Quote Originally Posted by jon1959 View Post
Where it all ends depends on the times and the culture - it keeps on changing.

A few hundred years ago all female parts on stage were played by boys. Two generations ago major white actors were blacking up to play black roles (1965 - Laurence Olivier as Othello for instance). In most cases in recent times when films or dramas have had trans roles the actor or actress has not been trans (can think of Eddie Redmayne in the Danish Girl 2015, Chloe Sevigny in Hit & Miss 2011) and at the same time there are now many examples of 'all female' Shakespeare plays, black actors playing roles that were obviously white given the period and place, and all sorts of transpositions that challenge stereotypes or rigid gender/other roles. Bugsy Malone!

If some groups of actors (or potential actors) are excluded from the industry or roles because of who they are, they have every right to protest about that and the domination by one segment of society - male/white/straight has been the easiest way in for most of the last century or more. It's a bit like GrangetownBlue shouting about Welsh players losing the chance to play for their country because of Ash Williams - but with more justification.

But this story doesn't appear to be about that. If the argument is that you have to have the same experiences as the character to play the role, or that there has to be some kind of trans/non-trans offsetting of opportunities (without reference to ability), then that is just daft.
Agreed.

I think the outcry from the trans community is fuelled by a deep sense of dissatisfaction as being excluded from many aspects of society, not just Hollywood. But as you say,