Men in Drag: Armisen Charms, Sandler's a Miss

Originally Posted on March 6, 2012, on

During its theatrical run last fall, the response to Adam Sandler's cross-dressing comedy "Jack and Jill," which made its DVD debut on Tuesday, was an overwhelming thumbs down: The film's approval ratings on the website Rotten Tomatoes were 43 percent from audiences and an abysmal 3 percent from critics.  The focus has mainly been on Sandler's portrayal of a woman--in fact, his record-breaking sweep of Razzie nominations includes the distinction of Worst Actress--and upon the film's recent U.K. release, The Guardian's Steve Rose went so far as to write that his performance may represent "the death of the cross-dressing movie".

Why does Sandler’s shtick fail to elicit laughter—or anything but a furrowed brow—and what might be the significance of his profound unfunniness for broader issues of gender and media?

In order for the humor in a film like this to take flight, the “ridiculous character” (aka, the guy who looks awkward in drag) needs to be played truthfully. As fellow thespian John C. Reilly says, it is the actor’s job “to tell the truth as much as you can,” and this honest commitment to exaggerated circumstances is what makes a scene funny.

But in “Jack and Jill,” Sandler seems too uncomfortable to play Jill’s truth and instead defensively scrambles to make derisive jokes about her. He emphasizes her rough and crass masculinity, rather than committing to revealing her (and his) true feminine qualities. One wonders why he would choose this material in the first place, if only to grab some laughs at the expense of unattractive women. The Guardian’s Rose suggests that perhaps underneath on-screen drag performances like Sandler’s “lie the unrequited yearnings of our fading comics to really get in touch with their big, fat feminine sides. It’s a shame none of them seems to have the balls.”

The fear of identifying with a person who is female or feminine is an oft-unspoken reality in Hollywood. The greatest actress of her generation, Meryl Streep, says heterosexual male actors and audiences have always been resistant to “assum[ing] a persona if that persona is a she.” But if this insidious fear—or “Femme Phobia,” as memoirist Julia Serano calls it—is the root cause of “Jack and Jill’s” bombastic failure, then the film industry has a real problem on its hands. Breaking the silence on this issue is crucial to averting flops like this in the future, as well as to uncovering the myriad ways in which Femme Phobia is harmful.

To begin with, what exactly is so terrifying to men about femininity? Numerous social scientific studies conclude that, for most men, there is a fear that presenting as too sensitive, too soft or too feminine may read as “gayness.” In simple terms, all things feminine in male behavior are considered to be “gay,” and all things “gay” are considered to be undesirable and bad and the worst possible thing for a man to be.

Perpetuating these attitudes on screen certainly exacerbates problems for LGBT communities, especially young people too often memorialized in a relentless news stream of bullying and harassment to the point of suicide or murder. But infrequently discussed in such news reports is the fact that such violence usually occurs due to people’s perceived sexuality based on gender presentation (i.e., men who are effeminate) as opposed to their stated sexuality (men openly identifying as gay).

What is talked about even less is the impact these attitudes have on straight men. In a 2010 piece for The Christian Science Monitor titled “Homophobia hurts straight men, too,” Jonathan Zimmerman emphasized how this contagious fear creates harmful limitations for straight men, like keeping them from having intimate, long-standing friendships with one another. This toxic fear seems to keep certain male actors, like Sandler, from maximizing their obvious creative potential. By widening the margins of their own gender expression, male actors would make room for more honest, effective and funnier work.

Not all straight male actors are so constrained, however, as evidenced by “Saturday Night Live” cast member Fred Armisen’s performance in IFC’s “Portlandia.” This sketch comedy series, which mocks hipster culture on the West/Left Coast, features Armisen in various roles, including several as women. Armisen’s performances are the polar opposite of Sandler’s: He fully embodies his female characters, honestly exposing his sensitive and feminine qualities—often to extremes—resulting in hilarity without mean-spiritedness, misogyny, homophobia or self-hatred. Armisen is authentically funny, and critics and audiences have embraced the show.

