Ava DuVernay hiring only female directors

Great Debates
1

As discussed in this article, Ava DuVernay is hiring only female directors for season 3 of her TV show Queen Sugar, along with as many other female writers/producers/etc as possible, and is quoted as saying “I invite you to tell whoever is feeling discriminated against to sue me so that I can sue every studio that has left women out…’cause we can do this, if that’s what you want to do.”

I’m wondering what people think of this… honestly, I’m a bit conflicted.

To be clear, I am definitely NOT having the stereotypical MRA anti-PC backlash response in which I mutter about feminazis and how men are the real downtrodden class yada yada yada. There’s a HUGELY long way to go before we even start to approach equality of opportunity between men and women in many venues of life, and film/TV directing is certainly one of those. And ethically, I think it’s not only acceptable but admirable for AdV to be practicing what she preaches and making an effort to help write historical wrongs.

That said, I have several areas of concern:
(1) I’m curious about the legality of this. If some guy sends in an application to work as her sound editor (or whatever), and a woman gets the job, doesn’t this sort of statement give him far more legal leg to stand on that he otherwise would have, should he wish to sue for gender discrimination?

There’s a debate pattern that happens a lot concerning issues like this:
A: Hey, how come it’s OK to have a NAACP but not an NAAWP. Double standard! Reverse Racism!
B: You’re stupid shut up (ideally with more eloquence, acknowledgement of the differing power dynamics, yada yada yada)

Normally, I fully agree with person B in that exchange. It’s an inane comparison. But… That’s just a discussion of what is appropriate/decent/reasonable, not of what is LEGAL. Obviously it should be LEGAL to form a NAAWP. If you’re a douche.

But… I’m a lot less comfortable with differing standards for laws when it comes to different groups. If it’s legal for someone to hire only women, and specifically say they’re hiring only women, and publicly dare anyone who didn’t get hired to sue… then it should be legal to hire only men, specifically say they’re hiring only men, and publicly dare anyone who didn’t get hired to sue. Which I would have serious issues with.

(2) There’s a key difference to me, ethically, between “we strongly believe in providing opportunities for creative people from historically disadvantaged groups, and we believe their voices are generally ones that fit our show/movie/whatever, and therefore we go out of our way to seek them out and hire them” vs “we will hire ONLY women to fill job X, period.” I’m all on board with the first. With the second… I dunno. Even if the in the first case they do in fact end up hiring only women, I’m generally very hesitant about any hiring decision in which someone’s race or gender is an absolute disqualifying factor. I don’t think a society in which that happens is a healthy one, and it’s hard to see how we can set things up so that it’s OK one way but not the other.

(3) “Go ahead and sue me, so we can sue all the studios for discrimination in the past” is also a bit of an odd statement, if you think about it. If there is a legitimate discrimination lawsuit against all the other studios, then for god’s sake, go ahead and sue them! But saying “hey, I TOTALLY could sue Paramount and MGM and Sony for decades of discriminatory practices against generations of women… but… eh… we’re not going to do so until someone first sues us” is just weird. It certainly doesn’t get justice or reparations for women who have been wronged in the past. Nor is it a particularly relevant threat for some man who doesn’t get hired by her company and is considering suing to be told “go ahead and sue us if you want, and we’ll see you in court, but also we’ll be suing a bunch of big corporations. Take that, man-we-didn’t-hire!”.

To be absolutely clear, I in NO WAY think or am saying or am implying that men working in Hollywood are the real victims here, or whining about how it’s SO HARD for men to find jobs, just because some tiny handful of all the shows that exist are hiring only women. But I do think there is potential for a troubling precedent here, with implications both legal and ethical, and I’m curious what others think.

2

It’s sexist, plain and simple. I’ll let those versed in American law handle that side.

But I wouldn’t be surprised to see unions and the SAG boycotting her.

3

I assume it’s mostly a publicity stunt, if they do get sued, it’ll be great for ratings.

There’s usually exceptions to equality laws for things like Chinese restaurants being allowed to only hire Chinese people or not considering a fat black woman for the next James bond.

It’s probably gone through lawyers and ‘series directed by women’ will fall into this exception so there’s no real legal risk.

4

*Are *Chinese restaurants allowed to only hire Chinese people? I ask this as a factual question for those knowledgeable about US law.

(Also - why would they want to?)

5

It’s a loophole in British law, if you can give a reason to discriminate it’s allowed, I assume they say it makes the restaurant seem more authentic.

In TV & Film they’ll have a lot more leeway since they can claim it’s artistically necessary.

6

I don’t know specifically about Chinese places; but Hooters and the like are allowed to hire only attractive women as waitresses, due to a rather nebulous “entertainment” exemption.

7

Do you have a cite for that?

8

There are times when an employer is allowed to treat you less favourably because of your race and this won’t count as discrimination…

If an employer can show that you need to be a particular race in order to do a certain job, they can insist on employing someone of that race.

This is known as an occupational requirement and does not count as discrimination.

An example of where an occupational requirement might apply is a hostel for Asian women who have suffered violence. They may be able to insist that they only want to employ Asian women workers because the women in the hostel would find it easier to relate to and communicate with people of the same sex and racial group.

9

Does that apply to Chinese restaurants?

10

Gosh, how soon are SAG and the unions going to start boycotting the all male writers rooms?

11

Can you clarify what you think the relevance of that is to the questions posed in the OP?

12

There was a whole episode of Freakanomics about this — Is It Okay for Restaurants to Racially Profile Their Employees? - Freakonomics

Ethnic restaurants like to hire front-of-the-house employees that look like they match the theme. It’s pretty much allowed. (Of course in the back of the house, the cooks are 90 percent likely to be Hispanic anyway, regardless of the cuisine.)

13

The OP is conflicted about the existence of all female groups. I am asking what effect this might have on all male groups, such as writer rooms.

14

It very clearly is not. It is conflicted about people clearly and specifically stating their intent to hire an all female group. In this day and age I would expect a show with an all male writers room whose show runner specifically and clearly stated that that gender makeup was intentional to be sued, protested and boycotted, or, most likely, all three.

15

Aren’t entertainers usually independent contractors? Anyway, IMNSHO she has the right to hire or not hire whoever she wants. There are places where women don’t belong, and places where men don’t belong, and chances are, the DuVernay set is the latter.

16

I’m not sure she should have said that. She certainly could have done it without saying so. Coming out with a statement, though, kind of makes the whole thing a target.

And I say this as a person who once wanted to be the drum major of my high school band. The band director wanted people to ask him, and then he would determine if they were able. So, at the end of my sophomore year, I asked him. And what he said kinda blew my mind. He said he had decided it was time to let a girl do it, and he had lined up a girl for the next year (it was always a senior), and while he thought I would do an excellent job at it, it would just be weird to have a girl as a drum major two years in a row.

Never mind that it had been a boy for the last 48 years in a row.

So the boys have had this one for more than 100 years in a row and I applaud her opening it up to women. I just think to come out and say that, all women, no exceptions, is not a great idea. Because I think equality is where you hire the best person for the job, without either promoting or penalizing somone because of what sex they are or anything else other than doing the job.

17

So as long as they claim it is unintentional, they can keep them, right?

18

What do I think about it? She is doing it just for this reason- to get post, tweets, FB rants or any sort of publicity.

And you fell right into her trap. :stuck_out_tongue:

19

This is happening in the US, not Britain. I’m not seeing the relevancy of British law.

20

Are there an equal number of men and women working, or trying to get work, in the TV/film industry?

Are men and women equally capable, and equally interested, in the various roles on offer?

Without knowing these things, we can’t say for sure that a male dominated TV/film industry is evidence of widespread discrimination against women.