MT/Acting Gender Gaps

A recent comment by @monkey13 in another thread brought to mind a pet peeve that’s been front of mind for me recently, and that’s the gaping gender gaps that persist in the theatre world.

While no one wants to hire or work with Divas, why is bad behavior more tolerated in males? Presumably it’s primarily due to grossly imbalanced supply and demand, as well as the predominance of male Directors and Theatre Administrators.

Most of us have already encountered this gender gap by the time our MT’s audition for their very first shows in school, and see it persist as they move through high school and into college auditions, where many schools admit fewer females than males.

A recent UK study concluded that while audiences are 70% female and 30% male, this ratio is almost exactly reversed when looking at employed actors, 70% of whom are male. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/dec/10/women-in-theatre-research-full-results

To make a bad situation even worse, the ratio of female to male actors auditioning is roughly 70% female to 30% male, so almost twice as many females are competing for half as many roles.

I’m not sure if this situation is mirrored in film, but given recent articles I suspect it is very similar. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2563561/Hollywood-place-white-men-New-study-finds-women-minorities-dramatically-underrepresented-films-television.html

To illustrate how this gender gap plays out in the professional MT world, our D recently texted me a photo of a Playbill for a show she was seeing on her night off. It was a well-known Rogers & Hammerstein piece that features many strong female leads, all of whom were very seasoned actresses who were given special mention in reviews at this large Regional Theatre. When I looked at the Playbill, I was shocked to see that while there were 12 Equity males in the show (including many ensemble members), there was exactly ONE Equity female (not a lead but the Dance Captain who is required to be Equity)!!!

Does the concept of Equal Pay for Equal Work have no meaning in the MT world? Given that this situation has not measurably improved in the past 10 years, is there reason to hope it will get more balanced in the coming decade? Can @soozievt 's D and others like her please write more, and faster? :slight_smile:

Seriously, though, if you have a female MT in the family, really urge them to consider how to create more work so the women in the profession can actively participate in growing the MT employment pie!

In regards to the “behavior forgiveness” isn’t that a society wide issue? A man with demands is strong, a woman with the same demands is a *itch" type thing

Could well be, @toowonderful, and of course the Matilda story is anecdotal, though this isn’t the first place I’ve heard it said.

Also, for those with male MTs, none of the OP is intended to imply the profession is a walk in the park for MT males either. As a female engineer in college 100 years ago I found that mediocre males would stay in the major, while only the very best females would last through graduation, and I suspect the reverse is often true for males in MT. There may be fewer MT males, but perhaps overall those who decide to pursue it professionally are only the cream of the crop, and I know they still face tough competition at every audition.

I have heard similar stories to the Matilda anecdote. And those who are divas young rarely seem to make it for the long haul

I agree that Divas seem to have a short shelf life in this profession. Mounting a production in a hurry, then running 8 shows a week for months on end, is stressful enough without any added drama.

This discussion of gender imbalance may feel academic today, but when you (or your D) are pounding the pavement to pay rent I can imagine that it can start to loom large for many. It’s a shame. The 12:1 Equity ratio was shocking to me. So far so good for our D (knocking on wood), but I can see why many young females hesitate to take their Equity cards too soon.

Wonder how it is for women of color…

@exitstageleft - I have no specific data or firsthand experience, and can’t imagine it’s easy, but on the bright side from a purely anecdotal standpoint the (few and exceptionally talented) women of color in D’s graduating class got great representation and seem to be in demand so far. I also know certain schools (CMU springs to mind) seem to especially seek out talented students of color. I’ve heard from some parents that their kids get frustrated with an apparent dearth of colorblind casting.

Do others have specific experience in this?

Not exactly the professional world, but this year WSU specifically chose Chicago as its fall musical to showcase their strong female performers. And Billy Flynn is being played by an African American male.

CCPA cross cast its production of The Beaux Strategem this term FWIW, though I think there’s definitely a gender imbalance overall. (I know there’s an all woman stage combat troupe in Chicago and I do see notices for gender-crossed Shakespeare from time to time.)

I recently heard about a former gender-switched professional production of 1776, which sounds interesting in a Hamilton-esque way.

