DarthSkywalker
🦉Your Most Aggro Pal (he/him)
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 132,821
- Reaction score
- 80,349
- Points
- 203
But why is that? It is the establishment of gender roles. Women weren't even allowed to be cops in most Western nations until the 20th century, and this before we get into the massive amount of sexism in that workplace.Yes, the variety of what is considered attractive in Hollywood is a much broader spectrum of shapes and sizes when it comes to actors, no question about that.
In fairness men are thought of first in those roles because there is a much greater percentile in these jobs in society, and while we are seeing more and more action roles for women in TV than in cinema they often are in a fantasy arena, but given that is the arena where the bulk of the money is these days then it's a strong start.
The 3rd paragraph is a mixture of stuff, as far as her missing out on the sequel, well both are so that seems fair if the studio wanted to distance themselves, but your point about whether she'll get another franchise opportunity while he has is a fair one, however I would say that I think there might well be more to it than that, Stewart is not ideal to build a franchise on as she's hopeless at promotion most of the time and I suspect over time she'd probably lean more towards the indie films anyway. However as far as issues with treatment go there certainly needs to be changes made, especially as regards to actresses age, Maggie Gyllenhaal's story was the tip of the ice berg and hopefully will lead to some sort of proactive measures taking place.
This actually reminds me of the conversation about the doing away of girl and boy sections at Target. Stuff we teach kids, with film, with their toys, etc. We put kids in boxes early and it matters. It matters a lot.