Today, I want to tell you about a pressing social issue. Now, it's not nuclear arms, it's not immigration, and it's not malaria. I'm here to talk about movies.
今天,我要談一個很急迫的社會問題, 不是核武, 不是移民, 也不是大麻, 我是來談有關電影的問題。
Now, in all seriousness, movies are actually really important. In film, we can be wildly entertained, and we can also be transported through storytelling. Storytelling is so important. Stories tell us what societies value, they offer us lessons, and they share and preserve our history. Stories are amazing.
認真的來說,電影其實很重要的。 在電影裡,我們能感到極大的娛樂, 也能在故事裡身臨其境。 講故事是很重要的。 故事教我們社會價值觀, 教人生課程, 還分享和保存我們的歷史。 故事是驚人的,
But stories don't give everyone the same opportunity to appear within them, particularly not stories compartmentalized in the form of American movies. In film, interestingly enough, females are still erased and marginalized in a lot of our stories. And I learned this for the first time about 10 years ago when I did my first study on gender role in G-rated films. Since then, we've conducted more than 30 investigations. My team is tired. And I've committed my life as researcher and activist to fighting the inclusion crisis in Hollywood.
但故事不給每個人 同等的出場機會, 特別是在美國電影裡 給予男女不同待遇的故事裡。 有趣的是在電影裡 女性在許多我們的故事中, 仍然被消除和邊緣化。 我在十年前第一次發現, 當我在 G 等級(普遍級)電影中 第一次研究關於性別的角色時。 從那時起,我們已經做了 超過 30 個調查。 我的隊員們都覺得累了。 我投入了我的生命, 以一個研究者和活動家的身份, 來抗爭好萊塢的性別歧視危機。
So today, what I'd like to do is tell you about that crisis. I want to talk about gender inequality in film. I want to tell you how it is perpetuated, and then I'm going to tell you how we're going to fix it.
所以今天我想要告訴你這個危機。 我想談談電影中的性別不平等。 我想告訴你它如何持續至今, 然後我要告訴你 我們將如何解決它。
However, one caveat before I begin: my data are really depressing. So I want to apologize in advance, because I'm going to put you all in a really bad mood. But I'm going to bring it up at the end, and I'm going to present a silver lining to fix this mess that we've been in for a very, very long time.
但是,我先提前預警: 我帶來的數據很讓人沮喪。 所以我想先向你們道歉, 因為我會讓你們情緒低落。 但在最後我會提升你們的心情, 我要提出一個撥雲見日的方案, 來修復這個已經存在 非常非常久的亂象。
So, let's start with the gravity of the situation. Each year, my research team examines the top 100 grossing films in the United States. What we do is we look at every speaking or named character on-screen. Now, to count in one of my investigations, all a character has to do is say one word. This is a very low bar.
好,讓我們從頭來講這個問題的重心。 每一年,我的研究團隊會 檢查排名前 100 部 最賣座的美國電影。 我們關注每一個在銀幕上出現的人, 說話的或被提到名字的。 這裡,要能算到我的記錄裡面的角色, 至少要有一字台詞。 這個要求夠低吧。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Thus far, we've looked at 800 movies, from 2007 to 2015, cataloguing every speaking character on-screen for gender, race, ethnicity, LGBT and characters with a disability.
到目前為止, 我們看了 800 部電影, 從 2007 年到 2015 年, 將每一個銀幕上說過話的角色, 按性別、種族、民族、性別取向 以及是否殘疾來分類。
Let's take a look at really some problematic trends. First, females are still noticeably absent on-screen in film. Across 800 movies and 35,205 speaking characters, less than a third of all roles go to girls and women. Less than a third! There's been no change from 2007 to 2015, and if you compare our results to a small sample of films from 1946 to 1955, there's been no change in over a half of a century. Over half of a century! But we're half of the population.
