Eddie Redmayne covers the new issue of Details Magazine. He’s promoting The Danish Girl, obviously, and I’m sure that this will be one of many prominent magazine interviews Eddie will do in the coming months. I always enjoy reading his interviews, even if he actually isn’t all that gossip-worthy. Like, I get the feeling that he’s simply a nice guy. He’s close to his family. He adores his wife. He works hard. His friends love him. And none of that is really scandalous or noteworthy or even particularly quote-worthy. Anyway, you can read the full Details cover story here, and here are some highlights:
Winning the Oscar at such a young age: “I had a moment of, ‘Oh f–k, I might retire tomorrow. I’m never going to do anything again.’ The thought that it happened too early came in for a second. But then I thought, No, I want this.”
On the paparazzi: “It’s really awkward! You get into the lift, they’re at the door. The lift closes, the lift opens, they’re there again! For another day or two, there were shots of me dropping off my dry cleaning or shopping. Eventually everyone got bored and pissed off.”
People freaked out when he said he doesn’t have a stylist: “What I absolutely loathed about that is the world going, ‘Uggghhh . . .’ I felt like a dick, but I was asked the question!”
He loves performing in the New York theater community: “What I love about Broadway is that you have all the theaters backing into each other, so the sense of community is stronger than in the West End. When I was doing Red there, you’d have Alfred Molina playing Rothko, the Phantom of the Opera was outside having a cigarette, there’s Lucy Liu . . .”
Playing a transgender person: “I fell into all the clichés of ignorance. I didn’t realize that gender and sexuality weren’t related. I confused the terms transvestitism and transgender. But what’s lovely is, the second you understand the difference, you see how gigantic it is and how important it is that we educate ourselves.”
He gets naked in the film: “Any time you get naked in front of a crew, it’s embarrassing. It’s not as if we as actors have some way of becoming comfortable with it. It would be exactly like you getting naked in front of 30 people. I have a fear of the talk shows on this one. They always say, ‘Tell me a funny story,’ but this film was so intense. We won’t be putting out a gag reel.”
Walking around the set as Lili: “Just walking onto a set filled with men, watching the difference in how you’re treated, or the scrutiny . . . the gaze was overwhelming. A lot of the women I worked with said, ‘Yeah . . . welcome to our world.'”
I have mixed feelings about Eddie talking about how ignorant he was of transgender issues. I feel strongly that his heart is in the right place and that his research into transgender issues was exhaustive and thorough. But I feel like he’s going to get a lot of backlash for being honest about his ignorance, and I’m also worried that many cisgendered people will be looking to him to “explain” (mansplain?) transgender issues, which he’ll try to do in his earnest, respectful way, and then he’ll get even more sh-t.
Photos courtesy of Details.
I like him. And I think since is is so earnest and respectful, hopefully no oone will go after him for not perfectly explaining such a complex issue. I think at least if a person is trying to understand, that counts for alot. You can tell he cares and is empathetic, which is alot more than some people are capable of doing.
He will not get backlash ( i would be really surprised) because he did the one thing that MANY celebs don’t even think to do… admit your mistake/ignorance and come across humble and human and not preachy.
I hate the idea that admitting ignorance is something to ridicule. First you have to realize that you don’t know, so that you can make an effort to learn. Good for him.
Exactly. Far better to admit one is ignorant and show a willingness to understand and learn, than spewing hateful rubbish.
Exactly. If we go after people that admit they don’t know as much will they be willing to learn? Probably not. I find it great when anyone wants to learn about complex issues and I never meet their ignorance with anger.
Willful ignorance is different though.
+1
Yesterday, thanks to the 10 year anniversary of its release, I watched one of the original interviews with the cast of Brokeback Mountain. Heath and Jake readily admitted to their own initial discomfort with the sex scenes, and Heath mentioned drawing on his initial real feelings of hesitancy and fear in those scenes. At the time, this was not at all contentious, though maybe today it would be.
Eddie’s role is slightly different, since being gay is about sexual attraction, while being trans is dependent on gender identity. While transitioning medically does not define being trans, it matters. What kind of gives me hope is that, 10 years down the road, the tenor of the conversation is different; less full of fear, and more willing to ask questions relevant to trans people, not just straight people. I’m GLAD that Eddie’s being asked, “why not a transgender person in this role?” and that he’s admitting it says something that a trans person was not cast. I think he even said that he was hesitant about the role for that reason.
