The Golden Globes have a long-standing tradition of ignoring women when dolling out awards and this year was no different.

Now, don't get me wrong, I saw the black dresses and suites and heard the speeches. I truly, though possibly naively, believe that Hollywood is working towards real change when it comes to sexual harassment and sexual assault. Not only were guests sporting "Time's Up" pins but there were advocates and lawyers who help and defend those who speak up about sexual harassment. There is now a fund, set up by "Time's up", that can help those seeking legal justice for sexual harassment pay for lawyer fees. These are all lasting promises and, at least I believe, show that "Time's Up" and "Me Too" aren't just passing hashtags.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the coveted Golden Globe for Best Director and the, as Natalie Portman so eloquently put it, "the all male nominees".

This has happened year after year and it's brought up year after year as a problem and then it is promptly forgotten. It is explained away that women have had a harder time getting to the role of director and with the changing times and more opportunities for women this should be changing and that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association can't just nominate a woman for the sake of nominating a woman.

The latter is one-hundred percent true. People should be nominated based on merit and merit alone, just as they should be paid and promoted regardless of color, gender, orientation or anything other than merit, in the rest of the world.

But, and this touches on the first excuse, there were women who, some could argue with a very good argument, deserved to be nominated for best director.

For instance, Greta Gerwig, who wrote and directed Lady Bird won best musical or comedy motion picture and Saoirse Ronan, who played the lead in the movie, won the best actress in a musical or comedy. Lady Bird was also nominated for best screenplay of a motion picture and Laurie Metcalf was nominated for best-supporting actress in a motion picture for her performance in the film.

Lady Bird won Best musical or comedy, best actress and was in contention for the best-supporting actress and best screenplay and yet it was not even in consideration for best director. It just doesn't seem to add up.

Not to mention the fact that Lady Bird had the longest running Rotten Tomatoes score.

Lady Bird wasn't the only film snubbed by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, Mudbound, directed by Dee Rees, is another film directed by woman that seemed to meet the high standard of best director and yet went unmentioned when it came to best director.

Now it is worth mentioning that only five films can be nominated for best director. The Hollywood Forighn Press Association voters vote for the nomination by listing the five movies they think should win the award, the first being their first choice and the fifth being their last choice of the five. Then the five movies with the best results go on to be on the final ballot. My point is that a bunch of people don't sit around, talk it over, and carefully choose movies not directed by women.

It is quite possible that if these voters were asked they very well might be able to give a good answer, that in their opinion the nominees checked a box that Lady Bird didn't. But it would have to be a pretty good reason given the evidence.

But even if a clear reason was given the Hollywood Foreign Press Association cannot deny that this is a problem that has been plaguing the industry since the beginning.

Barbara Streisand was the first and last woman to win the Golden Globe for Best Director of a Motion Picture in 1984 for Yentl. And since it's beginning in only seven films that were directed by women were nominated for best director, including Streisand's win with Yentl in 75 years. Since 1943.

It's clear that on some level movies that are directed by women are passed over. Directing is still obviously seen as a job only a man can do well.

The number of movies directed by women that had the potential to win the best director and were passed over is astounding: Selma (Ava DuVernay 2014),The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow 2008), Monster (Patty Jenkins 2003), Lost in Translation (Sofia Coppola 2003), and The Piano (Jane Campion 1993) just to name a few.

With the number of movies that are directed by women that reached and surpassed the quality of film that can be expected to win the Golden Globe for best director it is evident that films directed by women are passed over in preference of movies directed by men.

This needs to change and I'm not sure what the answer is. If the quality of film is clear and yet ignored there seem to be limited options. Wait for a new generation of Hollywood Foreign Press Association voters? Is that really the only option?