Post: Where are the Girls? It's Time to Take Notice of Gender Imbalance in Films
Where are the Girls? It's Time to Take Notice of Gender Imbalance in Films
(Editor's Note: A recent study commissioned by See Jane, a program of the non-profit Dads & Daughters, found that male characters outnumber female characters 3 to 1 in G-rated films. Below, See Jane founder Geena Davis discusses the importance of gender balance in films)
I’ve always had a keen interest in women’s images in the media. It first started because I wanted to play interesting, complicated characters and I saw how few of those there were.
Then I developed a super sensitivity after being in “Thelma and Louise” because the reaction of women I ran into was so strong, saying things like “Oh my God, you have no idea; that movie changed my life!” That was much different that someone saying, “Oh, I liked you in Beetlejuice.”
That experience really brought home to me what we know—that media images can really affect us. It was important to me to realize that the movies offer women so few opportunities to feel strong and like celebrating themselves.
And then I give birth to a daughter. When she was old enough, we started watching preschool shows and videos. It was very soon apparent to me that there was a big gender gap in these programs.
And I did a study of my own —- I would count the male characters on one hand and the female characters on the other hand (behind my daughter’s back -— she didn’t know what I was doing). It pretty consistently came out three or four to one in these videos. In hindsight, I realized that my childhood was dominated by programs and shows where all the characters were male. Looney Tunes has 12 characters and only 1 of them is female: Granny, the woman who was in some episodes because she owned Tweety.
We know that kids learn their value by seeing themselves reflected in the culture. They say, “I see myself! I must matter. I must count! There I am.”
What message are we sending kids when there are so few female characters and when the female characters are devalued and sidelined?
Our See Jane study, "Where the Girls Aren't," confirms that the message we’re sending our children is that girls and women are worth less and that their worth is different than boys and men.
It’s very important to say that we feel this message is just as damaging for boys. They are seeing the same world that’s dominated by male characters and where girls are sidelined. And they are learning to take this worldview into their future relationships.
The numbers for movies that adults watch -— that I would hope to be in —- are very similar. The characters are about 25% female, and it’s been that way for decades.
There’s an adage in Hollywood that everybody lives by: women will watch stories about men, but men won’t watch stories about women. If your movie gets labeled a “chick flick,” it’s the kiss of death.
What if that phenomenon has something to do with having seen the exact same gender disparity from minute one? From the very first cartoons and programs and little kid things that children see.
If the percentage of female characters is so small in entertainment designed for and aimed at kids, couldn’t that possibly affect the way you grow up feeling? And if we change that imbalance, couldn’t that also possibly affect the way we grow up feeling?
Couldn’t men who’d seen the worlds of movies and imagination shared equally with girls grow up to remain interested in stories that include a lot of women?
I think these attitudes are not in our genes or in our nature. I think we get them from the culture.
What I want from all this is for it to be normal and natural for children to see worlds and characters —- be they Martians or dinosaurs or talking toaster ovens —- that are roughly half female and half male. Just like the real world that our kids live in, where girls take up half the space.
And I want to be very clear about one thing: I’m not talking about adding one cool female character to stories, where she’s great and does everything and she’s also hot and wonderful. That won’t cover it. We want to see female characters reflected across the board: in the lead characters, the supporting characters, and the non-speaking parts.
Our study proves that the gender imbalance hasn’t changed significantly over time. The lesson I learn from this is that we can’t wait for the change to happen naturally. We’re going to have to push things along.
That’s why we have done this study. That’s why I got together with the national nonprofit Dads & Daughters to launch See Jane. I’m incredibly proud that See Jane was the springboard for this study, which is the most comprehensive analysis of G-rated movies that has ever been done. This is a dream come true.
Our very first goal was completing the study because we didn’t want to approach decision makers and film makers without the facts.
