<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Deborah Shaw<\/em><\/strong>, University of Portsmouth, UK<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n As part of the <\/em>SLACextras takeover <\/em><\/a>of <\/em>Mediatico, we are delighted to continue with a manifesto* in which Deborah Shaw,<\/a> Professor of Film and Screen Studies at the University of Portsmouth, reflects on the growth of, and critical response to, women\u2019s filmmaking in Latin America. Professor Shaw is founding co-editor o<\/em>f Transnational Screens, author of<\/em>\u00a0Contemporary Latin American Cinema: Ten Key Films<\/a>, Continuum Publishers, (2003)<\/em>,\u00a0The Three Amigos: The Transnational Filmmaking of Guillermo del Toro, Alejandro Gonz\u00e1lez I\u00f1\u00e1rritu, and Alfonso Cuar\u00f3n<\/a>,\u00a0Manchester University Press (2013)<\/em> and co-editor of \u00a0The Transnational Fantasies of Guillermo del Toro<\/a>, Palgrave Macmillan, (2014)<\/em>,\u00a0Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics<\/a>, I.B.Tauris (2017), and<\/em>\u00a0Sense8: Transcending Television<\/a>\u00a0Bloomsbury Publishers (2021)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n *Published in Spanish as 2018 – \u2018C\u00f3mo estudiar el cine de mujeres iberoamericanas: un manifiesto\u2019 in Scholz, Annette and \u00c1lvarez, Marta, <\/em>Cineastas emergentes. Madrid\/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana\/Verwuert<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This post is a reflection on the field of women\u2019s filmmaking, occasioned by co-editing a book. Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics <\/em>published by I.B Tauris (Martin and Shaw, 2016),and an invitation to present a keynote talk for a Latin American women\u2019s filmmaking conference in London in 2017.[1]<\/a> Our edited book and the keynote talk are responding to two cultural moments in filmmaking in Latin American film and in academia: 1) the growth of women\u2019s filmmaking and 2) the critical response to this filmmaking in a growing and dynamic field. There are too many directors to name in this article, but those currently drawing critical attention in Latin America include Alicia Scherson, Paz Encina, Lucrecia Martel, Luc\u00eda Puenzo, Claudia Llosa, Anna Muylaert, Yulene Olaizola, Paz F\u00e1brega, Natalia Almada, Marialy Rivas, Marcela Zamora, Tatiana Huezo, Marcela Said, Julia Solomonoff, Dominga Sotomayor, Alejandra Marquez Abella, Maite Alberdi, Patricia Riggen, and Issa L\u00f3pez<\/p>\n\n\n\n These cultural shifts are then behind this manifesto created to ensure that we have a comprehensive approach in our analysis of women\u2019s filmmaking. It was written with Latin America in mind, but can be adapted to apply beyond this geo-cultural area.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This manifesto’s aim is to lay the foundations for an approach to studying women\u2019s filmmaking through a focus on my area of specialism Latin American cinema, and to spark a conversation in a dynamic and growing field. As Scott MacKenzie notes in Film Manifestos, and Global Cinema Cultures: A Critical Anthology<\/em> manifestos present \u2018calls to action for political and aesthetic changes in the cinema and, equally important, the cinema\u2019s role in the world\u2019 (2014, 1). While women filmmakers have created many passionate film manifestos, of which more later, there is not, to my knowledge, a manifesto for critics on how to study women\u2019s filmmaking. This article addresses this gap and presents its own call for action for ways in which we can effect change in this critical field of study. This manifesto was conceived because any critical work on women filmmakers must be part of a collective project, and it seeks to offer a comprehensive series of areas that we should be covering. Those working on Hispanic women\u2019s filmmaking form a network of scholars and we all have diverse approaches to our specific subject area; thus, this manifesto argues for what the field of study in its totality should encompass, not what every study has to cover.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A Word on Manifestos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Manifestos have long been central to film culture and many of them have been collected in an anthology compiled by Scott MacKenzie, Film Manifestos and Global Cinema Cultures: A Critical Anthology<\/em> (2014). An entire section of this resource is dedicated to manifestos by women filmmakers and reproduces calls to action by American, German, Arab, African, Spanish and British directors. Some examples of landmark feminist manifestos freely accessible in MacKenzie\u2019s anthology are: \u2018Manifesto for a Non-sexist Cinema\u2019 by the FECIP (F\u00e9d\u00e9ration europ\u00e9enne du cin\u00e9ma progressiste) (Canada, 1974); Womanifesto\u2019 by Feminists in the Media (USA, 1975); \u2018Manifesto of the Women Filmmakers\u2019 by Verband der Filmarbeiterinnen (West Germany, 1979); \u2018For the Self-Expression of the Arab Woman\u2019 by Heiny Srour, Salma Baccar, and Magda Wassef (France, 1978); \u2018Thoughts on Women\u2019s Cinema: Eating Words, Voicing Struggles\u2019 by Yvonne Rainer (USA, 