10 years ago, many of Oprah’s questions to Jake and Heath were, “how difficult was it to pretend to be gay!? How difficult was it to do the sex scenes?” as if this was some exceptional acting feat, and the way both actors responded, to really normalize the acting effort involved, saying it was not a lot different than filming a straight sex scene, was very refreshing. They also had learning moments through the process of making the film, to which they admitted, as Eddie’s done in this interview.
I think it’s possible to acknowledge that in this case, a straight actor took on a role that could have been done by a trans person, while also talking about how brilliantly he performed the role. Maybe through the conversation, more stories about trans people that involve trans actors will catch the public’s attention and be made into movies.
Right, my Mother in Law had no idea that you could be transgender yet not gay. She thought only gay men would feel like they are another gender. I don’t think she is ignorant (she has a masters degree) I just think it is lack of exposure.
It’s totally about lack of exposure. I’m embarrassed to admit I didn’t get it until I went away to college. One of my professors my freshman year was a trans lesbian. I remember telling a friend in my cohort “Why would she bother to become a woman if she already liked women?” I was totally confused and ignorant and this (thankfully) patient friend explained to me that my professor’s decision to transition into a woman was totally separate from her sexual attraction to women. I am mortified by my ignorance now but I’m thankful my friend didn’t attack me for it and was kind instead. I wish more people took that tact with others’ ignorance. Alot of us really are just clueless and not mean spirited.
Totally agree. If he acted like the true authority on the matter, we would be all over him. In truth, very, very few people understand transgender and the differences between gender and sexuality. I’m just learning it at the age of 53. It makes a whole world of sense when you start to think about it, but I would never think it is something people should just know or would automatically know or be taught. He was honest. When honesty starts causing backlash then we are truly in trouble.
I hope he doesn’t get backlash..
There’s a lot of people that continue to stay in the dark about the transgender issues, won’t bother to listen, but if he’s making the effort to understand what’s going on.. that should say a lot. Of course, his explanations won’t be perfect, but he’s only playing a character, we really can’t expect him to fully comprehend the true feelings that transgenders face on a day to day basis.
And sometimes people are willing to listen and learn but they are shunned and labeled if they have any questions or don’t immediately get it and fall in line.
It’s pretty simple for it to not be on someone’s radar. It’s not a huge part of the population and there’s plenty of people in places where they have no contact with someone who is transgendered. It’s pretty understandable they’d be in the dark about it. It’s not a refusal it’s just simply not something that comes up. As much as I can’t stand Caitlyn Jenner and don’t like to give her credit for much, for a lot of people, she very well was the first they’d heard much about the issue.
I think its better that he’s honest about his ignorance than try and come across as some expert.
I hope he doesn’t get much backlash. He’s saying, “I didn’t know, and now I do, and I know better.” Which…isn’t that the point of educating yourself? Good on him for admitting it. He sounds far better than Jared Leto when he played a trans character and said stupid stuff.
He’ll be fine, I think. He’s very respectful and compassionate, and also seems mindful of the huge responsibility on his shoulders. So while he might not know the perfect answer about every question on the transgender issue I think he’d admit ignorance before saying anything offensive.
Oh I kind of wish it was back in the time when all of this nonsense didn’t exist. Cisgender? How many labels are we going to come up with for people? Can’t we just treat people as people, regardless of all the nonsense labels? I believe that everyone has a right to be happy and live their life the very way they choose. Done. Wanna fight against societies’ preset mould for you (whatever that resistance should be)? Fine. You live your truth and I will live mine. The excessive labels for gender and sexuality are taking away from the core issue. People are people and we all deserve to live a life of our own choosing without judgement, shame, or far worse.
No, we can’t just “treat people as people.” I wish we could, too, but people are shunned, ridiculed, beaten up, and even killed for being part of this “nonsense.” You are a tolerant and informed person. That makes you the exception, not the rule in our society. I get what you’re saying, but sadly, it needs to be talked about, I think.
So you regularly use the term ‘cisgender’ to describe yourself to yourself and other people? I agree with Me too that the labeling is annoying and imposing.
But I think the point is that the term cisgender doesn’t really capture the full spectrum of human expression. There are people who feel “not quite right” with their assigned gender but who never feel the desire to identify with the other gender. There are people who identify as genderqueer – neither male not female. There are people who are not trans but who are certainly not conventional.
