3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 28, 2017 16:52:25 GMT
Some interesting comments on the radio this afternoon which do highlight the way this has persisted in the arts far longer than in other professions. For example, a firewoman ringing in to say such behaviour would never be tolerated in her workplace - a traditionally male environment - because of bodies that dealt with it. Meanwhile, an actor recalling being on a children's TV show 2 years ago and another older actor groping a runner acting as an extra for a scene, on camera. Where, one wonders, were the supposedly fearsome Equity during all this?
Ann-Marie Duff, on Woman's Hour, explained that she put up with it when younger because - I paraphrase - of the impression given by the director (and in the arts field in general) that to have boundaries somehow means you're not wholly giving yourself to the work, being 100% creative and artistic. Terry Richardson's PR were trotting out the "but he's an artist" line just this week. How many 'creatives' - in theatre, film, visual arts, rock music, writing, poetry - have used that 'different rules for artists' line to get away with appalling, highly destructive behaviour over the years?
And it'll be interesting to see what emerges from Westminster. The pressure of not wanting to give a gift to your political enemies was used on women within the cultish SWP to silence them, in cases that emerged recently. I suspect some similar arm twisting has been used in Westminster.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 28, 2017 17:42:57 GMT
far, far harder to regulate There's Equity, though - what were they doing about it for all these decades? And what about actors' agents and agencies, casting directors and so forth? |
|
1,504 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 28, 2017 17:52:29 GMT
This is an interesting article in which Kate Hardie talks about the links between film content and harassment: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/14/time-to-make-link-between-abuse-and-film-contentI think agents, casting directors, etc. have been remiss in addressing this. But as Hardie points out - her request for a 'no nudity clause' in a film in which no nudity was suggested in the script led to her losing the job as the director felt it impinged on his artistic freedom. I frequently watch films and think - did she really have to be naked in that scene? |
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 28, 2017 19:10:04 GMT
I frequently watch films and think - did she really have to be naked in that scene? It's notable that as the once-unknown, young actresses in Game of Thrones have got more famous and presumably more say in what they can refuse to do, the nude scenes in the series have decreased to almost zero, and Dany's bathwater levels are a couple of inches deeper! There are scenes - Daenerys emerging from the pyre or burning building - where the nudity's important to the plot and did come across as powerful, but there was a really horrible early scene where she was being groped by her brother where the camera position and framing made it feel like the programme makers/audience themselves were groping her breasts. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2017 20:49:46 GMT
I have really mixed feelings on the topic of why “victims” did not expose their predatorsat the time. As someone who used to work in theatre i have to say that when people were gossipping about this stuff all those years ago I used to wonder why nothing was done about it. It has to be said that not all women are innocent in this because some of them enabled the behaviour in various ways and I really think that we should acknowledge this. I would also add that some women were also perpetrators of abusive behaviour. I remember a female director (now deceased) who had a reputation for singling out a cast member and playing mind games that stripped them of their confidence. It is mainly men who hold the reigns of power but there were some women who also abused their power when it was conferred in them.
|
|
1,127 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Oct 28, 2017 22:40:50 GMT
Agents and CDs have been knowingly sending women to meet predators for years. If I had a pound for every time an agent has said to a female client, "But he WILL try to grab you so be careful" or comforting a crying actress afterwards with, "God I didn't think he'd try to assault ANOTHER one, we gave him a strict talking to last time!" (or all the times actresses have been ditched or threatened with being ditched by their agents for refusing to do nudity or other things, or for p*ssing off or complaining about someone important) I could buy my own theatre.
Equity do try and the recent scandal has led to Equity having certain conversations which have led to starting to develop new avenues for handling complaints (ways to safely and confidentially report, and varying ways of handling or investigating complaints after they've been made). The Women's Committee in particular are spearheading a major policy change and have already implemented some smaller specific changes. Having said that, Equity have not historically been good at handling this stuff, not out of complicity but plain incompetence and lack of manpower and lack of proper procedure. I've heard some absolute horror stories.
