• Kumatomic
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        Thank you, I’ll check and see if anyone has. I am diligently learning Lemmy.

    • @ComradeWeebelo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Just want to point out that this statement makes it very clear that the original decision was reactionary discrimination against a minority in the first place.

      Following the closed meeting, a board member, Wendy Vellotti, put forward the motion to reinstate the original version and cast of the production as it was before the gender rule was created.

      Edit: The school board is now launching an investigation into the actions of the superintendent.

      https://www.kxii.com/2023/11/14/sherman-isd-board-trustees-discuss-superintendent-position/

      • Kumatomic
        link
        fedilink
        62 years ago

        They need to investigate him. There are images circulating of him harassing parents who spoke ill of him about the situation. Another board member was shown to be protesting the local pride problem that was held, yelling at children and taunting them.

    • Uglyhead
      link
      fedilink
      English
      862 years ago

      Some of the very first people that the Brownshirts went after was transpeople, even completely destroying an institute that was studying gender in the 30’s.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      112 years ago

      It’s not like the people involved in that lynching felt bad about it or regretted it. And then they passed that hate to their children who passed it on to their own children. Those people were the grandparents and great-grandparents of these kids. Some of them are still alive and still preaching their hate to the kid. Some of them were alive long enough to do it before they died.

  • @neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    362 years ago

    What’s most interesting to me is how Oklahoma! is an utterly poisonous production from the get-go. Every character is a self-absorbed jerk. Judd Fry asks a girl to a dance who only agrees as a ruse to punish the protagonist, who then literally tries to convince the dude to kill himself. The entire show is fucked up.

    Any director who isn’t doing something subversive with the content has their head up their own ass. But hey, it’s Texas. 🙃

    • @interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      82 years ago

      Eh. Just sounds like normal low-brow shit to me.

      Low brow writers feel compelled to make things as clear and obvious as possible for their dim-witted audiences.

      It’s simple. It’s straightforward. Everyone can understand what is going on without much thought.

      I don’t really think it’s bad for that, just is what it is.

      • @Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I think you mean it’s old.

        Before audiences had all the tropes figured out simple stories were amazing. All the contrivances we add today we only add to make bad movies seem more interesting or complicated.

        It’s why perfectly executed, simple stories are still compelling. But Oklahoma! certainly isn’t one of them.

        Edit: oh, and some people love the music

    • Any director who isn’t doing something subversive with the content has their head up their own ass.

      Its a school musical dude, calm down. If you want a subversive and thoughtful performance then don’t go to a school production.

      Oklahoma isn’t “poisonous” its just weird. But, its fun for high school students to perform, and that’s all it has to be. The purpose of a musical theater program in a school isn’t to impress you with complex well written narratives, its to provide the students with an experience they wouldn’t get otherwise.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    512 years ago

    You’d think they would ban Oklahoma! in Texas entirely for daring to be about a state other than Texas.

  • @dope@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I don’t get it. Not male and the lead calls for a male so you can’t play the lead. So we’re going with an actual male instead. Seems reasonable.

    • @Tenthrow@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      Wow, I didn’t know Oklahoma had scenes with full nudity. Oh it doesn’t? Then what part of this requires that the actor be born with male genitals?

    • @jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      Even if we engage in your transphobic rhetoric for a minute, that’s just not how theater works. People can be cast for different genders and have been for a loooong time

    • @EatYouWell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      292 years ago

      I highly doubt any lawsuit of this nature would be anything close to a slam dunk, especially in Texas. I’m not finding any federal court cases that provide legal precedent on the topic, and Trump revoked the Obama administration guidance that trans people are protected under Title IX.

          • 𝔼𝕩𝕦𝕤𝕚𝕒
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            It would start in a state court and progress to the state level Supreme Court, I imagine. After that it goes to the federal SC. This would be preferable if they are seeking punitive damages.

            Or I guess they could appeal it to the federal level. This is the route if you wanted to make a precedent for the entire US.

      • @aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Why can’t they be? Your issue is when it’s mocking trans women, but anyone could play the role and then mock trans women.

        • Are you aware that trans women are not physiologically the same as cis men? (If you weren’t, now you are.)

          Now do you understand how casting a cis man in the role of a trans woman will emphasize masculine features of the character, and that it plays into a narrative that trans women are men? (if you weren’t, now you are.)

        • Okay, so, addendum: if the story is set in a time or place where the character wouldn’t have access to hormones, then it’s fine.

          There’s also a case to be made that if you have sufficient fuckery with CGI, you could make a story during an ongoing medical transition.

          What I’m talking about is throwing a wig and some powder on some lantern jawed dude and calling it a day.

      • @h3rm17@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        42 years ago

        Poont is, I don’t really care who plays who, I’m okay with a trans woman being played by a cis dude, and a cis dude being played by a trans woman, it should not matter as long as their acting is good.

        • prole
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          What you are missing is a century plus of the thumb on the scale (much longer if you go back to Shakespeare where only men could play women). The world doesn’t suddenly become a complete meritocracy overnight (if ever), and striving for equal representation in the arts is very important.

          Just look at how children of color have been inspired since Disney decided to start making protagonists that look like them and have similar backgrounds.

        • @Soulg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          22 years ago

          I agree, but a key takeaway is to also ensure that trans actors aren’t discriminated against for any role so that they receive a fair chance.

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      You do realize that these aren’t the same people, right? They have like polar opposite beliefs on the subject.

      Anyway, this kid was “banned” from playing the role, they didn’t lose the audition.

      • @aidan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        Their point isn’t about this outcry, it’s about the reaction to the outcry.

        Their anology is, if it’s wrong for a cis person to play a trans character then it’s also wrong for a trans person to play a cis character. They’re trying to criticize leftist hypocrisy.

        Now, I think it was a minority of pro-trans people that criticize a cis person playing a trans character. But I guess their criticism of that minority is fair.

      • @h3rm17@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        Same website, but still you are right that banning someone from performing based on anything outside their performance is outrageous.

        • prole
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          So your suggestion is that the consistent view would to only allow trans kids to play trans roles? So a trans boy (assigned female at birth), who is literally indistinguishable from her male peers, is just shit out of luck? And trans girls are going to have to wait til their (obviously very open) school decides to do Rocky Horror Picture Show?

          Fuck off and let kids be kids. Weird fuckers obsessed with children’s’ genitals.

      • Bakkoda
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Not only did they not lose the audition, they won the audition and then had it taken away from them. And therein lies the hate. It’s not a “no”, it’s a “yes but go fuck yourself”.