That’s always been my problem with “cisgender.” While it might be helpful as shorthand for saying, “not trans” it’s not actually helpful as a meaningful descriptor. Technically, “cis” people comprise a huge variety of expressions and ideas, but normally “cis” is used as shorthand for “conventional” people. The term simply doesn’t really capture the group, I suppose.
No, Celebwatch, I don’t use that expression to describe myself, and I don’t believe I said that our even implied that. It’s really tiresome when posters make you explain or defend something you never said. My point was that we still need to talk about our differences because there are still a lot of misconceptions. Not everyone is as informed as Me too, in fact, most people aren’t. I think “cisgender” is broad, and as Bettyrose said, not especially helpful, and I’m not sure what it contributes to the conversation, but I wasn’t defending that specific term. I’m just addressing the need to talk about these issues, and that it would be nice if people were just thought of as people, but we aren’t there yet.
Me too, I agree with a lot of what you’re saying and the term cisgender really sticks in my craw. Because it isn’t defining something. It’s the absence of something. You don’t question your biological gender, so you’re cisgendered, which in no way means you don’t struggle with your sexuality or with balancing your true self with societal expectations of gendered behavior. Plus, it really creates yet another unnecessary us/them divide.
For all the talk about tolerance I can’t help but feel that we are more divided than ever. Everyone has their little “group” that they are defending and I feel like there is no real togetherness. I for one cannot keep up with all the new labels that have popped up in 2015 alone.
I don’t really get why it’s so irksome for you personally to know about a descriptive term to use for people when talking about gender identity. Surely most of your conversations about yourself are not about gender identity, so the few times it’s relevant to the discussion at hand, it’s right there for you to use when you need it. It’s not intended to be a title you apply to yourself in every conversation regardless of context.
Do the terms “straight” or “hetero” annoy you in a conversation about sexuality?
Cis is the same thing, just for use in conversations about gender.
And just like we also use the words bisexual, pansexual and asexual when talking about sexual-orientation, there are similar terms in relation to gender: gender-queer, gender-fluid, agender.
I really don’t understand why the modern gender-words are so problematic, when it’s exactly the same as how we talk about sexuality … and everyone seems to handle those just fine. What’s the difference?
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with admitting ignorance. At least it sounds like he didn’t stay ignorant.
‘Eventually everyone got bored and pissed off.’ Story of my life. I am the only person who isn’t swept away with Mr Eton Times the Third (seriously, what’s with the british prep school thing lately). I thought he was TERRIBLE in World Without End, always showing the tops of his teeth as an emotion, or letting loose that Cry Baby tear. I think ,backlash or not, it’s good that transgender issues are just being talked about.
He was in Pillars of the Earth so he couldn’t have been terrible in World Without End.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with Eddie saying that he was ignorant of these issues before this film. I think it’s better to own up to the fact that he was ignorant and that he had to learn about it. It shows that it’s okay to have to learn about these issues. As long as people are willing to be open minded and to learn, then I don’t think they should get sh-t for at one point being ignorant. It’s the people who are ignorant and are d-cks about it that are the problem.
I understand the concern but everyone…absolutely everyone…has been challenged in life to understand their gender identity. Rigid socially prescribed gender roles have done that to all of us. The new and growing understanding of transgender is wonderful but this new concept of “cisgender” creates a sense that non transgender people share a common understanding of gender, which is so far from the truth. Men often struggle with the right balance of emotional expression. Women struggle to balance feminity with being dominant in the workplace. To say nothing of our sexual identities, the spectrum of which is gaining larger acceptance. We shouldn’t be afraid to acknowledge ignorance of other people’s struggles, given how new all these discussions are.
I think cisgender just means you self-identify as the sex you were born. What that means to me may be very different than what it means to you, but I was born female, and I self-identify as female and so were you and, I believe, so do you. I think you’re over-complicating the concept.
I think you are over-simplifying the concept, which does have those stated implications.
It’s also at least somewhat strange that a binary “cis/trans” would be employed to describe a population that surely divides at most 99%/1(?)% along that binary.
GNAT, that’s exactly what I said. Cisgender is every person on earth who isn’t transgender. So to say “cisgender people” is to say that Donald Trump, Elton John, Putin, and Ellen Degeneres …all being cisgendered …all fit in one near little category together where gender/sexuality is concerned. What’s to over think? It’s a label that’s so excessively broad it has no real value in classifying a common experience or world view.
Ok, Bettyrose, I see what you’re saying. It’s terribly broad, I agree.
Thanks, GNAT. 🙂 In any case, it’s a worthwhile discussion. So much better than being afraid of breaking taboos.
Hi GNAT and Bettyrose, great discussions on here as usual.
I understand cisgender as a very specific & narrow term, not broad at all. As GNAT said, being comfortable in the body you were born with, self-identifying with that gender. Nothing more. Sexuality is separate. Social mores and expectations are separate as well…
A young girl might be a girly-girl, a tomboy, or somewhere in between, but if she’s cisgender she does not see herself as a boy. A young boy can grow up to be Putin, Trump, or Elton John, and is cisgender if he does not see himself as a girl.
It basically refers to the earliest form of self-identification we experience, that of boy or girl.
I agree that everyone, both cisgender and transgender, can also struggle with gender “roles” which are really societal expectations, like your examples of some men struggling with the right balance of emotional expression or some women balancing femininity with being dominant in the workplace. Those issues are not faced by all men and women and are related to how we perceive & respond to things external to ourselves, as opposed to how we see ourselves within.
Cisgender isn’t meant to broadly define a common world view, it’s a very personal concept related to internal identity. Just as transgender is a very limited, narrow term and doesn’t speak to that individual’s sexuality, or how feminine or masculine they are when they transition.
@GNAT and @Bettyrose, I think cisgender’s primary usefulness as terminology is to talk about experiences relevant to genderqueer folks, not about the depths of experiences with gender of all people who are not trans or non-binary. While Ellen and Donald Trump certainly do not share a lot in common, they do identify with their genders at birth. If you’re genderqueer, certainly you should have a useful term to refer to people who are not, just to analyse what separates you from them and the way in which these experiences shape their worlds. The point is for the trans person to be able to talk about how they experience life, not how I, as a straight woman who is comfortable with my biological status as a woman, experience the world.
There’s other cultural space for conversations about gender roles. That’s usually the task of feminism. This issue of trans-vs-cis nomenclature doesn’t have to encompass all social issues that touch on gender, just the one it’s talking about.
Justagirl & Senna,
Your points are well taken, but once we start labelling people for what they are not, where do we draw the line? Do those with celiac disease – a very serious potentially fatal intolerance to gluten – require a word for those of us without celiac disease? I don’t mean to be callous, but the semantic impossibility of labelling people for what they are not begs the question, why this one scenario?
@Bettyrose You raise a good point, I was curious about the origins of the term …wiki says “cis” comes from Latin and means “on this side of”, and is an antonym for “trans” which means “across from” or “on the other side of”.
Some prefer the term “non-trans”. And some dislike the divide on gender identification because it actually splits those who are LGB away from T.
In general, we assume the “norm” is that most people do not have celiac disease – however, even studies would call them non-celiac. Just as there are terms for gay or straight, it makes sense that an area as sensitive as gender identification needs formal terms…without a term, it implies a “norm”, which is steps away from “normal”, which veers into lack of understanding and prejudice.
The difference is that celiac is a) a disease, and b) was never used as a slur.
A better comparison is with homosexuality. Once they stopped categorising homosexuality as a mental illness, the term heterosexual became more common. (Prior to that it was “gay” or “normal”.)
The implication that they’re trying to give is that it’s not a separate “thing” (disease/problem/non-normal-state) that only some suffer from, it’s simply a different category of something we all experience.
I personally feel like the term cis-gender is divisive. It is assigned to us as a way to label as “the other”. I don’t think this is a good idea.
THIS^^^ that’s the reason I feel cisgender is not a positive. At a time we are fighting for inclusivity and acceptance, the cisgender label smacks of the same stink we assign the privileged white male group, a target group or the source of all woe (not completely wrongly, of course). Obviously it is not exactly the same situation, but it does promote the sense of ‘otherness’ oppressor vibe when in truth, even cisgender people have to deal with the broad spectrum of gender social expectation and conformation. It may be of use in a limited context to help non CIS people, but otherwise it is so broad.
I’m glad he brought up the issue about confusion of transvestitism and transgender.
It’s so strange, but I feel as though Caitlin is still confused about the two things since all she ever talks about are issues of transvestitism as opposed to being transgender.
Perhaps it’s due to spending over 2 decades with females whose only focus has been fashion and body image to the point of narcissism and that is reflected in how Caitlin talks about her journey.
It’s not true, however, that gender and sexuality just “aren’t” related.
