I'll admit that I am at least 90% responsible for why this thread spirals way off topic. I first misread Geoff's comment, and by the time it developed into a full on conversation, the snarky barbs had already been thrown, so it became more of a "one side vs. the other side" argument instead of an intelligent debate.
I still stand behind my feeling that "a lot of the female screenwriters I see are more attractive than the male ones, so there might be a bias" is a comment I would have a strong response to, but the way I originally replied was not appropriate.
This wasn't aimed at me, but I don't think you're sexist in the least. Any sampling of your posts reveals you are, in fact, anti-sexist. Is that a word? Though... I don't think Geoff is either. And I think everyone knows that, too.
I don't even know what people are disagreeing about anymore, but I think after 9 pages we can all just agree to disagree. I'll just proclaim myself to be right and that'll be the end of it. Viola!!
Thanks, figment. Ironically, I don't think anyone in this topic is sexist, or has argued in favor of sexist positions. I actually like everyone in this thread.
Beyond that, why not argue your own points rather than try and claim that other's opinions are motivated by an agenda--which by the way you did very selectively, aren't your own opinions on the topic strong enough?
Because there's no topic here. The last 7 pages have been an argument over a miscommunication. The only possible topic to debate is whether women face a negative bias in this industry, and every other for that matter. That feels like a non-argument to me, so I don't feel the need to offer an opinion on it.
In response to the rest of your post, there's really not much I can say. Most of us here are strong-headed, myself very much so. I don't think anyone was wrong in this thread, so much as I think there was a miscommunication/misunderstanding, and when it created the appearance of two "sides," everyone dug in their heels for the fight. If this were a comedy, it'd be a good one.
Because there's no topic here. The last 7 pages have been an argument over a miscommunication. The only possible topic to debate is whether women face a negative bias in this industry, and every other for that matter. That feels like a non-argument to me, so I don't feel the need to offer an opinion on it.
In response to the rest of your post, there's really not much I can say. Most of us here are strong-headed, myself very much so. I don't think anyone was wrong in this thread, so much as I think there was a miscommunication/misunderstanding, and when it created the appearance of two "sides," everyone dug in their heels for the fight. If this were a comedy, it'd be a good one.
Well, I still think there's a valuable argument to be had here. We had a thread about a female writer, and it barely got to the second page before someone felt the need to comment on the physical appearance of women in screenwriting.
Do you think if someone posted an interview with John August, that there would have been a comment about whether or not there was a bias toward good looking male writers?
If a Chippendales dancer sold a script, you don't think people would have a discussion about whether or not his looks were an advantage? I have to disagree.
If a Chippendales dancer sold a script, you don't think people would have a discussion about whether or not his looks were an advantage? I have to disagree.
Not only that -- there would all sorts of smarmy innuendo about what he had to do to sell his scripts. Because we all KNOW the man can't write.
("I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood")
Last edited by StoryWriter; 08-24-2015, 11:14 PM.
Reason: Sarcasm alert.
Well, I still think there's a valuable argument to be had here. We had a thread about a female writer, and it barely got to the second page before someone felt the need to comment on the physical appearance of women in screenwriting.
Do you think if someone posted an interview with John August, that there would have been a comment about whether or not there was a bias toward good looking male writers?
No, but there may well have been an argument about his race, his ethnicity (appearance), or his parentage. He comes from a privileged class. He has a leg up from the start, it's not offensive to discuss that. It's no different.
You're still being snarky. Somehow I "felt the need" to comment on appearance. Same thing from you, you should try and recognize it.
I commented on appearance because we were talking about someone who was being presented by the media in a fashion generated in part by her appearance which was in part generated by her stripper backstory. Just go back and read the press on her and try and tell me I'm off.
Because there's no topic here. The last 7 pages have been an argument over a miscommunication. The only possible topic to debate is whether women face a negative bias in this industry, and every other for that matter. That feels like a non-argument to me, so I don't feel the need to offer an opinion on it.
In response to the rest of your post, there's really not much I can say. Most of us here are strong-headed, myself very much so. I don't think anyone was wrong in this thread, so much as I think there was a miscommunication/misunderstanding, and when it created the appearance of two "sides," everyone dug in their heels for the fight. If this were a comedy, it'd be a good one.
What's funny here is that you had nothing to say on the topic but jumped in to argue about intentions and interpretation for seven pages as per your statement above.
No way a guy working as a male stripper while trying to break in doesn't get covered. Impossible.
If a male stripper sold a script, I could see comments about how he personally benefited from being attractive. But do you think it would spawn a "bias towards attractive male screenwriters" comment? Because of all the gorgeous guys in the Writers Guild?
Even if a former stripper sold a script, he still had to write a fairly descent script. There are thousands of beautiful people in Los Angeles. Why aren't they all selling screenplays left and right?
And again, what is the purpose of bringing up anyone's physical appearance on a forum for screenwriting? Male or female, focusing on a screenwriters attractiveness is a way of dismissing the quality of their work. I don't care how pretty you are, no one is going to spend millions of dollars producing your screenplay because you're cute.
Comment