Actress Ruby Rose has deleted her social media presence after facing a backlash for being cast as “Batwoman” — not from the right, angry that the self-described lesbian character will be played as written, but from the left, who declared Rose “not gay enough” to play the female superhero.
I found this quote in an article written by Emily Zanotti for The Daily Wire called Ruby Rose Quits Twitter After Leftist Critics Declare She’s Not Gay ENOUGH To Play Batwoman.
Since The Daily Wire is a conservative publication, and since social and political leftists seem to believe that any conservative news is “fake news,” I fact checked it (yeah, I do that), and according to the left leaning New York Times as well as Entertainment Weekly, it’s true.
What that heck (substitute a four letter word that starts with “F” [Edited to be less graphic])?
The EW states in part:
“Where on earth did ‘Ruby is not a lesbian therefore she can’t be batwoman’ come from — has to be the funniest most ridiculous thing I’ve ever read. I came out at 12? And have for the past 5 years had to deal with ‘she’s too gay’ how do y’all flip it like that? I didn’t change. I wish we would all support each other and our journeys,” the former Orange Is the New Black star reportedly tweeted shortly before shutting down her profile and disabling comments on her Instagram posts.
The Times soft soaped it, of course, at least as much as the facts would (supposedly) allow:
The complaints about the casting of Ms. Rose included assertions that she is not a lesbian, is not Jewish and does not have the acting skills to play the role. Ms. Rose said she was baffled by the first statement, posting on Twitter before she deleted her account that she “came out at 12” and spent the last five years being told she was “too gay” for certain roles: “How do y’all flip like that? I didn’t change.”
Oh, just some background. According to Wikipedia:
The modern Batwoman is written as being of Jewish descent and as a lesbian in an effort by DC editorial staff to diversify its publications and better connect to modern-day readership. Described as the highest-profile gay superhero to appear in stories published by DC, Batwoman’s sexual orientation drew wide media attention following her reintroduction, as well as both praise and criticism from the general public.
Welcome to the politically correct 21st century where any superhero must conform to progressive standards in order to be valid (which I guess includes gender fluid actresses).
I can sort of get why Scarlett Johansson withdrew from the role of playing a transsexual, but where is it written that says an actor/actress can only play a role that is exactly like them?
Gay men have been playing straight men on television and in films for decades, and on stage for centuries.
I’m pretty sure Christian Bale isn’t the world’s greatest detective, and I’m almost positive that Henry Cavell can’t fly and bullets don’t bounce off of his chest. So Ruby Rose isn’t gay enough to play Batwoman.
It’s called “acting” for a reason. No, she really doesn’t have Batwoman’s skill sets, nor a lot of other qualities the fictional character possesses, but it doesn’t matter as long as she can play the role. Get it?
Please, someone enlighten me why her critics should be granted even the tiniest shred of credibility? What gross bigotry is this?