1986); \u2018The Post Porn Modernist Manifesto by Annie Sprinkle, Veronica Vera, et al.; \u2018Statement of African Women Professionals of Cinema, Television and Video\u2019 by FEPACI (F\u00e9d\u00e9ration panafricaine des cin\u00e9astes)(Burkina Faso, 1991); \u2018Puzzy Power Manifesto: Thoughts on Women and Pornography\u2019 (Denmark, 1998); \u2018Cinema with Tits\u2019 by Iciar Bolla\u00edn (Spain, 1998)[2]<\/a> and Sally Potter\u2019s \u2018Barefoot Filmmaking Manifesto\u2019 (UK, 2009). <\/p>\n\n\n\n Many of these manifestos are concerned with combatting misogynistic forms of representation. Other manifestos are primarily concerned with generating opportunities and granting rights for women filmmakers who have been marginalised from the means of production across the world. For instance, the West German \u2018<\/em>Manifesto of the Women Filmmakers\u2019, created by the Association of Women Filmmakers, illustrates both of these aspects. One of their principal aims is \u2018to support, promote and distribute all films by women, which are committed to feminist, emancipatory and non-sexist forms of representation and goals\u2019 (377). In his introduction to this section MacKenzie notes that feminist (and queer manifestos) are predominantly \u2018concerned with questions of visibility and the possibility of finding a new feminist voice to combat patriarchy\u2019 (325). Yet, of course, women\u2019s languages are characterised by plurivocality as stated in the manifesto, \u2018Thoughts on Women\u2019s Cinema: Eating Words, Voicing Struggles\u2019 by filmmaker and writer Yvonne Rainer. Rainer speaks of the \u2018conviction that it is of the utmost urgency that women\u2019s voices, experience, and consciousness\u2014at whatever stage\u2014be expressed in all their multiplicity and heterogeneity, and in as many formats and styles\u2014narrative or not\u2014from here to queendom come and throughout the kingdom\u2019 (in MacKenzie, 2014, 378). What they share for Rainer is patriarchal \u2018economic and sexual oppression\u2019 (381) albeit through different manifestations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Feminist manifestos like all others are ambitious and have a transformative intent; as MacKenzie states, manifestos \u2018reimagine the world by calling a new world into being through the act of writing (2014, p 4). This manifesto also seeks to reimagine a world, that of film scholarship, and while those referenced above have been written by filmmakers, what follows is a manifesto for critics on how to study women\u2019s filmmaking. I certainly do not want to tell women what sort of films they should be making, or attempt to contain their creativity within prescriptive paradigms, or give any instructions on how they should fight patriarchy. But I do want to share a vision of feminist film scholarship. Our role as critics is to be allies of feminist filmmakers (whether female or male and in a multitude of roles); to take their films to our students, to fellow academics and to a wider interested public; to help make sense of the worlds filmmakers create; to use any specialist knowledge we have to share with others; to chart trends and patterns; and to hold filmmakers accountable for their visions of the world. This manifesto can serve as a checklist to ensure that we fulfil this role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Manifesto:<\/strong>[3]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. To raise awareness, promote and critically engage with the work of women filmmakers.[4]<\/a> I do not want to write at length about each point due to space limitations and as many are self-explanatory. Nonetheless, I would like to add a short discussion for points 14, 17, 18, 23. 24 and 25.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Point 14 argues that we need to assess the effects of large social and historical milestones on creating the movements that allow women\u2019s filmmaking to develop. In the introduction to Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics <\/em>we argued that women\u2019s filmmaking cannot be examined in isolation from social phenomena (Martin and Shaw, 2016, p 9). While it is known that texts need to be seen with their contexts, specific feminist milestones help to understand the conditions that have allowed women\u2019s filmmaking to develop and flourish. We highlighted the UN Conference on Women held in Mexico City 1975 and the UN International Decade For Women inaugurated in 1976. These events led to the Primer Encuentro Feminista Latinoamericano y del Caribe (in Bogot\u00e1 1981), which formed the backdrop against which women\u2019s filmmaking collectives emerged across Latin America in the late 1970s and early 1980s (such as Cine Mujer in Colombia) (Martin and Shaw, 2016, p. 9).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Points 17 and 18 argue for the need to assess the role of male allies and to have an inclusive vision of women\u2019s cinema and to consider male directors as feminist filmmakers when they are. L\u00facia Nagib in the chapter, \u2018Beyond Difference: Female Participation in the Brazilian Film Revival of the 1990s\u2019, frames Eduardo Coutinho as feminist filmmaker juxtaposing his filmmaking with that of L\u00facia Murat recognising equally their political feminist credentials, while noting that the filmmaker \u2018repeatedly turned to women\u2019 and documented their lives in favelas, as performers and as Northeastern peasants\u2019 (2016, p 42), Coutinho\u2019s female focused filmmaking is reproduced in the work of many other feminist male filmmakers and I would argue that we can we assess the impact of female experience on filmmaking in Latin America without reducing creation to an essentialist understanding of femininity or gender.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other prominent examples of male directors who have directed feminist films are David Pablos and Jayro Bustamente among many others. Pablos\u2019s Las elegidas\/The Chosen Ones<\/em> (2015) is an exposure of enforced prostitution in Mexico that manages to condemn the exploitation of women and official collusion without subjecting the sex workers to a male sexualising gaze. Ixcacnul <\/em>(2015) by the Guatemalan director Bustamente can be seen as an example of women\u2019s cinema for a number of reasons: it tells a neglected story of a Guatemalan Mayan Kaqchikel speaking woman, Mar\u00eda; its main themes are maternity and loss, and the power and limitations placed on women in patriarchal societies, and it has a female point of view. [5]<\/a> In addition, two of the producers and the executive producer are women.[6]<\/a> Bustamente is also engaging with point 20 of the manifesto by turning his gaze away from privilege and considering new representations of marginalised communities\/individuals. He summarises the feminist intent behind the film:<\/p>\n\n\n\n For me, Mayan women in Guatemala today are like that volcano that rumbles and resounds but hasn\u2019t yet erupted. Real change will happen when these women erupt and release what they have inside. That\u2019s the metaphor we wanted to convey, the connection between these women and the volcano\u2019 (Aguilar, 2015).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clearly, we must be careful not to marginalise women from telling women\u2019s stories. So Mayer in Political Animals:<\/em> The New Feminist Cinema<\/em> celebrates \u2018the emergence of openly feminist cismale filmmakers\u2019, and highlights the work of Jafar Panahi, Warwick Thornton and Apichatpong Weerasethakul. Yet, as Mayer also says, their work often seen as exemplary while women\u2019s creative labour is seen as niche (2014, 6).<\/p>\n\n\n\n To expand on points 23 and 24 that focus on the importance of shifting the lens to female identified filmmakers without wanting our subject area to fall into the margins in academia or programming, I want to mention our experiences of responding to male dominated curricula, and our attempts to effect change in our roles as critics, scholars, students, and external examiners. This relates to us having the eyes to see how male dominated much of our cultural curriculum has been and continues to be. Many of our colleagues only seem to realise their courses are exclusively populated by male figures when we point this out. We need to keep vigilant in showing others how to see the absence of women. Nonetheless, we also need to avoid capturing women\u2019s filmmaking in single modules leaving others to feel free to be lacking in diversity. This can result in the phenomenon of the one bookshelf in the bookshop, the single women\u2019s filmmaking festival, or the isolated course module. We need to protect women\u2019s cultural spaces, but also argue for more integrated spaces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The final point 25 – to assess how films with female co-creators have been distorted by a misogynistic industry – was added in response to an essay published by Salma Hayek in The New York Times <\/em>(December 2017), \u2018Harvey Weinstein is My Monster Too<\/a>\u2019 that presents a powerful indictment of Weinstein and the culture surrounding him and his ilk, and makes us revisit films that we may have analysed without sufficient knowledge of abuse committed against female directors, actors, writers and other key cast and crew. Indeed, I wrote an article on Frida<\/em> (Shaw 2010), in which I critique the \u2018lesbian\u2019 scene in which Frida (Hayek) dances provocatively with Tina Modotti (Ashley Judd) for the benefit of Diego Rivera (Alfred Molina) and Siqueiros (Antonio Banderas), a scene that Hayek explicitly references in her article in relation to the distortion of the film by Weinstein. In the article I implicitly held director Julie Taymor and Hayek responsible for lesbian representations that conform to the patriarchal male gaze (208). Yet the insight into Weinstein\u2019s abusive interference in the film\u2019s production (Hayek, 2017) demonstrate that this scene was insisted on by him and, as a result, caused Salma Hayek anguish and trauma, and I am grateful for the opportunity that this subsequent article affords to correct my previous misreading of the production context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Concluding thoughts<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The keywords that highlight approaches for this manifesto are: industrial; institutional; historical; theoretical; political; technological; aesthetic; biographical; thematic; and representational. This is a comprehensive list but requires two other key terms to allow this to be enacted: collective and collaboration. Studying women\u2019s filmmaking in Latin America is, happily, an enormous task, that can only be done well with a network of scholars, which also happily, now exists. This current boom in films by women and feminist film scholarship requires four main forms of collaboration:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The collaboration discussed in point 4 extends to the funding support mechanisms in place for women\u2019s filmmaking to develop and flourish. Previously marginalised cultural forms can only be sustained with national and transnational funding mechanisms, and women\u2019s filmmaking should not be the result of a handful of exceptional, often privileged women working against the grain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We also seek collaboration from filmmakers and critics in a transnational context to situate Latin American women\u2019s cinema within a culture of global filmmaking. Anglophone scholarship (that with which I am most familiar) such as that produced by Patricia White (2015), and So Mayer (2015), has incorporated a transnational approach in their work on women\u2019s cinema. Nonetheless, there is more for us to do to ensure that Latin American women\u2019s cinema does not remain confined to Latin American Studies and takes its place in the pantheon of global filmmakers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n References<\/p>\n\n\n\n Guti\u00e9rrez-Albilla, Juli\u00e1n and Nair, Parvati (eds.) (2013), Hispanic and Lusophone Women Filmmakers: Theory, Practice and Difference<\/em>, Manchester: Manchester University Press<\/p>\n\n\n\n MacKenzie, Scott (2014) Film Manifestos and Global Cinema Cultures: A Critical Anthology<\/em> Film Manifestos and Global Cinema Cultures: A Critical Anthology<\/p>\n\n\n\n LasTesis (2023), \u2018Set Fear on Fire\u2019, Translated by Camila Valle, London, New York: Verso, 2023. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Bustamente, Jayro (2015) ‘ “Ixcanul” Director Jayro Bustamente on the Strength of Mayan Women and Guatemala’s Indigenous Majority” Indiewire <\/em>1 December https:\/\/www.indiewire.com\/features\/general\/ixcanul-director-jayro-bustamante-on-the-strength-of-mayan-women-and-guatemalas-indigenous-majority-168343\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Hayek, Salma (2017), \u2018Harvey Weinstein is My Monster Too\u2019, The New York Times,<\/em> https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/es\/2017\/12\/13\/salma-hayek-harvey-weinstein\/<\/a> (accessed 19 December 2017).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mayer, So (2015), Political Animals: The New Feminist Cinema<\/em>, London: I. B Tauris<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mayer, So(2017), \u2018<\/strong>An Open Letter to the UK Film Industry on Addressing Harassment and Discrimination\u2019, <<\/strong>https:\/\/www.raisingfilms.com\/action-open-letter\/<\/a>> <\/strong>(accessed 5 December 2017).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Martin Deborah and Shaw, Deborah (2016), Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics<\/em>, London: I.B Tauris<\/p>\n\n\n\n Shaw, Deborah (2010), \u2018Transforming the National Body: Salma Hayek and Frida<\/em>. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 27<\/em>(4), 299 \u2013 313.<\/p>\n\n\n\n White, Patricia (2015), Women\u2019s Cinema, World Cinema: Projecting Contemporary<\/em> Feminisms<\/em>, Durham: Duke University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Marsh, Leslie L. (2012). Brazilian Women\u2019s Filmmaking: From Dictatorship to Democracy<\/em>, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rangil, Viviana (2005). Otro punto de vista: mujer y cine en la Argentina<\/em>, Rosario: Beatriz Viterbo Editora.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rashkin, Elissa (2001). Women Filmmakers in Mexico: The Country of Which We Dream<\/em>, Austin: University of Texas Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Torres San Mart\u00edn, Patricia (2002). Mujeres y cine en Am\u00e9rica latina<\/em>, Guadalajara: Universidad de Guadalajara.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Trelles Plazaola, Luis (1991). Cine y mujer en Am\u00e9rica latina: Directoras de largometrajes de ficci\u00f3n<\/em>, R\u00edo Piedras: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [1]<\/a> The talk was entitled, Latin American Women Filmmakers: Production, Politics, Poetics<\/em>: Connections and Collaborations, and this article is based on my talk. The lecture was a joint presentation with Deborah Martin who focused on redefinition of the political in Latin American women\u2019s filmmaking. The conference was held at Senate House, University of London, 18th<\/sup>-19th <\/sup>September 2017 and organised by the Institute for Latin American Studies and the Institute for Modern Languages Research.