Izzard as female reimagining of Dr Jekyll, anyone ?

as I understand it the role of Dr Jekyll has been rewritten as a female character and Eddie Izzard who has worn female attire for years has been asked to play the role.



Yes, we know.
Do you really think clothes maketh a woman?

I have been wearing trousers & jumpers for years, with sensible shoes. Does that make me a man, or suitable to play a male role?

trisher

Pammie1

* So actually it isn't as simple as a man playing a woman but it is another aspect to gender bending. Great to see!*

So you see yet more erosion of the role of natal women as great ?

How can it be erosion of the role of natal women Pammie1? If you rewrite a male character as a woman have you eroded the rights of natal men?
If a man dances a woman's part in a ballet have you eroded the rights of a natal woman?
If a woman plays a man's part in a drama have you eroded the rights of a natal man?
If a man plays the part of a woman in a drama have you eroded the rights of a natal woman?
It's called gender bending! Long may it continue and develop

And you’ve purposely avoided the issue here. A traditional male role has been rewritten as female and then the role has been given to a man who dresses as a woman. So yes, it’s the erosion of the role of natal women.

Why are we all assuming Nina Jekyll is a cis woman? Given the casting, it’s much more likely she’ll be a trans woman.

Thanks Pammie1. Your explanation makes it clear, but I fear you are wasting your breath with some posters.
If you change a male role to a female role then give the female role to a male pretending to be female, it’s not just the erosion of chance for an AHF to take the female role, it turns it into a farce.

Cis woman. The very words.
Please, please stop this happening
I am not a fucking cis woman.
What does cis actually mean?

Sorry. I’m a bit emotional about this.
Better stick to Wordle.
What a time to be alive

AmberSpyglass

Why are we all assuming Nina Jekyll is a cis woman? Given the casting, it’s much more likely she’ll be a trans woman.

Even if the writer is meaning for the character to be a transwoman why didn't they cast a female in the role?
Cis is an offensive term to many of us and requests have been made for it not to be used.

AmberSpyglass

Why are we all assuming Nina Jekyll is a cis woman? Given the casting, it’s much more likely she’ll be a trans woman.

Good point AmberSpyglass . The role may also have been written specifically with Eddie Izzard in mind. That happens sometimes.
As for the erosion of natal women. It's happened all the time in films and plays, men acting women's roles, women portraying men. The argument seems to be that because the character is originally male and has been rewritten as female someone who was identified as female at birth has to play it. It is the usual discriminatory shit

But trisher, the discrimination and is coming from you too. Saying that a part written for a female should be played by a female is not discrimination and not the rather vulgar word you used either.

FarNorth you may find cis offensive and if so you are quite entitled to ask it is not used about you, you are not entiitled to stop others using it. And in this instance it is not being used about you.

Mollygo

But trisher, the discrimination and is coming from you too. Saying that a part written for a female should be played by a female is not discrimination and not the rather vulgar word you used either.

Oh I used a vulgar word how very unladylike of me!

AmberSpyglass

Why are we all assuming Nina Jekyll is a cis woman? Given the casting, it’s much more likely she’ll be a trans woman.

cis is a term which is offensive to many and best not used.

Why would you cast a cis woman in a trans woman’s role? That doesn’t make sense.

trisher

AmberSpyglass

Why are we all assuming Nina Jekyll is a cis woman? Given the casting, it’s much more likely she’ll be a trans woman.

Good point AmberSpyglass . The role may also have been written specifically with Eddie Izzard in mind. That happens sometimes.
As for the erosion of natal women. It's happened all the time in films and plays, men acting women's roles, women portraying men. The argument seems to be that because the character is originally male and has been rewritten as female someone who was identified as female at birth has to play it. It is the usual discriminatory shit

So, now it’s ‘discriminatory shit’ to discuss this but it’s not discriminatory shit to receive online abuse for saying you’re proud to be a natural woman. I’m out.

It's not 'shit'. It is part of the pattern of women being pushed aside to make room for men, which underlies a lot of the TWAW mantra.

Izzard is not a transwoman. If that were the case, and if he then only played female roles, then fair enough. But no - he wants the best of both worlds.

Men 'competing' against women in sport, female shortlists becoming meaningless, Adele getting flak for saying that she enjoys being a woman, people who are adamant that TWAW being unable to say what a woman actually is - all of that is discriminatory, and when feminists are accused of transphobia for their objections, it gets utterly, utterly tiresome.

AmberSpyglass

Why would you cast a cis woman in a trans woman’s role? That doesn’t make sense.

It would if you felt that TWAW, but if not, then I suppose the role would go to a man? Or just an actor, really. I'm not sure that there are enough trans actors to corner all the roles, are there? Genuine question.

If so, then it would make sense to cast them in the role of transwomen, but Izzard is not a transwoman - or not as I understand it anyway.

Trisher I never said you were unladylike, I have no idea whether your GN persona reflects your true persona. I said you used a vulgar word.

AmberSpyglass

Why would you cast a cis woman in a trans woman’s role? That doesn’t make sense.

So in that case a transwoman may only act in a part that is described as a transwoman, she can never act the part of a natal woman, because she isn't one. Not going to be too many opportunities for transmen or transwomen actors then unless it beccomes law that every production must include a trans character.

trisher The argument seems to be that because the character is originally male and has been rewritten as female someone who was identified as female at birth has to play it. It is the usual discriminatory shit so I take it you are against all that 'shit' aimed at Eddie Redmayne for portraying a transwoman when he isn't one? Good to know you're not a hypocrite.

There are quite a few parts which were originally written for men which have gone to a woman- Ripley in the Alien films for example. Actors audition for parts and sometimes a part is written with an actor in mind. It's simply who fits the part best and in this case it's Eddie Izzard. Everything else is just irrelevant and the usual "I'm not prejudiced but"

trisher It's simply who fits the part best and in this case it's Eddie Izzard. Everything else is just irrelevant and the usual "I'm not prejudiced but"
Have you nothing to say about the flack Eddie Redmayne received then? Or is it a case of "I'm not a hypocrite but...."?

I have never seen the Alien films but is Ripley written as an obviously male character but acted by an obviously female actor?

Talk about tedious, offensive, confrontational nonsense.
It is the usual discriminatory shit’ . Yes indeed, directed at women

Yes.

Rosie51

I have never seen the Alien films but is Ripley written as an obviously male character but acted by an obviously female actor?

Yes. Originally a male character when the script was written Sigourney Weaver was in the film. It's not the only instance. Characters often change when the parts are cast, they also change sometimes in re-makes of older films.

I'm not keen on Eddie Redmayne although I know he is very succesful I believe he said after playng the part that transgender parts should go to transgender actors. I wouldn't condone any condemnation of an actor for a part they played.