I’m also unsure that, in the larger picture of sexism, this is even worth anybody’s time. Sure, it’d be nice to see movies that broke the “things explode near this guy’s chiseled figure before he and his girlfriend kiss!!!!” mold…God, would that be nice…but it’s not as important as, say, violence against women (if memory serves, http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com is still up and running) or the gap in pay. To focus on this issue when others of a more important nature are left unnoticed would be irresponsible.

The answer: We don’t know yet. The results just aren’t in… at least, they haven’t been reported: we need full statistics, reasonable assumptions and appropriate (in this case, random) selection.

This question touches the issue of sexism, certainly. We have to remember that a sexist person simply devalues another person based on gender. In order words, two persons applying for the same job, with virtually identical qualifications, differ in gender. The decision should be very difficult, but a sexist person would have a preference for one over the other regardless of qualifications.

Which means sexual differences aren’t the issue when we’re dealing with sexism. It’s actually dangerous to think that way, because it has nothing to do with the question. xkcd makes a rather strong assumption that males and females have identical acting abilities, regardless of sexual characteristics. Essentially, the great deal of “sexist remarks” made in this comment section reject this assumption. That’s fine. You’re thinking like a scientist.

We could argue back and forth about whether a cultural custom like the man footing the bill (considered a ‘dowry’ in human behaviorist speak) constitutes sexism or if monogamy (not necessarily natural in human behavior depending on the circumstances) is the correct lifestyle. The point isn’t about gender; it’s about fairness.

xkcd asks us, is this fair? How can we answer the posed question?

Only after we have an answer can we talk about fixing these problems. As much as you might feel like you’re floating in a sea of culturally underfed chumps, you and I ARE the culture. We have the power to change things (Like you haven’t heard that before!) but first we need to spread the word and have faith that others will do the same.

Teaching Mrs. Tingle (1999) - Katie Holmes and Helen Mirren. 2 strong female leads each seeking to better the other.

Hard Candy (2005) - I’m really surprised that Ellen Page wasn’t billed first since she really is the main character. There’s one where the female is neither the love interest nor the “hero”, but rather a grey area of morality combined with tainted righteous retribution.

Mr. and Mrs. Smith (2005) - Both characters are equally strong in their own right. Brad Pitt is the bigger of the 2 stars and thus got the upper billing.

Memoirs of a Geisha (2005) - Ziyi Zhang and Suzuka Ohgo. Even as a guy who loves action films with guns and car chases, this movie’s characters impressed me. Overcoming hardships is the theme rather than letting a man come to the rescue.

Juno (2007) - Ellen Page and Michael Cera. From the start, the female lead is stronger than the male and continues throughout the film.

Catwoman (2004) - Halle Berry plays exactly what you’re looking for…a female hero.

Superstar (1999) - Molly Shannon plays the female lead who comes from mediocrity to stardom. Hey, comedies can be heroic!

300 (2006) - You wouldn’t think such a small part of the film in terms of screen time would receive second billing, but Lena Headly’s character has the strength to face the entire senate (all men) for the love of her country and even kills a traitor.

Alright, that’s enough for right now. I would agree that F/F billing is much more rare than M/M billing, but I think this is a matter of market demand rather than the sexism of Hollywood. I think Hollywood would embrace strong female characters more if the consumers would do the same. As it stands now, that’s simply not the case.

“Perhaps that’s because the whole “buddy” genre is a male thing.”

I’m tired of this crap, especially when the people involved are trying to say something about sexism. That’s an inherently sexist statement, and it’s wrong. What is Sex and the City but a buddy movie? What’s that Ya Ya Sisterhood thing? Chicago? Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants? The Devil Wears Prada? Calendar Girls? Thelma and Louise? Charlie’s Angels (and again)? Just because female buddy movies generally have four to eight buddies instead of two doesn’t mean they’re not buddy movies. Hell, every mother-daughter movie ever made is a buddy movie, the buddies are just related (don’t give me that look. They call them “buddy films” if it’s a father-son or brothers).

Just because you would rather refer to your movie as ‘a touching story of the bonds of friendship’ doesn’t change that it’s a buddy movie. Get over it.

