CW network working on Batwoman series

[Reverend]

I guess I never really thought of gays as being that kind of a group.

Which is all too often the core problem for minorities in regards to how others treat them.
It wasn't all that long ago that "Blacks" or "The Poor" or "Women" all fell into that state of non-personhood in the minds of society.

And if that's not enough, just look at it from the perspective of a jobbing LBGTQ actor: there are scant few (good) roles made specifically for them as it is. Casting someone outside their group to portray a member of said group while they're already struggling to be noticed as it is is just grossly unfair and discriminatory.

 

[theenglish]

Right. That's why it's called acting. Actors portray characters. in Star Trek The Next Generations holodeck adventure The Big Goodbye, Patrick Stewart was an Englishman portraying a Frenchman portraying an American. It's called acting.

Gay roles shouldn't be denied straight actors the same way that straight roles shouldn't be denied gay actors.

But this isn't really the case here. CW decided they specifically wanted a gay actor to play Batwoman. They could have chosen otherwise and as long as the actor was solid any backlash would quickly die down. What is the status of the other actors in the CW whose characters are gay?

 

[JD]

Which is all too often the core problem for minorities in regards to how others treat them.
It wasn't all that long ago that "Blacks" or "The Poor" or "Women" all fell into that state of non-personhood in the minds of society.

And if that's not enough, just look at it from the perspective of a jobbing LBGTQ actor: there are scant few (good) roles made specifically for them as it is. Casting someone outside their group to portray a member of said group while they're already struggling to be noticed as it is is just grossly unfair and discriminatory.

It's not that gays were non-people for me, it's just that people being gay was such a non-issue for me that I never really gave that much thought to how much of an issue it was for other people.
I didn't really think of gays as a group because I just never really separated them out from other people. OK, I honestly have no idea if this is a bad thing or a good thing.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I don't know if this would be entirely the same situation since being white and not black is an obvious visual thing, a white person can't convincingly play a black person without going into black face. It's not that hard to a straight person to pretend to be gay.

No, it Is not the same by any stretch of the imagination, and its height of self-serving ignorance for anyone to assume a white person playing black would carry the same issues as a straight person playing gay (or the reverse). The reason black face (and its fellow, grease painted sub-industry in Hollywood's past) is that being a black person cannot be boiled down to a surface matter separate from ancient, familial, psychological, visual building blocks/relations & experiences that is not to be found in any other classification or appropriated like wearing a shoe style. That is not a responsibility (or necessary restriction) when straight actors have convincingly portrayed gay anymore than gays convincingly taking on straight roles, hence the reason no one in the audience questioned the casting of gay or straight as the other. So, the idea of anyone pulling the false equivalency game in regards to the "dos and don'ts" of casting where race and sexual orientation in concerned is either self-serving or completely divorced from the reality of racial perception/action in history and the arts.

 

[Awesome Possum]

No, it Is not the same by any stretch of the imagination, and its height of self-serving ignorance for anyone to assume a white person playing black would carry the same issues as a straight person playing gay (or the reverse). The reason black face (and its fellow, grease painted sub-industry in Hollywood's past) is that being a black person cannot be boiled down to a surface matter separate from ancient, familial, psychological, visual building blocks/relations & experiences that is not to be found in any other classification or appropriated like wearing a shoe style. That is not a responsibility (or necessary restriction) when straight actors have convincingly portrayed gay anymore than gays convincingly taking on straight roles, hence the reason no one in the audience questioned the casting of gay or straight as the other. So, the idea of anyone pulling the false equivalency game in regards to the "dos and don'ts" of casting where race and sexual orientation in concerned is either self-serving or completely divorced from the reality of racial perception/action in history and the arts.

How do you act gay? If any actor can do it convincingly, tell me how.

 

[Reverend]

It's not that gays were non-people for me, it's just that people being gay was such a non-issue for me that I never really gave that much thought to how much of an issue it was for other people.
I didn't really think of gays as a group because I just never really separated them out from other people. OK, I honestly have no idea if this is a bad thing or a good thing.

You have the luxury of not having to think about them. They do not.

