Photography has always maintained a complex and contested relationship with reality. While it has traditionally been understood as a transparent and objective representation of the world, many theorists and artists have argued that photography actively participates in constructing social reality rather than merely reflecting it. Critical theorists such as Allan Sekula, Victor Burgin, and Walter Benjamin have emphasized that photographic images are embedded within ideological and discursive structures. Consequently, photography can function not only as a mechanism for reproducing dominant realities but also as a medium for challenging and destabilizing them. Despite the importance of this issue, there has been no coherent methodological framework for analyzing how photography critiques the constructed nature of reality. Although photography theorists such as Andy Grundberg, Steve Edwards, and Sally Miller have addressed this topic in scattered discussions, their approaches remain fragmented and lack systematic organization. This study therefore seeks to develop a coherent methodological framework for examining photography’s critical engagement with socially constructed realities. The research adopts a qualitative and developmental approach using analytical-comparative methods. First, the study examines the writings of Grundberg, Edwards, and Miller in order to identify the principal strategies through which photography challenges dominant constructions of reality. Through comparative analysis of their theoretical discussions and photographic examples, three major strategies are extracted: 1. Masking and Unmasking 2. Distanciation (Alienation Effect) 3. Alternative Construction. The first strategy, masking and unmasking, is most clearly articulated in Andy Grundberg’s analysis of postmodern photography. In this approach, photographers imitate or repeat dominant visual codes in exaggerated, artificial, or parodic ways in order to expose their constructed and ideological nature. Cindy Sherman’s staged self-portraits exemplify this strategy by reproducing stereotypical female roles derived from cinema while simultaneously revealing their artificiality. Through repetition accompanied by difference, exaggeration, and theatricality, such works undermine the presumed naturalness of gender and identity. The second strategy, distanciation, is closely related to Bertolt Brecht’s concept of the alienation effect. Here, photography foregrounds its own constructedness rather than concealing it. Staged scenes, visible photographic equipment, artificial settings, and manipulations of the image remind viewers that they are observing a representation rather than reality itself. Such techniques interrupt passive identification and encourage critical reflection on how reality is mediated. Photographers like Laurie Simmons and David Levinthal employ toys, miniatures, and cinematic aesthetics to blur the boundaries between reality and fiction, thereby exposing the instability of photographic realism. The third strategy, alternative construction, involves presenting marginalized subjects or alternative representations that challenge dominant discourses. Photography can reveal aspects of social reality that have been excluded, suppressed, or naturalized by hegemonic systems. By representing overlooked identities, spaces, and experiences, photographers construct alternative narratives capable of destabilizing accepted meanings. This strategy also includes reimagining familiar subjects in unfamiliar ways through visual disruption and defamiliarization. Although these three strategies can be identified within photographic theory, the study argues that photography theorists have not developed them into a unified methodology. To address this limitation, the research turns to the work of Judith Butler, whose theories of performativity offer a more systematic framework for understanding how constructed realities may be challenged. In Butler’s theory, gender is not a natural or essential identity but the result of repeated performative acts. Gender exists through continual repetition of socially regulated behaviors and discourses. Because these norms depend upon repetition, they are inherently unstable and open to disruption. Butler therefore identifies the possibility of subversion within repetition itself. From Butler’s writings, the study extracts three corresponding strategies for challenging constructed realities: 1. Subversive Repetition 2. Alternative Construction 3. Distanciation. Subversive repetition occurs when dominant norms are repeated with difference, parody, exaggeration, or displacement, exposing their instability and artificiality. Butler emphasizes that parody does not merely imitate an original; rather, it destabilizes the very notion of an authentic original. This concept closely parallels the masking and unmasking strategies identified in photography. Similarly, Butler’s discussion of exclusion and unintelligibility aligns with photography’s ability to represent marginalized identities and realities excluded from dominant discourse. By making visible what has been culturally erased or suppressed, photography can produce alternative constructions of reality that challenge hegemonic frameworks. Finally, Butler’s engagement with Brechtian theater highlights the importance of distanciation in critical practice. Distanciation disrupts the viewer’s identification with representation and reveals the mechanisms through which reality is constructed. This corresponds directly with photographic techniques that foreground staging, framing, and mediation. The comparative analysis demonstrates a significant overlap between Butler’s theoretical framework and the strategies already present in critical photography. The study concludes that Butler’s theories provide strong methodological capacities for analyzing photography’s critical relationship to constructed reality. By adapting Butler’s concepts to the specific formal and technical characteristics of photography, it becomes possible to formulate a coherent analytical methodology for evaluating how photographic works critique, destabilize, and reconstruct social realities.