In this signature espnW column, Allison Glock sits down for a candid Q&A with a remarkable person. The aim is to cover topics high and low, deep and less so, to present a fresh look at folks we think we know and meet some others we wish we'd known all along. Welcome to The Conversation.
Who: Geena Davis, Academy Award-winning actress, star of several seminal feminist films and founder of the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media
***
Alison Glock: Geena, how are you?
Geena Davis: I'm doing so good. I'm sitting on the front porch swing of this quaint inn in Montauk. I'm very happy here. It's the perfect time to talk about all of this stuff.
AG: Let's get into it. In 2007 you launched The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, which has amassed the largest body of research on gender dynamics in the entertainment industry, looking across 20 years and 11 countries. When was the moment you decided you should be the one to tackle this giant issue?
GD: [Laughs] Yes, why me? Why was I the one? Probably because I take everything too far. Everything I do. [Laughs again] At first, I had no intention of doing all of this.
AG: What was the tipping point that motivated you?
GD: It started when my daughter was a toddler and I began watching entertainment made for little kids, G-rated stuff. I think because I played roles that resonated with women, I had a certain Spidey-sense others may not have about how women are portrayed. I immediately noticed there were far more male characters than female characters in the programs, even now, in the 21st century. It was stunning to me. It was so profoundly imbalanced. I'd mention it to my friends. "Did you notice that in that movie there was only that one female character in the entire cast?" And not one of them had until I pointed it out. There was a lot of, "My God, you're right."
AG: Then you decided to go right to the source.
GD: Yes. I decided to alert the industry. I know everybody -- actors, producers, studio executives, directors. I thought I'd point it out and change would get made. Surely we should be showing kids sharing the sandbox equally. So we'd have meetings and I'd say, "Have you ever noticed how few female characters there are in G and PG movies?" And every single one of them would say, "Oh no, no, no, that isn't a problem anymore. That problem has been fixed." I was like, wow.
AG: No one was noticing the gender imbalance you saw?
GD: Civilians and industry people alike were oblivious to it. And by the way, no one believed me. I couldn't convince them. They all stressed how much they cared about this issue; that they made a special point to think about girls and give them something to identify with. But they were always talking about the one female character. So I checked to see if there was any research to back me up.
AG: It's harder to argue with math.
GD: Exactly. I looked for data. But nobody had studied gender in children's media. I thought, well, if I'm right and the data shows I'm right, that will have an impact. And that's when I launched the institute. We focused on shows aimed at children 11 and under, and PG and PG-13 rated films, not stuff like "Keeping Up With the Kardashians," which of course they watch. We only looked at programming made specifically for children, and after doing the largest amount of research ever done on this subject, it confirmed exactly what I noticed when we started.
AG: The findings are eye-opening. For every female speaking character, there were three males. Female characters made up just 17 percent of crowd scenes. Comments about a character's appearance in films were directed at females five times more frequently than they were toward males ...
GD: The results were very, very bleak.
AG: What finding alarmed or surprised you the most?
GD: The ratio of one female to three male speaking characters was depressing, but it was what I expected. What was more distressing to me was that only 17 percent of any crowd was female. In other words, the fictitious worlds created for kids are nearly bereft of female presence. It's sending a very clear message from the beginning that women and girls do not have half of the adventures, that they're not as important. We're teaching kids that girls and women don't take up half the space in the world.
AG: Which isn't reality, of course.
GD: No. But kids absorb what they see. They take it in. We all grow up with this unconscious gender bias that permeates everything we do. Take "Winnie the Pooh." You have nine characters, and one of them is female: Kanga, the mom, who doesn't do any of the fun stuff. The most important thing is to change what children see from the beginning. To not create a problem we have to fix later.
AG: You've said research indicates "the more hours of TV a girl watches, the less she thinks she can do in life, and the more hours a boy watches, the more sexist his views become." What are the rules at your house around media consumption with your 13-year-old daughter and two 11-year-old sons?
GD: We severely limit their screen time. During the week they have very little. On the weekend they can watch a movie or a bit of TV. I know they want to see what other kids see. If I limited what they watched to gender-balanced shows, we'd watch nothing. Another thing I recommend whenever possible is that you view with them. You can teach them media literacy. Studies show you can lessen the negative impact of sexism in media by commenting on it. I'll ask my children, "Do you think girls could do what those boys are doing?" Or I'll say, "Why do you think the girl is wearing that when she's in a forest? Look at those shoes? Do they make sense?" And my kids see it now. If I start to lean over, they say, "I know mom, there's not enough girls."
