Current Events > Scarlett Johansson bullied out of transgender role

(+) Yeah! (+)

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Where's the outrage from Just One of The Guys, when a girl plays a boy.

The outrage from She's the Man when a girl plays a boy.

And so on and so on.

"And how come they can make a movie called White Men Can't Jump?!"
---

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

averagejoel posted...

this topic is full of misinformation and bad takes

Give us that hot Commie take. I'm ready.

hot commie take: don't cast scarjo as a trans man. cast a trans man instead
---

RE_expert44 posted...

Butterfiles posted...

boxington posted...

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Where's the outrage from Just One of The Guys, when a girl plays a boy.

The outrage from She's the Man when a girl plays a boy.

And so on and so on.

the entire point of those movies were that they were girls trying to masquerade as guys, not that the characters identified as a different sex in which they were born

most of the posters itt lack the critical thinking skills to differentiate the two

I mean, what's the difference?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V2sBURgUBI" data-time="

She's The Man is an adaptation of a shakespeare play. not sure about the other one because I've never seen it
---

Le__seul_dieu__ posted...

it's one think laughing at someone being murdered

No, pretty sure that's worse.
---

BarneyBosco posted...

Virtue signalling 101. Very impressive, did you read that off of a pamphlet?

I'm not sure you know what 'virtue signalling' means. For context, I'll begin by sharing this Sarah Scribbles comic.



In that comic, eating only organic food is a virtue for which that person apparently expects to be praised. Even that isn't the best example of virtue signalling, because they were at least having a conversation about food, before the topic shifts to being about her virtue. So it's not entirely irrelevant.

Consider the post you're quoting. What 'virtue' is that post 'signaling' in it's criticisms of that casting decision and speculation of it's impacts? And why do you believe that post is primarily seeking public praise as opposed to expressing it's posters honest thoughts about the topic?
---

RE_expert44 posted...

I mean, what's the difference?

In those plays/films those people don't actually identify as a man. They're fully aware that they are basically in drag and only impersonating the opposing gender, and a great deal of comedic and dramatic tension rests on the possibility that their actual gender might be discovered. Trans people aren't 'in disguise.' This is basically transgenderism 101 and I have to assume we all know this at this point. And no movie sympathetic to the perspectives of trans people would use this idea that they are deceiving people, or in disguise, to drum up comedy.
---

DrizztLink posted...

Le__seul_dieu__ posted...

it's one think laughing at someone being murdered

No, pretty sure that's worse.

yes... that's what i said
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Alexis Arquette (passed away)

Fuckin awesome in the wedding singer.

eston posted...

"And how come they can make a movie called White Men Can't Jump?!"

Whoa now, let's not bring the top 3 greatest movie of all time into this.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Transgendered people are getting a start in Hollywood. It's growing with each passing year.

It is already happening.

I feel like you don't have a point any longer.

How is it growing? Outside of Laverne Cox and Jazz Jennings, name five. I think five.... no, name three rising transgender stars. That's fair. Because someone like me who is pretty active in the trans world, not even I can name any others. And no, not Jenner either.

10-15 years ago I couldn't recall more than 1 or 2 transgendered actors. Now I can recall a lot more (exponentially). Not to mention, there are tons of buzzfeed-style listcles out there showing the 'best' transgendered actors. It's obvious it's growing with each passing year and you just refuse to accept that.

Chaz Bono
Alexis Arquette (passed away)
Andreja Pejic
Carmen Carrera
Trace Lysette (Transparent was a great show)

More: https://www.indiewire.com/2018/01/trans-actors-playing-trans-roles-on-screen-1201923074/

Models aren't hollywood actors/actresses. And Chaz Bono? What recent, upcoming movies can I see him, or any of these people in?

She has started her acting career: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5200438/

Chaz has played a sizable role in the last two seasons of American Horror Story.

Well, that's good. So there are three or four people now. Progress is looking up.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Transgendered people are getting a start in Hollywood. It's growing with each passing year.

It is already happening.

I feel like you don't have a point any longer.

How is it growing? Outside of Laverne Cox and Jazz Jennings, name five. I think five.... no, name three rising transgender stars. That's fair. Because someone like me who is pretty active in the trans world, not even I can name any others. And no, not Jenner either.

10-15 years ago I couldn't recall more than 1 or 2 transgendered actors. Now I can recall a lot more (exponentially). Not to mention, there are tons of buzzfeed-style listcles out there showing the 'best' transgendered actors. It's obvious it's growing with each passing year and you just refuse to accept that.

Chaz Bono
Alexis Arquette (passed away)
Andreja Pejic
Carmen Carrera
Trace Lysette (Transparent was a great show)

More: https://www.indiewire.com/2018/01/trans-actors-playing-trans-roles-on-screen-1201923074/

Models aren't hollywood actors/actresses. And Chaz Bono? What recent, upcoming movies can I see him, or any of these people in?

She has started her acting career: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5200438/

Chaz has played a sizable role in the last two seasons of American Horror Story.

