Katherine Rake
French Film Director Arnaud Desplechin once said, “People go to movies to see a woman’s face.”
With this in mind one wonders why a conference like Vamps, Vixens and Feminists has to be held in the twenty-first century, in such a progressive country as the UK, and yet it does have to be held, and it was: yesterday at London’s National Theatre, hosted by Sphinx Theatre in partnership with Equity, the Actor’s Union; Women in Film and Television; Arts Council England; the Directors Guild of Great Britain, and the Writers Guild of Great Britain.
Contrary to the Guardian’s coverage I felt, as an actress and cinemagoer, that it was a wholly positive event and uplifting to note that women, and a few men, around the UK recognised that women are poorly represented in the performing arts, and had come together in the hopes of making a difference.
Oona King
The conference was held not just to promote the plight of actresses who are stereotyped by their roles and, in British television and theatre, are outnumbered by men 2 to 1, but to discuss how, in all types of jobs in theatre, film and television, women are under-represented, stereotypically-portrayed, and discriminated against, and how the Gender Equality Duty, an act passed in 2007 making it compulsory for all public bodies to actively promote and take action to bring about gender equality (read more here), could impact women’s working lives in the arts.
Oona King, Head of Diversity at Channel 4, who chaired the event, spoke eloquently and passionately about the need for three basic changes:
- Recruitment from a wider base onscreen and off
- Encouragement of diversity in output and the portrayal of women
- Encouragement of diversity at senior decision-making levels
and concluded that a further positive progression would be to have more events such as VVF held across the UK, to arm more women and men with the resources and know-how to make changes in the way they run their workplace, whether they be producers, commissioners, actors, ADs, cinematographers or editors.
Baroness Prosser
Personally I think getting the policy makers themselves to attend more meetings like this one would be another huge step in the right direction, and it was good to see that Baroness Margaret Prosser, Vice President of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, was able to speak at the event, admitting that often the entertainment sector is passed over when discussing issues such as women at work, and it needs to be brought to the attention of policy makers that entertainers do indeed work for a living, and good practice, with the avoidance of ‘box-ticking’, needs to be in place across the board.
Amongst the other speakers at the event were writer and actress Tracy Brabin (view her blog here), who spoke enthusiastically and encouragingly, advising women to get feistier and more self-confident when promoting their work; and Vice President of Equity Jean Rogers, who spoke of the stereotyping inherent in the portrayal of women in most popular culture, and how figures seemed to get worse as one moved from radio, to theatre, to television, to film, then finally advertising.
Kate Buffery
This stereotyping was perhaps the most important concern raised on the day, as too often commissioners are willing to tick boxes and fill quotas without understanding that more women decision-makers and actresses does not necessarily mean a more realistic and rounded portrayal of women onscreen. The knock-on effect of this is that the image of women in the media does not change, but is re-affirmed by more portrayals of passive women. As actress and speaker Kate Buffery pointed out, when the portrayal of women onscreen improves, so too will women’s self-confidence, and the ‘image of women as real contenders’, changing the nature of work women feel they can train and apply for, and improving the ‘attitude of employers to women as employees’. We have to keep in mind that equal numbers does not necessarily mean equally indiscriminatory representation onscreen.
There were other, equally wide-reaching concerns raised on this topic, with mention of the worrying backslide in the past decade of the objectification of women within the print media, including gossip magazines and ‘lads mags’, exacerbating gender equality issues. As one rightly-applauded audience member put it, we are the consumer, and we
Kate Kinninmont
have to stop buying magazines that present the demeaning and trivialised view of women as eternally-shopping diet-addicted youth-obsessed bimbos.
Another issue at the forefront of everyone’s minds was the alarming propensity of networks to resist casting women above the age of 45, which is a huge problem that will, at some point, affect every woman in the industry, and can grind highly successful and lucrative careers to a halt, leaving actresses and their dependants in need. The difficulty in the theatrical profession is that actors don’t get fired on account of age, they just don’t get hired on account of it, so we have to find a way to both identify and stop ageist casting practices. This is one problem that the Gender Equality Duty could be used to solve, because the difference it makes is that issues can be dealt with before discrimination occurs, rather than investigation arising after such an offence. Kate Kinninmont, Director of Women in Film and Television, was one speaker who advocated audits, which could be used
Beatrix Campbell
to ensure that, for instance, channels commission a truly, and statistically verifiable, representative line-up of drama programmes, with an equal ratio of male to female characters, writers, directors and crew-members, and a wide-ranging and realistic portrayal of women onscreen.