AG: You are a big believer that much of our self-esteem comes from how we see ourselves reflected in the culture.
GD: Absolutely. But with one caveat: I don't get too hung up on female characters having to be role models. That hampers progress in some ways, this idea that they need to be perfect. I guess I played a baseball hero of sorts in "A League of Their Own." But women should have flaws and be dimensional. The role model expectation kind of drives me nuts.
AG: "A League of Their Own" is one of the first films I watched with my two girls and I remember they were very happy to see so many different types of women on screen at once, all of them competent, all of them really good at something.
GD: And they got to have personalities. We may get the odd female superhero. But when do they get to be funny? She's tough as nails! But she doesn't get the joke. When I talk about this issue of role models, people often bring up [Ellen DeGeneres' character] in "Finding Nemo" and call her "dumb." And I'm like, "She's the best character ever!" But the problem is, when that's the only female character in the whole film, it starts to feel like she is representing all girls. You get judged pretty heavily when there is only one example. Look at Hillary Clinton.
AG: Another finding that stood out to me was that there was "virtually little or no difference in the sexualization of female characters between the ages of 13 and 39 years." Which, distressing.
GD: It's horrifying. Even in G-rated movies we found the female characters wear the same amount of sexually revealing clothing as females in R-rated films. It was very specific measuring criteria -- showing the top of the breast, or the top of the buttocks, or the clothing is see-through. Why there would be any of that in G-rated films, one would wonder. It's craaaazy.
AG: You've repeatedly tried to dispel the myth that we've righted the ship as far as gender equality goes, pointing out that the ratio of male-to-female characters has been exactly the same since 1946. Why does the myth persist when the numbers don't lie?
GD: Because it has been so entrenched in culture. We've all been raised on the same ratio. My theory of everything is that we are training kids to have gender bias against girls, therefore when you are an adult, you don't see it. We think it's normal. We have it in our heads that women only need to take up a certain amount of space and then we've done right by them. It's the same in every profession. We get a handful of women professors, a few female board members -- that looks normal. I always remember a woman who told me this story about how she was at a company meeting and it was all men except her. Halfway through, the man next to her leaned over and said, "Do you realize you are the only woman in this group?" And she was like, "Uh, yeah." But to him, it was a stunning revelation.
AG: Have you ever felt like you just can't deal with this bulls--- anymore?
GD: No! And not because I am a Pollyanna, but because I am in the trenches and I see what's happening. If the reaction of the studios was different, I might feel discouraged. But once they see the numbers, they are so appalled by what they are making for kids. I try and present it in a way that is non-threatening, non-shaming, creative and easy, super super easy. "It's nothing to make this better, you can totally do it!"
AG: You even suggest fixes.
GD: Yes. Like, before you cast, do a gender pass and see how many characters can become female. You might even get more interesting results that way, with fewer stereotyped women if a part was originally written for a man. And the crowd thing is an easy fix. Just write in the script, "A crowd gathers, half of which is female." And it will happen. Otherwise, it will end up at about 17 percent. Listen, every area of society has this huge imbalance. Like Congress. It will take decades to find equality there, probably. But onscreen it doesn't have to be gradual. It can be overnight.
AG: Like a recipe. Just add women.
GD: [Laughs] Yes! We aren't sneaking up on progress. Just do it! We did a survey where we asked people how important they thought it was to achieve gender balance, and 90 percent said, "Important or very important." Now, if I said to studios, "You aren't making as many movies with a female star," they would say, "Yes, we're aware of it. Women will watch men, but men won't watch women. Sorry, our hands are tied." No matter how many films come out starring women that are giant successes, it doesn't change. Who knows? Maybe 2015 will be the year the needle moves on that.
AG: Speaking of films starring women that were giant successes, you've had a few of those. I will never forget seeing "Thelma and Louise" in 1991 as a young woman and being confounded by the backlash from my male friends, some of whom were deeply offended by the movie.
GD: I remember at the time I would get questions in interviews where I would be asked what it was like being in "a male-bashing movie." And I would say, "I don't see it that way. First of all, there are seven male characters, and only two of us, and the men run the gamut. Yes, there is a rapist. But there is also Brad Pitt's sweet hoodlum, and Harvey Keitel is a saint, practically. I feel we did very well by men." Later, I heard that when our writer Callie Khouri was asked the same question about penning a male-bashing script, she would just say, "So what?"
