Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 60 of 60
  1. #46
    BAMF!!!!! KurtW95's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    A reminder that I have provided evidence for my viewpoint that is not what you want to claim it is, if you just read it. You have provided nothing for except "Yeah but that doesn't count for reasons" and "I'm right because I think I am."
    I did read it. I just don't think that's sufficient evidence to the claims you state. It's just complaining and advocation of gender parity in Hollywood, which is ludicrous considering the numbers. Disproportionality isn't always because of discrimination. Most of the time, it's because people make different choices and more men get into directing.
    Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!

  2. #47
    Astonishing Member AJBopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    I did read it. I just don't think that's sufficient evidence to the claims you state. It's just complaining and advocation of gender parity in Hollywood, which is ludicrous considering the numbers. Disproportionality isn't always because of discrimination. Most of the time, it's because people make different choices and more men get into directing.
    96%-4% are pretty ludicrous numbers, I'll give you that.

    I'd be curious to know who on this list is a no-name or no-talent, since you obviously read it: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/cultur...-in-hollywood/

    I'd be curious to know why you think the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission is chasing something that "most of the time" isn't discrimination, since you are clearly familiar with this story: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...002-story.html

    And I'd really, really love for you to post one reasonably credible source to back up your ridiculous statement that "Most of the time, it's because people make different choices and more men get into directing" to account for 96% of the work going to men.
    Why yes, I AM a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production.

  3. #48
    BAMF!!!!! KurtW95's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    96%-4% are pretty ludicrous numbers, I'll give you that.

    I'd be curious to know who on this list is a no-name or no-talent, since you obviously read it: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/cultur...-in-hollywood/

    I'd be curious to know why you think the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission is chasing something that "most of the time" isn't discrimination, since you are clearly familiar with this story: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...002-story.html

    And I'd really, really love for you to post one reasonably credible source to back up your ridiculous statement that "Most of the time, it's because people make different choices and more men get into directing" to account for 96% of the work going to men.
    A) The first article isn't about directors. It's about pay for women in the industry as a whole. Something that's been debunked plenty. If you factor in box office draw, screen time, and negotiation, that's not an issue. B) The second article literally only lists the 1960s as the time the EEOC found discrimination against women. The main case of the article comes from the ACLU, which complains about underrepresentation. Something that is moronic considering disproportionality does not equal discrimination.
    Good Marvel characters- Bring Them Back!!!

  4. #49
    Chosen One Carabas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    17,804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    Just fine. And the fact that you're going for the ad hominem just shows you're lacking the facts to refute what I'm saying.
    Is there any kind of theoretical argument that you're not just going to ignore? Because you seem to be ignoring what all the people who refute you are saying. Like you always do.
    "One may be intelligent, and a Nazi. Then one is not decent. One may be decent and a Nazi. Then one is not intelligent. And one may be intelligent and decent. Then one is not a Nazi"
    - Gerhard Bronner

  5. #50
    Astonishing Member AJBopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    A) The first article isn't about directors. It's about pay for women in the industry as a whole. Something that's been debunked plenty. If you factor in box office draw, screen time, and negotiation, that's not an issue.
    Please provide a source that debunks this.

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    B) The second article literally only lists the 1960s as the time the EEOC found discrimination against women. The main case of the article comes from the ACLU, which complains about underrepresentation. Something that is moronic considering disproportionality does not equal discrimination.
    Again, it would be really helpful to the discussion if you would just read stuff.

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has begun contacting female directors to investigate gender discrimination in Hollywood.
    Still waiting for the source that backs your claim that sex discrimination is not a thing in Hollywood and hasn't been for years. I'd really like to have my mind changed on this, but you're giving me nothing.
    Last edited by AJBopp; 07-14-2018 at 10:54 AM.
    Why yes, I AM a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production.

  6. #51
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carabas View Post
    Is there any kind of theoretical argument that you're not just going to ignore? Because you seem to be ignoring what all the people who refute you are saying. Like you always do.
    Oh and lets not forget all the males of COLOR who have been passed over for jobs because they were males of COLOR.
    Including the ones with box office hits under their resumes. Who still catch heck because they did them and still get called unqualified for jobs.

