'Lord of the Rings' star to introduce all-trans, non-binary rendition of Shakespeare play
Sir Ian McKellen will be introducing a UK performance of William Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night" featuring a cast entirely of transgender and non-binary performers this summer.
The Trans What You Will theater group will soon be globally livestreaming their performance of a rehearsed reading of Shakespeare comedy "Twelfth Night" at The Space theater in London on July 25.
The cast, as announced in their casting call, will consist of "12 – 14 trans and non-binary performers," noting, "We are particularly interested in hearing from those who are multiply marginalized as we want a wide representation of the trans community."
The theater group announced on its official Instagram page that "iconic actor and LGBTQ+ activist, Sir Ian McKellen, will be introducing our show!"
Jk Rowling Does Victory Lap Following Uk Supreme Court Ruling That Trans Women Aren't Legally Women
The post featured a statement from the famous film actor, declaring, "'Twelfth Night' is perhaps the funniest and most moving of Shakespeare's plays. This is achieved through the complexity of gender and sexuality from first to last. I'm really looking forward to the impact of this latest version of the play at The Space. I hope to see you there!"
Read On The Fox News App
"Twelfth Night already toys with gender and performance – it feels like Shakespeare wrote it for us. This reading is about joy, solidarity and showing what's possible when trans and nonbinary artists are at the center of the story," director Phoebe Kemp told Attitude magazine.
A representative for the Trans What You Will theater company offered a similar statement, declaring, "With mistaken identities, cross-dressing, and declarations of love across shifting gender roles, Twelfth Night has long explored the complexity of identity. This production makes that queerness explicit, reclaiming the story through the lived experiences of trans and nonbinary artists."
Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture
According to its crowdfunding campaign, profits will be sent to trans charity Not a Phase.
Not A Phase describes itself on its website as a "trans-led, nationwide charity committed to uplifting and improving the lives of trans+ adults, through awareness campaigning, social projects and funding trans+ lead initiatives."Original article source: 'Lord of the Rings' star to introduce all-trans, non-binary rendition of Shakespeare play
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's mass firings of federal workers must remain on hold, court rules
A federal appeals court ruled on Friday night that President Donald Trump's orders for mass removals of federal staff and several agencies will remain on hold. The Trump administration had requested that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals freeze an earlier order from a lower court that put a stop to the mass firings at several agencies, CNN noted. The new court order is a significant step back for the president and his attempt to radically reduce the size of the federal government. The widespread firings, known as reductions in force (RIFs), have remained on hold since May 9, following the earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston stating that Trump needed congressional authorization for such a wholesale makeover of the federal government. The three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit stated in a two-to-one ruling that Trump's executive order in question 'far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution.' The majority found that the challengers could succeed on the merits of their arguments that the mass firings were illegal, and argued that the administration didn't manage to meet the other factors that would have prompted an emergency appellate intervention. The president had previously requested that the Supreme Court take on the case. That request didn't go anywhere initially. It's likely, however, that the issue will end up before the top court in the land once more. The case was put forward by unions representing federal employees, outside groups, and local governments. They challenged the executive order Trump signed in February, which called for a widespread restructuring of the government, along with directives from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget to enact the president's policy. The offices asked that agencies send in plans for how they would implement Trump's order to slash the workforce. The challengers argued that both OPM and OMB were making the final decisions on the size of the firings for each agency. They put forward evidence that proposals for less radical cuts were being shot down, making the firings illegal. The lawsuit also took aim at the involvement of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The agencies covered by the previous ruling by Illston, halting the firings, include almost every cabinet department, such as the departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, Interior, State, Labor, and Treasury. The 9th Circuit said on Friday that Congress, not the president, gave agencies the power to enact widespread firings. Bill Clinton appointee, Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, said in the majority ruling that the 'kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval.' Fletcher was joined in the majority by a Joe Biden appointee, Circuit Judge Lucy Koh. Dissenting from the ruling was George W. Bush appointee Circuit Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan, who wrote that 'the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs.' 'We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds,' the groups challenging the president's orders said in a statement, CNN noted.
2 hours ago
Panama will allow controversial mine to export already mined copper to fund maintenance
PANAMA CITY -- Panama will allow a controversial mine that was closed after months of protests to export more than 120,000 tons of already mined copper concentrate to pay the costs of maintaining the inactive mine site, government officials announced Friday. Opposition to the massive copper mine led to some of Panama's most widespread protests in recent years before the country's Supreme Court rejected a deal that allowed a Canadian company to operate it. Toronto-based First Quantum Minerals said Friday that exporting the material that's sitting at the site will fund maintenance and environmental protection measures. Panama's President José Raúl Mulino called for those steps in March, when business groups were lobbying him to reopen the mine. Income from the mine accounted for nearly 5% of Panama gross domestic product the last year it operated. 'The purpose is to avoid, above all else, environmental damage,' Trade and Industry Minister Julio Moltó said Friday. He emphasized that the mine was not reopening, but said that the plan would ensure the site remained safe. The open-pit mine was temporarily closed in 2022 when talks between the government and First Quantum broke down over payments the government wanted. In March 2023, Panama's Congress reached an agreement with First Quantum, allowing subsidiary Panama Copper to continue operating the mine in a biodiverse jungle on the Atlantic coast west of the capital for at least 20 more years. The deal faced opposition from those who believed Panama wasn't getting as much as it should and from environmentalists and Indigenous groups who raised concerns about the mine's impact. Protests included a blockade of the mine's power plant. Protesters also blocked parts of the Pan American highway, including a stretch near the border with Costa Rica. On Nov. 28, 2023, Panama's Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the 20-year concession was unconstitutional
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Stephen Miller calls out CNN anchor's 'lazy assumptions' about Trump's executive power
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller called out CNN's Pamela Brown's "lazy assumptions" regarding the Trump administration's executive power during an appearance on "The Situation Room" on Friday. Miller rejected the notion that district judges should have to "green light" each individual policy directive or executive order that President Donald Trump implements, claiming that it challenges the will of the voters who put him in office. The Supreme Court on Friday stayed a lower court order that blocked the Trump administration from deporting roughly 500,000 migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The decision is a near-term victory for Trump as he moves to crack down on border security and immigration priorities in his second term. Supreme Court Hands Trump Win On Revoking Parole For 500K Foreign Nationals The order stays, for now. The lower court ruling halted Trump's plans to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for some migrants living in the U.S., which allows individuals to live and work in the U.S. legally if they cannot work safely in their home country due to a disaster, armed conflict or other "extraordinary and temporary conditions." Brown asked Miller whether he believes district judges should just "rubber stamp" whatever the Trump White House does, and if not, what checks and balances he thinks should be in place. Read On The Fox News App "It's not the job of a district court judge to perform an individual green light or red light on every single policy that the president takes as the head of the executive branch," Miller replied. "Just think about the premise baked into your question. Respectfully, Pam, you're saying that when the American people elect a president of the United States of America…" Brown interrupted before he could finish his thought, claiming that her words were being taken out of context, and that she was just asking what checks and balances should be in place. Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture "I will answer the question happily," Miller responded. "But look, when you have these kinds of lazy assumptions built into questions, it makes it hard to have a constructive dialogue." The CNN anchor asked what "lazy assumptions" he thought she was making. Miller began to argue that district judges should not individually approve each executive action implemented by the president, but was interrupted by Brown stating that her question was being misinterpreted. She went on to clarify that she was questioning what checks and balances the Trump official felt were appropriate. Brown contended that her question about whether judges are expected to "rubber stamp" White House decisions was reasonable, before giving Miller the floor to finish his argument. "When you say, 'Do we think district court judges should rubber stamp each action' — there is a premise that is built into that that is absurd," he asserted. "The president is the sole head of the executive branch. He's the only officer in the entire government that's elected by the entire American people." "Democracy cannot function — in fact, democracy does not exist at all if each action the president takes - foreign policy, diplomatic, military, national security - has to be individually approved by 700 district court judges," he continued. "That's democracy? So if there's 15 communist, crazy judges on the court, that each of them as a team working together can block and freeze each and every executive action?"Original article source: Stephen Miller calls out CNN anchor's 'lazy assumptions' about Trump's executive power
