Sex, Lies & Celluloid: Unpacking 'Basic Instinct' Through a Therapeutic Lens

A recap of last week's Instagram LIVE deep dive into Paul Verhoeven's controversial thriller

(aired 4/14/25)

Whenever I announce an analysis of a '90s erotic thriller on Instagram Live, my notifications explode. There's something about dissecting these cultural artifacts through a sex therapist's lens that brings people running—whether it's nostalgia, curiosity, or the promise of discussing what mainstream entertainment often leaves unsaid.

Last week's session on "Basic Instinct" was no exception, with viewers joining to explore how this 1992 film reveals uncomfortable truths about gender, sexuality, and power in Hollywood. If you missed it, here's what we covered.

The MPAA's Male Gaze Problem

One of the most revealing aspects of "Basic Instinct" isn't what made it into theaters—it's what was cut out. The film initially received the commercially devastating NC-17 rating, requiring Verhoeven to submit nearly ten different versions to secure an R rating.

What did the MPAA find so objectionable? Primarily scenes showing Michael Douglas performing oral sex on Sharon Stone. Meanwhile, the infamous interrogation scene—textbook "male gaze" cinematography—remained intact. Scenes with female nudity and questionably consensual encounters stayed, while depictions of female pleasure got the axe.

The message was clear: female bodies could be exposed as long as they were primarily presented for heterosexual male viewers. Female pleasure? That was apparently too explicit for mainstream audiences.

As I quipped during the live: "Male pleasure, thumbs up; female pleasure, thumbs down." The supposedly neutral technical decisions of the ratings board reinforced a particular perspective as the default viewpoint.

Dangerous Women & Bisexual Villains

Catherine Tramell wasn't just a character—she was a statement about how Hollywood viewed women who didn't conform to expectations. Brilliant, wealthy, and sexually liberated, but also potentially murderous, her bisexuality wasn't presented as a legitimate orientation but as evidence of her dangerous nature.

This portrayal becomes even more troubling when viewed in historical context. During filming in San Francisco, Queer Nation activists confronted the filmmakers about their depiction of LGBTQ+ characters as killers. Harry Britt, Harvey Milk's successor on the San Francisco board of supervisors, asked a question that still resonates: "Why do they always have to be bad people on-screen?"

The MPAA allowed the lesbian and bisexual content precisely because it wasn't portrayed as healthy—it was shown as dangerous and deviant. During the AIDS crisis, when positive LGBTQ+ representation was desperately needed, "Basic Instinct" instead reinforced harmful stereotypes linking non-heterosexual desire with danger.

Erotic Thrillers & AIDS-Era Anxiety

"Basic Instinct" didn't emerge in a vacuum. It was part of a wave of erotic thrillers in the late '80s and early '90s that reflected profound cultural anxiety about sexuality during the AIDS epidemic.

These films offered a paradoxical cultural release—providing voyeuristic pleasure while ultimately reinforcing conservative values. They linked sexual freedom (particularly female sexuality) with danger and punishment.

The timing wasn't coincidental. As feminist and LGBTQ+ movements were making real progress, these films reflected a cultural backlash against changing gender norms and sexual freedom.

Sharon Stone: Empowerment or Exploitation?

Perhaps nothing captures the contradictions of "Basic Instinct" better than Sharon Stone's experience. Overnight, she became an international star playing a character marketed as empowered, intelligent, and sexually liberated.

Behind this narrative of empowerment was a much more complicated reality. In her 2021 memoir "The Beauty of Living Twice," Stone revealed she was misled about how the infamous interrogation scene would be filmed. She was told they "can't see anything" and only discovered how the scene actually appeared when watching the finished film in a room full of men.

The painful irony: while Catherine Tramell was presented as a woman with complete agency and power, Stone herself had much of her agency stripped away in the process of creating the character.

What We Can Learn

Thirty years later, "Basic Instinct" remains a fascinating case study in how seemingly technical decisions—what gets an R versus an NC-17, what stays versus what goes—are actually deeply political choices that reflect and reinforce cultural values and power structures.

Despite (or because of) the controversy, the film grossed over $100 million and became the sixth highest-grossing movie of 1992. And unlike most femme fatales before her, Catherine isn't punished for her violence or sexuality—which was quietly revolutionary for Hollywood at that time.

Our most revealing cultural artifacts aren't always the ones that set out to make statements. Sometimes it's the entertainment that captures our collective anxieties, desires, and contradictions that tells us the most about ourselves—if we're willing to look beyond the surface.

Want to join next week's Instagram Live analysis? I'll be tackling "Jennifer's Body" (2009) and exploring how Hollywood marketing has a penchant for undermining good ol' feminist content and making it all about the hetero-male fantasies about female bisexuality. Airing 4/21/25. Set your reminders now!