Gender Based Awards? — Page 2

Tag said: "They haven't really released all the details yet, but performance categories are going from the (separate gendered) 5 nominees per category, to 8 nominees in a combined category (ie. outstanding lead performance in a musical). I question whether that means for example, 7 men could be nominated against 1 women, or something like that. It seems like a clustef*ck waiting to happen."

Considering they have had 2 years I believe to examine and come up w this new system, I agree, the lack of details is frustrating .

A Dora award is a nice thing to get in TO but financially it means very little either to the performer or the producers. ( shows have already closed or moved on to the next tour stop)

In the commercial world of Bway/O-Bway/West End awards are very important for producers as they are used for promotional purposes big time. ( and we all know a Tony winning bump can save a show on the otherwise edge). And the ego-boo of winning a big time award helps the performer too. ( tho I still love Lupone's comment " the base of the Tony is plastic"

Will be watching this w great interest to see how it plays out here in TO and any ripples it has further afield.

Remember gender and sex are too completely different concepts. It would be reasonable if performers are divided by birth sex when being considered for awards.

Dancingthrulife2 said: "Remember gender and sex are too completely different concepts. It would be reasonable if performers are divided by birth sex when being considered for awards."

By "birth sex" I am assuming you mean the sex they were assigned at birth. My question is "why?". If say a Trans actor identifies and expresses themselves as the sex that they were not assigned at birth and uses the pronouns that go with that gender/sex, why do they have to put in a gendered category that is not how they identify as? This isn't sport (though that's a whole other topic that is usually debated by people who don't read up on it) and I don't see the harm in say putting a trans woman in Best Actress and a trans man in Best Actor. Statistically-speaking, I don't know how much that would occur anyway.

Updated On: 4/26/18 at 01:44 PM

Call me crazy, but gender nonconforming people are such a tiny percentage of the population that I think it's a little nutty to disrupt something straightforward like this to cater to such a small group. I think trans actors or actresses should simply be nominated in the category with which they identify. And if someone's gender nonconforming, hopefully they'd be willing to petition to be considered in one category or the other, maybe depending on the role they're playing. (And if it turns out that a gender fluid actor is playing a truly gender fluid role... then I don't know. We'll cross that bridge. But that's not the case >99.9 of the time.)

The animal kingdom is divided into males and females. This is biology 101. There are definitely exceptions in certain species, but they're few and far between. As humans, where it's not so straightforward because social gender constructs become involved... I still believe that the majority of people mentally fall into the "I am more male / I am more female" camp. I'm not sure I understand why that's a bad thing. (The "bad thing" is creating expectations for what it means to be male or female, but that has nothing to do with awards show categories.)

Doing away with awards altogether and just giving everyone a trophy feels like that South Park episode where instead of a Christmas pageant, they ended up doing a modern dance performance to Phillip Glass in grey unitards, because everyone was so offended by everything.

I think it's important above anything to be kind and respectful to others, and people should feel free and safe to live their lives however makes them the happiest. But we don't need to disrupt the entire system to cater to a fractional group of people. It's ok to live with things not being perfect. Like, I'm Jewish and it would be laughable to suggest that Hanukkah should have equal representation as Christmas in December, or worse, that we should just do away with holiday celebrations altogether because someone might be offended. Jews are a very small percentage of the population, and it's nice when you see a menorah here and there, but it would be ridiculous of me to be offended that I wasn't being properly catered to and represented when the vast majority of this country celebrates Christmas. The vast majority of the human population identifies either as male or female, wherever they fall on the spectrum of masculinity or femininity. That's just reality.

Here is a pretty thorough article that addresses some of the issues here:

https://www.refinery29.com/2017/11/180832/acting-awards-show-categories-gender-neutral?bucketed=false&bucketing_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

It first talks about the fact that the MTV Movie awards did away with a gendered acting category and then talks about Asia Kate Dillon's experience in submitting for the Emmys as a gender non-conforming actor. Dillon asked the Television Academy where they should submit for their role in the show Billions and was pleased with the Emmys' response telling Dillon to submit for any acting category they felt comfortable in.

It also has points and counterpoints and some alternative solutions to this problem. I think it was a pretty fair article that allowed both sides to speak.

Do we really want to talk about bathrooms here? That's a pretty loaded topic.

I learned on this forum a long time ago that the whole featured/lead dichotomy was originally created to ensure that the really famous actors didn't compete against less famous or non-famous yet actors. Like a lesser known actor who may be deserving of an award wouldn't have to compete against the likes of Ethel Merman/Alfred Drake/Mary Martin even if that lesser known actor was in a leading role. That's why the whole above the title rule is still in place as a holdover from that. Size of role obviously usually correlates with how famous one is, but not always. Now it seems featured is just synonymous with supporting and matches Oscars.

Updated On: 4/27/18 at 12:12 AM

Alice Cooper named himself Alice despite identifying as male when that was a transgressive move: a man in the late 1960s with not only long hair but mascara and flamboyant stage presence was bound to raise some ire (which he pokes fun at in his song "Be My Lover".

Alex Newell's stage persona is, if not quite full drag, at least a gender-bending performance style. It makes perfect sense for his stage name to be female even as he identifies as male: it fits the persona.

haterobics said: "raddersons said: "Alex Newell's performance means it's already happening - best start the discussion now."

How so? I don't recall any debate when Mark Rylance was nominated in a make categoryfor playing Olivia in Twelfth Night. And Newell uses male pronouns on his own website and such, so it's not like he's identifying as non-binary or anything. He just wanted to play that role."

Yes, I got confused with the "Alexandra" on the wiki.

^In any given year there isn't enough from either genre to warrant enough nominations. You'd also get into the Golden Globes scenario where films and actors get nominated in the wrong categories.

Wow, I hadn't thought of P-Orridge in years. I think that lower middle class English upbringing was significantly different from anything we Americans know. Didn't he try to sort of assume the mantle of Aleister Crowley?

Elfuhbuh said: "Yeah, most trans people are trying to distance themselves from their birth sex/gender. I don’t think a trans woman would appreciate having to compete for “Best Actor” just because she was porn with a penis. "

Not to divulge from the topic at hand, but this is one of the funniest mistypes I have seen on these forums.

Back on topic, In probably 10-15 years the gender in category will become relevant due to the rise of transgender teens and young adults, There's not as big of a Friday of nonbinary and trans people now, but there will be in a few years