Yeah I think Portman comments weren’t aimed at any of the nominees. I get that it made for an awkward moment for all ofthem, but they’ll be fine, and it was a quick and powerful way of criticizing the entire industry structure, where there absolutely should be more opportunities for women to direct films, which in turn will lead to recognition. I do think Greta Gerwig was a snub any way you look at it though. Imagine the same scenario where in 2008 nolan directs heath ledger to the supporting actor award, and dark knight wins best drama, but nolan wasn’t nominated for directing, we’d all be up in arms, and some are just expressing the same frustration.
I'm all for women getting the shot to direct as well, but doesn't necessarily mean that every single woman should be nominated for an Oscar when they get to make more films. As for Lady Bird, story-wise, it was good, but direction is not worthy of any awards to be honest. Though, it's definitely better in terms of direction than 'Get Out.'
Also I'm all for more women directors in the industry but a director shouldn't get nominated simply because she's a woman and that was clearly the opinion people were having at the ceremony. I'd rather be nominated for being one of the best directors rather than getting handed a nom for my gender.
Also I'm all for more women directors in the industry but a director shouldn't get nominated simply because she's a woman and that was clearly the opinion people were having at the ceremony. I'd rather be nominated for being one of the best directors rather than getting handed a nom for my gender.
Also, perhaps the disparity in gender representation in the film industry has nothing to do with sexism. Maybe people are making a scapegoat. Otherwise there must be sexism in hospitals with nurses, or in public schools, because of female overrepresentation in those positions.
Or maybe in actuality there isn't an issue of sexism when Best Original Drama is given to the movie starring a daughter and her mother, directed by a woman. Maybe because the average woman has two children, they don't have the time to be globe trotting for six months, away from family. Maybe women are biologically less suited to leadership roles because of how passive and unaggressive they are.
Just because Gerwig was snubbed in a landscape of 90% males doesn't mean "SEXISM".
Geoffrey wrote:Also, perhaps the disparity in gender representation in the film industry has nothing to do with sexism. Maybe people are making a scapegoat. Otherwise there must be sexism in 1) hospitals with nurses, or in public schools, because of female overrepresentation in those positions.
Or maybe in actuality there isn't an issue of sexism when Best Original Drama is given to the movie starring a daughter and her mother, directed by a woman. 2) Maybe because the average woman has two children, they don't have the time to be globe trotting for six months, away from family. 3) Maybe women are biologically less suited to leadership roles because of how passive and unaggressive they are.
Just because Gerwig was snubbed in a landscape of 90% males doesn't mean "SEXISM".
i must be angry at myself for even responding to this instead of reporting
1) well maybe that's cuz those (especially nursing) professional positions were among the very few in which women were encouraged to work, as historically, females have always been and still to this day continue to be deemed unfit for stereotypically male working positions? Of course, it's all more lax today, which is why there's an increase of women working in other fields as well, but you have to be a special kind of stupid to ask why women, for example, were working as secretaries in the 60s instead of executives. I'm sure if a male decided to become a nurse, he wouldn't be denied such an opportunity, and there are plenty of male teachers out there
2) yea and men don't have children and family, only women do
Ruth wrote:i must be angry at myself for even responding to this instead of reporting
1) well maybe that's cuz those (especially nursing) professional positions were among the very few in which women were encouraged to work, as historically, females have always been and still to this day continue to be deemed unfit for stereotypically male working positions? Of course, it's all more lax today, which is why there's an increase of women working in other fields as well, but you have to be a special kind of stupid to ask why women, for example, were working as secretaries in the 60s instead of executives. I'm sure if a male decided to become a nurse, he wouldn't be denied such an opportunity, and there are plenty of male teachers out there
2) yea and men don't have children and family, only women do
3) oh wait no, forget what i said, fuck off
That was not worth a response Ruth. You deserve better than to engage in an argument against whatever garbage was it, that poured out of that fella's brain.£
