Structural and Institutional Oppression of Creatives

The creative industries—encompassing fields such as music, film, literature, visual arts and fashion—are often perceived as progressive and inclusive spaces. However, beneath the veneer of creativity and innovation lies a deeply entrenched system of structural and institutional oppression.

Equal Payment and sozio-economic Inequity

One of the most glaring forms of structural oppression within the creative industries is the pervasive issue of unequal payment. Despite significant contributions to the arts, many creatives, especially those from marginalized backgrounds, face substantial pay disparities. Research has consistently shown that women and people of color are paid less than their white male counterparts for the same work. 

For instance, a study by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) found that women in the arts earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. This wage gap is even more pronounced for women of color, with African American and Hispanic women earning significantly less. In Hollywood, a prominent example is the pay disparity between Michelle Williams and Mark Wahlberg. Ironically this issue came up for reshoots of the film “All the Money in the World.” Williams was paid less than $1,000, whilst Wahlberg received $1.5 million.

The economic inequity is further exacerbated by the precarious nature of employment in the creative industries. Many artists and creatives are freelancers or independent contractors, lacking the job security and benefits that come with full-time employment. This instability disproportionately affects marginalized groups, who may already face financial challenges and limited access to resources.

Gender Disparity and the lack of Representation

Gender disparity within the creative industries manifests in various forms, from unequal representation to biased hiring practices. Women, particularly those in leadership roles, are still chronically underrepresented. For example, a report by the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film found that women comprised only 21% of all directors, writers, producers, executive producers, editors, and cinematographers working on the top 250 domestic grossing films back in 2020.

This lack of representation extends beyond leadership roles to the content produced. Stories by and about women, especially those from diverse backgrounds, are often sidelined or subjected to stereotypes. Ava DuVernay, a renowned filmmaker, has spoken out about the challenges faced by women of color in Hollywood, stating

“Women of color are the least represented behind the camera. The diversity that you see is all around the margins, but when you get to the center, it gets very homogenous”. 

Ava DuVernay

Marginalized Communities and their Access to Opportunities

Creatives from marginalized communities—including people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds—face systemic barriers that hinder their participation and success in the creative industries. These barriers range from limited access to education and training to discriminatory hiring practices and cultural biases.

Educational institutions and training programs often lack diversity, both in terms of faculty and curriculum. This block of inclusion can alienate students from marginalized backgrounds. Furthermore, unpaid internships and low-paying entry-level positions create financial hurdles that disproportionately impact those who cannot afford to work without adequate compensation. For example, in the publishing industry, a 2020 survey by Lee & Low Books revealed that 76% of the publishing workforce is white, highlighting a significant lack of diversity.

In addition to economic barriers, cultural biases and discrimination further impede the progress of marginalized creatives. These individuals often encounter a symbolic tokenism. The term tokenism, describes a common practice where diverse people are included only to fulfill diversity quotas. However their work is not given the same respect or visibility as that of their white, male counterparts. The music industry, for instance, has been criticized for sidelining Black artists in genres such as country and rock, despite their substantial contributions to these genres.

Support through prominent voices of the arts

The actress Cate Blanchett has been a vocal advocate for gender equality in the film industry. She has often spoken out about the need for better representation of women both in front of and behind the camera. At the 2018 Cannes Film Festival, Blanchett, alongside 81 other women, led a historic protest on the red carpet to highlight the lack of female representation at the festival. This protest was a powerful statement against gender inequality in the film industry and called for more opportunities for female filmmakers. Her latest coup was funding a new program for marginalized FLINTA filmmakers, after being the only woman on set. 

“We have to be a lot more creative about how we employ, how we give opportunities to women, how we make sure that people of color, people who have different perspectives, different experiences are given a platform to tell their stories.”

Cate Blanchett, at the 2018 Cannes Film Festival

Blanchett’s further work as a producer has also been significant in supporting marginalized voices. Through her production company, Dirty Films, she has been involved in projects that bring diverse stories to the forefront. For example, the company produced the 2020 series “Stateless,” which tackles the complexities of the immigration and asylum-seeker experience in Australia. This series shines a light on the often-overlooked stories of refugees and asylum seekers, highlighting their struggles and the systemic issues they face.

Political Influence and Institutional Bias

Additionally politics play a significant role in shaping the structural and institutional framework of the creative industries. Government policies and funding decisions can either support or stifle the arts, often reflecting broader societal biases and priorities. For instance, funding for the arts is frequently cut in times of economic austerity. This method of cutting costs disproportionately affecting community arts programs and initiatives that serve marginalized populations.

Moreover, institutional bias within major creative organizations—such as publishing houses, film studios, and art galleries—perpetuates a status quo that privileges certain voices over others. Decision-makers in these institutions often come from homogeneous backgrounds. Those political standards are leading to a narrow understanding of what constitutes valuable or marketable art. This gatekeeping effectively marginalizes creatives who do not conform to the dominant cultural norms.

For example, the #OscarsSoWhite movement highlighted the lack of diversity in Academy Award nominations, prompting widespread criticism and calls for change within the film industry. Nowadays we discuss the possibility and significance of these double standards and acknowledge more creatives from a diverse background. But the voices from formerly privileged groups remain loud and complaining about this changes of narratives.

Dismantling the systemic barriers

The structural and institutional oppression within the creative industries is a complex and pervasive issue, that requires concerted efforts to address. Equal payment, gender parity, representation, and access to opportunities are critical areas that demand immediate attention. To foster a truly inclusive and equitable creative sector, it is essential to implement policies and practices that promote diversity. We need to challenge existing power structures, and provide support to marginalized creatives.

Creatives deserves to be paid equally and according to their work and creative input. Institutions such as the Kulturamt Biberach, may not be the best example for cultural work practice in a professional sense. The entire process has shown, that systematic oppression is nothing which results out of the blue. Institutional and structural oppression has been build over years and passed on between the managements of each era.

challenging the traditional narratives

It is certainly time to dismantle these double standard practices and set new examples within the cultural mission. The fact, that we haven’t been paid for our work, shows how less institutions care about work ethics and valuation of creativity.

Instead of cooperation, we have been treated with unprofessionalism, ignorance and even blackmailing. The lesson learned is, that in terms of institutional work practice, political influence and personal connections are still out ruling social standards and the minimum wage.

By recognizing and dismantling the systemic barriers that hinder the progress of many talented individuals, the creative industries can move closer to realizing their full potential as spaces of innovation, expression, and social change.

References

• 1. Shapiro, Rebecca. “Michelle Williams Made a Fraction of Mark Wahlberg’s Salary for All the Money in the World Reshoot.” HuffPost, January 9, 2018.
• 2. Guerrasio, Jason. “Mark Wahlberg reportedly made $1.5 million for ‘All the Money in the World’ reshoots while Michelle Williams got less than $1,000.” Business Insider, January 9, 2018.
• 3. Lauzen, Martha M. “The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 250 Films of 2020.” Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film, San Diego State University.
• 4. Utichi, Joe. “Ava DuVernay On Inclusive Storytelling: ‘We’re Not Just Victims Of History, We’re Architects Of The Future’.” Deadline, August 6, 2020.
• 5. “Diversity Baseline Survey 2019.” Lee & Low Books.
• 6. Lang, Brent. “#OscarsSoWhite Explained: How the Academy Addressed Years of Diversity Criticisms.” Variety, February 7, 2020.