I'm a little stuck on this... They're telling the stories, but what are they doing about it? Are they turning down roles? Ashley Judd never got offered a role by that company, so I assume she never really tried for one after that incident, but assume.
It's just bothering me a little.
Sienna Miller turned down a role due to pay inequity.
I'm a little stuck on this... They're telling the stories, but what are they doing about it? Are they turning down roles? Ashley Judd never got offered a role by that company, so I assume she never really tried for one after that incident, but assume.
It's just bothering me a little.
Sienna Miller turned down a role due to pay inequity.
I'm a little stuck on this... They're telling the stories, but what are they doing about it? Are they turning down roles? Ashley Judd never got offered a role by that company, so I assume she never really tried for one after that incident, but assume.
It's just bothering me a little.
I'm bothered by your insinuation here that the only way to fight pay disparity is to turn down roles. So all women who are underpaid compared to their male counterparts should just quit working until they can find a job that pays fairly? Yeah, that's sure going to help us out.
Sometimes speaking out from a position of power - rather than relinquishing that position - IS the best way to create change.
I'm a little stuck on this... They're telling the stories, but what are they doing about it? Are they turning down roles? Ashley Judd never got offered a role by that company, so I assume she never really tried for one after that incident, but assume.
It's just bothering me a little.
I'm bothered by your insinuation here that the only way to fight pay disparity is to turn down roles. So all women who are underpaid compared to their male counterparts should just quit working until they can find a job that pays fairly? Yeah, that's sure going to help us out.
Sometimes speaking out from a position of power - rather than relinquishing that position - IS the best way to create change.
I don't think a stance like turning down roles can be applied to all women, but when we are talking celebrities who are getting tens of millions of dollars per film, they can surely afford to say no to be champions for other women. It is a unique situation for the super rich celebrity set that can do this and still have major income from royalties and appearances while saying no to roles that give them a lower income than their male counterparts. I don't think this could work for the "normal" woman without millions of dollars behind her and that would need a different tactic.
I think people in power sharing their stories are awesome, but I feel like from this article there is a lack of "here is my story, this is what I'm going to do about it." It could be just the way it was written or edited, but I felt like I was left hanging. I hope it encourages more people to speak up about it, but overall I'm just stuck with wondering how can we make this change? What steps can we take?
A mainstream romance (even with the male centric plots/views Hollywood uses) requires a woman for the most part. What happens if there wasn't a woman to put in the role until she got equal pay?
Post by tacosforlife on Oct 9, 2015 10:15:58 GMT -5
OK, but part of the problem is that if women turned down roles because they are paid less than their male counterparts, they'd have to turn down ALL roles. If Jennifer Lawrence turns down every role offered to her for a year because of pay disparity, she's going to be labeled a prima donna and blackballed from future films. Yes, her star is on top, but stars can fade quickly in show business. There are a million other starlets-in-waiting who will swoop in and take those roles. It's basically a free rider problem. You'd have to get every actress in Hollywood to refuse all roles, and that just won't happen.
Post by tacosforlife on Oct 9, 2015 10:28:03 GMT -5
And, I'd add that given the reactions we've seen in this very post - of limited sympathy for the super rich Hollywood star - the top actresses are going to lose public support for their positions if they turn down roles because of pay disparity. Public opinion is not going to be, "Wow, that is terrible that Jane was only offered $10 million while Bob was offered $15 million. Good for her for turning it down!" No. The reaction is going to be, "Really? $10 million wasn't enough for Jane? Fuck her. She's not that pretty anyway." IMO, the actresses are in a better position of power to take roles, knock them out of the park, and when people adore them (a la J.Law), point out the unfairness. When you've already got people on your side, they'll take up your cause.
Post by orriskitten on Oct 9, 2015 10:34:41 GMT -5
I think if they were to turn down roles for pay inequality, it probably wouldn't be enough to just quietly say no, but to make it public. Fight for the cause with their power. Go to the studios and demand changes. It would have to be wider than just a couple of starlets doing it, but I'm probably imagining something unrealistic in the world we have. Although it could be so easy to do if actresses called out studios that were unfair. A tweet about saying no because so and so thinks men are worth more than women could be a very powerful statement. Risky, but powerful.
I'm interested to see how things turn out with celebrities speaking up, but my gut says it'll Peter out or just apply to the women who DO speak out to keep them quiet, but not to other actresses.
I think if they were to turn down roles for pay inequality, it probably wouldn't be enough to just quietly say no, but to make it public. Fight for the cause with their power. Go to the studios and demand changes. It would have to be wider than just a couple of starlets doing it, but I'm probably imagining something unrealistic in the world we have. Although it could be so easy to do if actresses called out studios that were unfair. A tweet about saying no because so and so thinks men are worth more than women could be a very powerful statement. Risky, but powerful.
