“Most of the characters are female and three of them are gay, which doesn’t define their storyline. After the fact you sort of realize that we had a lot of female personnel, also behind the camera,” he said. “Obviously we want to get to a stage where we don’t notice and it doesn’t matter. But clearly it’s still, unfortunately, rare enough that women make up 50 percent of the cast and executive teams and that’s something we remark upon. But if that’s why it’s a good show, then clearly it’s something we need to do more of.”
After Hagan assured him that her sexual orientation would not interfere with her ability to coordinate speakers for the group, she says she was told: “We regret to inform you that you are forced to resign from your position as message coordinator.”
“Forced to resign?”
Frank Oz staying in character through take after take of prop failure
There is no doubt that we are in the midst of a bloody and brutal struggle. We are angry and traumatized. But after I saw a friend’s Facebook plea that we stop calling it a “war zone,” I have to agree.
In these times of subjective discourse, language—and literality—is more important than ever. War only begets more violence. War breaks the spirit.
In the words of General Sherman—the man who deemed Savannah too lovely to burn—war is hell.
I don’t want to live in hell. Do you?
For some, it’s probably easier to believe that the answer to the jacked–up violence is as simple as ridding ourselves of “the enemy.” Except that Savannah is not under attack from some foreign force.
If the singular they is not prohibitively confusing, it’s unclear why its use ought to be limited to cases where the subject’s gender identity doesn’t fit neatly into a binary. Instead, we ought to revert to the gender neutral “they” whenever gender is not explicitly relevant. Least of all because, if the goal is greater inclusion, limiting the use of the singular they to these cases doesn’t even have the desired effect.