Wokeism of the day *Revised Mod Note in OP and threadbanned users*

Oh course you could, and I'm sure it's been done, but it's not Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare.

It's something else.

Usually when they do Shakespeare it's billed as "Director's Name's: Shakespeare's Play" because they all put a little twist on it and there are no surviving original scripts.

The fashion industry trying to tick all the diversity boxes in one go

See can ye spot the ringer.

True. but that's not the major part of the story. It's Rose's rebelion against her legacy that drives her, not her gender. She contemplates jumping overboard at one point. If you wanted to use gender, making Rose and Jack both female would have done the trick (but probably not have sold as much tickets..._)

if you'd had a well-to-do sheltered male character and a female tearaway in the lower decks, you could still very easily tell the same story. Make them both gay, same story.

But make them both first class and wealthy then there'd be no conflict and no story (or at least a much less interesting one)

LATE EDIT - for the record, I'm not saying any movie could be changed - movies about sufferagettes for example - but only movies with gender identity sa a theme. Don't know Beckett well enough to say specifcially.

Surveys in Western cultures find, on average, that about 93% of men and 87% of women identify as completely heterosexual. That's today. I'd imagine in Becketts and Shakespeares day, it was a bit higher. So the plays were written to get the most butts on seats, and the overwhelming majority are heterosexual, so can relate and will attend. As a heterosexual, I wouldn't be interested in a LGBT remake because as I can't relate. Not that I'm interested in Shakespeare or Beckett anyway, but that's beside the point.

Most people won't relate to something different to them, even if they pretend they can. It's why the woke films/tv/anything is failing. Aside from being usually terribly written to ensure the wokeness is front and centre, or that it's a strong, independent, powerful [insert non-straight-white character here] that's the centre, not the story/world, they fail because not enough people will relate and, as a result, spend money.

That's just my thinking on it, based on nothing but my own thoughts. I can't relate to things that are not me; being gay, wanting to change sex, or any of the other things LGBT people experience. So it doesn't interest me. And I reckon most people are like that. I've no problem with LGBT characters, so long as they're part of the story and their sex/orientation not a highlight/main point. And yes, I also dislike hetero shows which concentrate on the love angle. I'm watching a movie about giant robots boxing kaiju, I have no time for love!

I started a threat on the latest woke (or plain stupid) reactions to great literature. The topic didn't take off, so maybe it will get some response here.

Even the supposedly censorious Ireland of the 20s to the 60s didn't censor Ulysses, unlike actions taken in the UK and US. Now along come these muppets. Large areas of the Humanities in the University world appear to have gone to the dogs, notably English, Sociollogy and Education, and also any department with "studies" in the title.

Maybe you could try re-writing a successful story still in copyright, changing one character from male to female and make a mint so?

Harriet Potter and the Philosophers Stone by Fr Tod Umptious would make a mint. Just tell JK Rowling's lawyers that "its not Harry Potter by JK Rowling"

I thought this thread was meant for posting 'Wokeisms of the day', not engaging in debates?

At least that's what people with moderator in their forum status told us previously.

PS I'm homosexual and I have not perceived a 'bashing' tone to this thread.