Women working in theatre - please help me with my research by answerin

[gareth]

Have a read of this thread from a few months ago. (As a matter of interest, moderators, what was the reason for the claimed exemption? Surely the event is no longer 'confidential' and we can now be told what they offered as a reason?)

 

As an aside, I'm sure I recall that thread containing reference to the group "Women In Stage Entertainment", and how many eyebrows would be raised if someone suggested setting up an equivalent group for men ... but I guess that element of it fell victim to the editorial delete key ...

[scjb]

Filled it in. Was intrigued to see no mention of Production Assistant or Wardrobe in the jobs section, both roles that are still almost exclusively filled by women in the live music world. Quite a few chap Stylists mind.

 

Agree entirely with Paulears with regards the way women used to feel obliged to become "geezer birds" in order to fit in, whereas nowadays (in my small part of the touring world) the women are women, and the chaps have changed their behaviours accordingly. Not to say there aren't still blokey-###### out there, but I truly believe that they're the exception rather than the rule.

[rostraqueen]

Albatross, I agree wholeheartedly! What kind of discrimination do you think there is 'prior to employment'? Is it against men or women?

 

Do any of you believe that sometimes women are hired over men in order to make the figures look better for equal opportunities? Has anyone had an experience of this?

 

brainwave-generator, when you talk about the live event production office, do you find that there are women in every department or that they tend to stick to certain areas of work?

 

dhutch, in what way do women get 'preferential treatment' in engineering or manufacturing? Is it that they get fast-tracked up the career line because, as you said they have 'bucked the trend' and so are seen as being remarkable? Maybe in a kind-of 'very good for a girl' kind of way?

 

Does anyone know of any men that have been discriminated against by women (relating to this industry)?

[Bryson]

If I may offer a perspective from another country/city: I was surprised to find in Vancouver, that the technicians seem split much more like 50/50 than I ever recall happening in the UK. Even in the supposed "physical" jobs, and management.

[rostraqueen]

Thanks Bryson, it's interesting to hear about other countries too. Was there still a difference in how the men and women went about the jobs though, for example did heavy flightcases etc take more women than men to lift or did you find that the women were actually as strong as the men physically? And how do you think having an even balance affected the team dynamics?

[paulears]

Of course girls have been hired instead of perhaps another man. This is particularly prevalent in council venues, where women are under represented in certain jobs, so a positive bias is applied. It is often quite a public 'feature' of their recruitment with integrity. A representative of the Police Service, talking to students at a local college - in their uniformed services course was frank with the students. If you are male and white, there's little point applying to be a Police Officer, as they are only recruiting non-white or female. Far too many officers in one category so leaving them open to criticism - as a result only under-represented categories are being recruited. This attempt to shift the makeup of an organisation is perfectly valid. A venue with all male staff in one area and all female staff in another need to be seen to be changing it to restore the status quo.

 

This means that there would appear to be more positions available to females backstage, and maybe in admin there is a positive swing to get more male staff because the balance of the sexes is wrong there too.

 

Nobody wants to be accused of being biased, so may employers are almost paranoid about being fair, but more importantly, being seen to be fair.

 

The problem for research is that nobody is ever going to admit to turning down a more suitable male at interview in favour of a less qualified female. There are always valid reasons that can be revealed. Nobody knows if they were the actual ones used to make the decision.

[Bryson]

No difference really along gender lines. Some of the crew are smaller than others, but that's men and women. I'm told by the crew that the healthy 50/50 split is a Vancouver thing - that Toronto or the prairies are still quite male-dominated.

[erroneousblack]

In over 20 years on and off in the West End, I have only ever met one straight male dresser. My ex-missus, after her obligatory one year career as a dancer ended, became like the of her type a dresser.

[Ynot]

If I'm honest, I have to say I find the whole subject of 'discrimination' worrying.

Not because I feel that either sex is being unfairly represented, but because the system itself is flawed. And it's gone so far down the path of that flaw that it's unlikely to ever be straightened out ever again.

 

In that ideal Utopia, men and women would WANT to apply for similar jobs, and after the initial sort through of CVs, the most qualified (on paper) of those who apply would get to an interview. Ideally (again, that word) there would be no consideration of gender at this stage, nor at any other in the process - suitability across the board would be the criteria.