I read about that too recently.

My D’s first original musical was ALL female. The second musical’s main character was female. The third musical was a gender bender on a familiar tale that centered on men but instead reversed the roles and centered on females. The current musical she is writing/composing is about an historic event that is all about women. There’s hope! :slight_smile:

Interesting article in today’s Playbill…

http://www.playbill.com/news/article/4-out-of-40-a-history-behind-the-women-whose-names-are-on-broadway-marquees-366394?r=n

Your daughter may be our daughters’ savior, @soozievt! But it is really discouraging to hear about casts where all of the men are equity and none of the women are, which I presume means the ensemble men are getting paid more than the lead women. Is that the case?? One field where equal pay for equal work is not happening and in your face and allowed. So 1950’s and it sucks that these women feel they can’t take their equity card while their male peers can because no one will want to pay them. I really wish AEA had different criteria for giving out this card so women can get paid equally and what they are worth. I’m a newbie to all this and certainly don’t have answers or even understand it all, but if ALL actors got their card after the successful completion of a BFA (or some other measurable criteria) then all qualified women would have it and would have to be paid the same.

Yup, I assume (but don’t know for a fact) that in the production I mentioned above at least some, if not most, male ensemble members were being paid more than female leads. Ouch. I have seen many productions where males (particularly dancers) were given limited Equity contracts over female leads.

I assume the rationalization is that many Regional Theatres have limited budgets, and so offer a limited number of Equity contracts, and choose to use them to attract folks in the most demand (often older actors and males).

I realize I’m very idealistic, but sometimes the right thing to do is just the right thing to do, whatever the cost. Imagine if minorities were paid less because there was less demand. AEA was put in place to force theaters to do the right thing, at least for those in the union, but a non-union world has opened up which is sort of circumventing this.

This has been an issue for a long time and, unfortunately, isn’t going to change overnight. I do think, though, that the larger issue of earning a living on stage for anyone is the more important one and the one that is likely to be a much larger influence on current students’ future in theatre.

@momcares, it would be interesting to learn more details about the production you mentioned. How, if these women were seasoned, experience actors, are they still non-Equity? I know that there are several types of Equity contracts that allow for some non-Eq performers but it seems strange to me that the ratios could be what you have been told. That certainly doesn’t happen in the theatres with which I’m familiar.

As for doing the right thing regardless of cost, unfortunately, these theatres are cutting it close budget-wise with any and every production. I posted an article here on CC written by our artistic director a couple of months ago about the costs of mounting a production. Even the most successful theatre companies are not making a huge amount of profit on any production.

I will be in NY next week at the NAMT Festival of New Musicals which is held annually. I know that at least one of the offerings we’ll see, maybe two, have minority casts. It’s a good time at the moment for minorities having opportunities in Broadway shows, with On Your Feet, Allegiance, and The Color Purple, all having casts almost entirely made up of minorities.

@Calliene…oh, I’m with ya (and @MomCares) on these issues. Such a long way to go. And it is 2015, geez! I’ll try to be hopeful that more attention is going to be paid to these gender gaps in theater. For instance, there is some momentum for women MT composers/writers, such as the fairly new (in its sixth year) Lilly Awards. The Lilly Awards was created to fight for gender parity in productions nationwide, and celebrate the work of women in theater.

Adding to @alwaysamom’s post, Hamilton’s cast is also largely made up of minority actors.

Still, the gender parity issue is an important one where improvement is needed in all areas of the theater.

First off, I wasn’t told this but saw it in the Playbill that our D texted me a photo of. 12 males with stars by their names and only one woman. I’m in no sense an expert on this market, since our D only graduated in June, has only been working professionally since a year ago July, and has never worked at this particular theatre. I also don’t personally know any of the women involved. My impression, though, is that many of the women have opted to Taft Hartley at various points in their careers due to a shortage of Equity contracts historically offered to women (especially younger women) in this market. I know our D has made that choice for now, at her agent’s urging, for that reason.

I’m also not an expert on the history of American theatre, but maybe it’s a direct descendent of all-male Shakespearian theatre and we should feel grateful for 30% female employment, even at inferior salaries?