"An actress can only play a woman. I'm an actor, I can play anything"

Whoopi Goldberg’s statement draws a sharp distinction between the stereotypical limitations traditionally placed on actresses versus the expansive artistic range she believes should be at the core of acting. She implies that the label “actress,” with its gendered expectation, has historically tethered women performers to portraying only female roles, or roles “appropriate” to their gender, constraining their creative possibilities. Goldberg identifies herself first and foremost as an “actor,” emphasizing the universality and versatility embedded in that term. For her, acting is not merely about gender but about transformation, empathy, and imagination, the ability to inhabit any character regardless of gender, age, ethnicity, or background.

Her words challenge both the entertainment industry and society to reconsider the boundaries set by language. “Actress” often carries connotations of secondary status or lesser seriousness compared to “actor.” Goldberg’s assertion points to a desire for parity, not just in recognition but also in opportunity. The use of “I can play anything” signals an ambition to transcend stereotypes, embracing a vision of acting as a fundamentally creative and boundless art form.

By aligning herself with “actor,” Goldberg situates her craft alongside her male colleagues, calling upon an audience to see talent unencumbered by gender. Historically, male actors have often played female roles and vice versa, think of the traditions in Elizabethan theater or contemporary explorations of gender, but outside these exceptions, women have generally been expected to stay within the limitations prescribed for them.

Goldberg’s perspective is also a statement against typecasting and the often-narrow scripts written for women. She calls for a world in which performers are understood and respected for their craft and versatility, rather than being boxed in by the expectations attached to gendered labels. Her words invite reflection on how language shapes opportunity, igniting questions about who decides what and who an actor is allowed to portray.