. And as an asexual person, I identified wholly and powerfully with Carole. Repulsion seems muddled in its portrayal of her trauma and, no matter how sympathetic it tries to be at times, seems to ultimately hold pity.

Repulsion wants us to understand why she is “crazy,” but still emphasizes her “craziness.” Carole slices the landlord’s throat because he attempts to rape her, but then her continuous and frantic slicing, at a low and sickening angle, conjures up “craziness” on her part (this becomes even more sickening when one considers who the director of the film is). So, while we understand why she is this way, we are left with constant imagery of “insanity.” This isn’t a particularly kind representation of assault survivors.

In the end, Repulsion is the closest I have come to seeing myself, my sexuality, and my fears depicted on screen.

Tweet

But it ultimately was not meant for me and is unkind to those for who it is meant.