MovieChat Forums > Normal (2003) Discussion > Suitable for a discussion?

Suitable for a discussion?

posted 19 years ago by Lady_Jeran
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm doing a movie night as part of our Gay-Straight Alliance's Pride Week, and I was considering using this movie. I'm looking for one that would be powerful enough to encite a vast array of emotions, and thoughts, and responses, but at the same time promotes understanding and at least some sensitivity to transgenderism.

I just watched this movie (literally, just finished watching it) and i think it pretty much fits the bill, except that I may have problems starting a discussion with it. Though it does seem to provide an accurate portrayal of the process and what the family goes through, it focuses more on love and acceptance coming from the family, rather than the fact that the rest of the world does not accept it that easily. I would've liked to see more regarding the church and the workmen's reactions, or Patty's classmates hearing about it and rejecting her.

Anyway, I wanted to know if anyone here has an idea for a discussion with mainly college-age lesbians with little to no experience with transgendered people. or if you have any recommendations for other movies I could use. If possible, keep it R rated or lower. Two others I was thinking about were "Soldier's Girl" and as a last resort, "Victor/Victoria."

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

[–] decent 19 years ago

Have you seen the film "Ma Vie En Rose" (My Life In Pink)?

It's really good and helps promote discussion because it has to do with a child, and this generally elicits a completely different set of responses from people who have seen other trans movies.

It's subtitled, and I don't know if that would be a problem. But it's a very good film for what you're doing, IMHO.

Also "Different For Girls" is interesting in it's own way. You may want to check these two films out.

[–] erinmarieking0 18 years ago

"We are not 'transgendered', we are transgender. Transgender is not something that was applied to us or which befell us. One is not 'gayed', 'lesbianed', 'maled' or 'femaled'; nor is one 'transgendered'."

thats a quote from a friend of mine her name is Nancy Nangeroni

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lime6light 17 years ago

However, one is gendered. A great deal of theory is based around the notion that bodies and actions are gendered. I believe that the common usage of the suffix (-ed) comes from said theory. I'm a bit surprised that anyone would find this to be disparaging.

There is a major difference between self-identification and hailing (the placement of a title by someone else), but even "transgender" is a label that is applied to a person. As are "gay" or "lesbian" for that matter. A person is transgender, gay, and/or lesbian because they have applied this term to their self and identify as such. OK, it is clear that I have taken way too many courses in gender theory if this was my knee-jerk response to a simple comment. I'll stop before going into how the terms male and female are applied.

[–] Isaac5855 18 years ago

I think it's admirable that you want to use this movie as part of your Gay-Straight Alliance Pride week, but this movie is not about a homosexual. Roy Applewood is not a homosexual. He is a man who feels he is a woman trapped in a man's body and wants to undergo a sex change. There is a big difference.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]