All in all, the day gave speakers and audience alike a lot to think about, and there was time at the end of the event to put questions to speakers including Oona King; writer and journalist Beatrix Campbell; Katherine Rake, Director of the Fawcett Society; Jean Rogers; Kate Kinninmont; Baroness Prosser; Kate Buffery; Giles Croft, Artistic Director of the Nottingham Playhouse; President of the Writer’s Guild of Great Britain David Edgar; playwrights Tanika Gupta and Colin Teevan, Tracy Brabin and theatre directors Lucy Pitman-Wallace and Janet Suzman, who spoke out against the ‘boys club’ of male theatre critics who spend entire plays ‘looking for the spark of sex that makes their evening less tedious’. Also speaking at the event were Executive Producer at the BBC
Laura Mackie
Hilary Salmon, Laura Mackie, Head of Drama at ITV and professor Vivien Gardner of Manchester University. Images of some speakers are featured on the left hand side of this page.
In my opening paragraph I referred to the one issue I had with the conference: the fact that it had to be held. It is appalling, in my humble opinion, that in this day and age we are still a long way off from gender equality. At the event Kate Kinninmont, Kate Buffery and Katherine Rake, all gave very inspiring speeches about our need for equality. I think it was one of them (and please forgive me if it wasn’t, I took many notes that all seem to be scribbled over each other), that referred to a court case that occurred in 1897, where the face of actress Gertie Millar was superimposed
onto a photograph of a scantily-clad and, at the time, sexually explicit picture, which was concurrently sold as postcards. When Ms. Millar sued, the Judge ruled that as an actress, she had no right to ownership of her image, and
Tanika Gupta
that it would have been different if she were a vicar’s daughter, but she was an actress, who had put herself in the public sphere and so her body and image belonged to everyone.
112 years later and women are still reaching to be taken seriously; to be given parts which are representative of real women; to avoid objectification; to be allowed to age past fifty, past seventy onscreen and still be seen as capable of being interesting; to be any colour and any size; to hold senior positions (although it was suggested that many artistic directors of theatres across England are women, playwright Colin Teevan pointed out that although that seemed true
for the rest of the country he could only think of one in London); to work as lighting or camera crew; to be thought capable of directing and to be respected as writers (one attendee, a writer herself, pointed out that if a writer is ‘difficult,
Tracy Brabin
challenging, uncompromising…and male’ he is thought of as exciting and talented, and, if female, the conclusion is somewhat different).
As Oona King concluded, and as Tracy Brabin has rightly pointed out in her blog on the event, it looks like change is something we are going to have to make happen ourselves, and perhaps the next event can be a gathering of women who want to create work together, which will, in itself, help rectify the gender imbalance. Below are a few ways you can make a difference too:
· Sign the VIEWER’S PETITION FOR EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IN FILM & TV DRAMA here
· Contact Sphinx Theatre , the hosts of this event, to ask for an event in your area, or to show your support
· Join Women in Film and Television, UK site here, international website here and (for Women & Hollywood readers) Los Angeles Chapter quicklink here
and last but not least, recognise that this cause, unlike most others, is one that, as a woman in the industry, or simply as an audience member, you can do something about. By supporting websites such as Melissa Silverstein’s Women & Hollywood, where this blog was first published, commissioning women-centric productions, writing strong female roles, supporting actresses and women filmmaker’s financially and with advice, and insisting upon discussion which puts gender equality at the forefront of policy-makers’ minds.
Abigail Tarttelin
Tags: abigail, conference, feminists, film, gender equality, tarttelin, vamps, vixens, women, womenandhollywood
For someone who couldn’t attend the event, I was grateful to see a full report and perspective from the blog. It is appalling that in this day and age we are still having to fight out corner. I was a programmer at the Birds Eye View film festival 09, and the need for more events like this is high. We need to build a strong network of women working together to promote training and progression through the industry.
