The film Suffragette is now being called out by a really bored media for a not so smart move of quoting the film and putting that on a t-shirt. Here is the offending piece of promotional material:
The t-shirt is offensive if you think it refers to human bondage suffered by millions at the hands of white Americans. That all white women are wearing the t-shirt is what makes it worse. Whenever a white person uses the word slave to refer to themselves they will always be called out for it — all the more reason why someone should have gotten the memo that this was a shitstorm waiting to happen.
But, as happens every year, I find myself wondering at what cost this clicktivist hysteria? What good does it do anyone? Are we to take from this that anyone associated with Suffragette is a racist? That Meryl Streep and Carey Mulligan are racists? That they intended to insult the still-suffering ancestors of slavery? Is the damage done to the only film released this year to get anywhere near the Oscar race that was directed, produced and written by women?
Suffragette is already being criticized for being “white feminism” in a movie. That means I cannot support the film without seeming like a racist. Yes, me of all people will get that finger pointed at me too if I try to defend Suffragette. White women who only think white women matter (like Patricia Arquette last year, by the way). Racists — the whole lot — all because of this dumb t-shirt.
I wish the people protesting this would actually get together to enact some kind of real change rather than just tearing down everything within their immediate reach. If one person can tell me what this does — and don’t say “brings awareness” because the people who need that wake-up call aren’t the people who are going to either read anything about Suffragette or go so see Suffragette — the last thing they are going to read are the angry hate pieces about the film. Oh well maybe it helps the radical right continue to write off Hollywood as a bunch of entitled liberal hypocrites.
You know who rarely gets attacked? Films made by white men, about white men. No one attacks them because they aren’t writing their agendas through those movies. The worst they get is the accusation that they are films by white men made for white men. We throw verbal bottles at them, raise our fists in protests but I don’t know — the way things are looking that is the only safe form of entertainment anymore. It’s just too risky to try to tell stories about women or people of color — the complaints grow too large and before long it’s just too much trouble to make those kinds of films.
Somehow at the root of this hysteria is always a woman. It was Ava DuVernay and Selma last year. It was Kathryn Bigelow with Zero Dark Thirty in 2012. It’s Mary Mapes with Truth. I’m starting to wonder if people just don’t like women. Maybe they don’t. Maybe it’s fruitless to fight for change because ultimately we’re left with the continuing march of films about white men.
![2025 Oscars: Can a Late-Breaker Still Win Best Picture? [POLL]](https://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/gladiator-350x250.jpg)
Many PoC have spoken up about their disappointment with this promo tactic.
This is true. Everyone is entitled to their own reaction and deserves to have their reaction respected.
Am I an asshole if I bring up the undeniable fact that many PoC have spoken up in defense of Meryl Streep and many PoC do not feel personally offended if the word “slave” is spoken by a white person in terms that have nothing to do with the antebellum South?
Because, trust me, many PoC have a ton of other things that matter to them much more than what t-shirt Meryl Streep wore for 2 minutes during a magazine shoot.
Many PoC actually understand that white people in clubs can put their hands in the air whenever Grace Jones sings ‘Slave to the Rhythm’ and those people of color understand that this doesn’t make all those white ravers racists. It doesn’t make Grace Jones* a racist either.
*(Grace Jones, a Person of Color who understands “slave” can be said out loud in thousands of ways that have nothing to do with pre-Civil War America.)
Are we getting an Oscar Podcast anytime soon?? Craving to hear about the next Oscar year (34, I think) as well as the latest opinions on this 2015 Oscar race. Its been a while! 🙂
Kay, I’m not sure how often you read the articles on this site but Sasha clearly doesn’t have any bias.
Let’s be straight here. This is clearly an instance of whiteness being entitled, insensitive and unaware. The moment I saw the promo material, I cringed. Yes, it is a quote but their team should have known that such a slogan would be crass in our current social climate. The fact that you attribute the negative reaction to “bored media” and “clicktivist hysteria” reveals your bias as a white woman. The use of the word hysteria is particularly upsetting for obvious reasons. Many PoC have spoken up about their disappointment with this promo tactic. Their concern does not make them hysterical. If anything, the criticism actually gave the film more promo. Relating the reaction to some kind of fervorous attack on women is misdirecting the issue onto white men. The criticism is not an attack on women, it’s towards whiteness, the privilege that allows you to be boldly unmoved by a slogan that clearly offends many.
Blacks need to get over themselves. 12 Years a Slave should have been renamed 12 Years a …..
