ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 19th July 2018, 08:38 AM   #401
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 11,466
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
Sorry I flipped out, y'all. I was having a bad night, and strawmen are so tiresome.
Don't apologize. He needs to be called on his nonsense.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 08:46 AM   #402
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 10,784
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So which characteristics are actors allowed to just pretend they have for a role (that is... well acting) and which ones aren't they allowed to pretend they have for a role?
Well, at least in this brave new world Tom Cruise will continue to work.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 08:46 AM   #403
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 42,624
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So which characteristics are actors allowed to just pretend they have for a role (that is... well acting) and which ones aren't they allowed to pretend they have for a role?
Well, from this thread we apparently learned that being transgender is one that is definitely not allowed to portray. So that one's checked
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 09:11 AM   #404
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,226
Next movie with Hitler? He should only be portrayed by an actual neo-Nazi leader of German heritage. And then the parts of the persecuted Jews should only be played by actual Jews -preferably descendants of those who were victims of the Holocaust. It's not about playing a part, after all; it's about the experience.

Hamilton! should actually be shut down, according to this new paradigm of experiential entertainment. How can black/latino actors convey the experience of being the Founding Fathers? They certainly didn't express themselves through rap/hip hop, either. It's blasphemy, I tell ya.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 09:20 AM   #405
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 4,893
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It isn't a strawman. Why is yellowface or what have you wrong even in roles that are not mocking the ethnicity, say how it is in Indiana Jones with a John Rhys-Davies playing an egyptian laborer? That seems to be regarded as wrong now. Why to the arguments against that not apply to trans characters?

You say that you agree with one but not the other but never present an argument that does not work for both.
This is the last time I am going to respond to you because I do not find discussion with you productive. But I don't want to appear as though I am running away from a difficult question.

The truth is, your question is a good one. It's thought-provoking. The way you presented it, however, was rude and vicious, and yes, it was a strawman. It was a strawman because you snarkily presented a sarcastic opinion as though it were my own, and roundly mocked me for it, instead of simply asking me, "but have you thought about...?"

I see the two situations as different because people can (these days) change their presenting gender. Gender is fluid now, right? That seems to be the consensus. Race isn't fluid - never was. (Just ask poor Rachel Dolezal.)

Secondly, I keep coming back to the fact that the real-life Dante did not undergo surgery or take hormones. (And neither did Brandon Teena.) They simply dressed as their presenting gender, as most transgender individuals had to do in the past. Would it not, then, be more realistic to have a cis actress dressed to look masculine play the part? If a transman actor such as Chaz Bono were to play the role, it wouldn't work the same way, because his facial and body features have been masculinized by hormone therapy. Part of Dante's struggle was (I imagine) trying to "pass" without the benefits of hormone therapy.

And my third point is simply a question. You implied, when I asked about the Brandon Teena movie, that we "know better" now, and that Hilary Swank taking that role would be seen as terribly offensive today. If that's true, why was the Amazon show Transparent such a huge hit? Last I checked, Jeffrey Tambor isn't trans. Yes, he's persona non grata now because of sexual harassment complaints, but that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I just don't think the situation is as simple as you're attempting to make it. It's very complex. And how are people supposed to discuss these complexities when even asking questions gets one shouted down and placed in danger of looking like a bigot?
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 09:20 AM   #406
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,911
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So which characteristics are actors allowed to just pretend they have for a role (that is... well acting) and which ones aren't they allowed to pretend they have for a role?
Either way, I think the transgender community has just argued themselves out of being considered for any acting job ever. Apparently cisfolk can perform identities other than their own, but transfolk can only ever represent their true selves. No wonder they've been historically underrepresented in performative fiction!
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 09:59 AM   #407
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
I just don't think the situation is as simple as you're attempting to make it. It's very complex. And how are people supposed to discuss these complexities when even asking questions gets one shouted down and placed in danger of looking like a bigot?

