1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Jane Dough
  8. The Braiser

It's A World of Laughter A World of Tears

Community Forced to “Quota Hire” Now Happily Maintains An Gender Equal Writing Staff

by Jamie Frevele | 4:23 pm, June 8th

Share on Tumblr

Before starting on this, a caveat: Personally, Community is by far one of my favorite shows on TV right now. In fact, it might even be my absolute favorite. That said, it pains me to say that while he has some great things to say about gender equality on his writing staff, my favorite show’s showrunner, Dan Harmon, had a rather patronizing quote in a recent interview with A.V. Club about female comedy writers. Everything else was actually pretty great, including how he’s going to stick with an equally representative writer’s room, but why — oh why — is it always such a revelation when men realize women have a different perspective on things?

In an old interview on the Nerdist podcast, Stan Lee said that Marvel‘s acquisition by Disney was a good thing for Marvel because Disney didn’t interfere with them creatively. And I believe that Dan Harmon was feeling that being told who to hire was interference. The order came from the former head of NBC programming Angela Bromstad before she left: “Get more women on your staff. Make it half women.” Harmon says:

I remember going, “Are you f*cking kidding me?” to myself. “Okay, I got a sitcom, and this is as far as you go,” because I’ve just been told that half of my staff needs to be a quota hire.

That sounds awful, but considering Harmon runs a show with three excellent female characters who get just as much screen time as their male castmates, this reaction could not have been because Harmon didn’t think women were funny. This sounds like a matter of not having control over your own show. What Harmon soon discovered was that the difficulty in finding female writers to hire wasn’t in the quality, it was in the quantity:

They’re harder to find. It’s definitely not because women ain’t funny, because I’m finding the opposite. It’s because there’s fewer of them. The statistical probability of picking up a sh*tty script, it’s compounded for women. There’s the same percentage of genius happening in both genders, but there’s less women writing scripts and out there looking for the job. So you dig a little extra-hard, and you end up with a staff that took a few extra meetings and a few extra sh*tty scripts to read.

And that’s true — women stepping up to the plate in comedy is not as prevalent as it is with men for a variety of reasons that can only be assumed. But Harmon makes excellent points about how he quickly learned that having a writing staff that had an equal number of men and women just plain makes sense (emphasis ours):

Now you have a staff that is just as good as the staff you would have had, but happens to be half women. And it seems like the greatest thing in the world, because the world is half women …

I don’t have enough control groups to compare it to, but there’s just something nice about feeling like your writers’ room represents your ensemble a little more accurately, represents the way the world turns.

Yes. Thank you, Dan Harmon. Thank you for pointing out the obvious. And while it’s clear that your male writers can write your female characters just fine (because Community‘s writers are actually good), it just makes sense to have their voices written by women sometimes. And obviously, as was illustrated in his reverential discussion of writer Megan Ganz, women can just as effectively write for male characters. But then, after briefly discussing writing for different races (which is a whole other post), he veers into the slightly patronizing.

… [B]lack women have ovaries and white women have ovaries; black men have testicles and white men have testicles, so actually, race is far more an artificial construct than gender. There’s a literal, actual difference between men and women, and it’s in their blood, and it’s in their brains, and it’s in their fingertips, and it’s in our conversations. I think women are different, and I think having them in the room is crucial to a family comedy, ensemble comedy, television comedy, where half the eyeballs on your show are women.

Unless this is just guyspeak. I feel like it’s possible that Harmon is intending this kind of thing for more closed-minded men rather than the women (and men) who know this all already (and have some concerns about the assumption that men and women are fundamentally different, with biology determining all personality). To his credit, Harmon says he has plans to maintain the 50/50 quota:

… even though Bromstad’s gone, now I’m carrying this legacy, going, “Eh, guys, we really need a half-female writing staff.” I would teach it. I think we have to stop thinking of it as a quota thing and think of it as a common-sense thing.

But again — why is this such a revelation?

(A.V. Club via Splitsider)

TAGS: | | | |


  • Anonymous

    “but why — oh why — is it always such a revelation when men realize women have a different perspective on things?” 

    Why? because it used to be common to say men and women see things differently. Then an entire generation of men was berated and beaten any time they tried to say men and women were different in any way. It was was made taboo. In an effort for equality, men were taught that differentiating between men and women would take them very close to saying things like “Men are better at X, and women are better at Y.” So to avoid accidentally drifting into that realm, we stopped differentiating between men and women approaching things differently. 

