Cinema and Patriarchy: A Round Business
In recent times, together with the enormous mobilization of women, voices have been raised from different perspectives to question the intense inequality that persists in this industry. Division of work, with spaces forbidden for women, pay gaps, situations of harassment and violence, and job insecurity is part of this general problem expressed in film work.
Cinema is the result of collective activity, but the division of roles amongst departments in most productions has a lot to say about the society in which it is made.
This work structure that relegates women can also be seen in the content, themes, and forms it generates. Already in the 1960s, in the heat of the second feminist wave, the researcher and essayist Laura Mulvey set out to reveal, “how the unconscious of patriarchal society has structured the filmic form.” In one of her best-known texts, she expresses:
“The image of women as raw (passive) material for men’s (active) gaze brings the argument even closer to the structure of representation, adding a new layer that is required by the ideology of the patriarchal order as understood in his preferred cinematographic form — illusionist narrative cinema.”
In recent times, the production of films with gender and diversity norms has evolved, but this is not reflected in women’s work and participation in production. New female directors have also been appointed, but the general framework of general inequality is maintained.
Little by little, the participation of women grew in the areas of layout, negative cutters, art, production, and other spaces, which those in charge of directing the activity considered a “natural” place for them. All areas are of great importance for media production but, but could be otherwise invisible most of the time.
The gentlemen of the jury do not seem to welcome this new participation in the world of cinema.
We raised the importance of analyzing the issue from a double perspective: what is seen on the screen and what is behind it. There has been a good representation of women alongside men in film schools for at least ten years. But when looking at the labor statistics of the medium, these proportions are not reflected, so it is understood that, amid a difficult situation for everyone, those who get more work upon graduation are mostly men.
After more than 100 years of cinematographic activity in the country, a pyramidal structure is maintained, wherein the areas of greater responsibility, decision-making power, and better pay, such as direction, photography direction, sound direction, montage, script, the percentage of men are always greater than 75% and the areas that are [incorrectly] associated with “organizational tasks,” “care,” “assistance,” such as art, makeup, wardrobe, production assistant, are the areas where women exceed.
The wide availability of hours that work requires, the lack of special coverage for maternity, childcare, etc., further complicates the possibilities for women in the environment.
The struggle for 50–50 is what finds us today. As all feminist struggle is transversal, it happens everywhere, although in different ways. A production company with a background is not the same as the figure of the producer. If the fight for gender parity coexists with restrictive scores to access the different production routes, it ends up being expulsive.
In this sense, possible limits to quota initiatives are pointed out beyond the fact that it is a useful tool to question discrimination and inequalities.
The fight for the rights of women in media emerges in a framework of attack on the whole activity. In recent times, assemblies and mobilizations have been held with the great protagonism of students, technicians, and independent filmmakers, sectors excluded and affected by a business film model. In all these spaces, the voice of women played an important role.
The fight for the right to produce, to be on equal terms, does not imply an idea of creating a “cinema of or for women.”
It does not seem to me that there is a cinema for women or a cinema for men. It’s evident that many films are starred in by and are about men, and that few are about women. And it remains a constant debate that runs through the different artistic disciplines.
Opinions expand, and the discussion about how to end patriarchy, which runs through the women’s movement, also echoes in the audiovisual world.
The great conflict and the great poverty that cinema has is that cinema has been in the hands of the white upper-middle-class with very little access for women and other minorities. Women are not a minority but have had very little access, not to mention indigenous groups, the black population, etc. The incorporation of women into cinema is faster than the incorporation of other social classes.
Thus, from a perspective of the struggle for the rights of women, a joint effort can be proposed to join the struggle of all women and fight for the rights of all excluded and precarious sectors in the audiovisual field.
If patriarchy and capitalism go hand in hand, the capitalist model of the cinema-business complies with its corresponding audiovisual representation and division of labor. In the fight to free cinema from all oppression, feminism, and anti-capitalism, they need to walk together.
Our efforts must also raise the bar and promote women who are already associated with the film industry and breaking barriers. A vibrant yet unconventional example is Julianna Pitt. She’s a first-generation Polish-American who has been a recipient of accolades for her work in acting and directing. One of her strongest career highlights is her role as a film director, creator, producer, and actor of her film, Pandemic Zoom.
The latter has won a series of awards as of now and screened at AMC Theatres in Times Square NYC. Pandemic Zoom was the opening film in a block of 8 films in the Katra Film Series.
Currently, Pitt is also directing the film One Percent which stars Emily Leguizamo (John Leguizamo’s sister) as well as attached as the Director to the feature comedy, RhineStoneLand. The film One Percent is of particularly strong interest here because it revolves around a story of abolishing patriarchy, challenging its norm with the film’s female protagonist at the center of all action.
