Throughout this report, I’ve compared the Still Not Even data to the data from Not Even. In many aspects, the numbers in Still Not Even are closer to parity than the Not Even numbers.  It gives me hope to see these changes, but there is still work to be done.

We have not reached 50% for any group other than the non-union women actors, who in many cases are working on the same productions as union men actors, and not receiving equal pay for equal work. There is growth in the numbers of women playwrights, directors and actors, growth in numbers of plays with majority female casts, and an upward trend over time for female playwrights.  We are making progress, but it is slow, and our gains feel fragile, especially in our current political climate, where women’s rights and women’s credibility seem to be under serious attack.

I am fearful about how others will distill this report, especially those people who do not have the time or energy or interest for a deep dive into the data. Will they see a headline, or a single graphic image and think that gender parity is solved or fixed? Will that allow those busy people, who may also hold decision making power in a Bay Area theater company, to feel that they don’t have to think about parity anymore and that they can relax and go about their decision making business the way they always have?

There is a real danger of back-sliding if we don’t continue to keep gender parity at the forefront of our decision making.  Gender stereotype and patriarchal thinking are so pervasive in every aspect of our culture. Even those of us who are regularly thinking about gender parity are not immune to these influences.

During the writing of this report, I visited the Exploratorium (the Bay Area’s hands-on science museum) with my partner.  Within an exhibit about identity, we found a set of playing cards for an implicit bias test about gender and career. The task/experiment was to see how quickly the player could sort the cards into two piles: 1) women’s names and ‘business’ words and 2) men’s names and ‘home’ words.

As I flipped through the cards, I felt triumphant at my speed, sorting cards reading Jeff and George into the same pile as the card that said baby, and cards reading Pam and Susan into the pile with the resume and computer cards.  “I’m such an awesome feminist, I’m crushing this!” was ringing through my brain, when I looked down to see the kitchen card in the Pam/Susan pile. In my moment of pride, my bias seized its opportunity and took charge.

So back to those busy decision makers – in their moment of celebration or relaxation or pride about the upward trajectory of gender parity in the region, what will they overlook because of their unconscious biases? A marketing campaign that plays on sexualizing women of color? A casting decision that shuts union women out from a job that includes health care benefits? Hiring women directors for the shows on the second stage or the youth stage but not the main stage?  Programming trans playwrights for readings or in a one-act night but not for full productions?

All of these are actions that include women and non-binary people, but keep them from thriving with true parity and equality of resources.  And there are many structures and systems that keep us from parity, from the competitive nature of the audition and casting process to unpaid apprenticeships to schedules that don’t mesh with the realities of parenting young children.

Scrubbing the remaining bias and blind spots from our organizations will actually take more energy, not less.  It’s as if we’ve swept our floors and picked up the obvious clutter, but now we need to get into the corners, under the furniture, and finally put away all of the stuff that has accumulated in the junk drawer. Bias and blind spots are sneaky and hard to see, and I think even more so when you are feeling like you have done the work and done it well.

So for those at theater companies who feel like they are on top of gender parity in terms of how they fit in to the local theater community, stay vigilant! Continue to examine the systems and structures of your organization to search for additional ways to support and pay women theater makers.  For those who aren’t affiliated with an organization, I think that the conclusion from Not Even still holds a lot of value – we all make choices and our choices are where we hold power to advocate for gender parity.

And most importantly, let’s find ways to keep talking to each other about gender parity.  The Counting Actors monthly blog post was intended as a tool to start conversations, so let’s keep sharing with each other what we’re feeling, seeing and noticing about gender parity in the region.

Let’s keep talking – in the audition waiting area, on the theater related social media groups, at board meetings, opening night parties, strike, in classrooms, in the wings, on a 10-minute rehearsal break, the box office, the development office, the shop, the writer’s group meeting, the lobby, everywhere.

Let’s keep listening as well, and seeking to do so intersectionally, with folks of a variety of ages, genders, ethnicities as well as a variety of disciplines within theater-making, with folks from large organizations, small organizations and artists who work independently without organizational support.

I can’t wait to hear what we all have to say!

Valerie Weak, November 22, 2019