Laura.

If you're a libertarian then perhaps consider the possibility that casting someone expressly because they are a certain race, male, female, transgender or have certain sexual, religious or cultural preferences, is what you're fighting against. Not rallying for.

1. When did I say I was libertarian? 2. Visibility and representation for marginalised groups IS important, SJ played an asian character and now a trans man, she is neither 3. Your premise is flawed, it's a biopic so the actor should be able to convincingly tell the story

Are you are arguing that even at the expense of the artistic vision of the filmmakers, and despite having followed a casting process to find someone suitable and bankable for the role, they should be forced to cast someone for what they are rather what they can offer to the role?

Are you trying to say that every time a trans character or character of colour has been portrayed in a film by a cis white actor it's because the "artistic vision of the filmmakers" determined they were the only people that could play that role?

Nope. Otherwise Id have said that. I suspect at least 80% theyre selected due to the bankability of the actor. Im saying they can shoose whoever they like so long as they consider everyone. Your stating that only certain people can have certain roles. And thats wrong.

If it was an even playing field then perhaps I'd be able to get on board with your idealogical thought experiment but it's not. It's not like trans actors are inundated with requests to play cis characters? Cis people continuously come out on top and get to tell trans stories

I agree with you to a degree, the lack of initial exposure is troubling. If I had proof of the casting process of this film I'd defend it more vocally which I'm not, I'm stating you shouldn't preclude people irrespective of character or talent. Who would you have cast ideally?

SJ has the luxury of playing almost any female role. She’s a successful actress who’s performances I have enjoyed in the past however, this is the second time she has taken a role of a character that could and in my opinion should have been given to someone in that minority group

That's their job.. you know..to act as one...as an ACTor

So who would you recommend to PLAY the part? You do realize it's called ACTING, right? It's their job to portray characters, even if they are a bit different in some regards.

If you did a little research then you would see there are plenty of trans actors that can play this part available. One thing is that they can't get work because cis actors are taking roles that are specifically for them.

This is where is gets a bit daft. A role isn't for any particular gender orientation. If that was the case then trans actors would only get trans parts and vice versa. Also, the role will include both before and after his change. Lastly, could you recommend a trans actor? Thanks

Not trying to be a smart ass just genuinely curious as I find this topic interesting Jamie Foxx played ray Charles. Ray Charles was a blind black man who could sing Jamie Foxx did a great job. Would it been better if they casted a black actor/singer that is also blind?

I haven't seen the film but I'm sure that he did do an excellent job (he's great ). One main issue with SJ is that she is a woman, her being cast as someone who spent their whole life trying to be his true self, a man, but was continuously misgendered, even in his obituary

Yes and Jamie Foxx didn't spend his whole struggling with blindness but still was a great fit for the role.

Why did Ben Kenobi play a jedi if he isnt a real jedi!!! #outraged

Jedis don’t exist. Trans people do.