If more male actors allowed themselves to play a wider spectrum of gendered behaviors as Armisen does, the benefits would be subtle but substantial. This could reduce an epidemic male fear of seeming sensitive, feminine or gay. It might even contribute to a reduction in violence against all women and men, particularly those in the LGBT communities, as so often we behave, enact and are what we watch.

LOVE BITES

For many, Valentine’s Day is the time to indulge in romantic delights, typically of the instantly gratifying but not so long lasting variety. This is all very well when your love’s fire is newly kindled, but several years in, the chocolates, bubbles and baubles may be inadequate fuel. This February 14^th I recommend sharing something perhaps less arousing but far more sustaining than small bites, sweet bites, and all other bites you're likely to share with your partner, sincere sound bites.

Yes, I know what you’re thinking, “that doesn’t sound very hot”, but I assure you, even hotter – not to mention more durable - than expensive expressions of passion is the ability to authentically listen, talk to and be heard by your partner.

Where to begin? First, we must acknowledge what happens to relationships once the Hollywoodized, hue of the first year or so has begun to fade. You each become exposed, and the magnetic love fields at your inner cores - the very specific, subjective, and deeply-rooted reasons you have gravitated to each other - begin to reveal themselves, making you vulnerable. Many of your conflicts as a couple derive from a fear of this vulnerability, which leads you to rely on opportunities like Valentine’s Day to glaze over the rough spots with chocolate denial. But it is in precisely this vulnerable place that you need to be to keep the love flame alive.

Vulnerability is necessary in order to have a “strong sense of love and belonging” says research professor Brene Brown, who has studied vulnerability, authenticity, and shame for over a decade. Brown says that a crucial component of this is being able to say “I love you first” and having “the willingness to do something where there are no guarantees”. This aspect of love often bites.

Now, the tricky thing about being vulnerable in love is that it can easily lead to unfocused emotional chaos, which is why we so often avoid it. We need to harness our vulnerability by defining where each of us is coming from, and thus clarifying our specific emotional needs. To accomplish this, it is helpful to establish the boundaries around each of our “characters”. As actress Mary McDonnell says, “Great characters develop out of restricted situations. When people feel the limitations of life, something else takes over that’s specific and colorful.” Much like acting, defining our roles can be incredibly helpful in freeing our expressions of emotion.

I must say, I often try to resist oversimplifying, generalizing or categorizing relationship roles (i.e. books of the “Men are from Jupiter, Women are from Neptune” variety only apply to a limited number of romantic pairs), but I’ve learned that defining emotional roles that are somewhat flexible, and which reasonably account for nuances, can create focus and lead to clear and productive communication.

Having worked with a variety of couples for years, and reading about couples’ work from myriad schools of thought, the two roles that I’ve identified in every single romantic relationship are what I call The Engulfed and The Abandoned.

What does that mean? Well, couples, I’m telling you that without exception, that one of you is The Engulfed - meaning you learned from a very early age that emotionally intimate relationships require you to be engulfed, enveloped, or somehow encompassed, to varying degrees, by the other person. And the other one of you is The Abandoned – meaning you learned from a young age that emotionally intimate relationships cannot be taken for granted and constantly require you to do something to maintain them, or you risk abandonment.

A few clarifications need to be made. We’ve all been abandoned in one form or another, and we’ve all experienced some version of engulfment. It should also be noted that I am not making any assumptions about gender, personality, temperament, passivity, or dominance in utilizing these terms. What these labels refer to are the highly specific ways in which each of us has learned to attach emotionally, and from what I’ve seen in my practice, there is always one person in a couple who does this by becoming engulfed, and another driven by a fear of abandonment.

These two roles are complimentary, which is how you ended up together, but they are also threatening to each other. Like a wandering oyster and free floating sea particle, the two of you found each other, aggravate each other, and are in the process of forming a thing of beauty. Knowing and accepting which of you is which, will take you both to the place you need to be. You'll be vulnerable, but with clarity and on equal footing, as neither of these roles is more powerful than the other. They both imply a need for the other, and if these needs are acknowledged and authentically expressed, neither one of you can rise above the exposure of your emotional nakedness.

