Stereotypical Roles of Women in Films

Films reflect and reinforce the dominant ideology, and this applies to how women are shown in films. Although roughly half of the population is female, they are underrepresented in films. Most leads are men. Also compounded with this issue of underrepresentation is how the women are shown, cast stereotypically in traditional roles.
Women films were popular in the 1930s and early 1940s, when women were shown as wanting to gain independence from their families, and trying to experience true romantic love. In this sort of film the woman was the central character. These were often melodramas, where the woman would eventually have to sacrifice her career for love, or vice versa. This showed women that although they could want to both work and have love, that it was not entirely possible. Also during this time women were shown as “sex goddesses” who were sensual and manipulated men. Actresses that fit this stereotype are Greta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich.
In the 1940s the production code, a way of censoring movies to make them more appropriate, kept the sexuality of women out of many films. At this time, women were shown as competitors to men in the workplace, such as many Bette Davis and Katherine Hepburn films.
Sexuality reemerged in the 1950s, when women were shown as blatantly sexual and seductive threats, such as Lana Turner or Ava Gardner, or as innocent and wholesome, like Audrey Hepburn and Grace Kelly. Marilyn Monroe slightly bridged this gap, as she was often depicted as both seductive and innocent.
More recently, the status of women in films has been declining, and the stereotypes have only been increasing. Women are shown in adventure films as sex objects, like “Star Wars” or “Dirty Harry,” if they are shown at all. In crime films women are often the victims, like in “Psycho,” and they are often times terrorized before they are killed. And then there are the androgynous roles, where women do not appear to be sexual in any way, such as “Alien,” “Lara Croft,” or as in the “Terminator.” These are supposed to be the “strong” women, showing viewers that women cannot be both strong and sexual, without posing a threat.
This stereotyping of women’s roles in films is nothing new, and will not go away unless women, who make up half of the film audience, voice their opinions of what types of films, and what types of leading ladies they want to watch.

Women Directors

Talent, considered by people in the Hollywood film industry, is considered to have two groups of people: the actors, and the directors. Just as is the case in the acting community, there is an inequality between the genders for directors as well. Unfortunately, the difference is only exacerbated at the director level.
Of the roughly 13,400 members of the Directors Guild of America only 22 percent are women, and only about 7 percent are actual women directors. The rest are people such as the directing team, the assistant directors, and unit production managers.
No woman has ever won an Academy Award for best director, and only three have ever even been nominated. These three women include: Lena Wertmuller in 1975, Jane Campion in 1993, and Sofia Coppola in 2003. There has also never been a woman winner for the top honor of the Director’s Guild, although six women have been nominated.
There is even a stigma of speech, where directors who happen to not be the majority are automatically referred to as “women directors”. The male counterparts are not called “men directors”, they are just directors.
Even positions in studios are making more progress than directors, with Sony Pictures Entertainment, DreamWorks, and Paramount having women in high rankings. It is kind of ironic, in that these powerful women have the opportunity to fund more films for women directors, and choose not to. Not-surprisingly, the three aforementioned women did not comment in the sources that I used for this blog. This choice to deny funding may be due to the fact that the majority of films lose money, and even more films are just never made. According to Soares of the Alternative Film Guide, Hollywood is targeting a young male audience and women would not be thought of as having the required touch to pull in that crowd. Studios want the safe bet, and for right now, that is going with well-known male directors, and keeping yet another aspect of sexism in Hollywood alive.

Associated Press. “Female directors remain a rarity in Hollywood.” 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20074475/.

Soares, Andre. “The Paucity of Female Directors in Hollywood.” Alternative Film Guide. 2008. http://www.altfg.com/blog/directors/female-film-directors-hollywood/.

