Why Have There Been No Great Women Cinematographers

[Guest]

I actually just read the article. ?

So those dip shits in Quebec are planning to honour women cinematographers? Quebecers only...of course!

This is the same group of people that bitch an moan about how they don't win enough awards at the English language "Oscars."  So what do they do? They set up their own awards show called, The Jutra Awards, to hand out awards to Quebecers only, the entire broadcast is in French only, and only programs in French can win.

You can see why I am fed up with this bullshit, and that's what it is...bullshit!

R,

PS: Sorry, here's a correction, not that this surprised me at all.

Until 2016, it was known as the Jutra Award (Prix Jutra, with the ceremony called La Soirée des Jutra) in memory of influential Quebec film director Claude Jutra, but Jutra's name was withdrawn from the awards following the publication of allegations that Jutra had sexually abused children.^[2]

 

[Albion Hockney]

On 2/4/2020 at 9:37 AM, Phil Rhodes said:

I should preface this by restating my position, which is that nobody should be unfairly prevented from doing anything they want to do.

The problem with all this is that we just don't know what proportion of DPs we'd expect to be female. I suspect, in a completely fair world, it'd be higher than it is right now. I also suspect that it wouldn't be 50% simply because of the differing average psychology of men and women. There may be no easy answer to this question but it doesn't mean we should ignore it, nor should we endorse a blank-cheque attitude to affirmative action without these questions at least being raised.

P

What "psychology"? That women's brains must be wired to spend time doing docile tasks. This sort of social constructed idea is very dangerous and ugly.

I should also note the idea of "merit" based job hire is a complete false hood. Your portfolio is yes partly do to your skill, but also do to luck and the work of those around you. IE if your a marginalized person it maybe be hard to create as shinny a reel as someone else... you might be just as good though. This is why most people in the industry don't come from low SES backgrounds. 

I know director's who've lost commercial jobs to women because of free the bid. They didn't complain for a second. They are happy to make the industry more inclusive.

I think its also important to note there are no women posting here and that I believe the average age of the men in this conversation is at-least 35-40+. I would suggest you all speak to some of your younger peers. Ideas on this subject have changed considerably for the better. 

[Stuart Brereton]

13 minutes ago, Albion Hockney said:

What "psychology"? That women's brains must be wired to spend time doing docile tasks. This sort of social constructed idea is very dangerous and ugly.

Albion, that is absolutely not what Phil said or meant. I suggest you go back and read his comments in this thread. I think you will find them to be fair and intelligently argued, unlike your own.

[Dom Jaeger]

8 hours ago, Phil Rhodes said:

As to pay, I think it's worth going over so that there is good information on this thread, for the benefit of everyone including future readers.

There is a pay differential between men and women that's probably down to prejudice at least in part, but it's nothing like as large as it is often claimed to be. Numbers approaching the high teens, up to 18 or 19% are sometimes claimed for western economies. These are invariably based on whole-life earnings, that is, not controlling for people's choices. We can illustrate that issue by considering a common and very reasonable concern, which is that women are typically burdened with childcare responsibilities at a greater level than men. Beyond biological necessities, which should of course be considered fairly, raising a family is a choice; a choice to do so or not, or a choice as to the division of the resulting labour. This is a discussion for the individuals in a childrearing relationship.

I’m not sure there’s much to be gained from entering this futile argument to be honest, but if you think it’s important to have “good information”, then at least supply some evidence for your claims. 

Many studies on gender pay gap do not in fact look at whole-life earnings, but simply compare the weekly or yearly wages of full-time adults, such as this one:

https://www.wgea.gov.au/data/fact-sheets/australias-gender-pay-gap-statistics
 

All the issues you raise are mentioned in such studies, including so called “choices” like child-rearing, or domestic work, which you conveniently dismiss as something to be discussed within each particular household. This neatly passes any blame on to the individual women, who presumably haven’t argued hard enough with their spouses about shared responsibilities, rather than looking at it as a societal issue. For the sake of the species, child-rearing is actually a necessity rather than a choice, so it needs to be something we support as a society.

Different statistical approaches will of course produce different figures, as will focussing on different industries, but the data is pretty unanimous in it’s conclusion that there is a gender pay gap, it’s more than your attempted dismissal of less than 5%, and it most definitely is due in part to systemic bias. If that reality confronts people who feel that they themselves have no bias against women, or no experience of bias, it’s no reason to dismiss or try to minimise the findings.

The problem with questioning this stuff without proper facts is that it feeds into an anti-feminist, contrarian agenda that seeks to blame people attempting to redress inequality rather than blaming the failures of the system. Young men are particularly vulnerable to the subtle misogyny that tells them they are being “feminised’ if we want to address domestic violence, or replaced in the work force if we want to support equal opportunity, or that feminists are controlling the agenda when it’s patently obvious that men are still much more likely to be in positions of power. It leads directly to the sort of alt-right philosophies that also blame minorities for people’s woes, and breeds resentment when there should be compassion.

