I want to point quickly (and probably futilely, heading into a long holiday weekend) to my latest post at the Time Out blog. Amid the hubbub over Emily Glassberg Sands's report last week on bias against female playwrights, and especially given the sensationalized reporting on her finding that women in power as artistic directors and literary managers were more biased against women playwrights than male leaders were, I wanted some feedback. I asked about a dozen of Chicago's female ADs and LMs (and one key dude) for their reactions to the study. To my delight, nine of them replied.
As for my own opinion, I haven't had time to check out the full 170-page doc yet, but based on the published reporting I think I find some of Sands's methodology suspect—Isaac has noted the discussion raging on one of the theater-related listservs, which I've been following as well. I'd also note that doolee.com, while sometimes useful, is far from what I'd consider a reliable primary source; neither Emily Schwartz nor Tanya Saracho is represented, which strike me as fatal omissions if you're interested in who's getting buzz and commissions and productions in Chicago. But even a potentially flawed study keeps the conversation going; as others have said: This isn't a final judgment, it's a starting point.
people are bias, because they always look in outside personality.
Posted by: online jobs at home | December 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM