Click here for Done Deal Pro home page

Done Deal Pro Home Page

Loading

Go Back   Done Deal Pro Forums > Movies & Television > Writers & Scripts
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-15-2015, 10:56 AM   #31
bmcthomas
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 786
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
Okay, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. My point is that there is the appearance of bias as I have met many male screenwriters and I have met many female screenwriters and by the way many male and female executives, many more than you, by the way, I am 99% certain.

I have noticed what, appears to me, to be a pattern--the female writers and executives appear to simply be in general much more attractive than their male counterparts.

This appears to me to demonstrate a bias towards hiring attractive women.

And here's where you totally misunderstand and accuse me of a bunch of bullshit.

I am not saying that the bias is to hire attractive women ahead of more or equally talented but unattractive men, I am saying that the bias is to hire attractive women over more or equally talented but not as attractive women.

But, oh, how could that be?!?!

It could be that the vast majority of female writers and development executives are being hired by straight men.

Now is it clear?
At a "women in film & TV" panel at Austin a few years ago, this was explicitly discussed. And that you need to make the best of what you've got - be put together and well groomed when you go to meetings. The women on the panel even laughingly pointed out that they were all in heels, with makeup and hair done, right there on the panel, whereas the festival was hip deep in slovenly male writers.

And honestly, this is the norm in most industries. Just google any variant of "attractive people succeed" and study after study will appear.

Making an observation that bias exists isn't endorsing that bias.
bmcthomas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2015, 11:50 AM   #32
mgwriter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 544
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

So some biase does exist in hiring writers and it's not just all about the writing as is often proclaimed when women or minorities point out unfair biases in place that work against them.

Perhaps more diversity amongst people with power to hire writers will lead to more diversity in hiring. Less attractive women have as much likelihood of being talented writers as attractive women. Maybe one day it will actually be all about the writing.
mgwriter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2015, 05:24 PM   #33
finalact4
Member
 
finalact4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,158
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
I am not saying that the bias is to hire attractive women ahead of more or equally talented but unattractive men, I am saying that the bias is to hire attractive women over more or equally talented but not as attractive women.

But, oh, how could that be?!?!

It could be that the vast majority of female writers and development executives are being hired by straight men.

Now is it clear?
I've been a working professional (in a different industry) for a while now, and I can attest to the fact that this happens a lot in other industries as well.

No only do more attractive women get the job, they get paid more, get more opportunities, get treated differently, and their mistakes are often overlooked more readily.

They also face a lot of open sexual harassment by men. I mean, like **** they [men] should be fired for. Like shooting a picture of your **** with their iphone over your shoulder.

And if the woman is overweight, well, some men can just be pigs about it.

We live in a society where they airbrush/photoshop perfectly beautiful women-- kind of sick when you think about that.

There is an expectation that women are always supposed to look good.

I think Diablo Cody is a talented writer. She's a cool chick. She's interesting, and I've had my hair the same color, so I think she has good taste to boot.

And I think it wouldn't hurt people to celebrate the things that make us different from each other instead of attacking them as if they are a flaw.

Last edited by finalact4 : 08-15-2015 at 05:38 PM.
finalact4 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2015, 07:08 AM   #34
figment
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 866
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by redturtle View Post

Speaking from limited experience being interviewed by the press as a filmmaker -- journalists want a story. Telling them "I worked hard. Got up everyday and worked. Repeat." is not what they want to hear, because it's not interesting for readers as a *news story*. Even if you do talk about the hard work and repetitiveness and drudgery of the everyday 10,000 hours thing, they want something they can hang onto - it could be a trivial but funny thing (developing odd or eccentric behaviors), or it can be stories of Hunter S Thompson benders, or whatever it is that you do to cope or deal with the drudgery of all that hard work (it can even be political, spiritual, etc - you became vegan, you ingest mushrooms, you meditate at a retreat in Oregon, you collect guns). There's a dance, and if you don't want to play, folks are less inclined to interview you again if you can't give them some juice.

For the general press, no one really wants to hear about the everyday drudgery of the craft, whether you're a writer, filmmaker, performer, etc.
Thanks for this red -- THIS was my takeaway from the article -- that she perhaps, in retrospect, wishes she hadn't become "Diablo Cody" or at least not to the extent she did. Because writing JUNO was enough. Getting it made was enough. Having it be successful was enough. Winning an Oscar was enough. Meeting other people that helped shepherd other work through was enough.

SHOULD we, if we are on the cusp of success, want or seek to "give a journalist some juice," to stand out -- or is just being successful enough?

The article seems to suggest her life would be easier had she not given journalists the juice.

So my initial question remains -- does she still get to be Diablo Cody the writer, if she'd never become " Diablo Cody" the persona? Would her career be the same?
figment is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2015, 10:20 AM   #35
sc111
Member
 
sc111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,285
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
Okay, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. My point is that there is the appearance of bias as I have met many male screenwriters and I have met many female screenwriters and by the way many male and female executives, many more than you, by the way, I am 99% certain.

I have noticed what, appears to me, to be a pattern--the female writers and executives appear to simply be in general much more attractive than their male counterparts.

This appears to me to demonstrate a bias towards hiring attractive women.

And here's where you totally misunderstand and accuse me of a bunch of bullshit.

I am not saying that the bias is to hire attractive women ahead of more or equally talented but unattractive men, I am saying that the bias is to hire attractive women over more or equally talented but not as attractive women.

But, oh, how could that be?!?!

It could be that the vast majority of female writers and development executives are being hired by straight men.

