Izzard as female reimagining of Dr Jekyll, anyone ?

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!

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

FarNorth

trisher I did google it and realised that the difference is that, previously, parts were being played by someone of the opposite sex to the one originally intended.

So Maxine Peake and Fiona Shaw, as far as I can see, are females who were playing male roles with everyone accepting that fact.

This is not what Izzard is doing.
He is a male, playing a male role, while claiming to be female.

An equal comparison would be Izzard playing, say, Miss Marple as a male.

Just quoting myself here because you seem to have completely missed the point trisher.

Yes, those male cygnets were in roles normally danced by females.
Great. I loved it.

Izzard is a male who is going to act in a role normally given to a male.
Claims that the role has been 'reimagined as female' are ridiculous.

Perhaps you also think Dick Emery or Ronnie Barker could have been suitable to play Ms Jekyll, if they were still around?

Yup. The whole TWAW thing is not about the tiny minority of transpeople, many of whom are in despair at the way their cause has been hijacked by misogynists, but about the patriarchy pushing the rights of women back centuries.

It's called gender bending! Long may it continue and develop

Wow yes! There are far, far more roles for males, and especially older males than the female equivalents. Let's 'gender bend' them all 100% then we'll not have many out of work female actors but a heap more males. Then listen for the squeals of discontent haha

Long may it continue and develop

Why do you see it ('gender bending') as a good thing, trisha.

I can understand people seeing some circumstances, or some incidents as being positive, but why have you taken the stance that blurring all boundaries between the sexes is always good? (If I have misunderstood and you feel that there are times when there should be differences based on sex, I would be interested to know what they are.)

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

trisher

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

As for the cygnets the whole point of that ballet was men playing the traditional roles of women so if that is really what you object to I can't see how that can be acceptable but this isn't.
If you think Eddie Izzard is a man he is playing the role of a woman in this production just like, the men in Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake took roles traditionally womens'. The only possible objection you can have is that Eddie believes he is gender fluid. Which as far as I can see is just plain prejudice.

Nope. The objection for me, is what is the point of reimagining the role from male to female in the first place, if you’re going to assign a man to play the woman. Sorry but I don’t subscribe to the TWAW point of view - natal women didn’t fight to establish their rights as women to see them eroded by men dressed as women. Apologies if that offends anyone, but it’s my point of view. Adele has received a load of abuse for asserting that she enjoys being a female performer, regardless of the fact that the Brit awards have decided not to distinguish between male/female in their awards. So we support trans women in celebrating being ‘women’, but natal women can’t celebrate their natural femininity for fear of causing offence. It’s bullshit, and this issue is doing nothing to help - it’s almost delighting in causing division.

* 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 ?

No, an entirely different objection is to the comparison between dance and drama, which are different entirely.

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

As for the cygnets the whole point of that ballet was men playing the traditional roles of women so if that is really what you object to I can't see how that can be acceptable but this isn't.
If you think Eddie Izzard is a man he is playing the role of a woman in this production just like, the men in Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake took roles traditionally womens'. The only possible objection you can have is that Eddie believes he is gender fluid. Which as far as I can see is just plain prejudice.

The theatre has always allowed people to cross gender boundaries and play other roles. Sarah Bernhardt did it In fact there have probably been more female Hamlets than there have been male Lady Mabeths once men stopped playing the women in all theatrical productions.

It's clear that you do understand the meaning of such words as female, male, woman and man.
I expect you even understand she and he.

(Cygnets are cygnets. It's irrelevant whether they are female or male. A mixture of female and male cygnets in a ballet line up, however, could look a little untidy - depending on the individuals.)

If I choose to use she because he's playing a female part

Do you mean the part of Dr Jekyll or the part of girl-mode Eddie?

trisher I did google it and realised that the difference is that, previously, parts were being played by someone of the opposite sex to the one originally intended.

So Maxine Peake and Fiona Shaw, as far as I can see, are females who were playing male roles with everyone accepting that fact.

This is not what Izzard is doing.
He is a male, playing a male role, while claiming to be female.

An equal comparison would be Izzard playing, say, Miss Marple as a male.

Did anyone object when the cygnets in Swan Lake became men?

FarNorth

^I don't think he minds if you refer to him as he or she. So let's change to she.^

Hahahahaha

No, let's not because he is a male person and hasn't even asked you to use she.

But my choice FarNorthas I said he doesn't mind. If I choose to use she because he's playing a female part that's up to me.
You can do as you like

Honestly all this it's a woman's part, it's a man's part is ridiculous. The theatre has always allowed people to cross gender boundaries and play other roles. Sarah Bernhardt did it In fact there have probably been more female Hamlets than there have been male Lady Mabeths once men stopped playing the women in all theatrical productions.
www.theguardian.com/stage/gallery/2014/sep/26/female-hamlets-sarah-bernhardt-maxine-peake-in-pictures

Pammie1 why is it "different" Just another step in gender bending.