There are various methods I use to help couples get to this place and to communicate with each other once they’ve arrived but for now, in order to apply this concept on V-day, think of it as an acting exercise. Like an actor preparing for a big scene, much of the "work" will take place within you, as you take some time to reflect upon all of the reasons you are drawn to your partner. You will want to make special note of the contradictions in your attraction, and to consider the psychological literature that contends we are attracted to aspects of our partner that seem familiar - whether that be comforting or frustrating, good or bad. Think about your own reasons for choosing someone "so controlling” or someone "so elusive”. Meditate on all of the caretakers you had as a child, what you got from them and what you didn't, what overwhelmed you and what you didn't get enough of.

Keep all of these reflections in mind as you approach the hot seat, and choose to share one current feeling, desire, concern or request with your partner, delivering the line from a place of vulnerability, clarity, and truth. This is a frightening task, so one of you will likely need to set up the scene, to “say “I love you” first, and once you take this leap of faith, you'll need your partner there to catch you. You will need to prepare your partner to listen...carefully, lovingly, and without judgment. The listening is just as important - if not more. The unconditional listening of a romantic partner is incredibly healing, and can help one to integrate seemingly contradictory feelings.

Psychologist Harvel Hendricks suggests a listening tool that you can both use, not unlike mirroring exercises developed by the acting teacher Sanford Meisner. The idea is to listen to your partner describe a feeling, desire or concern and to say it back to them neutrally, without attitude or interpretation. The next step is to validate their statement and then to empathize with it. That’s it. As any good actor would do, simply play each of those actions in your own way.

So, in review, your effective Love Bites can be achieved through the following steps:

1) One of you will have to initiate a dialogue.

2) You'll both have to agree to be vulnerable with each other.

3) Cast yourselves as yourselves: Acknowledge who is The Abandoned and who is The Engulfed, and then reflect upon your attractions to one another.

4) One at a time, state one feeling, desire, concern or request – possibly sharing a specific memory for context.

5) Wholeheartedly listen and mirror what your partner has said to you.

And you’re done!

If you both can allow yourselves to be fully present and follow these steps, expecting “no guarantees” – much, much easier said than done - you'll feel closer to each other than any oysters, petit fours, or champagne would ever allow. You’ll also likely find yourselves open to exploring more potential possibilities in your relationship…perhaps even bites you haven't yet imagined trying.

Don't Act, Don't Tell!: Discrimination Based on Gender Nonconformity in the Entertainment Industry and the Clinical Setting

Published in the Journal of Gay and Lesbian Mental Health Vol. 16 Issue (3)

ABSTRACT
The author describes anti-homosexual attitudes in the entertainment industry. Effeminate male actors generally have a hard time being cast, whether for gay or straight roles. Attitudes in the performing arts mirror those in society as a whole. Case reports are interspersed in the discussion to illustrate the points.

INTRODUCTION
There is a “don’t ask, don’t tell” practice in the hiring of actors for film, theater, and television—but it is certainly as ubiquitous in casting for the world’s stage as well. Here is how it works: actors can avoid discrimination so long as they do not disclose being homosexual. What is considered to be a disclosure in this case can be verbal, but is more often non-verbal, and merely a casting director’s perception or interpretation of the actor’s sexuality based on their gender presentation. This practice limits work for out and “seemingly gay” actors, and also severely limits audience perceptions of both homosexuality and gender. A simple example of this can be found in the film Brokeback Mountain, for which straight, masculine movie stars were hired to play gay men. By restricting the presence of gender-nonconforming people in film, television, and theater, the message, “you are permitted to be gay, just don’t flaunt your identity” (Yoshino, 2006), reverberates like an earthquake and without anyone having to claim responsibility or fix the problem. Until this phenomenon is brought to the surface – by naming and aggressively discussing it – homophobic discrimination will continue on and below the surface. Specifically we can expect to see more job discrimination, bullying, suicides, and hate crimes against gender-nonconforming people (both gay and straight)……

ACTING OUT

by Mark O'Connell

The following short film is a collection of interviews with lesbian and gay self identified actors. The actors discuss the pressure they often feel, to modify their instinctive gender presentations in order to appeal to casting directors, producers and directors. Casting director Brette Goldstein very honestly and eloquently shares her experiences working with gender nonconforming actors, and the way the business responds to them.

