It’s a Matter of Acknowledgement
[T]o be material means to materialize, where the principle of that materialization is precisely what “matters” about that body, its very intelligibility. In this sense, to know the significance of something is to know how and why it matters, where “to matter” means at once “to materialize” and “to mean.” -Judith Butler
In Judith Butler’s “Bodies That Matter”, she discusses what it means to matter, “…”to matter” means at once “to materialize” and “to mean.” When you apply this thinking to any type of discrimination, what are you really saying? What does it really mean “to matter”? It means, to be included, to count, to be acknowledged.
There has been a very hot topic in the news lately concerning whether or not minorities “matter” in the entertainment industry; the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has received a lot of backlash regarding discrimination for the nominations of Oscar candidates. Some argue that the nomination process favors white males and it demonstrates a lack of diversity for racial minorities and women. The Oscar nominee results released January 14, for the second year in a row, did not include any persons of color for the categories of Actress in a Leading Role, Actor in a Leading Role, Actress in a Supporting Role, and Actor in a Supporting Role.
Additionally, the nominees for the more specialized/technical categories are also mostly white and male. One clear exception is the Costume Design category. Five movies were nominated for this category, of which, only one designer was (a Spanish) male, and the other four movie nominees were female (where one female was nominated for two different movies). I’m not sure if this scenario can actually be considered an exception, to lack of diversity per se, however, since “Costume Design” could be considered a “feminine” role in the industry. (Frankly, given the previous year’s reaction to the lack of diversity in the Oscar nominees, I’m kind of surprised no one really jumped on this year’s list of eligible movies when it was released a few weeks prior to the Academy’s announcement of nominees.)
One major factor contributing to the lack of diversity in the nominee results, is the composition of the Academy’s voting members. According to the L.A. Times, the Academy’s membership is 94% Caucasian and 77% male. Blacks are 2% of its voting members, and Latinos are less than 2%. These percentages don’t represent the racial makeup of the general population, and they show a pre-disposed bias against diversity. The Academy is now making changes in member voting criteria to hopefully diversify future nominees. By bringing in newer members (while, at the same time, broadening the type of voters), they will eventually increase the percentage of racial minorities, and women, but it will take time.
In the Academy’s defense, the problem isn’t solely because of how the Academy members vote. The problem is also a reflection of the lack of diversified content that the members can vote on. This stems from the studios, and those that are funding the movies. Resolving the lack of diversity in the *movie (sector of) the entertainment industry will not result in diversity of nominated actresses/actors/crew/directors if these roles aren’t also worked on by minorities. The Academy is just a symbol of the industry, and (for now) a symbol of the major institutional changes that are required to achieve a more fair and accurate playing-field for everyone in the industry.
Perhaps there is reason to be hopeful that there will be significant changes occurring in the entertainment industry. In general, there are/have been numerous (individual and class action) lawsuits against studios by minorities that are being discriminated against, including women, racial minorities, LGBTQ, and people older than a certain age. Currently, there is an investigation underway by the EEOC to see if there is enough evidence to sue studios for discrimination against women. From this article on latimes.com: “In May, the ACLU contacted multiple government agencies, citing a USC study that found that only 1.9% of directors of the top-grossing 100 films of 2013 and 2014 were women. The group also cited a DGA report that found women represented just 14% of television directors in 2013 and 2014.”
*Note: with regards to diversity, though they still have a ways to go, the television sector of the entertainment industry is about 20 years ahead of the movie sector of the industry.
