No. Acting is acting, by definition.

It would feel nice to get to a stage where trans play cis, and vice versa, without much in the way of should and shouldn't.

We might get there when the storyline stops being about the character being trans, and starts being about other aspects of their lives - which unless the transition is particularly fascinating, is usually the most interesting part of a life.

It's great that gay actors and gay characters are pretty much now at that point. Who they are personally and privately doesn't come into what roles they play. Only that is really equality.

Otherwise, where does this stop? Only actors on chemo can play people with cancer? Tom Hanks shouldn't have been in Philadelphia? You can't have that role because you're not a lesbian in real life? Kim Cattrall shouldn't have played a New Yorker in SATC because she's English? Renee Zellweger can't play English because she's Texan? And on, and on.

Quote from: Kova V on September 19, 2016, 07:55:36 AM
Honestly, it would be nice if transgender actors could play trans movie roles. I'd also be happy if they cast cis-women to play trans-women roles. I don't think I've seen a movie with trans-men, that would be interesting to see how Hollywood would cast that role. I'd bet they'd be played by cis-men too.

Of the two biggest soaps in the UK, with ratings of up to 20 million each, there was a long running trans character played by a ciswoman, who probably did more to 'normalize it' than anything else ever has, to the point that it wasn't ever remarked on, and just became about the storylines the character had.

Had it been a trans actor, it might, at that time and with the goal of just being a regular character, not have worked (starting in the mid 90's) unless she had been particularly passable. As it was, it just became a completely normal depiction of a working class woman in northern England, which is ideal really. I don't watch it much, but I heard this character was dying so I tuned in and it was very well done.

I coincidentally saw the actress about a week later at the theatre, in the audience, and thought about saying something to her but couldn't bring myself to. I hear she does a lot of activist work, and she's so associated with that character she played for twenty years, apparently most of the public assume she is actually trans in real life, and react to her on that basis - most usually positively, occasionally negatively and with decreasing frequency as the years passed, and with surprise when she was actually on maternity leave.

And the other big soap has a transman playing a transman. Again, completely unremarkable to the point he's just a background character and his main storyline seemed to be about his desire to be a chef.

I think both are quite positive, particularly for what are not niche and cult shows, but very mainstream. More than a 'lets-have-a-song-and-dance about the trans character and their weird life and how it relates to every breath they take' characterizations.

It's easy to knock soaps, but they have massive audiences that are more representative of the average person in the street than the demographic (already largely on board with minority rights) who watch late night cult shows or choose to see films others can easily avoid by not going to the cinema, and I think both of those should be commended for making it completely unremarkable.

There was a time when there were no transgender actors but yet a show existed with that very issue. All that Glitters was that show and it was one I watched when I could. Problem was most of the time it was on so late it was well past my bed time.

Maybe sometimes so it can create awareness and openness but in the end a actor is simply playing a role just because they are CIS doesn't mean they can't play that role so to me personally i don't really care as long as they are a good actor.