Containers and Pinatas

We can all identify with the nursery rhyme Humpty Dumpty. At some point in our lives we’ve unwittingly sat on the wrong wall (some taller than others), fallen (some more disastrously than others), and broken into so many pieces we feel beyond repair. Whether our breaking has taken the form of a simple blow to the ego (i.e., not getting cast as the Jolly Green Giant in the school play—because you’re four feet tall), or severe trauma, abuse, or loss, each of us has felt broken, disconnected, and fragmented.

Recognizing that all the king’s horses and men can’t put us back together, we try to reassemble ourselves, or at least attempt to contain our broken bits – as if temporarily storing them in an urn - until we figure out how to heal, and to feel whole again.

Here are a few ways we try to contain our feelings of brokenness:

1) We seek mastery over our great fall by overcompensating. Not only are we determined NEVER to fall again, but we are also determined to become absolutely UNBREAKABLE. For example, if as a little girl you were cruelly criticized for your inadequate tennis skills, you might attempt to contain your feelings of incompetence through the single-minded goal of becoming the next Serena Williams.

2) We might use the creative arts to express our brokenness. The parameters that surround a work of art might allow us freedom to express ourselves. By directing the focus off of us and onto our creation, we contain our fragmented feelings within the part we play, the dance we choreograph, the picture we paint, or the book we write.

3) We seek guidance in the form of a therapist, counselor, or spiritual advisor - Psychoanalyst Wilfred Bion used the term “container” to describe a process where a psychotherapist holds, and reflects back a client’s thoughts and feelings for the client, until the client is ready to identify with those thoughts and feelings and possess them as their very own.

Containing our shattered emotions can be the beginning of great healing, but it only works if the container is secure. If it leaks, breaks or combusts, then it is no longer a container, but rather a piñata instead. When the walls of our containers crack, this can re-stimulate the experience of our original fall, leaving us once again feeling vulnerable, weak, broken, and hopeless. Here are some examples of the containers that I described above, becoming piñatas:

1) We are simply unable to overcompensate for the damage caused by our shattering fall – overcompensation being a precarious goal/container to begin with. If the little girl who was criticized for her inadequacies as a tennis player, fails to become the next Serena Williams, her debilitating feelings of inadequacy will inevitably become re-stimulated.

2) The work of art we create, in order to hold our broken feelings becomes too revealing, too unfocused - a scattered expose. If the parameters of the character we play, the story we’re trying to tell, or picture we’re trying to create, are not clear and appropriately observed, the work could potentially become too unnecessarily personal and exposing, leaving us vulnerable to harsh rejection and judgment by our peers and audiences that is directed at us and not our creation.

3) If our therapists, counselors, or spiritual advisors, take on more personal roles in our lives (friends, peers, co-workers, lovers, companions), or freely expel information we give them in confidence to anyone who will listen, we are being compromised, and will likely become less trustful, less hopeful, and more broken then we were when we sought help.

It is far easier to freely discharge our broken fragments into piñatas, rather than endure the discipline of keeping them contained. However, by respecting the solid parameters of a container, particularly in terms of a psychotherapeutic relationship with clear and agreed upon boundaries, much progress can be made. Emotional healing takes time, it is a process, and it is hard work, but respecting and accepting the limitations of a container can result in great liberation—and with time, you may even feel “back together again.”

AND THE OSCAR GOES TO...YOU!

Face it, mid-winter is not your finest hour. Many of us are putting off our vows and ambitions for the new year. Some of us are unhappy with our bodies (holiday over-eating, relentless blizzards limiting effective gym time), and some just burying our heads like ostriches, in order to avoid the winter blues—or what some call Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD). We hibernate, isolate, avoid invitations - preferring the couch to the concourse - all because right now you just don’t feel like being “you” and certainly don’t want to expose your sorry state to anyone else. Fortunately television producers know exactly how you’re feeling, and obligingly offer you a buffet of exciting special events - in order to lose your blues in someone else’s excitement - including the Super Bowl, the Grammy’s and the Oscars.

