S T U D I O R E S P ON S I B I L I T Y I N D E X
2 0 1 7S T UD I OR E S P ON S I B I L I T YI ND E X
Executive SummaryOf the 125 films released bymajor motion picture studios,only 23 (18.4%) containedLGBTQ characters.Nearly half (10 films, or 43%)of those 23 films includedless than one minute ofscreen time for their LGBTQcharacters.Of the 125 films released bymajor motion picture studios,only 9 passed the VitoRusso Test, which analyzeshow LGBTQ characters aresituated in a narrative.20% of LGBTQ characterswere people of color, adecrease of5%1film releasedby a majormotion picturestudio in 2016containedtransgendercharacters.
ContentsThe GLAAD Studio Responsibility Index (SRI) maps the quantity, quality anddiversity of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) peoplein films released by seven major motion picture studios during the 2016calendar year. GLAAD researched films released by 20th Century Fox,Lionsgate Entertainment, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures,Walt Disney Studios and Warner Brothers, as well as films released by foursubsidiaries of these major studios. The report is intended to serve as a roadmap toward increasing fair, accurate and inclusive LGBTQ film representations.04Letter fromSarah Kate Ellis050607MethodologyThe Vito Russo TestOverview of Findings081013Observations &Recommendations20th Century FoxLionsgate Entertainment161922Paramount PicturesSony PicturesUniversal Pictures252730Walt Disney StudiosWarner BrothersFive Year Trends313334Additional FilmDistributorsConclusionGLAAD’s EntertainmentMedia TeamFox SearchlightSony Pictures Classics3Roadside AttractionsFocus Features
Letter from Sarah Kate EllisMoonlight, fromthe independentstudio A24,made historythis year as the first film ledby a lesbian, gay, bisexual,transgender, or queer (LGBTQ)character to win the Oscar for BestPicture. Meanwhile, nearly half ofthe inclusive films released by theseven major studios included lessthan one minute of screen time fortheir LGBTQ characters. GLAADstarted the Studio ResponsibilityIndex five years ago to map thequantity, quality, and diversity ofLGBTQ characters in films releasedby the seven major studios. Westill struggle to see meaningfulimprovement in Hollywood’sdepiction of LGBTQ charactersand stories.Major releases continue to lagbehind the groundbreakingstories we see in independentfilms (like Moonlight) and evenfurther behind the LGBTQ storieson TV and streaming series likeSense8 and Steven Universe.Millenials aged 18 to 34 are morethan twice as likely to identify asLGBTQ as older generations.* Iffilm wants to remain relevant andretain an audience that has moreoptions for entertainment than everbefore, the industry must catch upin reflecting the full diversity of thiscountry.This year, GLAAD introduced anew five-point scale for gradingthe studios. Our previous reportingmade it clear that what was oncetermed “Adequate” is not at all. Thisexpanded gauge will allow GLAADto more accurately report on thestate of LGBTQ representation inmainstream film. The new gradingsystem will also hold Hollywoodstudios to a higher standardreflective of the LGBTQ inclusion thatis thriving in other forms of media.Looking back at five years of theStudio Responsibility Index (SRI),there remains very little consistencyin representation of LGBTQcharacters. This inconsistency isseen in the year-to-year data asstudios drop several grades, aswell as within the studios’ yearlylineup in which a single studio willrelease both standout inclusivefilms alongside more problematicportrayals. We continue to seemany of the same problemsrepeatedly. This includes LGBTQcharacters who lack substanceand are often treated only as apunchline, a dangerous messagewhich keeps old prejudices aliveboth here in the U.S. and aroundthe world where these films aredistributed. Hollywood must dobetter to question what they arereally communicating to audiences.In 2017, we have seen signs ofprogress in LGBTQ representationin mainstream films. Disney’slive action Beauty and the Beastestablished LeFou as a canonicallygay character. His happy endingmay have been a small moment,but it was a huge step forward forthe industry. Disney’s decision toupdate the character for a morecontemporary audience — whosee LGBTQ people and familiesevery day — paid off at thebox office with the film breakingrecords as the biggest Marchopening of all time. Lionsgate’sPower Rangers introduced astoryline that saw the YellowRanger, Trini, questioning herorientation; a story reflective ofmany other teenagers. While* Accelerating Acceptance 2017, HarrisPoll/GLAAD4these are positive steps, as thereport has shown, there is stillan inconsistency as other recentreleases have made headlines forincluding humor rooted in gaypanic like CHiPS.Therefore beginning this summer,GLAAD will be upping the stakesby holding Hollywood accountablefor the stories they are puttingon the silver screen in real timeas box office dollars are on theline. We will be reporting on filmsas they release, and ultimately,compiling that information fora revamped SRI to be issued in2018. There are plenty of uniqueand new LGBTQ stories to tell,and Hollywood must embracethat to remain competitive withother media industries. With thisnew method of reporting andfuture iterations of the SRI, GLAADwill continue to hold Hollywoodaccountable for who they are – orare not - representing.Sarah Kate EllisPresident & CEO, GLAAD
MethodologyMethodologyFor this report, GLAAD focused itsanalysis on the seven film studiosthat had the highest theatricalgrosses from films released in2016, as reported by the boxoffice database Box Office Mojo.Those seven are:Each film was researched andreviewed for inclusion of LGBTQcharacters. The total number ofLGBTQ characters was recordedfor each film, as well as eachcharacter’s race/ethnicity, sexualorientation, and gender identity. The films were also reviewed forthe presence of general LGBTQcontent and anti-LGBTQ languageor “humor,” though because suchcontent must be considered incontext, the language was notquantified for this report.20th Century FoxLionsgate EntertainmentParamount PicturesSony PicturesUniversal PicturesThe Walt Disney StudiosWarner BrothersThis report examines films thatwere released theatrically duringthe 2016 calendar year (January1 to December 31) under theofficial studio banners andimprints. Films released by thesestudio’s “art house” divisions (suchas Fox Searchlight) were analyzedseparately and not part of theparent studio’s final tally or grade.The total number of films releasedby major studios that fell within theresearch parameters is 125.GLAAD separately analyzedthe films released under foursmaller studio imprints that aresometimes referred to as “arthouse” divisions. This was done tocompare the quantity and qualityof LGBTQ representations in thesestudios’ releases directly to parentcompanies. These specialty films aretypically distributed and marketed toa much smaller audience than theirmajor studio counterparts. Thesedistinctions were informed in partby the box office reporting of BoxOffice Mojo and other entertainmentindustry databases. The totalnumber of films that fell within theresearch parameters is 41. Thesedivisions include: Focus Features(Universal Pictures)Fox Searchlight(20th Century Fox)Roadside Attractions(Lionsgate Entertainment)Sony Pictures Classics(Sony Pictures)Additionally, each film wasassigned to one of five genrecategories: comedy, drama,family, fantasy/science fiction,and documentary. The familycategory included animated andchildren’s films rated PG andunder. The category of fantasy/science fiction also included horrorfilms and action films not rootedin reality rated PG-13 and above.In the case of films that clearlystraddled genre lines, categorieswere assigned based on thepredominant genre suggested byboth the film and its marketingcampaigns.Based on the overall quantity,quality, and diversity of LGBTQrepresentation, a grade was thenassigned to each studio: Excellent,Good, Insufficient, Poor, or Failing.We must also recognize thatsome of the films counted hereas LGBTQ-inclusive will notnecessarily be seen as such byeveryone. Every year GLAADfinds characters that must besubjectively interpreted to beseen as LGBTQ, require externalconfirmation of the filmmakers’intentions, or rely on pre-existingknowledge of source material or apublic figure on whom a characteris based.Note: Prior to the 2017 report,GLAAD assigned studios scoreson a four point scale of Excellent,Good, Adequate, or Failing.5
The Vito Russo TestThe Vito Russo TestTaking inspiration from the “Bechdel Test,” which examines the way femalecharacters are portrayed and situated within a narrative, GLAAD developedits own set of criteria to analyze how LGBTQ characters are included withina film. The Vito Russo Test takes its name from celebrated film historian andGLAAD co-founder Vito Russo, whose book The Celluloid Closet remains afoundational analysis of LGBTQ portrayals in Hollywood film. These criteriacan help guide filmmakers to create more multidimensional characterswhile also providing a barometer for representation on a wide scale. Thistest represents a minimum standard GLAAD expects a greater number ofmainstream Hollywood films to reach