Sexism, Strength, and Dominance: Masculinity in Disney Films

As sexism is a two-way street, I have decided this week to focus on what Hollywood, and in particular children's movies, are telling boys and men. Disney movies have been around for a long time, and are one of the most popular sources of movie entertainment for young children.
Forgetting that women are often times left feeling that their place is in the kitchen after a Disney film, as they now owe the love of their life after he heroically rescued them from imminent peril, Disney films may also affect how boys are growing up.
Almost all Disney movies revolve around a heterosexual love plot, and tell young boys how to interact with women- they should view them as objects of pleasure (even if not in a sexual way). The men are seen as strong, glorifying chiseled abs, a barrel chest and huge arms; a body image that is often hard to attain. The masculinity of the characters is defined by how strong they are, and unwillingness to fight is seen as pitiful.
This image, the video says, often leaves boys feeling physically inadequate and emotionally detached. They are told that strength, dominance, and sexism define who they are as masculine beings, but that leaves out the caring, compassion, and vulnerability that women are supposed to possess.
Having a movie define what children should grow up to be sort of takes away the positive self image and freedom to choose how to feel and behave in certain situations. It is as if Disney movies are telling boys that their only option is to grow up to be a soldier, an emotionless fighter who only cares about a woman because how else would the cooking and cleaning get done?
This image that we are passing on to our children needs to change, and that has to start with adults, as they are the ones creating the movies that show these negative gender portrayals that are shaping the future of children’s lives.

Central Figure: Britney Spears

This week, I have decided to focus on a central figure for portraying the negative image of women in Hollywood: Britney Spears. Yes, I have mentioned her in other posts, but she has had so much drama, and the media focuses hate on her so often that she is always worth mentioning.
Not only is the media focused on her singing career, but also her drug and alcohol abuse, her sanity, her mothering skills, her shopping habits, her court appearances, her rehab, her family drama with mom and dad, her sister's life, her boyfriends, her ex-husband, and everything else imaginable. She has been loved, hated, scrutinized, and everything else imaginable.
When Spears was the epitome of the good, virginized, pop-singing teen the country was behind her, and she was a role-model for young girls everywhere. In my mind, when this changed was after she was known to have broken up with Justin Timberlake. Since then, the media, as far as magazines, tabloids and scandalous news sources like E! have torn apart every aspect of Spears' life.
Yes, Spears made some poor decisions as a mother, like holding her daughter on her lap while driving, but let’s not pretend that Spears is the only mother to make a critical error in judgment. The only reason that the country even knows about it is because the paparazzi are following her around.
Yes, Spears chose a man as her husband who seemed to only want to advance his own career.
Yes, Spears drank too much, and did some crazy things, and went to rehab several times.
But, why is this the public's business. Spears did sign on to become a celebrity, but to what extent do we as a society need to air all of the dirty laundry of a human being. To what degree does Spears' mothering skills and husband choices influence her ability to be a singer.
We as a society made Spears into the celebrity that she is, and we made her into the bad-role model that she now is by focusing on her negative aspects, and showing them to the entire world. If we had not shown those aspects and exploited Spears' life to the extent that we have, Spears could still be the role-model she once was.

Celebrity Pregnancy

On MSNBC several of the stories in the Entertainment section have to do with celebrities who either want to get pregnant or already have children. This has been a very hot topic in Hollywood for the past couple of years, and the public seems to never tire of it. I will discuss this topic further in a later blog, but will focus on a different topic within it. This blog post is focused on the invasion of privacy that these women experience, and how the media is focusing on topics that may not be the most important.
Christina Applegate was diagnosed with breast cancer in March of this year, and had to have a double mastectomy. The story instead focuses on how she wants to become a mother with her rocker boyfriend. Applegate is a cancer survivor, which is deserving of praise and should be revered.
Another story about celebrity motherhood is about Jennifer Aniston, and how there are rumors going around that she is pregnant. The story talks about how Aniston has denied these rumors, and how stories expressing rumors about Aniston’s life seem to surface whenever a big story about Pitt and Jolie is also in circulation. The idea that Aniston’s publicity depends on Pitt’s is sad, and the media should not make up rumors about Aniston’s pregnancy status so that she can be in the news. Making things up is not being on team Aniston.
Another story focuses on how Nicole Kidman does not want any more kids any time soon, but that she thinks that it would be a good idea for Katie Holmes to have another baby. Kidman should not have any say in Holmes’ child rearing choices, and the media should not endorse one celebrity saying that another should get pregnant.
In the last story featured today, Michelle Monaghan, who starred in “Eagle Eye,” had a baby girl and named her Willow. The story is extremely short, and is the only story that just reports on the facts, like when the baby was born and how the couple met. There was no editorializing in the stories, and no rumors about the actress.
I feel that these women are being exploited by the media just for a story. The media is focusing on rumors and does not seem to be concerned with the important issues, like Applegate’s survival, or Aniston’s career, or even how Katie Holmes is doing. Instead, they would rather talk about rumors of pregnancy, or what some celebrities might hope for in the future.

