Celebrities often use various public events to deliver important messages that refer to the most urgent social problems of the 21st century. Patricia Arquette’s speech at 2015 Oscars shows was one of the most influential in this context (Oscars). In the beginning, she expressed her gratitude towards all her colleagues and close people. Then, she focused on the problems of equality, especially in relation to women.
She stressed that many individuals combined their efforts to establish the just and equal society. She also believed that wage equality was especially important in this context as women should possess the same rights and opportunities as men. Her message was supported by Meryl Streep and other celebrities (Oscars). It seems that Arquette’s speech was very influential for several reasons. Firstly, it was very emotional, and all people realized that it reflected the speaker’s fundamental position. Secondly, Arquette explained that wage and other forms of equality were beneficial for all Americans regardless of their race, gender or social status. If society is equal (at least in terms of social and economic opportunities), it will contribute to the general well-being and justice.
In my opinion, Arquette’s speech provides the positive example of celebrities’ impact on individuals’ comprehension ofthe most important problems. In fact, the existence of inequality and hidden discrimination of women and minority groups is possible only if the majority of social members do not demonstrate their disapproval or resistance to such system. If the general social position becomes more radical, all employers and social institutions will have to ensure the rights of all people without any exceptions, as well as protect them properly. It will lead to a just society with the proper distribution of functions and mutual responsibilities among all social members. Thus, Arquette’s speech is highly important in delivering this message to a large audience in a very precise form.
Amanda Marcotte (2015) advances some criticism against Arquette’s position on feminism. In particular, she suggests that Arquette’s statements demonstrate that she evaluates the entire situation exclusively from the perspective of white women. Thus, Marcotte (2015) states that the correct interpretation of Arquette’s speech shows that it advocates solidarity only for white women. Consequently, considering such fact, the general public should be highly critical to Arquette’s position.
Marcotte’s interpretation is based on a slightly ambiguous statement made by Arquette when she has mentioned all groups that can be benefited from equality, including gays and people of color (Marcotte). HHowever, it seems evident that Arquette did not want to suggest that race equality was insignificant, or that the only discrimination present in the modern world was that related to women. Her underlying idea was that all individuals without exception could benefit from the gender equality. It would create additional stimuli for men and women in the context of a more productive cooperation.
Therefore, it seems that Marcotte’s criticism is mostly unjustified as she tries to misrepresent the actual message delivered by Arquette. It is logically incorrect to select only one sentence from the general speech and explanations and make some conclusions on this basis. It is clear that Arquette has made everything possible to demonstrate her respect and tolerance towards all people and the representatives of all social or racial groups. Thus, it is unjust to believe that she was insincere or had some hidden thoughts about the social prevalence of white women.
It is always necessary to evaluate all statements and positions in a complex way. It is not correct to separate or isolate individual’s words from one another. On the contrary, they are organized in a way for promoting the delivered message in the most effective way. Therefore, Arquette’s position is correct and coherent, and all social members should contribute to wage equality in all spheres of national economy.