With this study, I think we have something incredible to show people right away. And now is when our real work begins. Now is the fun part because I feel very strongly that when the people we meet with and work with see this data, that they will have the same reaction that everybody I’ve told about it had, which was, “Wow. Really? I didn’t notice this before.”
We believe there is nothing malicious about the gender imbalance in films for our very youngest children. There’s no plot. Nobody is going around saying, “I think it’s a lot better for our kids that they see a lot more male characters than female ones.” This is a problem of unconsciousness. It’s just been this way for a long time and that’s why we don’t notice it.
But seeing the data and having our eyes opened will make a big change. I think we can get from a three-to-one ratio to a two-to-one ratio fairly quickly. Maybe I’m naive, but I really think that it’s hard to defend the position of, “Naw, I think we should leave it alone. It’s better for our kids to see this imbalance.”
I think entertainment industry leaders will say, “Why not? Let’s think about our projects that are coming up and see if there are ways to add more female characters and stories right away.”
There are 5 replies to this post
Date: February 21, 2006
It is a shame that there are not more girl role models in TVs and Movies. While there are many, many books that celebrate every day women as heros, there really is little for us moms to get behind on the screen.
As Geena points out, I think it really is time for us to ask. Perhaps if we start with content aimed at kids first, we'll raise a generation who come to expect this as adults. Perhaps we can even banish the distinction "chick flick"!
Date: February 27, 2006
Geena, While I agree that leveling headcount needs to take place for girls’ visibility and voice, harmful media messaging to girls via gender roles needs reviewed with equal fervor. We talked about this when we met in Hollywood last year at the Mind on the Media event. Recall? I was the ‘stereotypical tall, thin blonde,’ who asked how you felt about brainpower in girls being portrayed negatively via the ‘geek/outcast coke-bottle glasses dweeb’, especially since you’re of Mensa intelligence.
I opened this dialogue w/girls (14-18) in my session on Stereotypes at Girls Economic Power Day discussing media’s influence upon girls’ attitudes toward finance and math! Impressions stick at a very early age, and money matters that portray girls as credit card wielding shop-aholics, dating opportunists, daddy dependent manipulators, or budget-challenged, ditsy, gold-diggers aren’t helping, no matter how many girls we plop on the screen in sheer numbers.
In ONE half-hour Disney show I watched ‘tween’ girls ‘learning’ to be math phobic, ‘playing dumb to get the guy,’ being valued for their ‘beauty pageant’ looks, & masking talents to appear inadequate. The intelligent girl was ‘dissed’ for being smart, there was a ‘catty, mean popular girl,’ undermining the other females, and the standard stereotypes vaulted into full swing. Hollywood argues that ‘the lesson in the end’ makes the context okay. As a sassy tween would say, “NOT!” Absence is one thing, but reinforcing harmful media myths is arguably even worse.
Like you said, we can’t rely on one great role model (thanks for “Commander in Chief’ by the way) to counteract media’s ‘unconscious’ filter which continues to position girls’ attractiveness and desirability above strength, performance and skill. If we do, we’ll be stuck in the revolving door of media drek that perpetuates behavioral cues. We must look at situational power when it comes to media’s influence on girls (economic/occupational/relational/political/individual roles) for if we increase girls’ numbers while casting them as vapid decorations we’ve accomplished nothing.
Amy Jussel
Exec. Director, ShapingYouth.com
http://www.shapingyouth.com
p.s. Ironically, the 3:1 gender imbalance in G-rated films also plays out at womentk.com for general interest magazine writers & in prime time as well. What is it about that magic ratio of numbers? Odd.
p.p.s. I’m heading up a new consortium of industry pros concerned about harmful media messages to girls AND boys. Our orgs should compare notes and align, for the damaging roles distorting our kids’ worldviews are now streamed 24/7 on multi-channel technological platforms.