AG: The criticism did seem a little bit over the top given, as you've definitively proven, most films marginalize women to the point of near nonexistence.
GD: Right? Welcome to our world. We never get seven supporting characters. We get one. And she is usually a bimbo. Like Callie also said at the time, "If you think the movie is male-bashing, you're identifying with the wrong character."
AG: Were you prepared for the media frenzy and cultural conversation "Thelma and Louise" sparked?
GD: It was kind of an astounding turn of events. We knew it was very unusual to have two huge, well-written female roles. We knew it was unique. We hoped people got why we drove off the cliff. But there wasn't anybody involved who thought the movie would explode like it did. Some people felt tremendously empowered and others were, like you said, so offended. I remember we were on the cover of Time a few weeks later, which stunned us. And with the cover they ran two negative essays. They couldn't print just one! Like what we'd shown was the worst thing that could happen in our culture. Women with power! And guns!
AG: Hide your children! One of my favorite evolutions in the movie is in the physical appearance of the characters. As the movie progresses, you and Susan Sarandon shed your artifice, stripping down to this unadorned essence. As you become formidable, you stop caring about lipstick and hairspray, and you both look so much more alive and appealing. That message was so powerful because it is the opposite of what women usually see on screen, and of what we're generally expected to do in life.
GD: Susan and I became very careful custodians of that happening. The poor wardrobe people. They'd wash our clothes, and then we'd just roll around in the parking lot to get dirty. By the end of the movie, there were layers and layers of filth.
AG: It was a literal rejection of the male gaze. Have you always had a healthy relationship with your looks and/or body?
GD: No. I had a pretty poor self-image for a long time. I broke into acting as a model in New York. I was never anything like a "supermodel," but I made a living at it for a couple years. The thing was, I was convinced that I was tricking everyone into thinking I was attractive.
AG: How did you figure you were managing to do that?
GD: I remember very distinctly being so tall I didn't fit sleeves, so I ended up modeling lingerie and bathing suits, sleeveless stuff, basically. I didn't have a good body, but I believed I knew how to stand or pose to mask it.
AG: That's some serious body dysmorphia right there.
GD: Oh yes. I'd wear these tiny, barely-there things at the shoots, and then to go home, I'd change into these giant underpants. I thought my body was so terrible that's what I needed to wear. I never had any eating disorders, though. So that's good.
AG: You're 6 feet. Were you also bothered by being tall?
GD: I was tall from minute one. Always the tallest kid by a large margin. And my fantasy was to take up less space in the world. I found this fairy tale about a princess that was 1-foot tall, and I wore that book out. That's all I wanted, to be petite and attractive. I was afraid I'd never stop growing.
AG: When did you?
GD: I hit 6 feet at 18, and then things changed. I went to Sweden my senior year. I'd never had a boyfriend in high school. I assumed there was something wrong with me. But in Sweden, suddenly people were telling me I was pretty. And everyone seemed taller there. I went from someone who had never had anybody even mildly interested in them to hearing people say, "You must have so many boyfriends." I wanted to stay there forever.
AG: It's ironic that your first film role was in 1982, in "Tootsie," where your opening scene required you to tower over Dustin Hoffman wearing only skimpy underwear ...
GD: ... while he freaked out. I knew it was sort of sexist. But it was also kind of funny, frankly, that he would be so disturbed by me.
AG: Like he'd never seen breasts before. What is the most enervating film or television show you've ever seen? For me, it's any of the "Real Housewives" franchises, which I watch in a near-constant state of horror.
GD: Well, it's not technically a show, but a new study says that, evidently, the No. 1 career aspiration for girls is to be Kim Kardashian.
AG: That can't be true.
GD: It's true. Not even growing up to be a "reality star." But actually being Kim Kardashian!
AG: Well, thanks for talking to me. I'm going to go jump off my roof now.
GD: You're welcome. I just wanted to live long enough to share that with you before I go jump off my roof. [Laughs] What's crazy is that the best ratio on TV for females, the category that is 55 percent women, is reality TV. So, make of that what you will.
AG: You're full of awesome news, Geena.
GD: Once I fix what kids watch, I'll be moving on to everything else.
AG: Good. I feel like representation is one thing, but showing women who are excelling at something (besides flirting, shopping or yanking out each other's weaves) is equally critical. Do you agree?
