Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

Infographic: Gender Inequality in Hollywood (It's Worse than You Think)

by Inkoo Kang
November 26, 2013 3:00 PM
  • |

In honor of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, the blockbuster success of which should disprove every industry myth about women-led films being unprofitable, the New York Film Academy shares this wonderful infographic to bring awareness to the continuing entrenched sexism in Hollywood. 

Gender inequality, it appears, has a "trickle down" effect that reduces salaries for top female stars and speaking roles for journeywomen actresses, fails to recognize women directors and screenwriters for their achievements and points of view, and leads to a skewed male-to-female ratio of 5:1 of people participating in the film industry. 

Scroll down below.

New York Film Academy
  • |

More: Gender Equality, Sexism

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • KEZ | December 4, 2013 6:14 PMReply

    the preferences of audiences do not spring from a vacuum--they are generated and cultivated via marketing and media, and male directors get to helm films with huge marketing budgets. I believe that Martha Lauzen from UCSD has analyzed films directed by men and women with the same marketing budgets and found that it's a wash: it's not the gender of the director that generates big revenues, it's the budget of the film. So as long as women face a celluloid ceiling (which they do), they won't get access to directing big films, and then the rationale for not hiring them for big films is that they haven't directed something that makes a lot of money. See the catch-22?

    If you think the deck isn't stacked against female directors, you haven't considered the case of Cathryn Hardwicke and the first Twilight film, which she directed. It had a small budget and made a huge amount of money (about $400 million worldwide against a budget of $37 million), but she wasn't asked to helm the second film.

    The playing field isn't anywhere near level.

  • jg | November 27, 2013 2:07 AMReply

    So the audience is to blame? Your sample set is skewed toward those that made the most money. This is what your general public paid to see.

    Personally I find very little out of Hollywood that is worth paying to see, but why is this statistical study of any relevance? Do you want to bash the audience for being sexist? Anyone can make any movie they want. Whether the slobbering hordes show up, however, is up to them.

  • Kieran_Frost | November 29, 2013 7:55 AM

    It's not about 'specifically this' or 'specifically that'; it's showcasing a depressing (and obvious) trend across movies. The article isn't blaming just audiences, just Hollywood, just this or just that. It's an OVERALL problem.

    And as someone who is an actor, I can tell you nearly EVERY audition (outside of all male casts, obviously) has more women apply than men (despite 90% of the time there being far less female roles than male). Many auditions the women outnumber the men 2-1; yet you wouldn't know that, based on the overall problems with hiring women in the industry.

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • 'May in the Summer' Writer-Director ...
  • Trailer Watch: Susan Sarandon Hunts ...
  • TIFF Announces Julie Taymor and Marjane ...
  • Emma Stone to Make Broadway Debut in ...
  • 'To Be Takei' Director Jennifer Kroot ...
  • Nicole Holofcener Announces Follow-Up ...
  • Trailer Watch: Studio Ghibli's Eerily ...
  • Elisabeth Moss and Michelle Dockery ...
  • AFI Expands Directing Workshop for Women ...
  • Sandra Bullock to Star in and Produce ...