in the future.To pass the Vito Russo Test, the following must be true:01.The film contains a character that is identifiablylesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender.02.That character must not be solely or predominantlydefined by their sexual orientation or gender identity(i.e. they are comprised of the same sort of uniquecharacter traits commonly used to differentiate straight/non-transgender characters from one another).03.The LGBTQ character must be tied into the plot in sucha way that their removal would have a significanteffect, meaning they are not there to simply providecolorful commentary, paint urban authenticity, or(perhaps most commonly) set up a punchline. Thecharacter must matter.Only nine of the 23 (39%) LGBTQ-inclusive major studio films passed theVito Russo Test this year. This is a slight increase from the previous reportin which eight of 22 (36%) inclusive films released in 2015 passed; thelowest percentage in the study’s history. This is compared to 11 of 20(55%) inclusive films released in 2014, seven of 17 (41%) in 2013, andsix out of 14 (43%) inclusive films released in 2012. There is clearly muchroom for industry improvement. More films need to include substantialLGBTQ characters that pass this simple test. However, as several of thefilms tracked prove, passing this test in no way guarantees that a film isnot problematic or offensive in its portrayal of LGBTQ people.6
Overview of FindingsOverview of FindingsGeneral FindingsOf the 125 film releases GLAAD counted from the major studios in 2016,23 (18.4%) contained characters identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual,transgender, or queer. This is an increase of nearly one percentage point fromthe 17.5% of films (22 of 126) found to be inclusive in 2015.Sexual Orientation& Gender Identity ofLGBTQ CharactersGay men continue to be the most represented by a significant margin with83% of the inclusive films featuring gay male characters. This is an increaseof six percentage points from the previous report (77%). Representation oflesbian characters is up with 35% of inclusive films including lesbians, asignificant increase of 12 percentage points from the year before. There wasalso an increase in bisexual representation: 13% of major studios’ inclusivefilms counted bi characters compared to 9% in last year’s report. GLAADcounted one transgender-inclusive film (Paramount’s Zoolander 2), similar tothe previous report.GLAAD tallied 70 LGBTQ characters among all mainstream releases in2016, up from 47 in 2015. It is important to note that 14 of these characterswere part of a single musical number in Universal Pictures’ PopStar: NeverStop Never Stopping, which misleadingly inflated the numbers. Malecharacters again vastly outnumbered females by two to one (47 to 22),compared to 36 men and 11 women in 2015’s major studio releases. Onecharacter (All, Paramount’s Zoolander 2) was counted as non-binary.Race & Ethnicity ofLGBTQ CharactersThe racial diversity of LGBTQ characters again decreased in films trackedin 2016 after another dramatic drop the year before. In 2016, only 20%were people of color, compared to 25.5% the year before and 32.1% infilms released in 2014. Of the 70 LGBTQ characters counted, 48 were white(69%), nine were Black/African American (13%), one was Latinx (1%), andfour were Asian/Pacific Islander (6%). Eight characters (11%) were non-human(Disney’s Zootopia, Sony’s The Angry Birds Movie and Sausage Party).Representation byGenre & StudioAs has been the case each year since GLAAD began this report, comediesremain the most likely major studio films to be LGBTQ-inclusive. Of the125 films tracked, GLAAD identified 39 films as comedies, of which12 (31%) were inclusive. By comparison, GLAAD counted 44 filmsas genre films (action, sci-fi, fantasy/horror), of which six (14%) filmswere inclusive. Additionally, two of 27 dramas (7%), and three of 15animated/family films (20%) included LGBTQ characters. GLAAD did notcount any documentaries from the major studios in 2016.Paramount and Universal Pictures tied as the most inclusive major studiostracked in this year’s report. Five of Paramount’s 15 films (33%) were LGBTQinclusive, and Universal’s five of 17 total films equates to 29%. WarnerBrothers is next with four of 19 films (21%), followed by 20th Century Fox atthree of 16 films (19%), and Lionsgate with three of 24 films (13%). Two ofSony’s 21 films were inclusive (10%), and Disney rounds out the group withone of 13 (8%). In last year’s reporting, both Paramount and Disney werefound to completely exclude LGBTQ characters from their slates.GLAAD also examined the film releases of four smaller, affiliated studios(Focus Features, Fox Searchlight, Roadside Attractions, and Sony PicturesClassics) to draw a comparison between content released by the mainstreamstudios and perceived “art house” divisions. Of the 41 films released underthose studio imprints in 2016, we found seven to be LGBTQ-inclusive (17%).This is down from the 22% (10 of 46) of films from the same divisions that wefound to be inclusive in 2015, but still up from the first year of counting thesestudios when we counted only 10.6% (five of 47).7