Now is it clear?
I understood you clearly the first time. Great posts. Both of them. And as others said, it happens in other industries, too.
__________________
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. “Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.”
sc111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2015, 11:42 AM   #36
UnequalProductions
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 918
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
Okay, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. My point is that there is the appearance of bias as I have met many male screenwriters and I have met many female screenwriters and by the way many male and female executives, many more than you, by the way, I am 99% certain.

I have noticed what, appears to me, to be a pattern--the female writers and executives appear to simply be in general much more attractive than their male counterparts.

This appears to me to demonstrate a bias towards hiring attractive women.

And here's where you totally misunderstand and accuse me of a bunch of bullshit.

I am not saying that the bias is to hire attractive women ahead of more or equally talented but unattractive men, I am saying that the bias is to hire attractive women over more or equally talented but not as attractive women.

But, oh, how could that be?!?!

It could be that the vast majority of female writers and development executives are being hired by straight men.

Now is it clear?
Honest mistake. I assumed your comment had more to it than "people prefer to work with men/women they find attractive." Not really screenwriting specific. Or Hollywood specific. Or human being specific.

But beyond that, to throw out the Fempire reference seems pretty condescending. Yes, those women are attractive, but they're all great screenwriters. Has being physically appealing helped them in their careers? Probably. Does it make them any less qualified for the job? Not at all. Is it something that needs to be brought into a conversation about writing? Not to me.

I 100% agree with you that you've met more executives than I have. I'm still relatively new to this. I've only sold one series/had one feature produced. But I'm not blind that every production company I go into has an attractive reception/assistant, regardless of their gender.

But I come from a world of comedy. Attractive women often rise through the ranks quickly, but also they disappear just as quickly. The male and female comedy writers I've seen build careers were never Homecoming Kings or Queens.

And I've seen far more dumpy white guys who inexplicably have screenwriting careers despite horrible writing than attractive women who have screenwriting careers with the same level of skills.

So again, not sure how this fits into the conversation. And that's why I called it out.
UnequalProductions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2015, 12:33 PM   #37
Geoff Alexander
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,589
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnequalProductions View Post
Honest mistake. I assumed your comment had more to it than "people prefer to work with men/women they find attractive." Not really screenwriting specific. Or Hollywood specific. Or human being specific.

But beyond that, to throw out the Fempire reference seems pretty condescending. Yes, those women are attractive, but they're all great screenwriters. Has being physically appealing helped them in their careers? Probably. Does it make them any less qualified for the job? Not at all. Is it something that needs to be brought into a conversation about writing? Not to me.

I 100% agree with you that you've met more executives than I have. I'm still relatively new to this. I've only sold one series/had one feature produced. But I'm not blind that every production company I go into has an attractive reception/assistant, regardless of their gender.

But I come from a world of comedy. Attractive women often rise through the ranks quickly, but also they disappear just as quickly. The male and female comedy writers I've seen build careers were never Homecoming Kings or Queens.

And I've seen far more dumpy white guys who inexplicably have screenwriting careers despite horrible writing than attractive women who have screenwriting careers with the same level of skills.

So again, not sure how this fits into the conversation. And that's why I called it out.
So now you're accusing me of being condescending. Not interested.
Geoff Alexander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2015, 03:14 PM   #38
UnequalProductions
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 918
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
So now you're accusing me of being condescending. Not interested.
Of course you're not interested in being called out. Few people are.
UnequalProductions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2015, 09:25 PM   #39
Danigirl
User
 
Danigirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 105
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by figment View Post
LA Times article on Diablo Cody for her new film, Ricki and the Flash.

Though still unconventional, she seems to eschew "fame" now.

So, my question is -- do you get to be Diablo Cody if you weren't a vehicle for everyone's ire/love/gossip to begin with? Because a lot of that hoopla over her being a stripper and whatnot (imo) led to her getting a ton of work that if she were just some average new writer girl -- she wouldn't have gotten those opportunities? Thoughts?

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...ry.html#page=1

I always viewed her and someone like Max Landis as being similar -- known for behavior first, and their scripts second. Don't know if that's fair, though.

Ok...getting back on track (or attempting to, anyway...)

Her background as a stripper certainly piqued people's interest. The press introduced her as "former exotic dancer Diablo Cody" repeatedly. I think she's earned her stripes through her writing talent. She wouldn't be where she's at if she had no talent to begin with.

I, too, am a stripper/screenwriter/actress. I feel that if I were to get recognized someday, it would be hopefully for the story I have to tell. Glad to see from her example that you can go from stripper to screenwriter successfully, as long as you do the work and you have the talent and tenacity to back youself up. It gives me hope.
Danigirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2015, 09:57 AM   #40
Geoff Alexander
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,589
Default Re: Diablo Cody article

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnequalProductions View Post
Of course you're not interested in being called out. Few people are.
Yes, of course, obviously I feel that I've somehow been "called out" by your incisive analysis.

The fact is, you can't even advance a consistent position in this conversation. You want to talk about Diablo Cody's appearance and the way she has been presented by media and dealt with within the industry but you don't want to talk about the way that other female screenwriters are represented. You want to talk about white male appearance and how that doesn't seem to impact their ability get work but you don't think there's any role to talk about female screenwriters and the the fact that the converse may be true. You claim that I have stated that female writers are getting ahead because of their looks, which is false. You think that it's "condescending" for me reference a New York Times article which showcases four women and presents them with a certain spin, i.e., they all share some pretty specific characteristics; young and attractive, and are posed and photographed in a certain way--apparently there were no women over forty and over 140 pounds working at the time. Yes, so condescending of me to expose you to that article.

You're either trolling or you are really confused about what is going on, which includes by the way your own posts.

If you want to try and call someone out for something, you might want to consider calling yourself out for your ridiculous approach to this discussion.
Geoff Alexander is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Done Deal Pro

eXTReMe Tracker