Being gay or trans or gender fluid is not like having a different hair colour. It's not something you choose, nor is it superficial. Sexuality (or lack of it) is fundamental to any person's sense of who they are.
For example: I'm a cis gendered hetrosexual and whether I like it or not, that effects how I see myself, how I act within and am seen by society in a plethora of different ways, both major and minor. Lucky for me, I happen to be within a society where "cis gendered hetrosexual" is not only accepted, but downright expected of most people.

People who are not cis gendered hetrosexual's don't have it so easy, so how about we at least try not to making any more difficult for them to simply exist that it already is?

 

[JD]

Looking at it from that perspective I guess I can see why this is so important, and why who plays gay people would matter.

 

[DigificWriter]

I don’t know a single example of a cishet actor playing a LGBTQ character that isn’t somewhat problematic

I can give you several examples off the top of my head:
Willow Rosenberg
Tara Maclay
Sara Lance
John Constantine

It is the same. The mere act of a cishet person playing a LGBTQ person is reducing them to stereotypes in one way or another whether or not they intended to.

Let's not get carried away here.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I can give you several examples off the top of my head:
Willow Rosenberg
Tara Maclay
Sara Lance
John Constantine


Let's not get carried away here.

They do, did you ever think for a second that a LGBTQ person might be more aware of LGBTQ issues and feelings than you? You're being incredibly condescending.

 

[DigificWriter]

You're being incredibly condescending.

How? By not agreeing with your hyperbolic claim that all instances of non-LGBT actors playing LGBT characters reduce said characters to stereotypes?

 

[Awesome Possum]

How? By not agreeing with your hyperbolic claim that all instances of non-LGBT actors playing LGBT characters reduce said characters to stereotypes?

You’re the one trying to tell a queer trans woman how she should feel about how people like her are represented. Come on educate me, you think you know so much, tell how I should be grateful.

 

[JD]

@Awesome Possum, I just want to apologize if any of my posts came across as offensive, that was not my intent at all.
I have to confess, you're the first person who I know is gay that I've ever spoken about this kind of stuff with.

 

[DigificWriter]

You’re the one trying to tell a queer trans woman how she should feel about how people like her are represented.

No. I gave you some examples of non-LGBT actors playing LGBT characters where said portrayals weren't/aren't stereotypical, and expressed an opinion that you'd gone a bit too far in one of your assertions.

I also expressed an opinion that what you want to see in terms of representation isn't practical or logistically feasible.

None of that is demonstrative of my being condescending towards you or your viewpoint or telling you how you should feel about anything, but I'm sorry that you feel otherwise.

 

[Awesome Possum]

No. I gave you some examples of non-LGBT actors playing LGBT characters where said portrayals weren't/aren't stereotypical, and expressed an opinion that you'd gone a bit too far in one of your assertions.

I also expressed an opinion that what you want to see in terms of representation isn't practical or logistically feasible.

None of that is demonstrative of my being condescending towards you or your viewpoint or telling you how you should feel about anything, but I'm sorry that you feel otherwise.

Yes, you keep insisting and ignored my counterarguments which were backed by the accounts of actual LGBTQ actors. So I find it condescending that you refuse to discuss any of it and continue to trot out your disproven claims.

I'll take your examples. Willow was a great character, but imagine that she came out as a lesbian because the actress herself came out herself. Taking her courage in real life and applying to the character in a time with few examples of lesbian women. This is of course ignoring all the bi-erasure of the Willow character because that's a road I don't have time to go down.

 

[theenglish]

I think we have to remember that the nineties were a different time as well. When Ellen came out and then had her character come out, the show tanked relatively quickly thereafter....not because she was a lesbian but because the show became mostly about her being a lesbian. This is not to say it was poor writing, more that it became more of a one note show.

Around the same time, Will and Grace was hugely popular and the two leads were straight. The show is still lauded today for its nuanced portrayal of its characters. Similarly, Buffy is praised for its portrayal of Willow.

Now, I am a white straight male that has no idea what cis means--but every time I apply for a job I have to sign that I understand that I am applying to an equal opportunity employer and that being a white straight male I may lose to someone with equal experience and skills who is not. (I don't have a problem with this.)

My point being is that it is wonderful that we are getting actors who more closely represent their on screen characters and that we are getting more diversity. The problem would come if it were exclusively LGBT actors that got LGBT roles. That would then be discrimination in the same way it would be discriminating to ban LGBT actors from playing straight.