Links to these articles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27599383/ - Monaghan story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27632403/ - Aniston story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27600099/ - Applegate story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27558918/ - Kidman/ Holmes story

This is just a disclaimer

My last blog post was not exactly on topic. Yes, it had to do with gender, and yes it was in the media. But, it was not focused in Hollywood.
One might argue that this election made celebrities out of all of the candidates, but especially focused on the women, Clinton and Palin (we are ignoring Obama right now).
So, the topic got me heated and I decided to post that blog. It was also harder to find a video link for my specific topic, and I already knew of this video.

Sexism Sells- But We're Not Buying It

Sexism Sells was created by the Women’s Media Center so that the public could become aware of the portrayal of women in the news media. This negative portrayal is exhibited through many news shows and sources. The video provides several clips of male, and sometimes female, news anchors and contributors talking about Hillary Clinton and other women in a negative way. Interspersed are quotes from powerful women throughout history, speaking on how being in the female gender has affected their lives. The stigmatization of women is pressing in their quotes, and shows that this issue is not in the past, no matter how much it is being ignored.
The main focus of the attack is on how the news media portrayed Hillary Clinton during her reach for Democratic Party ticket nominee. Obviously, the video is outdated, but it is interesting to think about whether or not this video had any impact on the race against Obama. Of course, this is almost impossible to measure at this point.
The news media, although many times presented as a neutral source of information, is incredibly slanted, in this case as a sexist source. In the clips provided, Clinton is portrayed as a nagging bitchy wife, who has no experience and needs her husband’s permission to get things done. This might sound strange, but Hillary probably had to make some decisions on her own while she was in Congress.
It is funny, and by funny I mean disgusting, in reading the responses to this video that many men were upset. Most of the responses bordered on misogyny, and the message was simple: women are not in control and have no power because they are not working hard enough; if women want to get ahead they have to try harder. These responses, though the responders probably do not think this, are the message that the video is aimed at. If women are referred to as “hos” and “bitches” and the focus is on their cleavage and their hair care, than their experience and expertise is side-lined.
In no way am I saying that Obama stole the election from Clinton, but that the media portrayed Clinton as a heinous woman, and chose to focus more on her gender than on any of her other qualifications.

