Sexism in Hollywood?

Introduce yourself to the community or chat with other users about whatever is on your mind
JohnSandwich
Posts: 42
3677 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 4:07 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by JohnSandwich »

ShogunRua wrote:


JohnSandwich wrote:First, what about the film industry, generally, and filmmaking specifically, would make it something more males are interested in? What about it makes the female less interested?


What about science makes it more attractive to men? What about modeling makes it more attractive to women?

These are worthwhile questions, but they have nothing to do with the name of the topic.


LOL. Of course they have something to do with the topic, at least until you actually say something that disproves that it is reasonable to believe that sexism is a contributing factor to the statistics in the case of male:female ratio of directors.

JohnSandwich wrote:I mean, the simple reason film school students are 80% male could be that 83% of working directors are male, making it a male-dominated profession and environment, which can both cause intimidation and ambiguity as to whether women are welcome or will be getting a fair shake. Which would lead to them opting for a safer route, since both women and men tend to want to be realistic and smart about decisions that directly affect their futures.


ShogunRua wrote:Oh, so your argument for most directors being men is the "fear and intimidation (sic)" women face? Again, like the guy above, do you have a shred of evidence for this, or is it just angry vitriol against "The Man"?

Let's assume for a second you're right. Women face horrific "fear and intimidation" in film school, Hollywood, or if they even remotely consider the possibility of directing, they're yelled at.


LOL that is not my argument. My argument was that for a woman to go into a field consisting of 83% males can be intimidating, regardless of whether there is a legitimate reason for that apprehension or not, since the numbers would indicate it's viewed as a "Man's job". Until it is no longer viewed as a man's job (meaning that there is no longer any ambiguity regarding whether or not women are treated the same and given the same opportunities as men in said profession) it remains quite possible that sexism is afoot, according to definition provided by Merriam-Webster.


JohnSandwich wrote:From your main argument I assume it is once again that white people are just less inclined to play professional basketball, they just don't like it, don't aspire to it, for some weird biological reason. In that case I would like to see percentages of white to black people in basketball from the start of the sport up until now. Or is your conclusion that black people are just biologically a better make (read: better players) for basketball than white people, and this is not racism because it is just biology yo?


ShogunRua wrote:It's a complicated question actually, with multiple reasons for the discrepancy.

Part of it is in fact biological; humans with West African ancestry, for instance, tend have more quick-twitch muscle fiber, have calf muscles higher up on their legs (allows them to jump higher), have narrower hips, and are generally taller than most Caucasians.

It's no different than why most Asians are much shorter and smaller than most Caucasians.

However, it's not the only reason; many impoverished blacks see basketball as a ticket out of a dangerous neighborhood for themselves and their family, and thus, pursue it with a passion and intensity many other players in more secure settings lack.


For more men than women being in directing, I think it's a bit simpler...men are just more interested in it! Hard as it is to believe, certain professions having more of one gender than the other does not automatically indicate any bias.


Sure it's that simple, if you're a simpleton just out to pick a fight! It amazes me that you do not see what an earth-shattering fail your analogy meant to demonstrate someone else's "warped logic" was. According to your interpretation of the statistics you chose to liken to male/female director statistics, you are saying that more men are directors because they are innately better at it than women, in addition to the fact that women just don't have the same drive as men. Which is, you know, just cartoonishly sexist.
Last edited by JohnSandwich on Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:49 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Dorkovsky
Posts: 339
41951 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 3:15 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by Dorkovsky »

Race is a social construct, not a biological one. The Ubermensch is a myth.

edit: so is gender

also i take offense at being called a liberal :P
Last edited by Dorkovsky on Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TheDenizen
Posts: 1638
3114 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:51 pm

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by TheDenizen »

*reads whole topic*

Who wants to watch a movie directed by a girl anyways?

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by ShogunRua »

JohnSandwich wrote:
LOL. Of course they have something to do with the topic, at least until you actually say something that disproves that it is reasonable to believe that sexism is a contributing factor to the statistics in the case of male:female ratio of directors.


I don't have to prove anything. That's not the way basic human logic works.

Instead, it's the person making the sweeping, broad claim that "there is rampant sexism in Hollywood" who has to prove that statement.

JohnSandwich wrote:LOL that is not my argument. My argument was that for a woman to go into a field consisting of 83% males can be intimidating, regardless of whether there is a legitimate reason for that fear or not, since the numbers would indicate it's viewed as a "Man's job".


Women are such dainty, fragile, weak beings that any traditionally male-dominated field is going to stop them dead in their tracks?

You sir appear to be the sexist here, not me.

By the way, this consideration sure as hell hasn't stopped women from kicking ass in traditionally male-dominated fields like biology, medicine, or business. In fact, there are almost as many female doctors as male ones, and MORE female managers than male ones in technology and business fields.

JohnSandwich wrote:Until it is no longer viewed as a man's job (meaning that there is no longer any ambiguity regarding whether or not women are treated the same and given the same opportunities as men in said profession) it remains quite possibly sexist according to definition provided by Merriam-Webster.


