EEOC Completes Investigation into Hollywood Sexism

A couple years ago, the EEOC launched a landmark investigation into sexist hiring practices in Hollywood. It has reached the settlement phase.

Sometimes (okay, a lot of the time) combating sexism, racism, and other forms of bigotry can feel hopeless. Progress happens in inches and loops; every positive sign seems accompanied by an equally discouraging one. But despair is not an option. If anything, the setbacks should only make us savor the victories, however small, that much more.

We might be on the verge of a major victory. On Wednesday, Deadline revealed that the Equal Opportunity Commission is in the middle of settlement talks with Hollywood studios accused of discriminating against female directors. It may not sound exciting, but, depending on the outcome, this could signify a historic turning point in the battle for equality in the film industry.

In May 2015, the American Civil Liberties Union tasked state and federal government agencies with examining the hiring practices of major Hollywood studios, networks, and talent firms. The recommendation resulted from years of activism by writer-director Maria Giese, whose last feature film, Hunger, came out in 2001. The EEOC’s investigation began in October of that year, involving interviews with numerous directors, studio executives, producers, agents, and actors.

The investigation has now ended and entered the settlement phase. If the EEOC fails to resolve the charges of discriminatory hiring practices, purportedly filed against every major studio, it can file a lawsuit. And if that happens, the specific charges can be made public.

Pursuing legal action poses several challenges. In the entertainment industry, an assortment of parties, from producers to agents, contributes to employment decisions, and directors typically work as contractors rather than employees. Furthermore, there’s no guarantee that whatever regulations the EEOC implements would be consistently enforced. Similar previous efforts have proven futile.

The DGA has tried to persuade studios to adopt an equivalent of the Rooney Rule, which would require producers to interview women and “minority” candidates for directing jobs. It’s better than nothing, but what’s to prevent studios from interviewing women with no intention of hiring or even seriously considering them? J.J. Abrams’s approach has a similar flaw, though it at least differentiates between various marginalized groups (and it seems to be paying off).

Frankly, it’s hard to imagine anything short of formal quotas producing concrete change. Give studios a little latitude, and they will simply find loopholes. Such a move isn’t without precedent. Ryan Murphy committed to filling 50 percent of directing jobs on his shows with women, people of color, and LGBTQ people, and so far, he has stayed true to his word. For her TV series Queen Sugar, Ava DuVernay made a point of hiring only female directors, a trend set to continue in season 2. Of course, given widespread aversion to affirmative action, there’s next to no chance of that happening on a large scale.

In an ideal world, the powers that be would choose to hire female, nonwhite, and queer directors because they care about having diverse storytellers, rectifying inequality, or at least being seen as inclusive. But that clearly isn’t the case. If nothing else, the EEOC investigation offers a sobering reminder that, even as filmmakers and actors speak out against the current president, Hollywood is still full of people who would prefer to hire Mel Gibson than a woman.

Home/Social Progress