I spent today at the Court's day of response, in session and conversation with Vicky and other ADs and concerned parties. What happened today is confidential but I feel real change is in the air. At the very least, some practical changes will definitely come out of the work and conversations being held right now.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 28, 2017 23:51:08 GMT
I still do find it astonishing that theatre, such an Oxbridge/ Guardianista world, should be lagging 20, 25 years behind other more mainstream workplaces. It was about 16 years ago that someone I used to know was sacked from their (admittedly not high profile) BBC job for verbal remarks to colleagues.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 29, 2017 9:52:49 GMT
There's an astonishing article by Sarah Solemani in the Guardian - her reaction when invited to dine alone at the house of a 50-something director, when she was 19 and Cambridge bound, and him asking her to strip. "Did I call Equity and file a report? No. We became friends, and even though he never gave me another job, we stayed in touch and I became proud to have “understood” him; the only thing that changed was I remembered to bring a girlfriend with me every time I went to his house. It was a decade before it occurred to me what an abuse of power this had been, and how I’d normalised it"
Parts of the acting profession are increasingly starting to sound like a religious cult, in which young acolytes are mesmerised by some creepy old guy and sexually exploited.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 10:22:53 GMT
There's an astonishing article by Sarah Solemani in the Guardian - her reaction when invited to dine alone at the house of a 50-something director, when she was 19 and Cambridge bound, and him asking her to strip. "Did I call Equity and file a report? No. We became friends, and even though he never gave me another job, we stayed in touch and I became proud to have “understood” him; the only thing that changed was I remembered to bring a girlfriend with me every time I went to his house. It was a decade before it occurred to me what an abuse of power this had been, and how I’d normalised it" Parts of the acting profession are increasingly starting to sound like a religious cult, in which young acolytes are mesmerised by some creepy old guy and sexually exploited. It's shocking when you see it written down but...honestly I'm not surpised. And it's not exclusive to theatre. I had a man (not quite as much age difference but considerable) do similar to me in academia- basically a 'befriend me and I'll make sure you get through your PhD' years of "friendly" come to my office, meet for coffee/lunch/dinners later he crossed a line. I stress nothing ever was inappropriate but it WAS inappropriate in terms of using power (his status in the University etc) and he also stirred up conflict between myself and other young female colleauges, so he could "intervene" on my (and I presume the other 'side' as well). None of this crossed a line, but all of it with hindsight was both weird and inappropriate. Was the line for me this creepy inappropriate conduct? no it took him trying to claim some kind of intellectual influence on my work to tell him where to shove it. Again, I'm far from the only similar story I know. Academia is equally cult-like and equally ruled over by groups of older powerful men...it doesn't surprise me how similar my two 'worlds' are. Just this week also a friend who started a job at a new University told me their Dean has monthly dinners at his house which he selects people from the department to attend. It could be entirely innocent but after all these years, I certainly warned my friend not to go until she's friendly enough with another attendee to feel safe. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 10:26:56 GMT
50-something is not old.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 10:30:02 GMT
There's still a 30 year age difference and more importantly a greater power imbalance. It's not just about age. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 10:37:43 GMT
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 29, 2017 10:38:07 GMT
It has to be said that not all women are innocent in this because some of them enabled the behaviour in various ways and I really think that we should acknowledge this. I think this is a really important point. People, especially in showbizz but actually in any situation that has to do with self-affirmation are willing to make very premeditated and interesting choices. For example when a person wants something, she or he has the choice to do whatever she/he is willing do to to turn the odds her/his way. A general rule of life is that it has often to do with liking people, making them feel good, flirting and granting people things. I personally know young women and men who deliberately tried to seduce a (casting) director to get what they want, and they admitted that he was not their type at all. When they eventually got their way/the part they wanted, all is good and great, but when they don't.....tables get turned and suddenly there is this envy towards that (casting) director and they bad mouth him. This behaviour also occurs in relationships. People have sex every day. Suddenly