“Heeey Aaaaaabbbbbbiiii” well it would have been, had Costello been matched with Abbi!
A stereotype? Perhaps. Was Abbott and Costello really about Gender inequality or just a great match and pair for entertainment? Women loved them. Men loved them.
Maybe we need “Alle and Abbi” but then, does that in it’s own create a gender stereotype? Abbi, join me on stage from September
I work in Diversity, and strangely, Film. I’ve been quite successful in film.
I’m also a rather unique person when it comes to Gender. Without giving the whole shebang away, I’ve found it easier and more positive the last few years of my life working in film than ever before. Both in front and behind the camera. In fact until last year, I was never in front of the camera! But thanks to many many many Actors and Actress’ pressuring me, I took a chance, and their advice that I could do more than Direct.
Kinda silly really isn’t it. Here I am saying I can’t Act, telling Actors they can. But it’s true. I sometimes find that the issue isn’t so much gender inequality, but gender over-equality.
Most of the films I’ve worked on have either been highly female weighted, in both cast and crew. In fact one feature I worked on, I worked with a team of 13 women. 1 man (even that was questionable!)
Other films have been very balanced, both in front and behind the camera.
I do agree however that there does appear to be a bias towards male dominance in film both in front and behind, in very stereotyped roles. But then, Film is a reflection of what our past, not our future.
Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek and put the gender stereotype out the window. He did this at a time in human history where racial equality was the big thing. Gene did a double though, he put a black woman in a command position on a starship, before rocket had been lunched to the moon. WOW!
But there is no shortage of “female” oriented films in general. From “Thelma and Louise” to “Erin Brockovich.”
But you know what stands out most. The fact that many Indie productions are written by, produced by and weighted for the male interests.
I have a short film I’ll be working on with the writer, and hopefully she’ll direct as well, later this year. It’s a sweet story. It works.
But it’s rare in the thousands of scripts I am sent each year, that I see more than a few female names. And the stereotypical stories: Female Lead, usually revolves around sexy body and ideal woman looks. Male lead, prey on the sexuality of a woman, well usually a group of women! (But I also understand the male sexual psychology! Must write a film about that one day!)
I just want to see scripts from women. A major shortage. Yet Actresses and Women in Film will complain endlessly that women are not equally represented.
Maybe, being a woman, I only get men approaching me with their scripts. But then, that shebang thing comes to mind and there has been no difference in the scripts I see really.
In working in Diversity and Equality, I have learned in the last year specifically that there is so much emphasis on created strands (or categories) of Discrimination that in the process of creating diversity and equality, we are creating and limiting the very thing we want to avoid.
For example, so much emphasis is on six areas that are considered separate. Disability, Mental Illness, Sexuality, Gender, Age, Race.
But what is someone is a 70 year old black lesbian woman transsexual with a mental illness (mild of course) in a wheelchair.
What box do you put her into? WHY should there be a box to check? Inequality is inequality regardless. If she applied for a job ad is capable of doing it, then she gets the job – right?
If a male applies for the same job and doesn’t get the job, over the women described above, does that mean he has been treated unequally?
We are at a time in our evolution where women have changed the entire face of the planet. Men are no longer really the leaders. We have had women Prime Ministers in several countries. We have Transsexuals (Male and Female) as CEO’s Members of Parliament and anywhere else they are skilled, like anyone else, to do a job or see a passion completed.
We’ve had women climb Mt Everest. We’ve got Women who are Astronauts.
Women win just as many Best Actress Awards as men won Best Actor Awards.
Maybe the issue isn’t so much Equality for Women, but really, maybe we should be focused on Equality for ALL, regardless of Race, Gender, Orientation, Age, Disability, Mental Illness.
A line I love from “Marley and Me” where she says on the beach “Instead of trying to have a baby, why don’t we stop trying not to have a baby.”
I love a phrase I coined, originally a different version about Politicians, but I translated it to Actors:
“Acting is a delicate balance between being Visibly Entertaining and Entertainingly Visible” – Alle Segretti, 5 June 2009
Hows: “Equality is a delicate balance between being Functionally Practical and Practically Functional” ??
Coming back to Marley and Me:
Instead of trying to have equality, why don’t we stop trying not to have equality.