I don't think it's quite as complicated as many people want to paint it, but it's not very simple either.

The blackface/yellowface/redface comparison is still a good one. Even when they weren't used to ridicule minorities, they were still used to shut minorities out of acting roles. I strongly recommend the documentary Reel Injun for the history of Native peoples in cinema, and how redface was used extensively in the US for the purpose of representing Native peoples without allowing Native peoples to act in those roles. Yellowface functioned similarly for much of cinematic history to exclude Asians from roles that sometimes were derogatory, but just as often were not.

While these problems have mostly (not entirely) been done away with, pinkface is still a problem for LGTBQ roles and actors, and is just as often a way to shut these actors out of roles, the same as was done to racial minorities in the past.

Ideally, the relationship of actors to characters shouldn't be an issue, all that should matter is the portrayal of the character, and some amount of physical resemblance when playing real-life people. But when out LGBTQ actors are routinely shut of out of work for any kind of role, it seems that making some concessions regarding LGTBQ actors playing LGBTQ roles at the very least would be simple decency. Unfortunately, simple decency doesn't seem to be a particularly powerful motivation for very many people, and especially not for big businesses.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 09:59 AM   #408
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,504
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
This is the last time I am going to respond to you because I do not find discussion with you productive. But I don't want to appear as though I am running away from a difficult question.

The truth is, your question is a good one. It's thought-provoking. The way you presented it, however, was rude and vicious, and yes, it was a strawman. It was a strawman because you snarkily presented a sarcastic opinion as though it were my own, and roundly mocked me for it, instead of simply asking me, "but have you thought about...?"

I see the two situations as different because people can (these days) change their presenting gender. Gender is fluid now, right? That seems to be the consensus. Race isn't fluid - never was. (Just ask poor Rachel Dolezal.)
This isn't about fluidity is is about who should get the chance a break out roles, a hollywood a lister or a person actually in the minority group. We already wrote Marsha P Johnson out of Stonewall her own damn story for a cis white guy. Is that good or bad? Why not just have the cis white actor playing the black trans character, no big deal right? Just acting.
Quote:
Secondly, I keep coming back to the fact that the real-life Dante did not undergo surgery or take hormones. (And neither did Brandon Teena.) They simply dressed as their presenting gender, as most transgender individuals had to do in the past. Would it not, then, be more realistic to have a cis actress dressed to look masculine play the part? If a transman actor such as Chaz Bono were to play the role, it wouldn't work the same way, because his facial and body features have been masculinized by hormone therapy. Part of Dante's struggle was (I imagine) trying to "pass" without the benefits of hormone therapy.
And of course not all trans men do surgery or take hormones. There is no you must have had X medical procedures and drugs to be trans standard.
Quote:
And my third point is simply a question. You implied, when I asked about the Brandon Teena movie, that we "know better" now, and that Hilary Swank taking that role would be seen as terribly offensive today. If that's true, why was the Amazon show Transparent such a huge hit? Last I checked, Jeffrey Tambor isn't trans. Yes, he's persona non grata now because of sexual harassment complaints, but that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
It would be an issue. Transparent is likely more complex casting a sex offender instead of a trans person. It is also unlike most of the other stories about someone just coming out and starting their journey that does seem like a good reason to cast a cis actor.

Quote:
I just don't think the situation is as simple as you're attempting to make it. It's very complex. And how are people supposed to discuss these complexities when even asking questions gets one shouted down and placed in danger of looking like a bigot?
There is also a big difference between a fictional show like transparent and film based on real trans people.

And of course here is an article pointing out that these same issues crop up again and again

https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...ew-mcconaughey

" Buyer's clubs were in real life co-operative social enterprises run by groups of mostly gay people. The film turns this into a rambunctiously rightwing message about the triumph of the individual the extremely straight individual. Because that's what he is. Totally straight. Yes, sirree."

