In the new movie, "The Danish Girl," Eddie Redmayne has been cast to play Lili Elbe, one of the first transgender women to attempt genital reassignment surgery.
Ever since his breakout role in “Les Misérables,” Eddie Redmayne has become an easily recognizable household name. And why wouldn’t he? With eighteen prestigious awards won, including one Oscar, and another forty-three nominations, the guy has taken Hollywood by storm. Not only that, but with a baby-face like his and a charming personality, it’s difficult not to swoon. I won’t lie. As a musical junkie, I was a fan of his “Les Mis” days. I saw “Theory of Everything,” and even “Savage Grace.” Hell, I’ll probably see him in his upcoming role in “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.” This isn’t about attacking Eddie Redmayne. The trans community is bigger than one cisgender man. This is about questioning why is it that one cis man is being permitted to speak on behalf of such a vast community. The simple answer?
Mansplaining.
What is it exactly?
One Atlantic article describes it as the phenomenon in which one party explains a subject “without regard to the fact that the explainee knows more than the explainer, often done by a man to a woman.” When cis men speak for or on behalf of cis women, accusations of mansplaining and misogyny are never far to follow. However, the very same group who claims to defend all women seems to allow the conversation to fall short when it comes to the public acceptance of cis men speaking on behalf of trans women.
Yes. I’m talking to you, mainstream feminists.
When cis men are cast in the roles of trans women, the overall message is ultimately altered regardless of any further content. In casting cis men as trans women, what Hollywood is saying is that they do not see trans women as women. Rather, they see trans women as an equivalent to cis men (which is not true, in case you’re having any trouble there). This is the only area in which casting agencies see it appropriate to cast cis men as women. Not only that, but casting agencies further prove their hypocrisies in refusing to cast trans women in both cis and trans roles.
Leaving trans women out of conversations that wholly regards transwomen is simply disrespectful. It suggests that cis men have the same contributions and opinions to add to trans discourse. It suggests that the target audience for films about trans people should be a cis audience. It suggests that being a trans woman is the same as a cis man putting on a performance of femininity. It not only mansplains what it is to be female, but "cissplains" what it is to be trans. It reduces femininity and transness to a caricature, “The Danish Girl” falls into easy trappings and stereotypes that cannot go accepted by mainstream audiences or LGBTQUIA+ allies.
So in short, what I’m trying to say is this: go see “Tangerine," a film by trans people, for trans people.