Well, that's good. So there are three or four people now. Progress is looking up.

You're being deliberately obtuse. I listed more on top of the couple you mentioned. Do a quick google search. IMDB has a listicle of the top 70 transgendered actors.

70? Then why put ScarJo as a trans man if Hollywood has that many?
---

The film studios want money. They want the money they put into a film to come back and turn into profit. They don't care about trans people not being represented, they care about money.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

70? Then why put ScarJo as a trans man if Hollywood has that many?

We are back where we started.

1. Transgendered actors are clearly progressing in Hollywood, but haven't quite reached their potential yet (huge A-listers).

2. Many studios sign on A-listers so that their movies can generate a certain revenue. ScarJo was that A-lister for them.

You're going in circles.

You are being obtuse when it comes to why this is a bad thing for women to be casted as trans men, but yes, we keep going in circles here. If they are out there, hire them. Simple.
---

I definitely don't agree with the bullying but they probably should have made an effort to get a trans actor first.
---

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

70? Then why put ScarJo as a trans man if Hollywood has that many?

We are back where we started.

1. Transgendered actors are clearly progressing in Hollywood, but haven't quite reached their potential yet (huge A-listers).

2. Many studios sign on A-listers so that their movies can generate a certain revenue. ScarJo was that A-lister for them.

You're going in circles.

You are being obtuse when it comes to why this is a bad thing for women to be casted as trans men, but yes, we keep going in circles here. If they are out there, hire them. Simple.

But it's not that simple.
---

happibivouac posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

70? Then why put ScarJo as a trans man if Hollywood has that many?

We are back where we started.

1. Transgendered actors are clearly progressing in Hollywood, but haven't quite reached their potential yet (huge A-listers).

2. Many studios sign on A-listers so that their movies can generate a certain revenue. ScarJo was that A-lister for them.

You're going in circles.

You are being obtuse when it comes to why this is a bad thing for women to be casted as trans men, but yes, we keep going in circles here. If they are out there, hire them. Simple.

But it's not that simple.

Then have open casting for trans people. I mean shit, I know a trans guy right now who has been doing theater. I am 100% sure he'd jump on that. Practically all of Emerson College too is full of them. It's not hard to find new talent or if there's 70+ current trans actors/actresses out there, asking around. This casting call for ScarJo is seriously just a slap in the face.
---

happibivouac posted...

But it's not that simple.

It is. Take the risk, and people might reward you for it. That kind of authenticity goes a long way towards building good press and getting eyes to your movie.

...Or you can do what Roland Emmerich did to the story of Stonewall and get savaged in the press.
---

Sayoria posted...

happibivouac posted...

Sayoria posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Sayoria posted...

70? Then why put ScarJo as a trans man if Hollywood has that many?

We are back where we started.

1. Transgendered actors are clearly progressing in Hollywood, but haven't quite reached their potential yet (huge A-listers).

2. Many studios sign on A-listers so that their movies can generate a certain revenue. ScarJo was that A-lister for them.

You're going in circles.

You are being obtuse when it comes to why this is a bad thing for women to be casted as trans men, but yes, we keep going in circles here. If they are out there, hire them. Simple.

But it's not that simple.

Then have open casting for trans people. I mean shit, I know a trans guy right now who has been doing theater. I am 100% sure he'd jump on that. Practically all of Emerson College too is full of them. It's not hard to find new talent or if there's 70+ current trans actors/actresses out there, asking around. This casting call for ScarJo is seriously just a slap in the face.

I'm not disagreeing with you that there should be some sort of casting done to try and find someone, but if everything were that simple, then there'd be no discussion here. There's a lot more that goes into a movie than a casting part. You have to think from the perspective of a company that is putting major investments into this. It's not as simple as "oh this will make twitter happy :)". It's a lot harder than that.

hollow_shrine posted...

happibivouac posted...

But it's not that simple.

It is. Take the risk, and people might reward you for it. That kind of authenticity goes a long way towards building good press and getting eyes to your movie.

...Or you can do what Roland Emmerich did to the story of Stonewall and get savaged in the press.

It's not. Might is a really big gamble when you're dealing with money.
---

The guy took no effort and I think we can all agree he casted her only because he worked with her with GitS. If there was signs of obvious effort, maybe. We all know there was none in this case.
---

Sayoria posted...

The guy took no effort and I think we can all agree he casted her only because he worked with her with GitS. If there was signs of obvious effort, maybe. We all know there was none in this case.

Total shit on his part.
---

happibivouac posted...

It's not. Might is a really big gamble when you're dealing with money.

This movie isn't going to make summer blockbuster numbers to begin with. From the topic, the best shot it has at making big money would be a healthy buzz during award season.

Thing is, they had to know that when they greenlit the movie in the first place. So trying to boost numbers now by throwing a random big money actress at it, reads false. Like executive meddling, or trying to do what Emmerich did with Stonewall, whitewashing and de-queering one of the defining riots of the gay rights movement...for the benefit of non-queer people who didn't see it anyway. And then queer people didn't see it either because of widespread reporting on a cowardly casting choice.