one person in the relationship feels he/she doesn't get the mental confirmation anymore/ feels an anger towards the other about something that happened, so he/she actually regrets the love making from yesterday and tries to pull it to the "rape" spectrum while the other actually never forced anything. We really have to ask yourselves who is the actual victim in cases like these. It's very complicated. I know a guy who was fired from the ensemble of a show because he came in early for a rehearsal one day and caught the musical director screwing an ensemble girl in the wings. That same musical director gave the girl the part of understudy for the female lead a few weeks earlier. They jumped up and the guy said "don't worry. I haven't seen anything, just do your thing". The ensemble guy was very discrete and never told anyone at the time. The following days things started getting grim and the guy was fired due to "artistic differences" in a meeting with only that musical director. Who said the producers had no interest in speaking to the ensemble guy again because he doesn't fit in the show. The guys said to him "why are you doing this, I'm discrete", and he told him that the girl encouraged him to do this. Now who of the 3 is the victim here? Obviously not the ones being intimidated. I would also like to add that "being intimidated" is often a choice. In 9 times out of 10 you have options to choose. When I was 12 and someone asked me if I was gay I felt extremely intimidated. I knew I was, but did not want to tell anybody. I just wanted that person to shut up and I actually felt harassed by that remark. Then one day I got over myself and found out that my "being intimidated" had nothing to do with the other but all with myself. I always have a choice to do, say or think what I want. I'm above being intimidated now. One person can get a mental breakdown from receiving a wink eye from a guy on the escalator, and another can start intimidation therapy after a remark about new lipstick. I bet jealous people in a relationship are intimidated by the other person's phone, his/her facebook likes, and basically intimidated by the whole big scary world, full of danger and seductions. There are rude people, there are assholes and there will always be. This "intimidate" hysteria goes too far. I see people campaigning to take down the tv show "Top model" because they say it gives off the wrong message because young viewers might think that it is all about beautiful looks but actually every person is equal......Well, NOT everyone is equal. Some people are beautiful models, others are not. You can feel intimidated about all your own insecurities but get over it or don't watch. And while I'm at it. If there is anything at the moment that needs to be addressed, it is the portrayal of men as lust objects in society today. Yesterday I saw a post on Facebook with a picture of a hot dentist. 923.000 reactions of mainly women saying "they would jump him immediately", "They change dentists right away", "If he'd take his shirt off, I would spread my mouth and more right now", "he needs to be the one tied up in the chair and I would use some instruments", etc etc. Imagine a photograph of a female dentist and men saying these things on FB today. Also, there is this sliver glow shampoo tv commercial airing over here, with a girl having a new "glow" in her hair, and sending horny texts to her boyfriend. Then the next day he is working in his garage and the good looking middle aged neighbour woman walks in, looking at him, licking her lips and close the garage door behind her, with a very determined look in her eyes, like she is going to devour him. Then we see him saying: Oops, this shampoo perhaps gives a little too much glow". Imagine tis commercial with the girl being in the garage and a middle aged man coming in, closing the door behind him, licking his lips. Just saying. Double standards. Not that I'm intimidated or anything. If someone walks into my garage I can always decide what I like to do, depending on the situation and interests. People have double agenda's and this hysteria is going too far. You can't use a pencil eraser to erase everything from the world that you don't like/feel insecure about and scream the word "intimidated!" to get your way. That's not how life works. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 10:41:48 GMT
Now, now clearly the point IS in fact that NOBODY in any point said "Old man of 50" but in fact simply pointed out a considerable age gap while highlighting inappropriate behaviour. And of course, the chance to correct women sharing stories about women on an entirely fictitious point is extremely valid and important work in all circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 11:08:43 GMT
