Do you think actors are unprofessional if they refuse to play a gay role, due to them not being comfortable doing so?

Not at all.

We are allowed to have hard limits in our own behaviour. Anne Hathaway was offered the part ultimately played by Katherine Heigl in “Baby Mama”, and refused because doing a birth scene on film was a hard limit for her. She believes the birthing room is a sacred space that she only wanted to share with her future child’s father. She is not unprofessional for refusing a role because it made her uncomfortable.

Similarly, if one has a hard limit on intimate activity with whoever for whatever reason, the most professional thing to so is to respectfully decline. There are many millions of dollars and many more man hours involved in the making of any major film these days, and if an actor cannot do the film justice due to a personal discomfort or moral difference, they absolutely should refuse that job. To do otherwise would be unprofessional.

If they’re not comfortable, they’re not going to act well. Knowing what they’re ok with and not ok with to me, is the mark of a true professional.

I don’t think it unprofessional at all for an actor to refuse any role for which they think themselves unsuited.

Give him time, Dwayne Jonson will come out in his own sweet time, like to see him play Quentin Crisp or maybe Elton John

No, not at all. Actors refuse roles all the times for all sorts of reasons.

Much ado about nothing.

“Unprofessional”? Not necessarily. “Unwise”, maybe, if they haven’t yet developed a body of work that is respected. Especially now, there are so many more mainstream gay roles available than in an earlier time, that refusing may be determined as “difficult” or “temperamental”.

No. If they don’t think the role fits who or what they want to be as an actor, they don’t have to do it. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads!
I always thought Richard Dreyfuss exemplified the position of a actor playing a gay role, and what the consequences of him playing such a role could be for his career, in “The Goodbye Girl.”

Not at all. No one should be goaded or pressured into doing work they’re uncomfortable with. A person’s limits should be respected. If one actor is uncomfortable doing a gay role then find an actor who isn’t and the film will be better for it.

(Case-in-point: Brokeback Mountain. Donnie Whalburg turned down the role that ultimately went to Heath Ledger because he was uncomfortable with playing gay.)

No, of course not. Just like any actor who might turn down a character because it is a child molester or some other sickening kind of sub-human being.

No. In fact, I think it’s a valid concern/objection both for personal feelings & consent, and for the professional consideration that it may be tricky to authentically portray someone with a very different sexual orientation, and the desire to not present one’s own ideas about that sexual orientation in the performance, which may likely have some unfortunate misunderstandings in it. I think it also may reinforce for some viewers the unfortunate mistaken idea that sexual orientation is merely a matter of choice (and therefore a moral issue and something to disapprove of or even correct or punish).

I think it shows maturity and an understanding of their own personal limits, actually.

Choosing or not choosing to undertake a role, for whatever reason, is strictly an actor’s choice, and in my opinion he/she need not exlain why in either case.

I don’t know who remembers the first season of Criminal Minds but the lead investigator was played by Mandy Patinkin, a wonderful (and very professional) actor with a longstanding reputation for excellence. But he refused to do more than that first year and resigned. He stated (and I’m paraphrasing) that he just found the requirements of continually dealing with the details of some of the most gruesome psychopathic acts imaginable to be just too much to handle both emotionally and spiritually. (I believe he is an Orthodox Jew.)

He received criticism in some corners for this but I and many others respect him for being true to his sense of conscience.

Even in real life, if a law enforcement person finds that they cannot handle some of the gruesomness that the job
entails, nobody blames them for resigning to find another profession. How much more so for an actor.

For Patinkin, this was just not a role that he felt suited to play. And there are numerous cases where actors will refuse roles for which they don’t feel equipped to handle, either emotionally or otherwise

If an actor is uncomfortable playing gay then I think it would be more unprofessional of him to commit to this role simply out of political correctness or fear of being thought of as homophobic.

That is just being fake and pretentious as well as unprofessional.

I know it was unintentional, but I still can’t believe no one called @Dutchess_III out on:

Q. “Do you think actors are unprofessional if they refuse to play a gay role?
A. ”...any actor [who] might turn down a character because it is a child molester or some other sickening kind of sub-human being.”

@ibstubro I did not think it was a comparison between homosexuals and molesters. It was a unrelated comparisoin. There was no need to knit pick @Dutchess_III on her choice of words, when I knew she meant nothing offensive by them.

Perhaps another comparison could have been used, say for example a 27 year old actor playing 17 year old character. It would have the same effect.

It doesn’t really matter what you (or I) think, @NerdyKeith. It’s an open forum, and answers should be addressed as they appear, not as we understand them to be.
I gave @Dutchess_III a pass with “unintentional.”

If the same comment had been made by a member perceived as a middle-aged conservative male, someone’s hair would likely be aflame by now.

Funny, my first thought was “Hm, Kevin Bacon has played a child molester, but not a gay man.”

Well, Kevin has yet to play a priest, too, @Seek.

Thank goodness.

I was thinking “bridge role”.

Ah.
If you get a chance, see The Woodsman. Great film.

I have actually seen that movie, or at least parts of it. It ended badly?

Bizarre. I’m not a Bacon fan, and I had to have watched it in a motel room, which are few and far between.

It’s been a long time, but if I remember correctly it just kind of… ends. Like you know his struggles aren’t over, but he’s still trying to be a better person.

Ah. I didn’t see it all. Just read a synopsis and he did not relapse. I must have stopped watching after the girl offered to sit on his lap.

@ibstubro I take your point. And when you put it like that people should be more mindful when it comes to making comparisons like that (intentional or otherwise). Due to the long history of homophobic persons putting homosexuals in the same class as pedophiles.

I am not calling anyone on Fluther homophobic just to be clear. But I can understand why others would find the two groups being discussed side by side to be in bad taste.

I just thought to address it to set the record straight (so to speak), @NerdyKeith.

It’s a line drawn so frequently in the past that it’s almost convention. I still hear people say they don’t have a problem with gay people, but, they don’t think they should be teaching kids. Hogwash.

@ibstubro I agree with you