The Oscars are perhaps the most alluring spectator sport of all, since we get to observe our beautiful heroines and heroes of the screen as they enjoy a surprise moment of unequivocal attention and lauds. Witnessing the Oscar winner seize this moment of grand deference, in a speech of three minutes or less - speaking from the heart as she expresses gratitude, shares her passions, and takes a moment to mention the ideals and social issues which are important to her – transports us from our SAD obscurity into a thrilling moment of receiving vicarious reverence. Of course the big hangover comes when the show is over, you return to your own life…and realize that it’s very late, on a very cold Sunday night.

For those of you who connect with the above experience, here’s what I suggest: give your own Oscar acceptance speech to the bathroom mirror. In three minutes or less, tell your looking glass how grateful you are, why it is so meaningful to win an award for “this” particular project, thank all of the people to whom you are indebted, blow kisses to all those who enrich your life, share what you value most about the work you do, and emphasize one or two important issues to which you’d like to bring international attention. If you feel it wanders or bombs the first time, take advantage of the fact that there is no orchestra to bully you off the stage (or out of the powder room) and give it another go until it feels right.

I know what you’re thinking: (1) “Isn’t this behavior Narcissistic?”; (2) “Isn’t this behavior Psychotic?”; and (3) “How can this be healthy?” My answers to these are: (1) “Yes, but there is such a thing as healthy narcissism. If you repeatedly thank yourself, as opposed to other people, in your “loo” speech, that would be the unhealthy kind.” (2) “Only if you do it every day, and at the exclusion of conversations with other people.” (3) “Because we all need our emotions, urges, and creative desires mirrored back to us, in order to feel secure, integrated, and motivated. If we’re not getting this mirroring from our relationships, we can at least imagine how we would express ourselves if given the opportunity to be showered with infinite positive attention. Besides, most of you have done this already anyway, so...”

The goal of this exercise is certainly not to replace social relationships with a reflective surface – the literally fatal moment of the Narcissus myth – but rather to motivate you to get off the couch and engage with others more purposefully, meaningfully, and effectively. We can’t really see other people and offer them generosity, love, and support if we’re not feeling seen, loved, and supported in our own skins. Perhaps your private Oscar moment will inspire you to surround yourself with people who are better reflectors than your current friends, or maybe it could open up significant topics to be discussed in your therapy. Whatever the outcome, at least you will have given yourself a moment to reflect on your potential as an individual and as part of a community. Just take it easy at any imagined “Oscar after parties” after you’ve finished your “speech.”

Trimming Your Christmas THREE!

As much as we may want to visit with family at the holidays (or just feel obligated to), many of us are weighed down with family drama. We feel heavy with the fear of unresolved conflicts being triggered, old wounds reopening, and multiple miscommunications devolving into emotional chaos.

Just as you might trim your waistline before summer, so, too should you trim your family drama before the end of year holidays. For swimsuit dieters, there are quick, easy and even healthy ways to achieve this trimming (such as The Southbeach Diet). For those of us carrying around a few extra pounds of family drama, there’s a surefire way to trim down as well - before getting caught in the “Hell”-iday flames.

The technique I’m about to share with you is simple as One, Two and….well, forget about Three. That’s it actually. That’s the whole technique. Drop the number three from all your family interactions in the days leading up to your family gathering. In other words, “three’s a crowd” and so don’t talk to anyone in your family about any other member of your family. At All. Under no circumstances. Keep all contact one-on-one.

Stick to this rule and just like abstaining from carbs will trim down your body in two weeks,trimming three from your family relationships will reduce your load of “dirty laundry” in the same amount of time. Keep it up between now and New Year’s Day, and you will coast through the holidays like Santa on a sleigh – minus the heavy load. I realize that this is easier blogged than done, but I promise you will see results if you are disciplined.

