+7
The current controversy shrouding Scarlett Johansson and her portrayal of a transgender person is a sensitive topic I think deserves to be discussed in a rational fashion.
Something I was first curious about is something that has already been spoken about by representatives of the actress, that individuals like Jared Leto have portrayed transgender-characters and not only received large-scale praise but have been given considerable accolades for their effort, including an Academy Award for Leto. Some have quoted Leto for saying that, in hindsight, he wouldn't have accepted the role if he was offered it now, but that doesn't really change the established precedent. Leto played a transgender character and received a much warmer response for it, and no time until now can I recall individuals ever being so vocally upset about a situation like this. Although critics praised Laverne Cox for her role in the newer Rocky Horror special, Tim Curry's performance in the original film is still fondly looked at. If we want, we can split hairs about the differences in those characters, however. I think Scarlett is bearing the brunt of a social-change that wasn't prevalent years prior (even a couple years ago), and really, if we want to criticize the decision, that's one thing, but I don't think she should be singled-out as transphobic for accepting a role that a couple years ago might've received acclaim.
Being an actor or being an actress is about being able to be whatever you want. That's how I always looked at it.
However, it does come with certain caveats in-terms of how you handle certain sensitivities. For instance, Leonardo DiCaprio would be an offensive casting decision as the titular role in a biographical-drama film about Martin Luther King Jr., because King was an African American man and it would be disrespectful to portray a white actor as a black actor. In this same train of thought, however, can a parallel be made that a female-born actress portraying a transgender is offensive in the same respect?
Obviously, the difference between sexuality and race have to be acknowledged.
If the film in-question (Rub & Tug) is about Jean Marie Gill, born a woman who later identified as a man (although, I can't find any actual information that specifies if he underwent actual sexual changes), that's a role I feel Scarlett could portray without an actual barrier to speak of. She was a born a woman and, as a capable actress, should be able to get across the different emotions needed for such a complex character.
It seems like a lot of the conversation steers more toward the production itself and that Scarlett has been caught up in the crossfire, with a vocal group sharing the consensus the role is better suited for someone from the transgender community. And, I feel like that makes a lot of sense. But I don't necessarily know how much I agree that it makes the portrayal of such a character from somebody else as inherently wrong at the same level as a crudely done portrayal of race.
One other thing I wanted to talk about is, I've heard a lot of mentions of transgender actors who'd be better suited for the role, and I find that a lot of the names mentioned show a lot of people thinking with their heart more than their minds. In the example of this film, you have an obscure historical event, and would need someone with name-recognition to front the vehicle. From a business perspective, I can imagine the mind-set of, if we don't get somebody who can sell tickets, this film isn't going to be green-lit at all, because no transgender actor is in a position right now to move the needle.
Which brings us to the final point, if we operate under these principles, no transgender individual will be able to portray roles outside of transgender characters, and with .3% of the United States identifying as transgender, this way of thinking makes them getting any real foothold in the industry seem very bleak.
Closed Thread
