AIBU to think gay roles for gay actors

[SqueakyCarrots]

Is basically pushing people to out themselves?

In what other career would it be ok to question people’s sexuality? What if the actor isn’t out or doesn’t want to be? What if it’s a teenage role and a teen actor- how can it be ok to question a child’s sexuality? What if the person themselves doesn’t know yet? How would they be expected to prove it? And wouldn’t pretending to be lgb something some would fake to get a role?

Sure there’s a need to address those who feel discriminated against because of their sexuality within the film industry. Sure it would be great to look at how gay people are represented in films, narratives that aren’t stereotypical or insensitive. But the idea that gay roles should only ever go to gay actors seems to be on every social media feed and I don’t see any concerns about it in response.

@OwMyNeck

I'm not arguing there aren't a lot of gay people in Hollywood, I agree that a lot of actors now are likely to come out/ or be outed later.

I'm arguing that they are under represented in certain roles and encouraged to follow dont asks dont tell to protect their career

Ok, but I was responding to a particular point, which wasn't true.

I don't think don't ask don't tell is true anymore, if anything every bugger wants to be something, anything, on the "diversity spectrum". Is there any actor under 40 who isn't coming out as queer, non binary, bi, trans, bi-curious, pansexual, asexual, or whatever the fuck have you?

I'm sure there is discrimination - but it's not everywhere. In my (admittedly limited) experience of the film and tv industry, the focus is on finding the best person for the role - so thats to do with looking similar enough to be family, having good on screen chemistry with your on-screen colleagues and being believable in the role.

The danger (for every actor) is being typecast. So if a gay actor is seen as playing gay roles, there's a real possibility that they will end up only being considered for gay roles. I don't think any actor would want that.

So how would gay roles for gay actors be balanced with that? I'm not sure.

@Fallox

That’s interesting.

Just googled some more and came up with this, from Equity website.

“Equity believes that artists from diverse backgrounds (on the basis of gender, ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation) should be considered more seriously for any role - and not confined solely to those written with their own personal characteristics in mind.”

Therefore, they suggest anyone can play any role.

@Standrewsschool

I think its important to look at their policy as a whole

Equity calls for greater incidental portrayal – where the artist’s personal characteristics are incidental to the role – providing real opportunities to increase diversity on stage and screen

Equity believes that artists from diverse backgrounds (on the basis of gender, ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation) should be considered more seriously for any role - and not confined solely to those written with their own personal characteristics in mind.
Equity is concerned that casting of people from diverse backgrounds on screen and on stage continues to be tokenistic and calls for greater representation in leading roles.
Equity believes that productions should ensure they audition a diverse list of artists for every role
Equity asks productions to make proper use of the occupational requirement provisions in the Equality Act 2010[1] - and to consider using the ‘tie-breaker’ provisions in the Equality Act 2010[2] - when casting any role
Equity calls for greater care and consideration by productions when casting roles where the artist’s personal characteristics are relevant to the role:

Make proper use of the occupational requirement provisions in the Equality Act 2010[3] when casting roles written for a character with a diverse background – ensuring that more artists reflect the character’s characteristics where it is relevant
Equity recognises that non-disabled artists playing disabled characters, is widely considered to be offensive to disabled people. Equity understands that on occasion, it may not be possible to cast a disabled artist but calls on productions to follow these principles in every instance:
Actively seek an artist whose characteristics reflect that of the role by:

And goes on to suggest solutions

It’s a bit tricky. I can understand why some people would want this but the whole point of being an actor is to be something you’re not.

If there was a rule that said a [characteristic] role can only be played by a [characteristic] actor, then Shakespeare and period dramas would be largely limited to white actors (except for Othello and Cleopatra, obviously!).

A well intentioned rule could end up limiting diversity in some areas.

YANBU, it's ridiculous. What next... only trained doctors should play doctors, and only convicted murderers should play murderers?

I don't care who acts a role, provided they can actually act - it's only the grown up version of make pretend, after all.

A quick Google says that in the top ten films of 2019 (as 2020 was an odd year for film). In the avengers film, lion King, frozen 2, spider man, captain marvel,joker, star wars, toy story, aladin and jumunji. Out of the top ten roles listed for each, of the 100 roles 97% were hetro actors.

Maybe they were just the right people for those parts? Maybe if you'd given those roles to someone else, the movie wouldn't have done so well? Although how star wars did well anyway is baffling considering how crap its become.

@Idefinatelyhavefriends

That's what I thought acting was - pretending to be something different. How far is this going to go? Should actors do accents? Can a rich actor play a poor character? I don't get it personally.

This !

@CakeRequired

Of course it could be coincidence.

Its the same as any place where representation is a bit off, women in stem, people being aged out of roles etc. One candidate vs another is impossible to make a judgement on. The theme only becomes obvious with the wider picture. Its nothing against any of the films individually

Its not to say that for example the casting director was making conscious choices based on that, or that they didn't pick the best person for the job.

Using the stem example, sometimes its totally unrelated, sometimes its a outright sexist interviewer, sometimes its a vague worry you won't fit in with the team, other times its because of other very related inequality issues but nothing to do with the company (women are less likely to study it, more likely to have part time experience etc thus education reforms are needed )

Sometimes its a whole range of factors eg who agents are promoting heavily, who's been offered roles before, pressure from film funders which could all be more difficult for certain types of people. Look at the number of actors that went to harrow/Eaton etc

I don’t who plays a tile as long as they are right for the part.

In terms or gay actors playing straight parts, the guy who plays Daniel in Coronation street is Openly gay and plays a heterosexual role

That should say plays a part