I’ve name changed for this post, mainly because “J K Rowling trans explosion” was how I described Twitter to my partner this morning and I thought that phrase needs to be either a Mumsnet handle or a punk band.
The Redmayne debacle got me thinking back to when I went to see The Danish Girl at the pictures, which was before I knew anything at all about the trans rights debate (beyond being liberal and supportive of trans people as part of the LGBT umbrella), and even before I recognised that I was a radical feminist.
I thought the film was very poor in terms of writing and structure, but also at the time it really annoyed me because I thought it was an insulting portrayal of transexuality - a missed opportunity to provide insight and understanding into a marginalised group.
I thought it was absolutely ridiculous that Redmayne’s character put on a pair of stockings and immediately realised he was a woman. I thought it was superficial and unrealistic.I found it offensive - on behalf of transwomen - that being a woman was portrayed as nothing more than dragging up and mincing about. There’s more to it than that, I thought. Real women don’t mince - why on earth has he suddenly started mincing and simpering? Real transwomen don’t just put on women’s underwear one day and suddenly realise - in that very sexualised context - that they’re actually a woman.
The characterisation of his wife was just as annoying too - she was a walking cliche.
I’m somewhat fascinated that my instinctive response to the film was “that’s not what a woman is” and to find it offensive for both women and transwomen.
These days, I’m not so sure that the film was off the mark.