[… whoops, you just bought a ticket to Pending Moderation. Drop by tomorrow and try again. – Ryan ]
A movie can’t be all things to all people. This is about on particular thing, and I’m sure it isn’t claiming to have been the cure to inequality, the end.
You’re right though, society likes to blame women for just about everything, which makes me wonder if everyone hates women too.
Dumb marketing move forgiven. As for the film, I don’t think it can be compared to STONEWALL, which is intentionally erases the contributions of POC in favor of white gay centrism. This is not that.
but also, they’re really ugly shirts in a really boring campaign.
It’s not a ‘campaign.’ It’s a one-off wear-it-once ugly T-shirt dreamed up by some idiot at Time Out magazine who said, ‘hey put this on for 3 minutes while we take a picture.’
Focus Features had nothing to do with the ugly T-shirt.
Thanks for piling on with a boring fact-free comment though.
but also, they’re really ugly shirts in a really boring campaign.
“Somehow at the root of this hysteria is always a woman.”
You nailed it! If a pathetic famous white comedian happens to wear this shirt, these so-called “social justice warriors” might even build a monument in honor of him.
“You know who rarely gets attacked? Films made by white men, about white men.”
Let’s not forget Dan Rather. Ben Affleck and Argo was heavily chastised on this site and elsewhere, one of the big criticisms was Ben Affleck playing a man with the last name “Mendez”. American Sniper was shit on left and right (justly? dunno. haven’t seen it) because of who the protagonist is. Hell, Stonewall by the trailer alone was shit on, granted that was partially because of “whitewashing”. The Wolf of Wall Street and it’s graphic tone, Captain Phillips and how the movie may have made the real Phillips into more of a hero than he really was (big backlash from the real crew), Jared Leto for being a straight man playing Rayon…this is just the 2014 Oscars. Spike Lee went after Eastwood by saying there wasn’t a single black person in Flags of Our Fathers and that became a big brouhaha. Let’s also not forget…Star Trek Generations and the ire of the fans for having killed Kirk. Death threats. Death threats galore. There are plenty of films made by white men, about white men, that get torn down all the time. And it’s mostly to smear the Oscar chances. Regarding the shirts…was it a smart publicity move? No. Should it have garnered this much criticism? No. The word “slave” should not be such a trigger word or else it can never be used in a movie again by a white person. Slavery was around long before it came to America and countless millions, perhaps billions of people throughout history have suffered. Some forms of slavery still exist today.
BN, Sasha hailed Suffragette as a masterpiece in her review. She definitely wants as many people to see this as possible.
marshall flores, yeah, that quote is horrible. and as much as their twitter nagging and permanent state of negativity and inabilty to take joy in anything makes me roll my eyes, these internet social justice warriors have a point in this regard. still like everyone says, not worth destroyng a movie about and im sure its more tone deafness and blind spots than anything else.
unless, the films campaign is critiqing itself somehow, like, “come and see this important film about suffragist fom england, but dont forget they were pretty flawed human beings as well who were naive about american slaverly”. or am i being optimistic?
“The quote in question is a direct quote from the subject of the film. Any offense is being taken out of context (out of historical context, out of the film’s British milieu, out of its significance in the film).”
Sorry, but the more this quote is looked in historical context, the more problematic it is.
https://twitter.com/thechangeu12c/status/651100206927335424
Guurl, I liked STONEWALL, so you can expect me to give this film a fair shot.
“You know who rarely gets attacked? Films made by white men, about white men. No one attacks them because they aren’t writing their agendas through those movies. The worst they get is the accusation that they are films by white men made for white men.”
I’m not sure if I can agree with this 100%. Woody has been attacked for the lack of racial diversity in his casts. Spielberg is getting hit with the same stuff about Bridge of Spies, and certainly got attacked for apparently whitewashing LIncoln. Much ado was made about Straight Outta Compton glossing over the history between hip hop and violence against women (a relationship that Ava DuVernay herself admitted to). And of course there was our michegoss last year about Boyhood and its depiction of Hispanics .As sometimes exhausting the Interwebs can be with going through each film through a social justice lens, I can’t fault them for trying to be pretty consistent.
But these types of attacks seem to have hurt women-directed or women-centric films a heck of a lot more than their male counterparts, especially during awards season. That alone should give anyone pause to think about the potential unintended consequences of being zealous in the name of activism. In an industry where female stories told by female directors are an endangered breed, is it really worth trying to throw them under a woodchipper for any insensitivies/lapses in good taste?
