Percentage of Roles for Men/Women by Decade

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
NOT sure if there is a discussion here, but I thought it was interesting...

According to the Washington Post, 80% of roles for actors in their 20's go to women.

After 30, the advantage goes to men : 60/40.

After 40, the advantage increases for men : 80/20.

After 50, it is almost exclusively men.
 

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,101
Duesseldorf
NOT sure if there is a discussion here, but I thought it was interesting...

According to the Washington Post, 80% of roles for actors in their 20's go to women.

After 30, the advantage goes to men : 60/40.

After 40, the advantage increases for men : 80/20.

After 50, it is almost exclusively men.
That's unsurprising. It has been complained about a lot. Perhaps if you would get more women to write scripts, among other things, it could change. I wonder how the quota is in Korea. Apparently, a sizeable portion of their TV writers are women.
 
Last edited:

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
That's unsurprising. It has been complained about a lot. Perhaps if you would get more women to write scripts, among other things, it could change. I wonder how the quota is a Korea. Apparently, a sizeable portion of their TV writers are women.
The 80% of actors in the 20`s being women surprised me.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
There could be a better discussion if you'd share the link. Without it, we're just guessing at what the Washington Post means. For example, I can only guess that they mean starring roles, since the ratios can't possibly be skewed like that in general.

I have definitely noticed that there are very few starring roles for men in their 20s. Maybe if we could get more men writing scripts, that might change :sarcasm:.
 
Last edited:

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
There could be a better discussion here if you'd share the link. Without it, we're just guessing at what the Washington Post means. For example, I can only guess that they mean starring roles, since, obviously there aren't 4x the roles for women. I have definitely noticed that there are hardly any starring roles for men in their 20s. Maybe if we could get more men writing scripts, that might change :sarcasm:.
Now I have to just find the link. :)
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,347
16,638
Mulberry Street
NOT sure if there is a discussion here, but I thought it was interesting...

According to the Washington Post, 80% of roles for actors in their 20's go to women.

After 30, the advantage goes to men : 60/40.

After 40, the advantage increases for men : 80/20.

After 50, it is almost exclusively men.

I think some of that has to do with actresses becoming mothers at that point, or stay at home mothers. I.E. once their kids are in their pre teens/teens, they probably want to spend a lot more time with them as thats a very important time for them to have their parents around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Osprey

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
42,530
10,127
Toronto
I think some of that has to do with actresses becoming mothers at that point, or stay at home mothers. I.E. once their kids are in their pre teens/teens, they probably want to spend a lot more time with them as thats a very important time for them to have their parents around.
Doesn't seem to impact actors, though. I don't think that this is a legit reason at all. I think the real reason is women of a certain age have trouble finding scripts that feature them in any meaningful way.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
Doesn't seem to impact actors, though. I don't think that this is a legit reason at all. I think the real reason is women of a certain age have trouble finding scripts that feature them in any meaningful way.

It certainly impacted Rick Moranis, who retired from acting to raise his kids after his wife died. Actors are human like the rest of us, so I think that it's a factor that belongs in the conversation. I agree that there being fewer roles for women as they age is also a factor, likely the largest one, but I think that the two factors work together. At about the same time as the roles start to dry up, a lot of women start feeling like it's time to start families and spend time raising them, anyways.
 

Eisen

Registered User
Sep 30, 2009
16,737
3,101
Duesseldorf
It certainly impacted Rick Moranis, who retired from acting to raise his kids after his wife died. Actors are human like the rest of us, so I think that it's a factor that belongs in the conversation. I agree that there being fewer roles for women as they age is also a factor, likely the largest one, but I think that the two factors work together. At about the same time as the roles start to dry up, a lot of women start feeling like it's time to start families and spend time raising them, anyways.
Same reason, different symptom. It's a complicated issue on many levels because this completely overlaps with genderstereotypes.
 

johnjm22

Pseudo Intellectual
Aug 2, 2005
19,398
14,497
Stories, pictures, movies, TV shows, art etc. are often portraying characters that are idyllic. Attractiveness is part of that. We like seeing attractive people.