    MAN: “Yes, women would approach this project in a very different way.”

    WOMAN: “WTF?! What, because I have a vagina you think I am going to cover everything in flowers and cry?! IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?!?!”

    Is that always the case? No, but we have learned that it can happen. The whole thing has become so gender sanitized out of fear of offence. THAT is why. We have forgotten that it is ok to have gender differences (or at least people stating them publicly) that we are shocked when it become apparent and someone mentions it publicly.

  • http://www.thechildhealthsite.com/clickToGive/home.faces?siteId=1 Edcedc8

    “but why — oh why — is it always such a revelation when men realize women have a different perspective on things?”
    it isn’t; male and female comedians have been pointing this out for decades.

  • Anonymous

    Well, you certainly have provided evidence that the genders have different perspectives.  Because, you know, a woman probably wouldn’t have gone on a patronizing rant about how it’s all feminism’s fault.

    Vive la difference.

  • Anonymous

    Perspective has to do with lived experience, not anatomical differences.

  • Anonymous

    Thus proving the point.

  • Anonymous

    Dude, if you knew I could prove your point by showing you up old school, why didn’t you just ask?  It would have saved a lot of comment space.

  • Anonymous

    If you say so, my point is proven. If you ever state that there are differences in the male and female perspective, no matter how valid both may be, someone will always come along and call you out getting upset about it. So, men have learned not to do it at all, simply because no matter how innocent 1 person will always get pissed and say you are putting down their gender. The question was posed “why is it such a revelation?” It isn’t, we simply don’t say it, because god forbid you point out the obvious differences (that are in no way derogatory, and in fact often welcomed as in the source of this article) someone will always get angry and call you out for having “wronged” their entire gender.

  • Anonymous

    If I got angry every time some guy went on a patronizing rant about how stifled he is by feminism, I’d spend my life in a permanent state of berserker range.  So, no, I’m not angry.

    I just find you and your kooky, overwrought, whiny-ass attitude to be absolutely hilarious.

  • Anonymous

    So I never even complained, but I am whiny. I never blamed feminists, but apparently I feel stifled by them. You are looking for a fight and an enemy where none exists. You know nothing about me. If you did, you would know I think feminism is a good thing and am totally supportive of it. I am all about equality in the sexes while admitting they have differences. My stating that men in general are made nervous about making such statements publicly was neither an indictment of feminism nor a complaint whining about how it has done any damage to anyone. I never stated any such thing in any way. You read those things into a comment where they did not exist, and that is exactly my point.

    I have spoken to many men over the past 24 hours and posed this very question. The response was universal. That they feel men and women can have different perspectives, neither being better than the other but they do not state it due to the fact that we have all encountered this, and simply by pointing this out we are often accused of somehow implying women are “inferior”, when what we said was “different”. Most people will take it how it is intended, but it seems we always encounter that small minority that reads gender bias into it simply because it came out of a man’s mouth, we are labled as woman haters and misogynists because of things we never said but were read into our statements. To avoid this, it is simply easier not to say it at all. If you say that small minority of knee jerk reactionaries that has led to this is made up of feminists, that is your comment. Not mine. I neither stated nor implied it. I spoke down to nobody, I only explained a rather unfortunate truth that is a by product of a small number of people who have acted irrationally for whatever reason.

  • Anonymous

    God damn, man.  How much do you talk when you HAVEN’T been cowed into silence by the snarky might of a random chick on the internet?

    Listen, I’m tired of embarrassing you, so I’m gonna try to educate you in a long, boring comment, ‘kay?

    You say that political correctness makes men too nervous to speak their minds.  Well, you know what makes women nervous?  Men who are obsessed with pointing out gender differences (however much merit their points may have — it’s the obsession that’s the creepy part.)  Oh, and men who are brimming with complaints about what they’re “not allowed to say anymore”.  These are warning signs.  They almost always indicate either unfounded assumptions about what is and isn’t off limits in modern conversation, or dog-whistle politics.  You seem like a nice albeit deeply insecure man, so I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it’s the former.

    The great news is, I can help cure you!  And I can do it by inviting you to perform an easy experiment in two parts:

    Step 1. List five or six of the gender differences that you believe you’d be “berated and beaten down” for.  If you want, you can even relate them to us.  It’ll be fun, like a sleepover where we read each others journals.  Even if you don’t choose to make them public, the mere act of writing them down will help you see whether they are or aren’t really offensive.