Related Blog- Women and Hollywood

One blog that highlights the issues of both women and the impacts of Hollywood is another BlogSpot blog called “Women and Hollywood.” It covers news and commentary about Hollywood from a feminist perspective.
This blog contains one main page, where the main entries are posted each week, and several links to other pages, websites, comments, and other articles. There is even the choice to subscribe to the weekly update of women-centric film openings. Some of the noteworthy items on the page include a list of 2008 possible Academy Awards winners for Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress, and currently playing women-centric movies.
The two main articles that were posted on October 24, 2008 was about women at the box office this weekend. This article reviewed two films, The Changeling, and I’ve Loved you so Long.
I’ve Loved you so Long is about a woman recently released from prison after fifteen years and for killing her son. This blog says that the movie is not for the faint hearted, but that Kristen Scott Thomas, the leading actress, plays out the story through her facial expressions. Many have called her performance Oscar worthy.
The Changeling, staring Angelina Jolie, is about a woman whose son went missing, and how the police department is trying to hide something about his disappearance. The review features the biggest problem/distraction of the movie, Jolie’s bright red lips. It goes on to say that the film is a reflection of a male interpretation of a woman, so the plot of a woman fighting back falls hollow. This review focuses on the acting of Jolie as well, saying that she has lost the qualities and commitment that she had ten years ago. It goes on to suppose that this may be due to her celebrity and exposure has restricted her onscreen. Oh, but Pitt is doing fine disappearing into his roles. Maybe it is the lips that are Jolie’s downfall.
The comments about The Changeling’s review were mostly in defense of Jolie, showing that film critique is subjective.
“Women and Hollywood” highlights a crucial part of Hollywood women, that of movies, but does not focus on anything other than movies, which misses many crucial aspects- television, media, magazines, etc. The website does focus completely on women-centri films, which shows that some are interested in the topic, and that it is noteworthy that these female actresses are eligible for awards and prestige just as men are.

Top Box Office Hits

Well, three, maybe four, of the top ten box office movies this past week were women-centric; these include: Beverly Hills Chihuahua, Nights in Rodanthe, and The Duchess, and we might be able to include Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist.
This may sound like a good thing, shooting thirty, maybe forty percent. But, the only problem foreseeable in this situation is that women make up over fifty percent of the movie-going audiences, and at least two of these movies appear to have a target audience other then women.
Nights in Rodanthe is obviously targeted to women, and an older crowd of them. This movie is about a woman and man who need to find themselves, they meet, fall for each other, etc. Classic romantic movie, and the target audience is obviously women, but the actor and actress chosen, Diane Lane and Richard Gere respectively, appeal slightly more to an older generation.
The Duchess, starring Kiera Knightly, is about the Duchess of Devonshire, who marries one of the most powerful men in England. She is loved by the general public for her fashion sense as well as her political activism, but is unloved by her husband, which sends her into the arms of another man. This movie focuses on the “brutal difference” between the rights of a man and woman in the eighteenth century. It is a good representation of the rights that women had, and does show that the Western world has come pretty far in the past centuries. The target audience, although many would enjoy this film, is again women, as the main point is to expose the differences between the genders.
Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist is about two kids in New York who meet and spend the night roaming the city. Like Nights in Rodanthe, this is a sort of love story, though targeted to a different demographic. Young women are definitely a target audience of this film, but it could be argued that the younger generations in general are targeted, as the movie focuses on the comedic side of the interaction, and less on the romantic aspects.
Finally, Beverly Hills Chihuahua is a movie about a female dog in Cali. that is separated from its owner’s daughter. The movie focuses on the lives of women in some aspects, and girls will definitely enjoy this movie, but it is almost targeted toward a much younger generation, like twelve year olds.
The only movies that truly are about women and show positive aspects of women’s lives are Nights in Rodanthe and The Duchess. Nights in Rodanthe shows that older women still have a chance to be found appealing, beautiful, and sexy, as well as confident, and successful. The Duchess portrays a woman who is loved for her activism, and the way she carries herself. It also shows the inequality between the genders, and may enrage the audience at the unfair treatment.
Beverly Hills Chihuahua shows even the female dog as greedy and driven by appearances, not the image that young girls need to be seeing. The human cast is also superficial and somewhat slutty in appearance.
So, even though it is good that several women-centric movies are out in theaters and making money, it is not enough. Not only do films need to focus on the huge proportion of women who attend movies, but they need to send positive images about those women.

