| re: Are actors just stating they are non-binary because it is the rage? | |
| Posted by: BruceinIthaca 08:07 pm EST 02/02/23 | |
| In reply to: re: Are actors just stating they are non-binary because it is the rage? - bsturtle 04:54 pm EST 02/02/23 | |
|
|
|
| Have to say there's something (unintentionally, no doubt) ironic in calling someone "small-minded" because their sense of identity and group inclusion doesn't match what YOU think is decided "truth." I know a number of trans/NB folk (I taught college for forty years), some within ten years of my age, some of the current college generation. In conversations with them, we have remarked that there are issues that address all who might be described as "queer," but there are some that are particular to LGB folk, some to trans, some to NB, some to those who may live at the intersections of these and other identities (race, class, nation, dis/ability, occupation). When you live(d), even in the last fifty years, may make difference in terms of who you consider your "people." I think it as "small-minded" to assume that you know the lived experience of the poster and are in a position to make such a judgment. Perhaps he could have worded his sense of affiliation in a way that you would have found less dismissive, but I don't see it as small-minded for him to say his "people" are people who identify as "gay": you may not like it, but he's describing a sense of affiliation. It's a complicated time--and your last point, your "threat" that trans people, lesbians, bisexuals, asexuals, and enby folk won't show up for him at Pride--well, I thought the point was it was PRIDE for all these groups--you make it sound like other groups would be doing him a great favor by showing up. I don't assume they are showing up for him--I assume they are showing up for themselves and for whatever sense of "us" they have. Back to theatre talk. While I understand the arguments in favor of degendering acting categories for awards, I'm just not sure we've reached a point where that might not mean that, without intentionally doing so, performances by women may be overlooked or underrewarded. It would be interesting, to choose an analogy, and look at awards in writing, like the Pulitzers or National Book Awards--are the lion's share still going to white men? I think the Pulitzers have cast a broader net in recent years (certainly in drama), but I've not done a counting in fiction or poetry. I'm for rewarding what the committee agrees is the best (and in the Pulitzer it's complicated because the committee makes a recommendation which the board can overturn and has done so memorably, as in the year of Next to Normal, when the three finalists, all by women or people of color, were rejected--no reasons given)., but am also aware that history, tradition, and what is viewed as "universal" are often privileged and based on majoritarian biases. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: Are actors just stating they are non-binary because it is the rage? - bsturtle 04:54 pm EST 02/02/23 |
| Next: | re: Are actors just stating they are non-binary because it is the rage? - bsturtle 07:54 pm EST 02/03/23 |
| Thread: |
|
Time to render: 0.016406 seconds.