California NOW

Women in Hollywood Face Serious Hurdles to Equality

Some depressing statistics on women's work in front of and behind the camera this week, leading up to Oscar season and the possibility of the first woman Best Director.



From the Los Angeles Times:

Women may make up 51% of the population, but actresses nabbed only 29.9% of the 4,379 speaking parts in the 100 top-grossing films of 2007, or so says a new study released by University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism, which was conducted by professor Stacy. L Smith.

According to Smith’s study, 83% of all directors, writers, and producers on those films were male. Not surprisingly, the number of female characters grew dramatically when a woman directed a film — up to 44.6% from 29.3% if a man was behind the camera.

From Women and Hollywood:

Dr. Martha Lauzen of San Diego State (the guru of stats about women in Hollywood) has released her annual Celluloid Ceiling survey looking at the women working behind the scenes on the top 250 grossing movies of the year and not surprising, women make up only 16% of directors, executive producers, producers, writers, cinematographers, and editors. That number is down 3 points from 2001 and is the same as 2008.

Women directors are now at 7% down from 9% in 2008 and is the same percentage as it was in 1987 (the year that Dirty Dancing and Baby Boom were released and Cher won her Oscar for Moonstruck.) So while we’ve all been talking about the prominent women who were recognized this past year, the opportunities for women to direct declined.

Women writers make up only 8%. That means that 92% of the films are written from a male perspective.

More stats:
Women make up:
17% of all executive producers
23% of all producers
18% of all editors
2% of all cinematographers 

From the Women's Media Center:

Women are 51% of the population but are losing ground in Hollywood. Even as we celebrate Kathryn Bigelow's "Best Director" nomination, in 2009, women comprised only 7% of all directors, 8% of writers, 17% of all executive producers, and 35 percent of 2009's top films had no female producers at all.

And it bleeds into children's programming too. From Jezebel:

The statistics in the SMH piece are startling: Three male characters for every one female character; 87% of narrators are male.

So what can we do about it? Start by signing the petition at the Women's Media Center, and make a pledge to support movies that feature women in front of an behind the camera. 

Jay Smooth on John Mayer & Celebrity Racism

We've posted videos from Jay Smooth before, and his take on race issues, and the ways in which real work on them gets derailed by the latest celebrity racist moment, is too valuable not to share.



Although this video addresses race issues, we could make the same points for dealing with issues of sexism. It's much more important for us to be doing the front-line work to eliminate sexism on a societal scale than to address one individual's denigration of women. At the same, time, we recognize that addressing the casual racism and sexism that slips out of celebrities' mouths can be important too, because it helps to fight the societal acceptance of that kind of language and sentiment.

The Superbowl, Pam Tebow, and My High-Risk Pregnancy

The feminist blogosphere is on fire over the fact that CBS has stated that they'll let an anti-choice advocacy ad from Focus on the Family air during the Superbowl.  In the past, CBS has absolutely refused to allow advocacy ads to air during the Superbowl, including ads from PETA. MoveOn.org, and one from the United Church of Christ taking an LGBT-friendly stance.  Now they say they've changed their policies and will allow "responsible" issues ads to air. 

Unfortunately, their definition of responsible is not mine.  Personally, I think suggesting that women should continue high-risk pregnancies against the advice of their doctors because everything will work out and your child-to-be will grow up to play football (or cure cancer, or whatever) is pretty irresponsible.  And I say that as a mother who went through a high-risk pregnancy herself. 

But I wouldn't attempt to force my choice on anyone else.  I'm glad I had that choice, and if my life circumstances had been just slightly different, I would have chosen abortion as the safer option, despite very much wanting a pregnancy at that point in my life. I'm glad that I didn't get ordered to two months of bedrest and 24-hour medical care, like Pam Tebow, because then I would have had to have an abortion; unlike Tebow, I couldn't have afforded the time off or the medical care.  I'm glad I didn't get legally forced to undergo bedrest, like this woman in Florida, because I would have lost my job and that would have been just great for a new mother.

No matter what your convictions are, if your doctor tells you, "You may die, and your fetus may die anyway, if you choose to continue this pregnancy," that's a hard decision to make.  It is also an immensely personal decision.  I cannot understand how any woman who went through that could believe that her choice would be right for every women, or every family.  I cannot understand how any woman who faced that choice could believe it would be right to take it away from anyone else.

The fact is, anytime we restrict women's ability to control their own bodies and lives, women suffer, children suffer, and families suffer.  Having the right to choose to continue a risky pregnancy is part and parcel of trusting women with all the potential choices that a pregnancy entails.

You can take actions asking CBS to reconsider airing this ad. 

Send an email with the Feminist Majority 

with NARAL 

and with the Women's Media Center 

and email CBS directly. 

Interesting update, apparently Pam Tebow's life was not actually at risk from her pregnancy.  Instead, she was taking drugs to treat dysentery which could have adversely affected fetal development. Again, no one should tell a woman that she *must* take that kind of risk. Not every woman or every family has the mental, emotional or economic resources to raise a child who may need special medical care.

Sunday Comics: For Better or For Worse Jumps on the Retro-Sexism Bandwagon!

Click the strips to enlarge for easier reading.


Lynn Johnson who writes the comic strip For Better or Worse has been doing reruns of some of her classic early strips, but I have to wonder if we really needed to see strips like these again.  The thinking behind this humor seems to be, "Hur, hur, women are completely screwed by sexist expectations! What a laff riot!"  Frankly, I get enough of this BS in life already, I don't need it in my entertainment.

Feminist Mom Film Review: The Princess and the Frog

Over the holidays I took my daughter to finally go see The Princess and the Frog.

