The "Fempire" is Not a Trend
Problems with the New York Times‘ reporting on women in Hollywood.By Kay Steiger
March 25, 2009
Screenwriter Diablo Cody accepts the Oscar for best original screenplay for her work on “Juno” at the Academy Awards. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)Last weekend, the New York Times profiled four women who are gaining notoriety in Hollywood. Screenwriters Lorene Scafaria, Diablo Cody, Dana Fox, and Liz Meriwether (writers of Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist, Juno, What Happens in Vegas, and a New York playwright-turned-screenwriter, respectively) make up what the Times called the new “Fempire” of Hollywood.
The piece garnered a lot of positive reaction on feminist blogs. Annalee Schafranek at the Bitch magazine blog said, “I am totally looking forward to the Fempire takeover.” Melissa Silverstein, who monitors this stuff at her blog Women & Hollywood said, “Overall, I’m thrilled about the Fempire. … I want them to be successful. I want them to be able to write films that are not regressive chick flicks and have enough power to get them produced.” Courtney Martin at Feministing said, “But what’s even more thrilling is that they’re unapologetically supportive of one another and being recognized for it.” And Megan Carpentier at Jezebel noted, “Who needs publicists when you have actual friends?”
After reading the Times article and all of the praise that followed it, you might think that women have gained a solid footing in the movie-making industry. But the reality of women in Hollywood is actually pretty grim. Consider the facts: Data collected by Martha M. Lauzen, a professor of film and theater at San Diego State University, showed that among the top 250 films at the box office in 2008, only 12 percent of writers were women and 9 percent of the films were directed by women. The numbers are better, but still bad, among the top films’ editors, producers, and executive producers (17, 23, and 16 percent, respectively) and dismally bad among cinematographers (4 percent). Of all the films, 22 percent employed no women in any of these positions, and there weren’t any films that didn’t employ at least one man in these positions. Women like those that make up the “Fempire,” in other words, are a very small minority.
From data collected in “The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 250 Films of 2008” by Martha M. Lauzen, Ph.D (Illustration by Shannon Ryan)
It’s a stark reminder that Hollywood is still a male-dominated town. It’s great to see that this group of women has found a support system for themselves, but so many women that might aspire to make successful movies might have a hard time gaining support and attention. After all, one of the most successful films this year, Twilight, was directed by Catherine Hardwicke—but she was removed from any subsequent sequel projects despite the fact that the film grossed $138 million in its first three weeks, $70 million of which was made in the opening weekend. Some argued that Twilight just wasn’t done that well, and the project needed fresh blood. But it seems that while success for male directors usually earns them more success, for this woman, it got her fired.
The premise behind the Times profile was well-intentioned: to highlight the success some women are finding in Hollywood. But readers shouldn’t think this is a trend. Lauzen, who has been collecting data since 1998, shows that these figures of women in key behind-the-scenes roles have remained roughly stagnant in the last decade. Maybe if Lorene Scafaria and Diablo Cody become really successful they will start a trend of successful women on parity with men in Hollywood. But I wouldn’t count on it. History is stacked against them.
Kay Steiger is an associate editor at Campus Progress.
Social Bookmarking
--------
Comments