it’s exclusive to say leaders of feminism can only be marginalised: non-white, trans, lesbian etc. I’m not white and while I agree Emma isn’t THE representative of feminism, she can be ONE OF the representatives of feminism.
Not the same thing.
Also, I’ve seen some criticise Emma Watson because her speech gets more attention than others. You are criticising the wrong target. You should be criticising society and its inequalities that lead to the reason Emma gets more attention. Not so much Emma herself.
I do not want to be part of a kind of feminism that wants to exclude a big proportion of the world and say they cannot speak because they are too privileged. Because that is saying oppression is a contest and that only the people worse off should speak.That is wrong because then we are not using the standard of human rights and equality but the standard of oppression as a benchmark. Neither do we have the luxury to exclude people who have enormous soft power and ability to spread our message. I have a problem if the UN cancelled Malala’s speech so Emma could speak. It is fair to talk about representation. But I have no problem with what the UN did because that didn’t happen, and UN ambassadors haven’t just been white women like Emma Watson. Some others:
Waris Dirie- she’s a Somali supermodel. She is a UN ambassador against female genital mutilation- because she suffered it herself.
Or Aung San Suu Kyi? Activist for democracy who was under house arrest in Burma for decades before she was finally freed- UNAIDS ambassador for Zero Discrimination
Botswana model Mpule Kwelagobe, UNFPA ambassador
Princess Bajrakitiyabha Mahidol of Thailand, another UN Goodwill ambassador for women
And, of course, Malala Yousoufzai:
Do all these women have something in common, that the average woman being oppressed usually doesn’t have? Sure, they’re ambassadors because they’re all famous for various reasons and have escaped the circumstances where they were formerly oppressed in the case of Waris, Malala and Aung San Suu Kyi. Many of them are beautiful and comparatively more privileged than the people they advocate for. But them being famous is the entire point of UN Goodwill Ambassadors- to attract attention to a good cause. That’s how the world works, and the UN works within that reality- where there is no luxury to reject using high-profile people willing to use their soft power for good. And Emma was chosen precisely because she is that kind of person with enormous influence. I am not “white” and I am glad (glad, not bowing and scraping to her- just glad) Emma has decided to use her fame for this end- unlike what many other wealthy people choose to do.
Just another WordPress site
