Joan of Arc to be portrayed as non-binary in new London theatre production

FYI, the original thread on this was deleted.

You have been warned, innocent one.

Historical accuracy irrelevant I guess as long as they can shove their agenda down our throats. I think we should just rewrite all history to better serve our current political climate.

[quote]Trigger warning! TRIGGER MOTHER FUCKING WARNING! This site contains all kinds of pointless shit posted by very peculiar people. You will doubtless be offended, perhaps outraged – that is assuming we are doing our job and you have any sense at all. Those delicate souls who worry about being offended should probably not hang around here. Quite honestly, nobody should hang around here - it is a very bad place full of very bad people posting truly awful things. Which is precisely what we would like for the next 20 years.

But we are not allowed to offend non-binary attention whores.

Will she be black too?

This is getting ridiculous.

Peak ridiculous. It's as if this whole agenda is one big punked IQ test.

It's the part I was born to play!

r6 She's unfit. She goes by "he/they". This role is for "they/them"

Joan of Arc was not burned at the stake, she was stoned to death. Marsha P Johnson threw the first brick at her.

Is she going to be a victim of revisionist history too like Marsha P. Johnson was?

This is one of those totally unnecessary, politically correct changes that actually undermines one put-upon minority group (women) for a smaller one (gender nonconformists).

It obviously isn't the right way to go about things, but people objecting to this are already being called names, stifling debate and provoking anger.

Why can't we have new, non-binary or trans stories and characters which won't trample on historical heroic women? What this production is doing is stealing one woman's bravery, her fighting, beliefs and inspiration and turning it into a "non-binary's" achievement instead. It's outrageous.

The Joan of Arc story is so insane, I don't think it's true. So who cares what some theater does with the story?

r11 Joan of Arc was very real.

It's so frustrating to me how every gender non-conforming woman or female character from history is being portrayed as trans, and distanced from womanhood. There is nothing progressive about it! I saw an absurd (and fairly popular) Twitter thread claiming that Louisa May Alcott, author of Little Women, was trans.

[quote]It obviously isn't the right way to go about things, but people objecting to this are already being called names, stifling debate and provoking anger.

And? Who cares? They can call us names and throw temper tantrums all they want. Normal people don't GAF what Troons think or feel. Facts are facts. Joan of Arc was a woman. Sex is immutable. The end.

R13 are you fucking serious? Holy shit there are some loons in the world

R15 Yes, enjoy one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read

Also, make sure to check out the whole absurd Twitter thread. The author is a batshit former Tumblr freak who published her/his/its/their barely disguised South Park fanfiction as a shitty YA novel

[quote]Will she be black too?

It's a London production, so probably.

Who will go to see this dreck?

R19 they will!

Malcolm x should be a white cis female

What's next? A gender non-binary Mulan as well?

What these lgbTQIA+++ gender cultists NEVER do is transing or nbing brown or non-white Mohammad, Allah, such people.

Such evil discriminatory Islamo-exclusive bigots.

^ Islamo-exclusionary*

I always thought Louisa May Alcott and her avatar Joy March were butch lesbians confined by an intensely patriarchal society and cult of domestic femininity. Women who were intelligent, independent, outspoken and feminist were called "men in women's bodies." Same with lesbians. Calling them trans is ignoring the misogyny that was commonplace then. Alcott wanted to be a man because she wanted freedom to be an intellectual without the baggage and disapproval of society.

*Jo

I don't like trans rights activists making every gender-nonconforming person in history somehow transgender. It shows serious ignorance of history. 19th century gender roles were extremely strict and there were many people who couldn't conform which caused a lot of mental distress for them. Women were viewed as lesser than men and had no legal rights. So if a woman expressed desire to be man it was no different than a gay man wanting to be straight or black person wanting to be white. They wanted the freedom and respect that only straight white men were given. This was also an era of pseudoscience that preached the white man was the most highly evolved human being and had a duty to protect women and racial minorities from self-harm.

Transgender people did exist historically and lived as the opposite sex. Something to TRAs seem impossible because they're obsessed with everyone knowing they're trans and acknowledging people are trans rather than letting them pass.

[quote]The Joan of Arc story is so insane, I don't think it's true.

r11 = the ghost of Henry VI

I looked up that Peyton person and Tumblr hates them with a passion, R17. For the racist South Park fanfic, pedo lusting for Finn Wolfhard and being a trustafarian which helped get their writing career to take off. This review talks about their published book and how racist, homophobic and misogynistic it is.

Is Peyton a bio male r29?

R30 Trans man who hates women despite being one biologically.

Trash has no gender r30.

She was a woman. They are taking everything from us.

Seriously, R30? You can't tell that's just an ugly woman?

transing the dead might be a new low

There were many female warriors. If the goal is to eliminate gender stereotypes, the non-binary or transing of historical figures isn't helping

It's weird how transgenderism has these parallels with other cults and strange religions, in this case the Mormons who were converting long-dead Holocaust victims to Mormonism.

Leslie Feinberg "transed" Joan of Arc all the way back in 1996.

Dear asteroid. Where the fuck are you, and do you mind speeding it up:?

Many thanks,

Leslie Feinberg?