Link: http://www.shapingyouth.com
Date: March 14, 2006
I have to also note that when a female character (in a movie, novel, on television, etc) chooses to behave in a manner that seems contrary to the "accepted role", she is seen as a "rebel", as "tough", a "hero" or other such nonsense. Media will sometimes play this up, making someone so assertive seem like an anomoly.
That's the problem.
All individuals have freedom of thought, action, and reaction in everyday life that is not represented as well in media. Classifying female characters as conformist or non-conformist limits potential and free-thought for not only women, but men as well. The limiting of roles for women intrinsically links the idea of roles for men. In this way, men have had to maintain a "stiff upper lip" mentality and contrasting "bread-winner" role that often conflicts with society's expectations and progression in equality.
There is a societal advance that needs to occur for both men and women, and to this blogger, media plays a big part in helping that to happen.
I applaud your efforts, Gina, as well as the strong women of See Jane and Shaping Youth.
Louis Molnar
Date: March 30, 2006
I unequivocally agree, the 'societal advance' hasn't transpired yet, and media is in a prime position of influence to give it a little nudge. Further, male media myths are creating some new problems for boys that are not getting much play on the sociological radar either...
That's one of the issues I'm focusing on with my org, harmful media messaging that impacts BOTH genders. (a huge point of differentiation for Shaping Youth, as I haven't found any other group unveiling the impact, trickle down, and lasting behavioral shifts starting to shape both girls AND boys at very young ages!)
We hear a considerable amount about females when it comes to body image/eating disorders/overt sexualization/products targeting them, etc. but boys are getting hammered with media roles and expectations that are creating causal links to this kind of damage far beyond the 'tough guy/stiff upper lip/breadwinner' angst...
In our appearance-based culture, we're now seeing boys have the same physical insecurities, and media behavioral cues fouling them up with equal fervor. Boys are exposed to a steady stream of steroid abusing sports heroes, buffed muscled videogame icons, and already 26% of male adolescents don't like their bodies or have dysmorphia issues, plus they're a 'growth category' in the eating disorder stats as well)
One of the film projects I'm working on is called, "Body Blitz: Media, Shaping Youth" and it examines the mental and physical health stresses taking place with today's acceleration of childhood...I can tell you firsthand, the gender roles/stereotypes portrayed in the media are playing out on the schoolyard & taking their toll on BOTH genders even at the K-5 level.
Hollywood, are you listening????
Link: http://www.shapingyouth.com
Date: April 3, 2006
As I read through these posts and comments I ended up chuckling a bit. It reminded me of a conversation I had with my 10 year old son only three days ago.
We were talking about the movie "Ice Age 2" and I asked him the name of the characters. It turned out that (if I remember correctly) six of them were male, one was female.
I have no idea why, in storylines such as this, it is necessary to have that type of imbalance. I cannot for the life of me see how that adds to the entertainment. My only guess is that, as with much of media and entertainment, it's formulaic.
Regarding 'Chick Flicks', I'm a bit confused...I've always used that term (in a positive way actually) to describe light romantic comedies. From what I see, they can generally do well. However, the heavy-on-drama movies the feature mostly women in leading roles are likely to struggle if they are hoping to attract a reasonably large male audience. I tend to think it's due, at least in part, in our genes. I don't mean that to sound flip or to stereotype men. But men are often steer clear of drama...especially when it primarily involves women. Men want to identify with the male leads - a heroic soldier, the buddy movie, etc. Too many of us simply cannot relate to or connect with stories about women. And when there is a strong female lead character, we often feel threatened.
Amy is right. We need to increase the percentage of positive female characters (and some of them can be middle-aged too). That will begin to bring change.
On the flip side, I also see a problem with the way men and boys are portrayed in media today. Clueless, crude, stupid, slackers. There was an Op-Ed piece in Fridays Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/30/AR2006033001341.html?referrer=emailarticle
To me, our entertainment and advertising industries have lost a lot of their creativity and rely on rehashed and recylced plot lines or promotional strategies that serve no one well.
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/