The politically correct panto – oh, yes it is!

Anew production of A Christmas Carol has reimagined Charles Dickens’s classic with a female Scrooge. To be honest, I’ve been wondering how long it would be before the PC police come for panto, although you could argue that the principal boy – an actress in male clothing – anticipated the gender-fluid trend 160 years ago.

By sheer coincidence, the minutes of the arts and culture department of a certain local council fell into my hands…

Chairperson: I have called this emergency meeting to discuss the suitability, or otherwise, of a pantomime.

Lesley: Objection! I thought we agreed to remove any reference to specific faith systems from council material.

Chairperson: Good point, Lesley. OK, due to be staged over the non-denominational, inclusive festive period. I hand over now to Secretary Clark, who will run us through the proposed productions. Secretary: Option 1. Aladdin. Lesley: Aladdin, I’m afraid, is not only guilty of troubling cultural appropriation. It’s also Islamophobic.

Geoff: Eh? It’s set in Old Peking.

Lesley: In which case it’s Sinophobic.

Chairperson: What about Wishee Washee? Is that a man or a woman?

Lesley: Request that Secretary Clark strike that genderist inquiry from the minutes. This is an inclusive, gender-fluid age and it is totally unacceptable to define a character by the restrictive categories of masculine or feminine.

Geoff: It’s bloody obvious that Wishee Washee’s a girl. She does the washing.

Lesley: Geoffrey, please! The main objection is that the caricatured nature of that character is grossly insulting to our ethnic Chinese community. Geoff: Prawn balls! Chairperson: Yes, well, I think Aladdin might not be quite what we’re looking for.

Secretary: Option 2: Cinderella.

Dave: OK, so, can I begin by pointing out that this narrative is heteronormative, right? It’s like totally unacceptable to imply that the most desirable relationship should be between a girl and a boy.

Geoff: It’s not hetero, Norman. The Prince is played by a girl. It’s practically lesbians. Lesley: Hate speech! Chairperson: Secretary Clark, please strike from the minutes Councillor Buckle’s suggestion that Cinderella and Prince Charming are lesbians.

Dave: Objection, madam chair! Under the Equality Act 2010, it is illegal to discriminate against people on grounds of their sexual orientation. We can’t possibly know whether Cinderella is gay or bi or cis.

Lesley: What we absolutely cannot have is Ugly Sisters. The council does not discriminate against vulnerable people.

Geoff: They aren’t vulnerable, they’re a pair of right cows.

Secretary: So how do we feel about a man stealing a woman’s shoe and withholding it until she agrees to sexual favours? Chairperson: Cinderella’s out. Secretary: Option 3, Jack and the Beanstalk.

Geoff: Go on, see if you can find something wrong with that!

Lesley: Vegans. The possible pain suffered by the beanstalk could trigger sensitive members of the audience.

Secretary: How about Mother Goose?

Lesley: Gah! Foie gras – such a cruel industry.

Secretary: Actually, Mother Goose does feature an older woman who’s a man.

Dave: Transgender, great. Chairperson: Brilliant. We can run awareness workshops in the interval. Lesley?

Lesley: But “Mother” can be a bit alienating.

Dave: What about “Parent”? Secretary: And we can replace “Goose” with “Non-meat Substitute”?

Chairperson: Fantastic! We’re agreed. This year’s panto will be “Parent Non-meat Substitute”.

This is my last column of the year. It’s been rather a bruising 12 months and, more than ever, I have been consoled by and relied upon you, my readers.

As well as shedding a few tears, I hope we’ve had a lot of laughs. Some of you have told me that I have given voice to your private thoughts and fears in 2019, which was a pleasure and a duty. At times, we may have felt alone, but the silent majority is silent no more.

See you back here in what promises to be a very happy new year.