Scott Morrison, Joss Whedon and the power dynamics of performative feminism
By Cayt Mirra
When a show or book gives you hope that the world is a bit better than you thought, it is difficult to discover that the creator doesn’t live up to those expectations in the real world.
We have seen this form of grief expressed by the many LGBT+ people who have felt betrayed by JK Rowling when she seemed to go full TERF on Twitter, as all around the world people rushed to ‘cancel’ her and have their deathly hallows tattoos removed. It’s easy to criticise cancel culture and the idea that we cannot make a mistake. But in a world where people often have little power, it’s understandable that we might want to disassociate from those who have a great deal of power and misuse it.
The comments made by JK Rowling hurt people, not because they have a personal relationship with her, but because of the investment they have made in the fictional characters she has created. Likewise, the online reaction to allegations made against Joss Whedon has been so large, only because his characters had such a huge impact on a generation of young women. We saw in characters like Buffy, Cordelia and Willow various versions of female strength and it is painful to think that these stories came at the expense of abuse experienced by the actors — to be reminded that in real life these women had no power..
In these instances, people with power prioritised their own image over challenging their own beliefs and listening to the lived experiences of others. This same power dynamic can be seen in politics, especially around issues of sexual assault. When the recent allegations made by Brittney Higgins surfaced, this was reiterated to me. Scott Morrison’s comments that his wife had clarified the issue for him were widely criticised, as was his need to think about these women as his daughters in order to empathise with them. His public response seemed like the same old #scottyfrommarketing — he was framing himself as a father (because fathers, of course, can’t be sexist) and as a protector. He was presenting himself as someone who cares about sexual assault and rape culture and who will act to protect women. But this image isn’t supported by his actions or by his party’s policies. Amanda Vanstone, in the middle of expressing her ‘support’ of Brittney, stated that she was lucky to have been offered a job in another office after coming into parliament drunk. This is blatant victim blaming masquerading as feminism and it is toxic. Her wish that she “hope(s) someone listens to his side of the story” is akin to the dude bros in the comments on every article about Joss Whedon asking why the women took so long to speak out. Four women have now spoken up about sexual assault in the Liberal Party, just like half the cast of Buffy have supported Charisma Carpenter’s statement, but that doesn’t stop people immediately crying witch hunt and #istandwithJoss and ‘what about our sons’.
The danger of politicians who claim to support women while actually supporting policies that harm us is a similar danger to that of celebrities who gain their platform through stories about empowerment and then use that platform to shit on the very people they empowered. In both of these cases, instead of listening to the voices of the women affected, the media spotlight is given to the people who ‘fully support women BUT’. We are listening to voices who care more about their own image. It isn’t cancel culture to hold people accountable for their actions. It isn’t cancel culture to take away someone’s platform when they are using it to hurt people — especially when they got that platform by pretending to care about those people. There’s a Liberal politician out there who has received multiple allegations of sexual assault who continues to have a voice in shaping policies that impact all Australians. Scott Morrison continues to have one of the largest platforms in Australia which is used to market himself as a caring Aussie dad, at the same time that his policies harm women and abuse continues unchecked within his own party. Similarly, Joss Whedon uses his position of power to create a toxic work environment for women, when he got that power by pretending to be a feminist. JK Rowling is famous for a book series that is literally about the danger of discriminating against groups of people and then uses this fame to do exactly that.
To continue to prioritise and publish the voices of people who do this harm is to tell the victims that they do not matter. To cancel them, if you will. ‘Cancel culture’ occurs every time a woman leaves her job to avoid sexual harassment, or when an actress is pushed out of the industry, or when someone doesn’t feel safe speaking up, or when trans women are told that they don’t really count, or when multiple women support each other and still aren’t believed. We have been ‘cancelling’ women for centuries. This phrase, like the ridiculous terms ‘snowflake’ and ‘social justice warrior’ (Yes, I fight for social justice — explain to me how that’s an insult) exists to make light of serious issues and to sidestep any situation where a person might be held accountable for their words and actions. We don’t need to live in a society where people are shunned for making a mistake; instead, we need to create a society where people who make mistakes are forced to admit it and to change.
As Buffy once said, “the thing about changing the world… once you do it, the world’s all different”. Whedon might have been a fake feminist, but his show spawned a bunch of real ones who are now holding him accountable. Even in the Liberal party, the women are starting to fight back. The world is changing, and there’s no going back now.
