'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
FrankGSterleJr
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:41 pm

'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by FrankGSterleJr » Wed Apr 13, 2016 11:28 pm

NFB to dedicate half its production dollars to films by female directors

VANCOUVER — The National Film Board of Canada says at least half of its productions will be directed by women within three years.
And NFB head Claude Joli-Coeur says female directors will get half of the board's production budget by 2019.
Joli-Coeur vowed to usher in complete gender parity while speaking at the Vancouver International Women in Film Festival.
He says he hopes the NFB can "lead the way for the industry as a whole."
Half of this year's spending already goes to projects with female directors, but Joli-Coeur notes that can fluctuate from year to year.
The federal agency boasts a strong stable of female filmmakers: Sarah Polley's intensely personal feature "Stories We Tell" is considered the NFB's most popular theatrical documentary of all time, while Torill Kove is an Oscar-winner for her animated short "The Danish Poet," and documentary maker Mina Shum is riding acclaim for her latest feature, "Ninth Floor."
"There have been good years and lean years for women's filmmaking at the NFB. No more," Joli-Coeur added in a release issued Tuesday.
"Today, I'm making a firm, ongoing commitment to full gender parity, which I hope will help to lead the way for the industry as a whole."
In the current 2015-16 fiscal year, the NFB says 43.4 per cent of all production spending will go to films directed by women, while 43.5 per cent is slated for films directed by men. Another 11.3 per cent will go to a mixed team, while 1.8 per cent has not yet been allocated.
That's up from the previous year, when spending was at 41.7 per cent for women, versus 47.8 per cent for men.
Female-directed projects in the works include Kove's next animated short, "Threads"; Zayne Akyol's "Terre de Roses, Mon Nom Est Gulistan"; Marie Clements's "The Road Forward"; Ann Marie Fleming's feature animation "Window Horses"; Tiffany Hsiung's "The Apology"; and Anjali Nayar's "Gun Runners."
Joli-Coeur, government film commissioner and NFB chairman, says 17 English-language feature documentaries are in production or on the verge of release — 13 are directed or co-directed by women, four are directed by indigenous women and three are directed or co-directed by women of colour.
Next year includes 48 English-language projects, 35 of them directed or co-directed by women.
"Yet the fact remains that, in 2016, we're still, as an industry, having this conversation about women being fully represented, on screen, off screen and in key industry positions," Joli-Coeur said in prepared remarks released to the media.
"Personally, I find the lack of representation unacceptable, given the amazing talent that exists."

(The Canadian Press, March 8, 2016)

_____________________________________


“The National Film Board of Canada says at least half of its productions will be directed by women within three years.”


Finally, the balls to plainly state what has always been on the Orwellian agenda -– to be at the very least ‘equal’. Or maybe it was nothing intentionally forthcoming, but rather just a slip of the keyboard and Send button?

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 6694
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:20 am

Giving someone funding based solely on things like gender or 'ethnicity' is patronising, PC bullshit, counter to creativity, and has nothing to do with 'equality'. 'Equal rights' would be giving men and women funding based on ability.

mickthinks
Posts: 747
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by mickthinks » Sat Apr 16, 2016 8:10 am

"SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS" is neither a cliché nor is it true. It is, rather, meaningless. Orwell was demonstrating how a few carefully chosen words can be destructive of meaning. To mistake it as a truth is to completely miss the point.

Impenitent
Posts: 1760
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by Impenitent » Sat Apr 16, 2016 12:36 pm

jealousy is a wonderful tool

-Imp

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1131
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Apr 16, 2016 6:56 pm

I think it might be time to introduce some form of Godwin's law to be extended in order to cover pointless invocations of Orwell over such trivial nonsense as this.

The National Film Board of Canada enforcing at least equal status for lady director's is a stupid story to get wound up about.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:46 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Giving someone funding based solely on things like gender or 'ethnicity' is patronising, PC bullshit, counter to creativity, and has nothing to do with 'equality'. 'Equal rights' would be giving men and women funding based on ability.
It's worse that patronising: it is sexist.