I’ve said this before, but in our own industry you only have to look at the statistics of female protagonists or speaking roles in movies, or the disparate amounts paid to the top 10 female actors compared to the top 10 males, or any number of other analyses, to see some sort of inherent bias at work. It’s not rocket science to see it. These are statistics relating to movies in general, where half the viewing population is female, so we’re not talking about specific jobs within the industry.

Of course it gets tricky with specific jobs because there are gender preferences. I don’t know why cinematography attracts so few women, but it’s interesting to note that at least in film schools there is a much larger participation rate, which dwindles the further along the career path you go. Certainly there seem to be more prominent female role models in the field nowadays, which will change things in time. 

As to the OP’s thread title, I know for a fact there have been and are many great women cinematographers, we just don’t hear that much about them.

 

[Dom Jaeger]

4 hours ago, Richard Boddington said:

I'm sorry to say this David, but when you make posts like this, I can't help but think you are lecturing the rest of us with an aura of superiority.  You've already admitted you didn't do a very good job hiring women on The Marvelous Mrs Maisel and the descriptive stats I posted bare that out. 

And I am certainly leaning more and more to the "I don't give a poop position," myself.  After all the Canadian government sent me a 20 page letter explaining why I have zero rights in Canada.  

R,

The irony of someone like you, Richard, who only ever comes on here to boast about your own achievements or to whine about some perceived bias against you, trying to claim that David is the one lecturing us is too much to let pass. He humbly admitted that he could do better, and you want to use that against him?

As opposed to David, who has given countless hours of fantastic advice to people here, I can’t think of a single one of your thousands of posts where you actually helped someone out with their question. You just use this forum as a blowhorn for your own agenda. Of course you’re in the “I don’t give a poop” position.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Dom Jaeger said:

The irony of someone like you, Richard, who only ever comes on here to boast about your own achievements or to whine about some perceived bias against you, trying to claim that David is the one lecturing us is too much to let pass. He humbly admitted that he could do better, and you want to use that against him?

As opposed to David, who has given countless hours of fantastic advice to people here, I can’t think of a single one of your thousands of posts where you actually helped someone out with their question. You just use this forum as a blowhorn for your own agenda. Of course you’re in the “I don’t give a poop” position.

Oh bugger off Dom!

I have spent a HUGE amount of time on here giving out loads of producing advice to a lot of people.  I have also answered dozens of questions via PM, I have also taken personal meetings with people I have met on this forum.

So keep your idiotic opinion to yourself!!

Oh and remind me once again what it is you do in the film industry, and why you're even here in the first place?

R,

 

[Aapo Lettinen]

Richard please!

Why don't you just learn some French to make the Telefilm people like you more? would be much easier than raging on forums about their attitude and it would be useful when traveling as well ?

[Guest]

In reality aapo you're not far off, that is EXACTLY what they want me to do!

Phone the Telefilm Toronto office, first they answer the phone in French, then in English, even through Ontario is English speaking.  The number is 416-973-6436.  Even the recorded message starts in French and you have to push one if you want English!!

That is the STUPIDITY of Canada!!!!!!!!!!

R,

 

[Dom Jaeger]

59 minutes ago, Richard Boddington said:

Oh bugger off Dom!

I have spent a HUGE amount of time on here giving out loads of producing advice to a lot of people.  I have also answered dozens of questions via PM, I have also taken personal meetings with people I have met on this forum.

So keep your idiotic opinion to yourself!!

Oh and remind me once again what it is you do in the film industry, and why you're even here in the first place?

R,

Well I'm happy to stand corrected, I just don't remember you ever being actually helpful. Maybe all those angry CAPS and rants against unions and film boards has distracted me from your true, generous self.

Luckily I'm not in your employ so I don't have to do a damn thing you say, but since you asked so nicely, my position in the film industry is a technical one to do with cameras and lenses. Way less important than your position, so you are of course entitled to casually dismiss me with a backhand wave.

The reason I'm here is in large part to do with David, whose generosity in freely sharing valuable information I found inspiring, although there are plenty of others on the forum here who I also admire. 

[Jon O'Brien]

Phil, you ask for evidence. There's a dumb, double-standard discrimination that occurs in many workplaces today, and I and people I know have experienced it. That's my evidence, and if you don't believe it then fine. I'm really against it. It doesn't officially exist and yet it's commonplace. It's just a plain fact. You aren't aware of it? I don't have any cool online encyclopedia articles to quote or link to. If you're curious, and truly unaware of what so many people are now saying, talk to some people about it. Talk to some teachers or people like that. A lot of online information regarding politically-charged topics from large organisations is heavily biased in favour of progressive, left wing ideals that are seriously damaging a lot of good, traditional things in society. There will inevitably be a reaction against that, in how people vote. It can take generations before change starts to happen. I believe society is starting to readjust to a more healthy balance.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Jon O'Brien

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Way less important than your position, so you are of course entitled to casually dismiss me with a backhand wave.

Oh good, we understand each other perfectly then...next.

R,

[Phil Rhodes]

2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Many studies on gender pay gap do not in fact look at whole-life earnings, but simply compare the weekly or yearly wages of full-time adults, such as this one:

https://www.wgea.gov.au/data/fact-sheets/australias-gender-pay-gap-statistics

The very study you cite lists some of the very things I've mentioned as aggravating factors, particularly issues associated with childcare interfering with people's career progression. I'm sure spending lots of time on childcare does interfere with careers, regardless of the gender of the carer. And at least some hardline feminists will tell you that the assumption that women should do the lion's share of childcare is an aspect of patriarchal oppression - and oddly enough they might actually be right about that, so it isn't so much about who's got a penis, it's also about who's at home looking after the kids.

Quote

This neatly passes any blame on to the individual women, who presumably haven’t argued hard enough with their spouses about shared responsibilities, rather than looking at it as a societal issue. 

That's your presumption, not mine. Please don't read traditional misogyny into what I write simply because I am questioning the mainstream narrative. I'm trying for evidence-based policy here.

Beyond the facile exceptions of abuse and neglect, it is nobody's place to tell parents, regardless of gender, how to look after their children. I have no doubt society places pressures on people to assume traditional gender roles. I will happily campaign against that. I have no doubt that some parents are awful people who do not support their partners. I will happily campaign against that, too.

But I don't think that banning men from film industry networking events is in any sense a solution to those problems.

Quote

it feeds into an anti-feminist, contrarian agenda that seeks to blame people attempting to redress inequality rather than blaming the failures of the system. Young men are particularly vulnerable to the subtle misogyny that tells them they are being “feminised’ if we want to address domestic violence, or replaced in the work force if we want to support equal opportunity, 

Redressing the inequality of a relationship in which someone refuses to adequately assist a partner in caring for their offspring requires modifying the behaviour of that person. Redressing the inequality of an employer who refuses to hire people because they are female (or male, or black, or disabled) requires modifying the behaviour of that employer. If you have evidence of this happening, and I'm sure it does, please, publish it. Let's get these people blacklisted. I'll help. People should not get away with it.

What this does not do is create a reason to scapegoat all men because of the perceived behaviour of some men, or because of the historical behaviour of entire societies, especially when the effects of that are so poorly researched. This is quite literally punishing people for things they did not do. If it is not clear why that's a problem, I can't help you.

P

[Jon O'Brien]

I think women make great cinematographers, just like men do. There doesn't seem to be many of them - but I would think people would go out of their way to help a woman who showed interest and talent in this field. I would, if I could. Is there a woman here who can comment on how she has experienced efforts to get into a male-dominated field? One of my favourite recent movies for cinematography was shot by a woman DP. I comment on how I and others I know have experienced things, and not on what an online encyclopedia tells me is so. I say cut Richard some slack. I think he's a great contributor here, as is Dom. Sounds like Richard has had an awful time lately putting up with a troublesome organisation that are not acting in a fair and balanced way. It's okay to complain about that!

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Jon O'Brien said:

I say cut Richard some slack. I think he's a great contributor here, as is Dom. Sounds like Richard has had an awful time lately putting up with a troublesome organisation that are not acting in a fair and balanced way. It's okay to complain about that!

Amen brother!

R,

[Jon O'Brien]

Something I've noticed over the years is how the so-called compassionate people of the progressive left are not actually very compassionate at all. They have a really hard edge and will attempt to throw you under a bus if you challenge their mainstream views. In universities now a speaker not from the left, addressing a topic fairly challenging a progressive ideal, will be shouted down. It's a strategy that's failing progressives now. People are seeing through it and can see they are not actually compassionate at all but are in love with their own ideals, statistics, self-serving research, and all the rest of it. The whole ugly bandwagon is losing its wheels. Thank God, at last.

[Uli Meyer]

5 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Something I've noticed over the years is how the so-called compassionate people of the progressive left are not actually very compassionate at all. They have a really hard edge and will attempt to throw you under a bus if you challenge their mainstream views. In universities now a speaker not from the left, addressing a topic fairly challenging a progressive ideal, will be shouted down. It's a strategy that's failing progressives now. People are seeing through it and can see they are not actually compassionate at all but are in love with their own ideals, statistics, self-serving research, and all the rest of it. The whole ugly bandwagon is losing its wheels. Thank God, at last.

Oh no, not on this forum too. Can't you leave your fear of the "progressive left" out of a forum that is supposed to be about cinematography, please? If you feel hard done by the world, there are other places you can vent, surely. As to the original question of this thread, there are great women cinematographers:

https://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/lists/17-female-cinematographers

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Uli Meyer

[Stuart Brereton]

18 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

I don’t know why cinematography attracts so few women, but it’s interesting to note that at least in film schools there is a much larger participation rate, which dwindles the further along the career path you go. 

One likely explanation for this is that statistically, 80% of women will leave the workforce at some point to have children, and according to a couple of studies I found, as few as 20% will return to work at all, much less in the field they originally worked. This would certainly help to explain why there are increasing numbers of female ACs, but fewer operators, and fewer still DPs. At some point, probably just as their careers are taking off, they have to make a choice between having children and having a career. That said, I do know several women who have come back to the camera dept after having children, and managed to pick up pretty much where they left off. Anyone, male or female, who works freelance knows just how hard this can be.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Stuart Brereton said:

 Anyone, male or female, who works freelance knows just how hard this can be.

In Canada women get a guaranteed two years off work with monthly payments from the government for child birth.  Of course this doesn't apply to those that work free lance as they are considered self employed.    My wife's hairdresser told her that she comes back from maternity leave after only 6 weeks, otherwise she'd have no clients left.  One can't expect people to have someone else for hair styling for two years, and then go back to the original person.  So in this case, it's not really the fault of the clients or the government, or men for that matter.

I have never been in this situation, but what if a lady DOP comes in to interview for a shoot that runs 8 weeks, visibly pregnant.  And informs the producer, I'll be giving birth at the start of week 5.  Now what? The producer must have a replacement on stand-by so in effect he/she must hire two DOPs.  In the US will he have to pay some sort of maternity leave benefits to someone that he employed for 5 weeks?  The shoot will be over before she can return to work, so there will be no on-going job to keep open.

I don't know the answer, and it's particularly difficult to solve in the US.

R,

 

[Phil Connolly]

48 minutes ago, Stuart Brereton said:

One likely explanation for this is that statistically, 80% of women will leave the workforce at some point to have children, and according to a couple of studies I found, as few as 20% will return to work at all, much less in the field they originally worked. This would certainly help to explain why there are increasing numbers of female ACs, but fewer operators, and fewer still DPs. At some point, probably just as their careers are taking off, they have to make a choice between having children and having a career. That said, I do know several women who have come back to the camera dept after having children, and managed to pick up pretty much where they left off. Anyone, male or female, who works freelance knows just how hard this can be.

Juggling freelance work and parenting is difficult full stop.  Pregnancy, recovery etc.. also necessitate more time off, which I guess at some point makes it harder to get back on the loop.

My good lady wife VFX Compositor her indoors, had time off due to having our child. It coincided with the industry shifting to a different set of software tools (bad timing huh?). So her skillset and experience was obsoleted during her short(ish) time away.

It was also difficult to learn the new software, limited external training, expensive license. It would have been easier to transition to the new software while in employment (the post houses trained the teams, mentoring existed, time was given to it). She looked at trying to get back into the work and everything had moved on and she'd be expected to be upto speed straight away. Add parenting duties into the mix and it wasn't practical.

Things like that, can derail a specific career. Sure it's a choice and my wife is happier being a parent and has since retrained as is now doing something else. But she was working at a high level her team won the VFX Oscar for the Dark Knight and it would be hard to get back to that level. 

Other companies, in employment sectors manage parenthood better, with ways to support people back into work after having children. The rough and tumble world of London post production no chance - the attitude is "your lucky to be here", circumstances change they won't expend effort to try and make it work - they don't need too, they get 200 speculative CV's a week.  The media infrastructure is too precarious and small prodco's working with mostly freelance staff, are not good at nurturing long term careers or supporting employees. 

Look at the way google treats its workers, it would be unthinkable in TV/Film. We wear the fact that working in this field is an ordeal as a badge of pride - putting up with years of crap, in the land of landing a nice creative HOD position in the distant future. 

Any business studies graduate working at entry level bluechip firm wouldn't believe the crap better qualified production runners deal with. 

I also worked in London post production for 6 years, work life balance was not that thing that's possible. It's a shame, I wouldn't have been able to be a parent and continue that career path. Hence I also made choice to step off that ladder. Is a shame that sometimes you have to choose between home life and career. This choice does impact women more, in some relationships Men's career prospects are less impacted by parenting. 

[Tim Tyler]

That's enough.

If any women would like to add to this thread, let me know and I'll unlock it.