“There’s no reason that almost all of the movies made require a dick between the main character’s legs except for institutionalized sexism and anxious masculinity.” - Cadence

Look, a veiled ad hominems attack against an entire gender! I have a dick between my legs, so I must be anxious about it! Yet again, we see sexism in the words of somebody who’s trying to show us how blind we are to the sexism around us. Yet again, I scream “practice what you preach, goddamnit” at my monitor, causing the cat to run from the room in terror. Yet again, nobody listens to me.

“But the fact that people will not even acknowledge this one obvious thing is frustrating.” - Cadence

Do tell.

“Is the suggestion that it would be nice to have movies with female heroes and more than just one of them so disturbing to the internet in general that it requires he-man macho nerds to quibble with statistics to prove that there’s no possible way that hollywood is sexist at all, grunt scratch sniff?” - Franny

…Do I even have to say anything? This is like watching people being beaten to death onstage at a peace rally. Am I the only one who sees this?

“It is utterly unacceptable and rather disheartening to see some of the male posters here straying into “Well… You know, guys, maybe it might just possibly be…” I’m starting to mentally finish that thought with “I’m an absolute cretin with and underlying desire to subordinate all of the women I know and IN THE WORLD.” Because that’s more believable than some of the bullshit that spews forth following the aforementioned opening.”

“Why must women ascend to such a higher level of discourse in order to provide valid points when they are responding to men who, through their very words, display that they do not necessarily subscribe to any theory of equality?” - same poster, when called on the above

My response: why must philanthropists ascend to such a higher level of action in order to provide valid points when they are responding to people who, through their very actions, display that they do not necessarily subscribe to any theory of philantropy?
If you’re going to fight for gender equality, you should exemplify it. Ghandi got this, why don’t you?

“Or, maybe you’re an asshole.” - Cadance

I wonder how she’d react if somebody responded to her by saying “maybe you’re a bitch.”

“I cannot respect any feminist who is not also a masculist, nor can I respect any masculist who is not also a feminist. To loudly proclaim one and not the other is pure hypocrisy.” - Psy

*hugs poster* Faith in humanity maintained.

““Women’s work” is almost universally valued lower than “men’s work,” by definition.” - Cadence again

It’s disturbing that somebody supposedly fighting for equality would continue to utilize that distinction. Aside from biological tasks (breastfeeding, giving birth, depositing genetic material into a uterus, etc), what is “men’s work” or “women’s work”?

I hope this post has helped everybody understand that sexism is found in both genders, and in fact, among people who pretend to fight sexism. I’d have more examples, but I only got about halfway down the page.

Perhaps we’re missing something. Even though Angelina Jolie and Jodie Foster don’t draw huge crowds all by themselves, they are still A-list stars. Perhaps a strictly economic definition of celebrity causes us to overlook another significant element of fame.

– A.
When was the last time a tabloid hypothesized about a male celebrity’s possibly-emminent fatherhood? Patrick Dempsey’s twins?

295 total actors
198 male
97 female
that’s 67% male actors

107 total directors
6 female directors
7 double male directors
101 total male directors

leading parts:
m - 20
f - 8
m/m - 30
m/f - 24
f/m - 13
f/f - 6

Lead: 73% male, 27% female
Second: 59% male, 41% female
Third: 59% male, 41% female
Fourth: male 64%, female 36%

Other Starring Roles: 18 films have more than four stars
41 male stars
14 female stars

Many people expressed the idea that if there were more female directors, there would be more female lead roles.

lead roles with female directors:
f
m/m
m/m/f/m/m
m/f
f/m
f/f

romance: 4
drama: 2
comedy: 2
horror: 1

It looks to be about 50/50. I would have to get more data in order to make any conclusions. But, from looking at this, it looks like rather than being skewed the other way, the female directors are more balanced.

there were 14 f or f/f films in the data set, 12 of them were directed by males, and one film was directed by a male/male team. But, remember to compare this to the 50 m or m/m films which were directed by males.

genre count for f & f/f films:

horror: 6
romance: 3
comedy: 3
drama: 2
thriller: 2
melodrama: 1

I went to see the IJ crystal skull movie, and while waiting for the movie to start, observed a young (11?) boy walking past the movie posters. He walked right past Baby Mama (girls + baby blocks … that’s a no-brainer), past one featuring an idiot with his pants down, glanced at the Narnia poster, past a couple obvious romances, did a double take at Sex and the City (SEX in huge letters + dark colors) but moved on when there wasn’t anything more (she’s not DOING anything, just walking), then past a boring looking action film, stopped to look at Indian Jones for a while, passed up The Happening, and stopped for the last poster, I can’t remember what it was.