Sure, and by John's brilliant logic, the NBA is racist against whites!

JohnSandwich wrote:According to your interpretation of the statistics you chose to liken to male/female director statistics, you are saying that more men are directors because they are innately better at it than women, in addition to the fact that women just don't have the same drive as men.


Apparently, you are either illiterate or just lying for the sake of starting a flame war (wouldn't surprise me, considering you are the only person disagreeing with me in this topic who is also resorting solely to childish insults), because I wrote the exact OPPOSITE of that, clearly stating that the case of blacks in the NBA and women going into directing occur for completely different reasons.

JohnSandwich wrote:Which is, you know, just cartoonishly sexist.


You mean your assertion above that women are easily intimidated?

kyle.loomis wrote:Race is a social construct, not a biological one. The Ubermensch is a myth.

edit: so is gender


Gender is a social construct? Pretty sure one that one set of chromosomes being XX and the other XY is a little more than a "social construct".

And when doctors start believing that tripe, it leads to tragic stories like this one;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

JohnSandwich
Posts: 42
3677 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 4:07 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by JohnSandwich »

Well, maybe I am sexist, then. It occurs to me though, from a male's perspective, that if I were a female and was looking for solid realistic career opportunities, I would not choose the one consisting of 83% males, a fair % of which might judge me on the fact that I was a woman rather than my merits. Well, maybe I would and then be miserable to find out that the industry is in fact sexist. And maybe it wouldn't be, maybe it would be the most awesomest ever. The point is it is quite likely that there are still traces of sexism in such a male-dominated profession and industry. And it is strange that so many more directors are men, given that it is at least in part a creative profession, which women seem to like otherwise (well, I don't have numbers or facts on that, but seems like it should be true). That might come off sexist, too - what I mean is, I agree with your point that to some extent men and women are likely just plain different, I just think the job of film director isn't a n example of that. And none of what you say above changes the fact that the NBA analogy is retarded, at best, ridiculously sexist at worst - and that the "flamer" here is, was and has always been you.
Last edited by JohnSandwich on Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:26 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Dorkovsky
Posts: 339
41951 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 3:15 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by Dorkovsky »

Reproduction =! gender

Stop being so hetero-normative.

JohnSandwich
Posts: 42
3677 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 4:07 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by JohnSandwich »

ShogunRua wrote:
JohnSandwich wrote:
LOL. Of course they have something to do with the topic, at least until you actually say something that disproves that it is reasonable to believe that sexism is a contributing factor to the statistics in the case of male:female ratio of directors.


I don't have to prove anything. That's not the way basic human logic works.

Instead, it's the person making the sweeping, broad claim that "there is rampant sexism in Hollywood" who has to prove that statement.


I have not made one single sweeping statement on this issue, nor do I believe anyone else has. The point has been argued that there MIGHT be sexism in Hollywood. Then you went berserk per usual. I'd say it's likely that there's sexism in Hollywood, but that's hardly a sweeping statement. Why you find this so absurd is beyond me.


By the way, this consideration sure as hell hasn't stopped women from kicking ass in traditionally male-dominated fields like biology, medicine, or business. In fact, there are almost as many female doctors as male ones, and MORE female managers than male ones in technology and business fields.


Well, maybe Hollywood isn't as progressive when it comes to welcoming women kicking ass, or not progressing as fast. Note: maybe. It might be like you say, that women just don't want to be directors, it also might not. In Norway it seems like a fairly popular thing for women to do.

cameron326
Posts: 153
1094 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:54 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by cameron326 »

http://www.wmm.com/resources/film_facts.shtml#Film & Entertainment Facts
Some interesting statistics, including:

Women accounted for 6% of directors of the top 250 domestic grossing films released in 2007, a decline of 1% since 2006. This figure is approximately half the percentage of women directors working in 2000 when women accounted for 11% of all directors

A historical comparison of women’s employment on the top 250 films in 2007 and 1998 reveals that the percentage of women in all behind-the-scenes roles (directors, writers, executive producers, producers, editors and cinematagraphers) has declined


As to why women are underrepresented in film - there's no simple way to answer that question is there? I expect its a combination of a huge range of factors, many of which have been spoken about in this thread already. What I do know though is that, for whatever reasons women are choosing not to pursue a career in the film industry, the film industry is poorer for it.

There is potential creative talent in every group in society. But as the figures above suggest, one huge group, that has always been hitorically underrepresented, is actually participating even less in the film industry in recent years.

Whatever the reason for this phenomenon - and it seems like a classic example of a vicious circle to me - due in part to ingrained attitudes of both men and women rather than 'active' sexism - it is a real shame.

In short, the film industry is losing out on a huge amount of potential talent. As much as I dislike the film the Hurt Locker, I at least hope that this Oscar win will at least inspire a few more women to consider trying to get into making films.

