“The dangerous transphobia of Roald Dahl’s “Matilda”

I agree.

His books recognise the political realities and the complex humanity of being a child. There is a book for most children where they will find themselves IMO.

I think Dahl as a person was likely deeply deeply damaged and flawed but I’m not sure why this would invalidate his actual books

I don’t think you get quite that depth and breadth of insight without being at least a bit damaged.

I used to subscribe to salon but gave up after a while, it is so extremist.

His books recognise the political realities and the complex humanity of being a child. There is a book for most children where they will find themselves IMO.

I think Dahl as a person was likely deeply deeply damaged and flawed but I’m not sure why this would invalidate his actual books.

I thought it was very peculiar that they had a man playing that character, as the character is a woman.

The fact they chose a man to play her shows the sexism in the people doing the casting. The idea that a woman written as having lots of masculine characteristics can be played by a man is sexist. Part of the reason I'm sure is that then they can have a bit of a pantomime dame stype thing going on - a man pretending to be a woman is funny and again this is due to sexism.

Has this person only seen it? Why don't they read the book? Saying that the show is the true version of what dahl wrote and that this character "really" being a man is a fact ie they are trans is a bit of a leap.

Offred is nailing it in my opinion - we recently listened to it in the car, and I had forgotten all the stereotyped side comments (like Blyton in the faraway tree) - but it still rings out - Matilda is the hero, it's about the child, and the exaggerated adults are all from a child's black and white view (I also agree about the passivity of Miss Honey, and Matilda being the one with the strength which inspires her to actually do something)

James and the Giant peach is the same, hell, Charlie and the chocolate factory - it's all a child hero, and the world viewed through that child's eyes.

Exactly what offred said.

The children are the heroes of Dahl’s books. All the adults are deeply flawed, and self absorbed and don’t see the children as people and this do damage.

I don’t even think it’s particularly sexist. It’s showing that the people who seem to be fluffy and perfect can do as much damage as the ogres. That appearances on the outside don’t always translate to what’s inside. And that children can and do have stronger moral compasses than grown ups.

Yet another EVERYTHING IS ABOUT MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME article from someone with absolutely zero self insight.

I very much doubt that Roald Dahl, who was born in 1916 and died in 1990, was even aware of trans issues, let alone that he was transphobic! Sexist, quite possibly (most of his generation are/were), but all this trans crap and back-dating it to things that were written long before 'trans' was a thing are nonsense.

I think it's more a pantomimey kind of thing in this show isn't it? Rather than being about trans.

Agree it's a bit shit.

But the idea of a masculine woman being played by a woman isn't sexist. Its the opposite, surely? As a woman would be showing a facet of womanhood that its unfashionable to show. In fact the idea of a large, aggressive woman is so unacceptable to society that its seen as better to get a man to play her. I can't see why a woman portraying a female character is more sexist than a man playing her.

Or does having her played by a man simply reinforce that masculine women are unacceptable?

Normally, but as we've seen, TRAs then latch onto the idea that this is a transwoman.

And yes, I dislike the idea of Trunchbull being played by a man because of all I’ve said.

Stranger things is my modern day Matilda.

I'm reading Matilda to DS2 at the moment. Transphobic?

So... because The Trunchbull displays characteristics which are traditionally considered more 'masculine', she must therefore be Trans? WTF!

Surely that is just reinforcing the old gender stereotypes and is therefore extremely misogynistic and possibly homophobic (are all butch women now actually trans? Jesus)?

The irony of protesting long and loud about how gender is all in the mind, it's a spectrum, it's fine to not confirm, etc etc - and then imposing the view that obviously anyone nonconforming MUST therefore be the opposite gender to their physical body! Seems to me that many TRAs are the most rigid thinking, repressed homophobes of all.

I think the whole point of dahls books is the children are people and the adults are caricatures....

That’s the whole point. That’s why honey and Trunchbull are extremes.

If you’ve read Matilda thinking that miss honey is perfect I think you’ve failed to understand the critique of passivity that I saw in it as a child. You’ve failed to understand that her character is the ‘good person who does nothing’ while trunchbull’s evil triumphs and that everything changes for Matilda when honey eventually takes a stand, having drawn strength from matilda’s example

If she was played by a very masculine woman, that would be more straightforward sexism.

Would it? Or does having her played by a man simply reinforce that masculine women are unacceptable?

Thats a fantabulous new word, lets keep it

Transphosphorylation wtf? Transphobia obviously, lol.

Transgender ideology and literary criticism discussed in this thread with following complaints in an article about Margaret Atwood's, 'The Handmaid's Tale'.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3245322-Transwoman-complains-that-The-Handmaids-Tale-should-include-them

their (implied) conclusion is that Miss Trunchball is a trans woman

Certainly not what Dahl would have intended. I can see the logic in that Trunchball is played by a man, though. If she was played by a very masculine woman, that would be more straightforward sexism.

Salon, the home of the questionable article:

www.thecut.com/2017/02/salon-shouldnt-have-unpublished-its-pedophilia-article.html

I think the irony of the article is that it is criticising both gender stereotyping and that in the story a woman acting outside of her gender stereotype is associated with being a villain. And yet their (implied) conclusion is that Miss Trunchball is a trans woman and the story is transphosphorylation, rather than that the story is sexist and reinforces gender stereotypes

Dahl IMO is important, and was important to me as a child (in an abusive home) because his books are about children being people and adults having flaws.

So I am learning from this thread the women of Mumsnet are much cleverer than the person who wrote the stupid article!

Much better analysis offred