GazetteHan
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:15 pm

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by GazetteHan » Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:38 pm

mickthinks wrote:"SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS" is neither a cliché nor is it true. It is, rather, meaningless. Orwell was demonstrating how a few carefully chosen words can be destructive of meaning. To mistake it as a truth is to completely miss the point.

just like the quote “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” it is somewhat true but we always ask for equality as it will prevent discrimination against individuals or groups, and to promote equality of opportunity for individuals and groups. Equality does not always mean treating everyone the same.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Wed Aug 31, 2016 1:51 pm

GazetteHan wrote:
mickthinks wrote:"SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS" is neither a cliché nor is it true. It is, rather, meaningless. Orwell was demonstrating how a few carefully chosen words can be destructive of meaning. To mistake it as a truth is to completely miss the point.

just like the quote “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” it is somewhat true but we always ask for equality as it will prevent discrimination against individuals or groups, and to promote equality of opportunity for individuals and groups. Equality does not always mean treating everyone the same.
Equality under the law; equality of opportunity, and equality of responsibility, are all moral positions necessary for a healthy society.
This does not mean that people do not naturally differentiate to inequality in acquisition of resources. Nor does it mean that we are born equal in ability , capability, or intelligence.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4208
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by Immanuel Can » Wed Aug 31, 2016 2:53 pm

Impenitent wrote:jealousy is a wonderful tool

-Imp
That's a very good comment. The whole truth of the thing is jealousy.

Nietzsche would agree. He spoke of "ressentiment" (i.e. jealous resentment of others' advantages) that, he said, is at the core of "slave morality." And the modern Politically Correct set runs on very little else...just a burning desire to pull all others down to the lowest level.

And it doesn't stop at equality, either: after "equality," there is "historical reparations," which means the class of people that has been resented must afterward be flagellated indefinitely and subjected to sub-par conditions until the PC impulse toward ressentiment is satisfied. Meanwhile, the "offended" class must be given advantages, the chief of which is that they are to be praised regardless of their actual achievements or the standards their work may or may not reach.

In the NFB's case, this means that women's films must be promoted regardless of quality, until the magical, preconceived 50-50 is achieved. And if it goes above that, but in favour of women, or any other minority that is being advocated, there will not be a rectification of the balance in the favour of males but rather a celebration of "how far we've come". It seems that inequity, sexism, racism and so forth are better than good, so long as they are being directed against the resented class.

That's Political Correctness for ya.

User avatar
Throng
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 12:05 pm

Re: 'Some are more equal than others' -- a cliche but disgracefully true

Post by Throng » Sun Oct 09, 2016 11:22 am

GazetteHan wrote:
mickthinks wrote:"SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS" is neither a cliché nor is it true. It is, rather, meaningless. Orwell was demonstrating how a few carefully chosen words can be destructive of meaning. To mistake it as a truth is to completely miss the point.

just like the quote “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” it is somewhat true but we always ask for equality as it will prevent discrimination against individuals or groups, and to promote equality of opportunity for individuals and groups. Equality does not always mean treating everyone the same.
I'm glad someone provided the correct quotation.

We have the concept, equity, which recognises that equality is not achieved by treating all people the same. 'Equal opportunity is enabled not by treating people the same, but by treating them equitably. If we imagine equity as a form of social order, we could picture a fence over which one must look to see the horse race. The tall person needs no support to that end, but the dwarf needs a step platform in order to see over. If we treat them the same, they do not have equal opportunity to see the race, ad the tall person in privileged and the dwarf disadvantaged. In this sense we could look at disability not as a personal condition caused by their uncommon stature of impairment, but as a social structure constructed in such a way that they are unable to participate equally in society. An equitable society would not construct social structures that place some people in privilege and others at a disadvantage under the fallacious notion that 'equality' implies treating everyone the same.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest