nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Transphobia Watch

JackTaylorFan

Because making lazy, cliched jokes, that place transwomen as the butt of said joke, is still funny in 2018 - and, well, who cares if it serves to normalize transphobic attitudes in society which often lead to serious real life consequences for said transwomen, such as assault and murders?

And before some ignorant person pipes up and asks: Yes, the word "tranny" is a slur, and no, it is not the only reason this whole thing is grossly transphobic.

https://attitude.co.uk/article/new-amazon-show-jack-ryan-slammed-for-using-transphobic-slur-1/18963/

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

JackTaylorFan

Further reading: Historical transphobia in TV and Film (the Deadpool entry I am quoting for emphasis of the insidious nature of it all)

https://www.buzzfeed.com/meredithtalusan/25-years-of-transphobia-in-comedies?utm_term=.yhy57QO5g#.djbwPZmw5

Deadpool allows itself a great deal of license to make fun of the LGBT community, in large part because it presents Deadpool as part of that community — a knowing, pansexual New Yorker who isn’t uptight about established gender and sexuality norms. When he and his best friend joke about giving each other blow jobs, or when he yells “Teabag!” after sitting on top of a villain after vanquishing him, his jokes are presented as progressive in-group humor, rather than an outsider making fun of queer people.

Yet no actual same-gender action happens in the film (except in an easy-to-miss animation as part of the credits). The one relationship treated seriously is the love between Deadpool and his ideal soulmate-esque cis woman girlfriend, Vanessa. The one hint of queerness between them — when Vanessa pegs Deadpool in a montage of humorous sex scenarios — is played for comedy. Since the devotion between the two forms the serious heart of the movie, queer attraction is presented as humorous, trivial, and fleeting, while overarching heterosexual love is forever.

But more regressive than the appropriations of queerness such as Wade’s gratingly fey intonation, or his campy love of musicals as evidenced by his RENT shirt and Bernadette Peters purse, is the movie’s treatment of women: trans, lesbian, and cisgender. One of the villains in the movie is Angel Dust (Gina Carano), a super-strong, buff woman who is part of a group that subjects Deadpool to a series of tortures, and ends up plotting to enslave him. Upon first meeting Angel Dust, Deadpool says, “Aren’t you a little strong for a lady? I’m calling wang.” And later, as another villain Ajax leaves the room, Wade says, “Oh come on, you’re going to leave me all alone here with less-angry Rosie O’Donnell?” The original trailer has this moment as “Jose Canseco” instead of “Rosie O’Donnell,” which, according to Entertainment Weekly, is one of several options the director Tim Miller considered, including “Louise Ferrigno.”

Again, the trope of the villainous trans or butch woman who is really “a man dressed as a woman” comes into play, which is insulting both to trans and cis women. Whether Angel Dust is transgender or cisgender isn’t addressed in the movie, but either way, it presents trans women or cis women with muscular body types as evil, while the conventionally beautiful woman, Vanessa, is painted as good almost to the point of sacredness.

Deadpool’s biggest problem is not necessarily that it treats LGBT people as punchlines — many movies do that — but that it does so while trying to pretend to be politically progressive at the same time, circumventing the antipathy of a general public that has over the last 25 years become a little less tolerant of blatant anti-LGBT humor. Both the movie and the character are happy to dangle Ryan Reynolds as fleeting gaybait, in order to excuse the actual ways it represents such tired stereotypes as hypersexed queer men, references to gay sex acts as ways to humiliate men, and depicting women who are not cisnormatively attractive as evil compared to conventionally hot women. Despite its makers touting the title character’s pansexuality, and at least one outlet calling the movie progressive, Deadpool trades on well-worn anti-LGBT tropes, repackaged to be palatable to mainstream audiences.

In one sense, trans people in Hollywood movies are better-off now than we were 25 years ago. Male characters in such movies (at least for now), no longer puke at the mere discovery of someone’s trans identity. But in another sense, the more things change the more things stay the same. Trans people continue to be jokey plot devices, rather than full-fledged human beings. This may not change until trans people themselves have the opportunity to write and direct blockbuster Hollywood comedies in the future — maybe ones that depict how hilarious it is when cisgender men publicly revile trans women, but often privately go to absurd lengths to try to sleep with them. There’s a scenario, so common in life yet unrepresented in mainstream movies, that is truly ripe for comedy.

igCorcaigh

It's the same struggle again isnt it JTF.
Over and over.

igCorcaigh

To reference an older movie that broke my heart, everyone should watch: Boys Don't Cry.

Annasopra

igCorcaigh wrote: »

It's the same struggle again isnt it JTF.
Over and over.

Mod - General warning to all

Please be aware as per the charter we expect mature civil and constructive discussion. Posts like the above are in my view are close to contravening that part of the charter. There may be red or yellow cards in future if the discussion is not mature civil and constructive

As always feedback on moderation will not be on thread so as not to derail it.

JackTaylorFan

igCorcaigh wrote: »

everyone should watch: Boys Don't Cry.

There are many who would disagree actually, for various reasons. Including, yet again, a cis woman playing a transman, and inaccuracies in Brandon's story itself. I can't really comment on the latter. As to the former, given the fact it was made almost 20 years ago, to me, it seems petty to criticize it too much. I do think the film done more good than harm at the time (1999), but if the role was given to a cis woman in 2018, I would feel quite different about it, obviously. It may have been viewed as a progressive move in 1999 but we have moved on.

J_E

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

There are many who would disagree actually, for various reasons. Including, yet again, a cis woman playing a transman, and inaccuracies in Brandon's story itself. I can't really comment on the latter. As to the former, given the fact it was made almost 20 years ago, to me, it seems petty to criticize it too much. I do think the film done more good than harm at the time (1999), but if the role was given to a cis woman in 2018, I would feel quite different about it, obviously. It may have been viewed as a progressive move in 1999 but we have moved on.

I would agree, but even if a representation rather than a trans actor made someone stop and empathise, I would say overall it was a positive step forward.

JackTaylorFan

EdgeCase wrote: »

I think it'll take a long time. Hollywood in particular has a history of being very slow to change. You can see that with the absolute dearth of gay or lesbian actors and very few gay roles. It's only relatively recently that you might see an incidentally gay character who isn't either somehow tragic or the focus of the plot of the film.

The same applies to non white roles. When you analyse it, there are endless roles that just reaffirm black, asian and other stereotypes. Even nationalities are played often as total stereotypes.

Then you've female roles where the women are always passive or fragile.

I think getting accurate trans characters and roles into film will take decades. Television will blaze the trail on that. Hollywood's barely getting up to speed with the 1960s on casting!

Yes, I appreciate the comment, but discussing representation isn't the purpose of this thread. This thread is about highlighting transphobia in TV and Film - with a particular emphasis on present day TV and Film (see first post for example).

If you wish to discuss representation here is an ongoing thread - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057862691

JupiterKid

What do you think of the film Transamerica OP? Did you think it was offensive because a cis woman played the role of a trans woman? Personally, I thought Felicity Huffman was superb in the role.

IMO if the actor is good at playing a role, that should matter far more than their gender or the gender/sexuality they play in a given film/TV show. As another poster opined, Hollywood moves at a glacial pace in representing minorities but trans actors and characters will increase over time.

Have you ever seen the 1980 UK TV documentary George and Julia?

JackTaylorFan

JupiterKid wrote: »

What do you think of the film Transamerica OP? Did you think it was offensive because a cis woman played the role of a trans woman? Personally, I thought Felicity Huffman was superb in the role.

IMO if the actor is good at playing a role, that should matter far more than their gender or the gender/sexuality they play in a given film/TV show. As another poster opined, Hollywood moves at a glacial pace in representing minorities but trans actors and characters will increase over time.

Have you ever seen the 1980 UK TV documentary George and Julia?

At the risk of repeating myself on the following thread - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=107861354#post107861354, I have just posted a considered reply to your questions.

Reason I am replying in that thread, is because there is an ongoing discussion on representation there, where I have covered most of this already.

JackTaylorFan

Yeah, can you not.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/09/09/robbie-williams-x-factor-transgender-felix-shepherd/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Buffer&utm_campaign=PN

7aubzxk43m2sni

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Yeah, can you not.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/09/09/robbie-williams-x-factor-transgender-felix-shepherd/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Buffer&utm_campaign=PN

https://twitter.com/felixjshepherd/status/1038750956807176192

7aubzxk43m2sni

In relation to the OP, should we never make jokes or say offensive things in movies ever?

Should we have no cops in movies joking about racism etc, since it's a real problem? Even if the dialogue is there to reveal some of the speaker's personality?

How does this go in an ideal world for you? How should movies look? What shouldn't they contain?

JackTaylorFan

Penny Stocky Landmark wrote: »

In relation to the OP, should we never make jokes or say offensive things in movies ever?

Should we have no cops in movies joking about racism etc, since it's a real problem? Even if the dialogue is there to reveal some of the speaker's personality?

How does this go in an ideal world for you? How should movies look? What shouldn't they contain?

The problem isn't necessarily the joking at a minority's expense, it is the positioning of the people making the joke as sympathetic rather than in the wrong. Take for example your hypothetical racist cop, he makes a racist joke, to which most audiences these days will respond negatively, and see that discrimination for what it is and rightly find the character repulsive, disgusting, shocking, etc.

The problem with the case in the OP is this: the character is not painted as being repulsive or as being in the wrong for making transphobic jokes. In fact, the joke they made about a "tranny" was meant to illicit laughter from the audience at the expense of transpeople, and to a lesser extent the man who was "fooled" and was initially attracted to a "tranny". It was an enlightened piece of script-writing to make us sympathize with the off-screen transperson, it was lazy, good old fashioned transphobia meant to further normalise transphobia in society, in relationships and sexuality. It also serves to reinforce prejudices and shames those watching that might otherwise be willing to date a transperson (transwomen usually being the biggest target), which feeds into a bigger issue - i.e. how a transphobic society shapes the dating preferences of people. When I do talk about transphobia on dating apps and such (which admittedly I rarely do because of kneejerk reactions from people), it is not to push an agenda that you must include transpeople in your dating options as an imperative, but merely to understand the reasons why some, in a less trans-stigmatised, more accepting environment, would happily consider transpeople (again, emphasis always seems to be on transowmen in these conversations) as potential partners, but refuse to on grounds that they will be ridiculed for such an attraction. Which leads to a disgusting culture in which transpeople are sought out for illicit sex from people who are very much attracted to us but at the same time treat us as ****ty as the rest of society - because they have and continue to be conditioned to do so by all the examples I have given in this thread thus far (read the Buzzfeed article).

So, no. Unlike in the case of a racist cop making a joke about "n****ers", we are not given the message that what this person is doing or/and saying in any way wrong, we are given the message that this in fact okay: the dehumanizing and vilification of transpeople (transwomen yet again the man focus) as somehow trying to deceive people is perpetuated ad nauseam.

But I suspect, given your history on here, you're not really listening to anything being said to you on here from transpeople like me, and are in fact just looking for ways to justify transphobia.

JackTaylorFan

Penny Stocky Landmark wrote: »

https://twitter.com/felixjshepherd/status/1038750956807176192

Again, perpetuating the idea that it is okay to ask all transpeople questions like that is fine, is not okay. I don't give a **** if one, fame-hungry outlier says otherwise. They are in the minority.

c montgomery

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Again, perpetuating the idea that it is okay to ask all transpeople questions like that is fine, is not okay. I don't give a **** if one, fame-hungry outlier says otherwise. They are in the minority.

Don't be hating on the minoritys!

GarIT

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

but if the role was given to a cis woman in 2018, I would feel quite different about it, obviously..

If a cis woman was played by a trans woman would be feel the same about that? Should people only be allowed act as exactly what they are. Acting is all about portraying a character, you don't have to be the exact same as the character to pull it off.

KevinCavan

GarIT wrote: »

If a cis woman was played by a trans woman would be feel the same about that? Should people only be allowed act as exactly what they are. Acting is all about portraying a character, you don't have to be the exact same as the character to pull it off.