Because if we are trying to bring one ‘demographic’ to the fore over that of the others, aren’t we then trying to visibly reduce the equality of those other demographics?
On the other hand, if you can’t join them, beat them!
Any time a group of girls wanna make some flicks in London, give me a bell! I’ve been bored the last 10 months! I haven’t even picked up a camera!
Lets make films women want to see! AND want to be in!
Cause I’ve seen many women walk out of the cinema within 30 minutes from the last 130 films I’ve seen and it’s an exhaustive list!
Following up. I saw two films last night.
First up I saw “THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT”. It’s not a Horror, but not a Thriller. It’s not a Psychodrama either. In fact it’s just quite painful, emotionally, to watch, without being willing to hide your own fear by laughing at the demise of the bad guys. Oh and yes, it’s 2 bad guys, 1 bad girl, and boy who’s cught in between.
The Mum plays well, although some scenes (or shots) were lacking the emotion and power delivered in others. The Daughter is brilliant throughout. You feel for her, you feel you are her.
I’m not going to spoil the film for those who haven’t seen it, but the balance is split between Mum and the Daughter. They both demonstrate intuitive intelligence and work out what’s going on. The Daughter friend is, killed, (spoiled huh!) in a very slow, almost emotionless way. But again her performance is spectacular.
The Daughter has a very complex character. Especially given the graphic depiction of what is done to her, but she survives, of course. The Parents perhaps don’t deliver the emotional impact that I think would happen in reality. But that was their only weak moment really.
The Dad, he’s just an ornament for the Mum and Daughter. He is also the “First” to kill. It’s kind like watching Friday the 13th or Texas Chainsaw Massacre but the opposite.
I give it 4.1 Stars because it made me feel, it made me cringe, it made me cry, it didn’t hit the Hitchcock Suspense button that Zak Penn credited me for achieving a couple of years go. And the gore is graphic, but you kinda expect it, in fact you want it. The Ending is very much off a page from SAW or Friday 13th, but hey one does have to go out with a bang – oh and it was a bang.
With that intense story in my head spinning my mind I then went to see TRANSFORMERS. Michael Bay and Steven Speilberg – what can anyone say? Besides the fact they aren’t women!
But does this really matter?
The leading female character is best described as “Behind every great man is a brilliant woman” and that’s how it came cross. I guess Liv Tyler wasn’t available for the film, because I could have sworn these two are twins!
The Mum is quirky, a bit dipsy, but enjoyable to watch when played off against the Father. Neither are majorly featured in the film, but they are funny and you can relate.
Yes all the Machines are “male” voiced, but then an androgynous Machine lifeform that procreates by taking “parts” from their dying species is a bit weird. I can’t imagine what a Cute Feminine Sexy Transformer would look like. I also guess Hasbro wouldn’t sell too many either. Then again the 16-25 market is always looking for that sexy fix.
I guess the contrast between the two films is the contrast between fact and fiction. Reality verse Science Fiction. Last House is, in effect, events that DO happen to people. Transformers is, well fiction. So far anyway. Unless your car converted into a stomping robot in the last few years?
It is interesting to see that most films I see that are targeted at the female audience, or are focused on the strength of women characters, are frequently clear true to life possibilities. Even the events in DRAG ME TO HELL, leading female story, would be argued by many as Real. Whereas Transformers, is just a fantasy, as is Stealth, Tomb Raider and so on.
Maybe the issue is that Women don’t believe they can be successful in competing against the male dominated market? I know I hear the excuses as to why a film can’t be made all the time. But George Clooney Said it clearly “I make the blockbuster so I can make 9 films I really like that don’t get an audience.”
We need to change that reality. And the only way that’s going to happen is if women take a forward step to teaming up together and making films and then promoting them, no different to any Indie film maker has to. Budget has to be set aside, you don’t make money making films, you make money selling them. If you never make films, you never have anything to sell.
My hand is UP. I want to make films. I have equipment, I have time. I don’t have Crew or Actors. Your investment is our future. I’m investing. Are you?
Exceptional article and I favor your attitude towards improving standards. Thanks for putting this material up. This really is what I’ve been seeking. Continue blogging. Getting excited about reading your future post.
You certainly have some agreeable opinions and views. Your blog provides a fresh look at the subject.