讓我們來看看 真的有一些問題的趨勢。 首先,女性在銀幕上的出場比率 很明顯的比男性少很多。 在 800 部電影中, 只有 35,205 個有台詞的演員, 只有不到三分之一的角色是女性。 少於三分之一啊! 從 2007 到 2015,基本沒變。 如果你拿我們的結果 和 1945 到 1955 年的 一小部分電影裡的結果相比, 半個多世紀以來都任何沒有改變。 半個多世紀啊! 我們可是人口的一半呀。
Now, if we look at this data intersectionally, which has been a focus of today, the picture becomes even more problematic. Across the top 100 films of just last year, 48 films didn't feature one black or African-American speaking character, not one. 70 films were devoid of Asian or Asian-American speaking characters that were girls or women. None. Eighty-four films didn't feature one female character that had a disability. And 93 were devoid of lesbian, bisexual or transgender female speaking characters. This is not underrepresentation. This is erasure, and I call this the epidemic of invisibility.
現在,如果我們看交叉數據, 這是我們今天關注的重點, 這個圖展示出更多的問題。 去年(2015年)最賣座的 100 部電影中, 48 部影片沒出現一個 有台詞的黑人女性演員, 一個都沒有。 70 部電影沒一個有台詞的 亞洲女性或亞裔美國女性的面孔, 完全沒有。 84 部電影沒有一個有殘疾的女性。 93 部電影中沒有有台詞的 女同性戀、雙性戀或變性女性的角色。 這不只是少數族群的 見光率不足的問題。 這是刻意隱藏。 我稱做隱形的流行病。
Now, when we move from prevalence to protagonist, the story is still problematic. Out of a hundred films last year, only 32 featured a female lead or colead driving the action. Only three out of a hundred films featured an underrepresented female driving the story, and only one diverse woman that was 45 years of age or older at the time of theatrical release.
我們來看一下主角, 這方面也是很有問題。 去年的一百部電影中, 僅僅有 32 個是女性領導 或共同領導了影片裡的行動。 一百部中僅僅只有 3 部, 這凸顯了女性 主導故事情節的嚴重不足。 只有一部電影上映時 是有關 45 歲以上的 少數族群女性的。
Now let's look at portrayal. In addition to the numbers you just saw, females are far more likely to be sexualized in film than their male counterparts. Matter of fact, they're about three times as likely to be shown in sexually revealing clothing, partially naked, and they're far more likely to be thin. Now, sometimes, in animation, females are so thin that their waist size approximates the circumference of their upper arm.
現在看一下人物描寫。 除了你剛才看到的數字, 女性在電影中更容易被性感化, 相對於他她們對手的男性。 事實上她們有三倍的可能性 穿著性感的衣服, 半裸, 以及她們特別可能是纖瘦的。 有時在動畫裡 女性瘦到她們的腰圍就像胳膊一樣細。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
We like to say that these gals have no room for a womb or any other internal organ.
我們覺得這些女孩子的身體裡 應該沒有子宮 或其他內臟的空間吧。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Now, all joking aside, theories suggest, research confirms, exposure to thin ideals and objectifying content can lead to body dissatisfaction, internalization of the thin ideal and self-objectification among some female viewers. Obviously, what we see on-screen and what we see in the world, they do not match. They do not match! Matter of fact, if we lived in the screen world, we would have a population crisis on our hands.
好,先不開玩笑了。 根據理論,研究也證明, 當人們被這種空想的纖瘦 和物化的理念包圍時, 可導致不滿自己的身體, 內化這種瘦子理念和自我物化, 表現在一些女性觀眾中。 很明顯,我們在銀幕上看到的, 和我們在現實中看到的 不一樣啊。 不一樣啊! 事實上,如果我們生活在電影世界裡, 我們手上會有人口危機。
So, as soon as I recognized these patterns, I wanted to find out why, and it turns out that there are two drivers to inequality on-screen: content creator gender and misperceptions of the audience. Let's unpack them really quick.
所以一旦我發現這些趨勢, 我想探討為什麼。 結果我發現有兩個因素 驅動銀幕上的性別不平等: 內容創作者的性別和觀眾的錯誤解讀。 讓我們快速地解秘。
If you want to change any of the patterns I just talked about, all you have to do is hire female directors. Turns out, the female directors are associated with, in terms of short films and indie films, more girls and women on-screen, more stories with women in the center, more stories with women 40 years of age or older on-screen, which I think is good news for this crowd. More underrepresented --
如果你想改變 任何我剛才談到的模式, 你只要聘用女導演。 然後,女導演 與短片和獨立電影相關。 更多的女孩和女人上鏡頭, 更多女人出現在故事的中心, 在銀幕上呈現更多 40 歲以上女人的故事。 我認為這對在座的聽眾是個好消息。 詮釋更多代表性不足的少數族群──
(Laughter)
(笑)
Sorry.
不好意思
(Laughter)
(笑)
Sorry but not sorry. More underrepresented characters in terms of race and ethnicity, and most importantly, more women working behind the camera in key production roles. Easy answer to the problems that we just talked about. Or is it? It's actually not. 800 films, 2007-2015, 886 directors. Only 4.1 percent are women. Only three are African-American or black, and only one woman was Asian.
沒事,繼續, 詮釋更多代表性不足的少數族群, 最重要的是 讓更多的女性在相機後面擔任 關鍵性的製作角色。 對於我們剛才的問題, 這是一個簡單的解決方案。 真的是嗎? 實際上,不是。 800 部電影, 2007 到 2015 年, 886 個導演中, 只有 4.1% 是女性, 只有三位非裔美人, 只有一位女性是亞洲人。
So why is it so difficult to have female directors if they're part of the solution? Well, to answer this question, we conducted a study. We interviewed dozens of industry insiders and asked them about directors. Turns out, both male and female executives, when they think director, they think male. They perceive the traits of leadership to be masculine in nature. So when they're going to hire a director to command a crew, lead a ship, be a visionary or be General Patton, all the things that we've heard -- their thoughts and ideations pull male. The perception of director or a leader is inconsistent with the perception of a woman. The roles are incongruous, which is consistent with a lot of research in the psychological arena.
為什麼啟用女導演這麼困難, 如果她們是部分的解決方案? 為了回答這個問題, 我們做了一個研究、 我們採訪了幾十個行業內部人士, 問他們有關導演。 結果,男性和女性高管 當他們考慮導演的時候, 他們想到的就是男性。 他們認為領導的特質 是男性與生俱來的。 所以,當他們要雇一個導演 指揮一船的船員,領導一艘船, 必須是一個遠見的人, 或是像是巴頓將軍。 根據我們所聽到的一切── 他們的腦子裡和想法 會自然出現男性。 對於導演或者領導者的概念, 與對於女性的概念是不一致的。 角色是不協調的, 大量心理學的研究證實了這一點。
Second factor contributing to inequality on-screen is misperceptions of the audience. I don't need to tell this crowd: 50 percent of the people that go to the box office and buy tickets are girls and women in this country. Right? But we're not perceived to be a viable or financially lucrative target audience. Further, there's some misperceptions about whether females can open a film. Open a film means that if you place a female at the center, it doesn't have the return on investment that if you place a male at the center of a story does.
第二個致使在銀幕上不平等的因素 是觀眾的錯誤解讀。 我不用說你們就心知肚明: 一半的去買電影票的人 是這個國家的女性。 對吧? 但我們並不被視為是能成功帶來 豐厚利潤的目標觀眾群。 此外,對於女性是否可以帶動票房 還是有一些誤解。 帶動票房的意思是 置女性於中心無法取得投資回報, 而以男性為故事的中心就能。
This misperception is actually costly. Right? Especially in the wake of franchise successes like "The Hunger Games," "Pitch Perfect" or that small little indie film, "Star Wars: The Force Awakens." Our own economic analyses show that gender of the lead character doesn't play a role in economic success in the United States. But what does? Production costs alone or in conjunction with how widely a film is distributed in this country. It's not the gender of the lead character.
這種誤解實際上傷害極大,對吧? 特別是在連鎖電影成功之後, 像是 「飢餓遊戲」、 「完美音調」 或那個小小的獨立電影, 「星球大戰:力量覺醒」。 我們自己的經濟分析顯示: 主角的性別與電影在美國 是否賺錢沒有關聯。 但是什麼會有呢? 光是生產成本, 或是結合一部電影在這個國家 是否廣泛的發行就很有關聯。 不是主角的性別。
So at this point, we should all be sufficiently depressed. No change in 50 years, few female directors working behind the camera and the entertainment industry does not trust us as an audience. Well, I told you there would be a silver lining, and there is. There are actually simple and tangible solutions to fixing this problem that involve content creators, executives and consumers like the individuals in this room. Let's talk about a few of them.
