A response to a social media campaign…
I have been following the debate and the responses in the
media to Emma Watson’s speech in the United Nations, and the campaign #heforshe
launch for gender equality with interest.
Yes, I did view Emma Watson’s speech in the United Nations
and read some of the responses from women around the world posted in newspapers
and on various Internet sites.
“Unpopular opinion:
Sorry but privileged white ladies, Emma Watson isn’t a game changer for
feminism” by Amy McCathy is a well thought out response and I agree with many
of the issues this author raised.
I am surprised too that an organization like the United
Nations engages in these kinds of social media campaigns, that basically
involves people clicking on a web page to say they support gender equality. Literally
hundreds of men and boys just circulated photographs of themselves with the
words #heforshe on social media including Twitter and Instagram.
I also didn’t see any further action people genuinely
interested in gender equality could take.
While the speech has raised awareness and created discussion
it was a wasted opportunity to provide people, male and female, genuinely
interested in gender equality with resources to educate and to make genuine
change at a grass roots level.
I agree with the following points from the article…
Agreed… “Women don’t
need to be rescued, whether it’s by men, Emma Watson, or the United Nations.
Positioning men as the saviours of oppressed women isn’t productive, and
devalues the work that feminists have been doing for decades”.
Agreed… “There was no
discussion in this speech as to how He For She can improve the lives of women
and nonbinary people who will experience intersectional oppressions, like
racism, transphobia, and fatphobia”.
Agreed… “Anyone who
uses their platform to spread feminist ideas deserves respect, but we should
probably be a little more careful in who we choose as our thought leaders.
Especially when there are hundreds of women who are directly, impacting the
lives of women through their work and writing”.
Agreed… “Paying lip
service to feminist ideas without actually doing any work to undo oppression
isn’t feminist, and it certainly isn’t new”.
Unpopular opinion: Sorry but privileged white ladies, Emma Watson isn’t
a game changer for feminism” by Amy McCathy published on xo Jane.com on 24
September 2014. (no copyright infringement intended)
Positioning men as the
saviours of oppressed women isn’t productive, and devalues the work that
feminists have been doing for decades.
When I woke up
yesterday, my Facebook feed was buzzing with the news of Emma Watson’s “ground
breaking speech”. On September 20, Watson used an emotionally stirring speech
at the United Nations to launch He For She, a new campaign that urges men to
“speak out about the inequalities faced by women and girls.” People who
never mention the words “feminism” or “women’s rights” were suddenly
interested.
More specifically, the
campaign centers around a website where men and boys can acknowledge that
gender equality is a human rights issue and pledge to fight the inequality that
women and girls face. On the “Take Action” page, the site encourages users to
tweet and Instagram with the hashtag #HeForShe. Beyond that, there is little
discussion of what the men who sign this pledge can actually do to improve the
lives of women.
“I am so excited about
#HeForShe,” one random girl from my sorority wrote, “because it finally shows
that feminism isn’t about hating men. I love men!” “Emma Watson gives
feminism new life,” read one CNN headline. Another blog noted that she
completely changed the definition of feminism while dressed in Dior. Media
outlets that had only previously used the word “feminist” to describe
hairy-legged stereotypes were now salivating over a newer, hipper, prettier
feminism based entirely on an 11-minute speech at the United Nations.
Most egregiously,
Vanity Fair called Watson’s speech “a game changer” feminism: “Watson is
potentially in an even better position than many of her peers,” writes Joanna
Robinson. “Her role as Hermione Granger, the universally adored heroine of the
Harry Potter series, gives her an automatic in with male and female millenials.
This is a rare case where an actor being conflated with their role might be a
good thing. In this way, her widespread influence on young minds (still forming
their opinions on gender roles and advocacy) is even stronger than other
high-profile defenders of the F-word like Beyoncé.”
Despite the slight
toward Beyonce’s feminist work, I thought for a moment that Robinson and others
who were anointing Emma Watson as feminism’s brightest young mind might have
actually been right. There is something uniquely brave about a young woman identifying
as a feminist, especially when so many others, like Watson’s contemporaries
Shailene Woodley and Taylor Swift, shy away from the label.