    Step 2. Pick the most innocuous one and slip it into a conversation at work.  If you’re “berated and beaten down” for it, stop there while you still have a job.  But, if you’re not “berated and beaten down” for your comment, move on to the next most innocuous one.  Continue in this manner until you’ve gone through the entire list.

    By the end, you’ll either have proved to yourself that you’re not living in the repressive social environment that you imagine the post-women’s lib world to be, or you’ll have demonstrated that you’re not the feminist icon you think yourself.  Either way, you’ll learn something.

  • Anonymous

    “How much do you talk when you HAVEN’T been cowed into silence” So was I “cowed into silence” or do I talk to much? I’m not sure I am capable of both simultaneously. And why is it you basically end with “you will learn you are either wrong, or wrong.” On one hand you admit that men are given hell (even when what they said has merrit) but at the same time, you are arguing that it doesn’t happen.

    What you want is for me to be one of THESE guys: “Im not sexist, but I don’t think women should be allowed in combat. Physically they are just weaker and can’t do the same job. The problem is, you can’t say that because it isn’t politically correct and the feminists will attack you, even if it is true. It’s crazy, you can’t even open your mouth any more. And why don’t we have a white history month? Man, I love that Rush Limbaugh.” The problem is, I am not one of them. I think those guys are wrong. What the article did was question why it is such a big deal when a man publicly in the media states there is a difference in the sexes. My answer, from personal experience, talking to other men and common sense, is that to make that suggestion in the public arena is dangerous.

    Making that simple comment in your home is fine. Making it among friends in public is also not a big deal. Picking up a microphone and announcing it to a large population of people means you will reach a LOT of people. A mix that will include people who don’t care, people who agree and think it is an innocent comment, and unfortunately those who will flip out, accuse you of being a sexist and ignore any substance in your statement and only pay attention to the fact you pointed out a difference in the sexes and have a Y chromosome. The latter is the minority, but they are a very vocal one.

    I haven’t once mentioned feminists, or political correctness. I acted in no way obsessed with gender differences. Still, you keep assuming and accusing. I simply stated that the reason it isn’t a common statement for men to make is because of the potential backlash from those (in the minority) that will automatically label them sexist for pointing out gender differences (however much merit their points may have) and attack with insults and without caring if there is any truth or merit, only that it came from a guy. So toss insults, call me insecure for no apparent reason and continue to accuse me of things I never said, because it is pretty obvious you don’t actually care what I say, you just want to be rude and right. So, enjoy that.

  • Anonymous

    So this is still going on, I see.  And yet, after all these long-winded messages, you still haven’t given a single example of any of the perfectly innocuous gender differences that it’s SO FREAKING IMPORTANT you be allowed to state at will, without fear of judgement.

    So, give concrete examples of gender differences that you think you’d be “berated and beaten” for mentioning, or you’re just blowing smoke.

  • Vystrix Nexoth

    I think this is how many social changes have worked and will work. Things that were considered unthinkably PC in the past and bitterly fought against, are obvious today. Of *course* marriage is about love! Of *course* democracy is better than hereditary monarchy! Of *course* slavery is wrong!Gender balance on a comedy show’s writing staff doesn’t have quite the same grandeur to it as those things, but the pattern is the same.I’m glad that Dan Harmon came around to it; and so quickly! So many others would not have. But now, by this example, perhaps they will.

    (Apologies for being late to the thread yet adding a comment. And because apparently there’s no “reply” button for the depth-limited discussion above… and this being the thing that moved me to comment here…)
    @mrphy42: In response to one of the examples you gave, about women and combat fitness (and whether it’s PC to discuss it):
    If the issue is about combat fitness, then judge people by THAT, not by their sex. Some women are fit for combat. Some men are not. Maybe each is a minority among their sex, but so what?

    Compare to this: men are taller than women on average; that is fact. But if you were lining up a group of people from tallest to shortest, it would be foolish to have all men on one side and all women on the other. There will be some overlap. You should order them based on their height, not based on their sex.
    (Fun fact: women from the Netherlands are taller than men from Vietnam, on average. There’s more to height than just sex. Likewise, there’s more to combat fitness than just sex.)

    If you’re choosing people based on combat fitness, you shouldn’t reject women regardless of fitness, you should reject those unfit for combat regardless of sex. Then it won’t be sexist or politically incorrect, *and* will be more practical. (You won’t have turned down a good soldier just for being female.)