Women Make Up Only 33% of Speaking Roles in Films

9 Comments

• | Reply

• Yan Yin | December 2, 2011 2:34 AMReply

  I really recommend watching the documentary "MissRepresentation" which talks about women, girls, and the media. http://missrepresentation.org/

• Michael Medeiros | December 1, 2011 10:48 AMReply

  It's really a ridiculous state of affairs and the only remedy is for writer's to script them, producers to produce them and directors to film them. I'm currently in post on my first feature, Tiger Lily Road a dark comedy in which 4 of the 6 leads are women. We're on FB at tigerlilyroadmovie and are looking for support as we head toward the festival and distribution hurdles.

• Kathleen | November 30, 2011 10:28 PMReply

  This is why I'm not a big moviegoer or TV watcher. It's so damn male-dominated.
  
  Last year, I decided to only go to movies that have strong female protagonists. I will not spend my hard-earned money on a male-dominated film. If a critical mass of women and men would consistently boycott male chauvinistic films, we would probably see some change.
  
  BTW, Jem's info about women being an extreme minority in the fields of active duty military, cops, politicians, doctors, lawyers, and CEOs is very dated. 50% of medical and legal students are women, 20% of politicians are women and over 10% of active duty military are women. It is extremely male chauvinistic to think that those jobs are more interesting than nursing, teaching, office work, feminist activism and full-time unpaid homemaking.
  
  I would rather see a movie about a teacher or nurse battling the system than a film about a CEO who exploits his workers and stay-at-home wife and gets away with it. And I certainly prefer a film about a great feminist activist than one about a "great man" of history.

• Jem | December 2, 2011 3:17 AM

  I did misspeak (mis-type?). Women ARE an extreme minority in the fields of active duty military, cops, and criminals (9-1? That's not extreme?). But they are not an extreme minority (just a minority by a significant margin) among doctors, lawyers, and CEOs. As for politicians - 20% is a serious minority - far more slanted than the 33% figure in the article above.
  
  Meanwhile, nobody said anything about students.
  
  More movies are made about powerful, dynamic people than are made about dental hygenists, electricians, mailmen, and stay at home moms. So what? It doesn't mean the souls of one group has more or less worth than the others. It means that you can't sell as many tickets with a nurse on your poster. Movies are a BUSINESS. Audiences want what they want. Hollywood can't be expected to forego a chance at profit by pouring money down the drain making hundreds of movies about stay at home mothers. Teenagers buy more tickets than anyone - you think they want to go to a movie about their mom?
  
  And by the way, the same goes for their dad if he's an accountant or a car salesman. Or yes, a nurse.
  
  My point is grounded in the economics of the movie business: you're only going to make money by attracting a movie-going audience (by and large, this means young people), and you can't consistently attract a movie going audience with stories about people in average jobs. You need a hook that you can market, and as long as more men hold down flashy jobs that look cool on poster... get ready for more of the same.
  
  So if it bothers you, change the underlying reality. That's more important than Hollywood's depiction of it anyway.

• Jem | November 30, 2011 6:23 PMReply

  To be fair, women are an extreme minority in the fields of active duty military, cops (and criminals), politicians, doctors, lawyers, and CEOs. You know, jobs that are inherently interesting enough to have movies made about them. Clearly there are movies that aren't job driven, but many genres and conventional story arcs are. You aren't going to see as many women in those films.
  
  What we see on the screne won't change until (and unless) the society it reflects does.

• Esther | November 28, 2011 7:28 PMReply

  Really interesting article, Melissa. And as for Twilight, clearly that's not a film for guys. However, it's also a film (and a book series) that doesn't do girls and women any favors either. I think Lisa Schwarzbaum's review of "Breaking Dawn," which was also a critical look at the series (book and movie versions) said it best:
  "[Kristen Stewart's Bella i]s maddeningly inarticulate. She's distressingly passive. She's a bad role model for girls. So, I say enough. Enough with Bella's depressed, ragdoll posture and her eternal gloom. And a pox on Breaking Dawn, the movie, for its contented complicity with Stephenie Meyer's ultimately awful message to millions of readers. What we learn in this all-pain/no-pleasure episode is that marriage feels like a life sentence, weddings are miserable events, honeymoon sex is dangerous and leaves a bride covered in bruises, and pregnancy is a torment that leads to death in exchange for birth. Also, during pregnancy, families fight like werewolves and vampires. Way to go, YA message. At least Bella's wedding gown is pretty. Ooh! Cue the fashion blogs."
  http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20483133_20518825,00.html
  
  I'm looking forward to future articles about increasing visibility for women - strong, diverse portraits of women in different life stages and roles - in film.

• Anita | November 27, 2011 8:36 PMReply

  Brian, there was no mention in the article about the films surveyed showing or not showing a preference for men. The article looks at speaking roles for women vs speaking roles for men and the statistics for that are not skewed. It's a fact that there are twice as many roles for men as women and of the roles for women, they are often more stereotyped into the roles of girlfriends, wives, grand-mother. They are more often secondary and supporting characters with less character dimension. They are younger than their male counterpart and more sexualised. I'm all for entertainment. I'm also all for entertainment where women are protrayed as complex, multi-dimentional, non-sexualised, older than 35 and not just a girlfriend/wife/grand-mother. Which is why I watch shows like The Good Wife.

• brian | November 26, 2011 9:34 PMReply

  Stats can be skewed to mean anything. Let's take Twilight. I bet the stats show enormous 'preference' for men. For a start there's the two male leads versus Bella. Plus all the gung-ho wolfpack. Plus Bella's dad is more involved in most of the story than mum. So Twilight, according to the stats, can be portrayed as male-dominated, male-focussed, etc.
  
  And the same case could be made for Harry Potter. And probably Pixar. So I say the analysis is wrong.
  
  I prefer to enjoy movies for one of their core functions - ENTERTAINMENT - instead of presuming bias in everything associated with movie-making.

• anna | November 24, 2011 11:52 AMReply

  "Women are sexualized "
  
  Of course they try to justify this by saying women just aren't visual, you know, ogling hotties is strictly a male thing. Yeah right. Men just don't like to think of their own bodies being judged- too bad sweetie! Women are not seeing Twilight for the articles.