Look, I hate saying this, I feel bad saying it, and it sucks for women, but the truth is females —in terms of physical attractiveness— are only in their prime for a relatively short period of time. Mostly around their twenties. (There are exceptions of course).

Men and women are different. What makes them attractive is different. For men it's not as much based on looks. George Clooney and Brad Pitt can be considered "The Sexiest Man Alive" in their 40's and 50's. It's not the same for women
 
  • Like
Reactions: Osprey

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
Stories, pictures, movies, TV shows, art etc. are often portraying characters that are idyllic. Attractiveness is part of that. We like seeing attractive people.

Look, I hate saying this, I feel bad saying it, and it sucks for women, but the truth is females —in terms of physical attractiveness— are only in their prime for a relatively short period of time. Mostly around their twenties. (There are exceptions of course).

Men and women are different. What makes them attractive is different. For men it's not as much based on looks. George Clooney and Brad Pitt can be considered "The Sexiest Man Alive" in their 40's and 50's. It's not the same for women

I admire saying that in spite of the political incorrectness. It's easy to criticize studios and screenwriters, but they're only responding to what sells. If a story calls for a female character and there's no good reason for her to not be in her 20s, she'll be in her 20s (especially her late 20s, considered the peak of female attractiveness) simply because that's more appealing for moviegoers, especially considering that more people in their 20s and 30s go to the movies than other age groups.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,831
4,924
Vancouver
Visit site
I admire saying that in spite of the political incorrectness. It's easy to criticize studios and screenwriters, but they're only responding to what sells. If a story calls for a female character and there's no good reason for her to not be in her 20s, she'll be in her 20s (especially her late 20s, considered the peak of female attractiveness) simply because that's more appealing for moviegoers, especially considering that more people in their 20s and 30s go to the movies than other age groups.

I read an article of a study somewhere that ranked age of attractiveness by age/sex. I guess take a bunch of men and women of different ages, show them pictures of the opposite sex of different ages, and tally up how they rank them in terms of attractiveness. For women attractiveness in men mirrorred their own age, but for men of all ages top choices were the 18-21 zone.

It sucks for the industry and doesn't have to be this way but if a studio is casting cynically for the money that's pretty much the obvious rational behind it and it's hard to break these kinds of casting barriers.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
I read an article of a study somewhere that ranked age of attractiveness by age/sex. I guess take a bunch of men and women of different ages, show them pictures of the opposite sex of different ages, and tally up how they rank them in terms of attractiveness. For women attractiveness in men mirrorred their own age, but for men of all ages top choices were the 18-21 zone.

That's interesting. What I was referring to was another study that I read several years ago that determined that women reach their peak attractiveness at age 27 or 28. I seem to recall it being a rather scientific study, but who knows how scientific you can be with something so subjective. I have noticed, though, that the late 20s are a very highly represented age range for female starring and co-starring roles. Maybe it's also just because it's a very versatile age, since actresses that age can still pass for college students and as plausible love interests for male actors in their 40s, in addition to all of the more age-appropriate roles.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
Don't people (read: men) realize that the "well, that's just the way things are" attitude is a big part of the problem.

Don't people realize that some things can't realistically be changed? 100 years from now, women will still be considered most attractive in their 20s and early 30s and film, TV and other media will still overly represent that age range. What's the point of wagging the finger over it?
 

MikeyMike01

U.S.S. Wang
Jul 13, 2007
14,361
10,247
Hell
If actresses being unable to find work in their 40s is a major societal problem, society must be doing pretty well.
 

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
42,530
10,127
Toronto
Don't people realize that some things can't realistically be changed? 100 years from now, women will still be considered most attractive in their 20s and early 30s and film, TV and other media will still overly represent that age range. What's the point of wagging the finger over it?
You are ignoring the immense change in the portrayal of women that has already occurred even in popcorn flicks. Ten, fifteen years ago women were never credible action heroes. Now pop cult movies are filled with kick-ass women and girls in action roles. Movies reflect what is going on in their society--how could they not? The "me, too" movement means more women will be directing and producing movies, writing scripts and controlling narratives. Male directors are adjusting, too, look at the portrayal of strong female characters in Black Panther directed by Ryan Coogler. Pretty girls are always going to be pretty girls, but hopefully they will be portrayed less and less as helpless, male-dependent bimbos. The times are changing in Hollywood, and, really, change is the only constant there is.
 