Exactly you don’t have to be a drug dealer to play a drug dealer in a movie. Hopefully no real life serial killers are used in a movie depicting serial killers. I do understand that the transgender community would like actors from their community to portray the lifestyle in a movie, but if the movie is to reach a wider audience, is it not better to have cis woman who is well known? Surely such a movie going out into the mainstream is the objective. For example I have watched Dallas Buyer’s Club, a movie about A.I.D.s victims because it had an all star cast, had the roles been played by lesser known actors, I probably wouldn’t have seen it.

JackTaylorFan

GarIT wrote: »

If a cis woman was played by a trans woman would be feel the same about that? Should people only be allowed act as exactly what they are. Acting is all about portraying a character, you don't have to be the exact same as the character to pull it off.

There is a whole thread not too long ago on here, where all this is asked and answered, but is clear nobody asking these questions is actually interested in listening to the replies and concerns of transpeople. And are happy to continue in the same "Sure, as a cis person I don't see the problem. I don't see why you are getting so arsey?" attitude.

GarIT

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

There is a whole thread not too long ago on here, where all this is asked and answered, but is clear nobody asking these questions is actually interested in listening to the replies and concerns of transpeople. And are happy to continue in the same "Sure, as a cis person I don't see the problem. I don't see why you are getting so arsey?" attitude.

I'm not aware of any previous thread, there probably was but I don't watch for every thread posted. You brought up the topic so it would be more constructive for you to participate rather than dodging questions by saying it was answered somewhere else some time in the past.

I am interested in listening but you're making the mistake or assuming that if I don't agree with you I haven't listened.

My gender and sexuality don't make my opinions and more or less correct than yours.

I havent said anything like "as a cis person I don't see the problem" What I'm saying is as someone who's family is deeply involved in the Irish acting community I don't see a problem. I've family members that have won or been nominated for major awards for playing different nationalities, sexualities, genders and even a spoon. When casting for a role you pick someone based on how they fit the look you are going for and their acting abilities nothing else whether they were born the gender they are portraying or not is irrelevant as long as it looks right on camera and they can act the part.

Can you explain why transpeople should only be protrayed by transpeople and why you don't think the reverse should apply too?

Annasopra

Mod

All posters please stop back seat moderating this thread. Stop telling other posters what to say, what not to say, how not to say things etc. Any more back moderating will get cards.

JackTaylorFan

GarIT wrote: »

I'm not aware of any previous thread, there probably was but I don't watch for every thread posted. You brought up the topic so it would be more constructive for you to participate rather than dodging questions by saying it was answered somewhere else some time in the past.

I am interested in listening but you're making the mistake or assuming that if I don't agree with you I haven't listened.

My gender and sexuality don't make my opinions and more or less correct than yours.

I havent said anything like "as a cis person I don't see the problem" What I'm saying is as someone who's family is deeply involved in the Irish acting community I don't see a problem. I've family members that have won or been nominated for major awards for playing different nationalities, sexualities, genders and even a spoon. When casting for a role you pick someone based on how they fit the look you are going for and their acting abilities nothing else whether they were born the gender they are portraying or not is irrelevant as long as it looks right on camera and they can act the part.

Can you explain why transpeople should only be protrayed by transpeople and why you don't think the reverse should apply too?

Here's a video that i previously posted, that sums up the issue exactly - http://screencrush.com/cis-actors-transgender-movies-characters/. It covers everything you need to know about why transpeople are currently feeling underrepresented and indeed exploited (and not in the good sense of that word). You'll probably disagree and say something flippant about a spoon after watching it, but that's the issue, that's why many in the community are upset about people like Scarlet Johansson and Jared Leto stealing our roles. And yes, at the moment, with the lack of opportunity out there for us even for roles that are supposed to be trans, that is how we regard it - as stealing. And spare me the best actor for the part routine. The fact is trans actors can't even get auditions.

GarIT

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Here's a video that i previously posted, that sums up the issue exactly - http://screencrush.com/cis-actors-transgender-movies-characters/. It covers everything you need to know about why transpeople are currently feeling underrepresented and indeed exploited (and not in the good sense of that word). You'll probably disagree and say something flippant about a spoon after watching it, but that's the issue, that's why many in the community are upset about people like Scarlet Johansson and Jared Leto stealing our roles. And yes, at the moment, with the lack of opportunity out there for us even for roles that are supposed to be trans, that is how we regard it - as stealing. And spare me the best actor for the part routine. The fact is trans actors can't even get auditions.

I understand and agree with a lot of it, particularly transpeople being portrayed inaccurately or satirically. There are still some flaws with the argument.

Realistically there is no point in even talking about this further as I'm to spare you the actual experiences I have in favour of how you think it is and in both your posts replying to me you have decided I'm going to say something derogatory before I've even opened my mouth but I'll say what I have to before I give up.

The real fact is nobody trans or not can get auditions. Most of the auditions I've been to have a max of a week to be carried out, typically only 2-3 days, with 15 mins per person so about 30 people per day and some of these roles are getting 20k people interested. I know fabulously talented teenagers that have been going through drama classes since they were 3-5, and still only get an audition or two a year if they're lucky. Getting an audition requires a lot of talent, the right look, a good agent with the right connections and a lot of luck.

The video you posted mentions an actor being dropped from a film because they weren't a big enough name to get funding and fobs if off as if that isn't a leitimate reason. It happens quite a lot, anything that didn't come from a big studio has to get funding, often studios want to see some big names supporting the project before they will fund it, it's **** when it happens, it has happened to family menbers, but it's not discrimination, it's just business.

Just on pure statistics (I'm using wikipedia's figure of 0.6% of people identifying as trans) for every 167 successful actors we should expect 1 of those to be trans. I don't think we're that far off that especially considering it wasn't ok to be publicly trans until 10-20 years ago so a lot of them will only be breaking into the industry while everyone else has a head start.

I've never met a more accepting group of people in my life than the artsy crowd so I think saying they are discriminating against transpeople is a stretch. Sure some portrayls of transpeople have been unfair, discriminatory and totally unacceptable but to say that only transpeople should be allowed portray transpeople is nonsense and goes against the fundamentals of acting.

JackTaylorFan

GarIT wrote: »

Sure some portrayls of transpeople have been unfair, discriminatory and totally unacceptable but to say that only transpeople should be allowed portray transpeople is nonsense and goes against the fundamentals of acting.

yeah, and I am sure you would say the same thing about a white man playing a black slave...

You are saying that the acting/arts world is the most open environment to trans people? Right, based on what your experience? Well here's just one fact. In 2017, a lesbian storyline was cut from a blockbuster for fear of isolating some viewers - https://www.avclub.com/thor-ragnarok-ultimately-cut-the-one-scene-that-confir-1820047758. We are not talking about your local am-dram group here - which may or may not be accepting of trans people in traditional cis roles. We are talking about the bigger message here, the one that is sent out globally to audiences; the one that says not only are lesbians not okay, but trans people are just men dressed up in silly wigs, etc., etc; the one that says if you are trans don't even bother.

So yeah, you are not convincing me with your argument in the slightest. Again, you are just looking for ways to try and reason and justify actions that dismiss the genuine worries and concerns of transpeople as nothing other than PC SJWing or some other patronizing garbage. Unless you have lived the life, and I say this with all due respect, you haven't got a clue how damaging the message currently being sent out by these giant media corporations has and continues to do the trans community.

rochey84

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

yeah, and I am sure you would say the same thing about a white man playing a black slave...

You are saying that the acting/arts world is the most open environment to trans people? Right, based on what your experience? Well here's just one fact. In 2017, a lesbian storyline was cut from a blockbuster for fear of isolating some viewers - https://www.avclub.com/thor-ragnarok-ultimately-cut-the-one-scene-that-confir-1820047758. We are not talking about your local am-dram group here - which may or may not be accepting of trans people in traditional cis roles. We are talking about the bigger message here, the one that is sent out globally to audiences; the one that says not only are lesbians not okay, but trans people are just men dressed up in silly wigs, etc., etc; the one that says if you are trans don't even bother.

So yeah, you are not convincing me with your argument in the slightest. Again, you are just looking for ways to try and reason and justify actions that dismiss the genuine worries and concerns of transpeople as nothing other than PC SJWing or some other patronizing garbage. Unless you have lived the life, and I say this with all due respect, you haven't got a clue how damaging the message currently being sent out by these giant media corporations has and continues to do the trans community.

I try not to get involved in these threads cause I do believe it's very difficult to gauge when you haven't lived it. However, I couldn't let the bit in bold slide, the poster you quoted explained exactly where they were coming from and gave a well reasoned argument as to why they feel that trans people are marginalised in movies etc. despite you showing an absolute lack of respect for them by putting words in their mouth on a couple of occasions.

But here are some genuine questions for you, do trans performers state on their CV that they are trans when applying for auditions? I would imagine that you'd be very upset if in the corporate world a potential employer asked if someone was trans so why would it be acceptable in acting?

Also again, like many I can only go on my own experience here but Emmerdale has a gay male couple played by exclusively straight actors, doesn't bother me in the slightest as a gay man, they are good actors, in fact in Emmerdale there is a lesbian couple played by straight actors that are really good actors there too. In fact of those 2 couples only one character is gay the rest are bi. Also Emmerdale and Eastenders and Holyoaks have all cast trans actors for trans roles in the last couple of years.

Finally, and I say this only cause I happened to be watching Ray D'arcy for Lynn Ruanne the other night but didn't he have a trans actor on who has played cis roles, I notice you're not kicking up murder over that and I also notice that cis people aren't kicking up murder over that, why is that?

<Snip>
Mod: Paragraph removed for backseat moderation

pl4ichjgy17zwd

rochey84 wrote:

in fact in Emmerdale there is a lesbian couple played by straight actors that are really good actors there too.

The actor who plays Vanessa is a lesbian

rochey84

Nico Enough Trek wrote: »

The actor who plays Vanessa is a lesbian

I stand corrected, thank you for pointing that out!

NoviGlitzko

Sorry if this comes across in a bad way (I don't mean it at all) but I've wondered about this. Has there ever been a transgender person who was heterosexual?

Goodshape

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Sorry if this comes across in a bad way (I don't mean it at all) but I've wondered about this. Has there ever been a transgender person who was heterosexual?

Yes absolutely. Gender (are you male or female) and sexuality (are you attracted to males or females) are two different things. Any combination, and a few in-between, are possible.

But let's not stray off topic.

JackTaylorFan

rochey84 wrote: »

But here are some genuine questions for you, do trans performers state on their CV that they are trans when applying for auditions? I would imagine that you'd be very upset if in the corporate world a potential employer asked if someone was trans so why would it be acceptable in acting?

Do black people put in their CV that they are black? I mean, what kind of nonsense argument is this? Are you saying racism only exists if it's formally disclosed on a piece of paper?

rochey84 wrote: »

Also again, like many I can only go on my own experience here but Emmerdale has a gay male couple played by exclusively straight actors, doesn't bother me in the slightest as a gay man, they are good actors, in fact in Emmerdale there is a lesbian couple played by straight actors that are really good actors there too.

Moving on from the fact that someone already put you right on this, Emmerdale doesn't have such a great history on Trans representation - https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/12/27/emmerdale-cuts-transphobic-scene-after-trans-actress-complains/ and it has hardly representative of the high profile, global reaching cases coming from Hollywood either.

rochey84 wrote: »

Finally, and I say this only cause I happened to be watching Ray D'arcy for Lynn Ruanne the other night but didn't he have a trans actor on who has played cis roles, I notice you're not kicking up murder over that and I also notice that cis people aren't kicking up murder over that, why is that?

See, you clearly haven't been paying attention to what I am actually saying - the whole idea is that we move in a direction where this happens more often. Did you watch the video I posted a link to? Or nah?

Anyways, I can't get over the feeling, like so many on here, that you are intent on dismissing the idea of transphobic attitudes playing a part in casting decisions, and just 'cause you can name one or two obscure cases where there has been positives does not change that very much. In time, these small steps forward might lead to an equal playing field... but, no, we are nowhere near that.