AIBU to be completely on the fence? Straight men playing 'gay' roles

[Wheresmykimchi]

Article here - www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/showbiz-news/corrie-star-hits-back-after-19618647

Russell T Davies has decided to cast only gay men in roles for an AIDS drama.

Peter Ash , who is a straight man playing a gay man in Coronation Street , disagrees.

I'm usually a dog with a bone , irritating poster on topics I feel passionately about and LGBT is one but on this I just can't decide.

I can see Russell's point given the nature of the drama , and I'm never sure I agree with people playing 'gay' , in theory

But then I look at the gay characters in soaps in recent years , Peter's character being am excellent example along with Aaron Lindsay in Emmerdale , Kate Connor and Sophie Webster in Coronation Street , and see Peters point that the whole idea is that there is no such thing as acting 'gay', they are playing people.

I'm so on the fence I've got splinters. AIBU?

@Jaypreen

Your'e reaching back a bit there aren't you?

The battles for acceptance are won. There's nothing 'special' about being gay - there never was - prejudice has largely vanished - hurrah! Time to move on. To continue to think, speak and act as though (British) homosexuals are beleaguered and victimised, [as though sexuality is even all that important] is damaging - but also strangely reactionary of you!

Jay , sorry I thoutht your previous comment was aimed at me and have just caught up.

This is not only offensive, but just completely wrong. Please don't derail what was a thought provoking and respectful thread.

A good actor can play a lot of roles. I dont think we should be regressing to the point of basically saying "no straights/gays allowed"

Idk, even if its just something as minor as casting roles for tv series, to me it just seems like segregation and we should be beyond that as a society.

[quote Wheresmykimchi]@SimonJT

Well, Anthony Cotton going for a role as Ste Hay in Hollyoaks who hates himself for being gay and is aggressive and angry - and vice versa.[/quote]
When you asked about what acting too or not enough gay would entail.

@donquixotedelamancha

I think it's fine to say actually this is a story about Something that disproportionally affected gay men and so that's who I'm casting

Why?
I think because it's about a particular story of Something adversely affecting a minority group. Same as if you wanted to only cast African American actors in a story about the slave trade in America rather than anyone with a set skin colour

Different imo to doing a generic movie even if it's a true story and saying well I'm only hiring straight men or I will only hire white men.

@SimonJT

*"Sigh.

It isn’t about ability to act. Its about representation."*

Then have a quota of LGBTQ+ actors to use. It makes no sense to say actors can only play their own sexuality, and it's none of the public's business what their sexuality is - they are playing a role.

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by under class, but if you take an under class boy who is white and one who is black, the child who is black is part of an oppressed minority and at a greater disadvantage to the white boy.

That’s no longer true. The highest percentage of underachievers are white working class boys.

@SnowflakeCulture

They are not straight anyway, even acting kissing is still kissing, if they were truly straight they wouldn't do it - so it's a non-issue!

Ridiculous comment.

[quote SleepingStandingUp]@donquixotedelamancha

I think it's fine to say actually this is a story about Something that disproportionally affected gay men and so that's who I'm casting

Why?
I think because it's about a particular story of Something adversely affecting a minority group. Same as if you wanted to only cast African American actors in a story about the slave trade in America rather than anyone with a set skin colour

Different imo to doing a generic movie even if it's a true story and saying well I'm only hiring straight men or I will only hire white men.[/quote]
I'm inclined to agree.

@VinylDetective

I’m not entirely sure what you mean by under class, but if you take an under class boy who is white and one who is black, the child who is black is part of an oppressed minority and at a greater disadvantage to the white boy.

That’s no longer true. The highest percentage of underachievers are white working class boys.

The black child still has the disadvantage of his ethnicity due to racism, the white boy doesn’t.

@Wheresmykimchi I still don’t understand how that relates to acting gay enough or not.

The black child still has the disadvantage of his ethnicity due to racism, the white boy doesn’t.

Oh ffs, even though he’s doing better? This is getting ludicrous.

[quote SimonJT]@Wheresmykimchi I still don’t understand how that relates to acting gay enough or not.[/quote]
Well..

I'm relating mainly to soaps as I think this is more what I'm driving at in terms of the spectrum of casting.

If you think about a character like Aaron Livesy, he is a young and angry man who took years to come out and still has moments of self loathing and hatred.

Sean Tully in Coronation Street is a well established, comedy gay man with all the lines and characteristics that entails.

Id imagine Danny Miller, the Aaron actor, would find it easier as a young straight man to nail one than the other convincingly.

But the industry isn’t fair! Casting isn’t fair otherwise the parts would be shared out equally with everyone and not just to the same handful of people. The people who choose casts can and do choose exactly who they want to cast anyway. The only reason we know that RTD cast gay men to play gay men is because he told us.

Ugly characters should only be played by ugly actors. Not realistic otherwise.

@VinylDetective

The black child still has the disadvantage of his ethnicity due to racism, the white boy doesn’t.

Oh ffs, even though he’s doing better? This is getting ludicrous.

White childs disadvantages Poverty Low aspirations of parents

Black childs disadvantages
Poverty
Low aspirations of parents
Ethnicity/racism

The black child has more barriers to success.

I’m also on the fence about this.

On the one hand I think there is a clear difference between gay/straight and able bodied/disabled. If you’re in a wheelchair it is physically impossible to play a character who isn’t in a wheelchair, so I think it’s fair to leave those roles for those who are disabled.

Obviously sexuality is completely different. But I think in practice it is harder for gay actors to get work sometimes and on that basis this could perhaps be justified.

@Wheresmykimchi Ah I don’t watch soaps.

comedy gay man with all the lines and characteristics that entails.

What do you mean by this?

@Whatsnewpussyhat

for discovery, i meant Grey, who is trans, not the adira, who is non-binary (and makes perfect sense for the character as they are the minds/memories of many people of different sexes from the past)

Being non-binary still makes no sense for Adira in respect to her having access to past hosts memories and experiences. They were a non binary human female before they got the symbiote.
The Trill do not change sexual preference or 'gender identity' when they receive a symbiote. They have access to the symbiote's experiences, they don't become someone else.

In discovery, the whole thing feels shoehorned in to appeal to the woke youth. I doubt people around in the 29th century will give a shit about pronouns.

Adira isn't trill? She is human. Grey was trill I thought and she was the nearest person when they died so got the symbiotic.

Also she was referred to as she /her for most of the first episodes she was in and then later said she wanted to be they as that is how they felt now.

[quote SimonJT]@Wheresmykimchi Ah I don’t watch soaps.

comedy gay man with all the lines and characteristics that entails.

What do you mean by this?[/quote]
I can't decide if you're being genuine and i have to be so careful don't I but

He's camp. He makes innuendo and characters make digs at him. He works in the factory with all women and goes on hen nights. Goes on nights out down canal Street. Is the bitchy, gossip friend. Very open and has has several partners.

Compared to even Paul Ash of the same soap who plays a very understated, private gay man who is coming to terms with his sexuality.

@TeachesOfPeaches

Ugly characters should only be played by ugly actors. Not realistic otherwise.

What about ugly Betty?

A director should be able to cast anyone s/he wants in any role (subject to producers wanting big names etc.)

In this case Davies wants to cast gay actors presumably because he thinks they’ll bring something he wants to the performance in this case. That’s fine. It’s equally fine that none of the lead actors in queer as folk were gay.

They are not straight anyway, even acting kissing is still kissing, if they were truly straight they wouldn't do it - so it's a non-issue!
What a ridiculous statement. Most actors would have a kissing scene with someone who is not their real partner, so it is irrelevant if the person they are kissing is their own gender, they would still have to act passion. Why would an actor/actress feel any more uncomfortable kissing someone of their own gender that they do not actually have feelings for, than someone of the opposite gender that they do not fancy?
While I do think that , on the whole gay or lesbian actors should play gay characters this often cannot happen in soaps for example where a character's (perceived) sexuality alters later in their development. In Emmerdale the character of Aaron was in it a few years before he admitted he was gay, so he was originally a straight actor in a straight role, should the actors be replaced as the story line develops and their true sexuality is revealed?

@Josette77

I think actors are paid to act. I don't see the issue. Can gay actors play "straight"?

Yes! Thats why I loved Frasier so much. Straight actors playing gay roles, gay actors playing straight roles.

hence why its called acting! Love frasier

@WestendVBroadway

*They are not straight anyway, even acting kissing is still kissing, if they were truly straight they wouldn't do it - so it's a non-issue!* What a ridiculous statement. Most actors would have a kissing scene with someone who is not their real partner, so it is irrelevant if the person they are kissing is their own gender, they would still have to act passion. Why would an actor/actress feel any more uncomfortable kissing someone of their own gender that they do not actually have feelings for, than someone of the opposite gender that they do not fancy? While I do think that , on the whole gay or lesbian actors should play gay characters this often cannot happen in soaps for example where a character's (perceived) sexuality alters later in their development. In Emmerdale the character of Aaron was in it a few years before he admitted he was gay, so he was originally a straight actor in a straight role, should the actors be replaced as the story line develops and their true sexuality is revealed?

I agree. And I think part of Danny's talent there was him going on the journey with Aaron.

They are not straight anyway, even acting kissing is still kissing, if they were truly straight they wouldn't do it - so it's a non-issue!

What a ridiculous statement. Most actors would have a kissing scene with someone who is not their real partner
@SnowflakeCulture does this count as cheating then?