Diversity can be encouraged and supported without placing absolute restrictions.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I was trying to make my original post clearer, but I’ve guess you’ve decided to ignore that too. Thanks for wasting my time.

I already understood your original post. And I *never disagreed that LGBTQ characters should be played be LGBTQ actors*. In fact, I explicitly agreed with that (twice) because doing otherwise is, in the context of the present world, taking away from those actors who sadly are not guaranteed an equal opportunity at getting a shot otherwise. I did mention that in an ideal future world, this would not be a problem anymore and this solution would therefore also be unnecessary, but I also immediately added that such a future is nowhere near reality and may never become reality. Yet somehow your response to me focused on the opportunities facing the actors and acted like I said the exact opposite of what I actually said in regards to that subject.

My actual point, from the beginning, was that I cannot agree with your belief that it is simply impossible for an non-LGBTQ actor to convincingly play an LGBTQ character. I do not believe it is supported by the history of acting as a profession (in which, among many other things, I have seen women convincingly play men, men convincingly play animals and LGBTQ people convincingly play non-LGBTQ people).

What I did not say, previously, because it took me a bit of mulling to really understand the core of what it is that bothers me about your statement is that the very nature of your argument seems itself built on the idea that the LGBTQ experience is so completely alien (or other) that no non-LGBTQ person can ever hope to understand even the smallest bits and pieces of it (bits and pieces are very often the standard basis from which any actor has to work). I find this argument, firstly, obviously incorrect, at least to some extent, since all the hardships that you have mentioned have in fact also been perpetrated against other groups in the world, so a non-LGBTQ person from such a group obviously should be able to understand them quite readily (if they were willing to try, of course). More importantly, I find this argument disturbing because it implies that there can never be any true or even half-true understanding between LGBTQ people and non-LGBTQ people, because we are apparently literally incapable of ever understanding each other in any way. I don't believe that. I don't believe it is supported by history, and I don't believe it is supported by any of my personal experiences with LGBTQ people, including yourself.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

How do you act gay? If any actor can do it convincingly, tell me how.

The point is there is no equivalency in hiring actors / performances who in no way cannot psychologically (not to mention physically) fathom the depth of racial identity/history/biology/action of non-white characters without resorting to explosively racist, historically inaccurate caricatures. On the other hand, we have seen that all that made a specific gay character never prevented a straight actor from taking the role, or in the reverse. All that was needed was the right actor for the part. Again, Quinto is gay--Spock is not, but he was able to carry the role, one I might add was a front and center heterosexual romantic take stronger than anything ever attempted by straight Nimoy in the role, yet no one complained about his landing the role. Similarly, Laura Innes--a straight actress--played ER's Kerry Weaver (the character eventually coming out of the closet) and was praised for her handling of the role despite being straight. That cannot happen where race is concerned in casting.

 

[Awesome Possum]

So you have nothing, thought so.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

No, you tried to sell an incredibly false equivalency between race and sexual orientation in casting, which is offensive in the extreme if anyone actually knows history, understands racial identity / the media's failings in this regard (which is tied to its social and political uses throughout time) and has...common sense. It is clear you do not. Moreover, in the case of gay actors playing a straight character or a straight actor cast as gay, the examples of success are there (which does no apply to race) as I--and others have presented in this thread, which deflates your ever-rickety stand that only gays should play gay characters (and yet you don't seem to have an issue with gay actors playing straight characters).

 

[Awesome Possum]

No, you tried to sell an incredibly false equivalency between race and sexual orientation in casting, which is offensive in the extreme if anyone actually knows history, understands racial identity / the media's failings in this regard (which is tied to its social and political uses throughout time) and has...common sense. It is clear you do not. Moreover, in the case of gay actors playing a straight character or a straight actor cast as gay, the examples of success are there (which does no apply to race) as I--and others have presented in this thread, which deflates your ever-rickety stand that only gays should play gay characters (and yet you don't seem to have an issue with gay actors playing straight characters).

How are they different? Both are born the way they are, both deal with differing degrees of oppression throughout both history and their own lives, both routinely deal with issues throughout their daily lives that those in the majority do not. The issues they face are different, but like other races LGBTQ people are an identity and one that unfortunately is greatly influenced by those outside the group. LGBTQ people of color face even more issues since they have to deal with the issues of both.