Laura Chodoroff | Washtenaw Voice
By: Robin Wyllie-Scholz
Deputy editor
For almost a century, the glamour and buzz of the Academy Awards has captured audiences across the country. The awards show better known as the Oscars has not been without its controversies, however. In 2015, the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite went viral as people highlighted the lack of nominees who were people of color. Another conversation that has gained traction in recent years is surrounding the gender-split acting categories. Unlike the technical awards like those for editing, directing or costume design, which aren’t separated by gender, the acting awards have been split into supporting and lead actors and actresses. With a greater level of awareness turned towards people who don’t fit neatly into the man/woman gender binary, this division is beginning to seem archaic.
Other prominent awards shows have begun to drop the practice– the Grammys started to go gender neutral in 2012, the Gotham awards merged their acting categories in 2021, as did the Film Independent’s Spirit Awards this year. The Oscars seem poised to possibly do the same.
A move towards a more inclusive future makes sense. More than 20% of adults in Generation Z (those born from 1997-2003) identify as LGBTQ+, according to a 2021 Gallup poll, and 5.1% of adults between 18-29 are transgender, according to a 2022 Pew Research survey. If awards shows like the Oscars want to stay relevant, they need to keep up with the reality of younger generations. Getting rid of gendered categories that many find antiquated is one way to do that.
Making awards gender neutral doesn’t just make space for people outside of the binary, it also helps diminish the perceived differences between men and women. There’s no reason that comparing, say, Michelle Yeoh and Cate Blanchett is any more sensible than comparing her and Brendan Fraser. Acting is acting, and the idea that there is an inherent difference between actors and actresses (a term that may also be falling out of favor, though that’s another story) is silly.
However, merging the awards for actors and actresses does have its drawbacks. For one, it would likely mean less people nominated overall and less awards given out. The acting categories are some of the most popular with viewers, so reducing the number of winners could lead to disappointment. Also, there is legitimate reason to worry that genderless awards could put women at a disadvantage. In the directing category, for example, only seven women have been nominated in Oscars history, and only three have won. That’s not entirely because of the Oscars themselves– directing is a very male-dominated field. In 2021, women only made up 17% of the directors of the 250 top-grossing films, according to a study from the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film at San Diego State University. The field of acting is more gender-balanced, but still favors men. The same study found that just 35% of “major characters” in film were women. Until women are given the same opportunities as their male counterparts, it would be hard to guarantee that non-gendered categories wouldn’t put them at a distinct disadvantage.
Clearly, it’s not enough to just merge the categories and call it a day. The problem of gender inequality in Hollywood is not one with a simple solution. For the Oscars to be truly fair, greater systemic changes are necessary. However, keeping the restrictive gendered awards categories won’t solve anything either. In order to move towards a more diverse, forward-thinking entertainment industry, gendered awards have to go. Hopefully, opportunities for women and transgender/gender nonconforming people in Hollywood will continue to expand, and this change will be reflected during awards season.
