Industrial Feminism vs. Modern Hollywood

          Everyone loves “Awards Season.” Or at least everyone I know does. The mornings after the award shows are filled with discussions of who/what won which awards, whether or not people agree with the decisions, and most commonly: what actress wore the best dress. On the surface, there is little wrong with these kinds of conversations, but something was made very clear after this year’s Oscars: things in Hollywood (and everywhere else) need to change. Seth McFarlane (creator of Family Guy) hosted the Oscars this year, and no one was very happy with his performance. The opening number was called “The Boob Song,” and it doesn’t take much to realize that the actresses called out because the audience “saw their boobs” in certain films were highly un-amused (particularly Charlize Theron). Throughout the rest of the award show, more misogynist and highly inappropriate comments were made, which led to an article entitled “Why Seth McFarlane’s Misogyny Matters” in New York Magazine's the Vulture. The piece began with some shocking information that I was unaware of: “Seth MacFarlane made a whole bunch of sexist, reductive jokes at the Oscars last night. It's frustrating enough to know that 77 percent of Academy voters are male. Or to watch 30 men and 9 women collect awards last night.” As an avid tv and film watcher, I am proud to say that I could name just as many if not more female performers than males. However, I am ashamed to admit that I know significantly more male producers and directors than female, although I’m learning this is not entirely my fault. 

The fire of the Triangle Shirtwaist Company is something that I had known about before reading Annie Orleck's Common Sense and a Little Fire: Women and Working-Class Politics in the United States, 1900-1965. However, I was previously unaware of the labor unions formed by women in the early 20th Century. Until two weeks ago I had know idea who Fannia Cohn, Rose Schneiderman, Pauline Newman, or Clara Lemlich were, or the immeasurable influence these women had during the early 1900s. By joining and creating working-class unions they gave other women a space to gather the knowledge and skills necessary to gain better wages and working conditions. Nevertheless, even when these women gained leadership positions within the unions, it was common for a man to be sent in to either replace her, or do the same job with better pay. This was the case for Pauline Newman: “The final straw came when John Dyche sent a male organizer to join Newman in Cleveland and paid him a higher weekly wage. Newman decided the time had come to quit the ILGUW for a career as a writer and freelance organizer. ‘You, Rose, know that the seven dollars does not bother me but there is a principle involved and for that I am ready to fight’” (Orleck 69). When the unions believed a man could do the same job as a woman, and do it better, they didn’t hesitate to insert him into the situation and pay him well. Along with being pushed aside by male organizers, the women also had to be concerned with their appearances in a way that is similar to Hollywood women today. Although they were taking on these powerful roles, they were frequently condemned for their more masculine appearances (most often: Cohn), or, in some cases, being to demure: “Schneiderman dressed and acted in ways thought of as “mild” and conventional. Newman was outspoken and passionate and dressed as she pleased. She wore her hair short and had a taste for tweeds and ties. She did not seem to care much about what others thought of her” (Orleck 136). They learned early on that how they dressed and behaved could sway how their ideas were received by others, and therefore the success they could have if they catered to their audience.

The final way (that I will explore) in which the women of the industrial feminism movement struggled in a way that is similar to the women in Hollywood, was their fight to be seen as actual people with a sense of individualism and personhood: “By breaking through poor women’s isolation in the home, by encouraging them…to learn about and become active in changing the world they lived in, the housewive’s movement promised to empower and liberate wives and mothers, for when mothers became activists they also became individuals…That required of children and husbands an acknowledgement of the mother’s personhood – a difficult thing for many family members to grant” (Orleck 226). As a collective audience we often believe that the lives of actresses belong to us – that we have every right to know what they’re doing, when they’re doing it, and whom they’re doing it with all of the time. In the 1930s women wanted to be recognized as an entity outside of their household in relation to their husbands and children.

The jump from working-class politics in the early 1900s to an Oscars host in 2013 is large, but one that immediately came to mind as I read about the four women who made major changes in unions and education at the turn of the century. A reoccurring theme…or mantra that we have repeated throughout the semester is “We always claim ‘we’ve come so far,’ but when you really look at it, things haven’t changed at all,” and that’s what I was thinking as I connected the work of these women to the Vulture article. Sure there are women working in Hollywood, but we rarely hear about the ones that work behind the scenes. Instead we focus on the “beautiful” and “talented” actresses. But what’s wrong with a female director, screenwriter, or even composer? The answer we all want to hear is: nothing. There’s nothing wrong with an intelligent, successful woman being responsible for an award winning score or plot. However, their chances of being recognized are stifled by the number of men in the industry. Not only that, but who cares about the non-beautiful women in Hollywood, or the traits that make the “beautiful” ones worthy as humans too? Margaret Lyons, the 54,000 people who recommended the article via Facebook, and undoubtedly many more people care. Which leads to the question: will there ever be a group of women to stand up for their rights and make a difference like these four women in the 1900s? I sure hope so, and when it comes to Hollywood...my bet is on Tina Fey and Amy Poehler.