This means that if a family member calls you up to complain about a prehistoric argument with another family member, change the subject. Keep the subject of the dialogue positive, and only on you and the other person, not anyone else in the family. This may result in yourtriangulating relative (TR) to feel rejected. Kindly remind TR that you are very interested in them and their life, but that you simply do not wish to discuss the relative they have beef with – instead you’d rather hear what’s going on with them. Your conversations may become much shorter than ever before, and this is ok too. As long as the conversations are positive and dyadic (only focused on you and that other person) you’re good.

After trying this (for at least a week), you can help yourself even more by proactively contacting relatives you will see at an upcoming gathering, but are used to only being in touch with through someone else. Again, these may be short exchanges, but at least they will be positive, and you will have made a direct connection, thereby avoiding any preemptive fanning of “Hell”-iday flames. By doing this, you may also even create an unexpected firewall for yourself, if and when family drama erupts.

By the time you arrive at your event, you will already be familiar with how to have brief, positive encounters with each person present. Everyone will know that you’re not the person to confide in regarding their smoldering feelings about others present, and since you haven’t talked about anyone behind their backs, you can enjoy the levity of having nothing to hide.

Leave the number three to 1) the three blessings while lighting your menorah (for Hanukkah), 2) lighting the three candles of hope/ and the three candles of struggle (for Kwanzaa), or 3) for setting up the three wise men in your nativity (for Christmas); but trim the number three from your family tree.

AutoNOmy vs. AutonomYES

Finding mutual satisfaction in relationships (be they romantic, familial, professional, etc.) is often a tough and awkward dance. We take lumbering steps trying to satisfy both our own needs, as well as those of the other person. To make things easier, some of us take the lead in this dance, thereby saying, “No” to the other person – which is only satisfying until we become bored, lonely, or resentful in this role, (or until the other party revolts). Some of us assume a passive, accommodating role and say, “No” to ourselves –until we start to feel suffocated or invisible (perhaps causing us to revolt). What we all generally share is a faulty belief; that in order for a relationship to work smoothly, someone must completely surrender his or her autonomy.

The “On Demand” culture we live in certainly doesn’t help us to resolve this dilemma. We regularly try to take the lead in our relationship to entertainment, as we flip through channels, DVR, Pay-per-View, don’t Pay-Per-View (a la Netflix On Demand)….until we realize that we are actually disappointingly passive in this relationship and stop the program, defiantly start another, say “No”, “No”, “Next”, “Next” (they should really call it “Next-Flix”), all in search of the perfect, most pleasurable entertainment. We are a culture of consumers, constantly battling for autonomy (I could write another piece entirely on the topic of our dependence on bad entertainment, and the importance of creating more of our own art, but for now we’re talking about relationships).

We look at our relationships this way as well, as consumers as opposed to creators. For example, we say things like, “I want a girl who listens to me”, “I want a guy who’s tough”, “She’s too assertive”, “He lacks drive”. We say a lot of “No” on our quest for the perfect “dance partner”, trying to take charge of this audition process and continuing to feel passive discontent. We rarely consider that rather than waiting around for the perfect match, we have the power to actively engage in this process of getting along – for some this means offering more of our opinions and feelings, for others this means being open to listening and discovering alternative perspectives to our own. We often fail to see that being autonomous in a relationship doesn’t have to be about consumption, it can be about creating new possibilities, for you and the other party involved.

The first rule of acting in improvisation is to never say “No” while performing a scene. You can say ‘Yes, and…….” or “Yes, but…..”, but it is never an option to say “No”. We can consider using this rule in our relationships. If something doesn’t feel quite right when we’re engaging with another person, before we say “No” and change the channel, consider that we often have more power than we think to create a more agreeable reality for both parties. We don’t have to shut ourselves down in order to maintain a relationship and we don’t have to shut the other person down in order to be autonomous. Be a creator in your relationships. Say, “Yes, and….”, or “Yes, but…”, but saying, “No”, will only leave you feeling discontent.