    So lets not assume the playing field was even for them as well. Even if 8 of them are among the 100 top grossing directors. Heck the highest one is Tyler Perry of all folks.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b06e2532657c63

    In short: Compared to their ever-flourishing (white) male counterparts, women moviemakers often face a shortage of career opportunities from the get-go, and steeper battles when it comes to producing the work that does get the green light. In 2016, only 7 percent of the directors behind 250 of the year’s highest-grossing domestic releases were women. (In television, things are a bit better: Thirty-two percent of first-time episodic directors during the 2016-17 television season were women.) From there, women directors get lower budgets on average, and their projects are played on only one-third as many movie screens as male-directed films, according to a study cited in 2016 in The Hollywood Reporter.

    The great Ava DuVernay was only given the rare chance to helm a $100 million studio film, the upcoming “A Wrinkle in Time,” after she fought tooth and nail to make smaller projects like “Middle of Nowhere,” “Selma” and “13th.”

    “I went into all of it with a[n attitude of] ‘I’m going to do it myself,’” DuVernay tells Adrion. “‘I will do it alone. I don’t need you. If you want to join in, great, but I don’t need you because this is going to happen regardless,’ was my armor in that time.”
    Catherine Hardwicke talks about how she took a 57 percent pay cut to direct Warner Bros.’ “Red Riding Hood” following the immense success of “Twilight,” which earned $393 million worldwide. The studio asked her to accept a lower salary after they shrunk the production budget on the Amanda Seyfried-fronted film to $40 million from $75 million.

    This is why “Wayne’s World” and “Black Sheep” director Penelope Spheeris (the comedic relief of “Half the Picture”) decided to trade in her life as a director for a more stable existence as a home renovator. Spheeris said she grew tired of “taking a lot of shit when you take a lot of money” and being made to feel less-than in an industry dominated by the opposite sex.

  7. #52
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Still waiting for the source that backs your claim that sex discrimination is not a thing in Hollywood and hasn't been for years. I'd really like to have my mind changed on this, but you're giving me nothing.
    That is pretty much what you are going to get.

    I mean when folks are really vocal about it-it's for a reason.

    There is a reason some companies like Michael B Jordan's company seeks out diverse staff. Because some of them would never get a shot.

  8. #53
    Astonishing Member AJBopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpiderClops View Post
    Did you seriously use BING???!!! I'm having Amazing Spider-Man flashbacks.
    Why would I not use Bing?
    Why yes, I AM a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production.

  9. #54
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KurtW95 View Post
    A) The first article isn't about directors. It's about pay for women in the industry as a whole. Something that's been debunked plenty. If you factor in box office draw, screen time, and negotiation, that's not an issue. B) The second article literally only lists the 1960s as the time the EEOC found discrimination against women. The main case of the article comes from the ACLU, which complains about underrepresentation. Something that is moronic considering disproportionality does not equal discrimination.
    sweet. so they finally debunked that myth? you must have links to source documents, then, right?

  10. #55
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    82

    Default

    /wrists

    I wonder if they are going to de-age her.

  11. #56
    Astonishing Member AJBopp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Totoro Man View Post
    sweet. so they finally debunked that myth? you must have links to source documents, then, right?
    Interesting results when you search on "hollywood sex discrimination debunked"

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=hollyw...D325F396BEB092
    Why yes, I AM a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production.

  12. #57
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AJBopp View Post
    Interesting results when you search on "hollywood sex discrimination debunked"

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=hollyw...D325F396BEB092
    honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it's even worse in Hollywood than it is elsewhere in the US.

  13. #58
    Formerly Blackdragon6 Emperor-of-Dragons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carabas View Post
    Luckily movies do not have to be gritty, grimy R-rated stuff to be interesting.
    But it's totally possible for R-rated, spy thrillers to be interesting though, but point taken.

  14. #59
    For honor... Madam-Shogun-Assassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Between L.A. & Savanna G.A.
    Posts
    570

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Emperor-of-Dragons View Post
    But it's totally possible for R-rated, spy thrillers to be interesting though, but point taken.
    Grace has a interesting take on this, including why ScarJo picked the director she did.


  15. #60
    Legend PapaShogun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Midvillian1322 View Post
    Wish they woulda done this with a different character. She hulk maybe. Just cant muster the strength to care about black widow
    Can She Hulk legally have her own film?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •