Golden Globe - Best Actress

[PostingForTheFirstTime]

Was won by a transwoman.

Bloody hell, Potholes. There’s no end to the zealotry, is there?

Good point. But you’re not suggesting we’re in danger of going back to the 16th century are you?

Quite large parts of the world never seem to have left the 16th century in terms of women's rights.

Good point. But you’re not suggesting we’re in danger of going back to the 16th century are you?

Even if there were no danger of that (and as Potholes just noted, there are those who would be only too happy to see a return to those “values”), the point still remains that women, and only women, carry the legacy of these countless generations of exclusion from every field imaginable on the basis of our sex.

Our lives have all been impacted by that, whether we’re conscious of it or not. We live in this world, not apart from it. And the domination of the female sex by the male sex, and our exclusion from public life, has been an absolute mainstay of life in virtually every corner of the globe, with huge ramifications for us all.

Women still don’t have anything like equal representation in film and tv. Women still face endemic sexism in those industries. Over 40% of films being made still fail the Bechdel test: the default human is still male in those portrayals of the world we live in, and the female characters only exist insofar as they relate to the male characters. Not as fully actualised people in their own right.

It’s in the context both of that history and the current situation we have now that it is completely unacceptable to give an award meant for a female artist to a male one - a biologically male artist playing a biologically male character, moreover. We haven’t anywhere near redressed the balance yet, and here’s the pendulum swinging back towards more over-representation of male people already.

I would like to know how far back posters would be happy to accept the right's of women to be 'turned back' though.

Here we have a male, who has even started their career as a male, been through education as a male. Who has had extreme drug treatment, and extreme cosmetic surgery to replicate the features of a female only recently. Playing a male who transitioned in a TV show about male presenting as women.

No female would have been acceptable in that role.

Yet, this is claimed as a female achievement.

And a female who has worked her entire life, in a supremely sexist industry, missed out.

How many women's awards is acceptable to these posters to give up?

Such as the 'first' female four star in the US military? How exactly is this signifying that a female has finally been allowed to overcome another supremely sexist 'industry'?

Exactly what benefit is this to females?

We have posters telling us that 'I don’t think you need be too concerned.' 'But you’re not suggesting we’re in danger of going back to the 16th century are you?' 'Shes had all the treatment and surgery so I cant get wound up by this."

I'd like to hear from them exactly what benefit this is to females? How has this helped females in the TV & movie industry?

@ScribblingPixie

There was a great post on the first thread which suggested changing categories so they're divided by age as well as/instead of sex. That would be so helpful in highlighting discrimination in Hollywood.

Oooo this was me but the thread got deleted before I could see if anyone agreed or just thought I was batshit.

I definitely favour scrapping sex based segregation in these type of awards; I'm fully aware female actors would have an uphill battle (or continue to have) to ensure they are treated equally in Hollywood, but I think there's some fantastic work going on to ensure women's stories are being pushed into the limelight and I think this might help it. (See for example the work Reese Witherspoon is doing.)

Age based awards make significantly more sense to me; you'd get actors competing against actors who have likely had a similar length of service.

Who even knows, if those overpaid lovelies in Hollywood can achieve equal footing, it might open the way for more equal footing in other industries and professions.

I would like to know whether other posters who see little issue with women being pushed out of the prizes instituted to redress the imbalance in professional recognition for women are aware that the proportion of women in the UK parliament is at an all-time high... of 34%.

We may make up 51% of the country, but we are still systematically under-represented. We have not achieved equality of opportunity and now we are seeing those measures that were instituted to achieve our equality, reallocated to another group.

And what about the impact of this kind of chicanery on women in countries where they haven't left the 16th century yet? Do you not realise that patriarchal, misogynist men in the global south are perfectly happy to exploit these concepts to keep our sisters there in the 16th century?

If they have unisex award categories in order to be trans-inclusive, do you think women will ever get a fair shit at the prizes? They won't here.

Consider this newspaper article from 2018, in Mexico.

extract

Mexico’s electoral tribunal has disqualified 15 male candidates who pretended to be transgender to get around gender parity rules in the southern state of Oaxaca.

The indigenous Zapotec community of the isthmus of Tehuantepec has long recognized a third gender of transgender people known asmuxes– who are born with male bodies, but identify as neither male or female.

Electoral rules in Oaxaca allow muxes to occupy candidacies designated for women.

On Friday, the tribunal – the final referee in political and electoral matters – ruled that the disqualified candidates were not known to bemuxesbefore the candidate registration period.

Two others candidates who had been disqualified by state electoral officials on similar grounds were ruled eligible, however, as they had consistently identified as transgender. The tribunal ordered the candidacies vacated by the disqualified candidates be filled by women.

The ruling proved thorny for the tribunal, which said in a statement: “The manifestation of belonging to a gender is sufficient to justify the self-registration of a person.”

But the tribunal added: “Electoral authorities must take care with the possible misuse of self-registration, to not permit … the transgender identity be utilized in a deceptive way to comply with the constitutional principle of equity.”

(Continues)

“Not a single spot designated for men was filled by a transgender person. However, 19 places designated for women … were filled by men who say they’re transgender,” said Anabel López Sánchez, director of the Women’s Citizenship Collective in Oaxaca, which denounced the phoney candidates in May.

Mexico has gradually introduced gender parity rules over the past two decades. Previous rules mandated a 60-40 gender split in nominations, while a constitutional reform in 2013 required a 50-50 balance in all congressional candidacies.

But candidates have attempted to get round the law from the start. In 2009, eight female lawmakers requested leaves of absence immediately after taking their oath of office and were replaced by male substitutes.

From
www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/22/mexico-elections-fake-transgender-candidates-disqualified

The golden globes are currently being boycotted due to their lack of diversity. Methinks this was a cynical move to look tres woqué!

The actor said that winning this award would encourage little girls from the Latin community that they could grow up and win one too... No. It's literally another male taking an award away from 4 outstanding females.

In Bangladesh, 14.29% of parliament seats are reserved for women. Like other countries across the world, 50% of the population is female. The most generous estimates indicate that transgender individuals compromise between 0.8 and 0.16% of the population of Bangladesh.

And yet, this subset of male people gets dibs on the 14.29% seats reserved for women to ensure women's political participation. The men who don't identify as transgender are not willing to subtract seats from the other 300 seats and reserve those in a separate category for transgender candidates. This mean every single successful male transgender candidate will be one less woman in parliament but NOT one less man.

extract

The Bangladesh parliament is comprised of 350 seats. Of these seats, 50 have been reserved for women since 2010, in an attempt to increase the representation of women in politics. In December 2018, Bangladesh’s parliament saw the highest number of women to be directly elected to the Lower House – though skepticism remained about the level of influence female members of parliament would actually have in a nation with staunchly patriarchal values. Less than two months after an election result that women greeted with cautious optimism, it has been announced that biologically male transgender-identified people will be permitted to take seats allotted to women. The most generous estimates indicate that transgender individuals compromise between 0.8 and 0.16% of the population of Bangladesh.It has been confirmed thateight “Hijras” – men who identify as women – will be vying for political seats in an election that is scheduled to be announced on February 17, 2019. If all eight of the individuals enter parliament, the trans population will hold nearly 2.3% seats in parliament, which is several times greater than their proportion of the general population. “There are 300 seats but we only have 22 women MPs [members of parliament],” Rita Roselin Costa,convener of the Women’s Desk at the Catholic Bishops Conference of Bangladesh, pointed out to Ucanewswhen discussing women’s constant under-representation in parliament. “Half of the population is female, so women deserve at least one-third of the seats in a direct election.” Most Bangladeshis frown upon their female family members entering politics. In Bangladeshi tradition, leadership in both domestic and public spheres is regarded as the man’s role, while the woman’s time-honored place is in the home, with her role being to reproduce and nurture the family. This is systematically reinforced by religious, political and cultural norms. While Bangladesh ranks 89th worldwide in terms of female parliamentary representation, and women hold many of the most important leadership positions, the political power is more symbolic than actual. Hazera Khatun, who holds a reserved women’s Parliament seat (RSWP) for the Worker’s Party, stated: Negative bias against women still exists in the political parties. Our male colleagues do not want to see us rise, and we face discriminatory attitudes even from our leaders. “Some of them tease us as parliament’s ‘call girls,'” said anotherRSWP.“It is really sad that many of our elected male colleagues do not look upon [us] with respect.” The 50 women who fill parliamentary seats reserved for women are not taken as seriously as the 300 elected parliamentary members, who are primarily men. RSWPs are allotted onlyone-third of the 400 million in funds that elected members of parliament receive toward development each year. Councils are required to seek the opinion of elected members, but not of RSWPs. RSWPs are not given as much access to the electorate, and are not taken as seriously by their constituency. In addition, when elected parliamentary members and RSWPs share a constituency, the elected official is often hostile to the RSWP. In at least one case, an elected male parliamentary member threatened an RSWP, whom he discovered had visited their constituency while he was abroad. His supporters attacked a prize-giving ceremony she intended, leading to the injury of many children, the February 4, 2016 issue of daily national newspaper theBangladesh Pratidinreported.