Observations & RecommendationsObservations &RecommendationsMainstreamfilm continuesto lag farbehind TV andother forms ofmedia when itcomes to LGBTQrepresentation.This year, GLAAD has introduced a new grading system that holds thestudios to a higher standard to reflect the quality and quantity of LGBTQrepresentation we are seeing in other forms of entertainment media. Onthe new five-grade scale, three studios received “Poor” ratings for their2016 slates [20th Century Fox, Paramount, Warner Brothers] and threeothers received “Failing” ratings [Lionsgate, Sony Pictures, Walt DisneyStudios]. Universal Pictures is the only studio to be rated “Insufficient.”No studios were rated “Good” this year, and none have ever received an“Excellent” rating.Studios mustdo better to notonly includemore LGBTQcharacters, butto constructLGBTQ rolesthat are directlytied to the plot.The overwhelming majority of LGBTQ characters in mainstream films arestill minor, in both screen time and substance. This has been a consistentproblem over the five years that GLAAD has tracked LGBTQ characters inHollywood releases. Of the 23 mainstream films that GLAAD found to beLGBTQ-inclusive, 10 (43%) included less than one minute of screen timefor their LGBTQ characters. While some of these were positive moments ofinclusion like Sony Pictures’ Storks and Disney’s Zootopia, many of thesecharacters only existed to be punchlines or establish urban authenticity.Many audiences likely missed several of these characters altogether. Thisbrevity remains standard for LGBTQ inclusion.Creators needto learn thatappealing toone audiencedoes nothave to meaninsulting otheraudiences.Comedy films (the genre most likely to include LGBTQ characters)continued to include out-and-out defamatory portrayals of LGBTQ people.The jokes around these characters relied on gay panic and defamatorystereotypes for cheap laughs. Dirty Grandpa and Central Intelligencewere two of the most egregious offenders, and the non-inclusive films TheBrothers Grimsby and Ride Along 2 also included offensive humor basedin idea that two men touching each other is inherently strange. Comedycan be a powerful tool in challenging existing norms, but when craftedwithout thought, these jokes have the opposite effect by signaling that antiLGBTQ attitudes are acceptable.8
Observations & RecommendationsCreators needto reflect thefull diversity ofour community,and tell thosestories throughthe eyes ofmore than onecharacter thatallows for newand uniquestories thataudiences havenot yet seen.The racial diversity of LGBTQ characters remains a problem in all forms ofmedia, but mainstream film is particularly dismal after a five-percentagepoint drop in LGBTQ characters of color. This is the second straight yearwith a significant decrease of LGBTQ characters of color; our previousreport found a near seven-percentage point drop in 2015 films from theyear before. Many of these characters were isolated tokens burdened withrepresenting multiple communities through the views of one person – oftenlimited to less than five minutes of screen time. Successful and criticallyacclaimed films that include central LGBTQ characters of color likeMoonlight, Star Trek Beyond, Pariah, and Lilting should send a messagethat there is an audience and a hunger for these stories.Filmmakersshould questionwhat theyare reallycommunicatingto audienceswhen they usethoughtless“humor”targetingan alreadymarginalizedcommunity.Hollywood film most notably falls behind other forms of media in itsportrayal – or lack thereof – of transgender characters. For the secondyear, GLAAD found one trans-inclusive mainstream film and, again, thecharacter existed solely as a punchline. Paramount’s Zoolander 2 includedBenedict Cumberbatch as All, a cartoonish portrayal of someone who isnon-binary, who only exists to mock people who don’t perform traditionalgender roles as strange and “other.” Several other mainstream films,which did not have transgender characters, nevertheless included socalled humor rooted in trans panic. There was one film from the smallersubsidiary studios, Fox Searchlight’s Absolutely Fabulous: The Movie,which included transgender characters. Again, the character’s identitieswere treated as punchlines and one was a last minute reveal.9