I was surprised when I learned (from Dr. Drew) that when say a straight man is transgender and becomes a woman he will subsequently date gay women. But then I learned that isn’t always the case. Sometimes he enjoys the attention he receives from men as a woman, and wants to explore that and subsequently dates straight men. So what has ‘happened’ to his sexual orientation? Clearly his new/true gender had some effect. Conversely, I have read accounts from female to male transsexuals that the introduction of testosterone hormone had a strong effect on their attraction towards women (where they had previously not really had any attraction). They were surprised by their physical reaction to seeing women in this new way.
All that means is that sexuality is very fluid, and more people are bisexual than realize it. Likely those people, had they actively considered it and allowed themselves to explore it before transitioning, would have discovered they are bisexual, but it took the transition and the new attention to sort of bring their bisexuality to their attention. And bisexuality can be weighted and shift over a lifetime – mostly attracted to women, shifting to mostly attracted to men.
😶
I actually disagree. Not many people are willing to admit their ignorance about such topics, so Eddie definitely earns points and respect for doing so.
Too many people are in the shoes he was in before taking on the role of a transgender person. I think he will be applauded for basically saying to people, “Look, I thought the way you did, but I learned the truth. You can, too!”
Does this site even know what mans plain means you just use internet buzzwords out of context.
And congrats to everyone on this site who is up to date on every single social issue, you are ignore like the rest of the people.
SMH SO THIRSTY EDDIE IS
> I have mixed feelings about Eddie talking about how ignorant he was of transgender issues. I feel strongly that his heart is in the right place and that his research into transgender issues was exhaustive and thorough. But I feel like he’s going to get a lot of backlash for being honest about his ignorance
It is a minefield. If anybody can navigate it, it is Eddie.
I think people should support him, It is worse than the whole conversation is shut down, then everyone just sits back in their corner and nobody is brave enough to reach out. That way lies bitterness and ignorance.
I wish people wouldn’t get offended as easily if they can see that the other person is honestly trying and wants to understand.
I hope he doesn’t get any backlash either. We all, at some point in time, are ignorant to any issue, no matter what it is. If it is not something that affects you personally, most people don’t know. If you don’t ask questions and research, you will never learn. Even those who do have it affect them personally still have to ask questions and learn. No one knows everything about everything and to ridicule someone for learning is outright wrong. Do we give children flack when they ask to learn? No? Then why should an adult be ridiculed for asking and learning? Ridiculous. Good on him for admitting that he didn’t know and good on him for taking the time to learn.
Intro to Gender Studies should be a distribution requirement in colleges. It should be taught in high school. It is so easy to be ignorant without the knowledge. He shouldn’t get backlash!
Cisgender is a very important term. And yes, mainly in the gender discussion department. We HAVE to use all of these terms when talking about privilege. Not wanting labels is akin to calling yourself colorblind. It might come from a place of wanting equality, but actually completely disregards the shit that poc go through every day.
I am OK with it being a part of social studies at school.
I am against making it requirement in college because college is very expensive and now you want to make students to sacrifice 2-3-5 thousand dollars for something they can study themselves. It is not right. We already have too many things in college that are required that an be studied independently and much cheaper and really belong to high school curriculum, not college while the things that are actually need for a given profession are limited to 1.5-2 years of study.
In general, I am against making any kind of studies required. You shouldn’t be forcing people to do anything, it always creates a backlash.
And how being non transgender is a privilege? That is just an overreach, which again will create a backlash.
Why is society so keen to label people? Growing up in the 70s, there was a huge backlash against being put into a box and labelled as “whatever”. Shouldn’t we encourage respect for individuals for who they are, regardless of their sexual/gender/or whatever orientation? For every person who fits neatly (in their own eyes) into a certain label there will be many others who won’t, outliers who are then marginalised. In essence, every person is an individual so do we all need individual labels? My label may be quite long! And my teenager’s label changes on a weekly basis!
This is the bloke who portrayed Stephen Hawking? The more you know about him personally, the more you realize what an incredibly gifted actor he is.
I think it is fine to admit you don’t know something, especially regarding Transgender issues (he is not in the minority). So much better than people spouting off in the wrong way to cover that they don’t know.
Details should have put someone more ICONIC on their last issue.. He is very stylish.. has a good sense of style and wears cloths will. I don’t every expect to see him in baggy pants/shorts or everyday street wear. He has an OLD HOLLYWOOD feel.