I lost my last comment to answering the poll, but after thinking about it, a lot of my answer comes down to what the Steering Committee believes is the purpose of T@F.
I'd definitely support a proposal for a play that only had male or female roles. If someone had a terrific idea for doing "The Vagina Monologues", "Agnes of God", or "'Night Mother", the group is doing a sufficient number of plays per year that it doesn't strike me as any more exclusionary that doing "Talley's Folly" which only had two roles. (I'd feel similarly about "Glengarry Glen Ross" or "Love! Valour! Compassion!" on the other face of the gender die.)
Where I'd find myself conflicted is if the play or project was chosen to push a particularly exclusionary gender agenda; that strikes me as a misuse of the organization which isn't set up for that purpose and runs on the efforts of volunteers who may or may not support the politics of the project. At that point, it'd depend a lot on what the director was trying to do and whether I thought they were sufficiently clueful to pull it off.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-14 03:53 am (UTC)I'd definitely support a proposal for a play that only had male or female roles. If someone had a terrific idea for doing "The Vagina Monologues", "Agnes of God", or "'Night Mother", the group is doing a sufficient number of plays per year that it doesn't strike me as any more exclusionary that doing "Talley's Folly" which only had two roles. (I'd feel similarly about "Glengarry Glen Ross" or "Love! Valour! Compassion!" on the other face of the gender die.)
Where I'd find myself conflicted is if the play or project was chosen to push a particularly exclusionary gender agenda; that strikes me as a misuse of the organization which isn't set up for that purpose and runs on the efforts of volunteers who may or may not support the politics of the project. At that point, it'd depend a lot on what the director was trying to do and whether I thought they were sufficiently clueful to pull it off.