 

HOWEVER, because in the past, many jobs HAVE been male dominated simply because that's the way the world worked back 'in the day', there is a perception that there is a need to open the door further to women than it is to men. Or indeed to other 'minorities' for whatever reasons those on high decree. So that then creates an uneven playing field as demonstrated in Paul's example of the police service. What had previously ben a force staffed mainly by white males is now discriminating AGAINST that group, who now face the prospect of themselves becoming a 'minority'.

 

This form of discrimination does, in certain areas, water down the quality of staff that are taken on. If this police service needs to cover their allotted percentages of men, women, blacks/whites/Asians etc, maybe even down to sexual preferences (who knows!) but the pool of applicants for some groups is much smaller than the traditional white hetero males, then the overall quality of the eventual successful candidates has, by definition, to be lower. That doesn't mean that ALL of the officers taken on are necessarily poorer quality, just that it's likely that SOME will be.

 

My own feeling is that these days when it comes to employment, there is little or no actual out and out discrimination against women or gays or other races per se, although there are PERCEIVED instances where some examples may be blown out of proportion.

 

But I say that if 10 men and 10 women apply for 10 jobs, then it shouldn't matter AT ALL if the jobs all went to men (or indeed all to women) just as long as each of them had a fair crack of the whip and were considered onm their merits and experience.

But granting jobs based on quotas just to appear to be PC is in some cases diluting the quality of the workforce.

 

 

[kerry davies]

The elephant in the room on the events side of things is that when major gigs are being built there are dozens of coked up "girlies-with-radios" from the BBC wandering around getting in the way of a predominantly male working force doing the "heavy stuff".

With things like trackway, fencing, seating, big tent work and the like there are exceedingly few women who can or want to do it. The exceptions are often better than their male counterpart but rare as hen's teeth. Our Kate swings a mean sledgehammer but even she has now become a carer.

[rostraqueen]

Speaking from a personal point of view, I often decide not to volunteer for the heavier jobs as I consider it to be easier and safer to just let the boys do it as they will probably feel I am just getting in the way. It's not necessarily that I can't do it, but that I know the boys could probably do it quicker anyway. But am I discriminating by assuming that the boys will want to do it themselves? It leaves me in an uncomfortable position of watching everyone else working very hard and feeling quite useless! I don't like standing and dictating how things could be done while other people do the dirty work, but I find it sometimes feels like the best I can do. Is it useful to have someone overseeing and thinking about situation as a whole (regardless of sex) or do people resent them for not getting stuck in?

[brainwave-generator]

But am I discriminating by assuming that the boys will want to do it themselves?

 

Yes, I think you are.

 

If it is a fact that 'the boys' represent the part of the crew who are the most physically apt to heavy lifting jobs, then 'the boys' could be used to describe the group that you choose to let do that. However, if you are assuming that because they are male that they have any more duty to do heavy lifting than you do, then you are being sexist.

[dee_84]

Why can the boys normally do it quicker anyway? A two "man" lift takes two people for a good reason, and it doesn't matter if the people who do it are male or female. I'd say get stuck in, it's the only way to learn how to do a job properly (which is recommended before you start giving instructions on how something should be done), and you're putting yourself (and the women around you) at a disadvantage by adapting the attitude that the guys you work with can do it better than the girls. You also do everybody involved a disservice: this attitude can polarize the work force. If all women took the attitude that the men could do it faster & better, we'd be back where we started before women's lib, with men accusing women of being weak, and women accusing men of being sexist. It's a vicious cycle. It's ok to feel that you're not capable of doing a particular type of job, or that somebody else is better at it than you, but don't let gender be the reason for it.

 

I too am a member of WiSE, however I feel the group would benefit from allowing men to join. I feel that when a group of women get started on the topic of sexism, it's good to have a male input, and vice versa. It's often very hard to see both sides of the coin, and this should be taken into account if you decide to pursue this topic.

 

The majority of both men and women in the sector are very good at their jobs, and aren't sexist. That does not mean that their aren't issues relating to gender politics and doing the job. I am in a relationship with a fellow lighting technician, and one day he and I might well want to start a family. If & when the time comes, we will sort this out between ourselves, but if I'm perfectly honest, I can't see how we can both remain working full time in the industry. It's not that I believe that having a child will make me physically or mentally incapable of doing my job, but I feel that I will probably have to choose between my career and my child, simply because we do not work a 9 - 5.