Before the movie came out I touched on some of the controversy around it, and pretty much decided that I would see it and let the movie stand on its own and judge it based on what I saw. Now that I have, it really intrigues me that there aren't more feminist voices speaking out and praising this movie. (Note: I am not going to summarize the story here, but the Wikipedia entry does a decent job.)

Even setting aside the huge step forward of having an African-American princess (and I love the conversation here that shows the impact of that) this movie tears down so much of the standard Disney "princess" formula, and even openly mocks some of that formula's most problematic aspects, in a way that should have feminist moms cheering.

Target Women: Lessons 2009

Princesses and Privilege

Disney is releasing a new film this Winter, The Princess and the Frog, which features the first ever African-American Disney princess, Tiana. There has been some controversy over the development of the character and story, with some important changes from Disney along the way.

As a feminist, a woman of color, and a mother, I find myself torn on this movie. It's easy to say that the princess idea is always negative for girls. We know that focussing on girls' looks as a measure of their value is harmful to self image and self-esteem. We know media that promotes a single type of look as the only way to be attractive is damaging too. But not seeing yourself in media is just as damaging.

Yes, I can look at The Princess and the Frog and wonder if giving girls another princess role model is really the best idea, but I'm not that little Black girl who wants to be able to see herself as a princess. I'm not her mom or dad, who have to explain why all the princesses are white. Let's face it, Mulan, Jasmine, and Pocahontas get short shrift in the princess line, and Esmeralda doesn't get to be part of it at all. (Why can't she be a Romany princess?) How wonderful for that little girl to be able to look up at the screen and finally see a princess who, at least on some levels, looks like she does. And how great for me to be able to have a movie in our collection to show my daughter that being a princess, or being pretty, isn't limited to certain skin tones.

Can equality of objectification ever be empowerment? This is where intersectionality comes into play. Is it more important for Black girls to see themselves as equally beautiful and princess-like, or more important for them not to be presented with stereotypes based on how women should look? In this case, does race trump gender, or gender trump race? Guess what, that's not my call to make.

Empowering Play: Games Tackle Violence Against Women

Interview with Ann DeMarle and Lauren Nishikawa of the Emergent Media Center at Champlain College

What do you want people to know about the project?

Ann: My answer to that is two-fold. One, violence against women is a huge global problem; that’s the most important thing for people to know. Secondly, we’re using a medium,games, that has been labeled as promoting violence, and we’re taking it and applying it in the opposite direction, to create behavior changes to end violence. It’s not as easy to accomplish as I wish it would be.

What was your impetus for taking on this project? Why a video game, and why one focused on this issue?

Ann: Games are a natural thing for us to be doing here. I began the degree program at Champlain College in game development, and in 6 years it’s become one of our most popular majors, and it’s the first program for game development in the Northeast. Games are an incredible medium, I compare it to the early days of film, they’re just finding their footing. Games provide an opportunity to accomplish communications goals and related tasks that is immense, and there’s a real potential for education if we can unlock it.

The focus on violence against women didn’t come directly from us. At the Emergent Media Center we work with partners, some corporate and some nonprofit. Population Media Center came to us to collaborate with them. They work with the United Nations on issues such as AIDS, teen pregnancy, overpopulation, education, etc., One of the eight United Nations Millennium Development Goals is Gender Equality and key is to reduce gender violence. They believe that gender violence is one of the root causes of poverty world wide. And I’ve had direct experiences that mirror those statistics, so it has personal poignancy for me as well.

What do you see as the challenges that face people working to promote respectful treatment of women and girls?

Lauren: One of the biggest barriers is the mentality that’s embedded into the cultures young boys and girls grow up in. When we went to South Africa, they felt that violence against women was just a part of culture and a part of life. So just getting over the idea that it’s a normal part of life is a huge challenge.

Ann: We started the project by doing research here in the U.S., and then in the townships of South Africa, and we came away with this one quote from a girl we spoke with. She said, “If my boyfriend beats me, he loves me the most.” So it pointed out to us that for generations people have assumed that it’s ok for a man to control the life of a woman, in Western nations it’s just as prevalent, but people don’t talk about and address it, it’s gone underground.

Goes Together Like Dishwashers & Ass!

UPDATE: turns out this ad isn't what it looked like. Read my mea culpa here.

Well, it finally happened.  When we decided to take on ads on this site, we knew we'd face the possibility that some of the ads would not be acceptable to us.  We checked the boxes saying that we didn't want ads for cosmetic surgery, diets, lingerie, dating sites, rated R movies, alcohol, etc., in the hopes that it would limit the likelihood of offensive ads.

And then yesterday I came to the site and saw this image.

In case you can't read it, the tiny text under the picture of the woman's ass says, "Because booty is only skin deep."

Would anyone from Samsung like to fill me in on what the hell that's supposed to mean, and what it has to do with a dishwasher?

Theoretically, the, "She just walks around with it," line could have something to do with the glass this disembodied woman is carrying, but not when you combine it with the booty comment.

For a product that is supposed to be marketed towards women, I really don't get what the appeal is supposed to be here.  Am I supposed to think that if I buy this dishwasher, I'll somehow develop an amazing ass?  Am I supposed to be impressed that this woman can just walk around with her butt and her cosmo instead of slaving over dishes?

As it is, this just reads as a massively creepy sexualization of a woman's body part (and we could do some anti-racist deconstruction on how the concept of booty is positioned in mainstream media).  This is how it sounds to me, "There she is, just walking around with her ass looking attractive!"  I guess I've just heard that kind of language too often from people explaining why it was fine to verbally or physically assault a women, because of how she was dressed, or how her body looked.

So, what do you think Samsung was thinking when they ok'd this ad?

Target Women: Beauty Contraptions