Of your a trans actor your racist tweets should be forgiven because your vulnerable and it's all so complicated

[mids2019]

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/feb/07/karla-sofia-gascon-emilia-perez-pr-tactics-ethics

Long article but the premise seems to be that being trans may mean you are particularly vulnerable and therefore not particularly politically astute. What may have been a quite reasonable distancing from an actor because of racism is portrayed a a witch hunt and the criticism of the actor should be reduced because of mental health concerns.

I think Hollywood maybe has dug a hole for itself on this one.

The conversation seems to have gone:

Trans person playing trans character! Amazing!

Trans person playing trans character plays worst possible stereotypes. Horrible!

Trans person nominated for awards, finally recognition of trans people! Amazing!

Trans person nominated for awards turns out to be an absolute arsehole and is damaging to trans people’s cause. Horrible!

Trans person gets cancelled for being absolute arsehole. Not sure what we’re supposed to do: trans but racist, but trans but Islamophobic, but need to be nice, but “she’s” horrible, I think, maybe? aaarghhh brain explodes.

Hilarious.

I read that yesterday and thought the Guardian wouldn't have said that if the actor in question had been a woman of the old fashioned variety.

Gina Carano, an actress, was sacked from The Mandalorian for a tweet.

The Graun didn't defend her. In fact it laid into her recently when it was announced that she was suing Disney and Lucasfilm.

But of course she's an actual woman.

It just seems such a convoluted article. The idea I think is that the criticism is disproportionate (?) and we such maybe forgive such tweets as trans people are troubled and that allows leniency (?). The implicit though unproven suggestion is that a journalist started digging because he was trans......

@NotBadConsidering

Trans people are vulnerable and not to be held responsible for their own odious beliefs and errors of judgment regarding other matters, and at the same time beacons of wisdom and sensitivity and entitled to the final say on what makes a person a woman?

I'm struggling with this.

A quote from the article: “But what’s really horrifying to me is that the most vulnerable person in the film, who previously was lauded and even fetishised, is now bearing the brunt of the ire and receiving no support.”
Fetishised?! An interesting choice of words there.

"Most oppressed minority" my left cheek...

“But what’s really horrifying to me is that the most vulnerable person in the film, who previously was lauded and even fetishised, is now bearing the brunt of the ire and receiving no support.”

Gascón isn't bearing the brunt of the ire and receiving no support because of the film. Gascón is getting criticised and ostracised because of Gascón's own words.

Crap and biased writing from the Graun. As usual.

Long article but the premise seems to be that being trans may mean you are particularly vulnerable and therefore not particularly politically astute

And this is exactly why society shouldn’t be capitulating to the outrageous demands of the trans lobby. Because the defining belief system is regressive and delusional, and relies on copious amounts of sexism, racism and unadulterated individualism. Lacking awareness of self and society is not a qualification for riding roughshod over established, consensual social norms.

Gosh, they really can't handle the cancellation they so readily promote and activate towards those who are on the side biologically reality, do they?

Diddums.

I still feel real sorrow over what has happened to the Guardian. I was a frequent reader for 20 years. It's depressing to see how low it has fallen. See also BBC obsession with drag queens and silence on gender critical news / court cases until it's literally unavoidable to report.

Sorry - but he’s obviously a bloke in a dress. End of.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/07/oscars-award-emilia-perez-progressive?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Marina Hyde's take on the story is better!

Ha I was just about to post a link to the Marina Hyde article. If you - understandably - don't want to give the Guardian any further clicks, here as a taster, are her thoughts on the phrase 'the wrong side of history' and all who use it (no names of course, she's far too clever):
'On which, before we conclude, a note: I can’t stand that infantilising, hectoring phrase, which has spent the past decade being the laziest but most successful way to force someone to agree with you. Ditto the idea that if you share any opinion – at all – with people on the other side of a supposed divide, then you should just consider what that makes you, and fall back into line with your tribe. What bollocks.'

She does pull her punches when it comes to pronouns, although I don't suppose the Guardian would have printed it otherwise.

“But everyone was on board for this amazing fairytale: an unknown becoming the first ever [out] trans actor up for an Oscar.”

And here lies the problem.

They were judging not on the story that the actors portrayed but on the story of one of the actors

Brilliant article!

Definitely a massive case of emperor’s new clothes syndrome - but no real surprise in the entertainment business that is Lala Land.

Urgh. That word "vulnerable".

It's like "nuance". Useful words when used correctly but now commonly found as a shortcut for virtue signalling and as a form of thought terminating cliche.

Nothing to see here folks. Transperson so vulnerable and Guardianista is capable of considerably more nuance than yow.

Male who’s happy to see a female lose their nomination and possible win at the Oscars in favour of him, while males lose nothing, turns out to be a not very nice or “progressive” person shocker.

I thought this article on the BBC was interesting- it’s written very fairly for them.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yvjd8nr3qo

it also includes pics of Gascon looking very clearly male and also a pic of the four leads with some, to me, body and facial language that suggests they are not doing much handmaidening at this point.

Yes - Hyde's observations is the Guardian's first genuinely considered and thoughtful post-election recognition of the damage done to US-inspired left-wing politics by the all-or-nothing positions on subjects like trans issues.

That the left bundles up ideologies into a single package that must be accepted whole played right into Trump's hands. Trans absolutism was a weak point, especially after Cass. Trump and his allies used a simple attack line:- that the global left is arrogant, delusional and dangerous to your children. Cass evidenced an area where that's actually true, and the failure of the US left to even consider Cass objectively was damning and disastrous. It proved Trump and Musk right, even if Trump and Musk's policies are much more harmful overall.

Labour was very careful to explicitly accept Cass - they read the change in the direction of the wind and adjusted their course. The Dems really needed to do that too... but didn't, because they're too far down their own rabbit hole.

This was going to be Hollywood's revenge for his executive orders on trans being abolished from schools and men being banned from women's sports. Instead it's turned into luvvies and virtue signallers turning on each other 😅🤣

So..is Marina Hyde GC now?

Yep. Bloke-in-dress playing a bloke-in-dress.

My heart bleeds for whichever biological female didn't get an award nomination because of this individual. The film is absolute trash. I don't feel sorry for someone who demands accolades, admiration and special treatment because of trans status, but is hoist by his own woke petard.