So much that’s great has already been said here so I’ll just add this:
I look forward to a time when there will be such a diverse range of film projects widely available to support, so that I don’t have to feel like my enjoyment of Straight Outta Compton endorses the marginilazation of black women or colorism in the industry. I won’t have to feel like I should support an oblivious work like Stonewall because I’m gay and hey, we may not get another film like this for a long time. More diverse pictures, and make them available to a wide amount of audiences.
On the subject of Suffragate, I’m sure it will be a worthy cinematic experience. I will continue supporting films of all types, but especially hope that when I support films featuring or starring white actresses over a certain age, I do my part in getting us *that much closer* to a Hocus Pocus sequel.
Okay, so are we for the film or against the film? You seem to be straddling the fence in your article so I’m slightly confuzzled #helpineedanadult
I’ve been looking forward to the movie and still certainly planning to see it. My first reaction to the T-Shirt was to wonder if it were a quote by a real person involved in the British movement. It took a while for the negative idea to sink in. It was a bad idea without up front explanation, but hardly the crime of the century.
The full quote is : “I know that women, once convinced that they are doing what is right, that their rebellion is just, will go on, no matter what the difficulties, no matter what the dangers, so long as there is a woman alive to hold up the flag of rebellion. I would rather be a rebel than a slave.”
Yes, Twitter loves to hide behind their screens or phones and troll away, without understanding the full context.
Alas, we sigh collectively. I’m sure people will expect an apology. Maybe, people should just read and understand the context in which the quote came from rather than call Meryl a “privileged white woman.”
SIGHHHING
Now that is a dumb shirt. I know these people are locked into contracts and all that. But you have to consider that someone thought it up and then no one, all the way down the line, not even the people wearing the shirts, said,”Hmm. You know. Maybe this is a bad idea.” Unless we think that someone held down Mrs. Streep and forced it on her. I only know who two of those ladies are and I’m as sure as I can be about people I don’t know that neither of them are racist. But are they not able to say something to the effect of “No. I’m not going to wear that because I don’t want people to get the wrong idea.” What it ends up making me think is that these women have no power.
Similar things have already happened this season to THE DANISH GIRL, STONEWALL and FREEHELD.
Heard about Danish Girl and Stonewall but not about Freeheld – what’s the problem there?
especially when these same Twitter politicians don’t turn out or show support for even-more-progressive films like TANGERINE, THE DIARY OF A TEENAGE GIRL, GRANDMA
Right on.
And here’s how that goes:
Shouting Into the Wind: “You’re a white guy making movies about white guys!”
White Guy: “I know. Pretty cool, yeah? You’re welcome. I’d give you my autograph but as you can see my hands are full of awards.”
Yup. But hey, there’s an upside: maybe Suffragette will make no money. Maybe the filmmakers will never get work. There’s always that.
I’m not sure to what extent it occurred in the British suffrage movement, but it certainly was a tactic frequently used by American suffragists.
And that story should be told by someone. The film Suffragette is about one woman in a very small community who was a laundress with a husband who took her kid away. This movie is about her willingness to change her thinking. One woman in one place at one time. It is not about the whole movement.
People who believe themselves to be progressive but are ignorant to their own implicit bias are the ones that need the wake up call.
Disagree. This isn’t a wakeup call. It doesn’t wake anyone up. It makes people feel better about themselves for five minutes on the internet. You tell me how this helps women who still can’t vote in parts of the deep south. Or how it helps black mothers find work or help women who are prevented from equal pay STILL because of the color of their skin. You tell me how a bunch of hysterics with misplaced outrage are going to help anyone in real life with real problems.
This is not calling them racist but it is calling out the fact that there is a blind spot when it comes to the nuanced and systematic issues people of color face. The movie itself should be judged by its own merits but idiotic campaigns like these should most definitely be questioned. And instead of taking a defensive position, people on both sides should be engaging in meaningful dialogue, not pointing fingers.
Absolutely right on.
The film itself has only been screened in a very limited capacity. The people who are complaining almost definitely have not seen it.
That’s right. I understand and respect the idea of feminism being exclusionary, or certainly it was back in the 1960s — I guess I feel like it is more worthwhile to have the movie do well to open doors for women and start discussions than it is to kill the movie, shame the filmmakers and stand against something rather than for something.
I have no words. I get so sick of this Internet/Twitter crap. It has turned into a forum for a million church ladies.
It feels like a kind of strict fascism that it’s controlling what people can say and do in art. While it’s necessary for some things – wildly unnecessary for others. Would be good if someone out there felt it worthy of a story to tell what happened to black women during the suffragette movement here in America. That would be a movie I would love to see.