What this says, is that you shouldn't be afraid to challenge audiences. If what's here is good, people will make the effort to figure it out.
---

happibivouac posted...

The film studios want money. They want the money they put into a film to come back and turn into profit. They don't care about trans people not being represented, they care about money.

I feel as though people are really exaggerating how much pull ScarJo actually has
---

I think too much is being made of Scarlett Johansson being a movie seller to begin with. Quite frankly, the era of the movie star, an actor so profitable that you can put him or her in a movie and people will see it just for that person, has largely faded. A well-known name can help a movie, but movie audiences now are much more driven by movie concept and franchises than the people in it.

With that being said, I'm not sure there was ever much a chance for this movie to be huge. Unfortunately movies about trans individuals are not big, general public hits. The director is a relative unknown that really doesn't have a good movie to his name. I'm just saying I'm not sure having ScarJo in the movie was really going to expand the audience much beyond the people who would already go to see it. Especially when you factor in that she is a sex symbol and that drives a pretty significant amount of her stardom. This is a movie where she is explicitly not going to be traditionally attractive.

So it is in there best interest to cast a trans actor. You get the inclusion points. You can pivot this scandal into way more publicity than this very likely bad movie was ever going to get otherwise. Most importantly, you do give an opportunity to a trans actor and those are unfortunately rare in Hollywood.
---

eston posted...

happibivouac posted...

The film studios want money. They want the money they put into a film to come back and turn into profit. They don't care about trans people not being represented, they care about money.

I feel as though people are really exaggerating how much pull ScarJo actually has

They are. I never hear of GitS or it's success at all.
---

50Blessings posted...

The double standards of the left continue.

Remember when people were upset that a black guy wasn't playing Spider-Man, and when you were like "Well, he's white" they were like "lol, that doesn't matter."

but now, of course, someone actually being trans to play a trans character maters because it's something they want.

Black Peter Parker would be a hell no from me.

A Miles Morales (who is black in the comics) as Spider-Man movie though is completely okay though.
---

Let them eat themselves.
---

I don't get why Hollywood NEEDS to throw someone a bone. End of the day, it's all about money. If they think ScarJo will get them money, good for them. If not, that's cool too.
---

gmanthebest posted...

I don't get why Hollywood NEEDS to throw someone a bone.

No one needs to do anything. This is under the realm of "probably should".
---

gmanthebest posted...

I don't get why Hollywood NEEDS to throw someone a bone. End of the day, it's all about money. If they think ScarJo will get them money, good for them.

You're not obligated to operate under the same logic as a Hollywood studio. As a person, the bottom line of profit is not the only thing you can care about. And certainly not someone else's profit.
---

I don't see the big deal, but then again, I'm not trans. I thought she would have probably portrayed the character well, or at least not done a disservice, and her big name could have brought eyes on to the issues that the movie raises. Oh well.
---

CrimsonRage posted...

mario2000 posted...

I definitely don't agree with the bullying but they probably should have made an effort to get a trans actor first.

Thats not really how Hollywood works. Im thankful when Hollywood gets the race right. otherwise its perfectly acceptable IMO when an actor portrays a role that they are not in their real life. Im okay if. transgender actor portrays a cisgender character.
---

My nipples told me I was tagged, but the post was deleted.

boxington posted...

Wow, flaming. Get that ass banned and stuff.
---

pinky0926 posted...

She wasn't bullied out of it. A community was critical, and after listening to them she changed her mind.

So bullied

Peter_Giffyndor posted...

pinky0926 posted...

She wasn't bullied out of it. A community was critical, and after listening to them she changed her mind.

So bullied

Bullying is an unwarranted action upon a party who didn't do anything.
ScarJo took a role she shouldn't have taken.

This is heckling. Not bullying.
---

eston posted...

gatorsPENSbucs posted...

Where's the outrage from Just One of The Guys, when a girl plays a boy.

The outrage from She's the Man when a girl plays a boy.

And so on and so on.

"And how come they can make a movie called White Men Can't Jump?!"

^That was just to set up the climax where Woody Harrelson throws down a nasty oop to seal the win.

StarLightGlimmR posted...

The LGBT community loses points with me due to this harassment.

What harassment?
---

Sayoria posted...

Peter_Giffyndor posted...

pinky0926 posted...

She wasn't bullied out of it. A community was critical, and after listening to them she changed her mind.

So bullied

Bullying is an unwarranted action upon a party who didn't do anything.
ScarJo took a role she shouldn't have taken.

This is heckling. Not bullying.

Same thing these days regardless of group heckling or their target.
---

Will the movie even get made now?
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Many studios sign on A-listers so that their movies can generate a certain revenue. ScarJo was that A-lister for them.

I know this is used a lot, but GiTS movie showed that merely having an A listed Actress like Scar Jo doesn't perform well at the BO, especially when it's surrounded in controversy. Same thing might happen with this movie as well. This is simply bad PR for Scar Jo, especially since she's marketing herself as a feminist.
---