I'm interested to see how things turn out with celebrities speaking up, but my gut says it'll Peter out or just apply to the women who DO speak out to keep them quiet, but not to other actresses.
They would be blacklisted. I am forgetting names, but I thought there have been at least a few actresses who have been vocal about it and their work has dried up.
I think if they were to turn down roles for pay inequality, it probably wouldn't be enough to just quietly say no, but to make it public. Fight for the cause with their power. Go to the studios and demand changes. It would have to be wider than just a couple of starlets doing it, but I'm probably imagining something unrealistic in the world we have. Although it could be so easy to do if actresses called out studios that were unfair. A tweet about saying no because so and so thinks men are worth more than women could be a very powerful statement. Risky, but powerful.
I'm interested to see how things turn out with celebrities speaking up, but my gut says it'll Peter out or just apply to the women who DO speak out to keep them quiet, but not to other actresses.
They would be blacklisted. I am forgetting names, but I thought there have been at least a few actresses who have been vocal about it and their work has dried up.
That is why I think it could be unrealistic and why I'm curious to see what happens next.
I think if they were to turn down roles for pay inequality, it probably wouldn't be enough to just quietly say no, but to make it public. Fight for the cause with their power. Go to the studios and demand changes. It would have to be wider than just a couple of starlets doing it, but I'm probably imagining something unrealistic in the world we have. Although it could be so easy to do if actresses called out studios that were unfair. A tweet about saying no because so and so thinks men are worth more than women could be a very powerful statement. Risky, but powerful.
I'm interested to see how things turn out with celebrities speaking up, but my gut says it'll Peter out or just apply to the women who DO speak out to keep them quiet, but not to other actresses.
Yes, you are.
I also resent the hell out of the idea that the burden is on the victims of discrimination rather than the discriminators.
I think if they were to turn down roles for pay inequality, it probably wouldn't be enough to just quietly say no, but to make it public. Fight for the cause with their power. Go to the studios and demand changes. It would have to be wider than just a couple of starlets doing it, but I'm probably imagining something unrealistic in the world we have. Although it could be so easy to do if actresses called out studios that were unfair. A tweet about saying no because so and so thinks men are worth more than women could be a very powerful statement. Risky, but powerful.
I'm interested to see how things turn out with celebrities speaking up, but my gut says it'll Peter out or just apply to the women who DO speak out to keep them quiet, but not to other actresses.
Yes, you are.
I also resent the hell out of the idea that the burden is on the victims of discrimination rather than the discriminators.
I also resent the hell out of the idea that the burden is on the victims of discrimination rather than the discriminators.
THIS!!!!!!
I do not think the burden should be on the victims at all!
This is not a new issue. The perpetrators are not doing anything about it to change it for the most part. They are clearly getting away with it and that is not okay. They need pressure put on them to make change happen. Talking about it is a good first step, but it's been talked about before. This is something that those in power need to change, but they are unlikely to do it magically on their own without those who've been discriminated against acting against it.
I can't be the only one that recognizes that Hollywood pay disparity is real, and terrible, but can't really get it up to be outraged that someone made, say, 12 million instead of 25 million on a movie?
I wondered about this too with Paltrow's Iron Man example. I haven't seen the movies but for some reason I thought she had a pretty small role.* So if that's true can she complain if RDJ gets paid more but has a much bigger role? Idk, just food for thought.
*Of course, that does go back to the problem of there not being very many movies made about women so female actresses are relegated to playing girlfriends/wives which tend to be smaller parts.
^I did read somewhere that this is because producers don't think men will go see a movie about women but women will go see one about men. Idk if that is true or not. Is the Iron Man franchise much bigger than the Bridget Jones franchise for example? (I really don't know, I'm just asking only because I read that they're making a third Bridget Jones movie so I'm assuming it must have been a pretty big money maker).
I think it's been proven to not matter when Hunger Games makes as much money as any other movie made.
Not every movie is going to make Avengers money. And that's okay. Lots of movies with female protagonists and even largely female cast make lots of money. And as women make more purchasing decisions in this country, advertisers should hope that it's women going to the movies.
I wondered about this too with Paltrow's Iron Man example. I haven't seen the movies but for some reason I thought she had a pretty small role.* So if that's true can she complain if RDJ gets paid more but has a much bigger role? Idk, just food for thought.
*Of course, that does go back to the problem of there not being very many movies made about women so female actresses are relegated to playing girlfriends/wives which tend to be smaller parts.