Changing the focus to a character they can advocate as straight(even if it is historically inaccurate).
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 11:26 AM   #409
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
 
Ron_Tomkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 42,624
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Next movie with Hitler? He should only be portrayed by an actual neo-Nazi leader of German heritage. And then the parts of the persecuted Jews should only be played by actual Jews -preferably descendants of those who were victims of the Holocaust. It's not about playing a part, after all; it's about the experience.

Hamilton! should actually be shut down, according to this new paradigm of experiential entertainment. How can black/latino actors convey the experience of being the Founding Fathers? They certainly didn't express themselves through rap/hip hop, either. It's blasphemy, I tell ya.
I'm sure those who are scandalized by the situation with transgender actors will find a way to argument that those cases are different
#specialpleading
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan"

Carl Sagan
Ron_Tomkins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 11:39 AM   #410
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 11,466
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 11:59 AM   #411
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
And of course here is an article pointing out that these same issues crop up again and again

https://www.theguardian.com/film/201...ew-mcconaughey

" Buyer's clubs were in real life co-operative social enterprises run by groups of mostly gay people. The film turns this into a rambunctiously rightwing message about the triumph of the individual – the extremely straight individual. Because that's what he is. Totally straight. Yes, sirree."

Changing the focus to a character they can advocate as straight(even if it is historically inaccurate).

Yeah, that is definitely one of the more problematic portrayals of LGBTQ people to hit the screen. But that's nothing new for Hollywood, which tends to sensationalize and distort, to greater or lesser degrees, pretty much every portrayal of a real life person or event. Ahistorical romances and plot points are irritatingly de rigeur anytime a real-life story is adapted for mainstream film or television. Reality is always a casualty to Drama.

The white/straight/cis-washing of LGBTQ and POC characters, and seeing them effectively written out of their own history, is to my mind a much more serious issue than the questions of non-LGBTQ actors playing LGBTQ characters.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 12:11 PM   #412
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,504
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Yeah, that is definitely one of the more problematic portrayals of LGBTQ people to hit the screen. But that's nothing new for Hollywood, which tends to sensationalize and distort, to greater or lesser degrees, pretty much every portrayal of a real life person or event. Ahistorical romances and plot points are irritatingly de rigeur anytime a real-life story is adapted for mainstream film or television. Reality is always a casualty to Drama.

The white/straight/cis-washing of LGBTQ and POC characters, and seeing them effectively written out of their own history, is to my mind a much more serious issue than the questions of non-LGBTQ actors playing LGBTQ characters.
For the point of actors I think separating gender from sexuality in LGBTQ makes a lot of sense. It is getting to the point where actors can be gay and not have it seriously effect their careers or at least destroying them.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th July 2018, 12:57 PM   #413
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It is getting to the point where actors can be gay and not have it seriously effect their careers or at least destroying them.

I would disagree. It's definitely still hard for newer actors to be openly homosexual. Well-established actors who come out of the closet later in their careers aren't subject to quite as much of the exclusion and erasure pressures as newer, less established actors.

A lot of newer actors, especially those who are slated for "leading man/leading lady" roles are pressured to stay closeted, to preset as heterosexual, in order not to alienate potential heterosexual fans. It's a bit easier for women to be openly homosexual than men, but the pressures are still there for both of them.

Producers worry that having, for example, having a "heartthrob" leading man come out as gay will drive away the heterosexual (and often significantly religious) female fanbase, so there is a good deal of behind the scenes pressure to keep as heavily closeted as possible, because they need to keep the image of the actor as "accessible" as possible to those fans, to avoid damaging the fantasies that they've built up around the actor.

That is changing, yes, but very, very slowly. The television and film industry is notoriously risk-averse, and will always push for lowest-common-denominator to maximize its ability to profit. Hence the white/straight/cis-washing, inventing or sensationalizing events, creating love-interests where none previous existed, and the insistence on using big-name actors for roles over lesser-known or unknown actors who may otherwise be closer to ideal for the character being portrayed.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.