Opinion discarded.

I'm not presenting her opinion to endorse it, r40, but rather to counter the idea that transing Joan of Arc is somehow a new phenomenon in 2022

I heard they're trying to claim Catherine the Great was non binary, but what about the horse?

r42 I think the cultists fear upsetting Russia, especially now? Well there are plenty of western historical figures whose real stories can be destroyed by these mostly white, western, 'revolutionary, rebellious, deconstructive, subversive' cultists because western countries now and even real, traditional cultural institutions... are just pathetic.

[quote] "Could you [bold]change gender[/bold] in the Middle Ages? Live as a man and become a saint? To be born a girl and end up a knight? [...] don't miss the conference "[bold]Fluid genders.[/bold] From Joan of Arc to [bold]trans saints[/bold]" by Clovis Maillet."

That 'art historian' Clovis is a fugly 'now non-woman' female, just like all these loons - from the creator & actor (both extremely fugly "they/them" bio females) of this Joan production to that hideous trustafarian Peyton (getting called as 'daddy' by her mental followers) who desperately wants to trans Louisa May Alcott.

And legit French newspaper Libération published multiple "Jeanne d'Arc could be trans!" pieces already in 2020 and before; one (or more, idk) of them by that same loon above.

Rich white Americans and Brits are funding this TRA and nonbinary movement. Because it came out of nowhere. I don't remember trans people in the 2000s ever demanding to change language or revise history. They never were antagonistic to cisgender gays then too. Then Twitter and Tumblr happened and bored rich white people decided that changing genders is totally fun and of course the pervs and pedos saw this as a way to get under the LGBT umbrella. It's all postmodern decadence.

By the way, skeptical trans people exist and there's a detrans movement but both are being silenced. The skeptics are trans people who actually had dysphoria for as long as they could remember, lived as the opposite sex and then transitioned for their health. They are skeptical about people changing genders like a pair of underwear and refusing to pass or get the hormonal and surgical treatments. They're dubbed "gatekeepers" by the TRAs. IMHO, gatekeeping is not bad.

This is so tiresome, it seems UK is really going full force with this crazy woke trans ideology.

Probably Joan of Arc will be black too, i have no doubt she will not be white.

They are rewriting history, the worst thing i've read it was " She got killed because she refused of dressing as a woman" which is 100% false, she was killed beacuse herectic beacuse she was saying she was talking to God.

I thought the woke activists hated religion but they are always ready to appropriate historical figures.

[quote] "She got killed because she refused of dressing as a woman"

r46 So this is another number added to the *countless* "murdered because he was trans"...?

But Joan or Johnny was insane first and foremost, remember.

Isn’t this really insulting to women? This whole non-binary shit is a trend of the minute but, hey, let’s pretend it’s existed throughout history for the sake of “representation’”.

It's insulting to anyone who ever dared stray from the norms of their time.

gender norms, that is.

R46 That argument conveniently omits that she went back to wearing pants because when she wore a dress in prison, a guard tried to rape her aka she only dressed "as a man" in the instance right before her death to protect herself. She died for her virtue as a woman, not to "live her truth" as a man, and that's without including the heresy charges aka her belief she was communicating with angels, which were kind of a big fucking deal.

That said, I'm ambivalent on this theatrical choice; gender swapping happens all of the time in theater. But I don't think making Joan trans is going reveal anything profound about her story: she already stood out for better or for worse by being a peasant who claimed to be on a mission directly from God and made demands of a king to be sent to the front lines of war; idk how Joan identifying as he/him or they/them is going to make that fact any more significant. To the 13th century English, it would just be another log on the "she's delusional" pile.

While at it, why not create "Christina, Queen of Sweden - trans + nb he/they" too? Oh they can also make a biopic/play about the actor who played her: "Greta Garbo who was actually trans nb".

Trannies!

Maybe they should portray her as Jewish too.

Because any woman who did anything courageous or exceptional must be a man.....

How fucking insulting.

any historical female who didn't exist to simply be a fuckhole is being transed. Kind of like the mormons do.

I forgot to sign that as misogyny

R39 we can only wish

People are getting nuttier and nuttier. To what end does this serve? Seriously? I try to parallel by imagining what would I gain by revising history and making George Washington (or anybody Abe Lincoln whoever) a gay man. Ok, so I've rewritten history and now Washington is portrayed as gay in the new play, Founding Father. Then? What's the fucking point? It's fucking insane

Weren't they trying to make Mulan into a trans allegory? Despite Mulan isn't even a tomboy nor showed any interest in fighting but only did it to protect her father who was too old and not fit for battle. The crossdressing serving as a plot a device to be able to serve in the military. With her eventually revealing her identity and proving as a woman she could fight and serve her country. And even after saving China, Mulan is still feminine and wants to return home and be a lady. Something that made it an empowering tale that didn't devalue femininity and showed women could be strong and fight and still enjoy being girly.

Joan wears breast binders in the image advertising the production.

I can’t with these people.

According to trans people, women are incapable of accomplishing anything unless they become a man.

Film Score by Jack Jones

Yeoman: (pointing at Joan) What are THOSE?

Joan: Nothing.