所以到目前為止, 我們應該已相當沮喪了。 50 年都沒變, 鏡頭後少有女導演, 以及娛樂業並不把女性 當成真正的觀眾。 好,我告訴過你們會有一線曙光, 的確有的。 我們有簡單而可行的方案 來解決這個問題, 包括了內容的創作者、 高管和消費者, 就像在座的你們一樣。 讓我們談談其中的幾個。
The first is what I call "just add five." Did you know if we looked at the top 100 films next year and simply added five female speaking characters on-screen to each of those films, it would create a new norm. If we were to do this for three contiguous years, we would be at gender parity for the first time in over a half of a century. Now, this approach is advantageous for a variety of reasons. One? It doesn't take away jobs for male actors. Heaven forbid.
第一個是我所說的「只是添加五個」。 你可知道,如果我們明年 約一百部的賣座電影裡, 每部只要添加五位有台詞的女性, 就會產生新的常態。 如果我們這樣連續做三年, 我們將在這半個多世紀以來 首次達到性別平等。 這個方法有利的原因有好幾樣: 一,它不減少男演員的工作機會。 天理不容。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Two, it's actually cost-effective. It doesn't cost that much. Three, it builds a pipeline for talent. And four, it humanizes the production process. Why? Because it makes sure that there's women on set.
二, 它很合算,花不了多少錢。 三,它會構建人才管道。 四,它將生產過程人性化。 為什麼?因為它確保有女人在場。
Second solution is for A-list talent. A-listers, as we all know, can make demands in their contracts, particularly the ones that work on the biggest Hollywood films. What if those A-listers simply added an equity clause or an inclusion rider into their contract? Now, what does that mean? Well, you probably don't know but the typical feature film has about 40 to 45 speaking characters in it. I would argue that only 8 to 10 of those characters are actually relevant to the story. Except maybe "Avengers." Right? A few more in "Avengers." The remaining 30 or so roles, there's no reason why those minor roles can't match or reflect the demography of where the story is taking place. An equity rider by an A-lister in their contract can stipulate that those roles reflect the world in which we actually live. Now, there's no reason why a network, a studio or a production company cannot adopt the same contractual language in their negotiation processes.
第二個解決方案是為了 A 級人才。 大家都知道 A 級人才 可以在合同中要求, 特別是參與好萊塢超級大片的那些人。 如果這些 A 級人員, 只是添加了一個對等條件 或一個要求, 到他們的合同呢? 這是什麼意思呢? 好吧,你可能不知道 但典型的電影 會有約 40 至 45 個 有台詞的角色。 我認為只有 8 到 10 個人 與故事有關。 除了「復仇者」,對吧? 「復仇者」多了幾個。 剩下的 30 個角色, 沒有理由為什麼這些小角色, 不能匹配或反映 故事發生地點的人口比例。 A 級人員能在他們的合同中 規定這些角色反映 我們實際生存的世界。 沒有理由廣播公司、 工作室或製作公司 不能在他們的談判過程中, 採用相同的合同條款。
Third solution: this would be for the entertainment industry, Hollywood in particular, to adopt the Rooney Rule when it comes to hiring practices around directors. Now, in the NFL, the Rooney Rule stipulates that if a team wants to hire a coach from outside the organization, what they have to do is interview an underrepresented candidate. The exact same principle can apply to Hollywood films. How? Well, on these top films, executives and agents can make sure that women and people of color are not only on the consideration list, but they're actually interviewed for the job. Now, one might say, why is this important? Because it exposes or introduces executives to female directors who otherwise fall prey to exclusionary hiring practices.