But at the same time,
when I hear this speech being discussed as a defining moment in feminism, I
worry about the message that the He For She campaign sends to people who still
aren’t sure that feminism is looking out for their best interests. More
specifically, will He For She leave behind many of the people who most need
feminism's help?
To begin with, the name
“He For She” is problematic, no matter how you slice it. Some may call these
criticisms divisive and nitpicky, but there is nothing feminist about a
campaign that reinforces a gender binary that is harmful to people whose gender
identities don’t fit into such tidy boxes. When we reinforce the idea that only
people who neatly fit the gender binary are worthy of being protected and
supported, we erase and exclude the people who are at most risk of patriarchal
violence and oppression.
Which is something that
Emma Watson knows only a little bit about. It was encouraging that Watson
acknowledged some of the privilege that led her to that United Nations stage,
but she failed to mention the things that are most important. She noted that
her parents and teachers didn’t expect less of her than male students, but
failed to mention how the automatic advantages that being white, wealthy,
able-bodied, and cisgender have colored her life experience. The state of
affairs for women that Watson presents in this speech is a best case scenario.
There was no discussion in this speech as to how He For She can improve the
lives of women and nonbinary people who will experience intersectional
oppressions, like racism, transphobia, and fatphobia.
This is not to suggest
that what Emma Watson did wasn't brave. Women face consequences when they speak
up on feminism, as evidenced by the internet trolls who threatened to release
nude photos of Watson shortly after her speech (luckily this turned out to be a
hoax).. Anyone who uses their platform to spread feminist ideas deserves
respect, but we should probably be a little more careful in who we choose as
our thought leaders. Especially when there are hundreds of women who are
directly impacting the lives of women through their work and writing.
In reality, Emma
Watson is the kind of woman that mainstream feminism -- the feminism that gets
a place on the United Nations’ stage -- has worked the hardest for. When Watson
speaks of equal pay, she’s talking about the white women who make 78% of their
white male counterparts, not the 46% gap that Latina women face in the
workplace. When we discuss sex work, we don’t talk about the transgender women
who rely on the industry to survive. Put simply, the discussion that He For She
and Emma Watson are having fails to invite the people whose voices need to be
heard most to the table.
Of course, the most
crucial component of the speech is Watson’s call to action for men that support
equality. “Unintentional feminists,” she calls them. These, of course, are men
who have been “turned off” by their own assumptions about what feminists are.
Men are an important component of breaking down barriers for women, but after
years of begging from feminists of all ideological backgrounds, they shouldn’t
need a verbal engraved invitation from an actress to get involved. More
importantly, there is little discussion of how the men who support He For She
will actually stand in solidarity with women.
Many men who consider
themselves vocal advocates for feminism have also had a real problem with
talking over the women they’re supposed to be supporting. The space of
male allies in feminism is a tenuous one, and one that is only successful when
male allies use their platforms and privilege to amplify the voices of women,
trans men, and nonbinary people. Instead of “He For She,” perhaps the campaign
should have been branded “Stand With Women,” to imply that men would be
standing beside women instead of standing up for them. Women don’t need to be
rescued, whether it’s by men, Emma Watson, or the United Nations. Positioning
men as the saviours of oppressed women isn’t productive, and devalues the work
that feminists have been doing for decades.
Paying lip service to
feminist ideas without actually doing any work to undo oppression isn’t
feminist, and it certainly isn’t new. Every few months, it seems as if the
media identifies an actress as the new young feminist darling, and Emma Watson
is only the latest in the procession. Emma Watson may be making feminism more
palatable for people who aren’t comfortable with in-your-face confrontations
from less camera-friendly feminists, but she isn’t doing anything new or “groundbreaking”.
And it’s unfortunate
that Emma Watson is selling the same boring, one-dimensional feminism that’s
existed since the first hypothetical bra was burned instead of really changing
it. She doesn’t deserve to have her privacy and body threatened by terrible
internet trolls, but she also probably hasn’t earned her place as a defining
feminist of her generation. If Emma Watson really wanted to be a “game
changer,” she should have handed the microphone to Laverne Cox or Janet Mock to
add some desperately needed diversity to the U.S.’s contingent of U.N. Goodwill
Ambassadors.
