Outrage Over Transgender Character in Zoolander 2

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

and if someone who is trans tells you they would rather no representations than NEGATIVE (potentially dangerous/harmful representation) then why would YOU care if somehow this boycott stops films ever portraying a trans character ever again ???? doesn't effect you, evidently. i don't know - i think the reaction to the boycott is a bit too hysterical ''ITS PC GONE MAD !!!!'' for my taste...i don't want to seem like i am personally attacking anyone here tho...im not...

The thing is, that would effect me as a film buff. I posted a list of films earlier with trans characters in them that enjoyed very much. The thing that troubled me regarding that was Robin essentially stating that all these films were negative portrayals of trans characters in her eyes.  

[Robin Of House Hill]

That kind of goes back to something Robin of Hill House posted earlier. She was saying that a boycott like this could actually prevent future films with transgender characters in them from being made. I think this is a very slippery slope that could potentially marginalize this group even further. 

I said no such thing.  I believe if you look for it, you will find that I said that a boycott like this could prevent similar portrayals from being included in future films.  I said nothing about it preventing films with transgender characters from being made.

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

The thing is, that would effect me as a film buff. I posted a list of films earlier with trans characters in them that enjoyed very much. The thing that troubled me regarding that was Robin essentially stating that all these films were negative portrayals of trans characters in her eyes.  

They are not all "negative portrayals" but they are all problematic portrayals. Sometimes the issue is with the narrative. Sometimes the issue is extraneous to the narrative. Using a non-trans actor to portray a trans person is an issue that is extraneous to the narrative. We can look back on Hollywood's use of non-Asian actors to play Asian roles as an analogue. Some of those movies are good. Some of those characters are good. But the facts surrounding the portrayal may make it problematic. 

Some of Robin's issues were clearly narrative - The Crying Game, Priscilla - and some were issues extraneous to the narrative. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I said no such thing.  I believe if you look for it, you will find that I said that a boycott like this could prevent similar portrayals from being included in future films.  I said nothing about it preventing films with transgender characters from being made.

 

The reason for a boycott is really quite simple.  Hollywood repeats what is financially successful.  And since people who produce this kind of movie don't give a damn about the people they are offending.  There is another movie in the early stages, that if this movie is successfully boycotted, might not even be made.

I extrapolated that out (In an admittedly hyperbolic manner) to question whether or not boycott might not just effect depictions that you find to be distasteful. As you say, this is all about finances as far as Hollywood is concerned. I apologize if I paraphrased you innaccurately. 

[Bonesy]

I'm confused about something. Aren't the targets of ridicule in the clip Derek and Hansel for being so goddamned stupid and not the trans woman?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I'm confused about something. Aren't the targets of ridicule in the clip Derek and Hansel for being so goddamned stupid and not the trans woman?

That was my take.

[The Mance]

That was my take.

Mine as well.  It's still problematic, though, in that the object of their stupidity is an over-the-top, eccentric, fashion icon, rather than an otherwise unremarkable, workaday person.  Which i think is the point:  not that Cumberbach's character is necessarily portrayed in a negative light, although I think that determination is still pending, but that, once again, a trans character is given such an overt, ostentatious persona.  They can't ever just be a plumber, or a bank teller, or just some schmoe in khakis and a $20 hair cut.  

[Bonesy]

But it's a movie about ridiculous fashion models not construction workers. I mean, that's the point isn't it?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

But it's a movie about ridiculous fashion models not construction workers. I mean, that's the point isn't it?

You have to admit though, the idea of a trans plumber is fucking capital.

[The Mance]

But it's a movie about ridiculous fashion models not construction workers. I mean, that's the point isn't it?

Soooo...of COURSE they have to make the most ridiculous of the ridiculous fashion models transgender?

[Bonesy]

I'm still pretty sure the most ridiculous people here are Derek and Hansel.

More to the point, I want to hear Robin and Karradin respond to my question as I respect them and their opinions on this issue, and their respect for my sincerity in asking.

[karaddin]

That kind of goes back to something Robin of Hill House posted earlier. She was saying that a boycott like this could actually prevent future films with transgender characters in them from being made. I think this is a very slippery slope that could potentially marginalize this group even further. 

I'm not saying it was intended this way, but do you realise just how condescending this can sound? Like we are too stupid to realise what's actually good for us, so we should shut up and accept awful depictions for fear of being excluded entirely.

Maybe B-rate comedies like Zoolander 2 would stop portraying trans characters at all, rather than abstain from making stupid as fuck, offensive anatomical metaphor. If that happens, I really couldn't give a shit. I doubt that this kind of boycott would have any impact on whether or not serious films attempt to portray trans characters in ways that are actually not dumb and/or problematic, though. 

Yes this. And for the second time in this thread, I'd personally rather no depictions than negative ones - I internalised more negative stuff from the bad depictions that are there than any benefit from seeing trans people existed.  In the internet age the information is there if we go looking for it, as long as the well isn't already poisoned by media. And it's not just the harm it did to me, it's the warping of attitudes of the rest of my family and friends all being primed to see trans people a particular way, it just makes the entire thing harder than it needs to be.