Continue reading Men Who Identify As Women May Fill the 14.29% Bangladeshi Parliament Seats Reserved for Women | Women Are Human. Read more at: www.womenarehuman.com/men-may-now-fill-the-14-29-of-bangladeshi-parliament-seats-reserved-for-women/

I want everyone who sees zero issue with this to tell me why the participation of males who identify as transgender is more important than the participation of females.

@oncemoreunto

Good point. But you’re not suggesting we’re in danger of going back to the 16th century are you?

Quite large parts of the world never seem to have left the 16th century in terms of women's rights.

There's really quite remarkable parallels with the 16th century and this particular political lobby, in particular the reformation where people were hounded for not having the political belief of the time, swearing it to it, there's several candidates for Cromwell and Wolsey et al. All we're lacking is a spoiled, insane monarch although Boris is doing his little best there. And certainly women's rights are being galloped back there at the speed of light.

There are quite a few historical parallels.

Artichokeleaves

Agreed. I came across this post yesterday, posted by a transwoman, on the 8th of January 2022.

Text of screenshot, for those using screenreaders

If we could submerge every single TERF in a submarine made of bread for 9,000 hours I think that would be a fitting punishment for being mentally inept. #terf #JKRowling #anritrans #diehorribly #drowning #luckyIdonthavesupergirlpowers

21st century witch-ducking. And may I say that I don't appreciate this person's underlying presumption that they are entitled to punish and execute anyone they deem "mentally inept". I've known a lot of cognitively impaired people, and they are humans, fully entitled to human rights.

The idea they aren't is also very 16th century.

Ah, it was you ReeseWitherfork, how appropriate! I don't know much about your namesake's production company, going to read up on her as I always like her acting work.

@Helleofabore

I would like to know how far back posters would be happy to accept the right's of women to be 'turned back' though.

Here we have a male, who has even started their career as a male, been through education as a male. Who has had extreme drug treatment, and extreme cosmetic surgery to replicate the features of a female only recently. Playing a male who transitioned in a TV show about male presenting as women.

No female would have been acceptable in that role.

Yet, this is claimed as a female achievement.

And a female who has worked her entire life, in a supremely sexist industry, missed out.

How many women's awards is acceptable to these posters to give up?

Such as the 'first' female four star in the US military? How exactly is this signifying that a female has finally been allowed to overcome another supremely sexist 'industry'?

Exactly what benefit is this to females?

We have posters telling us that 'I don’t think you need be too concerned.' 'But you’re not suggesting we’re in danger of going back to the 16th century are you?' 'Shes had all the treatment and surgery so I cant get wound up by this."

I'd like to hear from them exactly what benefit this is to females? How has this helped females in the TV & movie industry?

This.

Just had a reply to my complaint to the BBC about their inclusion of tw in their women of the year . It’s taken them about 6 months to tell me that because someone had decided to extend the category to include tw, that they were entitled to do so. Absolutely circular nonsensical argument . Why should we have to accept this? Why can’t there be a trans category in ll these awards ?

@EachandEveryone

I loved Pose and thought she was brilliant in it. Shes had all the treatment and surgery so I cant get wound up by this.

No amount of surgery can make a woman.