20th Century Fox2016GR AT I NPOOR20th Century FoxRYAN REYNOLDS AS WADE WILSON/DEADPOOL, DEADPOOLRecognized amongHollywood’spowerhousestudios, the Fox FilmCorporation wasfounded by producerWilliam Fox in 1915,subsequently mergingwith Twentieth CenturyPictures (founded in1933) in 1935 to form20th Century Fox.Media magnate RupertMurdoch bought thestudio in the mid-1980s,making it a subsidiaryof News Corporation.20th Century Fox isnow part of parentcompany 21st CenturyFox. Among Fox’s mostfamous films are earlyblockbuster franchiseslike Star Wars, Alien,and Die Hard.Aside from WaltDisney Studios, 20thCentury Fox has oneof the slightest trackrecords when it comesto LGBTQ-inclusivefilms, but it includesa few standouts inits repertoire. MyraBreckinridge (1970)and The Rocky HorrorPicture Show (1975)contain some of theearliest significanttransgender characters,though both depictionsare arguably moresensationalized thantrue-to-life. In 1982,the studio releasedthe drama MakingLove, which was oneof the first realisticallydepicted gay lovestories ever made by amajor film studio. Otherinclusive films releasedover the years includeSilkwood (1983), TheObject of My Affection(1998), The FamilyStone (2005), and Howto Train Your Dragon 2(2014).In 2016, 20th Century Fox released 16 f
family, fantasy/science fiction, and documentary. The family category included animated and children’s films rated PG and under. The category of fantasy/ science fiction also included horror films and action films not rooted in reality
Texts of Wow Rosh Hashana II 5780 - Congregation Shearith Israel, Atlanta Georgia Wow ׳ג ׳א:׳א תישארב (א) ׃ץרֶָֽאָּהָּ תאֵֵ֥וְּ םִימִַׁ֖שַָּה תאֵֵ֥ םיקִִ֑לֹאֱ ארָָּ֣ Îָּ תישִִׁ֖ארֵ Îְּ(ב) חַורְָּ֣ו ם
Independent Personal Pronouns Personal Pronouns in Hebrew Person, Gender, Number Singular Person, Gender, Number Plural 3ms (he, it) א ִוה 3mp (they) Sֵה ,הַָּ֫ ֵה 3fs (she, it) א O ה 3fp (they) Uֵה , הַָּ֫ ֵה 2ms (you) הָּ תַא2mp (you all) Sֶּ תַא 2fs (you) ְ תַא 2fp (you
reading comprehension. DIRECTIONS. this practice test contains one reading selection with two multiple-choice questions and one open-response question. Mark your answers to these questions in the spaces provided on page 5 of your practice test answer document. 1. The porcupine is a controversial, yet important, forest creature. Our more prickly encounters with “quill pigs” may be remedied .
Artificial Intelligence in Supply Chains Martin Zapke, 3806 A Field Lab carried out on the Master in Management Program, under the supervision of: Professor José Crespo de Carvalho 4th January 2019 . ii Disclaimer With this disclaimer, Martin Zapke, ensures that the following work project to obtain the Master of Science degree in Management is conducted by himself. The mentioned references .
1 This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee C-16 on Thermal Insulation and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee C16.30 on Thermal Measurements. Current edition approved Jan. 27, 1989. Published May 1989. Originally published as C 680 – 71. Last previous edition C 680 – 82e1. 2 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 04.06. 3 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 14.02. 4 .
Black holes: A physical route to the Kerr metric R. Meinel University of Jena, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Max-Wien-Platz 1, 07743 Jena, Germany meinel@tpi.uni-jena.de Abstract As a consequence of Birkho ’s theorem, the exterior gravitational eld of a spher-ically symmetric star or black hole is always given by the Schwarzschild metric. In contrast, the exterior gravitational eld of a .
This report presents the results of the Global Survey on Consumer Protection and Financial Literacy. The survey was made pos-sible by the generous contribution of time and expertise by central bank and financial regulatory authority officials in the 114 economies who responded to this year’s survey. The survey is a product of the World Bank Financial Inclusion & Infrastructure Global .
Children only have one childhood, so this strategy commits us to realise our vision for all children and young people and, as corporate parents, to achieve the best possible outcomes for all of our Children in Care and Care Leavers in Wakefield. In developing this strategy, we acknowledge that a child or young person in care is more likely to be vulnerable and face increased challenges .