第三個解決方案, 是為娛樂業 ──特別是好萊塢── 採用魯尼規則 來處理招聘導演的相關事宜。 目前在 NFL(國家美式足球聯盟) 魯尼規則規定 如果某隊想僱一個組織外的教練, 他們要必須面試少數族群的候選人。 完全相同的原則 可以應用到好萊塢電影。 如何做? 嗯,在那些頂級的電影中, 高管和代理可以確保 婦女和有色人種, 不僅在考慮清單上, 並且被面试。 或許有人會問這何以重要呢? 因為這讓高管看見女導演, 否則她們仍會被排斥在雇用圈外。
The fourth solution is for consumers like me and you. If we want to see more films by, for and about women, we have to support them. It may mean going to the independent theater chain instead of the multiplex. Or it might mean scrolling down a little further online to find a film by a female director. Or it may be writing a check and funding a film, particularly by a female director from an underrepresented background. Right? We need to write, call and email companies that are making and distributing films, and we need to post on our social media accounts when we want to see inclusive representation, women on-screen, and most importantly, women behind the camera. We need to make our voices heard and our dollars count.
第四個解決方案 是對於像你我這樣的消費者。 如果我們想看到更多由女性製作 或關於女性的電影, 我們必須支持她們。 這會意味著到獨立影片的 連鎖劇院去看電影, 而不是影視城。 或者意味你要多滾動幾下鼠標, 去找一個女導演的電影。 或者是寫一張支票資助一部電影, 特別是少數族群背景女導演的電影。 是麼? 我們需要寫信、打電話和電郵給 製作和傳播電影的公司, 我們要在社交媒體帳戶發言, 如果我們想看到包容性代表 和女性上銀幕, 最重要的是在攝影機後的婦女。 我們必須讓我們的聲音被聽到, 讓我們的購票金額具有影響力。
Now, we actually have the ability to change the world on this one. The US and its content, films in particular, have captured the imaginations of audiences worldwide. Worldwide. So that means that the film industry has unprecedented access to be able to distribute stories about equality all around the world. Imagine what would happen if the film industry aligned its values with what it shows on-screen. It could foster inclusion and acceptance for girls and women, people of color, the LGBT community, individuals with disabilities, and so many more around the world. The only thing that the film industry has to do is unleash its secret weapon, and that's storytelling.
實際上在這方面我們能夠改變世界。 美國及其內容, 特別是電影, 已捕獲了全世界觀眾想像力。 全世界。 所以這意味著電影業 擁有前所未有的機會, 能夠散播有關性別平等的故事 到世界各地。 想像一下將會發生什麼, 如果電影行業將其價值 與銀幕上顯示的價值觀相一致。 它可以促進包容 和接受女孩和婦女, 有色人種, LGBT(同性戀者)社群, 殘疾人, 和世界各地更多的人。 電影業唯一必須做的是 釋放其秘密武器, 那就是講故事。
Now, at the beginning of this talk, I said that films -- that they can actually transport us, but I would like to argue that films, they can transform us. None of us in this room have grown up or experienced a storytelling landscape with fully realized female characters, none of us, because the numbers haven't changed. What would happen if the next generation of audiences grew up with a whole different screen reality? What would happen? Well I'm here to tell you today that it's not only possible to change what we see on-screen but I am impatient for it to get here.
在這次演講的開始, 我說電影 實際上可以讓我們身歷其境, 但我想表明的是電影能改變我們。 我們在場沒有人成長或體驗過 充分實現了女性特性的故事的場景。 沒有人有。 因為數字還沒有改變。 如果下一代觀眾 在完全不同的銀幕現實中長大, 會發生什麼? 今天我在這裡告訴大家, 我們不只能夠改變在銀幕上所見, 而且我不耐煩那緩慢的進展速度。
So let's agree to take action today to eradicate the epidemic of invisibility. And let's agree to take action today to agree that US audiences and global viewers demand and deserve more. And let's agree today that the next generation of viewers and audiences, that they deserve to see the stories we were never able to see.
因此,讓我們同意今天就採取行動, 根除隱形的流行病。 讓我們同意今天採取行動, 同意美國觀眾和全球觀眾 應該要求和值得更多。 今天讓我們說好 下一代觀眾和聽眾, 他們應該看得到 我們過去未能看到的故事。
Thank you.
謝謝大家。
(Applause)
(掌聲)