Zoolander 2 "mocking non-binary"

[FreshwaterSelkie]

I am sorry to start yet another trans thread, I don't want to add to the stream of trans topics overwhelming us all, but I've only recently had my revelation of the damage being done to feminism by all of this, and I'm still working through my thoughts on it all. This is what's set me off this morning.

The gist of it is that transactivists have launched a petition to boycott the new Zoolander film on the basis that Benedict Cumberbatch, who is playing an androdygnous comedy character is "offensive". They comment: "This is the modern equivalent of using blackface to represent a minority", and 'By hiring a cis actor to play a non-binary individual in a clearly negative way, the film endorses harmful and dangerous perceptions of the queer community".

I keep getting stuck in the logic failure loop! It's OK for non-binary people to utilise (appropriate?) whichever bits of gender performance they feel best express them, and that's fine, but if someone who doesn't feel non-binary does the same, then it's offensive. How do they know Cumberbatch is "cis"? He might be yearningly non-binary inside and terrified to come out! How would we know? Also, he's an actor, so his job is dressing up and pretending to be people he's not, which seems to have eluded the creators of this petition.

"Cis" people dressing up as non-binary = blackface, appropriative, offensive. Why doesn't that apply when it's born men dressing up and demanding to be treated as women?

And all this is based on a few seconds of material from the trailer, when the film hasn't even been released yet. It's Zoolander, every last person in it is bound to be portrayed as a TOTAL arse - really, it should be viewed as progress...

I heard a trans spokeswoman on the radio saying what a great job Julie Hesmondhalgh did in Corrie as she just played a woman

Oh I heard her on Woman's Hour and it made me cross - because there are of course so many roles for middle-aged women to start with that there's room for a "worthy" actor.

"I had always understood that drag was wholly embraced not just by the LGB........."
Drag was a gay MALE creation and occupation. Many lesbians and feminists did and do object to drag since some of it can be very misogynistic. But drag can also be seen as a part of gay male culture. Which a cross-over in some cases between camp/drag/pantomime dames etc.

The problem now seems to be that from the trans point of view, how do you tell the difference between a gay man in a dress doing drag, and an ex-gay, ex-man in a dress who is a transwoman? Or even a straight man in a dress at halloween? The point is, in terms of the 'it's a biological male wearing a dress' signals, you CAN'T. Yet we are supposed to detect the 'true-trans' signals to distinguish it from the 'bloke in a dress' and label one as an authentic woman, and the other as offensive bloke taking the piss out of transwomen. And on is supposed to be all fine and good and SAFE to let in the ladies, and the other is not...............

To be totally frank, I CAN'T tell the difference :-) My 'essential female essence' detector is obviously broken...............

I personally like Conchita Wurst, because as a bloke with a beard wearing a dress, he is at least actually challenging the gender stereotypes that males can't wear dresses, or that a male wearing a dress HAS to be somehow viewed AS a woman.

" that woman is free to be appropriated, derided and mocked in ways that other classes of people are not." Yep. Our identity can be treated like a costume, and we're transphobic if we point out that people WEARING a woman costume hence seeking to legitimise their status as 'a real woman' are doing just that! Because WE don't get to define ourselves, males do! Simple, even for bears of little brain! I'm sure Pooh could understand it................

Ahh. A sensible thread about trans' issues. What a relief.

Interesting articles, turnips.

Somedyke I agree. I don't think the problem with my not getting it lies with me...

I also like Tom Neuwirth/Conchita Wurst. He is challenging stereotypes by wearing a dress and looking attractive in it as a man, rather than trying to wear it as a parody or trying to look like a woman.

I couldn't care less about Zoolander 2. I never got how it was amusing that two not particularly attractive men were playing male models anyway.

"I've seen recently, on twitter mostly, a campaign from some within the LGB community to "drop the T"."
Frankly, many in the lesbian community were never that happy with the G anyway! At least we got the L out the front, but more often than not, 'gay' taken to mean both lesbian and gay, which then gets illustrated on the BBC with a picture of two men holding hands, hence disappearing lesbians yet again.

To be utterly frank, T was, for me, never really more the fact that years ago, gay people tended to be more relaxed as regards people who didn't conform to gender norms. So an obvious bloke in a dress would not be seen as anything exceptional or as a threat. So, a safe space. But now, I think that some formerly gay organisations see that the gay rights legislation at least has been passed, so why should they continue to exist (and attract funding from the gay community, where males have least tend to have quite a bit of disposable income)? Trans gives them a NEW platform -- even if many gay people DON'T see it as a continuation of gay rights struggles, and DON'T see the various theories and trans ideologies as fitting in naturally with gay rights issues.
From the people shouldn't have to conform to gender stereotypes and people shouldn't have to HIDE their nature/choices point of view, I think gays and lesbians are right behind that! But I think when it comes to the various trans beliefs around gender and sex, gay people don't necessarily agree with those.
Which is probably around the Germaine Greer point of view. But then she is supposedly just a big ole transphobe.............

A male who does not pretend to be female takes on a job pretending to be a male who does pretend to female is totally wrong as stipulated by males who... forget it.

Don't gay men in Iran undergo transgender reassignment surgery in order to remain with their partners? Surely this is a human rights issue.

Worse than that, many are forced to undergo SRS to avoid being put to death or they are forced by their families. Not just gay men but lesbians too - it's the only country in the world where FTT outnumber MTT.

Marina Hyne's lost in showbiz is about this today. Worth reading! She gives the 'its offensive' argument pretty short shrift.

If I started petitions every time a woman was made to look stereotypical in a movie trailer I'd never have time to do anything else.

This, this, a million times this.

That said, I do genuinely think (if the part actually is trans) that it would have been better for a trans actor to have played the part. In exactly the same way it boils my piss that disabled characters are so often played by able-bodied actors.

If these transwomen think that they are women why haven't they been fighting this hard to get women respected on screen, or are they only women when it suits them? I am thinking of those causing a fuss now not all the transwomen quietly getting on with their lives.

So where does the trans community stand on Eddie Redmayne (presumably straight and cis as he is married to a woman) playing a trans character in The Danish Girl?

I think it's pretty damn appropriative for the (mostly white, mostly male, mostly middle-class) trans activists to use the phrase "blackface" for something that isn't blackface.

I loved the original movie, as it was stupid and funny. I will go see this one, in the hope that it will also be stupid and funny.