Sources used: http://movies.msn.com/movies/top-box-office/

Honoring Women in Hollywood

Elle Magazine, in their November 2008 issue, ran an article celebrating seven women in Hollywood who were “noteworthy.” The issue noted Nicole Kidman, Anne Hathaway, Sigourney Weaver, Salma Hayek, Halle Berry, and Catherine Hardwicke as Hollywood icons; Isla Fisher as their Hollywood spotlight; and Jane Fonda as a Hollywood legend.
In addition to the magazine coverage, an event was held to honor the women. Editor of Elle, Roberta Myers, said that the annual dinner is designed to pay tribute to women “who are telling our stories.”
Some of the biggest names in Hollywood women attended the event to honor their fellow actresses. Crucial introductions were made from generations of Hollywood women, having the event serve as not only an honoring but also a networking agent.
Sigourney Weaver, although looking at the event as positive, did include some skepticism, saying, “Someday hopefully it won’t be necessary to allocate a special evening to celebrate where we are and how far we’ve come… Someday women writers, producers, and crew members will be so commonplace, and roles and salaries for actresses will outstrip those for men, and pigs will fly.” Weaver does admit that things for women in Hollywood have improved, but adds, “We do have a long way to go.”
One of the younger stars honored, Anne Hathaway, has made it a personal habit to only choose roles that do not have negative messages about women. Hathaway says, “Women are about so much more than how they look… I’m free to play my characters as I imagine them, far beyond what size jeans they wear.” Hathaway played the princess-to-be of Genovia in the Princess Diaries, portraying to young girls that women can be empowered and hold elite positions.
Although the event highlighted women who are doing wonderful things in Hollywood, it should be unnecessary to have an event to honor these women. They should be honored every day in the media and in the roles that they play, choosing ones that show women in a favorable light. These honorary women should show future generations that they are choosing roles where women are equals, not subservient, powerful, not meek, and strong, not succumbing. These women have the ability to send messages to younger generations who watch them in the movies and on television, and the messages sent need to be positive. Maybe the start of this is through having events that honor only women in Hollywood, separating them from their male counterparts.

Sources used:
Cohen, Sandy. "A-list women celebrate their own in Hollywood." Associated Press. October 9, 2008. http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jWaUhdRi6N2a0qExRddSY_cXrzXwD93LP82O0

Women in Advertisements

The television and the internet are full of advertisements, offering a wide range of products and services. But, there is a large difference between the portrayal of men and women in the media, especially in ads.
Female bodies sell a wide range of products, from food to cars to clothing.
The main difference is that women tend to be more sexualized in the media than are men. Men tend to have their full figures shown, while women tend to be chopped into body parts, rarely being shown in full figure (Media Portrayal; 2007). The types of body parts represented also tend to focus on a more sexual nature. A shot of a woman’s lips to sell some sort of liquid, a shot of a woman’s hair and the outline of her naked body to sell women shampoo (come on, really?). These ads, although designated to both sexes or to women only, seem to be made for the pleasure of males.
Another issue is the portrayal of subservience of women to men in advertisements (Media Portrayal; 2007). Men tend to be looking directly at the camera, and women are often shot in profile, to best show off their features. One ad, for Gucci, portrayed a women on her knees next to a man, shown only from the waist down.
The influence that these ads have is mostly on young girls, a large portion of the people buying magazines, watching television, and surfing the internet. These girls place more emphasis on how they look, and are more prone to become sexualized at an earlier age, or to develop an eating disorder to try to attain the figures of the women in these ads.
Almost all of the advertisements, unless exclusively in a magazine for women of average American sizes, which are few to none, show women who are uncommonly underweight. Hair now has to be “super skinny” (Paul Mitchell), and make-up is something for women to “die for” (Dior), because a women who does not have her hair and make-up done perfectly is characterized as less feminine. These ads are saying that women are just body parts, but only the sexy ones, and only prove that women like this do not exist in the “real world,” outside of Hollywood and the media.

Sources cited:
“The Media Portrayal of Women.” Tennessee Journalist. 2007. http://tnjn.com/2007/mar/20/515-the-media-portrayal-of-wom/.