I must say that I would do about the same thing, only I am intrigued by The Happening because of MNS.

I just watched Bella Marta, and … awesome main characters (not to mention the food). For those who haven’t seen it - Marta is a career chef who lives alone. She runs her own kitchen and is very much the queen. Even defying the lady who owns the restaurant. Her sister is killed in a car crash, leaving her to take care of her niece. Well, she is not motherly, and knows nothing about the ‘right way’ to do things … pretty much defying the stereotype that most female characters are tacked with in films. Funny enough, an american version was made that reverted everything back to The Way Things Are Done.

I want any movie where the female isn’t a sex figure AND things get blown up. By sex figure, I mean she is wearing as little clothing as possible, while doing little more than run away, or posture, or get eaten or … you know.

To the people saying - you don’t like the movies out there, make your own, it will fail, thus proving the FACT that f/f movies aren’t desired by the mainstream, blah blah blah - If I had $100,000,000 I would do just that, and it would be an awesome movie. But, I, nor the vast majority of the people on this planet have the kind of money it takes to 1) make a great film with quality actors and some good FX and 2) market the heck out of it.

I’ve seen some really good filming with low budget, but the acting is always below par, and the writing is usually not great either because of a lack of editors, I think. IE the creator is funding it, and that’s almost never good for a first try. Kind of like letting an author design their own cover. You can spot them a mile away (usually).

Okay, now for the sexism. To blame the men for everything is to ignore the complexities of culture. Mothers teach their daughters and sons to act the way they do. Women are equal perpetrators in the subtle sexism that still saturates our society. Now, it’s NO WHERE NEAR the way it was 50 years ago. My grandma is 97, and I still remember her expectations as to what I, as a girl, could and could not do. I was not allowed to play with the trucks and tractors, nor was i allowed to fix anything (even though I begged to be able to use the pliers and screwdrivers). And so on. She was equally strict with my brother - no dolls, etc. just to be fair.

I just started playing D&D and was amused by the costumes of the female characters and monsters. I just shake my head and put it down to boys being boys. I know that if I want something that is intelligent, I have to go somewhere besides the mass-culture, teenage boy driven franchise. In six months, I have yet to play with another girl, so it’s probably justified as far as D&D is concerned, but NOT as far as RPG is concerned - changing a franchise makes people mad, adding to a genre without getting rid of the things that people like gives them a chance to try something new while knowing that they have their familiar home to go back to. On the other hand, if they are comfortable where they are, they will never leave. The same goes for movies and books and computer games and so on.

I am likewise frustrated by sweeping comments such as females use their emotions, females work well in groups, females like soap operas, males like competition, males are rational, and all the other things people pull out of their arse. I am a girl. I am rational as far as any human is rational. I hate/am apathetic to shows like One Tree Hill, Sex and the City, Alias, Roswell, Lipstick Jungle, the OC, other male/female relationship driven show. My husband on the other hand likes all of those shows, even though he is also rational (except for his taste in shows!). What am I saying here? People are people, we are different. Even if only 10% of the women in the world share my sensibilities (ie, not your average stereotypical girl who likes to talk about makeup (as if there are that many girls who do, it’s mostly an adolescent phase that most girls grow out of … AND, I would from experience put the % at 40/50 rather than 10)), that’s still 10 out of a hundred, or 1000 of them in my small town alone. That’s a force to be reckoned with if anyone catered to them.

If you are a woman, who do you identify most with in the xkcd strips? the “guy” character or the “gal” character (only when they are shown together). Most readers should identify with the focus of the strip, rather than the one that follows their particular gender. For instance, today’s strip where the gal exclaims “sweet! we made a baby!” while holding said child by the leg. The guy then delivers the joke. We think it is funny, and so funny stick-man goes up in our social factional character ladder. stick-lady is pretty funny too, but does not deliver the joke, and so does not go up as much. Mrs Roberts is her own character, and is awesome. But, she was also for the most part SO cool, that most of us can’t compete with her, and so we Identify with her less, even though we all worship her.

I subscribe to Archeaology, Science Fiction and Fantasy and a book catalog. I wish I could watch a film about nerdy girls who act like nerdy girls. I can imagine them as a super hero team… maybe their football jock neighbor is always getting in trouble, and they have to save him :D

It’s 4am, and so I plead innocence with this post!