www.thefrisky.com: Actor Katrina Day has collected a series of sexist casting breakdowns for her not-haha-funny new Tumblr Some Lady Parts. Some of these notices read like Craigslist personal ads: “Seeking: Hot Blonde girl … Blonde hair …. classic hot girl.” Others aim for highbrow, but end up unrealistic and porn-y: “Seeking: Ultimate fantasy woman of a sexually frustrated college graduate. Sophisticated, stylish, sexy, intoxicating.” Reading the Tumblr all at once is jarring, a reminder that there are many ways to be sexist — from styling a character as “a typical prostitute” to the many female characters that are not given names.
10 comments:
It's easy to point out the fact that we walk a very fine line when we describe what we want out of someone in a casting call. Theres part of the argument that says that we have to provide a thorough enough description of the character in order to allow for the actor to get a good enough idea of the type that the casting team is looking for, but another side of the argument that points out the fact that you have to be careful about the way that you're describing that specific type. With that in mind, the article fails to point out some additional facets that develop the conversation further:
1. Males are just as easily described in this sexist manner. I can very easily get behind the fact that women are more often described in this manner, but by failing to leave out the fact that the nature of the casting call requires blatant description of a persons physical attributes , we fail to acknowledge a very critical part of the issue at hand.
2. There is no solution provided in the article. The article could easily be described as an introduction to this issue, but it leaves out any inkling of how we could improve the difficult navigation of this situation. If perhaps Prinzivalli provided some kind of explanation of how the casting call could be worded in a more socially proactive manner, the depth of discourse would be expanded in a way that doesn't leave the article in such a bleak position.
I started browsing through some of the tumblr posts for context, and every time I scrolled to a new post I just got angrier and angrier. I watch so many shows and movies where female characters are trivially sexualized to the point where it doesn't even register to me how absolutely ridiculous that female actors are placed at such unattainable, shallow and ridiculous standards in the acting industry, while still continually being relegated to secondary roles. For example, in 2012, women held only 28.4% of speaking roles.
The thing is, this is not only damaging to women in the industry who aren't getting the same employment opportunities because of societal expectations assigned to their gender. This is also highly detrimental to the state of our society. Like it or not, we are highly affected by our media in the way we look at the world. Movies and television teach us how to interact with and treat the people around us. If the main way we see women being portrayed is the stereotypical male sexual fantasy, is it any wonder that we still have to deal with sexist behavior in an age when we honestly should be far beyond it? This is a constantly repeating cycle of sexism wherein people grow up unwittingly watching sexist content, unwittingly imbibe its values, and than we produce a generation of writers, casting directors and directors who recycle the same sexists tropes time and time again.
I have never met a single woman that should be able to fit neatly into one of these casting calls, and I find it depressing know that most of the smart, introspective and driven women that I will be working with here at CMU and eventually in world will be forced at some point to fit themselves into the box of a sexist fantasy.
Someone has to break the cycle. Why can't it be now?
It's ludicrous to still entertain the notion that all actresses are willing to do anything for fame. In essence, these casting calls are aiming to have women sell themselves and their integrity for the sake of a role. I fully support this tumblr because it is time to not only recognize actresses are talented people who take on challenging characters, but that they are actually human beings capable of nearly anything an actor can do.
I do believe that parts that are caricatures can be a useful commentary on a particular aspect the film or show or whatnot wants to address. However, these casting calls make it painfully clear that these actresses would not be a valuable and respected part of the overall piece, that their characters are not to help serve the story--rather they are being used superficially and taken for granted because of their gender.
I have to disagree with Brennan’s last two points. Physical appearance does matter when casting a character, but I don’t think that the issues is simply that it’s brought up more often in women’s casting calls than men’s. The issue is that physical appearance almost always going to be the most important deciding factor when casting women, and probably only the second or third most important factor when casting men; that is where the disparity in the casting calls comes from.
The other thing I disagree with is the idea that Prinzivalli could have suggested a solution like wording casting calls more carefully. This issue is not about casting calls, it is about the greater, alarming state of Hollywood’s relationship with women, on and off the screen. Even if the casting call didn’t request the actress to a hot 25-year old brunette, that is the person that the casting agents are looking for, and the one they will cast. Casting calls aren’t the problem, blatant sexism in Hollywood and our society in general are the problem.
What is important to note about this article is that these sexist casting calls demonstrate a symptom of a much bigger issue, which is how female characters are portrayed in television and film. The article does address this, although it is too brief to really delve into any of the issues it touches on. I think the way the article is structured is a little misleading, because the introduction paragraph kind of sets up the reader to believe the problem is the phrasing of these casting calls. Like Brennan said, casting calls require blatant descriptions of the desired physical attributes of a character. But the problem Katrina Day is trying to address is not the way these casting calls are written as much as it is the fact there are so many casting calls for these kinds of characters. She doesn't want to see more-delicately written descriptions of hot, blonde, characters, she wants to see less character's whose most important attribute is that they are stereotypical, sexy, female characters. While the author of this article may not make it entirely clear, this is not a call-to-action for casting-call writers, it is a call-to-action to the TV and film industry to start producing work with more complex, interesting, female characters.
I think that this article highlights a huge problem with the way that women are perceived in the entertainment industry. All of the postings would have been offensive descriptions of women in any other context, so I don't see these as valid ways of describing realistic character roles in entertainment. I was happy that the writer of this article included examples of postings for male actors as well. It is easy to immediately assume that these would be substantially less simplistic and degrading, but on the whole they weren't that that great either. Both were center around stereotypes of what different types of men and women look like
While I do agree with brennans point that "the nature of the casting call requires blatant description of a person's physical attributes" as with any spoken word, there is a right and a wrong ay to say things. If you need someone to play a specific looking role, the by all mean blatantly list their attributes not their aptitudes. Blonde, short, less than or more than so many pounds. These are all okay people who take offense over them just need to get over themselves, because this is how we understand or world. But when casting becomes about sexuality, thats where the line is drawn. "smokin' hot" and "Brad Pitt like" are all relative, and by no means have any place in the casting vocabulary.
It's great that people are getting called on their crap more; it's completely offensive to feel you cannot audition for a part because you don't fit the idea of "sexy" that a someone has laid out. What I found crazier were the articles suggested at the bottom of the page. "Ariana Grande Nude Pics Surface Online And Trend Nationally", "8 Tiniest Celebrity Breasts", "Awesome Uses For Big Booties", "NFL Cheerleader Wardrobe Malfunctions", "11 Celebs Whose Dress Sizes Will Surprise You", and more. On a website, where they have clearly just placed an article about how women are mistreated by the entertainment industry, they advertise the same kinds of behavior the article has just stated to be sexist and inappropriate. The website is expressing conflicting opinions (and has obviously not been paying close attention to the advice of the articles they post). It is ridiculous that a website can post something so "forward thinking" and addressing a serious social issue and be completely ignorant to the fact that they, themselves, are demonstrating the exact same sexist behaviors.
UGH this makes me furious. Of course Hollywood would be awful at objectifying women, because that's what will make money- pretty girls on a screen. Not only is this a problem for the women auditioning for these roles, making them feel like how they look is the only thing about them that will sell, but more disgustingly, this kind of systemic objectification completely perpetuates body image problems for women in the audiences who are seeing these films, facilitating the notions that the only way to get into the Hollywood scene is to look pretty. This subtly showcases Hollywood's best kept and dirtiest secret: This monstrously huge and influential industry is built on a foundation of exploiting women's bodies and looks rather than what they have to say. That's not showbiz, that's horrifying.
This is kind of scary. It's true. Female actors, still, are only seen as the sexual desire of a male. That is their purpose, for the most part. Granted there are a handful of strong female roles and string female actors that refuse to be drawn into being sexually objectified. But the sad truth is, most roles involve being viewed as a sexual desire of a man.
The problem with portraying women in this way in the media transfers into our society. Boys in high school think it's ok to make sexist comments. They think it's ok to talk about girls as attainable objects. Like they are trophies. It's not ok. This is 2014. Women are no longer second class citizens. So why are we still treated as such?
Continuing to portray women as sexual objects in the media is making it impossible to get out of this ditch. Women are stuck in a society where they are seen as sex objects first and colleagues second. So where's the solution? What's the next step? Is it possible to change a whole society's way of thinking?
Post a Comment