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2]<\/a> Bolla\u00edn\u2019s manifesto was first published in Spanish as \u201cCine con tetas,\u201d in Carlos F. Heredero, ed., La mitad del cielo: Directoras espa\u00f1olas de los a\u00f1os 90 <\/em>(M\u00e1laga: Primer festival de cine espa\u00f1ol de M\u00e1laga, 1998), 51\u201353. Trans. Fabiola Caraza.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3]<\/a> This manifesto can and should be adapted for diverse national and cultural contexts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [4]<\/a> I concur with the definition of \u2018woman\u2019 given by Chilean feminist performance collective LasTesis who say write in their own feminist manifesto (2023, xiii) \u2018when we use woman, we are referring to all subjectivities who understand themselves as such, independent of anatomy\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [5]<\/a> For more on the film and its production process see the interview with the director in Aguilar, 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [6]<\/a> http:\/\/www.imdb.com\/title\/tt4135844\/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ql_1<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Deborah Shaw, University of Portsmouth, UK As part of the SLACextras takeover of Mediatico, we are delighted to continue with…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":3553,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3448","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-film"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/files\/2024\/09\/Latin-American-Women.jpg","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p49QSj-TC","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3448","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3448"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3448\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3567,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3448\/revisions\/3567"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3553"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/reframe.sussex.ac.uk\/mediatico\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
2. To act as cultural commentators and analyse representations and themes within the film texts and assess what social, national and transnational patterns these are responding to.
3. To analyse the work of women in film industries as directors, but also as other industry professionals – producers, scriptwriters, production designers, costume designers, actors, composers, editors, cinematographers, technicians, and mentors.
4. To create better links, contacts, and collaborative events between academics and filmmakers.
5. To forge and map connections and disconnections between (his)stories of women\u2019s filmmaking in a global context.
6. To tell and reveal untold and invisible histories of women behind and in front of the camera.
7. To examine women\u2019s relationship to the industry and assess constraints, difficulties and opportunities.
8. To pay attention to the industrial sectors\/genres in which the work is taking place.
9. To account for the transnational funding mechanisms and the role of co-productions and assess the relationship between the funding and the text.
10. To analyse visual and aural languages applied and dominant and disruptive aesthetic and generic modes.
11. To trace the relationship between macro (institutional) and micro (private familial) contexts to account for the state of women\u2019s filmmaking.
12. To examine influences on women\u2019s production and attempt to establish a cinematic genealogy of women\u2019s filmmaking.
13. To consider how women\u2019s creativity is enabled (development of film schools; women\u2019s collectives; national and transnational film policies, funding mechanisms; the role of technological developments; and critical promotion).
14. To assess the effects of large social and historical milestones on creating the movements that allow women\u2019s filmmaking to develop.
15. To assess the relationship between women\u2019s filmmaking and socio-political-historical events.
16. To reconsider definitions of the political in women\u2019s filmmaking.
17. To assess the role of male allies in the collaborative nature of women\u2019s filmmaking.
18. To have an inclusive vision of women\u2019s cinema and to consider male directors as feminist filmmakers when they are.
19. To embrace intersectionality and seek to understand how gender intersects with sexuality, class, ethnicity, political discourses, and (trans)nationality.
20. To turn our gazes away from privilege and consider new representations of marginalised communities and non-conformist individuals.
21. To have a comprehensive view of Latin America, Hispanic and Latinx film cultures that includes those from nations and peoples that have been neglected.
22. To apply, re-apply, appraise and generate theoretical frameworks within which to analyse film cultures and creative works.
23. To consider what the history of film looks like when seen through a woman-centric lens and focus. But\u2026
24. To avoid pitfalls of ghettoization and ensure we do not remain in the margins in academia\/or the industry.
25. To assess how films with female identified co-creators have been distorted by a misogynistic industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n