I'm still pretty sure the most ridiculous people here are Derek and Hansel.

 

More to the point, I want to hear Robin and Karradin respond to my question as I respect them and their opinions on this issue, and their respect for my sincerity in asking.

My feeling is certain styles of depiction are so harmful that depiction vs endorsement breaks down and the intent of the creator doesn't matter.  I went to see a movie about two trans sex workers in LA a couple of months ago called Tangerine, the two actresses are trans and I'm pretty sure some of the people behind the camera were as well, it's a raw and realistic take on people in those circumstances.  In the cinema there were these two fuckwits that spent the first 30 minutes just laughing at them being transgender.  I ultimately felt it was an effective powerful movie, and the assholes did stop laughing at the idea of trans people, but it's a movie coming from within the group being depicted and even then the only reason it seemed to get through to them was because it was entirely about these characters and lasted too long for them to continue that dehumanised laughter.  If it's being done with no input from the community and the characters aren't central to the story it's going to be a much larger issue and it's going to be exploitative, using our stories and struggles to profit.

Anything that employs stereotypes without a very thorough subversion and sensitive touch is going to have too much of the audience just go along with the stereotype and thus ends up harmful.  Even if the moral of the story is Derek and Hansel are dicks, and pro BC's character it doesn't mean it hasn't done harm on the way and I'd simply rather these kids of depictions not exist at this point in time.  I'm not demanding other people don't go to see it, I'm not judging people that do go to see it, but I will tell anyone to fuck off if they think I don't have the right to have my own feelings on the subject or that trans people in general don't have the right to call for a boycott.  I'm sure there are other trans women that won't be offended, that will see the movie and love it and they have that right too.

ME - Saying that there are problematic elements to the depictions in those movies doesn't mean they shouldn't have been made, it can also mean they should have been done better and if you want to tell a similar story you should do better.  Personally I love Priscilla, but there are problematic elements to the depiction.  Now maybe I'm wrong and there will be context around the character in this movie that puts it into a similar circumstance - still OK to exist, but should have been done better. I'm sceptical, but it's possible.  There is no excuse for having that joke in the trailer though, because it plucks out any of that potential mitigating context and goes straight to that shit.

[Bonesy]

No depictions are better than negative ones.

That makes sense and thank you for your insight.

[karaddin]

As I said that's a personal feeling based on the impact on my own life, I can't say that as a universal truth.

[Bonesy]

I know.

I'm not a speech surgeon, and I fervently wish people wouldn't be.

Also, I did specifically ask for your input. Never censor or mitigate your words on my account, please?

[karaddin]

I know.

I'm not a speech surgeon, and I fervently wish people wouldn't be.

Also, I did specifically ask for your input. Never censor or mitigate your words on my account, please?

I may be scarred by recent threads /tangent

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I'm not saying it was intended this way, but do you realise just how condescending this can sound? Like we are too stupid to realise what's actually good for us, so we should shut up and accept awful depictions for fear of being excluded entirely.

 

I don't pretend to know what's best for you or presume to make any decisions for you. The thought occurred to me, so I presented it.  

[karaddin]

I don't pretend to know what's best for you or presume to make any decisions for you. The thought occurred to me, so I presented it.  

I didn't phrase that part of my post well, I was trying to point out that what seemed to you a reasonable point to make can come across as very insulting or inflammatory.

[Robin Of House Hill]

 

I extrapolated that out (In an admittedly hyperbolic manner) to question whether or not boycott might not just effect depictions that you find to be distasteful. As you say, this is all about finances as far as Hollywood is concerned. I apologize if I paraphrased you innaccurately. 

No problem.  By the way, in reference to this...

The thing is, that would effect me as a film buff. I posted a list of films earlier with trans characters in them that enjoyed very much. The thing that troubled me regarding that was Robin essentially stating that all these films were negative portrayals of trans characters in her eyes.  

While some of those films  are negative portrayals, such as the hyperfeminization of Bree in Transamerica, the absurd series of situations, the "psychologist" who should have lost her license , there are others that while not negative portrayals, per se, are nonetheless, problematic.  While I have personal issues with Boys Don't Cry, that make me view it less positively than others, what it portrayed must certainly have had an impact on those transgender people considering whether to transition.  I honestly don't know how movies such as that can avoid unintended collateral damage. I only know that I have to come down on the side of helping people get on with their lives, than with concern about a movie studio's bottom line.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

I didn't phrase that part of my post well, I was trying to point out that what seemed to you a reasonable point to make can come across as very insulting or inflammatory.

I probably didn't phrase it well to begin with. When I get into a debate that interests me quite a bit, I tend to get a bit emotional and somewhat hyperbolic. You probably picked up on that vibe. I honestly did not mean to insult or inflame.