Scarlett Johansson No Longer Playing Trans Lead In Hollywood Film Amid Backlash - Sensationalist Headlines

citation needed

Kind of ironic coming from someone who's claim the hollywood did it just to fuck over trans people based on just as much evidence.

Cast Johnathan Goodman, he loves doing weird stuff.

When did I say this.

So, why exactly was this an ethical problem? Its one woman portraing another. I mean, I suppose they could have gotten a trans actor instead, but they clearly wanted a celebrity name attached to it and there arent really any famous trans actors that come to my mind. A lot of people go watch movies based on whos the lead (this is especially true for "weird" and otherwise hard to market movies), so I cant completely blame them.

Hey wasn't this the movie where they turned a trans man into a drag king?

On one hand, yeah, there's probably plenty of people they could hire for the role, no problem. On the other, they cast Scarlett Johansson. Can you name any trans actor that high-profile? Regardless of any other motives this movie may have, I refuse to believe "making so much money we could swim in an olympic sized pool filled with it" isn't pretty high up there, and getting well-known actors who're in like every other MCU movie is a pretty safe boost. She may have dropped out, but now this is free publicity for the movie and her PR guys are patting each other on their backs knowing they turned a potential crisis into a boon. Her dropping out is a win-win for everyone involved.

I was thinking to myself the same thing.

I'd like to see them get a trans actor or actress. But mostly I want them to get someone who can actually act and ScarJo definitely cannot. She's as stiff as a fucking board. Pieces of furniture regularly steal shots from her. She makes scenes better when she is silent. An intern with a poster board with her lines written on it could walk out in front of the camera and it wouldn't hurt the scene. Holy fuck is ScarJo a bad actress.

I think the reason people were so particularly upset over this is because Scarlett is a very big name, and she already has a bit of a history with bad casting decisions. Nobody's forgotten Ghost in the Shell. And if you're making a movie about or for the LGBT community you should probably pay attention to what that community actually wants, and it seems like we're all pretty outspoken against her playing this role. Which kind of undercuts any pro-LGBT message you pretend to have when you just straight up ignore the actual community. This kind of thing bothers people not just because the role isn't meant for her, which it very much is not, but because whenever some white or cisgendered or heterosexual actor takes a role meant for a black person, or an asian person, or an egyptian, or a disabled person, or a gay person, or indeed a trans person, then that's a role that a black actor, asian person, egyptian, or a disabled person, gay person, trans person, whoever it is is not getting. Minorities are already far from popular for main billing or even side billing, and then we have roles that are literally made for us being stolen by normal boring ass white people who already dominate the industry. There are only two reasons I can think of why Scarlett was their pick. Either she's a big name and they care more about that then the actual subject matter they're working with, in which case, ditch making a trans movie and make another shitty ScarJo action flick, or, they intended to fetishize trans men by making her more of a sexy tomboy than anything else. I can't think of another valid reason. It's definitely not her acting. Like, OK, if you need someone who can play both 'before and after transition', then ScarJo would NOT be your pick in the first place. You would want to pick someone androgynous who can pull off both genders, like Rain Dove. Or you'd want to pick two actors for the role, which as far as I can tell they weren't planning on. Either way, I don't get vibes that Scarlet Johannson gives a fuck about the LGBT community or minorities in general considering the roles she keeps taking. Particularly considering she backed off from this because of backlash as opposed to it just being an awful choice and was being awfully condescending earlier. She's not someone I want representing my people.

Stick to other roles that won't cause a news shitstorm, Scar.

"It's routine so it's not worth complaining about" is the kind of attitude that allows these never-ending circles of garbage and misrepresentation, though. No positive social change ever came from sticking to the same old norms forever.

I'd be totally ok with that.

I dont understand this 'shes not trans' argument well, i mean its been said before here, but basically to me it boils down to 'shes an actress, she can act trans' I get the whole 'trans actors are struggling' part of it too, but i get a heavy 'being a trans actor is a gimmic' vibe, and i dont feel good about that line of reasoning.

I think it's sillier because it seems to imply that people should "stay in their lane". How would these same people feel if FtM transgendered actor like Chaz Bono lost out on a role because people protested him playing cisgendered character?

There's no equivalency there though, because trans people don't generally get roles for cis people either. There's a reason you get people who are the closest match to the character possible, it's more believable

Agreed, your argument sold it immediately for me, this is dumb and damages trans people. This is really really bad, actors should not 'stay in their lane' at all.

Except Chaz has has cisroles. He's a recurring cast member in American Horror Story and has been in a few other films. https://m.imdb.com/name/nm0095106/filmotype/actor?ref_=m_nmfm_1

Listing one actor to prove a point is like saying america has no more racism cuz obama

FtM Trangender actors are a minority within a minority. Chaz is the only one I know off the top of my head. You made the claim that it "doesn't happen" and then spouted an ad hominem when I proved that it has. Provide an actual counterpoint.

There's an argument to be made that cis actors don’t generally get cis roles, the 'number of aspiring actors' -> 'number of acting jobs' unbalance ratio is immense and well known. Just saying 'its because they are trans' requires a little more evidence in statistics in my opinion. On top of that, listing 1 actor is better then not listing anything, and nobody here said there is 'no' discrimination against trans people in acting. Like i dont want to me mean but that sounds like a massive false equivalence to me.

It should be noted that according to the Williams Institute only .3 of americans identify as transgendered. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, there are only around 63,000 (employed) actors in the United States. For transgendered actors to have equal representation, that means merely 189 would have to receive roles.

I felt bad for her for 2 seconds, then I remembered that she's Scarlett Johansson and she's kind of a crappy person, so it's hard for me to care.

I honestly don't get this point - isn't the goal for most trans people to basically be indistinguishable from the a cisgendered person? This isn't like casting a white person to play a black character, because A) they're gonna look way off, and B) the fact that you're black has a bearing on how people treat you (you couldn't do a scene where a white guy playing a black character walks down a 50's street getting disagreeable looks, for example). I guess there's a bit of an equivalence with trans people who don't "pass" well, but that could equally well be portrayed by a cisgendered person. There's a point to be made about experiencing dysphoria and the like, though - but knowing how something feels and being able to portray it in a movie is two different things, meaning that at least in principle a cisgendered actor could do equally well in a role. Doesn't mean Scarlett getting the role isn't just a popularity contest, but that's a different issue with Hollywood.

How is she crappy?

Being an actor is apparently becoming less acceptable.

People keep saying "you need a biologically female person to play this role," when you really don't, and afaik, the movie isn't about his transition, but rather, his crime empire running massage parlors. If you really wanted to portray him when he had to live as a woman, then do what Orange is the New Black did: cast someone else for flash backs. But for Dante, in the prime of his life? Cast a man. It's a person who was a man, so why on earth would you not cast a man to play him? Once you cast a woman to play him, you're all but saying "trans men aren't really men, they're biologically women, so we can't cast a real man to play them." If you want to really go along with the "need a person who was born with a vulva" line, then use your big ol' budget and find/hire a trans man. But the filmmakers are more obsessed with money than accuracy or respect, which was evident once they cast Scarlet Johannson to play him.

As TraderRage pointed out, Trans people are already such an incredibly small demo, and (professional) actors even smaller. Finding the balance between an actual trans actor, and trans actor that can ACT is such a slog of a job that i would be a literal waste of money. The only reason why ScarJo is getting grief is because its a continuation of the woke-reaction against her in GitS. And even then that was a nonissue

Being an actor is becoming less of an excuse to do stupid shit and say stupid things and get away with it.

Like what? What is this comment about?