Diablo Cody article

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Diablo Cody article

    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.

    Comment


    • #32
      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.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Diablo Cody article

        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, 03:38 PM.
        "Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist,- Pablo Picasso

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Diablo Cody article

          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?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Diablo Cody article

            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.-

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Diablo Cody article

              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.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Diablo Cody article

                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.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Diablo Cody article

                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Diablo Cody article

                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Diablo Cody article

                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Diablo Cody article

                        Originally posted by Danigirl View Post
                        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.
                        You can go from any background to screenwriter, that's the beauty of it. There are barriers at every point, but there's no sign at the door that disqualifies you on the basis of something other than your work. That being said, personally, I wouldn't advertise the stripper element of your BG, or even the acting BG, but I could be totally wrong about that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Diablo Cody article

                          Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                          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.
                          Look, all I've been responding to is your comment. You said that you think female screenwriters are on average more attractive than male screenwriters. Then you follow it up by saying you don't think they're getting ahead by their looks, but there may be a bias at work.

                          Is my interpretation of your original comment wrong?

                          The reason my opinion keeps shifting is that I'm trying to figure out why you brought this up, and I've done my best to try to admit when I misinterpreted your comment.

                          Do you think there's a bias towards Diablo Cody because she's attractive? That might get her more meetings, but it's not winning her an Oscar. Same goes for any of the women in the Fempire article.

                          "Hey, here are some extremely talented writers, but I'm going to point out that they're physically attractive." Why? What does this have to do with any conversation on a screenwriting forum?

                          I can understand the conversation about Cody's history as a stripper. It's relevant to her writing and the marketing of herself as a writer. We should all be tapping into our unique histories both on the page and in the room, but no one is attaching a headshot to their scripts.

                          Even if you were saying that being attractive might add to your self confidence in a room, I could see that as being relevant to the conversation.

                          But what's the point of bringing up your personal opinions of the attractiveness of a writer? Or female writers as a whole? And how does it help anyone trying to be a screenwriter?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Diablo Cody article

                            Originally posted by figment
                            Sure. But... she wrote a book about being a stripper and it was published the same year Juno came out -- so the stripper angle was hers to begin with -- it's not like it was a secret, she used it as a marketing tool.
                            That's also what her blog was about. Prior to Juno, her writing identity and her stripping identity were very much wrapped up in each other. I think it's a mistake to think that the stripping, alone, drives (or initially drove) the fascination with her, though. It was the kind of writing she was doing about stripping that made her fascinating before she started selling screenplays about other things. It's a subtle difference but it's meaningful, IMO. It's not just, "Ooh, she used to be a stripper, look at that!" It was, "Look at the kind of writing she's done about her stripping career, isn't that interesting."

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Diablo Cody article

                              Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
                              Do you think there's a bias towards Diablo Cody because she's attractive? That might get her more meetings, but it's not winning her an Oscar. Same goes for any of the women in the Fempire article.
                              I think you're misinterpreting Geoff's comment. Not to speak for Geoff, but I don't think he's saying that a female writer's attractiveness is an asset that can overcome meager talent and effort.

                              I think it's that an unattractive or plain woman will find her appearance to be a LIABILITY. It's something that she has to overcome.

                              In essence, any writer who "makes it" needs talent and work ethic. But, unfortunately, for female writers it appears they also need to be attractive. And that's an issue that's reflected in our larger society.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Diablo Cody article

                                Originally posted by Bunker View Post
                                I think it's that an unattractive or plain woman will find her appearance to be a LIABILITY. It's something that she has to overcome.

                                I hope this is a joke.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X