 

Kerry Davies - I take your point about the coked up girls on radios, however I've worked with men who are equally as bad - if not worse - and turn up to work drunk, or dive into their lockers for a fix and still continue to work and do the heavy work, when they too ought not to be on site. Drug taking and getting in the way isn't exclusive to women. I also take your point about there being women who don't want to do particular jobs, I too have noticed this, and I wonder if a lot of women are preconditioned by upbringing and society to not want to do them. I think the reason it seems some women can't do particular jobs isn't because they're women, it's just because they don't want to do that job. Equally I know lots of men who say hey can't sew a button on, but it's just a skill they have no interest in learning. This may be simplifying this a a bit, but I have never come across a woman who can't lift a one man lift by herself, or a two man lift with a partner. :)

[paulears]

The thing with lifting is that some people's idea of a two man lift is another persons under one arm, and I'll take the other under the other arm. I've never seen anybody get waspy with a girlie crew member when they carry items that are within their frame and muscle limits but heavy. The 17 stone muscly bloke can carry more, so usually do. I've had four operation on my shoulder, and have been forced into looking at something and knowing that I can't lift it. This is just common sense. what wrangles people is when there is a truck full of gear, and the girlie girl picks up a laptop bag, and the big blokes grab a cable trunk. I've seen the looks dozens of times when this happens. I've also seen the look on a female crew member's face when a well meaning male sidelines them from the heavy item with a "I'll take that one - it's heavy". The good crew members take their fare share, with a top limit of how much they personally can manage safely - and most people know it. You are perhaps one side of a big case, holding the handle, and a girl grabs the other one and you shift it. That's how it should be. Some great girls I have worked with took any form of male intervention as a huge insult, others didn't want to break a nail. We used to have a competition to see who had the least damaged shins - and our girls never won it.

 

I think I'm actually sexist when I don't mean to be because I've been conditioned (being older) to do things for the girls - and I used to be guilty of the "I'll do this one" thing. Now I don't. Nobody expects the smallest person on the crew to do the heaviest jobs, but if this person works less hard than the others, then they won't get repeat work from me - male or female.

 

The oddest thing is how males and females interact in the odder situations. The fellas used to get changed in the tea room, so it was a common sight to walk in and see somebody with no trousers. You can call it integration when you walk in and see male or female without trousers. I think this just was because everyone had become a real team member and had sort of bonded - everyone were friends. So much so that we now have a crew outdoor barbecue with hot tub party each year, and it's very weird to see new people join in. You're going where, and going to do what? If they come and join in, we know they're going to be ok. In fact, for the past umpteen years this has become a regular thing - all apart from one member of our crew - who alienates himself by never coming, or doing any of the social things - even food. We all go to the same place for food, picked from about three or four we could do. He never, ever comes with us.

 

 

I've worked with a huge range of people over the years, and I've seen extreme sexism and bad behaviour towards our girls plenty of times. Even one time our lighting op being banned from the auditorium when a particular turn was on. Who'd been pretty offensive to her. The deal struck was that she'd be paid, but while he was on, somebody would do her job, and she'd sit in the tea room! This caused a big problem and plenty of bad feeling - and was probably the worst it gets.

[Claire]

I've known at least 2 jobs where the person hired was a man and that was a major part of the decision making process in who to hire, also one of those, only men were interviewed as they wanted a man in the department.

 

From my other career I know a lot about workplace issues surrounding gender (particularly around starting a family...) and suffice to say, if you work in theatre and you get pregnant then there's a whole heap of issues to circumnavigate. You need a risk assessment that doesn't just say 'you can't go on stage and you can't lift anything' (both wrong). You need reasonable time off for appointments; this is legal but it's hard to do when you're self employed. You then need to consider the issue of maternity leave and childcare. I know various people who have said that they feel they have to choose between career and family just because if they start a family, especially if their partner is also in the industry, one of them will probably have to put their career on hold or move into a different area of work. I'm a stage manager. If I ever have children I don't want to miss bedtime 6 nights a week because I am at work, and then be exhausted at 'getting up time' because I've been out late with work and my normal time to get up might be 10am but my child needs to get up at 7... In the main, it is the mother who is the primary caregiver so women do need some support in being able to have a family and use the skills they have built up but maybe in a different way (so moving into a role that uses technical skills in a more family friendly way, for instance, for a few years).

 

Not wanting to say too much, I also feel sometimes from certain people there is an element of 'oh, you can't do that... it's because you're a girl. Call yourself a technician and you can't even lift [whatever it is]' which has nothing to do with gender but all to do with safety, yet the inference is that you are workshy and trying to get out of heavy work because of your gender, rather than you're protecting everyone by not doing something you can't do because you aren't strong enough. Or in my case, tall enough with enough upper body strength.