^I did read somewhere that this is because producers don't think men will go see a movie about women but women will go see one about men. Idk if that is true or not. Is the Iron Man franchise much bigger than the Bridget Jones franchise for example? (I really don't know, I'm just asking only because I read that they're making a third Bridget Jones movie so I'm assuming it must have been a pretty big money maker).
I think it's been proven to not matter when Hunger Games makes as much money as any other movie made.
Not every movie is going to make Avengers money. And that's okay. Lots of movies with female protagonists and even largely female cast make lots of money. And as women make more purchasing decisions in this country, advertisers should hope that it's women going to the movies.
Zero Dark Thirty did well too and it was a movie that theoretically could have had a male protagonist. Jessica Chastain was really good in that role. I hope it shows producers that women can take on the thriller roles that men usually do and make money for them.
I do not think the burden should be on the victims at all!
This is not a new issue. The perpetrators are not doing anything about it to change it for the most part. They are clearly getting away with it and that is not okay. They need pressure put on them to make change happen. Talking about it is a good first step, but it's been talked about before. This is something that those in power need to change, but they are unlikely to do it magically on their own without those who've been discriminated against acting against it.
But the issue with women turning down roles is power in hollywood is very 'what have you done for me lately' an actress who turns down roles due to pay inequity is quickly going to be a "has been" with no power and no work. that is making the victim pay for the crimes of the perpetrators.
I do not think the burden should be on the victims at all!
This is not a new issue. The perpetrators are not doing anything about it to change it for the most part. They are clearly getting away with it and that is not okay. They need pressure put on them to make change happen. Talking about it is a good first step, but it's been talked about before. This is something that those in power need to change, but they are unlikely to do it magically on their own without those who've been discriminated against acting against it.
But the issue with women turning down roles is power in hollywood is very 'what have you done for me lately' an actress who turns down roles due to pay inequity is quickly going to be a "has been" with no power and no work. that is making the victim pay for the crimes of the perpetrators.
My mind didn't go there, but I can see that others would I guess. If I heard something like that I'd be so happy and proud of a woman who would stand up for herself that way. It didn't occur to me that thought might not be as common. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It's hard to believe (not the right word- understand? Wrap my head around? Not finding the right word here) that people would be against it rather than supporting a woman who stood up against sexism like that.
But the issue with women turning down roles is power in hollywood is very 'what have you done for me lately' an actress who turns down roles due to pay inequity is quickly going to be a "has been" with no power and no work. that is making the victim pay for the crimes of the perpetrators.
My mind didn't go there, but I can see that others would I guess. If I heard something like that I'd be so happy and proud of a woman who would stand up for herself that way. It didn't occur to me that thought might not be as common. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It's hard to believe (not the right word- understand? Wrap my head around? Not finding the right word here) that people would be against it rather than supporting a woman who stood up against sexism like that.
Why do you find that hard to believe? Look to earlier posts in this very thread, where women were saying they were having difficulty mustering sympathy for actresses who are still making millions of dollars. Obviously there would be exceptions like you, but on the whole, public opinion would be that any actress turning down a million-dollar or more contract is a greedy bitch.
I can't believe we are still entertaining the idea that women should turn down jobs when they get paid less than men (assuming they even know about this in advance, which if the Sony hack taught us anything, women in Hollywood don't.)
But the issue with women turning down roles is power in hollywood is very 'what have you done for me lately' an actress who turns down roles due to pay inequity is quickly going to be a "has been" with no power and no work. that is making the victim pay for the crimes of the perpetrators.
My mind didn't go there, but I can see that others would I guess. If I heard something like that I'd be so happy and proud of a woman who would stand up for herself that way. It didn't occur to me that thought might not be as common. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It's hard to believe (not the right word- understand? Wrap my head around? Not finding the right word here) that people would be against it rather than supporting a woman who stood up against sexism like that.
The issue isn't the general public (who might well cheer on an actress who did this) it's the studio heads/directors/producers who enforce the pay inequity but who cast the roles actresses compete for. as we've discussed good roles for actresses are limited as it is, give the powers that be a reason to not have you read for a role and you are OUT.
My mind didn't go there, but I can see that others would I guess. If I heard something like that I'd be so happy and proud of a woman who would stand up for herself that way. It didn't occur to me that thought might not be as common. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It's hard to believe (not the right word- understand? Wrap my head around? Not finding the right word here) that people would be against it rather than supporting a woman who stood up against sexism like that.
The issue isn't the general public (who might well cheer on an actress who did this) it's the studio heads/directors/producers who enforce the pay inequity but who cast the roles actresses compete for. as we've discussed good roles for actresses are limited as it is, give the powers that be a reason to not have you read for a role and you are OUT.
Yea, my mind wandered and went to empowered women standing together and trying to change something in a better world. I needed to step back towards reality.