You summed it all up Sasha. I have no patience for this click-bait-happy crap. I’m sick of the Internet fabricating moral outrage …Yes, if you look at the quote in the context of black slavery, then you could go from A-Z, but ….
I have no words. I get so sick of this Internet/Twitter crap. It has turned into a forum for a million church ladies.
Oh, please BB&B. This has nothing to do with nuance.
The quote in question is a direct quote from the subject of the film. Any offense is being taken out of context (out of historical context, out of the film’s British milieu, out of its significance in the film).
The film itself has only been screened in a very limited capacity. The people who are complaining almost definitely have not seen it.
The goal here isn’t to prompt meaningful, informed discussion. It’s to stir shit up, plain and simple.
“If one person can tell me what this does — and don’t say “brings awareness” because the people who need that wake-up call aren’t the people who are going to either read anything about Suffragette or go so see Suffragette”
People who believe themselves to be progressive but are ignorant to their own implicit bias are the ones that need the wake up call. This is not calling them racist but it is calling out the fact that there is a blind spot when it comes to the nuanced and systematic issues people of color face. The movie itself should be judged by its own merits but idiotic campaigns like these should most definitely be questioned. And instead of taking a defensive position, people on both sides should be engaging in meaningful dialogue, not pointing fingers.
My two cents on this are that this was a pretty dumb marketing move that should not have survived vetting, but it’s not worthy of torpedoing and vivisecting a film (or anyone involved in it) about an important story regarding women’s suffrage.
Still, one cannot ignore the historical record in which women suffragists often played upon racial divides (i.e. they demonized blacks) to engender support for their own cause. I’m not sure to what extent it occurred in the British suffrage movement, but it certainly was a tactic frequently used by American suffragists.
To think that anything to do with slavery has only to do with the horrendous struggle countless African Americans had to deal with and not with the wide context of slavery existing in many forms affecting countless people of many, many ethnicities throughout history of narrow-minded idiocy The struggle of British women to gain basic human rights is as worthy a description of slavery as any..
The worst they get is the accusation that they are films by white men made for white men.
And here’s how that goes:
Shouting Into the Wind: “You’re a white guy making movies about white guys!”
White Guy: “I know. Pretty cool, yeah? You’re welcome. I’d give you my autograph but as you can see my hands are full of awards.”
Similar things have already happened this season to THE DANISH GIRL, STONEWALL and FREEHELD. Social justice warriors are destroying the commercial viability of well-meaning “feminist” works because they fail to speak for every possible person (even when set in specific historical circumstances). This strikes me as politically self-destructive, especially when these same Twitter politicians don’t turn out or show support for even-more-progressive films like TANGERINE, THE DIARY OF A TEENAGE GIRL, GRANDMA, etc..
These folks just want to feel important, so they complain, but don’t suggest reasonable alternatives. Short-sighted, and a real wound to films that are difficult to get made in Hollywood as-is.
The quote on the t-shirts is a direct one from Emmeline Pankhurst herself, so it has relevance to the film they’re promoting. As such, I can excuse Pankhurst misspeaking, and I can excuse people misinterpreting her words today. Her choice of words doesn’t resonate today, even as the sentiment behind them does. My gripe is that whoever was in charge of selecting this quote for the photoshoot hadn’t chosen something a little less potentially incendiary, even if that hadn’t ever been their intention.
This is only adding fuel to the fire sparked after Meryl herself misspoke and diminished the very cause which her character stands up for. She’s of neither the generation nor the countenance to appreciate the power of an apology in these circumstances, though I wish she would at least appreciate the power that her voice has in the equality debate.
I’m basically stating that I don’t think anybody in this debate is particularly wrong nor particularly right. I don’t believe it’s even my place to proclaim any side to any of these arguments wrong or right, as a man. But those berating the film for ‘white feminism’ need to get a grip, though. I get that there are thousands upon thousands of untold stories of WOC enduring sexism and speaking out for their rights over the years, but this is justly one of the most famous stories of the feminism movement, and it’s about time that a film was produced about it.
same thing happened with Straight Outta Compton. no scenes of physical violence against women, oh well, tear the movie down. twitter activists love some drama. by the way, that t shirt is dumb as hell. i was ginna make fun of the activist types but then i saw the t shirt, yikes. i wont lose any sleep over it but it sure is tone deaf. however, you have to laugh at the “we are hurt by our erasure that your t shirt has done” . lol really? ya life cant go on because of a t shirt, give me a break