Pranzo Oltranzista

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
3,826
2,669
If actresses being unable to find work in their 40s is a major societal problem, society must be doing pretty well.
tenor.gif
 

LeafalCrusader

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
9,644
10,939
Winnipeg
You are ignoring the immense change in the portrayal of women that has already occurred even in popcorn flicks. Ten, fifteen years ago women were never credible action heroes. Now pop cult movies are filled with kick-ass women and girls in action roles. Movies reflect what is going on in their society--how could they not? The "me, too" movement means more women will be directing and producing movies, writing scripts and controlling narratives. Male directors are adjusting, too, look at the portrayal of strong female characters in Black Panther directed by Ryan Coogler. Pretty girls are always going to be pretty girls, but hopefully they will be portrayed less and less as helpless, male-dependent bimbos. The times are changing in Hollywood, and, really, change is the only constant there is.

Ever watch T2 Kill Bill or Alien?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kihei

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
You are ignoring the immense change in the portrayal of women that has already occurred even in popcorn flicks. Ten, fifteen years ago women were never credible action heroes. Now pop cult movies are filled with kick-ass women and girls in action roles. Movies reflect what is going on in their society--how could they not? The "me, too" movement means more women will be directing and producing movies, writing scripts and controlling narratives. Male directors are adjusting, too, look at the portrayal of strong female characters in Black Panther directed by Ryan Coogler. Pretty girls are always going to be pretty girls, but hopefully they will be portrayed less and less as helpless, male-dependent bimbos. The times are changing in Hollywood, and, really, change is the only constant there is.

I'm not ignoring that. You seem to be ignoring that the stats in the OP are the situation right now, after the 15 years of the change that you spoke of. If anything, that change has skewed the numbers even more, since most of the new female-led movies, including action movies, account for the 80% of roles that go to 20-something women. The momentum that you mention is likely to mean that that will hold steady or get even more lopsided.

Speaking of which, I've noticed that no one seems to have a problem with that stat, only with the equally lopsided ratio in men's favor after 40. You even expressed concern that women after that age have trouble finding scripts that feature them in meaningful ways. What about men in their 20s who have just as hard of a time of it because most of the starring roles are now going to their female peers? There are never calls for equality when it's men who are under-represented. It seems to me that, if you see the lopsided employment of actors vs actresses over 40 as a problem in need of addressing, you should feel similarly about the progressively lopsided employment of 20-something actresses vs actors.
 
Last edited:

kihei

McEnroe: The older I get, the better I used to be.
Jun 14, 2006
42,530
10,127
Toronto
I'm not ignoring that. You seem to be ignoring that the stats in the OP are the situation right now, after the 15 years of the change that you spoke of. If anything, that change has skewed the numbers even more, since most of the new female-led movies, including action movies, account for the 80% of roles that go to 20-something women. The momentum that you mention is likely to mean that that will hold steady or get even more lopsided.

Speaking of which, I've noticed that no one seems to have a problem with that stat, only with the equally lopsided ratio in men's favor after 40. You even expressed concern that women after that age have trouble finding scripts that feature them in meaningful ways. What about men in their 20s who have just as hard of a time of it because most of the starring roles are now going to their female peers? There are never calls for equality when it's men who are under-represented. It seems to me that, if you see the lopsided employment of actors vs actresses over 40 as a problem in need of addressing, you should feel similarly about the progressively lopsided employment of 20-something actresses vs actors.
First off, unless we are talking teen rom- coms, most of those young actresses are likely playing second or third fiddle to an older, established actor.

As for sympathies for young actors in their 20s, it is more like they are serving an apprenticeship, as the older they get seemingly the more acting opportunities there are for them. That's the exact opposite with actresses.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->