GD: Yes. Yes. Yes! We've extensively researched the occupations of female characters, and 80 percent of characters with jobs are male. It is almost statistically insignificant how few female characters have jobs of expertise. By the way, as bad as it is in other sectors of society -- corporations, government, etc. -- it's profoundly worse on screen! Way, way, way, way, worse. Which makes no sense. The claim that Hollywood is so liberal? Ha! It is so retro it is almost unbelievable. In our research, very few women have a career or even much of an ambition beyond finding romance.
AG: Do you watch much television?
GD: I used to. I was obsessed with "True Blood." And "Spartacus." I really like that sword-and-sandals stupid stuff. It's so embarrassing.
AG: I'm a huge "Orphan Black" fan. I feel like that is far and away the most feminist show on television. It definitely meets your gender-equity criteria.
GD: "Orange is the New Black"?
AG: No, "Orphan Black," about clones. Tatiana Maslany plays several different versions of one person, all of them badass women.
GD: Dude! I'm going to be so bummed if I watch that. When I watch "Breaking Bad," I'm like a 2-year-old; why does he get to do all this amazing stuff? I want to do it. Playing five different clones? I'm jealous as hell of that kind of role.
AG: You said that you were surprised to fall into the same career abyss as so many other women actors as they age out of the ingénue slot.
GD: I love what I'm doing with the institute. I love spending time with my family. But I don't want somebody else to decide that's what I have to do because there are so few good parts for women.
AG: I've been reading the coverage of your speeches on gender and equality, and I was wondering if you ever look at the comments?
GD: I'm mostly wise enough to avoid them. But it is interesting because the one I get the most is, "Why are you bothering? Who cares? How dare you suggest this or that?" And my feeling is, you don't have to approve, I'm doing it, and it's better for everybody.
AG: Have you considered releasing a new rating system? Rated GD for reasonable depictions of women?
GD: Ha! Actually, yes. We've definitely thought about that. It's kind of what we're doing with the Bentonville Film Fest.
AG: The festival you started with the explicit goal of showcasing women and diversity in film.
GD: Yes. We want to wake everyone up to their unconscious culpability. The festival is a way to make progress faster.
AG: Let's talk about archery for a second. In 1999, you were one of 28 women competing in the semifinals at the U.S. archery Olympic trials. How did that happen?
GD: I used to be very unathletic. I was always so gangly and self-conscious about my height. I had convinced myself I was uncoordinated. And as a result, I didn't want to try stuff. I didn't want anybody to look at me trying stuff. But then came "A League of Their Own." I learned to play baseball and I was like, "Hey wait a second, I'm kind of good at this."
AG: Very meta.
GD: After that, I learned a bunch of athletic skills for movies. The shooting coach for "Long Kiss Goodnight" told me I had a freaky natural ability at pistol shooting. He said I could probably compete if I wanted to. And I was like, that is so awesome. But do I really want it to be pistols? You can't exactly practice at home. Right around then, the Olympics were on television and they had all this coverage of this kid who won at archery. I was thinking, archery is beautiful and dramatic and maybe if I was good at shooting, I could be good at that, too. My assistant found me the Olympic coach -- like I said, I take everything too far -- and I started training with him. I became obsessed. I practiced around four hours a day.
AG: How transformative was that experience of going from someone who believed themselves uncoordinated to becoming a contender for an Olympic team?
GD: Beyond. It fixed my self-image about my body. And my coach worked a lot on self-talk, the horrible things you say to yourself.
AG: For example?
GD: He started by asking me, "What did you think after you shot that arrow?" And I'd answer, "I was thinking I suck." I'd shoot again. "What about then?" "I was thinking you think I suck." He really made me conscious of how I needed to stop beating myself up all day long. Another thing I realized I loved about sports and competition was that it was about points. It was measurable. It wasn't just somebody's opinion. I'd lived so long being judged by other people's opinions. It felt freeing to leave all that behind. With archery, you either hit the bull's-eye or you don't.
AG: It's similar to the way you relied upon numbers and statistics again with your institute.
GD: Archery totally turned me onto that. I am now a full-on numbers geek. I like things you can calculate.
AG: Math shuts people up. Ideally.
GD: Ideally.
AG: Do you still shoot?
GD: It's not a weekend sport. It's a whole deal. You have to keep your strength up. I have a Funny or Die episode with trick shots. You should see it! But no, I don't have time to practice now like I'd like.
AG: You're too busy correcting gender inequity and exposing seemingly intractable bias.
GD: [Laughs.] You're welcome, world!