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by ShogunRua »

JohnSandwich wrote:Well, maybe I am sexist, then. It occurs to me though, from a male's perspective, that if I were a female and was looking for solid realistic career opportunities, I would not choose the one consisting of 83% males, a fair % of which might judge me on the fact that I was a woman rather than my merits.


Why not? If you were good at something and it made you happy, why wouldn't you pursue it as a career?

It certainly didn't stop blacks from going into the once traditionally white games of basketball or baseball, or women in everything from biology, medicine, to business.

Besides, I'd love to hear about the supposed "fear and intimidation" women face in film school, according to you. Should be good for a laugh, especially considering how open and encouraging film programs in the US are towards minorities and women.

And aren't you from Norway?

JohnSandwich wrote: And it is strange that so many more directors are men, given that it is at least in part a creative profession, which women seem to like otherwise (well, I don't have numbers or facts on that, but seems like it should be true).


Some creative professions appeal more to women (let's say fashion), and others more to men. (let's say metal music...or chess) Why is that so difficult to understand?

JohnSandwich wrote:I just think the job of film director isn't a n example of that.


And what's your reason for this? Beyond just a gut feeling?

JohnSandwich wrote: And none of what you say above changes the fact that the NBA analogy is retarded, at best, ridiculously sexist at worst - and that the "flamer" here is, was and has always been you.


Again, either you're purposely lying, or refuse to read. I specifically noted that the reasons for the two are very different.

JohnSandwich wrote:I have not made one single sweeping statement on this issue, nor do I believe anyone else has. The point has been argued that there MIGHT be sexism in Hollywood.


Yes, and in reply, I asked for some evidence. Most people responded to, and tried to make arguments, even if they weren't the best. (Catherine Hardwick comes to mind)

But of all the people who have disagreed with me, you're the only one who has resorted to mostly petty trolling.

JohnSandwich wrote:Why you find this so absurd is beyond me.


I find most of the argumentation absurd, not the statement itself.

I totally agree, in fact; there might be sexism in Hollywood. Why the hell not? But if you're writing that, present some real evidence, not wild conjecture that is either irrelevant or factually inaccurate.

cameron326

cameron326 wrote:As much as I dislike the film the Hurt Locker, I at least hope that this Oscar win will at least inspire a few more women to consider trying to get into making films.


And "The Hurt Locker" is one of my favorite films ever, and I think Katherine Bigelow is an outstanding, talented director. All-time, Lina Wertmueller is one of my 5 favorite directors ever.

But saying that women being underrepresented as film directors is some major tragedy would be like saying that Chinese and Indian directors being underrepresented as film directors in Hollywood is a major tragedy...not necessarily.

The tragedy is that there aren't more talented, passionate directors with the freedom to make the projects they want to...it doesn't matter what the hell their gender is.

I have yet to hear someone complain about the French New Wave, German realism, or 70's American film because it was virtually all men.

cameron326
Posts: 153
1094 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:54 am

Re: Sexism in Hollywood?

Post by cameron326 »

Some more intresting stats:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stacy-smi ... 80848.html

When only males were at the helm, the percentage of females on-screen was 29.3%. For films with a female director, the number jumped to 44.6%!

Surely, a lot of work still needs to be done on behalf of females in film. It just doesn't make sense that females are 50% of the population but less than a third of all characters shown on-screen, and less than a fifth of all producers, writers, and directors in top-grossing films from 2007. Box office revenue can't be used as the sole scapegoat any longer to explain gender differences across all speaking characters on-screen and people employed behind the camera.

So just to clarify my position as to the debate quesion:

Although active/conscious sexism might be much less than it once was in Hollywood, the damage has already been done - as a result of beliefs and practices in less enlightened times.

This belief that women are no good at making films/working behind the scenes now operates at the ground level subconsciously - with the result that women don't even consider getting into films seriously in the first instance - ie studying film. Certainly its my impression that women are underrepresented in film courses at university, although I might be wrong on.

The Arts, be it Music, Film, Painting or whatever, should be attractive to all. That film is currently an extremely male dominated profession should be of concern to all film lovers who wish to see the best most creative people out there consider a career in film.

But saying that women being underrepresented as film directors is some major tragedy would be like saying that Chinese and Indian directors being underrepresented as film directors in Hollywood is a major tragedy...not necessarily.


It is tragedy. I play an instrument. If there were currently no worldclass female players of my instrument (there are at least half a dozen I can think of) I would consider it a tragedy. Why? Because women in the arts (notice I'm not talking about basketball, maths, gardening or anything else here) are as capable as men. Therefore if I can think of thirty famous male musicians (which I can) but can't name a single female musicians something is wrong. Why? because this suggests that women are not learning the instrument in the first place or being held back in some other way.

Either way, the result is that a whole bunch of talented people - in this case women - are not getting involved in the thing that I love. A huge amount of potential is remaining undiscovered or going to waste. That is necessarily a bad thing.

Post Reply