The Golden Globes have come and gone and the world was raving about the engagement of the grand dame’s in Hollywood towards female empowerment. And while we were always critical of #metoo we did applaud #timesup at least as far as the theory goes. But let’s start from the beginning.


Me Too” spread virally in October 2017 as a two-word hashtag used on social media to help demonstrate the widespread prevalence of sexual assault and harassment, especially in the workplace. It followed soon after the public revelations of sexual misconduct allegations against Harvey Weinstein.

The phrase, long used by social activist Tarana Burke to help victims realize they are not alone, was popularized by actress Alyssa Milano when she encouraged women to tweet it to “give people a sense of the magnitude of the problem.”

Vice Magazine published a critic on the movement saying: “The fact that Tarana Burke’s creation of the movement was ignored, that it is credited to a famous white actress, is not irrelevant here. It’s a good place to begin, when interrogating its use, to acknowledge the many kinds of people who will be unable to speak out, or who will not be respected if they do. “Who gets to speak, and why, is the only question,” as Chris Kraus wrote in I Love Dick—but the other question is: Who is listening when they do?”

Seal put it this way in his infamous video, defending his opinions on posting an Oprah Meme kissing Weinstein: “To those of us who support the #metoo movement, just note this: Not one of the woman, that have been sexually abused, not one of the women that have come forward, has received any real justice. Not what so ever. Losing your job, because you A) raped, B) sexually abused or even sexually harassed a woman is not a real punishment.You steal from the post office, you go to jail and #realtalk for a second, we all know what would have happened to any of the abusers if they would have looked like me”. #TellTheTuth #Weallknew #Accountability


Rose McGowan and Asia Argento weren’t extended an invitation or asked to sign the “Time’s Up” letter according to their own Twitter accounts but the woman now spearheading the movement in the press Reese Witherspoon and Meryl Streep brought social justice warriors as their guests. Asia Argento claimed not just being excluded from the Globe’s, but also never been asked to even sign the Time’s Up Letter.

The Golden Globe’s ladies of the night claimed to set a sign by “wearing all black” at the prestigious event. But the question remains – what sign? Hasn’t the “little black dress” always been a synonym of female sex and elegance? Let’s quote the urban dictionary:

Little Black Dress

LBD: Little Black Dress for the sole purpose of seducing men. Most women have one in the recesses of their closet. This is the dress that is just a little too short. Just a little too tight. One that hugs curves you never knew you had. One that looks as ifit was made for your body and your body only. One that makes you feel sexy the second you put it on. It has to be simple. All black, no buttons or ornamentation. The exhibition of the LBD should only be used in emergencies because once revealed, it would never again have its full potency. The philosophy of the LBD is a writ in the canon of the Sisterhood.

 So what statement did it really make? The ladies sure did not like going to a funeral for patriarchy?

We have been very critical of the movement from the start, not because it was not right, but because of the fact, who took the credits and most of all because we were missing real consequences and the power of men. How many men stood up and said: #nomore, as in no more “he said he was sorry”, or no more “it’s not my problem” as fellow actor Raúl E Esparza did for . How come this hashtag never got viral and received the same attention than #metoo. And how many companies, film studios, and agents stood up and said #nothere?

In a movement that is lead by showmanship instead of consequences, by blames instead of actions, what do we tell our children how to behave, which examples do we really set. If losing his job and his wife is the only consequence, if even the 1% of the wealthiest in this country cannot afford to get out the big guns and demand some real consequences – where does this make the rest of society stand?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *