Are the Academy Awards sexist?
March 6th 2010 21:58
VYOOS EDITORIAL
The Academy awards are sexist because the Best Actor Awards are separated into genders. We don't have separate Best Actor awards for black and white actors, so why should we have them for men and women?
This argument for a single-gender Best Actor category at all festivals of film has been put forward by Kim Elsesser, a research scholar at the Center for Study of Women at the University of California, Los Angeles, and has gained prominence this week after Elsesser wrote this article about it in The New York Times.
"Separate is not equal," says Elsesser. "While it is certainly acceptable for sports competitions like the Olympics to have separate events for male and female athletes, the biological differences do not affect acting performances. The divided Oscar categories merely insult women, because they suggest that women would not be victorious if the categories were combined.
The Oscars, she says, have separated male and female actors into two categories to make sure women get their share of the awards spotlight. "In the 21st century women contend with men for titles ranging from the American president to the American Idol. Clearly, there is no reason to still segregate acting Oscars by sex."
Nice try. Sexism is an important issue, and any suggestion of sexism deserves to be met with the full force of objective public scrutiny. Sexism within the ranks of a venerable institution such as the The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is even more headline-worthy. Wait until the week of the Academy Awards to publish your story, and you have done everything possible to maximise the impact of your story.
If you think I am suggesting Elsesser's claim is cynical opportunism, you are right.
At the heart of the argument is the claim that having Best Actor gongs for men and women insults women. Rubbish. How does it insult women? And if it does insult women, why doesn't it insult men too?
Kim Elsesser suggests the actor awards were separated from the beginning (the first Academy Awards were in 1929) because at that time women had only recently won the right to vote and "so perhaps it was reasonable to offer them their own acting awards". Isn't this turning a positive into a negative? And the argument doesn't make sense, because if that were really the Academy's motivation, why didn't it make the directing, screenplay, music, costume etc awards separate too?
The Academy created Best Actor awards for men and women because it was an eminently sensible thing to do. It reflects the fact that the roles of men and women in films, as of course in life, are different. There are naturally different physical and psychological responses to events. There are largely single-gender issues such as motherhood and priesthood. The roles of women and men are as separate in film as they are in the real world which film reflects.
Recognising that does not create inequality.
"Collapsing two major categories into one would have the added value of reducing the length of the awards show, a move that many viewers would laud," says Elsesser towards the end of her article. Some may laud it, but they have the option of going to make a cup of tea if they get bored, or not watching in the first place. For the industry and for the fans, this night of nights can't go long enough, and for them the thought of losing two of the biggest, most drama-filled moments of the Academy Awards is as unthinkable as it is unnecessary.
Ingrid Bergman won three acting Oscars, but Kim Elsesser says we may have to change that number
| 68 |
| Vote |
Comments (14)
Add Comments