Cellulite- Proving Women's Imperfection

The Celebrity Condition recently published an article praising finally seeing Britney Spears' cellulite. Not only was she at the top of the list, but there were also numerous portrayals of celebrities sporting bikinis, with photographers obviously zooming in on their cellulite.
The writer of this particular blog chose to post these pictures for very obscure reasons. It seems that the writer, a woman, only wanted to point out that these celebrity women were not perfect, which may be misconstrued as noble to some.
But, the ways in which she did this were only demeaning to the women portrayed. The blog had a picture of Britney Spears, and besides it being a close-up of the cellulite on her thighs, it also recommended that she should don a bra. Spears has had two children, and is expected by many to be free from all of the signs that she was ever pregnant. Not only is this an unrealistic expectation, but it just continues to show that Americans think too highly of celebrity women, because we do not expect non-famous women to meet those high of standards.
Another picture of Charlotte Church talked of her up-and-coming career while simultaneously demeaning her body, but also chose it important to mention that her cornrows were “horrible.”
Yet another example was of Uma Thurman, who even the writer of the blog admits had a hard time finding any real cellulite, was made fun of for her “saggy boobs.”
This blog completely misses the point. In the process of pointing out the imperfections of these celebrity women, it completely demeans their characters. Most of the women were involved in a field other than bikini model, so their cellulite should not be a factor on the minds of the American public. These women are talented, many are mothers, and most importantly, they are people. None of the photos stated that these celebrity women were claiming to have perfect bodies, and that statement is rarely, if ever, heard anywhere. So, to pick on the faults of these celebrity women, we are trying to bring them down to our level as non-perfect. But, in doing so, we bring the entire class of women down by subjecting them to the ideals of perfection, and then “proving” that the concept of the perfect woman is impossible.


Sources used:
The Celebrity Condition: Diet, Fitness & Health News of the Rich and Famous. 2008.
http://www.thecelebritycondition.com/cellulite/index.html

Why Women in Hollywood? Start of the Issue

Women in Hollywood originated around the same time as Hollywood. People began moving to Hollywood in the late 19th/ early 20th century, as it offered a lot of unused land for movie production (Allen; 2008). D.W. Griffith shot the first movie in Hollywood, In Old California, in 1910. Now Hollywood is a hubbub of activity, including several lots of studios for television and movies.
Hollywood is not just known for its movies. Hollywood is a part of Los-Angeles, and it is known for several reasons. There are award shows, shopping, numerous clubs, and a lot of paparazzi to go along with all three. It is a breading ground for celebrities and the rich and famous.
Because of the culture of Hollywood, and the opportunities available for the up-and-coming, a lot of media gets focused in Hollywood. Tabloids and magazines produce pictures of celebrities daily, and a lot of times ones that portray these people, especially women, poorly. There have been numerous times that Lindsey Lohan and Britney Spears have been caught getting out of a car without underwear on. Tabloids run pictures of celebrity women in bathing suits, and then circle the areas on their bodies that are not perfect.
A lot of times, movies and television shows are not any better in their portrayal of women. Many movies still show women as delicate housewives, or if they do work, as unfit mothers. A couple of new movies, The Women and House Bunny, show women in an unfriendly light. The former shows women in a department store advertising facelifts and joking about cooking, and this is just in the previews. The latter shows women in scantily clad outfits, pretending to be dumb to get the attention of their male counterparts.
Our population is already obsessed with how we look. We do not need these movies and magazines telling us that our bodies are ugly and that we should dumb ourselves down for the sake of getting a boyfriend. We are presenting a negative image to younger generations, who see these portrayals and act accordingly. No wonder eating disorders and plastic surgery are common in the United States. These celebrities, who have so much influence on the nation, are giving women everywhere a bad name, and influencing the population in a negative way.
This issue is highly prevalent today, and I am personally sick of watching television or movies, or having to see tabloid magazines while I am grocery shopping, that portray women in such a negative way. These women who allow themselves to be shown like this need to realize that they are influencing so many people, and need to either not play the roles that treat women unfairly, or the general public needs to stop buying tabloids that take women back to the 1940’s.

Sources sited:

Allen, R. "Sociology of Film." WSU, Fall 2008.