Viva is powered by Vocal.
Vocal is a platform that provides storytelling tools and engaged communities for writers, musicians, filmmakers, podcasters, and other creators to get discovered and fund their creativity.
How does Vocal work?
Creators share their stories on Vocal’s communities. In return, creators earn money when they are tipped and when their stories are read.
How do I join Vocal?
Vocal welcomes creators of all shapes and sizes. Join for free and start creating.
To learn more about Vocal, visit our resources.Show less
So Emma Stone we know; huge eyes, redhead more often than not, extremely open about her own anxiety, and her characteristic goofiness.
She presented the award for best director and dared to say "Greta Gerwig and the other four male nominees."
You could hear the clamour of the unanimous gasp of all the self-righteous social justice warriors and whoever else likes to get pathologically offended.
Now, Natalie Portman pulled something like this I believe at the Golden Globes? Announcing the—the male nominees—which deserved all the glorious hail of the public because extreme but suave shade is to be celebrated.
Now, I'm not sure whether I'm just mentally challenged or most other people who do not seem to have the art of mundane thinking as a common feature are troglodytes, but I see very little difference between the two statements.
While probably on Natalie Portman's side, this was a calculated move, I can imagine her doing that without any antagonistic feelings or judgement—after all it's just her own personal opinion to not commend the lack of diversity amongst the nominees. Drastically radical, I know.
I can also imagine that Emma Stone basically forgot what the fifth male nominee's name was and just proceeded to only give nominal credit to the only female nominee. Cause it was safer than naming three and just not saying the other two. The only reason there isn't a cult comprised of Teen Vogue, Cosmo and all the other unyielding girl-power magazines already worshipping at Emma Stone's shoes is that there was Jordan Peele, a Black man, among the all male nominees.
This way Natalie Portman's claim is stronger. At the G-Globes only White men represented the candidates, meaning the 'alpha oppressors.' While I concur that it is an achievement to be nominated as either a woman or a man of colour—both Gerwig and Peele are the fifth to be nominated in the category, as a woman and as a person of colour—and think it is a bow to the directors that they achieved this as representatives of both mentioned crowds, I'm sure it would've felt just as good as if they were considered talented human beings, not a bunch of labels.
This hysteria seems to only surround the Academy Awards too. I never hear anyone getting offended at how many directors of colour we're nominated at Sundance for example. Maybe I haven't found the right source of the calvary of indie fests... Or maybe they focus on the artistic value of the movie and then everything else. Or maybe unlike the Oscars, which I agree has a tendency to consider mostly White people in the industry as nominee it simply allowed anyone and everyone regardless of ethnicity or gender to showcase their work there provided it hits the standards and criteria. Maybe...
I am all for having diversity. I do think the Oscars are rigged as hell too. Can we just agree that if it weren't in fact, as predestined as it is, it would be great if the awards were distributed on the basis of talent and not gender, age, or skin colour?
I know comparing this to sports is a hard analogy to press but we can admit that without the obvious performance enhancers, what counts is truly who the best are. You can't lie about who came first in a 100m freestyle in swimming unless the machines are faulty. Even then we can agree that if a White man came first and a person of colour was the third it would be clear that it was their ability that made a difference not their skin colour. It would be the same if a Black man came first in 200m races and a White man was third or last. It would be a fair win.
(There is unfairness in sports obviously but I feel that is mostly the result of external judgments, like referees calling something, or not.)
No one says that the White man won because he's a privileged White man. Of course in a cultural context someone from the western world does have advantage over people coming from poorer countries. They don't have the training facilities or other resources etc., that the abundance of techy goods would provide. However, this is true to the overall population. A Black American man can still be considered to be in a more advantageous situation than a Black person from Ethiopia. Yet they still win in long distance races. Great performance is not a direct product of any sort of privilege.
To return to the subject at hand, another reason why Emma Stone was accused is because she's a White woman, see 'White feminist' disclaimer on every other article written about the incident. Despite the sonorous view that most feminists agree with that women are oppressed and are not in leading positions etc.
So when there's a woman, in a position of influence, having defeated all the oppressive ways of the elusive patriarchy, basically embodying what the third wave feminist ideology epitomizes, speaking out against there being too many men in this particular 'place of power,' they're saying she's sexist because she put emphasis on a woman director's name. As a woman herself. As a feminist? Herself.
And anti-diversity. I forgot that one. I wasn't aware that there are feminist categories based on skin colour either. Or that there's a difference between a White person representing the same ideologies as a Black person. How is that not racist to point out that she was White, nor sexist that she was a woman? It just defeats the purpose of trying to achieve the equality they supposedly want. You just can't win, can you...
If she really called the men out on being male than what else does that prove other than her own personal opinion? The same Natalie Portman expressed with stressing the word male before saying nominees. Her own opinion. That everyone is entitled to. Even if you're a White woman, even if you're an Asian man, even if you're an adorable Black baby and all you can do is cry, eat, and sleep in which case crying is you voicing your opinion.
Besides, again the difference between the Golden Globes statement and the Oscar's one is the weird notion that it is okay from a third wave feminist point of view to dislike men—but only if they're White. I sense some sort of backwards discrimination there. I bet it doesn't have a name yet... It's okay to hate men, but not all men, just the White ones, we can love men of colour...huh. What a logical argument.
Previously I proclaimed myself to be a feminist. To me it always meant that women should not be frowned upon for going after their goals and achieving them with the same fervor men do. Women should not be condemned for acting certain ways that according to traditional western gender roles should be attributed to men.
This is what it meant to be a feminist for me. I never experienced getting paid less or have been given less rights. The only reason I have less rights in the UK is because I'm an EU citizen. Not because I'm a woman.
I've experienced the sort of disdainful condescension that for example older men would have towards me when talking to me without knowing me. I could see that I had to convince them that just because I'm young and aesthetically pleasing, I do not rely on these factors alone. And those who allowed me to I had convinced. These experiences propelled me to adopt some sort of feminism when really it's just the benefit of the doubt that I was looking for.
I face the, "You're a foreigner" thing every day. Hell, my boyfriend asked me whether I knew who Kevin Costner was at the beginning of our relationship. Let's be clear, I'm from eastern Europe not the moon—and he doesn't know who Carry Grant was despite being British so...
It is beyond me why this general malcontent is present even though it is the western world that has little to be unsatisfied about. However, I don't hear people from India or poorer African countries on the streets vehemently screaming hate all men, women need rights, with at least 40 pounds of extra fat and rainbow coloured hair.
Somehow only in the western world have people time to shame another human being for a personal subjective opinion. Emma Stone maybe thought it was not okay to only have one woman among the nominees. Tough shit... She's allowed to say it though. It seems to me that the States, despite being a proud advocate of uncensored speech and the self-proclaimed country of freedom, seems to gradually represent these values less.
Maybe, just maybe if celebrities were regarded as humans too and not perceived by their labels such as White woman, mundane things such as Emma Stone's statement wouldn't be blown out of proportion. I doubt that she goes around consciously thinking, 'I'mma go and use that White feminist female privilege of mine whatever that may be.'
You know what, I bet in a world that truly was going towards equality Greta Gerwig and Jordan Peele would've won the awards they deserved. And because they're good at what they do, they ultimately will. Not because one is White, one is Black, or one is woman, one is man.
The world needs to sort out their priorities. Look at good old Leo DiCaprio going about saving the planet instead of getting offended. We should all just be Leos. Help Leo. #LetsallbeLeos