I do like to think if the hypothetical situation should occur where actresses stand up and say "not until I have equal pay" that the masses (of women and allies) would support them and not make life and career miserable for being a greedy bitch.
The issue isn't the general public (who might well cheer on an actress who did this) it's the studio heads/directors/producers who enforce the pay inequity but who cast the roles actresses compete for. as we've discussed good roles for actresses are limited as it is, give the powers that be a reason to not have you read for a role and you are OUT.
Yea, my mind wandered and went to empowered women standing together and trying to change something in a better world. I needed to step back towards reality.
I do like to think if the hypothetical situation should occur where actresses stand up and say "not until I have equal pay" that the masses (of women and allies) would support them and not make life and career miserable for being a greedy bitch.
It would be nice BUT Hollywood lives on 'the next new thing' the big actresses do this? Studios will just cast the new no name girl from Tx/MN/Etc who isn't able/willing to not work. the way it's set up makes it almost impossible for the actresses to do this. Speaking out about it and making it a point of conversation and pushing for more in their contracts (even if its not equal just MORE) is the only way they have to combat this until more women are in the position of the power positions mentioned above and can change it from that side of the table. Which is why supporting female directors/producers/etc is so important.
Post by oscarnerdjulief on Oct 9, 2015 14:42:14 GMT -5
I don't know why "Steve Jobs" and "The Walk" have to be disparaged. The former in particular is very well-received and probably beats the pants off any movie that will star a female this year. "Steve Jobs" is a major, major contender from what I have read.
Sienna Miller has done well for herself, garnering roles as The Wife in good movies like "Foxcatcher" and "American Sniper," but I don't know if I'd put her up on the cross just yet. Ask Sadie Frost for a second opinion.
Post by oscarnerdjulief on Oct 9, 2015 14:44:34 GMT -5
"Zero Dark Thirty" is a great example of the very rare time when a woman has a starring role that doesn't rely on any personal relationship. It's all about what she does and what she has achieved. Maya wasn't defined at all by who she was dating, who she was married to...
Loved Jessica Chastain and the movie. What the Hollywood far left did to that film during Oscar season was unconscionable.
"Zero Dark Thirty" is a great example of the very rare time when a woman has a starring role that doesn't rely on any personal relationship. It's all about what she does and what she has achieved. Maya wasn't defined at all by who she was dating, who she was married to...
Loved Jessica Chastain and the movie. What the Hollywood far left did to that film during Oscar season was unconscionable.
My beef with the first 2 mentioned is that those were just made. Jobs came out 2 years ago. Man on Wire came out in 2008. I'm sure they're fabulous movies, but does the exact same story need to be told again? Already?
I didn't like Zero Dark Thirty. I think I fell asleep.
I don't know why "Steve Jobs" and "The Walk" have to be disparaged. The former in particular is very well-received and probably beats the pants off any movie that will star a female this year. "Steve Jobs" is a major, major contender from what I have read.
Sienna Miller has done well for herself, garnering roles as The Wife in good movies like "Foxcatcher" and "American Sniper," but I don't know if I'd put her up on the cross just yet. Ask Sadie Frost for a second opinion.
What does her personal life have to do with anything? I mean, really.
Post by oscarnerdjulief on Oct 9, 2015 22:04:52 GMT -5
She's just playing the colorless wife roles. Not someone whom anybody should waste time praising for turning down a role when the ones she does take are just 'the wife,' have no nuance or much of anything and have no depth. I have seen these movies. She's the least of anything involved with them---less than the directors (Bennett Miller and Clint Eastwood), the lead actors (Steve Carell and Bradley Cooper), the screenplay, the other supporting actors (Ruffalo, etc.).
The fact that she was a cheater in her personal life (as Jude Law was) is only secondary to my point that she played the colorless wife in many roles, not exactly a trailblazer in the way that Jessica Chastain and a few others are. The Sadie Frost comment was just a secondary diss to my main point that her roles are undistinguished.
I don't know why "Steve Jobs" and "The Walk" have to be disparaged. The former in particular is very well-received and probably beats the pants off any movie that will star a female this year. "Steve Jobs" is a major, major contender from what I have read.
Sienna Miller has done well for herself, garnering roles as The Wife in good movies like "Foxcatcher" and "American Sniper," but I don't know if I'd put her up on the cross just yet. Ask Sadie Frost for a second opinion.
:/
Because both subject matters have already been turned into films. So Hollywood is now on repeat when telling the stories or men. I eagerly await all 3 of the Snowden biopics sure to hit the big screen.
And duh Jobs could be better than any female driven film. This is proving the point. Men's stories are of accomplishment, success, building things, being compelling or having depth. Women get the stores of family, love, friendship, helpers to the men.