There's an astonishing article by Sarah Solemani in the Guardian - her reaction when invited to dine alone at the house of a 50-something director, when she was 19 and Cambridge bound, and him asking her to strip. "Did I call Equity and file a report? No. We became friends, and even though he never gave me another job, we stayed in touch and I became proud to have “understood” him; the only thing that changed was I remembered to bring a girlfriend with me every time I went to his house. It was a decade before it occurred to me what an abuse of power this had been, and how I’d normalised it" Parts of the acting profession are increasingly starting to sound like a religious cult, in which young acolytes are mesmerised by some creepy old guy and sexually exploited. I was responding to the above post which clearly states that "50-something" is "old". Obviously this isn't "the point" under discussion. But my point is that the actual point being discussed in this thread can be made quite strong enough already without exaggerating it, for example by stating that a 50-something is old. I feel that such smears risk weakening the valid main points which are being made. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 11:45:49 GMT
There's an astonishing article by Sarah Solemani in the Guardian - her reaction when invited to dine alone at the house of a 50-something director, when she was 19 and Cambridge bound, and him asking her to strip. "Did I call Equity and file a report? No. We became friends, and even though he never gave me another job, we stayed in touch and I became proud to have “understood” him; the only thing that changed was I remembered to bring a girlfriend with me every time I went to his house. It was a decade before it occurred to me what an abuse of power this had been, and how I’d normalised it" Parts of the acting profession are increasingly starting to sound like a religious cult, in which young acolytes are mesmerised by some creepy old guy and sexually exploited. I can’t recall which it was (and possibly not even on this country) but I remember seeing a documentary about an acting school where the class had to strip in front if each other as part of the course. I’m talking thirty years or so ago, maybe this was a leftover from the sixties and its confusion between freedom and exploitation. There can be no other profession where this has been accepted as ‘part of the job’, surely? |
|
1,504 posts
|
Post by foxa on Oct 29, 2017 11:55:56 GMT
Cardinal - that sort of thing would happen quite a bit in NYC. Many years ago, I met a young actress who told me how she performed a number of scenes topless in her acting classes because the teacher said that her breasts had to be 'as expressive' as her face. Yeah, right. And I had an uncomfortable dinner party argument when I disagreed with a director who felt that actors had to sexually experience anything they were portraying (he advocated masturbation in rehearsals to aid with this.) We actually ended up shouting at each other over the table - and then carried on shouting at each other in the street. I was never invited back to another dinner party there for some reason....
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 29, 2017 11:59:27 GMT
There can be no other profession where this has been accepted as ‘part of the job’, surely? Fashion modelling, which is even worse because the models are generally teenagers, some really young, often from overseas (Eastern Europe particularly), alone in a strange country with work visas dependent on them agreeing to various demands, from increasing weight loss to nudity. Agewise, I'm no spring chicken and I wasn't intending to insult 50-somethings (or indeed, 30, 40, 60, 70, 80 or 90-somethings), but when a man asks someone young enough to be his granddaughter to strip for him, it's icky. |
|
1,127 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Oct 29, 2017 13:09:11 GMT
It starts in drama school. Drama school is all about psychologically tearing someone apart and demolishing all their boundaries and defences in order to build them backup, which makes students incredibly vulnerable. The level of trust between drama student and tutor is unlike an academic student-tutor relationship (though of course abuses do happen all the time within academia too).
What also does damage is the attitude instilled in drama students that they must never say no, that directors are Gods, and that boundaries are defence obstacles that get in the way of the emotional honesty necessary for creating Art. And a culture that explicitly considers nudity and sex (and any form of emotional nakedness or vulnerability) as "brave" or "challenging" or "being willing to take risks" eg all the qualities necessary to be an artist.
Dave, I found your post misogynistic, and I don't think a male-created male-fantasy TV commercial featuring an overtly sexual, objectified women is a good example. No woman wants to have to have sex with someone she doesn't find attractive to get a job. The only reason a woman would do that is if she considers she has no other choice. There are plenty of women who have "voluntarily" gone alone with unwanted sexual contact just to get or keep a minimum wage job flipping burgers, because without it they'd be homeless or unable to feed their kids. Is that an example of a woman making an empowered choice? The fact women have to choose between prostitution or unemployment, and men for the most part don't, is purely down to patriarchy and a culture of objectification. Plus a culture where women shag for roles is toxic for all women, since it makes it that much harder for women to decline, and even if they do they'd still be subject to objectification and harassment by men who consider female bodies their birthright.
