Women in the Oscars

While sitting around with my friends watching the Oscars yesterday, I got to thinking about women's roles in the Academy Awards. With a little research, I found some pretty astonishing (although unfortunately not particularly surprising) information. Women have almost no role in any part of the Oscars process, from the voting to the actual winners. Yes, there are awards for women only, but in gender-neutral awards, men tend to win.

Why was it that when Kathryn Bigelow won Best Director in 2010 for her film The Hurt Locker? Because she was the first woman ever to win Best Director. Just as astonishing, only four women have ever even been nominated for the award.

And why is this? Well, probably because women are tragically underrepresented in both the voters and the groups of people eligible for the behind-the-scenes awards at the Oscars. Women make up a minute piece of the people involved in writing, directing, and producing the movies nominated for Oscars (see the graphic on the right).

But this very small minority could be making incredibly fantastic films, right? But would they be recognized for them even if they were? For this, we can look at the demographics of the people who vote on the films and people that take home the prestigious Oscar statue. The LA times wrote a fantastic article on not only the gender disparities in the Oscar voters but the large number of old, white men that make up the Academy. Here's an infographic that sums up the findings about the demographics of the Academy:

Now are we all that surprised that women don't tend to win or be nominated for male-dominated awards? Not particularly.

If you're interested in the subject or a little more on how the male perspective is favored in Hollywood films, here is a great video (what I'm talking about is around 3:22):

Fashion in Politics

Appearance is a huge part of politics. Voters will not elect or support someone that does not look a certain way, and especially for women this is a huge issue. A male politician has a neutral dress option: dark suit, white shirt, tie. What does a female politician have? Nothing of the sort. Women are constantly being judged based on what clothes they are wearing, not what new revolutionary or intellectual ideas that they have. Voters want someone that looks put together, that looks appropriate, and does not dress too "out there." Take Condollezza Rice for example, she wore a dark coat and heeled boots, and much of the American public was uncomfortable with her dressing "too sexy." This is an issue for female politicians in America. They are constantly judged based on what they wear.

Michelle Obama has worked hard on a national campaign to fight child obesity while serving as First Lady, but when she steps out most of the headlines about her are related to what she chose to wear. This is unfortunate for her because it shifts the focus of whatever she does to her attire, and if it is not deemed appropriate then it doesn't matter what she originally set out to do, because all eyes are on the clothes. To give Mrs. Obama quite a bit of credit, though, I think that she has done wonderful things to choose her clothing very wisely. She recognizes the position that she is in, and has not only showcased up and coming designers like Jason Wu, who designed her dress for the Inaugural Ball, but she has worn very affordable and modest clothing, so that a typical American woman has even a hope of being able to emulate her. This is a very smart move politically as well, because she seems much more relatable when you have the same cardigan in your closet that the First Lady is wearing to lunch.

And finally,what "fashion and politics" blog post would be complete without discussing Hillary Clinton? The current Secretary of State has come under probably the most fire than any other female politician about her attire. There are many a blog post on the internet bashing Hillary's fashion choices, regardless of what she may have been doing to better America. The critical language used is astonishing:

"Nice try with those chic shades, Hill but not even Jackie O could salvage this look from the depths of frumpiness. The retro braided headband is bad enough, but the boxy black jacket is not helping Hillary's cause. We just hope Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd was not as horrified by this look as we are." 

She really just can't catch a break, can she? No matter that she was conducting State business with Australia, she should be dressed perfectly as well. Even Tim Gunn, one of the very prominent (and genius) mouthpieces of American fashion had some very critical words about Hillary:

“All these big, baggy menswear-tailored pantsuits. No, I’m really serious. She wears pantsuits that are really unflattering.”

Would the same be said if Barack Obama wore a poorly tailored suit? I doubt it.

And now I open it up to you, readers. What do you think about this? Is there a double standard surrounding fashion in politics in respect to gender? Is it fair to expect women to dress on a different standard than men?