Many industries have policies regarding relations between people in a position of power and underlings as a matter of course, to avoid harassment allegations or conflict of interest scenarios. Ditto rules regarding uni professors and students. There is no reason such policies cannot be implemented within the theatre industry, and indeed this is one of the things currently being discussed by ADs across the industry. There is zero reason for a director to have sex with an actor they are considering casting, or for a tutor to have sex with a drama student. Totally inappropriate. Even if two people have genuine feelings for each other, it's not going to kill them to wait till they're no longer in a position with such a dodgy power dynamic.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Oct 29, 2017 14:32:33 GMT
It'll be interesting to see if all this stuff finally coming out - and things like the flop of Blade Runner 2049 and The Snowman (more murdered women) - acts like one of those extinction of the dinosaurs geological layers and that the films and TV shows from 2018/19 have better, less naked, less victimy roles for women.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 15:30:25 GMT
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 29, 2017 18:58:41 GMT
Dave, I don't think a male-created male-fantasy TV commercial featuring an overtly sexual, objectified women is a good example. No woman wants to have to have sex with someone she doesn't find attractive to get a job. The only reason a woman would do that is if she considers she has no other choice. I think it's a very clear example of the double standards in society today. The women objectify the man in the commercial. And you brush it off as a male fantasy? As if it's okay to sexually intimidate men? Just like the dentist on FB? Maybe men are not as easily intimidated, but this lack of acknowledging the double standard is a big problem. And about your 2nd point, I have seen plenty of women (and men) doing exactly that. Actually pursuing the unattractive person in question. It's whether they got the role or not that determined the reaction afterwards. There is a huge grey area here. Also, like I said, intimidation is different for everyone. Some people are never intimidated. |
|
1,127 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Oct 29, 2017 19:06:59 GMT
In the real world women are not rapacious sexual beasts who accost men demanding sex. In the real world using a particular brand of shampoo will not bring hordes of hot, sex-crazed women flocking to you. There is a reason so many products aimed at men use this concept in their adverts (and have done since advertising started), and it's because that is a male fantasy. If ads like that were not effective they would not exist. The reason ads for women's shampoo don't feature sex-crazed men following strange women home is because it is not a female fantasy. For most women unsolicited sexual advances are an unwanted fact of life, and a very frightening thing. We can pretend men and women are equal but the fact is, men are overall physically stronger and bigger than women, and something like 98% of sexual violence is committed by men. Acknowledging facts is not some sexist "double standard."
You obviously have serious issues with women, or you wouldn't be trying to derail a conversation about rape with a load of MRA victim-blaming rantings about how women are hysterical whores who are asking for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 19:10:02 GMT
Apparently it needs spelling out but: the TV commercial in question is aimed towards a male audience, presenting a sexualised fantasty that is all too familiar to...well anyone with a TV. I don't know the exact one in question, but I'd lay good money on it being directed by a man, the concept being by a man and signed off by a male executive who thought it was a great idea.
Why? because I'm a bloody woman who lives in this world and puts up with this bullsh*t every day. And I'm tired. I'm tired of being surrounded by this bullsh*t and I'm tired of men trying to tell women how to feel about it and more importantly that somehow we're in the wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2017 19:12:25 GMT
In the real world women are not rapacious sexual beasts who accost men demanding sex. In the real world using a particular brand of shampoo will not bring hordes of hot, sex-crazed women flocking to you. There is a reason so many products aimed at men use this concept in their adverts (and have done since advertising started), and it's because that is a male fantasy. If ads like that were not effective they would not exist. The reason ads for women's shampoo don't feature sex-crazed men following strange women home is because it is not a female fantasy. For most women unsolicited sexual advances are an unwanted fact of life, and a very frightening thing. We can pretend men and women are equal but the fact is, men are overall physically stronger and bigger than women, and something like 98% of sexual violence is committed by men. Acknowledging facts is not some sexist "double standard." You obviously have serious issues with women, or you wouldn't be trying to derail a conversation about rape with a load of MRA victim-blaming rantings about how women are hysterical whores who are asking for it. Thank you, that was far more articulate than I managed. Men- this is how to engage with discussions on sexual violence and harassment, acknowledge the facts on the problems, don't talk over women and stand up for women when idiots like that are talking. Thanks samuelwhiskers it actually means a lot. |
|
